ICA, MOM refuse to release Burmese statistics
Sunday, 18 May 2008, 10:39 am | 53 views
Selene Cheng
Why is labour information being hidden from citizens? Is a culture of secrecy healthy for good governance in Singapore?
Getting official statistics from government agencies is next to impossible, as The Online Citizen (TOC) recently found out after reporting on the gridlock outside the Burmese embassy on 27 April 2008. Burmese nationals had gathered there to vote in a referendum on a new Constitution.
The night of 27 April saw Channel NewsAsia reporting on television that the Burmese community in Singapore is estimated to be 30,000 strong.
Members of the Burmese community TOC had spoken to, however, put the size of the community at around 100,000.
On 29 April, an article in the Straits Times (ST), “Three-day extension for Myanmar poll”, put the number at 50,000. On May 3, yet another article appeared in the ST on the Burmese community in Singapore (“Myanmar community here gets bigger”). The article noted that the Burmese embassy in Singapore estimated that there are “100,000 of its nationals living here, up from 60,000 at the beginning of last year”.
TOC on a number investigation launch
The huge discrepancy between the size of the Burmese community as expressed by different sources prompted this writer to try and confirm exactly how many Burmese there are in Singapore.
On 28 April, this writer sent separate queries to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) requesting statistics relating to the Burmese community.
MOM was asked if it could provide statistics relating to the number of Burmese nationals who hold employment passes/work permits, and the number of Burmese nationals who hold student visas for the current year and if possible, for the last five years.
ICA was asked if it could provide statistics relating to the number of Burmese nationals in Singapore currently residing long term, and/or working, and/or studying in Singapore (excluding those who have become Singapore citizens); the number of Singaporean PRs who are Burmese, and the number of Burmese student pass holders (and the breakdown of how many are PRs, and how many are foreign nationals), again for the current year, and if possible, for the last five years.
Automated replies from MOM and ICA indicated a response time of three and five working days respectively.
“We regret to inform that the required information is unavailable” — MOM
This writer received MOM’s response on 2 May, the fourth working day after 28 April. The reply? “We regret to inform that the required information is unavailable.” Unsure as to what “unavailable” meant, this writer emailed MOM again to ask if “unavailable” meant:
a) the information does not exist as it as MOM does not log who it gives employment passes and work permits to,
b) the information exists, but no one has created and/or compiled statistics on breakdown by nationality, and therefore it is not possible to know the number of Burmese in Singapore,
or
c) the information exists, but it is classified.
MOM replied on 7 May confirming that the information was “available, but it is classified”.
The long wait for ICA’s response
5 May, the fifth working day from 28 April, saw no reply from ICA. Finally, on 12 May, ICA replied: the information was “not available”. As with MOM, this writer emailed ICA again for clarification.
ICA replied on 12 May, apologising for giving this reporter “the impression that the information requested is not available”. ICA clarified that while they had the statistical report, they were unable to release the information to the public.
Secrets, transparency, and the people
The quest to find out how many Burmese there are in Singapore reveals one thing: nobody knows for sure how many Burmese there are. An iron veil of secrecy surrounds the information, which is tightly guarded by the government agencies.
The number of Burmese, though, is not the real issue. The real issue really is this: there is a lack of transparency from the bureaucracy. Without detailed statistical reports available to the public, how can the public trust the figures quoted by the government every now and then? There is no way to verify the information.
The issue of the number of foreigners in Singapore is very close to Singaporeans’ hearts. Taking the ST’s Forum page as a barometer of Singaporeans’ sentiments, it is clear that there is rising discontent over foreigner-related issues. Language barriers between foreigners and Singaporeans in retail situations; concern over the proportion of foreign students in local educational institutions, and worries over the criteria in awarding, and the number of scholarships and bursaries awarded to foreigners, versus Singaporeans; the rising number of foreign-born sportspeople representing Singapore in competitions; and the most touchy of them all, foreigners taking up a significant proportion of jobs, both blue and white collar ones.
Out of all the abovementioned issues, the one that has garnered the most discontent is jobs, and naturally so, because it involves the rice bowl. But if Singaporeans cannot even obtain basic information on how many foreigners there are in the country and the breakdown by nationality, what more information on economic sector participation (i.e. what percentage of jobs do foreigners take up in various industries)?
How then can Singaporeans know where they stand in relation to employment competition, and prepare themselves accordingly?
How then may Singaporeans know if they are indeed being given priority in employment (in terms of the citizen-to-foreigner ratio, not “blind” priority ignoring the quality of candidates) in their own home country?
Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen feels that the government has “got the balance right” (“Tensions over foreign workers will continue: Ng Eng Hen”), and that Singaporeans got the majority of the “professionals, managers, executives and technicians’ jobs” last year. Perhaps Mr Ng is unaware of the reality in the streets – just one small example we have is the significant number of former white-collar professionals who are now part of the taxi driver fleet.
Something is seriously wrong if so many tertiary-educated Singaporeans are ending up as taxi drivers.
Singaporeans have come to expect good governance. One of the hallmarks of good governance is a transparent bureaucracy, which is able to provide citizens with information necessary to making choices that affect their daily lives. Surely, no information is as crucial as information relating to employment.
The time for secrecy is past.
———————
Email this to a Friend
Bookmark this
Looks like it is time to enact the Freedom to Information Act that was even mooted by the opposition party PK in Malaysia. I don’t think our PAP MPs have the gall to suggest this lest they get shot down by the Old Lee. Maybe our watchdog Low or better still, Sylvia has the tenacity to push it. Bring out subjects like this in parliament and get these buggers to get off their butts and debate on it instead of sleeping like some MPs. That will be a start!
Hi Sylvester,
Excellent suggestion, TOC is actually in the process of doing a piece on FOIA. Look out for it soon!
90% of all numbers in this country are a secret. we live in a neo-communist, pseudo dictatorship. its george orwell 1984…..
i shall offer $100 to the first person who can find out
(i) number of original Singaporeans i.e. Singapore citizens currently living in Singapore out of the current 4.5million who have been here since 1965 or who were born to parents living here since 1965 or who were born to parents whose parents have been living here since 1965
why is this sooooo important… well it shows much of our population is really Singaporeans by origin. out of 4.5million i dont think its more than 2 - 2.5 million and hardly people notice this.
can someone also find out (no reward for this)
2) number of PRCs who have been given PR or citizenship or working status over the last 2 decades.
The figures are not actually secret but it is just difficult to dig maybe because it is “undoable” (to quote Jakayumar).
You can check the figures in Table 3.9, p53 of Saw Swee-Hock: The Population of Singapore (2nd edition) , ISEAS Publishing.
http://bookshop.iseas.edu.sg
Figures are until 2000, total number of chinese Singapore citizens in 2000 is 2,284,617, an increase of 12.9% over the last decade (1990-2000), while the PR stands at 220,762, a 370.2% increase in the last decade (1990-2000).
http://www.mica.gov.sg/pressroom/press_0803030.htm
Free-flow of information
18 Let me now turn to Mr Siew Kum Hong’s question about freedom of information which was a subject of discussion in this house at least twice before. ………..
“How then can Singaporeans know where they stand in relation to employment competition, and prepare themselves accordingly?
How then may Singaporeans know if they are indeed being given priority in employment (in terms of the citizen-to-foreigner ratio, not “blind” priority ignoring the quality of candidates) in their own home country? ”
This is a good and analytical article. For a long time, I have questioned the same thoughts. Besides the lack of full and transparent datas about the foreigners, I was also puzzled why no one else seems interested in such issues that could have a huge impact on their livelihood.
Look, a FOIA is probably not going to bring you anything, unless there is a reliable institution in Singapore which can act as a check. Are there any reliable institutions? The Court? For all you know, the FOIA documents you receive may be just as doctored as what you’re being told anyway.
Ai ya… no use one. Our G is always likes foreigners. Most of us have take up low paying job. Why is this so? Bring in foreigners to press down the wage while inflation is at sky high. Who bothers about our wage? The thing that bothers our G is how much money they can earn. The bosses will be happy as they earn much more profit.
What I see is most of us, perhaps the 60% of the Singaporeans who do not need to pay tax had become a class lower than the foreigners. Foreigners need to pay tax what right, so value them.
Our G don’t dare to publish this piece of information perhaps, not to upset the whole lot of Singaporeans who find hard to look for a better pay job that could lead to a better life.
Now, the problem lies at there is an increase in wage, however productivity has dropped. Why? Ai ya… work so hard for what, our boss never restore our real wage…. Perhaps, the next step is to adopt hire fire. Cheap foreigners are around thank you. The morale is low what do you expect Mr. G?
bloggers always point out how ST Online or channel news asia change their article titles or sentence wording as time goes by for whatever reasons.
I noticed you guys changed the article title as well.
I’m sure you must have your reasons, but please *stop* that.
Oh ConsistentOne. Don’t be silly.
it is ike that in Singapore what.
Other questions - how many Foreigners in NUS / NTU / SMU on full scholarship. I (44 years old) just found out the fees can be as high as SGD20,000 Gulp. How can I afford that amount of money?? And here we are, govt paying foreigners to come in here, while my sons serve NS and proceed to pay Uni fees in full. What the hell!!
MM Lee and Mrs Lee. She was warded on Monday, and newspapers reported it on Thursday. Why does Sammyboy forum have to report it first?
I hope PAP learns a lesson, like China has learnt its lesson on transparency from the sichuan earthquake issue. But with all these opaqueness, PAP will fall. TOC and other bloggers need to highlight all these,
Yes the NTUC / CASE issues was a real nugget!!
SawSwee - Are you Prof Saw Swee-Hock?
Anyway, I attended the presentation by Prof Saw Swee-Hock at ISEAS some time back (and bought his book too). He mentioned that sometimes the only way to get info out of the govt is to get an MP to ask for it in Parliament. Until we get our Freedom of Information Act, that might be the only way for now.
u still hope this garmen to be transparent with us ??? you wait long long till earthquake hit singapore . pui !!! translucent also don’t have ah…. opague all the way till cyclone nagis hit them.
Does it matter many? When you take the MRT you’re sorrounded by Foreign Talents here to create jobs for us. Our govt is just being modest about how much good they have done for Singaporeans and they don’t want our competitors to know and have an edge. That is also why GIC accounts and performance has to be kept a secret so that our competition is not given a leg up.
It is amazing how western govt undermine themselves by having a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) which requires them to release all information so long as it does not compromise national security. But in Singapore, every piece of info. compromises national security - so we have the reverse of the FOIA which is known as the OSA (Official Secrets Act) - a civil servant can’t even tell you his overtime allowance without violating this act.
Interesting article in ST on Sat about UNSW fiasco - final tally from the losses were disclosed. And it indicated issues where the Asia President of UNSW was also sitting in the EDB board.
That show a red flag for Singapore governance system - where our MM is also Chairman of GIC and insists that accountability of GIC performance be given only once every 5 years or something - over the long term.
Really, who ‘audits’ GIC and checks and guides the management in case of poor governance issues? President Ong has brought up this case and there is still no resolution till today.
Even when they do publish some data, you get something like the Mas selamat COI report - akin to Mee Siam mai harm…..
whats is so secret about foreigners’ numbers in Singapore? Do we all as citizens got the right to know? Guess the govt knows this item is very unpopular in Singapore thats why they classified it. Makes you wonder why kind of transparency they were trying to preach about.
On balance, I believe that there may be some bigger purposes, other than the usual reasons given for foreign talents, foreign workers, etc…
Sensitivity was the key work in the 1980s; it may be the key word now, too.
I am an unhappy & presently unemployed Singaporean, but bearing up; I had hoped though that there will be more “Tan Cheng Bock”s around.
Thank you.
You know the shocking news i have from FM G.Y is that we are trading with North Korea $86 million last year. Improving ties with them? Aren’t they a nuclear aspiration nation? Just like IRAN? Which our singapore also trying to woo? I shake my head at this type of unmoral foreign policy.
Why do Singapore Gahmen loves to trade with nations like Burma, IRAN and N.Korea? Countries with very poor human rights records and having nuclear ambitions. Why? What is our foreign policy? Trading with nations that has no moral authority just like ours? What a let down!
Fever Guy,
the answer is that we have no human right here. Information is withdrew from the layman. And MSM never did cover any of the news that jeopardise commerical interest. What other country which respect human right does not want to deal with non-democratic country due to fear of backlash by their own people on the government, our shameful government knows very well nothing will happen to them even they rob, support, price-fixing, collusion, monopolize and work with nefarious government etc because they know Singaporeans can’t do anything much after 4 decades of PAP programming and propaganda. That’s why they withhold information and says it confidential. What’s an insult to intelligence of Singaporean.
The problem with our society is that we are taught to argue and fight with fact and evidence, and hence by withholding the crucial information which is the key, the government knew educated and intellectual citizen will be helpless and despondent. It is the same thing with NKF, EDB NSWA saga, ShinCorpse… Ironically most of information is given by related outsider than our coffers.
But I sense one day, Singaporeans will wakeup their **** idea and do what need to be done to regain their dignity and pride.
TOC Moderator:
Sorry, Daniel. Expletives are not allowed here.
Yesterday afternoon, I was sitting in McDonald’s and overheard two mainland Chinese (FT base on their dress code) discussing about that Singaporeans are having some kind of hard feeling towards foreigners. One decides to leave and the other kept quiet and decided not to probe more. I do not know how to comment in this situation, however, this shows that even foreigners know this.
Anyway, the field just beside JE MRT has become a mini-little india. Just too many foreigners. Tom, Dick and Harry are also welcome…. just joking… cheerzzz….
It could simply be that nobody thought of compiling the information - and that as an afterthought, admitted that yes the information is afterall available but classfied.
Depending on the arrivals of these talents (many from expected to resume employment here in the wake of subprime retrenchments in the US), the horizontal and vertical mobility of local professionals are affected.
Is there assurance that this wont happen? When a local engineer is retrenched from say Motorola, he will have to queue behind unlimited applicants from less developed countries for a job. If he cant make it due to these liberal immigration policies, he can consider new vocations as a taxi driver or manager at macdonald’s. Isnt it fair then that the G should dip into its tax collections and the long term benefits it will received from the foreigners, to compensate ( in terms of unemployment benefits) locals who are directly affected by these policies, instead of letting them rot away?
India was the most recent country to enact the FOI or Freedom Of Information Act. For a country which has been consistantly been ranked high on corruption it is a notable achievement. Is is not strange that a country which prides itself on its governance, accountability and transparency is not willing to indulge to its own citizens information which would be public knowledge even in third world countries. Instead we are seeing so many new laws being put in place to secure secrecy and blatant excuses for not providing adequate information. Perhaps it true when the government says “You can’t handle the truth”.
At one time, the authorities refused to reveal how many China nationals/PRs are in Singapore but Forbes recently repored the figure to have crossed 1 million.
From the report “Singapore’s Unloved Chinese Labor Boom”: (http://www.forbes.com/2008/05/08/singapore-chinese-immigration-markets-econ-cx_jc_0508markets04.html):
“Chinese workers are just one constituency in Singapore’s fast-growing foreign population, but they are the largest component of an expatriate contingent that crossed the 1 million mark in October…”
Deduction and reasoning through elimination through various sources …. try …. http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/catalogue.html#sib
Anyone can pick up a stone and throw anywhere there are people and you can hit a foreigner! It is so bad. We are SWARMED with foreigners. SWARMED is the WORD to use. It is going to get worse until GE2010. Singapore is feeling more like SINKAPORE.
What if in future, foreigners become too important to let go? I believe I would not be surprise that Singaporeans would be overpowered by foreigners. Just like what my mom told me foreign factory workers ganged up to bully a local.