Mystery of Singapore confined to expat eyes

The latest declaration of this strange passion is a survey of 400 expatriate businessmen across the region by a group called the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy.

The survey praised the Singapore government's "strategic thinking", its "understanding" of its internal shortcomings and "more coherent, realistic policy" for dealing with the issues.

Hong Kong was a different matter.

"Instead of coming across as a flexible pro-business government, willing and able to make quick adjustments to suit the shifting economic winds, the administration of [Chief Executive] Tung Chee-hwa has given the impression of stumbling its way through the crisis," the survey said.

The first thing to do here is install a set of alarm bells that ring at any mention of "pro-business government".

Have you ever run across a businessman in favour of a free market for his business if instead he could have his government rig that market? Your correspondent has never seen one.

Pro-business rarely means pro-market. It is a term invariably applied to governments easily swung by business lobbies seeking relief from free market pressures and Singapore is a good example.

Singapore is still largely a closed shop run on centrally planned lines, with the government having direct control of an enormous proportion of the economy. Monopolies, or near-monopolies, run many key services. Local businessmen are happy, but is it really good for business?

The survey's respondents certainly did not have much dissenting input from within Singapore itself to consider before awarding plaudits. The only dissenting voice in parliament, the Workers' Party, faces bankruptcy because of libel proceedings by government officials and may have to give up its seats.

Consider also Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong urging Singapore banks to merge in order to become stronger players.

Why this fixation with nationalist concerns in commerce? Are Singapore depositors and borrowers best served by being steered to DBS if Citibank can offer a better service?

Now look at Hong Kong. Our biggest banks are all foreign-dominated and yet we have the strongest and healthiest banking system in Asia, one that serves the public well regardless of where its banks are headquartered.

Just who is flexible here? Just who has the realistic and successful policies?

Look at the strides made over the past year in opening public services to markets.

There is competition now in ferries and buses, there has long been competition in electricity supply, telecommunications has been opened wide, the Mass Transit Railway Corp is to be privatised and housing policy is having a drastic rethink. Even social services are to be privatised.

What is this nonsense about Hong Kong not making "quick adjustments to suit the shifting economic winds"? Adjustments have been quick and pervasive.

Why is it when Singapore jumps to offer expatriates "pro-business" sweeteners to set up shop and drowns them in public relations talk that they cannot see the bureaucratic, monopolistic system?

It's a mystery. Fortunately it is almost exclusively an expatriate one.

Let us put a longer term perspective on this "pro-business" stance.