Jamus Lim on Minister Chee Hong Tat’s remarks on fiscal policy: Calls for genuine debate over rhetoric

Workers’ Party (WP) Member of Parliament (MP) for Sengkang, Associate Professor Jamus Lim, offered a thoughtful rebuttal on Facebook to remarks made by Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat during the Economic Society of Singapore’s Annual Dinner on 28 August.

The event, held at Orchard Hotel, brought together policymakers, economists, academics, and business leaders to discuss critical economic challenges facing the nation.

In his speech, Minister Chee, who is also the Second Minister for Finance, addressed the government’s approach to managing the economic impact of global inflation, particularly in the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

He highlighted the importance of sustainable economic management, focusing on productivity improvements, skill development, and prudent fiscal policies aimed at supporting lower- and middle-income groups without resorting to broad-based subsidies or price controls.

However, the speech took a sharp turn when Minister Chee criticized “some parties” for what he described as indulging in “fiscal fantasies”—proposals to increase public spending without adequately considering the long-term fiscal implications or the necessity of raising taxes to support such spending.

He characterized such approaches as politically irresponsible and economically unsound.

Minister Chee also addressed the issue of drawing down from Singapore’s past reserves, arguing that it is disingenuous to suggest that such actions would not deplete resources meant for future generations.

He employed a metaphor to underscore his point: “The way I see it – if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it is a duck. Don’t try to mislead people by saying it is a chicken.”

In his Facebook post, Associate Professor Lim, who is also an associate professor of economics at ESSEC Business School, acknowledged agreement with several substantive points made by Minister Chee, particularly the need to balance mass transport needs with rising costs and the government’s role in managing the cost of living.

He also welcomed the progress on the Johor-Singapore Rapid Transit System, as highlighted by Minister Chee.

However, Assoc Prof Lim expressed concern over the rhetoric used by Minister Chee, particularly the remarks about “fiscal fantasies.”

Assoc Prof Lim cautioned that such language risks framing moderate policy differences as irreconcilable stances, which could perpetuate a climate of fear and turn constructive policy discussions into emotionally charged debates.

He emphasized that the Workers’ Party’s fiscal approach does not involve unfunded liabilities but rather proposes alternative taxes—targeting the wealthy, large corporations, and activities with negative societal impacts—instead of placing additional burdens on middle-class households.

Assoc Prof Lim humorously noted that if the Workers’ Party had made similar remarks about the government’s fiscal policies, they might have been subjected to a POFMA (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act) correction.

He used this point to illustrate what he perceived as a double standard in how fiscal policy debates are conducted in Singapore.

Responding to Minister Chee’s metaphor about the reserves, Assoc Prof Lim argued that while it is important to be cautious about drawing down reserves, the issue requires a nuanced discussion.

He suggested that there should be an honest and thoughtful debate about when and how these reserves should be used for the public good, rather than simplifying the issue into a metaphor that might obscure the complexities involved.

Assoc Prof Lim concluded by advocating for a more constructive approach to public discourse, one that encourages genuine debate over policy choices without resorting to rhetoric that could polarize the conversation.

He called for discussions to focus on whether society agrees with these policy choices rather than using terms like “fiscal fantasies,” which, according to Assoc Prof Lim, only serve to scaremonger rather than engage in meaningful debate.