Opinion
A decade later, the same problem: PAP’s one agency approach falls short again
Opinion: Ten years after former PM Lee Hsien Loong championed the “One Agency” approach to streamline governance, Singapore faces the same inefficiencies under PM Lawrence Wong. The PAP’s failure to resolve these issues raises questions about competence and the sincerity of their reform agenda.
![](https://gutzymedia.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/wp/2024/08/18233133/Lee-Hsien-Loong-2014.png)
The People’s Action Party (PAP) government has long touted its commitment to efficient and integrated governance, yet a decade after former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s grand vision of a “One Agency” approach, Singaporeans are left wondering if these promises were ever more than mere rhetoric.
In 2014, during his National Day Rally speech, Mr Lee highlighted the absurdity of inter-agency fragmentation by recounting examples like the infamous “fishball stick” incident, where multiple agencies were involved in cleaning a single walkway.
To address such inefficiencies, he announced the creation of the Municipal Services Office (MSO) to streamline public service delivery and ensure a more coordinated approach among government agencies.
Fast forward ten years and Singapore’s newly appointed Prime Minister Lawrence Wong is still grappling with the same issues, albeit in a different context.
In his 2024 National Day Rally speech, Mr Wong admitted that the country’s regulatory environment had become burdensome, stifling innovation and increasing costs for businesses.
He pointed to the complicated process of organizing drone shows as a prime example of how bureaucratic red tape had grown unchecked. To address this, Mr Wong announced the formation of yet another inter-ministerial committee, this time to review and simplify these outdated rules.
The glaring question is: why was the “One Agency” approach, so passionately advocated by Mr Lee in 2014, not consistently applied over the past decade? Why has it taken so long for the government to recognize and address these inefficiencies?
The very fact that Mr Wong is now initiating a similar reform, albeit focused on business regulations, suggests that the PAP government has either been complacent or incompetent in following through on its promises.
The irony is hard to miss. Mr Lee’s 2014 speech was filled with optimism about breaking down inter-agency silos to better serve the public.
Yet, a decade later, Mr Wong’s speech reveals that the problem persists, and now, businesses are bearing the brunt of bureaucratic inefficiency. The new inter-ministerial committee led by Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong is being touted as a solution, but it raises the question: why wasn’t this done earlier? What happened to the “One Agency” approach that was supposed to eliminate these issues?
The PAP’s failure to deliver on this promise not only undermines public confidence in the government’s ability to govern effectively but also calls into question the sincerity of its reform agenda. If the government was truly committed to efficiency and innovation, why have these issues been allowed to fester for so long? Is it sheer incompetence, or is it a deeper systemic issue within the PAP’s approach to governance?
Adding to this concern is the recurring question about inefficiencies that seem to serve political ends rather than the public good. Consider the issue of some HDB blocks having their shelters connecting to amenities built only after the Build-To-Order (BTO) flats are completed. In the eyes of some, this appears to be a way for Members of Parliament to score political points by “solving” a problem that should never have existed in the first place, had the Housing & Development Board (HDB) done its job correctly from the start.
Is this kind of inefficiency intentional, allowing for quick fixes that politicians can showcase as achievements, or is it simply another example of a government machinery that struggles to get things right the first time?
Singaporeans deserve answers, not just more promises. The time has come for the PAP government to reflect on its shortcomings and take real, meaningful action to ensure that the “One Agency” approach is not just a catchphrase but a reality in every aspect of governance. Otherwise, the cycle of inefficiency and bureaucratic inertia will continue, to the detriment of the very people the government is supposed to serve.
![](https://gutzy.asia/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Gutzy-Logo-whiteS.png)
-
Politics2 weeks ago
Jamus Lim on Minister Chee Hong Tat’s remarks on fiscal policy: Calls for genuine debate over rhetoric
-
Community2 weeks ago
Toast Box faces backlash and boycott calls amid price increases
-
Media1 week ago
Notice to Our Readers: Moving Back to The Online Citizen
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Singapore introduces new scheme in April 2025 offering up to S$6,000 in financial support for retrenched workers
-
Politics2 weeks ago
Jamus Lim raises concerns over high cost of living and its impact on Singaporeans’ sense of belonging
-
Opinion2 weeks ago
Chee Hong Tat’s call for fiscal prudence rings hollow amid contradictory government spending
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Tan Suee Chieh: Sacrificing NTUC Income’s values for short-term gains undermines its foundation
-
Comments2 weeks ago
Netizens raise skepticism over Inclusiveness of Singapore’s new Jobseeker Support scheme
Just last week, met a FW in our recently refurbished HDB lift. There was a glitch and I pointed it saying “No Good”. FW (who was doing another project): “Can complain Town Council.” So happened talked to 70+YO retired neighbor earlier and he recounted his displeasure of the issue and how he complain-king to the MP. Me: “Neighbor below said he saw MP, MP said see TC, TC said see HDB,….” By now FW began laughing. Me (cont’d):” …. HDB said see contractor, I think contractor next see foreman and foreman will see your friend who installed lift previously.” Even… Read more »
Wrote to Oneservice on a e-scooter riding on pavement and into HDB block’s void deck, to deliver Grab food. LTA responded, ask me write to town council, not their scope. Government agencies and ministries are beyond lazy,
… non-accountability. Gave up on this government.
The PAP need not do anything anymore as they are confident of staying in power. So if we want change, just do it at the ballot box. I have not watched a NDR since the fishball story from LHL. I only watched LW on the Education grants, scholarships and monies the government will give out. Later he spoke about the sports hub and athletes performance in the Olympics. There was no long term projections of where the State is heading or even short term projections. It was just as always about nothing so the T.V got switched off.
On the “fishball stick” incident, Kayu Son’s solution was to increase the number of Coordinating Ministers from one to three. Recall I advocated with such mentality, he better add ten coordinating ministers instead. And since then, with 3 Coordinating Ministers, we can still paint a BTO completely in red; there was no central education that cotton isn’t from sheep; that million$ ministers can’t demonstrate Ownself Check Ownself, etc. Adding bureaucracy, rather than establishing direct KPIs to solve a problem, is a sure sign of promoting bootlickers over the welfare of the country. Allowing a No Blaming Culture (whenever they fuxkup… Read more »
All the papee arse licking fat cats sitting comfortably on their fat arses enjoying the perks of office got no incentive to change to be more efficient to do so is to be at the detriment of themselves.
If this is a real issue, then is those who vote to Condone them part of the problem? Complicit? Retarding SG making progress? My short view on Democracy is, all variants known and practised in the world to-date are failed versions of Democracy because we see that the Majority of all countries are not able to discern the political issues and worse is , despite their power to make change, they CONDONE the ruling party instead of forcing them to make real improvements . They basically ensured More of The Same. This is true worldwide. Real Democracy is not Lobbyist… Read more »
Go on then, be brave, smart and stupid at the same time, … and keep voting them in and you’ll have half a decade, … for every term with them !!!
Who knows, … this naive and nonsensical citizenry may just be dumb enough to want the same, even if it hurts and harm !!!
Masochism springs to mind !!!
All PEDESTRIANS, SGpns 1000s and 1000s UNDERSTAND the PAP THE BIGGEST liars – when they ASSURED provisions of Bicycle Marshalls to Police safety in shared footpaths.
Anyone seen any Marshall???
And this PROMISE WAS MADE in a Holy Place, Parliament where ACTUALLY NO LIES are TOLERATED.
Then?
Is the PAP ready and game for a seismic shift?
How much the world has spinned, and the PAP went giddy but they CLAIMED they MOVED with times when actually they remain status quo while spinning their head CAME OUT with NO ideas, ownself pat ownself, well done.
Goh Chok Tong used to tell SGpns to go GUERILLA – talked cock, ONLY a PIECE OF LIE.
Theyve basically LOST THE PLOT.
Nothing will change much until more alt.parties getinto parliament to balance out…
As long as Loong is pulling the strings or LW still needing a babysitter, we’re doomed in this cycle…
So many promises made and he ‘s begging for our support.
Hmmm…lets see results first, ok?
Need shelters at traffic lights/pedestrian crossing to protect against sun and rain while pedestrians wait. Solar panels can be placed above the roofs of such shelters. Sidewalks that are so patched up and full of cracks need to be resurfaced. Some are also very rough and bumpy with big granite chips embedded in them.
i guess … that One Agency idea will be recycled again in 2034
I’m sorry but it’s time to stop legitimizing their perspective with attempts to understand their contemptible positions. We’ve been down that road, and it leads nowhere. Some lies are wrong because they have bad consequences; some lies are wrong because they betray trust; some are wrong because they are the outcome of vicious traits such as cowardice or selfishness; some are wrong because they deny the autonomy of rational agents.
He managed to cover 4 of these! At least he’s good at something ….
If they are so efficient ,they would not have their contractors digging one part of the road month , patch it up and dig again 2 months later and another 6 months later again!
Your money….you know…being used for digging!😆😆😆😆😆
Talked so much but said so little on how the gov is going to tackle cost of living…..rising prices…but he telling us about world issues impacting sg and climate change…yes sure we know that..
I could see most of the attendees looked bored & tired…workers who mustve been chosen to attend the ndr after work…
I suppose if there are more govt entities it is harder to keep track of their spending and functions may be duplicated.
In the end, it is the people who will be paying more these inefficient services.
We need anti trust laws to prevent companies from working together to control prices unfairly or to create a monopoly. We need to break up monopoly, oligopoly and those who control price to create a competitive market to reduce prices. Stop making rich become richer. The new way forward.
We need anti trust laws to prevent companies from working together to control prices unfairly or to create a monopoly. Singapore PAP through Temasek,GIC and many companies control many Singapore big companies like NTUC to suck people money and now prices of many products are high. We need to break them all up. Many people go to Malaysia, Johor Bahru to buy grocery see the truth about Singapore prices. Singapore companies are making money and profit but they raise prices on consumers. To reduce prices and create a competitive market, we need anti trust laws to make prices competitive. Break… Read more »
The simple answer is that there are no incentives to make a government smaller. What do you get when you make government larger? More voters who will vote for your government to secure their jobs. What benefits does the ruling government get by keeping government in this tiny island larger? 1) Securing more Votes by employing more citizens. 2) Securing more tenders for their cronies, thus securing more votes. 3) Being able to “tout” the achievements of the alphabet soup of government bodies, thus securing more votes. The inefficiencies do not matter, at least in the beginning. Until of course… Read more »
It’s inevitable from a design and engineering perspective that what’s fundamentally flawed is unsustainable and cracks will show beneath the facade of “perfection”.
Wealth cannot last 3 generations. The OG no more, those taking over are not the OG. Parry name may remain the same but the OG is no more. People are different. Same party , different substance
I mention before , eagerly waiting
Those half pass 6 people want to 陪葬
By all means