A time consistency approach to conscription enforcement
So the decision has been made.  A guy by the name of Ike has won a scholarship to a prestigious US music college but will have to give that up due to him being liable for NS soon.

Now, I have discussed this issue from the economic perspective of opportunity cost and efficiency here.  It is easy to apply the same perspective to Ike.  Suppose we let him go and study the fine art of violin playing and he comes back as a superstar, drawing nights after nights of packed crowds at the Esplanade.  Our GDP might increase by say 5 million dollars over his lifetime.  If he goes into NS and have to give up his dreams of being a violinist and be an ordinary salaried employee, our GDP might increase by 1 million. Thus, the cost of him serving NS is 4 million dollars and not the puny allowance that we pay Ike for both his full time NS as well as his reservist trainings. 

Of course, the above arguments rely on quite strong assumptions but you get the point.  I was quite optimistic that Ike might get deferment because of the publicity over the ST forum but the Kway Teow Man and Mr Wang predicted correctly while I was wrong.  On retrospect, you can understand the decision.  It was Parliament who enacted the rule "No deferment for university studies unless you are a goverment scholar" permanently into the invisible rulebook that all civil servants carry in their jobs. Other than maybe LHL or LKY, the rest of the civil servants have no power to change the rules in the rulebook.  Col Benedict Limm like all civil servants, is suppose to enforce the rules that are already in the rulebook and we cannot blame him.  If we want the rules to be changed, the proper way is to petition the PAP to change it in parliament or run for the government yourself and change it after Singaporeans vote you in hehe.

As a further elaboration of the above principle, let me sidetrack a bit now. Those who are used to dealing with the civil service are well aware of the need to frame your grievances as close to the rules as possible. Once your particular situation falls within the rules, the civil servant can easily tell you a straight Yes or No. The real nightmare is of course when your situation does not align to the rules, like the recent RGS white elephant T-shirt saga. Under such circumstances, the tendency for civil servants is to say No, no matter how you argue. Sim Wong Hoo famously calls this tendency the "NUTS" or the No U turn syndrome. You can read an extract from his book, ''Chaotic Thoughts from the Old Millennium'', here

But let me now approach this Ike issue from Mindef's perspective.  I (Mindef) have just urged for strong measures to stop these people trying to defer their NS and now the damned Straits Times have to publicize this issue and as a result, I see so many letters to the ST forum urging me to give Ike a chance to defer NS.

Now if I give in to these demands, a problem arises. If Ike refused to come back even after completing his studies, saying that he has to earn big bucks performing as a world class violinist, there is really nothing I can do. 

This is the classic economic problem of time consistency: basically, as all parents know, giving in to the kid now makes it much more difficult not to give in later.  This is the same problem Bush's faces in his recent immigration Bill.  You cannot grant current illegal immigrants amnesty and then say all future illegal immigrants from now on will not get amnesty.  The potential future illegal will reason that, after a few years of staying illegally and building up the numbers, the same pressure will be there again to grant him amnesty.  (If this is confusing, always think about parents disciplining their kids, they have to make "credible threats" for punishment to work hehe)

So Mindef have to be strict now and stick to the rule, which is again, "No deferment for university studies unless you are a goverment scholar" and make zero exemptions.  The moment you grant one, the floodgates would be open for others to urge for deferments. 

Of course, beyond the economics, the real problems I see with this rigid stand is, like I have mentioned before, male Singaporeans are effectively taxed by the sole virture of being a male Singaporean.  The principle of equal misery, that Ike cannot be deferred because "to do so would be unfair to others who have put their personal aspirations and goals on hold to serve NS when called upon to do so" (quote from the letter below), side stepped the entire argument of how the FT policy has changed the dynamics of the social contract that every male Singaporean has with Singapore.  How can you talk about equity when there is now a significant number of non Singaporean and Singaporean males who need not serve NS. To rub salt into the wound, you even ask Ike to do an early registration for NS haha.

Future male Singaporeans, I weep for you.  Remember, if your future parents choose not to give birth to you in Singapore, it is for your own good.  You will thank them later.  As for present Singaporeans like Ike, there will never be a time when you can be thankful just as Americans are now. 

===================
http://www.straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/forum/story/0,5562,395419,00.html?
May 25, 2006
No NS deferment for violinist Ike to study in US institute

I REFER to the letters 'Give Ike a chance to pursue his dreams' and 'Mindef should grant teen violinist NS deferment' (ST, May 17).

Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singaporeans and Permanent Residents are liable to serve National Service upon reaching 18 years of age. However, Mindef has exercised flexibility by not insisting that all NS-liable males enlist immediately upon turning 18.

In determining when a person is to be enlisted, Mindef considers two main factors: the need to preserve equity in terms of educational attainment before NS, and the need to enlist NS-liable males for rigorous military training while they are young and fit.

Mindef has therefore allowed students to attain educational qualifications up to 'A' level, polytechnic diploma or their equivalent before requiring them to serve NS.

Students taking up such courses may be granted deferment from NS for a reasonable amount of time until the completion of their courses.

NS-liable males will therefore be enlisted at the earliest opportunity after turning 18 or when they have finished such courses.

Mindef is prepared to grant deferment to pursue university studies under very exceptional circumstances. Such cases are rare and can only be considered when there are exceptionally strong reasons.

Mindef has to ensure that the principle of equity is upheld when considering applications for deferment so as to uphold the commitment of the vast majority who dutifully fulfill their NS obligations before pursuing university studies.

This issue was thoroughly debated in Parliament in March and the principles under which equity is maintained for national service were reaffirmed.

In the case of See Ian Ike, Mindef has given due consideration to his appeal. However, we are unable to accede to his request for deferment to pursue his university studies before NS.

To do so would be unfair to others who have put their personal aspirations and goals on hold to serve NS when called upon to do so.

Mr See may wish to consider applying to enlist for NS earlier, under Mindef's Voluntary Early Enlistment Scheme (VEES).

This will allow him to complete his full-time NS earlier and proceed for further studies thereafter. He may contact the Central Manpower Base at 63733120.

Col Benedict Lim
Director, Public Affairs
Ministry of Defence