Volume 41 No.11 NOV 2009

MICA (P) 031/01/2009

PRESIDENT’s FORUMAH GU
HOBBIT

TwelveReasonInterview
withChairmanPhilip Yeo
M

r. Philip Yeo is Special Advisor for Economic
Development in the Prime Minister's Office
and also Chairman of SPRING Singapore,a government agency with the mission of enabling
Singapore's small and medium enterprises to broaden anddeepen Singapore's economy.
He was Chairman at the Economic Development Board
from Jan 1986 to Jan 2001 and then Co-Chairman
EDB from Feb 2001 to March 2006 with the mission ofbuilding up the biomedical sciences industry. From Feb
2001 to March 2007, Mr. Yeo was Chairman, Agency for
Science, Technology and Research.
Mr Yeo is credited as the driving force behind
Fusionopolis and Biopolis, both of which are co-located toenhance collaboration across diverse scientific domains
and pave the way for multi-disciplinary research. For his
formative role in Singapore's life sciences industry, Mr Yeo
was awarded the BioSpectrum's Asia Pacific Life Time
Achievement Award in March 2009.

TRAVELOGUEPENANG:

palatepleasing
paradise!

FEATURE

Volume 41 No.10 OCTOBER 2009

Editorial board
EDITORDr Toh Han Chong
Deputy Editor
Dr Tan Yia Swam

MEMBERS
Prof Chee Yam Cheng
Dr Martin Chio
A/Prof Daniel Fung
Dr Hsu Liyang
Dr Lim Boon Leng
Dr Jeremy Lim
Dr Tan Poh Kiang
Dr Tan Wu Meng
Dr Teo Eng Swee Cuthbert

ex-officio
Dr Chong Yeh Woei
Dr Abdul Razakjr Omar

EDITORIAL MANAGER
Ms Krysania Tan

EDITORIAL EXECUTIVE
Ms Gracia Ong

The views and opinions expressed in all the articles
are those of the authors. These are not the viewsof the Editorial Board nor the SMA Council unlessspecifically stated so in writing. The contents of theNewsletter are not to be printed in whole or in partwithout prior written approval of the Editor.
Published by theSingapore Medical Association,
Level 2, Alumni Medical Centre, 2 College Road,
Singapore 169850.
Tel: 6223 1264
Fax: 6224 7827
Email: news@sma.org.sg
URL: http://www.sma.org.sg
SMA Reg. No.: ROS 198/59 TAP
For classified advertisements andprofessional announcements, please contact SMA.
For other advertising enquiries, please contact
Equity Communications Pte Ltd
Tel: 6324 4337

Many scientists think that an idea is a business, butthey are wrong. In the good old days, money could beraised easily, until these scientists finally realised that
an idea is not a business. An idea remains an idea,
until it is transformed into a product or service.

THC: For Singapore to makebiomedical sciences one of thesuccessful pillars of the economy, what
are the key ingredients needed?
PY: The key is to see the link up
between biotechnology companies,
the pharmaceutical industry andResearch and Development (R&D).
Now, we have GlaxoSmithKline(GSK), Novartis and Eli Lilly
laboratories already established here.
The pharmaceutical companies are
currently creating small R&D centres,
many of which are specifically diseasefocused. What I planned in the early
2000s was that we should encourage
this setting; we are the only othercountry in Asia, apart from Japan,
where such a critical mass of major
pharmaceutical companies is situated.
THC: Even in the context of Asia,
can we excel against the Chinese, theKoreans and the Japanese in basic
science and R&D?
PY: St Jude Children’s Research
Hospital in Tennessee has only 56 beds
for paediatric cancer treatments andthe Director is now on the A*STAR
Biomedical Sciences International
Advisory Panel. The crux is indeveloping specialised areas. Focusing
on a specific disease is important
but we should not allow research in
one area to continue forever if it is
not fruitful. Money is finite, so it
should be reallocated. One must findsome laboratories to close and others
to support, but still look after thelaboratory staff at the same time.

America’s science has greatcompetitive advantage. Scientists there
are not rich, but are happy – theirhappiness is governed by a different
reward system. Chinese, Korean andJapanese science is handicapped becauseof poor English.
THC: Geographical clusters may
create a unique value proposition foreconomic growth and competitiveness.
Can we create an economically vibrantcluster system like that between Hong
Kong and Shenzhen?
PY: Hong Kong is part of China, so therelationship between both is like a houseand windows. Singapore, on the other
hand, has no hinterland. If Malaysia andIndonesia succeed, we will also succeed
because we are part of this geographicallocation; we cannot row away! I am ofthe opinion that we should learn Bahasa
in addition to Mandarin.
THC: Many pharmaceutical companies
are moving their operations and R&D
to China. Is that of concern to our own
biomedical enterprise?
PY: China is focusing largely on
producing for its huge market. Anotherissue is that of intellectual property,
if R&D is to take place. The problem
is not of compliance, but one ofenforcement. It is tough because China
is such a big country.
The big pharmaceuticals are here:
GSK, Novartis, Genentech/Roche,
Merck/Schering-Plough, Abbott, andPfizer. I have been involved in this area
since I was at EDB in 1986; I started
sma News november 20093

FEATURE
off with biotechnology investments in
1990, and have built up our know-how
since then.
In mid 1990s, we decided to delve
into chemicals, which involved oil andgas, petroleum and pharmaceuticals
and started doing biomedical
developments in 2000. Many drugs
involve small molecules and links to
GPCR receptors; this leads to side
effects. More science is needed toaccomplish targeted treatment.
THC: That is true; many of the newsmall molecules in cancer are not as
effective as initially hoped.
PY: I agree that it is a tough job
creating good drugs against cancer.
Although we know much more about
how cancers grow and spread today, we
may not have real solutions yet. Manycancer drugs are merely providing extra
months of lifespan.
THC: There is much hope and hypeabout the potential of stem cells andalso the nature and role of cancer stem
cells. Do the latter really exist?
PY: Dr John Dick of the Universityof Toronto, Dr Irv Weissman of
Stanford and Dr Robert Weinberg
of MIT believe in cancer stem cells.
The problem is in identifying thesestem cells and harnessing this new
knowledge in treating cancer. At
the end of the day, there are threeimportant fields moving forward:
cancer, immunology and stem cells.
We have a number of scholars studying
immunology, as immunotherapy isvery important.
THC: How can we convince
Singaporeans to take risks, create newideas and venture into new fields withthe fear of failure being dominant in
our DNA?
PY: Asian parents can influence theirchildren, as they are often the ones4

sma News november 2009

supporting them. We can increase ourtalent by attracting the brightest – andonce this happens, more will join. Thisis the halo effect, although it is harder
to manage smart people as compared toless smart ones. Smart people need roomfor different views – scholars will returnfrom overseas with varying mindsets andwill argue their points and also among
themselves. The key is to have a systemof tolerance for dissent and ideas; theycannot be expected to flourish if put
into small pots.
THC: Why do we not have moreinnovative companies like Apple here?
PY: If a person is bright enough,innovation will follow. The issue hereis that many of our young want to geta job, quickly get married and havechildren. Nothing wrong here, butmany entrepreneurs have late marriages.
How are these people able to marrywhen they are busy struggling away intheir start ups and businesses? It is a realsacrifice and unless one’s partner shares
similar values, it is hard.
THC: What do you think are the traitsof Americans, which enable them tosucceed in the innovation enterprise?

PY: I believe it is their ability tochange. The Americans have the habitof criticising themselves, and this drives
them. Their flaw is with regards to their
massive expenditure. For example, canmost Americans afford a house? They
may be better off renting than buying,
but they are lured by low interest
rates. With the government’s pushfor housing as well as the “American
Dream”, people who should not own
property, do. In comparison to theEuropeans who purchase property tolive in, many Americans purchase themfor flipping. This leads to the equitisingof their house, and they use the moneyfor other purposes.
I suppose all this is partly because
the Americans are optimists; theEuropeans do not do such things. Thatbeing said, I do admire Americans fortheir openness, flexibility, and abilities
for self-criticism and change.
THC: The American free market
system seems to be pretty robust;where certain companies die, they may
also be revived, or have other stronger
companies emerge.
PY: Yes, these companies learn fromtheir mistakes and return. Also, there is

FEATURE
a lack of stigma. In Singapore, the bankwill not see you if you are broke!
THC: Do you feel that universal healthcoverage is the answer to solving thehealthcare problems of disparity andinequity in the US?
PY: Universal health coverage is the way
to go. However, people should not beallowed to “eat free food” otherwise thetaxpayers end up paying all the bills.
The weakness of the current US systemis that everyone uses Medicare, andcharges every expense to it. It is almosta system of abuse, which results inballooning healthcare costs. The current
incentive system for doctors in the US
can also be improved on; which will
reduce the number of unnecessary tests
and charges taking place.
Singapore’s healthcare is betterin this aspect – people pay a portionof basic healthcare, coupled withgovernment subsidies and a choice of
insurance plans. However, on our part,
we must keep up with inflation.
THC: Can Singapore learn fromthe Americans in building global
companies and world-leading
enterprises?
PY: No, that would not be advisable;
we are a small country. Instead, weshould look to the Danish, Swedes,
Finns and Norwegians (for example,
the Scandinavians) and the Swiss.
I always admire the Swiss – they
are much disciplined. Switzerland
has a population of six million, andyet they have produced two giant
pharmaceutical companies, Novartis
and Roche. They have also produced
great Swiss chocolate despite nothaving cocoa!
Perhaps the answer to the Swiss andScandinavian model lies in their social
compact and networks. In addition, thedisparity between the top and bottom
percentile is small.

THC: You once mentioned in the
media that all else being equal, you
would favour a poor scholar over one
from an affluent background. Could
you explain more?
PY: A middle to upper-income family
can afford to give their child the besteducation and exposure from young.
A child from the bottom twentiethpercentile is handicapped from young.
All things being equal, this child willlack exposure and experience when it
comes to interviews. I favoured thosestaying in HDB housing, because there
will be families who can afford to send
their children overseas, and those who
cannot. If a family is able to afford ascholarship, then they should not apply
in the first place. Bond breakers arealways those whose families can afford
to break them. It is always the parents
who pay for the cost of breaking thebond. Those who do not wish to be“tied down” should not have taken up
the scholarship – it is a matter of choice.
THC: Tell us more about yourA*STAR scholars.
PY: Our foreign scholars hold Singapore
passports. They have grown up here.
I do not take people who havereceived their basic degree overseas– they must have received secondary
school education here. However, thisdoes not guarantee that they will not
run away; we are taking a chance. The
problem with Singapore is that with justover 4 million people, we have a limit
to talent.
With four years of upper secondary
and junior college schooling, together
with nine years of BSc and PhD, it
comes up to 13 years! It is a long andcostly horizon, so A*STAR can only
afford to fund about100 BSc to PhD
scholars a year.
We look for future research leaders,
not bookworms. When scholars are
picked, they are seen as the future of

our country. I have a good track recordin my selection; these scholars enter
top schools even as undergraduates.
Whether all end up doing science, ordivert, it is alright as they have had
sufficient foundation.
If managed well, these scholars willcontribute to Singapore and create
an impact in 10 – 15 years. They are
the intangible wealth of our nation,and for me, it is a 15-year effort. Most
importantly, these scholars must comehome. At the end of the day, the topic
of money has never been raised, as they
believe in a different value system. If wesucceed with our scholars, we will havean advantage over all our neighbours.
THC: There have been remarks thatyou might be setting unrealisticallyhigh benchmarks for your scholars– some eminent scientists havecommented that despite not doing wellas an undergraduate, one might stillshine phenomenally later on so there
should be second chances.
PY: The scholars that we look formust be able to do well and survive.
It is no big deal to do well at the
BSc level – to get a GPA of 3.8, all a
student needs is 50% of As and 50%
of A minuses. 3.8 is the cut-off mark,and these students must meet ourrequirements for PhD funding.
I don’t believe that our criteria may
cause us to miss an Albert Einstein or
Lee Hartwell. Both were not selectedat ‘A’ Levels! If our scholar is not able
to survive at the BSc level, he/she willprobably not be able to get into thebest graduate schools for their PhD. For
those with such quirks, I would rather
let someone else take care of them. Ourtime and resources are finite, so there isno compromise. Our students are not
run of the mill; they are the best andbrightest, and most of our scholars are
well-rounded. It is an issue of proper
time management – if they cannot do
sma News november 2009

5

FEATURE
well, they will not be able to enter top
PhD schools. One has to compete with
global talent just to enter, and one is on
his/her own after entry.
We need to have high standards: it
is easy to go low, but we should set abenchmark. Our job is not to manage
outliers, but to manage our total talent.
THC: Urban legend has it that you
know each and every one of yourscholars inside out. What are yourhopes and visions for them?
PY: Well, I interviewed every single one
up till our seventh batch. Many of thesescholars will come back in 2010/2011,about 100 each year. These scholars
have been away for nine years, doing
their BSc up till PhD.
All our scholars are very bright, butthere has to be a value system at the endof the day. Our young PhD scholars
realise that America is an R&D haven.
It is very competitive in America, tothe point of being Darwinian. It issuch a big country and also a magnet
for talent. I brought the “whales” toSingapore, so that our youngsters cangrow up under their guidance. My
mindset is that if our youngsters are“guppies”, they will become “whales”
someday. At the end of the day, my bet
is on our young people who put in nine
to ten years; 15 if we consider theirworking experience – before we can see
a well-rounded scientist. It is importantto have a long-term view.
These students are lucky. We have1000 scholars; a battalion’s worth!
Not all of them will make it, but thenagain, how many will have the tenacity
to do research? When these students
return, it is imperative that we havean environment that allows them toblossom. If we talk down or attempt tocontrol them, they will be stifled; theyshould be allowed free rein, as long as
they deliver results. Our system has to
be tolerant, not dictatorial.

6

sma News november 2009

THC: How do you prevent yourscholars from being headhunted by theprivate sector?
PY: At the end of the day, people will
stay if they feel that there is a sense ofvalue and ethos. Everybody thinks that
it is all about the money but people
move because they are pissed off.
Money is just an excuse; if someone
is happy with his/her work, it is notabout the money! Most of the time, itis the environment that drives people
away, with money being the mostconvenient excuse.
Singapore has to plug into theglobal connection. Rather than
forcing all to root themselves to
Singapore, perhaps it is better to allow
them to spread. One has to find an
environment where they feel they cancontribute, and will be rewarded. If
not, there is no reason for them tocome back. This is our challenge.

industry, we will need people who are
not only scientists, but also possess theabilities to organise and lead.
THC: I agree that scholars should havethe freedom to grow, form independent
opinions and think different. However,even in the United States, there arelimits. The Nobel Prize winner forthe discovery of PCR, Kary Mullis,
is certainly different. So what is youropinion on the recent incident of the
A*STAR scholar who walked around
Holland Village nude?
PY: The girl in question had a
Karolinska Institutet (KI) scholarship in
Sweden and there, nobody cares if you
want to walk around naked or skinny
dip in the summer. I think that she andthe young man, who accompanied her,
did it for fun.

THC: It takes years to build a global
pharmaceutical company like Novartis.
Which companies do you admire most?
PY: The key to admirable companies
is their people. Chairman and CEO of
Novartis, Dr Daniel Vasella, is excellent.
The problem today is that an increasing
number of pharmaceutical leaders arefinance-oriented.

THC: What drove you to make theremark that those with basic science
degrees would only qualify as “test-tube
washers”?
PY: I was using the power of ridicule tomotivate people. Children in Singapore
do not want to do their PhDs, butwant to be successful scientists! Thereis no future in science with only a basic
degree alone, especially with the increasein the NUS and NTU intakes.

THC: Are you looking for the priests
of science like Francis Collins/Sydney
Brenner, or biopreneurs like Craig
Venter/Bill Haseltine?
PY: I would say there has to be aspectrum. Apart from academic results,
I also look at the personality of thescholar, whether they are Type A or TypeB. I am looking for research leaders –this is evident in our scholars. Whether
these scholars are local or foreignborn, they are capable, outspoken andindependent. What is leadership? It isthe capability in managing people andif we want talents in the biotechnology

THC: When Dr Goh Keng Swee wascreating the universities in Singapore,he tended to place more emphasison hard sciences, and less on social
sciences. Your thoughts?
PY: Dr Goh’s reasoning was that it iseasier for students of hard sciences tostudy soft sciences, unless the person
cannot read and write! For example,
50% of the science students whom
we send to the University of Chicago
do humanities. It is much tougher
for a social science student to pursue
physical science, and the best way
around this is to ensure that physicalFEATURE
science students can study humanities
as well. I was an engineering student
in Canada, and 25% of my curriculum
was devoted to humanities likeliterature and economics!
For Dr Goh Keng Swee, Singapore’s
focus at that point in time wasindustry-based. However, he neverneglected the fact that one needs to beable to read and write well. Dr Gohhimself was very well-read, with a big
library and books everywhere.

was created without extra money! From
2007-2010, there has not been any
increase in the budget as well.
THC: One of Singapore’s key
enterprises is our internationallycompetitive healthcare sector. How
can this further be developed moving
forward?
PY: I agree. Our healthcare should not
merely be about treatment delivery
alone; it should also be backed byresearch. We can emulate the American

academic specialty centres like Mayo
Clinic and Cleveland Clinic.
The key is to do clinical science.
There should be laboratories in thehospitals, where doctors and scientists
can go to and work together. Thereneeds to be separate funding as well;clinical, hospital and research. What
I have done is to shift the focus frompure science to science-based medicine.
I believe that this is where the real effectis; science is unable to accomplish thisunless there is clinical translation.

THC: There is a famous story about
you being headhunted by Li Kar Shing
to work for him in a top position in
Hong Kong. What stopped you fromgoing over?
PY: I retired from the Singapore
Administrative Service as a Permanent
Secretary in March 1999. Richard
Li flew to meet me in Boston in lateAugust 1999 with an offer that was tocommence in 2000. I could not join
him as I had just started planning for
Singapore’s biomedical industry. If I
had left, there would have been nobiomedical sciences industry, Biopolis
and Fusionopolis today.
THC: Are you nervous about the fiscal“burn rate” at the Biopolis?
PY: The amount of money has notchanged; the budget of $4 billion
has remained the same during mytime, from 2001-2006. Biopolis andFusionopolis belong to JTC and I
help by getting companies to comehere, so as to cross-subsidise. Someof our scholars eventually moved tothese companies. It is a long-term
investment, awaiting the return of
our scholars.
A lay person will not realise thatthe 5-year budget I inherited frommy predecessor was $5 billion, andI returned $1 billion to MOF andreshuffled the use of the S$4 billion
amount. The BSc to PhD scholarship
sma News november 20097

FEATURE

I brought the “whales”
to Singapore, so that our
youngsters can grow up under
their guidance. My mindset
is that if our youngsters are“guppies”, they will become“whales” someday. At the end of
the day, my bet is on our young
people who put in nine to ten
years; 15 if we consider theirworking experience – before
we can see a well-roundedscientist. It is important to havea long-term view.
THC: Do you think there should be agroup of doctors who are well-versed
in science? Doctors contemplating thiscareer track fear that this entails
a pay cut!
PY: Yes, and they should also be
rewarded differently. It is also harder asfunding has to be sought, and this groupmust have the freedom to do outside
work. To do research, a laboratorycomplete with equipment and assistants
is necessary for graduate students. This
needs to be embedded, and perhaps
inter-agency funded by A*STAR and theMinistry of Health (MOH).
Funding for MBBS-PhD comes up
to about a million and a half; the costof medical education is expensive, andalso has to include the salary. Whenscholars return and complain about
their starting salary, they have forgottenthat their education was fully paid for,and they did not have to do “real work”
for the past nine years! These scholars

8

sma News november 2009

must realise that a million dollars havebeen invested in them, and it is almost
like winning the lottery.
THC: As a child, were you inquisitive?
PY: I am the middle child, and wasallowed the freedom to do my own
things. I was never hot-housed, andwas lucky enough not to have anyone
bugging me.
THC: Are your children scientists?
PY: My daughter is a happy English
teacher in Japan. She loves theculture there.
My son is an Assistant Professor at
UC San Diego Medical School heading
a laboratory of 10 persons. Recently
he won a stem cell research grant of
US$1.37 m for his lab.
THC: Could your son have become abusinessman?
PY: His interest is not so much about

making money, but being creativein science.
When he was doing his postdoctoral work at the Salk Institute in
San Diego, he wanted to understand thebasics of business management. He thenenrolled in UC San Diego’s businessschool for part-time MBA studies thatspanned two years. While conducting
his research, he would have to go forhis studies every alternate Friday andSaturday! He is now trying to raisemoney for a company dealing withbioinformatics. Today, biology is now
bioinformatics. It is tough if one is not a
numerically-inclined person.
THC: In the wake of the 2008 financial
crash where many biotechnology
companies have gone bust, do you feelthat the biomedical enterprise is too risky?
PY: There are too many biotechnology
startups. Many scientists think that an
idea is a business, but they are wrong.

FEATURE
In the good old days, money could beraised easily, until these scientists finallyrealised that an idea is not a business.
An idea remains an idea, until it istransformed into a product or service.
In the medical arena, the greatest
challenge is clinical trials. I had aJapanese journalist asking me recently,
what the relationship between
biotechnology and pharmaceuticals
was. I replied that the relationshipcould be likened to that between a
flea and a dog. Biotechnology needs
pharmaceutical companies, and thelatter’s strength lies in its ability tofund clinical trials. These companies
can upscale ideas to a production
scale, manufacture and then distribute.
Not many biotechnology companies
can accomplish this; the only two are
Amgen and Genentech, but they bothhave gone into production.
THC: Do you feel that we havenot enough private VCs (venture
capitalists) here?
PY: “VC” is a misnomer. The VC will
not respond to you unless there is aready product, so the fact that every
scientist thinks that their idea canbecome commercial is simply not viable.
If one deals with IT, that is easy,
because it has to do with applications.
What we see in the biomedical field is
new knowledge. Today, the amount of
new knowledge far outweighs that in
the 1990s, when we first started doing
biotechnology. Perhaps the issue has to
do with the full journey of clinical trials
taking such a long time.
THC: What are you currently reading?
PY: I am reading The Invisible Hook:
The Hidden Economics of Piracy byPeter Leeson. Piracy is basically about
venture capital. If I had a pirate ship,
I would go around looking for otherpeople; it is property sharing. No prey,no pay!

I usually read a whole bag full of
papers, which have been pdf-ed andprinted out. I read about 30 articles aday. The problem is that they proliferate
so I end up with boxes of paper which I
cannot bear to throw away as collecting
them took much effort. My house is likea storeroom; I should go down to PSA torent some storage space! I can’t give themaway either, as it is a personal collection.
Sydney Brenner too has tons of papers,
which he donated to the A*STAR libraryand his collection includes monographs
and original copies.
THC: You have been both daringly
controversial, and yet a pivotal
player in the decades of Singapore’s
development. How does the politicalleadership view you?
PY: To me, a job is a job. If others do
not like what I do, it is not my problem.
If I had hindsight, I would have goneahead to make a lot of money. I believe
strongly that the system needs to allow
one’s freedom to do things.
There was no model for the Biopolis.
What I did was look around andwonder why institutes and researchwere separate entities. Why couldn’t
industries be located together withpublic and private research?
THC: There is disappointment
surrounding the outcome of Germany’s
biomedical enterprise, and the successrate of Biopolis is projected at only
50% by one international journal. Howis success defined, and what would
ensure the success of such a venture?
PY: Germany’s biomedical field waslike throwing money at them. The
people involved want instant results
and biotechnology companies. Mostof the results are science, not products
or services.
Biopolis is a foundation, which
will take a long time for its success – itis a 15 to 20 year effort. There wasno blueprint or scenario planning for
Biopolis or Jurong Island. It was likeexperimenting with clay. China can dothis too; there are more bright people
there but the key is that their system
must allow this.
I went to Guangdong in early 2000,
and the Party Secretary (PS) invitedme for dinner. I had to travel to Hong
Kong and he asked me to go by way of
Zhuhai. The PS of Zhuhai waited forme by the highway, to “kidnap” me toshow me their airport! The man was
impressive; he built an airport without
permission! He bypassed Beijing andbuilt an airport so as to put Zhuhai on
the map. That’s not scenario planning;he broke the rules! I must say that the
airport and its runway were beautiful.
THC: Economist Professor Amartya
Sen said that post-2008 financial crash,
the Europeans have not collapsed interms of their quality of life becauseof their social safety nets including
universal healthcare. The Americans arefacing more significant pressure points
in this respect. Your thoughts?
PY: I was in Europe last month, anddid not see any homeless people. This
is in contrast to the homeless people in
the US, even in Cambridge/Harvard
Square. Many Americans have been laid
off in this economic downturn, andthere is no net to catch them.
Europeans are no less innovative.
I was with the Party Secretary of
Jiangsu two years ago as I am one of his
advisors. This man was in his early 50s,
and said that following the Americanmodel might have been a mistake.
There are lessons to be learnt from theEuropean model, unlike the extremes of
the American system. The bottom line isthat a society must be able to look after
its lowest tier.
THC: It’s been a great interview. Thankyou, Chairman.

sma News november 20099