Features
Is Singapore a role model we must emulate?
By Susirith Mendis
(susmend2610@gmail.com)
I was prompted to write this post after I read the article in ‘The Island’ newspaper titled “The MPH Formula of Singapore” on 25th April 2022, by an anonymous author.
For the past few decades, especially since 1977, when JRJ said that he would make Sri Lanka a ‘Singapore’, this comparison between Sri Lanka and Singapore had been bandied about, ad nauseum. So many have been eulogising Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) and the ‘Singapore miracle’ that he created from next to nothing. Singapore is the role model that is being held up for us to emulate.
It was said in that article, that “the need of the hour for Sri Lanka” is the ‘MPH Formula’ – Meritocracy, Pragmatism and Honesty – of Singapore; that it is the magic formula that made Singapore what it is. Nobody will disagree that the ‘MPH Formula’ is necessary for good governance and economic development of any country. But do we need to take Singapore as a role model for such governance?
Is this formula a true representation of Singaporean governance? Or, is this a half-truth with a dark underbelly deliberately withheld in the uninformed enthusiasm (or desperation) to seek role models? Why not look closer for the real truth? Why not be both truthful and realistic and call Singapore’s magic formula MPHD or MPHA? Why not add the words dictatorship or autocracy to it?
Take an unblinkered closer look at the economic miracles of the ‘Four Asian Tigers’ – Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Between the early 1960s and 1990s, they underwent rapid industrialisation and maintained exceptionally high growth rates. They were called ‘The Asian Miracles’. If you wish, you can add the other Asian ‘miracles’ to this list – Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.
There is a common thread that runs through all these ‘miracles’ (perhaps with the exception of the then British-ruled Hong Kong) – political repression and authoritarianism. Since I do not wish to make this too lengthy an article, I will limit myself to who LKY really was, and how his ‘Singapore Miracle’ came into being.
1. Repression by LKY
Let us begin with a quote from the horse’s mouth:
“I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters – who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.”
(Lee Kuan Yew – The Straits Times, April 20, 1987)
LKY said the following to one of the “silver-tongued, but more principled member of the Opposition” in independent Singapore’s first parliament, J.B. Jeyaretnam:
“If you are a troublemaker … it’s our job to politically destroy you. Put it this way. As long as J.B. Jeyaretnam stands for what he stands for – a thoroughly destructive force – we will knock him. Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one.”
The New York Times reported on Nov. 16, 1986, that Mr. J.B. Jeyaretnam, a Tamil of Sri Lankan descent, who was the leader of Singapore’s parliamentary opposition was sentenced to a token month in prison and stripped of his seat in the country’s legislature. At that time, LKY’s People’s Action Party (PAP) held 77 of the 79 seats in Parliament. The opposition, thereby, was reduced to just one MP. Has anybody wondered why the PAP has held power continuously since 1959 – even before Singapore’s independence from Malaya? If not, why not?
With incredibly petty vindictiveness, LKY’s government pursued Chee Soon Juan, who was fired in 1993 from his teaching job at the National University of Singapore after he had joined an Opposition party, and who was repeatedly imprisoned and bankrupted simply for joining an Opposition party and for holding small street demonstrations to air criticisms that state-controlled media wouldn’t publish. Since 2002, he had been repeatedly arrested and imprisoned for organising a rally to promote workers’ rights; he has regularly faced legal charges for speaking out about undemocratic practices in Singapore in the past and has twice been imprisoned for speaking in public without a permit; and fined S$20,000 (US$15,720) for “making an address in a public place without a license”.
Chee Soon Juan was the secretary-general of the Opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). He has been convicted four times, in each case for speaking in a public area with street vendors for four to five minutes about upcoming elections ultimately held in May 2006. The courts convicted Chee of violating the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA), which provides that “any person who provides … any public entertainment without a license under this Act, shall be guilty of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000.”
Thor Halvorssen, President of the Human Rights Foundation, published an open letter to LKY’s son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, noting that, “In the last 20 years he (Dr. Chee) has been jailed for more than 130 days on charges including contempt of Parliament, speaking in public without a permit, selling books improperly, and attempting to leave the country without a permit. Today, your government prevents Dr. Chee from leaving Singapore because of his bankrupt status … It is our considered judgment that having already persecuted, prosecuted, bankrupted and silenced Dr. Chee inside Singapore, you now wish to render him silent beyond your own borders.”
Another one-time founding father of Singapore, its former Solicitor General Francis Seow, had to flee the country after declaring that its Law Society, which he headed, could comment critically on government legislation. Seow was arrested and detained for 72 days under Singapore’s Internal Security Act on allegations that he had received funds from the United States to enter Opposition politics. Seow lives in exile in Massachusetts, where he has been a fellow at the East Asian Legal Studies Programme and the Human Rights Programme at Harvard Law School.
Here is the first two paragraphs of the foreword to the second edition of the Amnesty International Report on Singapore in 1978:
“The first edition of Amnesty International’s Briefing on Singapore was published in February 1976. Since then, the Singapore Government has taken a series of actions which have led to serious violations of human rights. More men and women whom the government claim are members of or sympathizers with some branch or satellite organia0stion of the illegal Communist Party of Malaya have been arrested.
However, no formal charges have been brought against them and there is no opportunity to test the government’s allegations in court. These people can be imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial by government order under the Internal Security Act. Those arrested in 1976-77 include people who have been outspoken in their criticism of the Singapore Government.
Former political detainees, some of whom spent up to 10 years in prison without trial in the 1960s, have been arbitrarily re-arrested and once again face indefinite detention without trial.
An increasing number of political detainees have made “confessions” on the State-run television and in the government-supervised press. Such “confessions”, which are usually required as a pre-condition for release, contain claims relating to allegations that they have engaged in illegal and subversive activities, but their statements are not tested in open court according to generally accepted legal practce. The “confessions” often implicate friends and associates of the detainee and are used by the government as a pretext to arrest these people.
There is growing concern, both in Singapore and abroad, at the increasing use of public “confession” to justify the arrest and imprisonment of men and women without any involvement of judicial process.”
2. Racism of LKY
Too often, Singapore is held up as the epitome of racial equality and ethnic harmony. Let us just quote LKY himself to disabuse you of that notion about Singapore.
“Now if democracy will not work for the Russians, a white Christian people, can we assume that it will naturally work with Asians?” he asked on May 9, 1991, at a symposium sponsored by the large Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun.
Race riots among Chinese, Indian and Muslim Malay residents of Singapore in the 1950s had taught LKY to impose “harmony” through strict allocations of resources and services along race lines: All Singaporeans carry ethnic identity cards. A policeman or government official examining the ID of a Singaporean will immediately know the race/ethnicity of that person.
Here is more from LKY:
“The Bell curve is a fact of life. The blacks on average score 85 per cent on IQ and it is accurate, nothing to do with culture. The whites score on average 100. Asians score more … the Bell curve authors put it at least 10 points higher. These are realities that, if you do not accept, will lead to frustration because you will be spending money on wrong assumptions and the results cannot follow.” (LKY in 1997, in an interview for the book ‘Lee Kuan Yew: The Man and His Ideas’).
“If I tell Singaporeans – we are all equal regardless of race, language, religion, culture, then they will say, ‘Look, I’m doing poorly. You are responsible.’ But I can show that from British times, certain groups have always done poorly, in mathematics and in science. But I’m not God, I can’t change you …” (in LKY’s book ‘Success Stories’ – 2002).
Was LKY endorsing or recommending eugenics?
“People get educated, the bright ones rise, they marry equally well-educated spouses. The result is their children are smarter than those who are gardeners. Not that all the children of gardeners are duds. Occasionally two grey horses produce a white horse but very few. If you have two white horses, the chances are you breed white horses. It’s seldom spoken publicly because those who are NOT white horses say, ‘You’re degrading me’. But it’s a fact of life. You get a good mare, you don’t want a dud stallion to breed with your good mare. You get a poor foal. Your mental capacity and your EQ and the rest of you, 70 to 80% is genetic.” (in LKY’s book ‘Hard Truths’(2011)
(For more, read Jim Sleeper’s article ‘Lee Kuan Yew’s hard truths’ in ‘Open Democracy’).
3. Singapore’s migrant underclass
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” wrote George Orwell in ‘Animal Farm’. The father of Singapore and its present leaders obviously seem to agree with this jocular Orwellian understatement.
The horrible plight of the Singaporean migrant underclass was exposed to the whole world when Covid-19 hit Singapore.
As the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases skyrocketed in migrant worker dormitories—where men from India, Bangladesh, and China live in cramped rooms of about 12 to 20 persons, making social distancing impossible – the government adopted a racist strategy of treating the situation as one of “two separate infections,” one affecting migrant workers in dormitories and another circulating within “our own community” in Singapore, as relayed by National Development Minister Lawrence Wong. (FP, May 6th 2020)
Purpose-built and factory-converted dormitories that housed 323,000 migrant men were an epicentre of the pandemic. Singapore has 1,427,500 migrant workers comprising 38% of its labour force. The prejudices and negative attitudes against migrant workers are well-documented in ‘Research Brief’, a document by the UN WOMEN of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in December 2020. The public (Singaporean citizens) attitudes to, and perceptions of, migrant workers have deteriorated since the previous study done in 2010, they claim. A significant percentage of Singaporean citizens (36%) are of the view that migrant workers should not be given equal pay for equal work; should not receive same work; and should not be able to join unions.
An article published by the Asia Pacific Migration Network of the ILO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific in Bangkok, Thailand, notes that foreign workers in Singapore work long hours for low pay in frequently hazardous conditions and are often abused by employers and labour contractors and “many have to endure abuse, discrimination and violations of their rights but few can obtain legal redress.”
With a total population of approx. 5.82 million (2022), roughly 1.43 million people in Singapore are in the foreign work force. Non-citizens now comprise 36% of the population compared with 14% in 1990. Singapore, in too many ways is a “fiefdom”; raising concerns that the country is starting to resemble the oil-rich Gulf sheikhdoms in which low-paid overseas workers allow citizens to enjoy lives of ease.
In terms of undemocratic governance, inbuilt racism, enforced ethnic harmony and migrant forced-labour, Sri Lanka is comparatively still a haven compared with Singapore. The worst of our good governance parameters have not exceeded those that have been prevalent for decades of LKY rule. What we have instead is chronic economic underdevelopment – the scourge of many developing third world democracies.
When those who should know better, tell us that Singapore should be our ‘role model’, are they telling us to follow the despotism of LKY? Were we not shocked when an uninformed priest (Anunayake of the Asgiriya Chapter, Venduruwe Upali) asked Gotabhaya Rajapakse – Presidential candidate – to become a Hitler? It seems, from some ‘liberal’ and ‘democratic’ voices we have heard, that he seemed to have faulted on the name. Instead, if he had said “be like LKY” would our ‘Singapore-Model’ torch-bearers have said that anything was amiss? That we do not want the autocracy of LKY?
What we are being told by these same voices is that the final economic outcomes outweigh the democratic freedoms we treasure. A ‘miracle’ like Singapore (or South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia or Indonesia) is what counts and not its record of political repression. The oxymoronic expression ‘benevolent dictator’ is often in convenient usage and now part of the political lexicon. LKY is said to be one such rare national leader. The venerable Asgiriya Anunayake must have had a ‘benevolent dictator’ in mind when he made the unforgivable faux pas.
Or are we advocating what I mentioned at the outset – MPHD or MPHA? That dictatorship, autocracy and repression is OK if meritocracy, pragmatism and honesty is also practiced in governance? That what we need is development at any cost to individual freedoms? That democracy and civic freedoms can be sacrificed at the altar of the creation of an affluent state? That repression is OK if we are given adequate food and fuel?
It was a few years back that a former President of Sri Lanka took it on himself to pronounce SAARC ‘dead’. Since then there have been other sections of Sri Lankan opinion that have joined the critics of SAARC and taken the solemn stance that SAARC has indeed died what may be called a natural death.
Their fatalism is understandable. SAARC has failed to meet at heads of government or state level for the past several years to take the SAARC process notably forward. Regional cooperation has more or less been only an appealing idea. No substantive concrete projects have taken off to make the idea a hard reality. ‘Inner paralysis’ seems to be SAARC’s lot. Hence the fatalism in these circles.
However, being one of the worst cash-strapped regions of the world and a teemingly populated one with people virtually left to their devices, what choices do the ‘SAARC Eight’ have other than to try their best to band together and continue with their cooperation efforts, however small they may be?
There is no escaping the mounting debt trap for many of these countries and bankrupt Sri Lanka is a glaring example, but ‘throwing in the towel’ and abandoning themselves entirely to the diktats of the strongest economies and their agencies will prove a ‘living death’ for many countries in the SAARC fold.
The gains may be meagre but giving-up on SAARC cooperation in full would prove self-defeating for the organization and South Asia. Right now, the collective intention ought to be to salvage what the region could from the tenuous cooperative efforts. Moreover, such initiatives could go some distance to generate a degree of goodwill among the Eight and help in sustaining a dialogue process.
Given this backdrop it proved ‘a stich in time’ for the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, to recently host the SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar to a round table discussion on the unifying potential of SAARC and its future possibilities, besides other related issue areas.
Held on June 24th and moderated by RCSS Executive Director and former ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the forum brought together a vibrant, wide ranging audience comprising academicians, diplomats, senior public servants, civil society activists and many others. Following the presentation by Ambassador Golam Sarwar titled, ‘Reigniting SAARC: Achievements, Challenges and the Way Ahead’, a lively Q&A followed.
The above forum could be described as an act of lighting the proverbial ‘candle’ rather than ‘cursing the darkness.’ It surely is a ‘darkness’ that could be seen as daunting considering that the region’s pivotal powers, India and Pakistan, are failing to act in a spirit of accord but are engaged in bitter finger-pointing on a number of questions of vital importance to SAARC.
On the other hand, what is the rest of the region doing to bring the above sides together? It is disappointing that to date the rest of SAARC has failed to launch a major diplomatic drive to bring peace between the feuding regional heavyweights. It needs to act without delay and establish its earnestness and this effort would need to prove SAARC’s staying power in the unfolding months and even years.
In assessing SAARC’s seeming failure local opinion in particular has failed to factor in what could be described as weak leadership. Since Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh, the founding father of SAARC, the region has failed to produce a visionary leader who could advance the SAARC cause with charisma and drive.
Among other reasons, weak leadership accounts considerably for the faltering and stuttering status, as it were, of SAARC. Badly needed are leaders who could go the extra mile, think less of narrow national interests and work diligently towards the collective well being of the region but SAARC’s millions of ordinary people have been made to wait in vain for leaders of such stature. Instead, they have been burdened with politicians who seem to be relishing the apparently moribund state of SAARC.
Looking back, it could be said that it was the dynamic leadership factor that led to the launching of the Non-Aligned Movement and for its sustenance for a few decades. True, it could be seen in some quarters that NAM is no more, but as in the case of SAARC, the former too has been unfortunate to be burdened over the years with politicians who lack the vision and drive to unflaggingly advance the fortunes of the South. NAM and SAARC lack the dynamism and vision of leaders of the stature of Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, to give them the required guidance and intellectual depth.
The reasons are complex for there not being among us currently political leaders with the vision and the steadfast commitment to advance the legitimate interests of the South. However, it could be stated with conviction that the majority of Southern leaders have too easily caved in to the demands of the global North and its financial agencies.
These leaders have failed to see, for instance, that the largely market economy oriented Northern governments would not view with favour a centrist economic model that attaches priority to the interests of the dis-empowered publics of the South. This realization ought to have dawned on the current government in Sri Lanka, for instance, some while ago but it has no choice but to abide by IMF dictates since economic survival at present is unthinkable without the latter’s succour.
Accordingly for SAARC this should be the time for some soul-searching. Priority needs to be attached to ending the feuding between India and Pakistan since at present the material fortunes of the region hinge largely on these regional giants giving peaceful relations among them a try. This is no easy challenge to meet but some daring, visionary diplomacy needs to take hold among the rest of SAARC.
There is some sense in SAARC bringing the peoples of the region together through programs that address their best collective interests. A meeting of minds among SAARC nations could enable SAARC and its agencies to build a region-wide people’s movement for progressive political and economic change that could in turn lead to the region’s political leaders sensitizing themselves more to the neglected needs of their publics.
However, the time is ‘now’ for the initiation of these progressive changes and the voice of SAARC well wishers would need to drown out those of their critics.
A seminar, “Sri Lanka’s Economic Crossroads: Navigating Recovery, Resilience and Growth” was recently held by the Organisation of Professional Associations of Sri Lanka (OPA) at the OPA Auditorium, bringing together economists, OPA members, and professionals from diverse fields for an insightful discussion on Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and future growth prospects.
The event was held under the patronage of Jayantha Gallehewa, President of the OPA, and was jointly organised by the National Issues Committee (NIC) and the Seminars, Workshops and Programmes Committee of the OPA. The event reaffirmed the organisation’s commitment to advancing professional excellence, fostering insightful intellectual engagement, facilitating interdisciplinary knowledge exchange and creating a constructive platform for informed dialogue on issues of national importance.
The panel of speakers comprised Dr. Harsha Aturupane, Lead Economist and Programme Leader for Human Development at the World Bank for Sri Lanka and the Maldives; Dr. Achinthya Koswatta, Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Open University of Sri Lanka, and Anushan Kapilan, Lead Economist at Verité Research.
In his welcome address, the President of the OPA emphasised that Sri Lanka was at a critical juncture in its economic recovery journey where sustained reforms, effective implementation, and collective national commitment are essential to achieving long-term stability, resilience and inclusive growth. He noted that the country had experienced one of the most severe economic crises in its history with the economy contracting by 7.8 percent in 2022 and a further 11.5 percent in 2023, resulting in significant economic and social challenges.
Delivering his introductory remarks Bhanu Wijeyaratne, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the National Issues Committee, underscored the need to move beyond short-term economic stabilisation towards a comprehensive agenda of structural transformation. He observed that the economic crisis had revealed deep-rooted weaknesses within the economy, including persistent fiscal pressures, rising public debt, foreign exchange limitations, and insufficient diversification of the export base. He stressed that addressing these challenges through strategic reforms, institutional strengthening and long-term economic planning would be essential to establishing a more resilient and competitive economy.
While acknowledging recent positive developments, including improved inflation management, tourism recovery and signs of economic stabilisation, Wijeyaratne stressed the need to advance reforms aimed at strengthening fiscal discipline, enhancing productivity, improving competitiveness, developing human capital and reinforcing governance and institutional effectiveness.
He further highlighted the important role of professionals, businesses, academia and other stakeholders in contributing to evidence-based dialogue and supporting Sri Lanka’s journey towards a resilient, inclusive and sustainable economic future.
Delivering the keynote presentation, Dr. Harsha Aturupane provided a comprehensive assessment of Sri Lanka’s economic prospects within the broader context of global economic transformation. He argued that Sri Lanka functioned as a small open economy whose performance is significantly influenced by developments in the global marketplace. External factors could not be controlled, and the country must strengthen its domestic capacity and resilience to respond effectively to international economic shifts, he noted.
Tracing the evolution of global economic systems, Dr. Aturupane highlighted the transition from ideological divisions between state-controlled and market-oriented economies towards increasingly pragmatic approaches focused on growth, competitiveness and development. He noted that Sri Lanka’s own economic journey reflects a similar evolution, with contemporary policy debates now centred on practical solutions for sustainable economic progress.
The presentation also examined the transformative impact of globalisation. Dr. Aturupane observed that global economic integration had enabled several East Asian economies, including South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong, to achieve remarkable economic advancement through export-led growth strategies. Sri Lanka similarly benefited from this process through the expansion of its apparel industry and increased integration into global value chains.
Turning to Sri Lanka’s recovery programme, Dr. Aturupane emphasised that the ongoing stabilisation process should be viewed as a national programme supported by the International Monetary Fund rather than solely as an IMF initiative. He observed that strong worker remittances, improved tourism earnings, enhanced government revenue mobilisation and prudent import management have contributed significantly to economic stabilisation.
Despite this progress, he cautioned that rebuilding foreign exchange reserves and meeting future debt obligations remain major challenges. He underscored the need to strengthen export performance, attract investment and generate sustainable foreign exchange earnings to ensure long-term economic resilience.
The discussion also focused on monetary stability, inflation management and exchange-rate policy. Dr. Aturupane stressed that maintaining price stability was fundamental to sustainable growth and household welfare, while sound monetary policy remains essential for preserving economic confidence.
Looking beyond stabilisation, he argued that Sri Lanka must transition towards a broader economic transformation agenda. Sustainable growth, he noted, will depend on expanding productive capacity through investment, technological advancement, innovation, skills development and structural reforms.
Among the key constraints identified was the high cost of energy, which continues to affect competitiveness and investment attractiveness. Dr. Aturupane emphasised the importance of improving efficiency and affordability within the energy sector to enhance Sri Lanka’s business environment.
He further highlighted the social dimensions of the crisis, noting the rise in poverty and economic vulnerability among households. Strengthening social protection systems and ensuring inclusive growth, he argued, must remain central components of the national development agenda.
Another critical challenge identified was Sri Lanka’s demographic transition. With an ageing population, outward migration and evolving labour market dynamics, the country is increasingly confronting labour shortages in several sectors. Dr. Aturupane suggested that greater automation, increased labour-force participation and strategic workforce planning would be necessary to address these emerging realities.
Concluding his presentation, he emphasised the need to improve governance, strengthen institutions, enhance competitiveness and create an enabling environment for private sector investment. Sri Lanka’s future success, he noted, will depend on its ability to move decisively beyond crisis management towards a development model founded on resilience, innovation, productivity and inclusive growth.
Dr. Achinthya Koswatta reiterated the importance of policy consistency and predictability in fostering investment and industrial development. She observed that frequent policy changes create uncertainty and discourage long-term investment decisions, whereas stable and coherent policy frameworks build confidence and support sustainable economic transformation.
Meanwhile, Anushan Kapilan highlighted the substantial progress achieved in restoring macroeconomic stability following the recent crisis. He noted significant improvements in fiscal performance, including increased government revenue, reduced reliance on debt financing and a historically low fiscal deficit.
He further observed that public debt levels are declining faster than anticipated, economic growth has exceeded expectations and inflation has been brought under control more rapidly than forecast. Nevertheless, he cautioned that the recovery remains uneven, particularly within the industrial sector and that many households have yet to experience a meaningful improvement in living standards.
The seminar was expertly coordinated by Eng. Chamil Edirimuni, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the Seminars, Workshops and Programmes Committee, while the technical moderation and interactive discussion session were facilitated by Bhanu Wijeyaratne, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the National Issues Committee.
The event was attended by Tisara De Silva, President-Elect of the OPA, Eng. Ravi Rupasinghe, General Secretary, Past Presidents, members of the Executive Council, representatives of the General Forum and professionals representing a wide range of disciplines.
The seminar concluded with a vibrant exchange of ideas and perspectives, reaffirming the importance of evidence-based policy dialogue, institutional collaboration and collective national commitment in advancing Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, resilience and sustainable growth.
Yes, for UK-based presenter and artiste Samantha Kay, home is where the heart – and the roots – are. And her roots run deep in Sri Lanka.
In an exclusive interview with The Island, Samantha says “I’m proud to be Sri Lankan. My mum is from Kandy and my dad is from Colombo, so Sri Lanka has always held a very special place in my heart.
“Whenever I visit Sri Lanka, I love spending time on the beautiful south coast, especially Hikkaduwa and Mirissa. It’s somewhere I always feel connected to my roots and completely at peace.”
Now living in Bournemouth, on the south coast of England, where, she says, she is lucky to be close to some of the UK’s most beautiful beaches, including the iconic Sandbanks, Samantha has built a career that refuses to fit into one box.
She is a radio presenter, podcast host, singer-songwriter, personal trainer and life coach.
“I genuinely love the variety because every role allows me to connect with people and, hopefully, make a positive difference in someone’s day.”
Of course, music has taken her far.
One of her proudest achievements, she says, was releasing a song with 90s music icon Angie Brown, which reached No. 9 in the UK Club Charts.
She also reached the final stages of The X Factor and performed at Wembley Stadium in front of thousands.
Beyond music, Samantha competed in bikini bodybuilding across the UK, winning several titles. “It taught me discipline, resilience and self-belief,” she recalls.
Today, her focus is on radio, podcasting and coaching women. Her podcast encourages people to live life on their own terms rather than feeling pressured to follow society’s expectations.
Says Samantha: “Whether someone is single, changing careers, travelling solo or simply trying to find their purpose, I want them to know that it’s never too late to create a life that feels authentic. If you’ve ever felt like you don’t fit into the box, maybe you were never meant to.”
Samantha Kay also spent a year in Dubai, performing at five-star hotels, including FIVE, and coaching at the iconic outdoor gym on Palm Jumeirah.
“I taught strength and conditioning classes, and hosted wellness retreats, combining my passion for music, health and inspiring others.”
However, with family matters calling her back to the UK, she made the choice to return. “Family comes first,” she says.
Looking ahead, Samantha plans to grow her radio and podcast work, release more music, and expand her wellness retreats.
“My biggest passion is helping people, especially women, build confidence and believe in themselves,” she says.
“Wherever my career takes me, I hope to continue inspiring others to live with courage, kindness and authenticity, while never forgetting my Sri Lankan roots.”
Current El Niño Status in Sri Lanka
A few showers may occur in the Western, Sabaragamuwa and North-western provinces and in Kandy, Nuwara-Eliya, Galle and Matara districts.
Argentina face fine for Falklands banner in semi-final win
US launches fresh strikes on Iran as Trump warns Tehran it ‘better behave’
Govt. move to extend retirement ages of top judges: Opp. complains to UN
Dengue surge pushes hospitals to the brink as cases near 70,000
‘Dates have the highest sugar content to fight Coronavirus’
Sunday Island 27 December – Headlines
#SundayIsland 17th December – Headlines
Sunday Island – 28th March
Sunday Island Headlines – 21 March
Sunday Island – 21st February – Headlines
-
News6 days agoHerath warns prospective migrant workers not to get fleeced by racketeers
-
Features4 days agoPrison riots and politics: NPP’s biggest challenge and Sri Lanka’s biggest opportunity
-
Editorial5 days agoWhat’s the world coming to?
-
Foreign News6 days agoTensions erupt in Indian state after 11-year-old raped and murdered
-
Features6 days agoDevanesan Annan – in Memoriam
-
Editorial6 days ago
Punishment in hellholes
-
News6 days agoRepresentatives of the Organization of Professional Associations (OPA) of Sri Lanka meet the Prime Minister
-
Features1 day agoDirty Money