Singapore is a oligarchic dictatorship and so corruption is somewhat irrelevant there. You have the most important institutions controlled by the Lee family, who's cult of personality remains unquestioned by those in outside Singapore, I mean did Lee Hsien Loong really deserve to be senior wrangler at Cambridge or is that just PR?
Yes, public sector competence is very high but that's not exactly difficult in an authoritarian and highly educated city state.
I'm sure there's a lot wrong with Singapore but the closest countries with comparable quality of government are Australia and Taiwan or Japan.
If the Lee family have a cult of personality it's invisible to tourists too. And Cambridge didn't even put the thumb on the scales to let in the current generation of the royal family, you really think they care about the Lees?
Of course a top University in the UK cares about the Lees. If you were like Lee Hsien Loong and nearly guaranteed to be a next generation political leader, any sane self-interested educational institution would give you preference.
Universities do this all the time, accepting children of foreign oligarchs who have CVs and test results padded with dubious measures. Why do you think the LSE brushed under the table Saif Gaddafi's ghostwritten doctorate? (a) because they didn't notice, or (b) the network effect of having the presumed (at that time) next dictator of Libya?
Cambridge never needed to put the thumbs on the scale for the current generation of the UK Royal Family because they never applied.
Lee Hsien Loong's story just seems like a propaganda story tailored for the perfect Singaporean technocrat (clever, driven, and can fit himself into any institution). While he's no idiot, his life could have been dreamed up by the North Koreans, a meteoric career in the army, receiving the title 'Chief Wrangler' at Cambridge. It sounds like propaganda.
Not that I disagree entirely however if Singapore is an oligarchic dictatorship then most democracies are. This includes UK & USA which we are discussing here.
Regardless Singapore has very low levels of corruption from what I have seen and experienced.
not at all true. Singapore is known for having draconian laws (such as no gum chewing) and it's government is high corrupted oligarchy. I've read about the previous leader Lee Kew that ruled with a iron first and died recently . He was the one that revitalized Singapore in the late 1970s to where it is today and its rampant corruption was an effect of his harsh rule and greed
You have read, I have experienced. Lee Kuan Yew was extremely anti-corruption and his actions back this up. When the CIA tried bribe him with $3.3m (about $25+m in todays cash) he turned it down. The guy was a master strategist and made it work for Singapore anyhow. You can read about it here: http://singapore.coconuts.co/2015/03/24/lee-kuan-yew-once-un...
...or if you are interested just google it and read about it somewhere else.
If Singapore were corrupt it would be more like Malaysia (it used to be a part of Malaysia). Instead Singapore is an economic miracle surrounded by hostile countries. The anti-corruption culture Lee Kuan Yew developed permeates every layer of society here. Try bribe a Singaporean cop and see how far you get. My brother-in-law works for the Land Transport Authority. He will not discuss the details of any up-coming projects with anyone, not even close family members, for fear that word will get out and speculators will take advantage.
Finally if you think the chewing gum law is draconian I can't really help you. It is completely inconsequential and I say that as someone who likes to chew gum. More worrying are the corporal punishment laws, lack of press freedom and civil rights violations (gays sex is still illegal for example) however 2 of 3 of these problems also exist in the USA today and 1 in the UK.
How so? Singapore has open and free elections. Anyone can run, it's just that the PAP, for all their flaws, do such a good job that there is no reason to vote them out. This is a reflection of the low corruption environment.
Or, lest we forget PRI, it is a sign of insanely high corruption. (Not saying it's the case in Singapore, just pointing out that a one party system doesn't necessarily point towards low corruption).
There's other possibilities (low press freedom, etc).
