MDDI 演讲稿 · 2017-08-22
维文部长就智慧国话题接受彭博社面对面采访实录
Transcript of Minister Vivian Balakrishnan's Offline, On-The-Record Interview with Bloomberg on Smart Nation On 22 August 2017
要点
- • 维文谈「智慧国」三层目标：①人的生活质量；②企业效能；③机会的分布。第三层最根本——若数字革命让中产岗位流失或工资停滞，社会就麻烦了。
- • 类比上一轮工业革命：当年镀金时代有 Carnegie、Rockefeller；今天数字寡头是 Gates、Brin、Page、Bezos、Zuckerberg。真正挑战是「让技术商品化」——孕育新的中产。
- • 新加坡做法：①5 年 190 亿新元 R&D；②基础设施（光纤到户、宽带与移动连接力争世界第一）；③数字平台（电子支付、安全数字身份、PKI、国家传感器平台）；④以「政府采购」（GovTech 24 亿新元中 60%+ 给本地 SME）替代「补助专制」（grantocracy）。
- • 数字身份是关键缺失项：FAST + PayNow 把转账费降为 0；下一步「数字 ID」——让买车、买房等可以「无纸、无现金、无在场」地数字化完成。
- • 「政府的工作是打开平台、让创新与竞争发生」。「不要责怪贸易、不要打贸易战、不要试图把过时岗位『岸内化』——投资基础设施、投资人民、跟上数字革命。」
完整译文（中文）
MDDI 英文原文译文 · 翻译日期：2026-05-03
本文已从早期版本的网站迁移过来——格式可能有不一致之处。
点击此处观看 Bloomberg.com 上的视频
[彭博后续与维文部长的离线访谈实录如下。]
彭博：能介绍下「智慧国」吗？未来 1 到 2 年里有没有想看到的近期目标？因为眼下有一种紧迫感。
部长：我们可以从三个层面看「智慧国」。第一层是「人的生活质量」；第二层是「企业效能」；第三层是「社会中机会的分布」。
第一层——便利、安全、可获取性。事实上——若你做对了——技术会「退到背景中」。比如想想 iPad——孩子能用、长者能用——它是直觉的——这是「设计」。这是一层。
下一层——企业效能。我们的公司是否在产出——具有竞争力且相关——的新产品与新服务？是否更高效？是否能扩张？这其实关乎「资源利用与配置」——以及「企业竞争力」。
但第三、也是更根本的一层——是「机会」。当一个社会未能跟上数字革命时——一个早期信号——是「中产岗位流失或中产工资停滞」。新的价值创造方式涌现——也有新的「分配价值之果」的方式。你必须彻底重塑工具、提升技能。你也必须确保——「没有人被甩下」。我之前说过——「年龄太小或太大都不影响学新东西」——这就是为什么我们投资教育、投资 SkillsFuture。我们对「行业转型地图」（Industry Transformation Maps）念念不忘——它是「未来经济理事会」（由王瑞杰部长主席）的一部分。因为只有当你真正提升了社会的技能——才能把人与正在被创造的新岗位匹配起来。每一次工业革命之初——往往伴随「不平等加剧」的「镀金时代」（Gilded Age）。如果你回想上一次工业革命——出现在脑海的名字——Carnegie Mellon、Rockefeller——他们代表钢铁、银行、石油。今天——伴随「数字寡头」——你想到的名字是 Gates、Brin、Page、Bezos、Zuckerberg。他们是数字寡头——因为这是数字革命的早期阶段。
真正的挑战——是把技术「商品化」——让新的中产兴起——使用并享受这项技术的果实——这才是真正的挑战所在。
彭博：那新加坡如何走到那一步？
部长：对新加坡而言——我们在多个层面同时做。第一——R&D。这就是为什么我们划拨 190 亿新元——用于未来 5 年的研发。第二——硬件。对我们而言——这一块差不多完成了——光纤已经到家——若你仔细看「光网络终端」（ONT）——会发现我们其实已经有「两根光纤」。我们的目标是——在宽带与移动连接上做世界最佳——这部分几乎是「容易的」。我们目前在做的另一些事——是数字平台——电子支付、含生物识别与 PKI（公钥基础设施）以支持加密的「安全数字身份」。
我们也在推出「国家传感器平台」。我之前提过——传感器很便宜——但「融合数据、产生相关且可执行的洞察」——才是挑战所在。我们希望把这些平台对私营部门开放——「开放数据、开放平台、开放 API」。这样私营部门——能借助这些共享平台与共享数据——产出新的产品与服务。
最后——我们将以「采购服务」而不是「发补助」的方式——「喂养」私营部门。
举个例子——GovTech 用于全政府 ICT 招标的 24 亿新元预算——60% 以上流向数字领域的本地 SME。这是「从需求侧喂养」的例子——「自己吃自家狗粮」——把机会给到自己的初创与企业。我们看到——私营部门能在这些平台之上——使用共享数据——创造新产品与服务——而政府按定义——要么不做这些事、要么做不了像私营部门那样快、那样高效。
我们通过「采购他们的产品与服务」来「喂养」他们。这是「需求驱动」的模式。我不相信「补助专制」（grantocracy）。
彭博：你提到了那些「数字寡头」、还报了那些名字。但如果真的被少数人控制——你怎样才能帮中产升到那一层？我们是希望造出自己的 Zuckerberg、Bezos——还是利用他们已经造出来的、并帮中产成为其中一部分？
部长：让我回到「创造一个新数字中产」的想法——通过把工具与技术「商品化、民主化」。再用上一轮工业革命的例子——是「二战后的《GI 法案》」——让美国战争退伍军人接受了大众级大学教育——给了他们教育、培训与工具去抓住上一波工业革命。这就是为什么美国中产有了「黄金时代」（Golden Age）——而不是「镀金时代」（Gilded Age）。「黄金时代」的标志——是中产兴起、工资上升——使用当代的技术。
我们应当瞄准的——是「在数字时代重演这一幕」。所以我衡量成功的指标——是中产。我们在创造新岗位吗？我们的人民有装备来抓住这些新岗位吗？这才是真正的成功指标——不是我们造出多少「数字寡头」。当然——新加坡有有活力的初创圈——有 6 到 12 个独角兽（估值 10 亿）——若把门槛放低到 5 亿到 10 亿——我们大概能数出十几乃至上百个这样的公司。
拥有这些当然不错——但这不是「足够」的成功指标。它「也许」是必要的——否则就完全不在场。但真正重要的——是中产的工作与中产的工资。这是政治的「重心」。
再回到国际层面——「不要责怪贸易、不要发动贸易战、不要试图把过时岗位『岸内化』。投资基础设施、投资人民——跟上数字革命。」
彭博：这就是为什么你们采用开放平台——并把支出的一大块投到 SME 上——因为这是「民主化」与「构建中产」的一部分。
部长：是的——这是「机会」。所以我那「三层分析」很重要。第一是人的福祉、第二是企业效能。但更根本的——是「机会」。当价值链已被彻底颠覆——价值的创造方式焕然一新时——政治问题——就是「数字经济果实的分配」。我相信——政治体系的使命——是把生产工具民主化——并促进这场革命之果更公平的共享。
彭博：所以基本上——你们要看中产如何能从中受益？
部长：是的。关于「我们不能去无现金，因为有些人会觉得不便」——这种纷扰——答案不是「放慢」，而是「加倍下注、跑得更快」。
在这样做的同时——确保「没有人被落下」。你跟我说没智能手机？我送你一部都比拖慢这场革命便宜。你说目前的公共交通支付不便？我同意你——目前做法的确荒唐。我们要加快这场革命——把它做得如此便利、无痛、透明、无缝——以致反对意见自行消失。这才是我们要做的。所以——你不能慢下来。你必须加速。这基本就是总理那次演讲的内容——「加倍下注、加速前进」。
彭博：所以你们会比如把信用卡交易费降下来吗？
部长：那不是政府要做的。
彭博：不是——但你们可以监管它。
部长：让我这样说——我们「逼」银行造出了 FAST（快速安全转账）——又「逼」他们造出了 PayNow。这意味着什么？意味着今天——我不需要你的银行账号——只要你的电话号码——我就能转钱。手续费是多少？零。如果我是信用卡公司或电子钱包公司——我会注意这件事。为什么政府要创造或推动「把交易成本几乎降为零」的平台？因为真正的价值——回到经济中的「价值创造」——不是把每笔交易抽 3% 或 6% 的佣金——而是「润滑交易」——让真实的产品与服务以「具竞争力且相关」的方式被产出。这是我们想做的。
如果今天我能免费转给你——为什么我要用信用卡付你钱？但若我能在「个人层面」做到——那「小贩、零售商、企业」呢？他们是不是也该被允许搭上这个共同基础设施？
重点是——一旦你创造了这一平台、并把它开放——我推动的另一件事——是把 API 也开放。请注意王瑞杰部长最近的讲话。我们以前在「银行与非银行」之间画了非常明确的界线——但我认为这条线必须降下来——因为技术变了。未来的金融科技提供者——会是银行、电信、零售商，还是共享经济公司？答案是——「你不确定」。政府的工作——是打开平台、允许创新与竞争发生。让最终胜者胜出。希望——尤其对欠发达国家——这能真正做到「让生产者（农民、手工艺人、服务提供者）——以最低交易成本——接入全球市场」。让全球金融——以「高效、便宜、即时、安全」的方式跨境流动。这就是这些平台真正允许的。所以重点是——我们正经历一段大酝酿期——你不应「先验地」决定哪个物种会成功。
未来成功的公司——可能还没被发明。但我们必须把选项保持开放——这样我们才在场上。所以——这就是哲学。超越「便利」——甚至超越「企业竞争力」（虽然这也重要）——在更深层——是机会、价值创造与分配。
彭博：你愿意把「进入门槛」降下来——这是巨大的进步——也是心态的改变。
部长：但我们必须这样做——因为我开始就说——你看连通性、AI、机器人、基因组学——这是一场革命——它改变我们生活、工作、玩乐、流动、组织、沟通的方式。无论你喜不喜欢——一场革命就在发生。因此——这是值得冒的风险——必须做出投资。如果你目光短浅——你才会去做「责怪贸易」之类的事。
陆路交通管理局（LTA）说 2020 年实现无现金——但说真的——我觉得这件事得更快。为什么不能？我们如今在「个人层面」已经能即时自由交易——下一步显然是「零售」。问题是——为什么要等 3 年？答案是——还少一块——「数字身份」。即便是几百块的交易也能搞。
但我会数字化地买你的车、买你的房吗？能不能做到「无纸、无现金、无在场」？要做到这一点——缺的就是「数字身份」。如果我们的方案成功——我现在还不准备宣布细节——我相信我们会有一个非常有意思且前沿的「数字身份」体系——以「生物识别 + PKI」结合的方式实现安全——人人都能用。
彭博：这是政府数字身份吗？
部长：是的——我们创造平台——但显然关键是「开放」——让私营部门能搭上来。想想中国发生的事——比如 Ali Pay——他们试图用「数字声誉」搭出一个「伪数字身份」。如果我能给你一个「真正的身份」——由政府做真实验证、有真实数字签名、并能用真实加密做安全交易——那会怎样？我们已经有「身份证」（IC）——你做任何严肃交易都需要。但 IC 已是上世纪的东西。即便想想 IC 这件事——更大的问题是——今天我问你——你随身携带最多的、比钱包更不离身的——是哪一件物品？
你的手机。
彭博：在中国——事情一夜之间就发生了。
部长：在中国发生——悖论性地——是因为传统银行与金融系统没那么便利与可及。数字系统——「跳过」（leapfrog）了那些没满足人们需求的旧系统。
在新加坡——我们面对的是相反的问题——我们的金融体系运作良好——监管者也在状态。但我们也可能因此被「困住」——因为我们「太擅长一个本地最优解」。我们准备要再上一层——因为我们的监管者「懂」——我们准备承担风险——并准备打破做事情的旧方式。
维文·巴拉克里什南医生——「智慧国」倡议主管部长
英文原文
MDDI 官网原始记录 · 抓取日期：2026-05-02
This article has been migrated from an earlier version of the site and may display formatting inconsistencies.
Click here to view video from Bloomberg.com
[The transcript of Bloomberg's subsequent offline interview with Minister Vivian Balakrishnan continues below.]
Bloomberg: Can you tell us about Smart Nation? Are there immediate targets over the next 1 to 2 years that you want to see, because there’s a certain urgency to it now?
Minister: We could look at the Smart Nation at three levels. First level is human quality of life; second is enterprise efficacy; third, the distribution of opportunities in society.
The first level – convenience, security, accessibility. In fact, if you do that right, technology recedes into the background. I mean, you think of the iPad, kids can use it, seniors can use it, and it’s intuitive. That’s about design. So that’s one level.
The next level is enterprise efficacy. Are our companies generating new products; new services that are competitive, which are relevant; are they more efficient, are they capable of scaling up? So it’s really about resource utilization and allocation. And enterprise competitiveness.
But the third and more fundamental level is opportunities. One of the early signs that a society is in trouble, not coping with the digital revolution, is when you get loss of middle class jobs or stagnation of middle class wages. There are new ways of generating value, new ways of distributing the fruits of that value created. You need to completely retool and reskill your society. And you got to do it in a way that makes sure that no one is left behind, I made the point that no one is too young or too old to learn new things, and that’s why our investment on education, on SkillsFuture. We are obsessed with Industry Transformation Maps, which is part of Future Economy Council chaired by Minister Heng Swee Keat. Because if you can really up-skill your society, you can match your people with the new jobs that are being created. At the beginning of every industrial revolution, there is often a gilded age with increased inequality. So if you think about the last industrial revolution, the names that come to mind – Carnegie Mellon, Rockefeller – they represent steel, banking and oil. Today, with digital oligarchs, the names you think of are Gates, Brin, Page, Bezos, Zuckerberg. They are the digital oligarchs, because this is the early phase of the digital revolution.
The real challenge is to commoditise the technology so that the new middle class can arise. Using and enjoying the fruits of this technology, that’s really what this challenge should be.
Bloomberg: So how will Singapore get there?
Minister: For Singapore, we’re doing it at several levels. Number 1, R&D. And that’s why for instance, we’ve set aside $19 billion for the next 5 years for research and development. Number 2, hardware. And for us, that’s almost done because we’ve got fibre in every home, if you look carefully at the Optical Network Terminator – we’ve actually got two fibres. We’re aiming to be the best in the world for our broadband and mobile connectivity. That’s almost the easy part. The other things which we’re working on now are digital platforms – e-payments, secure digital ID, with biometric features and PKI (public key infrastructure) to allow encryption.
We are also rolling out the national sensors platform. I mentioned that sensors are cheap, but the ability to fuse the data, to generate relevant and actionable insights – that’s where the challenge is. We want to open these platforms to the private sector. Open data, open platforms and open APIs. So the private sector can generate new products and services using these shared platforms and shared data.
Finally, we’re going to feed the private sector, not by giving grants, but by buying services.
To give you an example, GovTech’s budget of 2.4 billion dollars for whole-of-government ICT tenders – more than 60% of that goes to local SMEs in the digital space. So it’s an example of feeding through the demand side of the equation, “eating your own dog food”, giving opportunities to your own start-ups and enterprises. We see a crucial role for the private sector to ride on the platforms, to use shared data and to create new products and services which Governments by definition, will not be doing or will not be able to do as quickly and efficiently as the private sector.
And we would feed them by buying their products and services. It’s a demand driven model. I don’t believe in a grantocracy.
Bloomberg: You talked about the digital oligarchs, and you know, you cited those names…but how can you help the middle class raise to that level if it’s really controlled by a handful of people? Are we looking to create our own Zuckerberg or Bezos, or are you looking to tap on what they’ve created and help the middle class be part of that?
Minister: I come back to my point about creating a new digital middle class, where we’ve commoditised, democratised the tools and the technology. Again if we use the example of the last industrial revolution, it was the GI Bill after the Second World War, which led to mass college education for American war veterans, which gave them the education, training and tools to take advantage of the last industrial revolution. And that’s why there was a Golden Age for the middle class of America; not a Gilded Age. A Golden Age is when you have a rising middle class with rising wages, using the technologies of the day.
What we should be aiming for is to repeat that for the digital age. So my index of success is the middle class. Are we creating new jobs? And are our people equipped to take those new jobs? That’s the real index of success – it’s not how many more digital oligarchs we create. I mean, yes, of course it’s great that in Singapore we’ve got a vibrant start up scene, it’s great that we’ve got between half a dozen to one dozen unicorns, which means a valuation of 1 billion, and then if you take a lower figure from say, $500 million to $1 billion, I think you’ve probably got 10s or maybe even a 100 of such companies.
So it’s fine that we’ve got all that, but that’s not a sufficient index of success. That’s probably essential to have, because otherwise you’re obviously not in the game at all. But really, it’s about middle class jobs, middle class wages. That’s the political centre of gravity.
And to bring you back to the international level: don’t blame trade, don’t start trade wars, and don’t just try to onshore obsolete job. Invest in infrastructure, invest in your people. Get on with the digital revolution.
Bloomberg: Which is why you’re having open platforms and you’re actually investing a large chunk of the spending on SMEs, because that’s part of the democratisation and creating this middle class.
Minister: Yes, it’s about opportunity. So that’s why that three-level analysis is important. One is human well-being and second is enterprise efficacy. But really the more fundamental thing is opportunity. Now that value chains are completely disrupted, new ways in which value is created and the political problem is the distribution of the fruits of this digital economy. And actually the mission of political systems, I believe, is to democratise the tools of production and to promote a more equitable sharing of the fruits of this revolution.
Bloomberg: So basically you’re going to look at how the middle class can benefit from this?
Minister: Yes. This kerfuffle about how we can’t go cashless because some people might find it inconvenient? The answer is not to go more slowly. The answer in fact, is to double down and go faster.
And while you’re doing that, make sure that no one is left behind. You tell me you don’t have a smartphone? It’s cheaper for me to give you a smart phone than hold back that revolution. You tell me the current payment for public transport is inconvenient? I agree with you. It’s crazy, the way we currently do it. We need to speed up revolution and make it so convenient, so painless, so transparent, so seamless, that the objections disappear. That’s what we need to do, so the thing is, you can’t slow down. You need to speed up. And that’s basically what the PM’s speech was about. Doubling down and speeding up.
Bloomberg: So are you going to bring down, say, transaction fees for credit cards?
Minister: Well, that’s not for Government to do.
Bloomberg: No, but you could regulate it.
Minister: Let me put it this way – We forced the banks to create FAST (Fast and Secure Transfers) and then we forced them to create PayNow. What does this mean? This means today, I don’t need your bank account number. With your phone number I can transfer money. And what’s the transaction fee? Zero. If I was a credit card company or the e-wallet companies, I would be paying attention to this. Why is the Government creating or forcing such platforms which bring transaction costs down to virtually zero? Because the real value comes back to value creation in the economy. It’s not just collecting commission of 3% or 6% on transactions, but on lubricating transactions so that real products and services are generated in a competitive and relevant way. That’s what we’re trying to do.
If today I can transfer to you for free, why should I use a credit card to pay you? But now if I can do it at an individual level, what about hawkers, retailers and enterprises? Should they also be allowed to ride on this common infrastructure?
And the point is, once you’ve created this platform, and you open the platform, the other thing which I’m pushing for is to open up the APIs. And you should notice the recent speech that Minister Heng Swee Keat made. Hitherto we’ve tried to draw a very firm line between banks and non-banks, but I think that line needs to come down, because the technology has changed. So should the fintech provider of the future be a bank, a telco, a retailer or a sharing company? And the answer is, you’re not sure. Government’s job is to open up the platforms, allow innovation and competition to occur. And may the winner succeed. And hopefully, what that really does, if you think especially about less developed countries, you want the producer, whether it’s the farmer, handicraft-maker, the provider of service, to be able to access the global market. You want him or her to be able to collect money or pay money at lowest possible transaction cost. You want global finance, cross border to occur efficiently, cheaply, instantly and securely. That’s what all these platforms actually allow. So the point is, we are living through a period of great ferment, you mustn’t take a priori decision as to which species will succeed.
It’s possible that the company that will succeed may not yet have been invented. But we need to keep options open, then we’re in the game. So that’s really the philosophy. Go beyond just the convenience, go beyond even enterprise competitiveness - although that’s important. At the deeper level - is opportunities, value creation and distribution.
Bloomberg: And the fact that you’re willing to bring down all the barriers of entry is a huge step and change in mind set.
Minister: But we have to do it because again I started off by saying look, you’ve got connectivity, you’ve got AI, you’ve got robotics, you’ve got genomics. This is a revolution. It’s changing the way we live, work, play, mobilise, organise, communicate. Whether you like it or not, there’s a revolution going on. Hence, a risk worth taking, and investments must be made. If you’re short sighted, that’s when you start doing things like blame trade.
Well LTA said go cashless by 2020, but actually, between you and me, I think it needs to be faster than that. Why shouldn’t we? We can now transact freely at individual level instantly. The obvious next step is to move it to retail. The question is, why do we need to wait three years for it? The answer is, there is one missing piece- that’s digital ID. I don’t mind if it’s a few hundred dollars and send to you.
But will I buy a car from you, will I buy a house from you digitally? And can I do that as a paperless, cashless and presence-less transaction? To do that, the missing ingredient is digital ID. If we succeed in our plans – I’m not ready to announce details – I think we’ll have a very interesting and cutting edge digital ID system, which is secure using a combination of biometrics and everyone will have access to PKI infrastructure.
Bloomberg: Is this a Government digital ID?
Minister: Yes, we are creating the platform but obviously the key thing is to open it so the private sector can ride on it. You think of what’s happening in China, with Ali Pay, they are trying to create a pseudo digital ID with a digital reputation. What if I can actually give you a real ID with real verification by government and with real digital signatures and with real encryption to allow secure transactions? We already have ICs (Identity Cards), which you need for any serious transaction. But ICs are so last century. Even if you think about ICs, the larger question is when I ask you today, what is the one item which you always carry with you even more than your wallet?
Your handphone.
Bloomberg: In China, things just happen overnight.
Minister: It happened in China, paradoxically, because the conventional banking and financial system was less convenient and accessible. The digital system leapfrogs over the older systems which were not meeting people’s needs.
In Singapore, we have the opposite problem. Our financial system actually works and the regulators are on top of their game. But we can be trapped because we’re too good at a local optimum. We are prepared to go one up because we have regulators that get it, and we are prepared to take risks and we’re prepared to break the old ways of doing things.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Minister-in-Charge of the Smart Nation Initiative