Singapore Democrats

Home News Singapore Who is PERC?
Who is PERC? Print Email
Monday, 22 September 2008

Singapore Democrats

The Political and Economic Risk Consultancy or PERC, as it is commonly referred to, is held in high praise by Singapore's establishment.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew himself placed the organisation in the same esteemed group with global institutions like the International Bar Association (IBA). That is, until IBA criticised the Judiciary, which then made it a Western liberal NGO out to do this island in.

The Minister Mentor is not the only one, Ministers Mentee also cite the company whenever they get the chance.

The Straits Times regularly carries prominent reports written by it.

"Non-government" think-tanks like the Singapore Institute of International Affairs cannot resist citing it

Even our Supreme Court proudly refers to it.

So who or what is this group that is so admired by Singapore's establishment? Who runs this outfit and what does it do?

PERC's website tells us that it is a "consulting firm specializing in strategic business information and analysis for companies" doing business in East and Southeast Asia. It also produces a range of risk reports on the strengths and weaknesses of individual countries in the region. So far so solid.

But when it comes to information about who runs the organisation, the website is rather diffident. For example under "Senior Management", there is only one name -- a Robert Broadfoot who is described as an economics graduate “directly responsible for managing PERC's research and consulting.”

Is there a governing board? If yes, who is on it? If no, is PERC a sole-proprietorship? Does anyone else run the organisation with Mr Broadfoot?

Based in Hong Kong, PERC says it “coordinates a team of researchers and analysts” but doesn't tell us who they are, how many there are, and what their areas of expertise are. Do they work full-time for the Consultancy or on an ad hoc project basis? If part-time, what are their main occupations and what companies do they work for?

The organisation also avers its "complete independence from any vested interest groups." Several lines below, however, it says that it engages in "retainer work and specific projects" and "in-house briefings" for international business associations. Who these groups and associations are is not revealed.

Such information is important as it allows the reader a gauge of just how independent the organisation is and, by extension, how reliable its reports are. This is especially salient when the reports are cited by governments for political purposes. Simply asserting that the company is completely independent does not make it so.

For example one of its analysts, Mr Bruce Gale, is also a senior writer with the Straits Times. Whether he continues to work for PERC is unclear as the website has no information on him.

Given the nature of the state-media arrangement in Singapore, it is more than fair to ask what an employee of an organisation that is supposed to have "complete independence" is doing writing for a newspaper owned and run by a government. It is imperative that PERC makes clear the status of Mr Gale.

Ironically, Mr Gale himself notes that "most political risk assessment remains both superficial and subjective. Typically, such analysis is very informal, consisting of little more than a few brief visits to the country..."

Even the information about the surveys that PERC conducts such as the kinds of questions asked, the variables used, the sample characteristics, etc are not readily available. One assumes that they are contained in the reports which cost US$645 to subscribe annually. Analysis of the reliability and validity of such surveys is lacking. This is a problem. Yet, the results are held next to biblical truth by those who benefit from it.

The next and obvious question is: Who pays for PERC's services? One will not be surprised to find Singapore's establishment a ready customer. For example, the Nanyang Technological University and the National Institute of Education are online subscribers to the organisation's Monthly Risk reports.

And what do these reports contain? The page tells us that the topics covered are "Politics, Economics, Business." Politics? The Singapore Democrats can confirm that PERC has never attempted to seek our views on matters political in Singapore. We're unsure if the Consultancy has interviewed any other opposition party or civil society group. We could easily find out by doing a search on its website. The only problem is the website doesn't have a Search button.

Given that the organisation is so oft-quoted by the Singapore establishment, it is time that more questions are asked of PERC which must do a better job of providing background information about itself. A consultancy that assesses the political and economic risk of countries must surely understand the importance of transparency.

This article was sent to PERC at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it and it was invited to respond. If and when it does, we will publish it here.

 

 

Share this article:
Facebook Technorati Stumble It! Newsvine Reddit Del.icio.us Digg This!
Comments (23)
  • Carlson
    Good job SDP. People should start doing fact and source checking before believing what PAP dishes out.
  • Anonymous - Need to consult SDP ?
    "... [i]the topics covered are "Politics, Economics, Business." Politics? We can confirm that PERC has never attempted to seek SDP's views[/i]."


    [b]It does not even have to consult SDP. What substance does SDP have, to even warrant consultation ? NOTHING.

    SDP only gives biased views out of hatred.[/b]
  • anon - PERC
    Perhaps we should really go thru' LKY's past accolades. Who knows ...
  • Derek_wong
    First time I feel SDP is asking the right questions!

    well done guys. Hope you guys can find out more.
  • Anonymous
    "Who pays for PERC's services? It's not exactly earth-shattering news to find Singapore's establishment a ready customer."

    In other countries on Earth, Conflict of Interest is deemed as a kind of CORRUPTION.

    In Singapore, which is so eclectically governed that it ought to exist only in Mars, that CORRUPTION is Uniquely defined by the LEEgime Elites to allow Conflict of Interest legally permitted and accepted and recognised as CLEAN.
  • ExSINgaporean - Dig more
    Now we know why LKY hates and even afraid of SDP.

    These type of questions reminds me of my MBA education in Imperial College, London England when my business professor, Professor Eilon would question the validity of the research findings of Marketing firms and the underlining truth of statistical data.

    Just like if Bill Gates walks into a hall will 100 homeless people, "statistically" on the average in the hall all of them are "millionaires". Is this happening in Singapore?...with all the rich Indonesians residing as PR in Singapore. You get my point?

    Later when I did a English business letter writing course under a British lecturer, we were again reminded to question the hidden meanings of the words. For eg if someone writes: "Singapore economy is "good"". Then what is meant by good? Quantify it is possible.
  • curious
    i think sdp should subject organization it cites proudly from to this scrutiny too. it will then make it fair, and show the sdp's impartiality and enhance its credibility.

    dont just cry foul, show some evidence to support your side too. dont just lampoon the other side; their loss and not necessarily your gain.

    and interestingly, will the sdp provide information on its funding purposes? in the pursuit of thoroughness and truthfulness, will the sdp demonstrate that it is, unlike what PERC is suspected of, absolutely independent, and not acting under the influence of any group or persons who are funding them?

    we all know the people who fund groups have very strong last word on policies. so perhaps it is high time sdp shows us this side of things?

    that'll be greatly appreciated by all and sundry who wants to know about the aspiring ruling party of spore.
  • curious too
    Hi Curious

    Is is not great that you can so openly demand that SDP to be transparent and stand up to scrutiny. Now would you or could you do the same with the ruling party. Lets just start by asking them to disclose the details of all their family and kin in govdernment positions.
  • lol - irony??????????
    [color=red][b]What a big irony /joke of the year -LOL- MM/LHL visitng Britain's Opposition but in their own country - their "FIX" OPPOSTIONS LIKE NO BODY'S BUSINESS????????????????????????????[/b][/color]
  • anon - MM Visit
    May be the ruling party wants nothing to do with him?

    Also, I don't think PAP is afraid of SDP ... if we think this way, we are doomed to fail.
  • fairplay - MM's visit
    The reason the govt. does not have dialogue with the opposition in Singapore is because they have no substance and are losers out to destroy the country. Those who support the above writing are envious of the success of others and refuse to acknowledge the progress the country had made.
  • maxChew - All clutching the only straw available?
    Why is every Govt official up to the PM, SM and MM as well as the pro-estab media referencing PERC for its continual praise and bum-sucking of S'pore? It's the only international watchdog albeit quite well-known body available that speaks well of S'pore.
    When u r drowning, u look for any floating thing to cling on to, even a straw. In this allegory, all of them (led by MM) have found the PERC straw and are clinging on to it for dear life.
    It's now up to SDP to investigate fully what kind of org PERC actually is. Is it an independent genuine
    watchdog or something else? Don't forget nowsaday, with money, one can buy/sell almost anything and everything.
  • Anonymous
    [quote]Those who support the above writing are envious of the success of others and refuse to acknowledge the progress the country had made.[/quote]

    Sure the place (Singapore) has progress, spanking upgraded HDBs and nice clean highways, but has the PEOPLE progress as a whole. Have you forgotten that the lower 25% of the income earners have been left behind this thing call 'progress' for more than 10 years now.

    And what about the others, most are just in line with inflation while others are 'progress' by an annual token of 2% - 3% over inflation (progress? or just treading water). Mind this dismal wage situation is no thanks to the PAP ministers who have done their utmost to keep the people's wages low while driving their own wages to the stratosphere compared to leaders around the world.

    Progress??!! You seems to forget that whatever progress that this place has, comes from the collective effort of the people. Not just due to a few PAP ministers at the top.

    The PAP leaders. They progress by leaps and bounds. Millionaires many times over year after year. To a great many people for more than 10 years --- what progress??
  • Anonymous
    They imagine they are Gods.
    But peasants have another dream.


    Oppression Evolution Under LEEgime
    厉狂妖贼暴政镇压异己演化史
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHQ7DERbTjU



    Imagine A Singapore.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqtFKkqe8z8
  • N - re: Dig more
    [quote=ExSINgaporean]Now we know why LKY hates and even afraid of SDP.

    These type of questions reminds me of my MBA education in Imperial College, London England when my business professor, Professor Eilon would question the validity of the research findings of Marketing firms and the underlining truth of statistical data.

    Just like if Bill Gates walks into a hall will 100 homeless people, "statistically" on the average in the hall all of them are "millionaires". Is this happening in Singapore?...with all the rich Indonesians residing as PR in Singapore. You get my point?

    Later when I did a English business letter writing course under a British lecturer, we were again reminded to question the hidden meanings of the words. For eg if someone writes: "Singapore economy is "good"". Then what is meant by good? Quantify it is possible.[/quote]

    Wow.
    I think you've just shattered the "Singapore is a first world nation" myth for me.

    I really do wonder sometimes why Singapore is so vent on silencing opposing voices.

    But you've shed a bit of light on that I feel.
  • Methink
    Methink this is one of the best article written.

    Keep up the good work SDP!
  • Carlson - re: MM's visit
    [quote=fairplay]The reason the govt. does not have dialogue with the opposition in Singapore is because they have no substance and are losers out to destroy the country. Those who support the above writing are envious of the success of others and refuse to acknowledge the progress the country had made.[/quote]

    The real reason is by opening dialogue with opposition parties, PAP might risk seeing as endorsing them. Leaders who can't work across the party line are narrow minded and doomed to fail. And please don't confuse PAP with Singapore. They are not equal.
  • curious
    "Is is not great that you can so openly demand that SDP to be transparent and stand up to scrutiny. Now would you or could you do the same with the ruling party. Lets just start by asking them to disclose the details of all their family and kin in govdernment positions."


    er, i think you have an excessively optimistic mind - just because i can ask, doesnt mean i can actually obtain those answers to my questions.

    and it does seem that the sdp does not really reply on very legitimate queries, like for example about the educational backgrounds and qualifications of the sdp's CEC on the "Who are we" section of the website.

    go have a look at whats going on there and you'll know what i mean.

    and just for the record, you can, in fact, ask the ruling party a whole hosts of question. the frustration doesnt lie in not being able to ask questions, but in not getting a reply, which is not dissimilar to what the sdp is actually, exactly doing too.

    so there's nothing really "great", as it were, about this state of affairs. in any case, i am disappointed that the sdp has once again, highlighted my post. it is not even an offense - it was a mere suggestion.

    why the sdp has to reveal their thinly-veiled tolerance for free speech - championing it when the occasion benefits them and abandoning it when it is their transparency that is in question - is disheartening and puzzling.
  • cozy
    So, what's next? Next election, voters have to be a university degree holder before allowing to vote?

    Many elections ago, thought there was one PAP uni educated candidate lost to one non graduate opposition member for 2 straight elections.

    Now, where was this PAP candidate? Get into the parliament from the backdoor, GRC method under the skirt of someone, and now was and is a Minister.

    He was a loser many times over in my eyes, so shamelessly walked into (not voted in, mind you) parliament! Can't fight and win his own personal election battles, what do you have to say, curious? Graduate vs non Graduate?

    curious, are you going to blame us ordinary citizens for voting in a non grad MP in Potong Pasir now? PAP is good in using such tactic, anything good happenings were due to them and claimed credits, anything bad happenings were due to us citizens!
  • Puzzled
    [quote]and just for the record, you can, in fact, ask the ruling party a whole hosts of question. the frustration doesnt lie in not being able to ask questions, but in not getting a reply, which is not dissimilar to what the sdp is actually, exactly doing too.[/quote]

    Dear Curious,

    Really weird logic?!. Who is the Govt? The PAP or the SDP. The PAP leaders are paid by the people to do a job i.e. governing Singapore. Once in a while, the people or organisation or political party would be questioning the PAP on its decisions. Whether good, bad, popular or unpopular policies/decisions the PAP have to clarify and explain.

    It's as simple as that, the PAP have to explain, clarify, answer on decisions made or policies implemented that affect people, esp. whenever doubts or controversies araises. IT COMES WITH THE JOB!! As the govt of the day, it is the PAP duty and obligation to answer to the people. You think you got that? Curious?

    And as you yourself have said the frustration is not getting answers. PAP has for years done this to the people - not giving straight answers

    [quote]and it does seem that the sdp does not really reply on very legitimate queries, like for example about the educational backgrounds and qualifications of the sdp's CEC [/quote]

    There you go again, Curious. Always inquiring first and foremost a person education background. The same sickening kind of elitist mind as the PAP, using education as the utmost tool to judge a person. As if nothing else matters?!?! You mean to tell me that Singaporeans who don't have a degree is not qualified to form a political party or be a member of a political party. An average non-degree holder Singaporean cannot question the PAP govt on its decisions and policies?

    As the Chinese saying "It's a dog's eyes that look lowly on others"
  • G Chen
    SDP is just a political party and not an academia or professes itself to be a specialist in certain field, so there is nothing wrong with it not stipulating its member's qualification. On a similar note, everyone have the right to question an organisation which professes itself to be an authority in certain field and whose opinions or findings have been quoted as such. Such organisation in fact should welcome any of such challenges which would eventually differentiate the "wheat from the chaff". Anyway, this article makes me decide to go and visit PERC website and I was initially quite impress with it but only to quickly discover that I "clicked" on the wrong website for Property and Environment. Well,subsequently I visited the "Political" PERC website and all I can say is that I dont blame anyone for questioning the credibility of the organisation just solely by looking at the website alone, the rest is as what the article mentioned. As the saying goes "He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever." Thanks SDP for helping many of us not remaining as a fool forever.
  • greyheyn - re: Curious
    [quote=curious]"

    why the sdp has to reveal their thinly-veiled tolerance for free speech - championing it when the occasion benefits them and abandoning it when it is their transparency that is in question - is disheartening and puzzling.[/quote]

    Curious,
    To explain and identify differences in party political behaviour in office and in opposition requires scrutiny on all aspects of the party's attributes not just questions.
  • Chew - Just for your info
    Just for info, the following MPs did not receive a single vote during GE 2006.

    [ Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC ]
    Hri Kumar Sangaran
    Ng Eng Hen
    Wong Kan Seng
    Yong Li Min Josephine Teo
    Zainudin Bin Nordin

    [ Holland-Bukit Timah GRC ]
    De Souza Christopher J
    Foo Yee Shoon
    Liang Eng Hwa
    Lim Swee Say
    Vivian Balakrishnan

    [ Hong Kah GRC ]
    Amy Khor Lean Suan
    Ang Mong Seng
    Yeo Cheow Tong
    Yeo Khirn Hai Alvin
    Zaqy B Mohamad

    [ Jurong GRC ]
    Grace Fu Hai Yien
    Halimah Bte Yacob
    Lim Boon Heng
    Ong Chit Chung
    Tharman Shanmugaratnam

    [ Marine Parade GRC ]
    Fatimah Lateef
    Goh Chok Tong
    Lim Biow Chuan
    Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim
    Ong Seh Hong
    Seah Kian Peng

    [ Tanjong Pagar GRC ]
    Baey Yam Keng
    Indranee Thurai Rajah
    Koo Tsai Kee
    Lee Kuan Yew
    Lui Tuck Yew
    Tan Chin Siong

    [ West Coasr GRC ]
    Fong Jen Arthur
    Foo Chee Keng Cederic
    Ho Geok Choo Madeleine
    Iswaran S
    Lim Hng Kiang

    37 PAP MPs in total, which means 44% of the parliament are form by people who do not represent the people of Singapore.

    Simply put, these 37 PAP MPs were never chosen by the people, and as such, they do not have any moral obligation to take care of the people or fight for their well-beings.

    Still wondering why life is getting tougher and tougher?
Please login or register to post your comments.
 

Latest Videos

SDP's Chinese New Year walkabout 2012
You need a Flash Player enabled browser to view this YouTube video
youtube link

Share this article:
Facebook Technorati Stumble It! Newsvine Reddit Del.icio.us Digg This!
 

SDP Publictaions

Magazine Support SDP , buy our 30th Anniversary Magazine here

minsal
pdf
link

 

Act Now

Support Democracy!
Please Donate
Read:The party that stands up for you
More options to donate
 

Danny the Democracy Bear

Now available online here!

 
Singapore Democrats on Facebook
Banner
Banner

Awesome Words

Where, after all, do human rights begin? They begin in small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any map of the world.

Eleanor A Roosevelt
Banner

News feeds

Singapore Democrat News
Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack