Pls read Bye Bye Singapore hello China
-
9 in 10 Singaporeans do not feel well prepared for retirement
By Gladys Ow, Channel NewsAsia
Posted: 16 September 2009 1907 hrs
SINGAPORE: Ninety-one per cent of Singaporeans do not feel well prepared for retirement compared to the global average of 87 per cent, according to an annual report by Oxford University's Institute of Ageing on Wednesday.
Elderly Singaporeans (file picture)
The Oxford Institute of Ageing is known for its gerontological research and training programmes.
Singapore, like most countries in the world, is facing an ageing population. In fact, the number of dependent adults is expected to surpass the number of dependent children for the first time next year.
The Oxford report suggested that the low level of preparedness is linked to a lack of access to financial advice. Although Singapore has a wide range of retirement products available, more could be done to educate families to plan for the long term.
The team responsible for the report conducted a workshop in Singapore to help stakeholders from the private and public sectors, non-government organisations and academics plan for an ageing society.
Participants were asked to suggest policy solutions for a variety of situations.
At the end of the three-day programme on Wednesday, researchers felt that Singapore is well-equipped to deal with an ageing population because there is a high level of awareness of the issues. One of the key solutions for Singapore is to keep older workers employed.
Dr George Leeson, deputy director, Oxford Institute of Ageing, said: "Governments need to help employers, employers need to help employees, and trade unions need to play a role. I know that in Singapore there are moves for re-employment legislation in 2012.
"What I think employers have to remember is that they are the people they have to keep in the workplace because there is going to be a demand for the skills they have."
Individuals are also encouraged to take responsibility for their own retirement by planning early, especially for financial security.
Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...005355/1/.html -
Wow obviousely mr georgetan did not sleep well....
-
this is nothing compared to telok training
-
Originally posted by Georgetan884:
this is nothing compared to telok training
What is telok training?
-
Many foreign-born do NS yearly
PRIME Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Tuesday addressed a pet peeve among Singaporeans, that new immigrants do not do national service (NS) or are called up for reservist training.
Mr Lee said every year, hundreds of foreign-born youths do their NS as new citizens or permanent residents (PRs).
'They come from different races and countries, but they have consciously committed themselves to do NS, and march together with Singaporeans,' he said at a dialogue with students of Nanyang Technological University.
In July, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean had said in an interview the number of such youths is in the 'high hundreds every year'.
On Tuesday, PM Lee also said a 'good number of these new citizens' excel in NS, attending Officer Cadet School or topping their cohort and being awarded the Sword of Honour.
Some have signed on to be regulars in the Singapore Armed Forces while others have won SAF scholarships, he said.
Mr Lee cited Lieutenant Kok Khew Fai, 21, a Malaysian-born officer, who became a citizen in May 2007. Lt Kok received the SAF merit scholarship last month and will be an air engineering officer after completing his aeronautical engineering studies at Britain's Imperial College.
He was awarded the SAF Medal for Distinguished Act last September for shielding a recruit from a grenade blast during an exercise in March last year.
Besides defence, PM Lee said new citizens and PRs also contribute in other areas. 'They not only contribute to our economy, they also enrich our society and make up for our population shortfall.'
Singapore made sure these newcomers raised the population's quality in terms of education, skills and drive, he added.
Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_430460.html -
siong not enough everyday very hot place run here run there
-
not enough sleep
no tv
don't do ns go db army prison
-
MM Lee: Treat new citizens as equals
By Lee Hui Chieh
SINGAPORE accepts only skilled and educated immigrants "who increase the average level of competence of Singaporeans", Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday.
"Once they become citizens, they must be treated as equally as native-born Singaporeans, or our society will be fractured," Mr Lee warned.
Singaporeans have complained about new citizens and permanent residents taking away jobs from citizens, and that they do not speak or understand English even when they are working in sales or the service industry, he noted.
But their struggle with English means that "they cannot compete against Singaporeans", he said, addressing these complaints yesterday at a National Day dinner in Tanjong Pagar.
Yet they can be integrated because most of them come from familiar countries such as Malaysia, China and India, he said.
Their children will grow up as Singaporeans, learn English and compete with children of existing citizens for university places and scholarships.
But the Government will raise the number of bursaries and scholarships, and that of places in top schools, for existing citizens' children.
"So they will not be disadvantaged in getting admission to polys or universities," he said.
"Without the immigrants, Singapore will decline."
The Government has protected citizens by ensuring that they enjoy more privileges than permanent residents in areas like applying for HDB flats, the size of hospital and school fees, and in receiving Budget surpluses.
On immigrants, he said: "But we cannot make it so onerous that they will not come. For example, by requiring permanent residents or new citizens to be fluent in English, which even some existing citizens are not!"
Foreign workers have helped Singapore grow faster when conditions were favourable, and buffered the shock in the downturn, he added.
Many of the job losses this year have been among foreign workers rather than citizens. In fact, more citizens and permanent residents here have gained jobs in the first half of this year.
"Had we not had the foreign workers, more Singaporeans would have lost their jobs," Mr Lee said.
Despite the recession, the outlook is positive for Singapore, going by a recent investment here by the world's biggest oil company, ExxonMobil, he said.
It has just given Singapore a vote of confidence, by investing $4.5 billion to build a new plant on Jurong Island, he revealed.
Yesterday, he also urged Singaporeans to speak more Mandarin and study in China's top universities, so that they will have an edge in doing business with China.
But he reassured Singaporeans, saying: "It does not mean we are displacing English as our working and common language, our first language. English will remain the master language for all Singaporeans."
Source: http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne...14-161001.html -
Then how come the americans and europeans are laughing at our english? Asking us why do we speak english in shortcuts?...
-
Originally posted by Georgetan884:9 in 10 Singaporeans do not feel well prepared for retirement
By Gladys Ow, Channel NewsAsia
Posted: 16 September 2009 1907 hrs
SINGAPORE: Ninety-one per cent of Singaporeans do not feel well prepared for retirement compared to the global average of 87 per cent, according to an annual report by Oxford University's Institute of Ageing on Wednesday.
Elderly Singaporeans (file picture)
The Oxford Institute of Ageing is known for its gerontological research and training programmes.
Singapore, like most countries in the world, is facing an ageing population. In fact, the number of dependent adults is expected to surpass the number of dependent children for the first time next year.
The Oxford report suggested that the low level of preparedness is linked to a lack of access to financial advice. Although Singapore has a wide range of retirement products available, more could be done to educate families to plan for the long term.
The team responsible for the report conducted a workshop in Singapore to help stakeholders from the private and public sectors, non-government organisations and academics plan for an ageing society.
Participants were asked to suggest policy solutions for a variety of situations.
At the end of the three-day programme on Wednesday, researchers felt that Singapore is well-equipped to deal with an ageing population because there is a high level of awareness of the issues. One of the key solutions for Singapore is to keep older workers employed.
Dr George Leeson, deputy director, Oxford Institute of Ageing, said: "Governments need to help employers, employers need to help employees, and trade unions need to play a role. I know that in Singapore there are moves for re-employment legislation in 2012.
"What I think employers have to remember is that they are the people they have to keep in the workplace because there is going to be a demand for the skills they have."
Individuals are also encouraged to take responsibility for their own retirement by planning early, especially for financial security.
Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...005355/1/.html
after using your CPF monies for HDB than whats left for retirement? So why do we need this report to tell us ? -
PM Lee: NS for children of PRs will scare them off
October 5, 2009 by admin
Filed under Selected reads, Top NewsFrom our Correspondent
During a dialogue session between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and around 200 women from various women’s organisations, participants suggested making NS mandatory for children of PRs to ensure a level playing field for all young people here. (read article here)
But PM Lee rejected this, saying that doing so would scare away potential citizens. He added that each year, several hundred children of new Singaporeans and PRs elect to serve NS.
Mr Lee’s response brought a sharp rebuttal immediately from netizens.
Frederick Wong wrote:
“I am surprised by what PM Lee said. First, if PM Lee is afraid of scaring away PRs, won’t he be afraid of scaring away current citizens? We as Singapore citizen has duties to fulfill, so as PRs.
As mentioned many times, Singapore prosperity, safe environment etc etc doesn’t come naturally, we work very hard to be here today. What happen now, many people from other countries just drop in and enjoy the fruits that we have work so hard for the past decades.
The miserably small tax incentive for NSmen cannot and never will cover the time and sacrify that we have done for our country.
One unfortunate consequence arises from PRs is that they are normally younger and can accept a much lower salary, when it comes to redundancy, older citizens who have contributed their whole life for the growth of Singapore economy are normally not favoured over younger and cheaper PRs/Immigrants. Worst thing is that new immigrants may have the same ang bao when there is surplus from our efficient governement.”
Jay added:
“I’m extremely disappointed with PM Lee’s response. This is liken to a company that pays new employees well above market rate to attact them but doesn’t treat existing employees well . Really short sighted.”
The government’s liberal immigration policies has come under intense fire from an increasing disgruntled and disillusioned citizenry in recent days.
Mr Lee was forced to make a rare concession publicly when he reassured Singaporeans that the inflow of foreigners will “slow down”. However, he was quick to reiterate that the policy will stay as Singapore need foreigners to survive.
His argument cuts no ice with Singapore males who have to sacrifice the two best years of their lives as conscripts in National Service.
Furthermore, they still have to serve thirteen years of reservist which put them at a disadvantage compared to foreigners who have no such obligations.
The relentless influx of foreigners has also led to record high prices for public housing. A recent ERA report revealed that 40 per cent of the HDB flats in the resale market are bought by PRs.
Faced with growing calls from the ground to temper the intake of foreigners, the ruling party may have little choice but to tweak the policy to appease angry citizens. However, with virtually no opposition to challenge them, there is no political pressure on them to do more to protect the rights of locals.
EDITORS’ NOTE:
If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account ([email protected]). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you!
Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview
We are looking for the editors of The Campus Observer, Kent Ridge Common and The Enquirer. We are keen to finance their student newspapers. If you know any of them in person, please ask them to contact us at the email above. Thank you.
-
Sweta Agarwal proud to be Indian citizen and to have PR status in Singapore
From our Correspondent
The man, or rather, the lady at the center of the controversy, Ms Swetal Agarwal has replied. (read article here)
In a letter to the Straits Times Forum on 20 August 2009, Ms Swetal Agarwal wrote that she is happy being a PR though she does not get equal benefits in housing and other aspects.
However, she was adamant that her child get the best education in Singapore:
“But where our children are concerned, we just want them to have the best education possible and I think we are not asking much…….where schooling is concerned, ‘every child has the right to get the best education possible’.”
Ms Swetal Agarwal did not explain why she did not choose to take up Singapore citizenship after living here for 6 years.
“About living here for six years and not taking citizenship, I think this is a very personal choice.”, she wrote.
Unfortunately, many Singapore citizens do not enjoy the luxury of ‘personal choice’ as Ms Swetal. They are stuck with the citizenship with nowhere to go. On the other hand, Ms Swetal can always choose to return to India where the cost of living is much lower.
Ms Swetal is not alone. There many Malaysian and Chinese PRs who refuse to become Singapore new citizens in order to enjoy the “best of both worlds”. They earn decent salaries in Singapore which when converted to their native currencies, will enable them to retire comfortably in their homelands. Therefore, many do not see their future in Singapore.
Ms Swetal ended her letter by proclaiming her loyalty to India: “I am proud to be a citizen of my country and have PR status in Singapore.” Many Singaporeans would be envious of her position. How nice it is to be a Singapore citizen and a Australian or Canadian PR at the same time.
In the meanwhile, the furore over foreigners being “given a free meal” continues unabated with one Singaporean calling on the government to start new citizens on ‘quasi-national service’. (read letter here)
Bryan Tan wrote of his suggestion: “Besides being seen to contribute to society, they can also integrate into society faster by interacting with people at various levels. By serving in hospitals or charities, they will gain an instant insight into cultural and religious aspects of the community of which they will become part.”
While Singapore men spent two years of the best years of their lives in the army, it seems a “good deal” for the new citizens to do contribute to Singapore by serving in civilian institutions. The question is: does the government have any political will or courage to implement it?
-
Thanks, being a PR is enough
IN RESPONSE to letters by Mr Jimmy Loke (’The PR difference’, last Saturday) and Mr Chia Kok Leong (’No school, no Singapore’, last Saturday), I would only ask them to refer to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew’s speech reported last Friday (’MM: Foreign talent is vital’), where he gave an idea of the benefits citizens have over permanent residents (PRs).
I am happy to be a PR and although we do not get equal benefits in housing and other respects, that is understandable. We understand the difference between a citizen and a PR.
But where our children are concerned, we just want them to have the best education possible and I think we are not asking much. Citizens have the upper hand in buying homes and other respects, which is justified, but where schooling is concerned, ‘every child has the right to get the best education possible’.
About living here for six years and not taking citizenship, I think this is a very personal choice. I would just like to end this topic by saying we are not here to compete with citizens but there are certain things on which one cannot compromise and children’s education is one of them. I think we are not asking much and we are grateful to the Government for understanding that for every parent, his child’s welfare comes first.
I would like to thank Mr Loke and Mr Chia for inviting us to become citizens but for now, I am proud to be a citizen of my country and have PR status in Singapore.
Sweta Agarwal (Mrs)
Source: ST Forum
-
Embrace foreigners
I REFER to the report on Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew’s speech, ‘Give new arrivals the time to adapt’ (Aug 14), and letters on immigration and privileges of citizens and permanent residents (PRs).
Reading excerpts of MM’s speech on integration and PRs reinforces the fact that his visionary leadership has brought Singapore the success we now enjoy, which is a contrast to the short-sighted view about whether to welcome foreigners.
Reaction on the subject of balloting for Primary 1 places involving Phase 2C places (in which children of PRs are eligible) gives the misleading conclusion that enrolling a child in a ‘top’ school is a guarantee of future academic success. These letters further argue that children of PRs should not be entitled to compete with Singaporeans for a place in the school of their choice. I beg to differ.
First, having PR students thrown in the mix will benefit Singaporean students in the long run. Schools will have international exposure which will improve the social skills of students.
Second, PR students provide healthy competition and remind us we must constantly upgrade ourselves.
Third, for every Singaporean who complains about foreign students competing under Phase 2C, there are also Singaporeans from less-well-off families who complain about well-to-do families who buy or rent property just to qualify under Phase 2C.
Online search engine Yahoo became a global name because its co-founder and former chief executive officer Jerry Yang moved from Taiwan to the United States, was educated in the US, became a citizen and founded a company which created many jobs.
He could do so primarily because of a liberal US immigration policy and an embracing education platform. Perhaps Singapore can cultivate successful entrepreneurs in future if we are more open-minded about foreigners.
Biologically, it makes sense to bring in foreign talent to take up PR status. Our future Singaporeans will be of higher quality when Singaporeans include a foreign gene pool.
We should be open-minded about integration, embrace change and take challenges in our stride for the sake of future generations.
Harry Ng
Source: Straits Times Forum
-
PRs given equal chance in Primary 1 admission a sore point among Singaporeans
From our Correspondent
The equal chance granted to PRs in the Primary 1 admission exercise has become a contentious issue for Singaporeans again.
It was sparked by a letter written by a Mr Eduard Tay to the Straits Times last Thursday about his son’s unsuccessful application for a place in a neighborhood school though he acknowledged that “his chances were poor, having to vie with children registered under Phase 1A, 2A1, 2A2, 2B and first-generation permanent residents’ (PRs) children under Phase 2C.” (read letter here)
Mr Tay, who has completed his National Service, asked why these Phase 2C children are given an equal chance in Primary 1 registration. when first-generation PRs can choose not to do NS when they reach 18 by returning to their own country.
His letter brought a swift rebuttal from a PR the very next day. Mrs Sweta Agarwal justified the equal chance given to PRs because they “pay taxes and abide by Singapore’s laws”. She also issued a veiled threat that PRs may consider leaving Singapore if their children cannot get into the schools of their choice.
Mrs Agarwal’s insensitive letter triggered a massive furore among Singaporeans. Mr Jimmy Loke replied a day letter castigating Mrs Agarwal for not taking up citizenship after a lengthy six years as a PR.
“Mrs Agarwal has the option of returning to her country to find a good school for her daughter. Mr Tay’s child does not enjoy that luxury. As a Singaporean, Mr Tay served national service for 21/2 years and spent 13 more years as a reservist. Should any government not take care of its citizens first?”, he added.
Mr Chia Kok Leong felt disappointed by her rationale. He wrote: “Paying taxes and working here for six years are commendable but instead of telling us what other value-added contributions she or her family would offer.”
Ms Violet Koh asked the Education Ministry to give citzens priority in Primary 1 registration.
“Why are Singaporeans and PRs in the same category when it comes to the Primary 1 registration process? When top schools are overwhelmed with applicants and places have to be decided by balloting, Singaporeans are not given priority.”, she asked. (read letter here)
Mr Edwin Han mooted the suggestion of requiring long-term PRs to take up citizenship:
“To the question asked by Mr Loke on why Mrs Agarwal has not taken up citizenship, I have this suggestion: Require all permanent residents (PRs) who have lived here for 10 years or more to apply for citizenship, and remove some or all privileges accorded to them should they fail to do so. This forces PRs to think carefully about whether they feel they belong in Singapore.” (read letter here)
The rising number of foreigners in Singapore has become an important issue for many Singaporeans. MM Lee said recently defended the government’s pro-foreigner policy on the grounds that foreigners are “vital” to the economy.
Despite widespread concerns, the fault line between foreigners and citizens was hardly mentioned by the Prime Minister during his National Day Rally. To add salt to the wound, citizens are asked to make foreigners “welcome”. The government even goes out of its way to organize events for foreigners, including a recent “amazing race”.
All Singapore men have to serve two years of National Service and 13 years of reservist. They have to contribute 20% of their monthly income to CPF. PRs, on the other hand, do not have these burdens and they can always return to their homelands at anytime.
Perhaps Ms Agarwal has been doing her calculations all along: that after her daughter completes secondary education here, she will go on to pursue her tertiary education elsewhere and the entire family will relocate.
The government’s extreme “friendliness” towards foreigners is almost unheard of anywhere in the world. No wonder some Singaporeans are beginning to wonder if it would be better to be PR than a citizen.
-
PAP organizes “amazing” race for PRs
From our Correspondent
The government is sparing no efforts in cozying up to the PRs in a desperate bid to attract more to take up the Singapore citizenship.
As part of the National Day celebrations, the first-ever Amazing Race for New Citizens will be held this Sunday to help them bond with the community.
Organised by the Clementi grassroots organisations (GROs) and Integration and Naturalisation Champions, 45 new citizens from China, Myanmar, India and Malaysia will join 45 grassroots leaders for a half-day of adventure after taking part in the Clementi National Day Walk-a-Jog.
Participants will form seven teams, each with five new citizens or Permanent Residents (PRs) and one Residents’ Committee (RC) member. New citizens’ family members are also encouraged to join the participants in the race.
Singapore’s Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng expressed his concerns in a recent speech that the new citizens are forming “enclaves” within themselves and urge them to adapt to local ways.
Stung by a declining birth rate amongst locals, the Singapore government had went all out to attract foreigners to the island in the past decade.
PRs are usually granted within 3 months if one is eligible and citizenships in less than 2 years.
The rapid influx of foreigners has led to complaints amongst Singaporeans about their “quality, with one irate Singaporean writing to the Straits Times Forum suggesting that prospective citizens must be fluent in the English language and be subjected to a form of modified National Service.
The Singapore government is adamant that foreigners are needed to boost the economy and replace the aging population. However, many Singaporeans see them as “parasites” coming here to snatch away their rice-bowls.
Nowhere in the world do we see a government organizing events for PRs. In Australia, PRs are treated like a source of cheap labor and receive far less benefits compared to the citizens.
In Singapore, PRs and new citizens are worshipped like gods by the ruling party who feels that they are more “appreciative” of the government and less “troublesome” than the demanding locals.
In spite of frequent grouses on the ground, Singapore citizens have little power or influence to change the government’s policy as the system does not permit them to vote out the ruling party.
Source: http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/08/14/pap-organizes-amazing-race-for-prs/
-
Singapore PRC PR Zhang Yuanyuan flashed NRIC on Chinese TV and proclaimed loyalty to China publicly
October 4, 2009 by admin
Filed under Top News
From our Correspondent with tip-off from Ho H K
A Chinese national and Singapore Permanent Resident by the name of Zhang Yuanyuan humiliated Singapore publicly on China’s CCTV by flashing her NRIC on the screen and subsequently declared her undivided loyalty to her motherland, China!
Ms Zhang was the only overseas returnee in the formation and has intrigued the media because she chose not only to return home, but to also take up the tough regimen as part of the parade.
She came to Singapore to study and work in 2003, and got her blue Singapore PR identity card two years later.
Despite a job with a multi-national company, which reportedly paid her some $4,000 a month, she returned to Beijing last year and worked in a state-owned enterprise.
Months later, she heard about the chance to be part of the women’s militia contingent during a recruitment drive, she jumped at it.
When asked by CCTV Channel 7 reporters why returned to Beijing, she proclaimed with a wide smile on screen that “repaying the motherland is her greatest wish!”
To add insult to the injury, she allowed her Singapore blue NRIC (for PRs) to be filmed. As expected, the Chinese state media swooned over the story:
We were alerted to Miss Zhang’s CCTV interview by an angry Singaporean Ho H K who complained:
“I happened to view this clip on Youtube and I got the biggest shock of my life when I reach 1min 05sec of the clip! It proudly displays a PRC woman by the name of Zhang Yuanyuan denouncing her Spore pink IC & return to China to work & participate in PRC’s 60th National Day celebrations. With the opening of the floodgate for the foreigners, I seriously wonder if there’s a small fraction of possibility that I will trust them in times of national crisis.”
Ever since the Singapore government open the floodgates to increase the population through immigration, large numbers of Chinese nationals have flocked to study, work and live in Singapore.
Though they are encourage to take up PRs and citizenships, not many of them choose to settle down in Singapore especially with the growing strength of the Chinese economy.
Unlike a few years ago, China is more prosperous than before. Certain cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou have a living standard which is comparable to Singapore.
Ms Zhang, who benefitted from a Singapore education, will be highly sought after in China due to her English proficiency. It is not surprising that she has decided to return to China.
The ruling party has come under increasing criticism from the disgruntled citizens for “mass importing” China internationals including athletes to represent Singapore in international competitions.
During the Beijing Olympics games last year, Singapore’s Li Jiawei, who was born in China, caused a stirred when she swept the Singapore flag on the ground when marching as head of the Singapore contingent:
Jiawei is currently in Beijing waiting to deliver her first child. It awaits to be seen if she will return to Singapore.
Credits: Temasek Review : http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/10/04/si...china-publicly/ -
Here are some of the more interesting comments.
1) kknd on Sun, 4th Oct 2009 9:50 pm :
Please guys, there is nothing to be concerned or upset about.
The SG(PAP) government gives out PR/citizenships to foreigners like candies to kids on Halloween. A lot of economic statistics is computed using ‘Singapore Residents’, which means it includes the blue card holders.
Furthermore, Miss Zhang was merely honest about where her loyalty lies. And it is always a good idea to side with the winning side. Give another 5 to 10 years, Sinkies may have to find employment in Shanghai as domestic workers. And just like the Pinoy maids who hang around Lucky Plaza on weekends, Singaporean maids may have to hang around one of the Capitaland-owned malls in Shanghai.
2) cy on Sun, 4th Oct 2009 4:03 pm:
firstly, there’s nothing wrong in PR proclaiming loyalty to their own country, its normal.
the problem is that the govt in a wish to please PRs and new citizens, neglected old citizens and thus cause envy,resentment,anger,jealousy.
it’s like a parent who dotes more on an adopted child than their own child. how will the own child feel?
3) Eve on Sun, 4th Oct 2009 9:57 pm:
For those who can read Chinese, check out this popular chinese website where people speaks badly of Singapore(http://www.tianya.cn/publicforum/content/worldlook/1/146789.shtml).
1. Why are we giving them scholarships that our poor Singaporeans are not getting?
2. Why are we importing NEW people with low QC check and increase our crime rate?
3. Why are we giving them citizenships that they don’t even care a heck about?
4. Why did our country import so many people to come and criticize us, take our jobs and not be loyal to our country at the end of the day?
I guess that’s because we do not know the NEW people well enough as they will always remain loyal to their five-stars flag country. They came to Singapore only to get what they need – it’s a matter of making use of us and foresaking us after they have got what they want. I’m sorry to say that this is how people survive in China. Having been in China for five years, worked with the locals in many cities and travelled all around their country, I am sad to see Singaporeans becoming the minority in our own country! My Chinese friend in Singapore even told me that he’s considering whether to be a Singapore PR as he was invited to be a PR only after working in Singapore for 2 years!
This time I came back to Singapore, walked our streets, I felt like a minority. So what if the birth rate has increased? Can this last? Will these people remain loyal to our country? I doubt. I know they will leave us when we are in trouble. I seriously think that the ruling party should look into their policies that introduced so many NEW people. Why force the minority Sgreans feel like leaving their homeland? My sg born friend told me that he wanted to give up his citizenship in the future. Why?? Do you know that the importing of China nationals to represent our country for ping pong was being laughed at by people in China? They said that China has won 1st and 2nd place at the Olympics! I then found out that they were China Chinese. Sigh… -
i cannot imagine, if one day china gahmen decide to abolished one child policy in china
what would happen to singapore and the rest of the world
may be mix veg rice s$2.50 become s$4.00 (1 veg, 1 tofu, 1 meat-white/red) - i would not know
-
Is there room for more foreigners in Singapore?
By Bhaskaran Kunju, Political Correspondent
On 15 September Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong gave a speech to NTU students as part of the NTU Student’s Union Ministerial Forum 2009. The theme of the event was ‘Is there room for more?” a rhetoric question on the capability of Singapore in the face of growth on the financial and social front.
With a significant slice of public debate being taken up by the issue of social integration in the run up to the speech, it was little surprise that a large portion of PM Lee’s speech was dedicated to this issue as well. Having already touched on the topic in his National Day Rally and the National Day Message, there was little else he could expound upon other than to provide assurance to Singaporeans that their positions were not being usurped
PM Lee started the speech with an update on the state of the economy, stating the relative state of recovery and the success of fresh graduates in finding employment, albeit gradually. But the focus of his speech was, as stated by him ‘on the long term’ effects on Singapore as whole.
The most recent statistics from the Department of Statistics indicates a rise in the nation’s population to 4.99 million, with foreigners (non-residents) comprising 1.25million of that figure compared to 1.2million the year before. Additionally there are 533,000 Permanent Residents (PRs) a rise of 55,000 from the year before.
In the wake of such staggering numbers one might question the sustainability of the country, physically, economically and socially as population figures rise, almost entirely due to the increase in foreigners and PRs.
It might even appear that a state of our size will have its resources stretched to the limit. While these worries seem logical and even justified with the various social problems that have been in the news, from increased competitions in public schools to crowded public transports, the Prime Minister provides some critical views on these.
In his speech PM Lee urged students not to be restrained by constraints and to create more room. In his opinion critical constraint is not physical but people, as we need good people who can provide creative ideas that will help in building the country.
Just as it happened decades ago when our forefathers migrated here. The immigration process is needed to cover labour needs and the low birth rates, which according to the latest statistics is at just 40,000 for 2008, far short of the required natural replacement number of 60,000.
While trying to justify the need for foreigners, he at the same time also concedes in the limit by acknowledging the failing economy. He cites this as a reason for the administration to scale back the admission of foreigners henceforth. With more than 100.000 new foreigners being admitted per year in recent years, that number is now expected to drop.
According to PM Lee, most of the foreigners comprise of transient workers. More than half (55%) of the non-citizens here are transient workers with 15% students and dependants and the remaining 30% PRs.
This group of transient workers is expected to stay only temporarily and for as long as they are required by the economy.He also states that not taking in foreign workers will be a mistake as that would mean they could be absorbed by other competitor nations, much to our own hindrance. While this is true theoretically, the statistical figures for foreign workers are still unusually high with a 2007 estimate placing Singapore as having the highest proportion of foreign workers in Asia.
PM Lee stated 4 reasons that he believed stood as hurdles in the integration process, competition arising from new arrivals, differences in cultures, a change in the social landscape and the indifferent treatment of citizens and PRs.
While it is welcoming to see the administration being able to acknowledge reasons other than that of xenophobia for the lingering dilemma of social integration between locals and foreigners, it still falls short of practical solutions that are most definitely long overdue.
All 4 reasons are pretty much on target with the worries of the general public, and having known that, one could not help but wonder why relevant actions weren’t taken much earlier instead of just providing lip service over the years, or even worse no acknowledgement at all. After all these issues are not new and have been at the forefront of even the mainstream media for just under a decade now.
It would be wrong to deny that foreign workers are needed at all and as pointed out by the Prime Minister in his speech a number of them take up jobs that most Singaporeans refuse to do. Another key point he raised was the added competitiveness brought in by foreigners. He compared Singapore to the likes of New York and Shanghai and stated his desire for our city-state to be of a similar level. The worrying problem in this desire is that Singapore, unlike New York City or Shanghai cannot just function as a financial centre.
The notion that Singapore is first and foremost a home to millions of citizens and needs to fulfill its purpose as a residential hub for its citizens before anything else, seems to be lost on the government.
While it’ll be naïve to halt economic growth for these reasons, greater micro management must be in place to ensure that growth on the financial front does not mean the displacement of another, namely social. One example of an ill effect of this will be the rising housing costs, a similar trait in New York and Shanghai.
Given such a scenario could the average Singaporean then continue to afford to live here? Could we continue to sacrifice the needs of the average citizen in favour of perpetual economic expansion? New York City and Shanghai could afford being financial centres as the respective country’s citizens could easily reside anywhere else in their vast country, away from the carry over effects of high costs. But given the physical limitations of Singapore these effects are felt throughout the country and are inescapable.
With the rapid population boom these fears are no longer unfounded. As mentioned in my previous article “A question of fairness: PRs competing with citizens for Primary 1 places,” I believe the issues of social integration are deeply rooted in the failure to account for these needs and wants of the citizens before any other. It is not too far off the mark to predict the demise of the lower and middle class strata in Singapore.
In fact the population displacement by foreigners is not an unlikely scenario either with many qualified young Singaporeans preferring to migrate instead.
The consolation from PM Lee’s speech is the detail in which he discussed the issue. For example, he pointed out the problems of service line staff who do not speak English and the difficulty in integration for International Students in local varsities. It is thus heartening to note that the most plebian of problems are still under the watchful eye of the government. But as mentioned before the issue being left unattended to in depth for so long does not bode well for the government at all.
The Prime Minister does however cite some miniscule examples of these issues being dealt with. In the case of non-English speaking staff, he mentioned SBS Transit’s intensive English course for its drivers from China. Regular patrons of SBS Transit may however beg to differ on the level of English of foreign drivers and the letters to Straits Times and STOMP and even news reports of incidents on public transports attest to this as well.
While this policy is at least in place with SBS Transit, it is still not a requirement for other companies. The Prime Minister did however mention the Ministry of Manpower’s decision to study the means of implementing a basic English course for all foreign service line personnel.
In addition to this he also mentions the National Integration Council, which was set up in April as an effort in integrating New Citizens and PRs and promises that more will be done.
However as mentioned before these problems aren’t new and have been at the forefront long enough. In fact so have the promises of distinction between PRs and Citizens and putting the needs of citizens first. In his speech PM Lee once again repeated this promise.
He said, “But in the midst of all this discussion about Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans, I think I should emphasize one point. And that is that in Singapore, the interests of citizens always have to come first…..I think it is right that we make a clear distinction between citizens and PRs and others. And we will make this differentiation sharper over time to reflect the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship. But of course, we cannot make it so onerous for PRs and non-residents that nobody wants to come to Singapore.”
It is almost an exact match for a quote given by PM Lee some 3 years ago at the backend of the 2006 General Elections and I included it in my last article “A question of fairness: PRs competing with citizens for Primary 1 places” as well. Little concerted has been done and it seems only the declining economy has brought the matter to attention, given the possible social and economic repercussions that would arise.
The argumentation of the government on most socio-political topic has always been one based on false dichotomy. In other words if the solution isn’t Option A then it must be Option B with Option A being what’s already been implemented and Option B a radical alternative that could savage society and upset the carefully calibrated balance of the nation. But socio-political problems are far more complex and are not easily characterised by dual options. There are accessible middle-ground options that are just as compatible if not more.
In the case of justifying the need for foreigners it is no different either. It is true that immigration policies are needed to sustain the work force and in part also make up for the falling birth rates. But the extent of this policy is the biggest variable and the latest statistics are rather staggering.
The middle ground options include further boosts to encourage Singaporeans to have more children and providing avenues to Singaporeans to realise their dreams here without feeling hindered, to stop the outflow of our already diminished labour pool. For the former, while policies are already in place with little improvements, it must be noted that increases in birth rates do not occur overnight. Shifts in social attitudes are better measured in the long run.
In his speech the Prime Minister mentions policies to encourage and develop Singaporeans. A new university, the Singapore University of Tech and Design is in the pipeline. He also mentions plans to allow Singaporeans space to realise their dreams locally and to keep in touch with Singaporeans abroad in hopes of bringing them back in the near future.
The exodus of local talent as mentioned before is a worrying phenomenon and Mr Viswa Sadasivan mentioned this in his maiden speech in Parliament as well. He said,
“Look at the results of a scientific survey done in 2007 by the Singapore Polytechnic. 800 Singaporean youth – between the ages of 15 and 29 – were polled. They all went to Singapore schools and attended National Education sessions, as required. Thirty-seven percent of the youths polled said categorically that they are not patriotic. More than 50% said they would migrate if given a chance. The findings of this survey are not very different from many others conducted with youths, younger working adults, overseas Singaporeans and even National Servicemen.
I read a July 2009 article in AsiaOne.com that quoted a major survey by Experiences 2009 (the organiser of an annual US education convention) that highlighted that of the 153 Singaporean students studying overseas polled, 79% prefer to work in the USA after they graduate. Earlier this year, at Chung Cheng High School’s 70th anniversary celebration, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong revealed that more than one-fifth of the students who performed well in their “A” level examination between 1996 and 1999 are no longer working in Singapore today, a decade later. Now even though these findings may not be surprising for some of us, they must certainly become a cause for concern.
To me, the biggest challenge we face, as a nation, is not so much the sluggish GDP growth or flight of capital. It is not about whether we have enough able bodies here to create economic prosperity, but whether we have enough hearts and souls committed enough to make this home, not just a convenient place to live, work and play.
At the heart of the matter the problems are a lot deeper than just the lack of social integration between locals and foreigners.
There is 1) The unattended needs, wants and concerns of citizens that spill over to other issues and 2) The failure to realise that immigration policies while serving their purpose bring with it its own set of problems that add to the pre-existing woes.
It is indeed of some comfort to note the Prime Minister’s pledge to alleviate the concerns of the citizens but as mentioned earlier the promises are long standing and are still not yet fully resolved. Perhaps with the General Elections right around the corner there could be some practical changes in the immediate timeline.
About Author:
Bhaskaran Kunju is a political science undergraduate in a local varsity. He is a regular contributor to the Straits Times Forum and TODAY Voices.
Source: http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/10/07/is-there-room-for-more-foreigners-in-singapore/
-
Originally posted by Georgetan884:MM Lee: Treat new citizens as equals
By Lee Hui Chieh
SINGAPORE accepts only skilled and educated immigrants "who increase the average level of competence of Singaporeans", Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday.
"Once they become citizens, they must be treated as equally as native-born Singaporeans, or our society will be fractured," Mr Lee warned.
Singaporeans have complained about new citizens and permanent residents taking away jobs from citizens, and that they do not speak or understand English even when they are working in sales or the service industry, he noted.
But their struggle with English means that "they cannot compete against Singaporeans", he said, addressing these complaints yesterday at a National Day dinner in Tanjong Pagar.
Yet they can be integrated because most of them come from familiar countries such as Malaysia, China and India, he said.
Their children will grow up as Singaporeans, learn English and compete with children of existing citizens for university places and scholarships.
But the Government will raise the number of bursaries and scholarships, and that of places in top schools, for existing citizens' children.
"So they will not be disadvantaged in getting admission to polys or universities," he said.
"Without the immigrants, Singapore will decline."
The Government has protected citizens by ensuring that they enjoy more privileges than permanent residents in areas like applying for HDB flats, the size of hospital and school fees, and in receiving Budget surpluses.
On immigrants, he said: "But we cannot make it so onerous that they will not come. For example, by requiring permanent residents or new citizens to be fluent in English, which even some existing citizens are not!"
Foreign workers have helped Singapore grow faster when conditions were favourable, and buffered the shock in the downturn, he added.
Many of the job losses this year have been among foreign workers rather than citizens. In fact, more citizens and permanent residents here have gained jobs in the first half of this year.
"Had we not had the foreign workers, more Singaporeans would have lost their jobs," Mr Lee said.
Despite the recession, the outlook is positive for Singapore, going by a recent investment here by the world's biggest oil company, ExxonMobil, he said.
It has just given Singapore a vote of confidence, by investing $4.5 billion to build a new plant on Jurong Island, he revealed.
Yesterday, he also urged Singaporeans to speak more Mandarin and study in China's top universities, so that they will have an edge in doing business with China.
But he reassured Singaporeans, saying: "It does not mean we are displacing English as our working and common language, our first language. English will remain the master language for all Singaporeans."
Source: http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne...14-161001.htmlWill senile oppressor be treating foreigners as equal if one day his rice bowl is threatened by FTs? Bunch of heartless despots!
-
移民å�´è¦�报效ä¸å›½ 阅兵美女é�æ–°åŠ å�¡äººç‚®è½°
October 7, 2009 by admin
Filed under Chinese sectionä¸å¤®ç¤¾ 2009-10-05
一ä¸å›½å¥³å�åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡æ‹…ä»»å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆå¹¶å�–å¾—æ°¸ä¹…å±…æ°‘èº«åˆ†ï¼Œä½†æ”¾å¼ƒæ–°åŠ å�¡ç”Ÿæ´»å›žåˆ°ä¸å›½ï¼Œå�‚与ä¸å›½é˜…兵队ä¼�，接å�—电视访问时指è¦�「报效祖国ã€�ï¼Œå¼•èµ·æ–°åŠ å�¡ç½‘å�‹ (netizens) ç ²è½°ã€‚
æ–°åŠ å�¡è¿‘å¹´æ�¥æœ‰å¤§æ‰¹ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç§»æ°‘ï¼Œç”±äºŽæŽ’æŒ¤åˆ°æ–°åŠ å�¡æœ¬åœ°äººçš„å·¥ä½œï¼Œå› è€Œå¼•å�‘ä¸€äº›æ–°åŠ å�¡äººåœ¨å…¬å…±åœºæ‰€æŽ’挤ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç§»æ°‘，最å�Žè®©æ€»ç�†æ�Žæ˜¾é¾™ã€�内é˜�资政æ�Žå…‰è€€çº·çº·å…¬å¼€å‘¼å��，è¦�æ–°åŠ å�¡äººæŽ¥çº³æ–°ç§»æ°‘ï¼Œå¼ºè°ƒæ–°åŠ å�¡çš„ç¹�è�£éœ€è¦�é� 新移民和外æ�¥äººæ‰�。
ä¸�è¿‡ï¼Œæœ€è¿‘æœ‰æ–°åŠ å�¡ç½‘å�‹æŠŠä¸€å��æ›¾åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡æ‹…ä»»å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆï¼Œå¹¶å�–得永久居民身分的ä¸å›½å¥³æ•™å¸ˆå¼ 元元，接å�—ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç”µè§†å�°è®¿é—®çš„ç‰‡æ®µä¸Šä¼ åˆ°æ–°åŠ å�¡æŠ¥ä¸šæŽ§è‚¡çš„STOMP网站，å†�æ¬¡å¼•èµ·æ–°åŠ å�¡äººè´¨ç–‘æ–°ç§»æ°‘å¯¹æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„å¿ è¯šåº¦ã€‚
28å²�çš„å¼ å…ƒå…ƒæŽ¥å�—ä¸å›½çš„电视å�°è®¿é—®æ—¶æŒ‡å‡ºï¼Œå¥¹äºŽ2003å¹´èµ´æ–°åŠ å�¡ç•™å¦ï¼Œå�Žæ�¥æ‰¾åˆ°å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆçš„工作，并å�–得永久居民身分，有人åŠ�她入ç±�æ–°åŠ å�¡ï¼Œå¥¹ç”說：「北京æ‰�是我的家ã€�。
å¼ å…ƒå…ƒåŽ»å¹´åˆ�得知ä¸å›½å�—æ–¹é�é�‡å†°é›ªç�¾å®³ï¼Œç«‹åˆ»å�‘ç�¾åŒºæ±‡æ¬¾ï¼Œå¹¶åœ¨åŒ—京奥è¿�å‰�返回ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ï¼Œæ”¾å¼ƒè·¨å›½å…¬å�¸ä¼˜æ¸¥å¾…é�‡ï¼Œè¿›å…¥ä¸€å®¶æ”¶å…¥å·®10å€�çš„ä¸å›½å›½æœ‰ä¼�业工作；今年她å�¬èªªè¦�组建å��一阅兵女民兵方队时，å�ˆæŠ¥å��å�‚åŠ è®ç»ƒã€‚
å¼ å…ƒå…ƒå�‘电视å�°è¡¨ç¤ºï¼Œæœ‰äººé—®å¥¹ä¸ºä»€ä¹ˆè¦�æŠ•å…¥è¿™æ ·è‰°è‹¦çš„è®ç»ƒï¼Œå¥¹ç”èªªï¼Œã€Œå› ä¸ºæŠ¥æ•ˆç¥–å›½æ˜¯æˆ‘æœ€å¤§çš„å¿ƒæ„¿ã€�。
一å��网å�‹åœ¨ç½‘ç«™å¼ è´´å¼ å…ƒå…ƒè®¿è°ˆç‰‡æ®µå�Žç•™è¨€èªªï¼Œç»�è¿‡è¿™æ ·çš„äº‹æƒ…ï¼Œè¦�è®©æ–°åŠ å�¡äººå¦‚何平ç‰å¯¹å¾…新移民。
ä¸€äº›æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„网å�‹çœ‹äº†è¿™æ®µè®¿è°ˆï¼Œä¹Ÿä¸�是滋味地å��问，「我们è¦�怎么相信外æ�¥äººæ‰�ã€�。
-
Originally posted by Georgetan884:
移民å�´è¦�报效ä¸å›½ 阅兵美女é�æ–°åŠ å�¡äººç‚®è½°
October 7, 2009 by admin
Filed under Chinese sectionä¸å¤®ç¤¾ 2009-10-05
一ä¸å›½å¥³å�åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡æ‹…ä»»å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆå¹¶å�–å¾—æ°¸ä¹…å±…æ°‘èº«åˆ†ï¼Œä½†æ”¾å¼ƒæ–°åŠ å�¡ç”Ÿæ´»å›žåˆ°ä¸å›½ï¼Œå�‚与ä¸å›½é˜…兵队ä¼�，接å�—电视访问时指è¦�「报效祖国ã€�ï¼Œå¼•èµ·æ–°åŠ å�¡ç½‘å�‹ (netizens) ç ²è½°ã€‚
æ–°åŠ å�¡è¿‘å¹´æ�¥æœ‰å¤§æ‰¹ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç§»æ°‘ï¼Œç”±äºŽæŽ’æŒ¤åˆ°æ–°åŠ å�¡æœ¬åœ°äººçš„å·¥ä½œï¼Œå› è€Œå¼•å�‘ä¸€äº›æ–°åŠ å�¡äººåœ¨å…¬å…±åœºæ‰€æŽ’挤ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç§»æ°‘，最å�Žè®©æ€»ç�†æ�Žæ˜¾é¾™ã€�内é˜�资政æ�Žå…‰è€€çº·çº·å…¬å¼€å‘¼å��，è¦�æ–°åŠ å�¡äººæŽ¥çº³æ–°ç§»æ°‘ï¼Œå¼ºè°ƒæ–°åŠ å�¡çš„ç¹�è�£éœ€è¦�é� 新移民和外æ�¥äººæ‰�。
ä¸�è¿‡ï¼Œæœ€è¿‘æœ‰æ–°åŠ å�¡ç½‘å�‹æŠŠä¸€å��æ›¾åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡æ‹…ä»»å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆï¼Œå¹¶å�–得永久居民身分的ä¸å›½å¥³æ•™å¸ˆå¼ 元元，接å�—ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ç”µè§†å�°è®¿é—®çš„ç‰‡æ®µä¸Šä¼ åˆ°æ–°åŠ å�¡æŠ¥ä¸šæŽ§è‚¡çš„STOMP网站，å†�æ¬¡å¼•èµ·æ–°åŠ å�¡äººè´¨ç–‘æ–°ç§»æ°‘å¯¹æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„å¿ è¯šåº¦ã€‚
28å²�çš„å¼ å…ƒå…ƒæŽ¥å�—ä¸å›½çš„电视å�°è®¿é—®æ—¶æŒ‡å‡ºï¼Œå¥¹äºŽ2003å¹´èµ´æ–°åŠ å�¡ç•™å¦ï¼Œå�Žæ�¥æ‰¾åˆ°å�Žæ–‡æ•™å¸ˆçš„工作，并å�–得永久居民身分，有人åŠ�她入ç±�æ–°åŠ å�¡ï¼Œå¥¹ç”說：「北京æ‰�是我的家ã€�。
å¼ å…ƒå…ƒåŽ»å¹´åˆ�得知ä¸å›½å�—æ–¹é�é�‡å†°é›ªç�¾å®³ï¼Œç«‹åˆ»å�‘ç�¾åŒºæ±‡æ¬¾ï¼Œå¹¶åœ¨åŒ—京奥è¿�å‰�返回ä¸å›½å¤§é™†ï¼Œæ”¾å¼ƒè·¨å›½å…¬å�¸ä¼˜æ¸¥å¾…é�‡ï¼Œè¿›å…¥ä¸€å®¶æ”¶å…¥å·®10å€�çš„ä¸å›½å›½æœ‰ä¼�业工作；今年她å�¬èªªè¦�组建å��一阅兵女民兵方队时，å�ˆæŠ¥å��å�‚åŠ è®ç»ƒã€‚
å¼ å…ƒå…ƒå�‘电视å�°è¡¨ç¤ºï¼Œæœ‰äººé—®å¥¹ä¸ºä»€ä¹ˆè¦�æŠ•å…¥è¿™æ ·è‰°è‹¦çš„è®ç»ƒï¼Œå¥¹ç”èªªï¼Œã€Œå› ä¸ºæŠ¥æ•ˆç¥–å›½æ˜¯æˆ‘æœ€å¤§çš„å¿ƒæ„¿ã€�。
一å��网å�‹åœ¨ç½‘ç«™å¼ è´´å¼ å…ƒå…ƒè®¿è°ˆç‰‡æ®µå�Žç•™è¨€èªªï¼Œç»�è¿‡è¿™æ ·çš„äº‹æƒ…ï¼Œè¦�è®©æ–°åŠ å�¡äººå¦‚何平ç‰å¯¹å¾…新移民。
ä¸€äº›æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„网å�‹çœ‹äº†è¿™æ®µè®¿è°ˆï¼Œä¹Ÿä¸�是滋味地å��问，「我们è¦�怎么相信外æ�¥äººæ‰�ã€�。
Hahahahha, any way she is just one of the many China Chinese who still prefer China. Wonder what comments does the ruling party has on this. hahahhaha. -
Even Malays want to emigrate
By Karim Raslan from Sin Chew Daily
Last week I received a call from an old friend. She was agitated because her daughter had decided to apply for permanent residency abroad.
I can still remember the call. She had started talking almost as soon as I answered the phone: “Karim, I can’t stop her this time. She’s old enough to sign all the forms for herself. I’m upset but there’s nothing I can do. She is adamant, she says things are only getting worse and that there’s no future for her here.”
What the mother didn’t say, but I could sense it from her tone- was the fact that she no longer had the confidence or courage to persuade her daughter otherwise. She in effect had agreed with her daughter’s choice and given the events of the past few months, can anyone blame them?
Moreover, unlike in the late 90’s when I found myself fielding countless calls from non-Malay friends talking about emigration, this was one of the first from a Malay counterpart–someone from the Bumiputera middle class who’d benefited enormously over the past few decades from the government’s largesse. I should add that those with daughters appeared to be the most concerned.
However, a slew of landmark cases have rattled the Malay middle class. The list is long–the part-time model Kartika’s impending caning for drinking a beer, the bizarre decision (which was subsequently reversed) to bar Muslims from an upcoming Black Eyed Peas concert and the cow’s head demonstration in Shah Alam are just a handful.
With each incident, the lines between private and public morality, race and religion have become increasingly blurred and indeed, hotly contested.
As we settle into the Hari Raya festivities–spending time with friends and families, it’s clear that many are beginning to feel a sense of deep discomfort with the mounting tensions within the Malay community.
To my mind, the biggest losers in all this are the Malays themselves or rather ourselves. As politicians seek to stake a claim to the Malay vote they define the community in ever narrower and more exclusive terms–a series of dead-ends where your Malay-ness bars you from doing or being different things.
Furthermore, the politicization of Malay identity–the basis of political power in Malaysia–means that all Malays, whether or not they’re directly involved in politics are feeling the “heat.”
At the same time, Umno’s insistence on attacking the Pakatan on this terrain (hence relinquishing the multiracial ground to the Opposition, it would seem) has left many middle class, professional Malays feeling increasingly exposed and uncomfortable.
For them (and that includes myself) the broader, more cosmopolitan multiracial appeals–such as the Prime Minister Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia–allow for a greater degree of flexibility in terms of lifestyle and personal choice.
To be frank, the Malay middle class have been complicit in this situation. Over the past decades most have drifted away from active engagement in politics. In short, we’ve always thought that politics is too dirty and corrupt for us – that public service is something that those who can’t get good jobs spend their time doing.
Instead, we live our lives totally separate and apart from party politics–rarely meeting with Umno, PAS or PKR activists. We’ve been more focused on our families and our careers. This has allowed others have set the agenda politically.
Nonetheless, we’ve started to view Umno with alarm, seeing party members as rowdy, corrupt, ill-disciplined and greedy. We also worry at the current unrepentant tone and the way “winning at all costs” has supplanted any other higher aspirations.
At the same time PAS’ antics in Selangor in particular remind us of what the Ullama-led party is capable of when the opportunity arises. The constant pressure to take the moral high-ground, neglecting more serious governance and social issues reveals the conservative faction of PAS’ narrow-minded bigotry at its very worst.
So where does that leave the Malay middle class? Well we’re nowhere. We are lost and we are without a voice.
There is no doubt that we want PAS’ uncompromising attitude to corruption. Indeed, there are moments when we can’t help thinking that maybe–just maybe–Shariah penalties would be a good deterrent for high-level white-collar crime?
Moreover, we admire PAS’ commitment to openness and transparency. At the same time the party seems to be manned by so many clever and well-educated professionals.
However, when it comes to social and moral issues (as in Selangor) the party’s stance is worryingly extreme and at times downright frightening.
The Malay middle class is caught in a no-win situation. We desperately want Umno to clean up their act, to reform and repent but this seems increasingly unlikely. At the same time Anwar Ibrahim has all but disappeared from view and PAS is seeking to dominate the Pakatan’s social policies.
Is it any wonder that some Malays–some of best and brightest–are starting to vote with their feet? – Sin Chew Daily
-
It is nationwide that locals (not just the Chinese) are fed up with the way the ruling party is running the country. There is rising resentment about this.