opulation of 5m, 5.5m, 6m, 6.5m or 7m ?
First, we need adequate and efficient infrastructures in such a compact
island. Also, we need cheaper and greener energy, and more importantly
new sources of food supply and potable water that is affordable to all,
especially those who are poor and struggling to make a living.
On food to feed a population of 5.75m (midway between 5 and
6.5m), I have to refer interested forumers to my comments on Jilin
investments by Temasek Holdings (see below). It is also available at my blog:
http://tan-koktim.blogspot.com/2010/...s-in-huge.html
and
Facebook: tankoktim
Also at Google docs, the link is:
https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=1_JCk-GUuX1qXkhP414iK1WN02ptKpJ-esSQxzlgzxnk&hl=en#
=======================
Temasek Holdings’ investments in a huge farm project in Jilin, China
Sharing and inviting comments on what I wrote to the government and the media on the subject matter.
Quote:
I refer to the media reports that Temasek Holdings will invest in a
huge China farm project, which will be a proposed super farm of 1,450
sq km that will be named China-Singapore Jilin food zone with land
twice the size of Singapore.
In my email of 25 July 2002 [see below], I suggested to the Singapore
government to invest in overseas farms, forestry, etc., and not just in
concrete and steel in office buildings, hotels, industrial estates, or
in banks, businesses or telco companies, etc.
It is not too late for GIC and TH to look into more such investments by
parking a few hundred millions of dollars here and there to invest in
non-concrete projects.
We should invest strategically by putting our eggs in more baskets and to widen our sources of food supplies in the long term.
The news of the Jilin investment last week is a long wait for me as my
suggestion to the government went back not just 10 years but to as far
back as October 1990. > >
============
MCDS Feedback > hoo.co.uk> > Unit/MCDS/SINGOV@SINGOV > >
> >
Subject: > More freedom, fewer safety nets, will help
Singapore grow >
25 July 2002
> Dear Sirs, > >
I refer to “More freedom, fewer safety nets ‘will help Singapore grow’
” (Straits Times, July 25th) and it reminds me that there is no
absolute freedom in any aspects of the human life. Very few people
understand this. > >
In the Remaking of Singapore, we want the Govt to leave no stone
unturned, not even the CPF sacred cow. > > But when the Govt
announced the coming changes in CPF, those affected voiced against it
strongly.
It is all about on which side of the bread we want the butter to be applied. No one can have the cake and eat it. > >
Govt has made many policy changes over the years. Some they got it
right but not all. They have to pull the brakes and change course
completely for some. >
However, on the whole, the Govt has done well. To err is human.
However, it is wise to listen carefully, consult and not lose touch
with the ground. > >
In difficult times, the art of Govt is about how to bring down the
costs of basic daily necessities. It will carry alot of political
weight when such issues are addressed to calm nerves. > >
Many of us including some young MPs cannot remember the Welcome Club of
the 1950s. We must not lose sight of that chapter of our history in
nation building.
It is still relevant to affluent Singapore today if we wish to continue to grow well economically. >
> I am glad the AVA has provided Bintan and Baatam with technical support in agriculture. More should be done.
I wrote about this in Oct 1990 that we should invest in areas around
our regions to ensure we have steady, cheap and reliable sources of
supply for our basic food needs. We have invested in poultry, pig
husbanding and pawn farming in many countries.
The Govt will say that this be best left to the private sector.
However, there is a strategic factor in such investments and the Govt
should not rely solely on the private sector, which has only one aim
and that is to make profits. >
> It is still not late as I wish to bring forth again > what I recommended many years ago: >
> a) invest in rice, fish and vegetables farming to ensure such
farming activities can thrive overseas as it is important to our own
survival as we need a steady source of food supplies. >
> b) help by giving the needed capital for fertilisers, farming
machines and research in improving crops quality and yields. A firm
foundation in farming will help feed the host nation too, a win-win
situation as there will be less instability in the region when the host
nations are fed, and at the same time ensuring we provide them a steady
market for their produce. Terrorism will not rear its ugly heads so
often.
Investments in factories and buildings are important aspects, it is a
norm a trend, but it will not feed a nation in a downturn like what we
see in Indonesia today. There is social unrest when factories are empty
affecting all.
We should not put too many eggs in one basket. Countries like Laos,
Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, they are hungry for investments to upgrade
their farms. The World Bank can only do that much. But we enter into
such investments for different sets of reasons, and it is for the
betterment of everyone. >
c) Invest in deep sea fishing. We consume thousands of tons of fish each year.
We may not have the expertise and a blue-ocean fishing fleet, but we
can invest in fishing vessels, build them here if we can and equip them
with sophisticated fishing gears and have them manned by foreign crew.
We can provide them a ready market for the catch. > >
No one owes us a living. We may invest in high-tech industries but we
should not lose sight of the traditional areas, which are required to
ensure a steady supply of our basic food needs at the lowest cost
possible. Both the private sector and the government should unite in
joint investments, which would benefit us as well as the investee
countries. >
> d) in addition we should balance and invest in some long term
projects. Examples, joint ventures to open up land around the world to
plant pine and teak forests, etc. It will help both the environment to
stay green, and provide the needed material resources for future
generations as trees will take years to mature.
It does not need much upkeep and maintenance of the trees, and the
future value of money in such investments will be protected. The
initial investments will not be in hundreds of millions of dollars.
It is wise to spread our investments for the sake of our survival as a nation and for future generations. >
>’Unquote”