Elevating the level of debate

Jean Lee: Right now, there are too many views on what we want and what we hope to see, and I think it stems from the fact that there is not enough of a two-way conversation going. Policy-makers need to demonstrate that they trust the masses enough to explain why they do certain things, so that there’s more education on a two-way street, so that people can start to understand.

Once that growth starts and people start to trust each other, then the conversation would be more constructive and reach a point where we would be in a truly strong position ... to tap into the mass intellectual capital that we have.

Ian Tan: How about getting people to understand the meaning of walking the walk and talking the walk ... This is something that needs to be inculcated from a young age. People who grew up unable to speak up and afraid of sharing their views openly ... this will continue into their adulthood.

Calvin Cheng: (On whether a Freedom of Information Act would enable better participation in policy-making) There is a limit to what information the Government can share with the public. For example, there are things that have to do with defence that cannot be shared with the public. We could have more freedom, but there would be limits to that freedom.

Mahadevan Lukshumayeh: Having more information is also about having more people participate, citizens playing an active role in policy-making.

Ian: In education, for example, all parents know how much homework their children have — they hold a lot of information. What they need to do is to have a good conversation among themselves first and then present the case, rather than just shooting from the hip.

SETTING THE TONE FOR A CIVIL CONVERSATION

Lukshumayeh: Online, there’s a lot of very acrimonious discussion, so I find that one way of drawing away the most acrimonious part of the debate is to ask people out ... when people are face-to-face they tend to be more civil.

The Internet is important, but the Government should only use the Internet as part of its strategy and not the entire strategy.

Ng Choon Seng: In the Our Singapore Conversation, we have certain ground rules — for example, to listen with respect. It’s perfectly okay to disagree. So how do we duplicate this in future in civil discourse, where people disagree, but can still be friends? Also (during the OSC) I think the environment was such that people were open to talk, they didn’t feel they were being watched, no one censors their conversation, there was no taboo subject, and people did bring up extreme views.

Ian: If the government could look into having such public forums where there is a good sharing of views from both sides ... It’s a lot more work, but it will show willingness not to just talk among each other and leave feedback to just emails or Facebook posts.

ABOUT THE SPEAKERS:

Calvin Cheng is a former Nominated Member of Parliament. He currently serves on the Media Literacy Council, and the MDA Board for Screen Singapore. Ng Choon Seng, a professional facilitator, served as a facilitator in 15 Our Singapore Conversation dialogue sessions.