Andrew Loh
On 8 March 2008, the Straits Times carried a report headlined, “Oil prices ‘unlikely to rise further’.” The person making that prediction was none other than Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
At that time, oil prices were trading at US$105. The ST report said, “As crude oil prices hit US$105 (S$145) per barrel, MM Lee believes it is not likely to creep further up to US$110.”
MM Lee said, “’I don’t think it can go up US$110, US$120, US$150 and the world economy goes on. Inflation will go through the roof. Economies of the West will go down, hyper-inflation in many developing countries. So it will go into reverse.”
Hardly two months later, prices rose above US$110 in May. Another two months later, in July, prices shot to US$145.
ext-align: center;”>
[MM Lee has also admitted to being wrong in banning Formula One races and for disallowing casinos in the past. The GIC, of which he is chairman, was also wrong in "going in too early" when it invested in UBS and Citigroup, MM Lee said in March this year. See here. In July 2007, MM Lee said Singapore was in a "golden period" - right before the financial crisis hit.]
The point here is that we must not be lulled into thinking that MM Lee is always right. He is not. Even his GIC outfit has lost more than $50 billion in bad investments this past year alone.
Thus when the 14 August 2009 edition of the Straits Times gave front page prominence to MM Lee’s remarks on foreign workers and immigrants, we should take pause and ask ourselves: Is MM Lee right?
His past results in population control is, to say the least, dubious.
Stop-At-Two
In the 70s, then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew introduced the “Stop-At-Two” policy to curb our population growth. The buzzwords then were “Family Planning” and “Two Is Enough”. For those who are unfamiliar with the policy, this was what it entailed, according to :
“Birth rates fell from 1957 to 1970, but then began to rise as women of the postwar baby boom reached child-bearing years. The government responded with policies intended to further reduce the birth rate.
Abortion and voluntary sterilization were legalized in 1970. Between 1969 and 1972, a set of policies known as “population disincentives” were instituted to raise the costs of bearing third, fourth, and subsequent children.
Civil servants received no paid maternity leave for third and subsequent children; maternity hospitals charged progressively higher fees for each additional birth; and income tax deductions for all but the first two children were eliminated.
Large families received no extra consideration in public housing assignments, and top priority in the competition for enrollment in the most desirable primary schools was given to only children whose parents had been sterilized before the age of forty.
Voluntary sterilization was rewarded by seven days of paid sick leave and by priority in the allocation of such public goods as housing and education.
The policies were accompanied by publicity campaigns urging parents to “Stop at Two” and arguing that large families threatened parents’ present livelihood and future security. The penalties weighed more heavily on the poor, and were justified by the authorities as a means of encouraging the poor to concentrate their limited resources on adequately nurturing a few children who would be equipped to rise from poverty and become productive citizens.”
The policy was so clinically effective in its application and implementation that by the 80s, Singapore’s falling birth rate was in the danger zone. None of the Members of Parliament at that time sounded any alarms about the danger and all apparently supported the birth control policy. The local state-controlled media went along for the ride, much as it is today.
Yet, instead of a total reversal of the policy when it became clear that it was having adverse consequences, MM Lee introduced another ill-fated idea – the infamous “Graduate Mothers Policy”.
e government acted to give preferential school admission to children whose mothers were university graduates, while offering grants of S$10,000 to less educated women who agreed to be sterilized after the birth of their second child. The government also established a Social Development Unit to act as matchmaker for unmarried university graduates. The policies, especially those affecting placement of children in the highly competitive Singapore schools, proved controversial and generally unpopular.”
In 1985, the highly unpopular policy was abolished as it was not achieving its aims of having graduate mothers produce more babies. It was only in 1987 that the Stop-At-Two policy was abandoned entirely. By then, Singapore’s birth rate had run into serious problems – we were not replacing ourselves at an appropriate rate.
Population control revisited
30 years later, the same man who was responsible for the “Stop At Two” policy in the 70s, is now telling us that the government “accept only immigrants who increase the average level of competence of Singaporeans” – and doing so to the tune of 1.68 million foreigners presently on our tiny island, in a population of 3.2 million Singaporeans.
This is in response to Singapore’s birth rate problem – it continues to fall, despite government incentives to induce Singaporeans to have children.
Besides MM Lee’s dubious record in population control, the same danger of our Parliamentarians silently tagging along and thus giving support to such policies, as similarly happened in the 70s and 80s, may see history repeat itself – 30 years hence, with future generations living the consequences of this present policy.
Calls from some quarters for the government to re-look its policy on foreigners have been met with dismissive remarks by government ministers. “Just zeroing in on foreign workers alone is not the total solution,” Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong said in August. He also termed such calls “simplistic”.
What concerns Singaporeans are not just jobs or economic prosperity but also the social consequences of having so many foreigners in our midst. This has led to some Singaporeans wondering if the government knows what is happening on the ground, where physical and personal space is now harder to come by, even in the heartlands. This may potentially result in social friction among the various groups, something which the Prime Minister spoke about in his National Day message recently.
The government’s preoccupation seems to be the economy and how foreigners can contribute to this. It has said little about the social consequences, although it has set up the l “to drive social integration efforts across the private, people and public sectors”. The success of the council’s effort is left to be seen.
In the meantime, the government has been urging Singaporeans to “embrace and accept” these foreigners, as MM Lee said on 14 August. He also urged Singaporeans to “treat new citizens as equals”.
According to the New Population Secretariat website, the number of PRs in 2008 was 79,167, upped from 63,627 the previous year.
The number of new citizens hit a record high of 20,513 in 2008, upped from 17,334 in 2007.
We seem to be in a hurry to bring in foreigners at an alarming rate.
But perhaps all is not lost. The lone voice in Parliament calling for a re-look of the policy has come from the ruling party’s own Member of Parliament, Mrs Josephine Teo. But even so, she is only concerned about the falling productivity level of Singaporean workers. Her argument is that a more targeted approach to the employment of foreigners will help up the productivity level of Singaporeans.
But given how the government seems to feel that the policy is the right one, and ministers have defended it to the hilt, it does not appear that any changes will be forthcoming.
The man and his ideas are not always right
Lee Kuan Yew’s attempt at population control in the 70s and 80s has resulted in a population unable and unwilling to replace itself.
Will our current policy at population control by the same government result in a worse fate for Singaporeans in the future?
Blogger Lucky Tan says it best here:
The real reason for the large percentage of imported labor, more than almost anywhere else in the world, is to keep wages down so that rent, utilities, transport and other costs can go up. It would have been alright if we did it like Dubai where the indigenous population sits on top of the economic food chain while foreigners do all the work. The problem is a large number of Singaporeans are at the bottom of the food chain….crushed.
Anyone who’s had a track record in population control as Lee Kuan Yew has would be seen as a failure. Yet, we are providing front page coverage to MM Lee’s latest thinking on the topic.
MM Lee may have been instrumental in building Singapore.
But neither he nor his government is always right – as history has proved.
—–
We recommend this article in Singapore Angle on the topic: Demographic Policy Transition.
Read also: Why are we still being led by one man’s philosophy?
—–
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
He was not right during the elections.
He imposed his might during elections.
There is a huge difference.
Local talent is more important
You mean blood sucking talent?
last time, why control popu
now time, why need so many millions more import?
only a difference of a few decadesin planning horizon leh.
so how come wan?
i regard that man hi hi last time wan u knoe?
OK, I’ll be the first one to say it: No more China Ah Tiongs.
Unemployment rate here getting higher and still let in so many migrants……how to sustain like that? Build more casinos is it?
One problem haven’t solve yet and now add more fuel to the fire…..Definitely a social time bomb in the making.
The reason why the PAP govt is so bold in forcing its population control policies on its citizens is because the citizens themselves have failed to control the population of PAPies in parliament.
To me, that’s the best way to deal with pests…..LOL
The population control program did have an impact of our fertility. But the strongest factor of our self-sterilization is of 2 factor below.
1) The system actually bestow tacit edge to woman in terms of education. Giving woman education is the best birth control program compard to all others as observed by many academics.
2) The real serious decrease in birthrate occurs during the Goh Chok Tong’s property enhancement program which caused running inflation in housing. Cities which hign property prices are without exception low in procreation. And when such event occurred, people would acquire habbits and mindset that favors low birthrate for a very long time and a future decrease in property prices would not be able to alter such culture.
PAP is the blood sucker culprit of all our woes. They always try to protray themseleves as sage and wise guys.
Proves the point. He IS a SENILE man. Trying to cling on to his power and to HOPEFULLY, gain the trust of sgreans.
unfortunately, that will never happen. Who the hell in the right mind will believe the crap that he says: unless you’re speaking abt his “dogs”, then thats different.
Talk more rubbish? He nvr get slam b4 thats why. In power for too long, think everything all merry merry in his ivory tower.
Reason for old man action:
in the past, he do not foresee Singapore will be what it is today and worry if Singapore will be dragged down due to over populated. It will increase overhead and profit do not confirm to sustain the overhead (poor LKY)
In the present, he has to quickly bring in ready foreigners to run his business, because now his family, relatives and associates basically run the whole country like a company (now he is the towkay LKY).
So you see ladies and gentlemen, you and me are simply like a business tools to him be it past or present. We are just number game. The reason why most Singaporean get rich or well to do, is because Singapore is a country with no natural resources. Thus, it is important to bring up the wealth of average Singaporean in order for him to reach his goal.
However, in the present situation where the whole world can move their assets easily from one country to another. So, why need Singaporean who cannot catch up
any more? It sound very harsh, but fellow Singaporean, you are just the tools. For this, I really hope Singaporean can really wake up in the next election. Any later, I am afraid, the country will eventually fight against one another to resolve this. Meaning split into pro-pap and pro-alternative.
Can’t trust anyone? Well, notice the Bishops have prevailed & vindicated over their stand on “Stop-at-2″ — and don’t even have to pay them $m salary.
So far, don’t trust:
1) idiots with billions of OUR money investing in ABC learning, BoA, Micropolis, etc.
2) posters using different nicknames;
3) TBD
@96) Nazryn on August 16th, 2009 3.22 am
“…If the government really do care for the masses, they would have been more engaging to aroused ideas to form possible solutions,…….”
The “Stop-at-2″ till the current “Import FT/FW en masse” is one continuous policy. Since when was the general populace ever “engaged” for their views of such policies? In the 80′s and 90′s, when the fertility rates were 1.9-1.7, nothing was done because they already knew how to cross the bridge when we come to it — being masters of trade, simply import lah! So what the social faultlines are then screwed — the top echelon knows they won’t be affected (in fact, they have since entrenched themselves with comfy fat pays, haven’t they?). Having really pro-family initiatives back then would have been possible, but that would only disrupt the GDP momentum. Sorry, making $$$ more important than making babies.
to regret !
Pick yourself up and make preparation to be foreign talents elsewhere.
i still cannot der understood how the come he can der be wrong?
but then,
1. yes, there was a stop at 2 policy.
2. yes, there has been welcoming new immigrants – to add a few more millions more.
so how? i confused liao!
the strongest team according to who?
The strongest team that had failed investments and realised at 30%.
?
”
114) FPC on August 16th, 2009 5.05 pm the strongest team according to who?
The strongest team that had failed investments and realised at 30%.
?
”
but how does anyone know what is the absolute total Damage?
[i]Non Religious on August 16th, 2009 2.58 am Finished? Some overseas idiot just planted billions of dollars in Jurong. The news must be false then?[/i]
i knew someone liked you would come alon to rebutt/defend
do you see any hightech jurong island in thailand or phillippines includin china?
we are alway numero UNO in oil refinery
thats is our only factor simply because we invested in the most expensive machineries even malaysia tried to compete with us on oil refinery technique, they failed…..
so as a foreign invester in chemical where do you want to go?
just liked buyin a computer must we lanlan see billgates?
LKY is out-dated. He must step down. Otherwise Singapore will be definitely screwed-up deeper by him.
he has NO GUTS to face his own people!
We can recalled in the 70s, how MOE punished the 3rd child by allocating them to a far away school, these kids thave grown up today, their living might have suffered from poor academical records.
The government also scrutinized some religious groups who opposed 2 is enough policies.
The 2 child policy yield great results, today we have 0.8 kid per couples… World Class Government, BEST leadership with GREAT FORESIGHT indeed !
Got this from TKL blog. It shows the benefit of Sinkaporean (i know…a pun) vs PR.
http://0000pcj.people.delphiforums.com/downloads/Benefits_of_Singaporean_vs_PR1.htm
For you to digest
Well, in chinese , we called this kind of article as ” horse back cannon”.
If the old man is so powderful, long time back he always united malaya and would not shed tears on our independence day. He aren’t no prophet.
In decision making/ info science, we know that decision always has to be made in the absence of data or 100% intel. Someone just has to do the decision making, regardless of outcome may or may not be happy for all people.
biggest team = strongest team?
productive anot leh?
10 men do 11 -12 men job? 100% commitment & responsibility?
lol…
I had a chat in Melbourne with friends about the ordeal I go through in ordering food at stalls in Singapore….they had lived here before…
We all had a good laugh….
Singaporeans are going to be a laughing stock ..and thanks to PAP policies.
It’s time to boot them out and most of the PAP guys out.
It’s the ballot box people wake up….or your children will be the ones to suffer.
In his message he urges Singaporean to …”treat new citizen as equal”….
I find it very difficult to bring myself up to be equal to them. So how to treat them as equal?
LKY thinks he’s god, can control population, hw many children n old pple, but is actually is the reverse.
Stop at two is right so that there is enough places at school. FT is right so that they can marry our people and bring them overseas to retire when they passed their prime age. Thus less burden for our society and better retirement system overseas. Here is a place to work and earn/save money. Not a place to have family and live your old age.
@113) but how can creme dela ? on August 16th, 2009 4.46 pm
Maybe cos the leader at that time tell Singaporeans to stop at 2 but he himself stopped at 3?! Very confusing, lol?
Again MM Lee talks as though it is not his doings. Remember the family control measures then the graduate marries graduate policy then the SDU SDS etc…. imagine a politician doing social engineering what will you get? His skin must be thicker than elephant pretending again not his doing and misjudgement. Anyway we are paying huge sum of salaries to him and his cabinet and parliament for making mistakes after mistakes.
Don’t teach your grand father to suck eggs.
30 to 40 years ago there is no instant coffee or tea.
To give birth to baby is easy, like chicken laying
eggs, delivery cost only few cents.. specialist
doctor never heard off….
Stop at 2, I choose one, because my father had 3.
I am now 67 years old, still can tah han one night stand.
everyday sit down cross legs, and shake handballs.
One son university graduate with a master degree married
to a girl also university graduate.
Wah sooo happy lah. durian married durian sure got durian
grandson…up till today no durian, blue bird, chee ham,,,,,
So scold who…????
Last time son listen to father, what father say die die must
do, don’t do people say bad son.. bo ka see..
So let the old grand father do what he like, and die die
must listen, because one day we the sons will be like
him……Die Die must follow….
Supposing there was no ‘Stop at 2′ and there is no ‘shortage’ of Singaporeans, do people think we will have enough ‘talents’ for the Govt’s economic progress? Our local grads are jobless while we need more FTs. Why and why did the MM not address this issue too? My guess is the Spore education system is very questionable whether it is truly World Class, and the meritocracy system is highly damaging to building childrens career dreams.
Our schools only produce graduate who survives by talking.
Take a peep in the research lab apart from DSTA, how many local grad you see?
The influx of PRCs engineers depress the wages so much that there is almost no difference in terms of real income between SG and Shanghai.
LKY thinks he can get scientific talents to work in sweat shops while depressing wages. He is day dreaming.
To point it straight, we are no longer attracting talents, we are getting only china 2nd class graduate, and sooner, we can only attract those who cannot find employment in China.
Meanwhile, LKY pander the very best of our local graduate with high pay doing almost nothing in civil service, so as to stiffle a potential supply line of elite for opposition. In the rest of the world, the very best goes into productive sector. Singapore is a pervert system.
singapore has about 478,000 PRs and 3,164,000 Singapore citizens in 2008. the total population of singapore in 2008 was 4,839,400.
4,839,000 – 3,164,000 = 1,675,000 foreigners in singapore
34.61% of our population are foreigners thats about 4 out of 10 people
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/themes/people/popnindicators.pdf
In Chinese saying Hero Never Cry….
Don’t cry for me Singapore….
He never fail in what he do…
until that day when he was asked to leave…
The opportunity to be the Prime Minister
of Malaysia was beyond reach……..
The Charming Prince could forsee the future..
To save the King, the Prince banish his best
friend…….
You think grand father is stupid meh..
If did not stop at 2…..
What will happened, there will be alot of Brigadier Generals,
wise alexes ministers and all smart Ladies and Gentlemen
producing all of smart and genius babies….
What will happened to grand father 2 sons and 1 daughter
and grand sons and grand daughters……?????
In a class of stupid AhKong is clever……
In a class of clever Ahsoon is stupid…….
Already stop at 2, Ahsoon need AhKong and friends
to help in the office…..
Imagine what will happened if did’nt stop at 2…
Singapore will be the best place in the world
to live and stay….
The PAP regime seem to think they could switch on or off at will the population level anytime they like. The issues with many young family are living space and family income which are the determinates of whether to start a family or not and how many. Most young couple will settle at two as the cost of bringing up children is so expensive these days. It was true, in the past (1950-60)family with 6 to8 children was fairly common as I myself came from a family of 8 excluding the parent. Cost of living was bearable then but modern Singapore with high housing and food cost really forced young family to decide what they must give up to start a family. My borthers had only have one child each as they had decided they could not affort to have more. It is economic considerations and living space that is holding back family having children. The government have to address these issues to resolve the low birth rate in the country. Just calling the population to have more without addressing those issues is like talking to a wall.
Actually, from a secondary school age in 1980s, I really doubt the necessity of the “2 is enough policy”, disincentives measures started in 1972. Anyway, I proven right.If only, like the govt, I had access to birthrate statistics (1975 already dropped to 2.1/family!)Surely it doesn’t need till 1987 to abandon “Stop-At-Two policy”. They should aware that Tokyo/New York/London/Paris these developed country cities then already below birthrate replacement level back then so …..sleepin away or all ministers silent & waiting “the Almighty” finally give in to ego & ended that stupid policy, another 12 yrs after 1975′s 2.1 population replacement level?
I shook my head at his son “argument” of claiming credits for being “too success” with their “stop at 2 policy” while grinning away in the speech…..it should be an honest/remorseful admittance of incompetent ministers being ” too late”, “too complacent” & “tardiness” to the affected families then & all 3rd/4th generations Singaporean now!!!
There was still plenty of land in 1972 till mid 1980s for new HDB flats. Govt claimed it was neccessary then the policy to curb population growth, then why 1975 (barely 3 yrs it nosedived to 2.1 babies per family), it took this “capable” govt who got the cheek to say praises to it’s own grave mistakes another 12 more years to realise it’s fault & stop this policy??? This is same as the 1980 started “primary 3 streaming exam”, deciding for parents that “their kids at age 9 if/not suitable to go JC in future”. They also don’t admit nor listened to educationlists opinion & took almost 20 yrs at yr 2000 then reviwed this policy!!! This is the price we paid for JUST one party as govt!!!
With the high cost in living, government need to offer more favorable incentives to get people to give birth. However, it must not be across the board or else it will pose another problem especially if a particular people group that contributes to social problem is increasing. One solution is to have a flexible adjustable approach where the statistics of crimes and inmates based on ethnic group is taken into consideration. In short, if a group has less people committing crimes, that group can have more money to have more babies. This will also force affected groups to be more conscience of their ethnic social issues. It will greatly enhance social stability and promote population increase of healthy groups.