Pritam Singh / Founder of OpinionAsia.com
The overall perception is of a poorly articulated, poorly communicated and poorly understood FT policy that incites questions of loyalty, nationhood and national unity for native Singaporeans.
The Straits Times’ report on 14 Aug 2009, “MM: Foreign talent is vital” of MM Lee’s Tanjong Pagar GRC National Day 2009 dinner speech did not reveal anything substantively new about the Singapore government’s foreign talent (FT) policy.
Its flavour was slightly different from usual reportage on the issue insofar as it buttressed the importance of foreigners in supplementing the country’s low birth rates – an argument which could potentially resonate more deeply than one which portends the decline of the Singapore economy in the absence of foreign talent.
The lacunae in the latter argument has been variously exposed over the last few years with a broad, data-backed consensus indicating that Singapore’s low-income workers did not see a rise in their median income in line with the rest of the economy. While various government ministers have over the years accrued this to the impact of globalisation, for a significant minority of Singaporeans, the perception continues to dominate that the FT policy does not benefit them, but instead squeezes prospective job opportunities and drives their real wages down.
More recently, the government argued along the lines of worker retraining and e2i, but preceding these reactionary initiatives has been a lack of information, debate and communication concerning the ramifications of what the FT policy entails for Singapore society and our low-wage earners; evidently, the most vulnerable group of Singaporeans affected by the FT policy.
Compounding the less than enthusiastic public response to the FT policy is the term ‘foreign-talent’ itself, which has hitherto been loosely and sometimes interchangeably employed with the word ‘foreigner’ in the public domain and media. The word ‘talent’ also obfuscates, especially when MM Lee was quoted as saying, “We accept only immigrants who increase the average level of competence of Singaporeans” only for ST to report immediately thereafter, “(t)hey [immigrants] must have skills and at least, secondary, preferably tertiary education.” Clearly, in the context of the MM’s words and the subsequent reportage of the ST, ‘talent’ is a very loosely defined word, not necessarily synonymous with conventional definitions found in a dictionary.
But more importantly, the ST article’s focus on MM Lee’s remarks covering population regeneration as a goal of the FT policy, involve two separate prongs to it. One element deals with population regeneration, a goal which many Singaporeans can appreciate, until the question is posed – what is the optimum population level for Singapore?
If the goal is to maintain the population of Singapore, which for a long time stood between 3-4 million, it is rather likely that the public vitriol against the FT policy would be more subdued. It would take either a brave man or a soothsayer to conclude economic decline would as a result ensue, if Singapore’s population stabilizes around the circa 4 million figure. Even the example used by MM Lee in his speech on Japan’s falling population and the future impact on its economy was instructive – it was based on a dire economic situation in Japan contingent on a declining population, not a stable one.
It is precisely this second element of the FT policy, the very prospects of economic decline and the necessary pre-emptive measures to meet this alleged challenge, which compounds the discomfort among Singaporeans. For some, the FT policy underwrites a population surge on a very small island to a population figure Singaporeans have little clarity about. As a result, the FT policy has given birth to the very real heartland reality of a more crowded Singapore, where infrastructure, on the surface of things, does not seem to have grown in parallel with the volume of foreigners allowed entry from 1998, when the effects of the FT policy began to be felt in earnest, particularly from 2002-2007. This sense of overcrowding has subsided somewhat, thanks to the latest recession. But even today, the unusually large number of linen and work wear hung out to dry on bamboo poles from some, ostensibly let-out HDB flats and even condominiums, offer leading conclusions to the number of occupants in each apartment. The perception of stresses on public facilities like the police force and separately, on the transport system by way of jam-packed trains and buses, have been but some of the more tangible and direct repercussions of the FT policy on heartlanders so far.
On a tangential, albeit worrisome note, class distinctions have taken root under the cloud of the FT policy, since the vast majority of policymakers and ruling politicians are likely to reside in districts and estates that do not deal with the day-to-day realities of the FT policy faced by heartlanders. Even relatively well-off Singaporeans are likely to host at best, mixed feelings about foreigners living in their immediate environment with the Serangoon Gardens episode of 2008 a primer of this deep emotive.
Arguments concerning class distinctions are brought into sharpest focus when some laymen opine that the real beneficiaries of a larger population in future are big business and corporate interests, with the bulk of Singaporeans having to readjust to smaller homes, congested roads, crowded public spaces, unintelligible service staff, and the worry of a real drop in living standards as a function of the preceding compromises.
The effect of these optical and cognitive realities creates a genuine feeling of unease and insecurity among a potentially large number of Singaporeans, who viscerally cannot make sense of a ST headline which reads, “MM: Foreign talent is vital”, especially when it is they who are perceived to be paying for it. Compounded by occasional government feelers suggesting the relocation of old-folk homes to Johor Bahru, the overall perception is of a poorly articulated, poorly communicated and poorly understood FT policy that incites questions of loyalty, nationhood and national unity for native Singaporeans.
While MM Lee sounded as if he was at pains to reinforce the importance of foreign talent to Singapore, the debate and concerns of many Singaporeans have arguably moved beyond those covered by the ST report’s ambit. In fact, MM Lee hinted at this himself, although these were not expatiated upon in the aforementioned ST article. After reporting that the total fertility rate (TFR) was 1.91, 1.19 and 1.14 for the Malay, Indian and Chinese communities respectively, MM Lee was quoted as saying, “If we continue this way without the new immigrants and PRs and their children doing national service, the composition of the Singapore Armed Forces [SAF] will change. So please remember that.”
Without prejudicing other interpretations to the TFR figures juxtaposed against MM Lee’s remark, one interpretation conveys the prospect of the Chinese community’s demographic percentage dropping below the current 76%, as the community hosts the lowest TFR rate of all the racial groups in Singapore. The curious lack of rigorous public debate in the mainstream media over this prospect and the FT policy in general is noteworthy. Would the essential character of Singapore society be so fundamentally altered if the envisaged percentage for the Chinese population existed within a band say from 65-80%?
Superficially, the preceding point comes into distinct relief especially when Singapore’s population is anticipated to rise to between to 5.5 to 7.5 million, or whichever figure is eventually pursued by the Ministry of National Development. One would have thought that any change in the character of Singapore society ought to hold greater relevance for Singapore’s racial minorities, rather than for the majority community.
Separately, what the ST report did not mention was that even for the Malay community, TFR rates have been steadily dropping from 2.48 in 1998 to 2.1 in 2003. Clearly, the problem of population replacement is affecting all Singaporeans, regardless of race, since all three major racial communities are below the magic 2.1-population replacement figure.
An arguably more significant take-away from MM Lee’s remark was the reference to the SAF and the projected prospects of more Malays in uniform, because of the TFR figures in question. Speaking on a similar subject in 1999, MM Lee (then SM) opined “(i)f, for instance, you put in a Malay officer who’s very religious and who has family ties in Malaysia in charge of a machine gun unit, that’s a very tricky business. We’ve got to know his background… I’m saying these things because they are real….” While those remarks proved controversial then, on balance, at least they contained caveats in that they identified potential religious overzealousness and family ties as determining factors for military deployment, not that of being Malay in itself.
But MM Lee’s more oblique and open-ended references this time need to be unpacked, something the ST article did not do, for whatever reason. Critically, the crutch-like reliance on race-based arguments throws a wet blanket on the progress of Singapore’s nation-building efforts since independence. Should such thinking continue, the FT policy will raise even more uncomfortable questions akin to those which question the loyalty of a Malay (or any other race for that matter) soldier whose family has stayed in Singapore for generations, against that of a newly-arrived Chinese or Indian who may claim to be as loyal as a Pavlovian dog but who cannot sing the Majulah Singapore without looking or sounding like an oddball. That the insinuation of a Malay soldier’s loyalty may even be raised, is testimony to the deep, intense and unsettling emotions engendered by the FT policy. This is not to say that the racial factor is irrelevant and that MM Lee’s latest remarks were totally disingenuous. But it is hard to imagine Singaporeans enthusiastically playing their part integrating new foreigners when elements of the political leadership appear to intuitively speak the language of race as the argument of last resort.
More broadly, framing the FT policy solely through the lenses of race also threatens to roll back progress made by Singaporeans since independence in the national unity and political maturity arenas in particular. Feedback in the ST Forum over the last few months recommending the induction of English tests and other qualifying criteria for new immigrants are indicative of a public attempt at determining a minimum set of hoops future citizens ought to pass through before succeeding in their application for citizenship.
Taken further, one wonders what sort of values new citizens would bring to our shores should they come from corruption-ridden, authoritarian countries and host nary a spark of talent and with no experience of living in a multi-racial society. Singaporeans ought to welcome these immigrants if they display a desire to cast away or replace the narrow and self-serving values picked up in their former countries of domicile and commit for example, to absorb the values defined by our pledge, crafted by our first foreign minister, S. Rajaratnam.
It is for this very reason that some qualifying criteria – beyond educational standards – for citizenship based on Singapore’s shared values and a reasonable competency in English, amongst others, stand out as more nuanced and realistic requirements for citizenship, rather than an overly rigid adherence to the racial balance.
In a final message to Singaporeans, MM Lee rightfully observed that the speed at which foreigners integrated into Singapore society depended on how Singaporeans treated them. But the question remains of how far the government is willing to go to alleviate the very real concerns, repeatedly made in a variety of fora, in addressing the immediate and future social costs of the FT policy on native Singaporeans.
According to the same ST article, MM Lee asserted that the government safeguards the interest of native Singaporeans, highlighting education, housing and hospitalization policies favouring citizens over PRs. If this defence is employed to justify the government’s FT policy, it must be a highly specious one, as Singaporeans do not benefit from education, housing and hospitalization policies because of the FT policy. Therein lies the principle reason accounting for the largely insipid reaction of many Singaporeans to the FT policy – a lack of acknowledgement by the government of the very real sacrifices Singaporeans of all strata, but especially the nation’s lower and middle-classes, have to make and will likely need to make in future, to accommodate more foreigners into Singapore.
The very deep and all-encompassing changes to Singapore society as a result of the FT policy call for not only fresh approaches in dealing with concerns of the Singapore public but the slaughter of some sacred cows as a result. Significantly, a relationship based on transparency and openness with the public vis-à-vis the FT policy must represent the central pillar of the government’s efforts rather than one that sees the intermittent release of government data providing selective details on the FT policy, with no interest in revealing the guidelines that has and will shape that very policy. In the circumstances, it is unsurprising that Singaporeans continue to exhibit indifference to the FT policy. In this regard, it may serve the longer-term interests of government to appoint an ombudsman for the National Population Secretariat and National Integration Council, the two central bureaucratic organizations that oversee the government’s FT policy.
In addition, it would be in the government’s interest to develop a more inclusive policy formulation mechanism specific to the FT policy and even invite and encourage opposition parties, civil society groups and NGOs to form committees to provide regular feedback. Not only would this attract the focus and attention of Singaporeans to a policy that is likely to have a profound impact on their lives and those of their fellow citizens, it would expose Singaporeans to the realities of policy formulation in a larger way and promote the building of cooperative bonds between the executive and the populace at large. Both the government and Singaporeans at large stand to gain from such inclusiveness with the larger objective of citizen participation in the national integration project more likely to succeed.
In the final analysis, the fact that the government, through MM Lee no less, sees a need to repeat the ‘foreign talent is vital’ mantra every so often, is indicative of the mixed results of the FT policy so far. While it must be regarded as a success from the perspective of sheer numbers, the overt public skepticism against the policy for a variety of reasons alluded to earlier and other reasons this writer is uninformed about, seem to resonate more than any desire to help new immigrants integrate into Singapore society. If left unchecked, such a reality could force new immigrants to constitute one half of a bifurcated Singapore polity in future, a state of affairs that bodes ill not just for Singapore society and national unity, but also for the same SAF MM Lee frets about.
——
Pritam Singh can be reached at pritam@opinionasia.com
—–
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Heloo folks, what to complain about. All of you vote them in the last election. I already warn all of you but nobody dare do the opposite way. So got to share the blame.
So folks, next GE is coming. Hope that all of you don’t repeat the same mistake and again grumble or complain.
Remember, give our opposition a chance to do something for us in the government. Don’t be trick by PAP giving us a lot of goodies during the election period.
@50) Spirit-centred on August 18th, 2009 4.19 pm
Ah, yes, high-end value-adding industries is the way to go. So academical and obvious. However that requires injection of billions of $, which is unavailable once the allocation is given to TH for investments.
Also, for high-end industries, our scores of govt-sponsored scholars and ministers would then have to show their worth — produce tangible results after 2, 3, 5-years. Now, they wouldn’t want to pressure this group too much and lose a chunk of the 66% (mandated) votes, right?
Aside: To highlight the seemingly disparity in priorities. Healthcare is another issue — $25 millions coughed out to build 3 nursing homes recently. But TH is soaked in BILLIONS (i.e millions with 3 extra zeroes), of which it happens to lose $40B, last announced, in one year. LPPL! Maybe we invest heavily in Vietnam and China so can build cheaper retirement homes there for our aging population.
Our FT policy, ultimately, is just another way to keep costs low, so that FDI would keep coming.
Singapore has not changed from its dependence on FDI to keep the economy growing and yet keep locals uninterested in politics.
Paul Krugman wrote in the 1990s that Singapore’s growth would eventually cease because we merely work harder, but not smarter.
Little did he realize then the extent that Singapore would do now to “keep working harder”, that includes introducing such a liberal immigrant policy.
All these events are connected.
The PAP sounds like it is running the country as dysfunctional management- without common sense- would a business.
So many counterproductive policies that do little except for putting down Singaporeans. Maybe, they are so sure that they will not be voted out that they see fit to be as unimaginative and unproactive as they are?
39) gemami on August 18th, 2009 1.31 pm
Singaporeans are indeed the treasure of the country and why does the Govt. want to force them out like they are doing?
Thanks for reminding us of that truth :)
52) Yang on August 18th, 2009 4.58 pm ………….Too true!
14) Gilbert Goh on August 18th, 2009 7.58 am
” start a business anytime due to our lack of creativity and risk adverse mentality.”
I think the Govt is the clearest demonstration of this and why would anyone want to start a business if they have to unfairly compete with a GLC?
I can’t pass a single day without being pissed off by foreigners.
Sleep is disturbed by some foreigners speaking at the top of their voices at the void deck. So didn’t get enough sleep.
MRT is overcrowded, some foreigner insist on pushing his way in before I can get out. They rush for the seats, ignoring our elderly who needs the seat more.
Go for lunch at foodcourt, served by foreign worker with poor attitude. How to boycott when every stall is the same?
Having my lunch, sitting beside me is some foreigners who got their jobs through connections, not talent. Thinking of my friends who got degrees but still jobless made me pissed off.
Back home, went to exercise at park connector. Encounter foreigners who walk like it is their grandfather’s road.
Later at night, go for a stroll at neighbourhood park and exercise station. The place has been turned into mini China and mini India. The old foreigners chat loudly, blowing their noses into the open air, spitting on the ground. The young foreigners use the exercise stations as their kids’ playground depriving people who want to exercise. Can only see a few Singaporeans around cos’ they are too pissed off to come.
Go back home, switch on the TV. Wonder why TV station can play Korean and Japanese shows at Channel U in their original language, but cannot play dialect show.
I saw this comment on temasekreview.com. Another sad case of Singaporeans being betrayed by the Goverment.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
SadSingaporeans on Tue, 18th Aug 2009 9:30 am
I am a Singaporean. Borned there, grew up there, sang the anthem, served my national service, attended local university, voted my MPs, and then left to do a PhD during my mid twenties.
When I completed my studies, my first thought was to return home. So, I applied to NUS and NTU for a faculty position. Unfortunately, I was immediately rejected. The reason was quite a convenient one stating that my research area is one that is not matching their interests. It got to me pretty hard and I started questioning, “Am I unqualified?”
Following both rejections, and still wanting to be close to home, I applied to universities in Hong Kong. I got lucky immediately. It was not one job offer, but three from three very good universities. All of them were eager to hire me. I picked one. I was given a package (very ironically) that is 30% better than what NUS and NTU are offering to the Singaporeans, what they call local terms. Even more ironic is that I grew to learn that in general, it is much more difficult to be offered an academic job in Hong Kong than in Singapore (because of the better packages). So, I thought, I was really a lucky person to hat-tricked my job applications.
Anyway, months later, out of curiosity, I visited XXX’s departmental website of NXX to find out who they recruited for the particular job posting I was interested. I was shocked. They recruited an India’s Indian who is doing a similar kind of research to mine. But what really puzzled me is that for point-to-point comparison, I have way better credentials than this guy. Nevertheless, I calm myself down with the reasoning that maybe they saw something promising in him that I did not possess.
Several years passed. I revisited their website. The guy is still there. Unlike what I am expecting, he did not seem to have accomplished very much relative to what I have been achieving here in Hong Kong. So, I feel a little troubled as to what is going on. I looked into their websites once more to study their personnel list and recruitment officer. Ha, I begin to understand what went wrong. The division/section that I was applying to contains mostly Indians of India origin. I cannot say that preferential treatment had been imposed in the recruitment. But nevertheless, in my mind, the popular saying that “One Indian becomes one community of Indians” keep flashing into my mind. Then, I start wondering whether “One Chinese from China will become one community of Chinese from China” … and so on. So, what about Singaporeans? When will we be recruited into our country?
Anyway, I am still a Singaporean, and a happy one not living in Singapore. Never want to give up my citizenship because as I said, “Borned there, grew up there, sang the anthem, served my national service, attended local university, voted my MPs ….”
This real-life story is for all “SadSingaporeans” who think that they have been discriminated in SIngapore. I hope that you can find some peace in knowing that many people, qualified and not, are facing the same situation with the FTs.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Heard about the rumoured auditions for “Singapore’s Got Talent”? Locals needn’t apply.
I can’t pass a single day without being pissed off by Singaporeans.
Complain about everything but still vote for the same old guard that took away nearly everything they ever worked for without even recognising this for a second
Allow MRT to be overcrowded instead of protesting out loud that it is unacceptable for MRT to put profits way before travelers comfort.
Go for lunch at foodcourt to realise it is staffed by people who smile a lot more than Singaporeans even though they are paid a pittance and get looked down on by most local
Having my lunch and sitting beside me some Singaporeans complain about how foreigners take the best jobs without asking themselves if their passive and sub-serving attitude may be part of this problem. Thinking of my friends who get exploited while building the infrastructure and the maids who cost more in government fees than the salary they get for themselves
Back home went to exercise at Fitness First where I got so royally suckered in a subscription with not one single jot of customer protection. Business First, you come way later.
Later at night, went for a stroll in the neighborhood park. That place has been turned into big brother with camera’s filming the Speaker’s Corner activities. No Singaporean came out to protest. The only ones who dared to talk loudly were foreigners, even though they had to sign a statement they would never get involved into politics (pay tax and shut up, thanks).
Go back home, switch on the TV and wonder why there is no decent news on, why no journalist asks why Singaporeans have to suffer, where nobody explains where all the money goes, where Government propaganda is pushed in between no-provoking shows.
You see Mr. Terence Goh, it is easy to throw stones but it is not wise to do so from your shiny glass house.
Lets all fight for a better Singapore and not fall in the divide and concur strategies we are fed day by day.
A respectful foreigner (who loves this country)
the bottomline is why the MIW think that we are expensive employees:? 1st world standard liviing, 2nd tier salary ?
Dear Ture Blue Singaporeans,
All the actions of the Govt points to the fact that Local Singaporeans have been abandoned by their leaders.
See for yourselves. In so many areas, aging issues, employment issues, FT issues, etc.
It’s time to really help ourselves least it is too late. Remember, successful changes favours those who are prepared. Start preparing Now!
Kelvin Tan @54
“Our FT policy, ultimately, is just another way to keep costs low, so that FDI would keep coming.”
I think you mean its another way to keep costs low FOR BUSINESSES TO MAKE BIGGER PROFIT. Consumers do not benefit from the low costs. We are lucky if they do not mark prices up.
“ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!” should be the oppositions tag line, with a simple list of “How to prosper Spore the ORGANIC way” (meaning using our very own talents). Few suggestions:
More funding for education.
Reform education system.
Funding to help local businesses expand ovs.
Where to get the money? NOT from more taxes but reshuffling of funds eg from Ministers & president’s pay (incl perks, allowances, bonuses, pensions etc), getting rid of costly white elephants eg MM, SM & all the deputies. Cut govt spending on political banners, body guards and big offices. Finally shift some of the investments in FIs to invest in the people instead.
59) Foreigner on August 18th, 2009 6.55 pm
Foreigner, there is no need to be pissed off at Singaporeans. Nobody forced you to come here. If you are unhappy with Singaporeans, go back to your own country.
59)foreigner on august 18, 6.55pm….foreigner, r u here cos u can’t find a job in ur own country? what gives u the right to pass judgment on us born bred educated, served ns, sacrificed for this country? u think u r better than us, then why don’t u take the next flight out, together with ur family in tow, and go back where u come from..so why r u still here…no job back home?
no. 37 hwpro on 18 august 12.38pm….housewives weren’t mentioned cos to the PAP we don’t pay taxes, we don’t add to their coffers, so we r of no use to them any more, never mind the sacrifices we have made so our husbands are able to go out to work like slaves for this gahmen!
no. 52 yang on 18 august 4.58pm….how to vote when we got no chance to vote cos we live in walkover wards? is this the way the gahmen retain their power?
many of the young people of voting age for the first time we housewives talk to r very unhappy about this situation, they feel it is downright unfair that living in a walkover ward robs them of the chance to vote.
Get the FT in.
Give them all the goodies.
So what if the locals are unhappy.
Make these Ft happy.
Then when they become citizens, they will vote for PAP.
Even if half the S’poreans didn’t vote for PAP, the FT will help PAP remain in power.
Then for the next 5 years, pap can squeeze them like they squeeze us now.
The old man should be died by then and there is nothing we can do.
I think “59) foreigner” tried to point out that action is all we need now.
Vote wisely, so we won’t feel betrayed or regret for the next 5 years.
As of those stay in the walkover ward like me, just pray hard that PAP is punished by voter this round.
Singapore, truly, one country, two systems.
If any lesser mortal had dared to utter LKY”s insinuation about the loyalty issues that Malay soldiers might face, that lesser mortal would immediately face charges of sedition.
But when the corrupt emperor exposes his biggotry, he is doing it in the name of keeping Singapore safe.
Truly one country, two systems.
I am for the view that having a certain amount of foreign immigrants is healthy. However, the rate and standards at whch we are admitting them is alarming. It’s giving me the impression that policy makers have made a blunder in the past, through population controls, and not having implemented effective policies to arrest the declining TFR (this has been going since generations, not years) of changes in political leadership. Then, keeping quiet on the blunders they made, and bring in foreigners as much and quickly as they can, to make up for lost time.
it doesn’t makes sense that in times of hardships, job losses, FTs are still being given long stay visas to enable them to look for another job here should they decide to change employers…i know of one FT being given that special treatment, and the wonder of it all is that he has no intention of taking up PR, cos he doesn’t wann to contribute to cpf, and he doesn’t have any nice thing to say about the present gahmen, the MOE his employer, and esp MM, and it is such a joke that this is the kind of FT the gahmen gives the red carpet treatment!
No 68, totally agree!
aiyoyo
is the top elites also going to be foreign talents?
aiyoyo
@54) Kelvin Tan on August 18th, 2009 5.32 pm
Definitely all event/policies are connected, starting from the Stop-at-2 policy. Once demography is played with, problems can snowball especially for a small place like Singapore where the only true resource is (or was?) its people.
If you read my post @#15, FDI (capital injection) is already surpassed by injection of manpower as main driver for GDP growth. This is a deliberate policy, so the govt should be extremely aware of the implications on the locals for past decade.
Frankly, I am fed up with all this FT policy (this stupid policy has been repeated again and again for the past 10 years!!!).
I am fed up with how easy it is for any foreigner to obtain S’pore PR.
I am fed up that the benefits enjoyed by PRs are almost the same and in some cases far better than citizens.
You know what…….I have done my NS, but I will NOT defend this country in times of war. Me and my family will simply cross the causeway to M’sia or take a boat to Bintan/Batam.
There is NOTHING worth defending here. Why defend the wealth of a tiny segment of our ruling elite as well as the assets of FT and PRs???
where does MM stays, i go throw piranha (FT of a fishy kind) into his swimming pool.
59) Foreigner on August 18th, 2009 6.55 pm
” I can’t pass a single day without being pissed off by Singaporeans.
Complain about everything but still vote for the same old guard that took away nearly everything they ever worked for without even recognising this for a second…”
But 1st did EVERY potential voter voted or was there walkovers?
How many really actually voted that constituted the ‘landslide victory’?
is gov setting the stage for singapore to enter into china, as one of the province?
63) Terence Goh
It is sad you don’t see the irony. My piece is a response to your racist tirade.
Why would I need to leave? Because I don’t agree with people like you? Thank god I have the honor of working with some great Singaporean people, have loads of friends here and take the time and effort to read TOC every day to help me understand the culture I live in.
Perhaps it would help to direct your frustrations towards those who created the mess in the first place.
64) very pissed
No, had a very good job in my country, was asked by a SG company to come over, did so, helped make company a bit more successful and I still make it a point to hire SG before any others in my team and that worked out even better for me. I can not vote here, but that wont stop me to try and do my bit for what SG gives me.
Nice to know I should be on the first plane out of here. And how did you propose to change things?
F
can someone tell MM Lee he has passed the retirement age?
is his retirement home in JB ready yet?
@57) Betrayed! on August 18th, 2009 6.52 pm
Had likewise experience with so-called talented FTs we are getting. Went to one of the national test labs for failure analysis on a machine part for my coy. The head of dept was a Ph.D from China. Offered all kinds of nonsense & theories on possible failure mode. Fortunately, I read up a bit beforehand so that I wouldn’t look blur in front of such “experts”. Turns out instead had to explained to Ph.D what I thought the possible failure mode was and whether his lab had the capability to do tests in certain way. He poo-poo the ideas out of hand.
By luck, ran into his subordinate (a lab officer) and somehow ran up conversation with him. He thought about our request and offered to run a first run with no guarantee. Turned out the test was possible (though we had to corelate the results ourselves). So this is the type of foreign “talents” that Singapore can’t produce? A Ph.D (in material science) who relies on two non-Ph.D old dogs to do his work! Yup, we are sure the best training center/stepping stone for FTs. Must be part of contract with China in order to do business with them.
BTW, the lab officer is a S’porean, been working there longer than his boss but I think only diploma. Meritocratic Singapore indeed!
S’pore is a stepping stone, doormat or springboard for FTs to greener pastures.
no wonder there are people stepping, walking over & stomping on our heads. that really hurts!! :(
77) Foreigner on August 19th, 2009 12.21 am
My comment is to complain about selfish and arrogant behaviour of some foreigners. You can choose to see it anyway you want. If you are one of those who is guilty of the selfishness and arrogance I mentioned and see nothing wrong with it, do feel free to fcuk off from Singapore with my compliments. Singaporeans are not perfect but the behaviour of these foreign assholes is unprecedented.
If you have an axe to grind against Singapore government, do start your own comment and not hijack mine. My piece was purely about some foreigners pissing me off with their behaviour.
79) theforgottongeneration on August 19th, 2009 12.49 am
“The head of dept was a Ph.D from China. Offered all kinds of nonsense & theories on possible failure mode. Fortunately, I read up a bit beforehand so that I wouldn’t look blur in front of such “experts”. Turns out instead had to explained to Ph.D what I thought the possible failure mode was and whether his lab had the capability to do tests in certain way. He poo-poo the ideas out of hand.”
Was he hinting that you should give him some kickbacks?
Foreigner
post #59 on August 18th, 2009 6.55 pm
“The only ones who dared to talk loudly were foreigners, even though they had to sign a statement they would never get involved into politics (pay tax and shut up, thanks).”
foreigners who talks loudly & do not know the situation on the ground can really talk loudly- hot air….
& in our tiny country we cannot talk too loudly, must be more considerate. want to shout scream & make alot of noise dun do so in S’pore. :P this foreigner cannot take the stress here but want to stay here earn money.
Foreigner,
If you have not made that statement in one of your comment, I wound not even want to spend time writing this reply. I cannot help it because you insulting me because I am a Singaporean. If you cannot live with what Singaporeans are, please go away. I do not welcome you. I hate foreigers that think so greatly about themselves. Like it or not you are just a vistor. If you are a visitor and please respect the owner. If you are here to work, please be grateful as there is another Singaporean that is jobless now because of you. Keep quiet and earn your money. Like it a not this is Singapore.
Hi Foreigner,
Wah! Foreigner getting so much brickbats for your ‘ironic’ prose. Well, you can’t blame the true blue Singaporean can you? Your opening line is a challenge to the Singaporean on Singaporean soil. To think your company could send someone like you to Singapore. It proves our point that the definition of ‘talent’ is somewhat subjective. Where is your talent in subtlety?
Your second point about complaining yet voting for the same government shows up your lack of understanding on the intricate mechanism at work within the dictatorship. Surely you do know that in any fairly-operated democracy, a 35% of votes garnered would normally win you the election. Only in Singapore do you see that 35% could only win you 2 parliamentary seats. It clearly illustrates the point that it is not the voter’s fault but the fault of one group of power-crazy and power-hungry men in whites.
You might argue; how did we allow it to reach this stage? Again, you ought to understand that ours was an illiterate population for the better half of 50 years. The populace was as naïve as sheep. It is only in the latter half of our democracy that the second- and third-generation citizens are waking up to this realization, hence, the rumblings and complaining you now see and hear.
What then are we complaining about? We have heard the constant boast that we have attain first world standard – in education, financial stability and is one of the most stable economies in the world – all because of our hardworking foreparents – yet we are told that we are not good enough to carry this country forward and must depend on foreigners to do so. Should we not complain then, that all these talk about our ability is nothing but smoke in the air? Should we not complain? Or are you suggesting a ‘foreign’ approach like taking to the streets?
Your third point on lack of Singapore smiles: tell me, if you are in our shoes would you smile readily at any TDH? Why should we even be competing with the foreigner to see who has the better smile? The foreigner has ever reason to smile. He is earning a sum of money that is way beyond his imagination; and when he returns home at the end of his working venture, he can look forward to a life of bliss and happiness. For the local, he has no such prospects to look forward to. It is not difficult to see why the foreigner can smile so much.
Finally, your invite to come together to fight for a better Singapore worries me most. You have suggested no less than three times that the way to change things is to come out in protest against the government. Again, you have shown a lack of understanding of the Singaporean mindset. Taking to the streets is not for us. No loss of life can compensate for freedom – more so if that life is one that is dear and near to you.
You claim to be a respectful foreigner but your comments are anything but respectful. Who doesn’t know it is easy to love Singapore – tell us something new.
Simply don’t understand why alot of problematic Malaysians and China PRC are granted PR status; when they are not competent and loves to sabotage people at work. Maybe that does not concern the government, but have they really spare a thought on how we think and feel or do they really care for the true blood Singaporean? It makes little or not difference for the offsprings of those PRs, due to the values that are imparted from their parents. Much more of less, they are more of a parasite.
@83) Terence Goh on August 19th, 2009 1.02 am
No, he was basically a sotong with the “required” paper qualification. I think we are becoming too lax based solely on qualifications, accreditations, etc. Recall we are having scholars running naked at Holland V.
Anyway, are S’poreans having to pay kickbacks to FTs in our own turf now? They must be modelling their behavior with our MP’s –> must pay them sufficiently so that they wouldn’t be corrupt? Best anti-corruption scheme in the world!
Of course those that come here are probably not their best brains, or have the “jump ship” mentality already — if they have no loyalty to their place of birth, very difficult to expect they will embrace SGP sincerely.
Singaporeans whinge over 2 types of new migrants:
1) the lowly skilled table waiters and cleaners who are taking over the locals’ jobs
2) the very highly skilled who become intolerably successful
Of the 1st, even the most desperate of the local jobless do not want to to
take up menial jobs, or else have unrealistic expectations of remuneration that such repetitively mindless vocations should pay.
Of the 2nd, given the handicap of working in a foreign land with a bewildering
new work ethic to follow, it takes special cream to rise to the top.
To begrudge the creme de la creme for having an ability that eludes the local has-beens
devoid of any ambition or ability does not bespeak well.
rmber once that LKY commented on the ministers salaries.
if you were to pay peanuts, you’d get incompetent ministers?
I cant see how LKY and his dogs are of any contribution to sg. What they’ve done is cause upset and discourse btw sgreans.
Furthermore, i remember LHL asked, why more and more sgreans are migrating away. Well, it doesnt even take a freaking goondu to realise it.
Proves the point, PAP=Bunch of monkeys.
How about blocking foreigner from accessing the job opportunity as you mention in 1) & 2) ?
1) only singaporean are hired in low skill jobs, such as coffee stall helper, construction worker, etc , with a decent and minimum wages i.e $1,500 per month?
2) only consider singaporean for the top posts and set minimum quote, i.e 85% of top senior management officers must be singaporean ?
And you will get the following:
1) Coffe will cost $1.50 per cup instead of $0.90 now. Property prices will spire up even higher with an average HDB costs of more than half a million. Childcare centre will charge parents a minimum of $1000 for a full time day care. Everything from basic neccesity to luxury spending will go up even more. Are we going to complain further why cost go out of control again?
2) MNC and big company will simply cannot get enought right-mind Singaporean to staff and run their operation here. Some of them would leave for Malaysia or China, and those stay are unlikely to generate profits and pay tax that indirectly enrich our nation
There is no simple solution to this. Simply calling government to block FT is not going to help us anyway. But “FT is vital” by old Lee sounds distorted and misleading. What we need is some balance between importing FT and preserve substantial benefits for our own citizen.
Hey Cynic
I think you are living an ivory tower. How abt the below catergories:
1) S Pass holder- semi skilled catergory Can be asst accountants, clerical staff, etc
2) PR given to Traffic Police, Coast Guards, even Malaysians serving in SAF. ( i know coz I used to work in ICA, but gahmen will never admit)
don’t come and tell me Singaporeans cannot fill these roles. The answer is that these are cheap labour period. It is Gahmen and business who do not want to pay market rates but want to charge market rates for everything incl public transport and HDB flats.
foreigner, do u really think u r doing us a favour by telling us u employ locals first? in the first place, u robbed a local’s job, i m sure that local would av done just a good job as u claimed to av done for ur company, n ur employer is just as guilty for employing u instead of a local. what can i do to change things? sadly not much, cos the govt don’t recognise us housewives as valuable assets these days cos we don’t add to their coffers..and i can’t do much politically cos i live in a walkover ward, one way for the gahmen to retain their power.
so, yeah, i can’t do much, but i sure as hell will not stay silent when singaporeans who r born bred educated, served their ns, did their duty, sacrificed for this country are being edged out by people like u..so unless u reallly really understand us very very well (pls do not insult us by telling us u read TOC to try to understand our cultures and all that, reading alone will not make u understand us, one has to be us..and u r not one of us!) and not a handful of ur so called local frens who ‘cow tow’ to u cos u r a foreigner, u r most welcome to take the first flight outta here, u will not be missed by us, ya. n if u had a real good job in ur own country, maybe u can do us the real favour by going back to that same job..or have u reached ur sell-by date liao?
the trouble with foreigner is he hasn’t witnessed fathers losing their jobs, jobs they had made many sacrifices for like family time, the traumas these sole bread winners go through worrying how to feed their families, put their kids through schools, pay mortgage, bills, elderly parents to support, medical bills, etc etc…these people aven’t a clue on the real situation on the ground, they think they understand us just by reading TOC or whatever, and just cos they have great singaporeans as colleagues and frens, they know us very well…what he forgets is his singaporean colleagues and frens have sound secured jobs, they don’t worry about having to feed their families, put their kids through schools, pay the mortgages, bills, support their elderly parents,, etc…so, yeah, cos they feel great! until they have met with an old lady, whose only daughter lost her job to a china national cos the latter was cheaper, and who hasn’t been able to find another job cos she is considered ‘old’, and she only in her early forties, this old lady who has to rummage through the dustbins for cans to sell, until they have met that father who has loyally served his former firm for over 20 years but later replaced by an FT from UK, without so much as a thank u, and until they have seen the distress on the faces of the family members..i just can’t begin to comprehend how on earth these foreigners think they can try to understand us by just reading TOC….i m just so upset by the arrogance of these people! the gahmen has let us down big time, and i wish to god i could vote, but i can’t, and it just soooo upset me and many housewives i know..this stupid walkover ward thing should be done away with, that is our opinion, cos it is not right we don’t get the chance to voice our vote…we may not be highly edu-me-cated like this foreigner but we know the real situation on the ground, mr foreigner..so please, do take the first flight out of here.
To be fair, it is not the foreigner fault, but more to our own government screwed up policy of favouring foreigner than our own local-born bred singaporean.
If the existing FT policy continue for another 5 – 10 years, in 2020, we may reach 6 millions population with 3 millions PR, S-Pass, Work permit etc
We dont need FT’s , we need MINIMUM WAGE, to boost the purchasing power of Singaporeans , (PR’s not included),with minimum wage, we wont see this problem of over crowding and low birth rates.
Cant you see our govt has passed us a “HUGE COST SAVINGS” in their policies to take care of Singaporeans.
3 cheers !!!
20-30 years ago, it was all about nation building and national pride…these days, it’s all about money money money! no more compassions for the ordinary singaporeans, no more thoughts and planning goes into caring for the elderly, but instead they tell us no more cheap fares for the elderly, and to send our elderly parents to jb nursing homes…i feel so shameful being a singaporean these days! what the hell is wrong with this present gahmen? why don’t they care about us common folks anymore! i feel like crying some days, when i see poor folks barely making ends meet, fathers and mothers losing their jobs, young graduates can’t get jobs but foreigners easily get them, and i c the big sea of foreigners taking over our country, and our MM telling us we need FTs to make us competent..no wonder they r laughing at us! i just feel soooo sad! i used to love this country, when it was all about nation building and national pride, these days i just feel ashamed and sad!
95 steven 19 august 2.20pm…maybe u right, steve, but i have come across FTs who are just sooooo arrogant to think we need them or else this country will sink if they leave…i have even one telling me that MM is way past his sell-by date, and should kick the bucket soon, and believe it or not, he is employed by MOE in a top management post in a tertiary institution up in the north..the laughable thing is this FT got in here cos his wife is singaporean, but it became pretty clear after his second contract was signed that he got arrogant, he hasn’t the intention to apply for PR, he charmed his way into getting his second contract renewed, and hoping to do the same for the third, he doesn’t like the cpf scheme, and he intends to milk as much out of the bonus scheme as possible before packing himself back to uk, and soon after his contract was renewed, he started sprouting “u people need us’ and to say our civil servants have no balls, can’t think out of the box, blah blah blah (he is right, i must admit), i just can’t help but feel very upset, not only at the FTs, but at our own govt bodies who employ these people in vast numbers in the first place, edging out our own talented populace…we aren’t goondus, for heaven’s sake! i know of several highly talented 50s somethings locals with Phds and masters, but they can’t get jobs cos the jobs they applied for r taken up by FTs. i can’t smile at FTs, FWs..how to smile at them when u c so many locals losing jobs or having difficulties getting jobs..so sad, this country has become!
NTUC Supermarket – Singapore’s very own, employs PRC as cashiers and shelving staff. Why?
We know what happens when new wine is added into old wine skin, don’t we? It is precisely what is happening to our society. We may be Chinese but we are no longer mainland Chinese; we may be Indians but we are no longer mainland Indians, we may be Malays but we are no longer mainland Malays.
With the birth of new generations after our fore-parents, our ties with the motherland no longer exist. We have built our own identity – Singaporean. To implant new citizens from these motherlands with the hope of strengthening the racial compound is, at best, silly.
What we have done in these 50 years is not something replaceable with mere numbers. Within this period we have gelled and bonded, and have developed attributes that harmonises us, the different races – attributes the foreigners do not possess.
For example: there is a huge difference with being able to say ‘lah’ and understanding what the ‘lah’ is to a Singaporean, or how it had evolved into a language that gives the Singaporean his identity and soul. It is even more insulting for a foreigner to say it, thinking it will make him a Singaporean.
The day every foreign PR is considered a Singaporean is the day Singaporeans decide to do so – not for the government or any authority to say so.
btw, u good folks, i apologise if i seem to go off the rails at times, but cos i have seen so much miseries with job losses, many of them frens and some family members, i tend to get very passionate, and if i sound incoherent at times, i apologise..but i will not apologise to aFT or FW. i may b just an ordinary housewife, not highly edu-me-cated, not a valuable asset any longer to the gahmen cos i don’t pay tax to add to their coffers, but i do feel the real pulse of the ordinary people, cos i talk to them, cos we get together to discuss and wonder, and worry about our children’s future in this country, worry about husbands losing jobs, worry about the rapid rising costs of living, medical bills (h1n1, and what else will hit us next)..and the list goes on…so my apology to u good folks who are contributing to this wonderful site.