TR EMERITUS

I remember when I was young and someone asked me if I would ever emigrate or abandon my roots in anyway. My answer was a strong "No!". My friends and family are here in this little red dot, and my life and soul was built up right here. It was in the 80s, and life at that time was not too bad. I was young, not involved in any political hoo-hahs, and minding my own business. My family could provide me with a good life - life was happy. Now, I am out in the corporate world trying to carve a mark in this society. I am soon to be married, and it is now that I'm lamenting the harsh reality facing Singapore right now. On the issue of PRs, I know that the government is constantly evading the main problem and continually harps upon the mentality that PRs bring Singapore wealth and vibrancy. What I do know is that I have PRs sitting right across me in the office, holding medium-top positions. I asked my little sister (who is 13 this year) if there are any PRs in her class. Her reply was, "Of course". I asked her if it was comfortable having them in class, and she told me that since her primary school days, seeing PRs in classrooms have become a norm and nothing special or awkward. This is how far foreigners have infiltrated and integrated into our society. I do not mind if PRs are extremely talented and bring along skills which Singapore lacks. However, I see PRs holding jobs which normal Singaporeans want. 10, 20 years ago, when we hear that this restaurant has a chef from China, everyone will flock to the restaurant with the in-build notion that chefs from China produce delicable cuisine and for all the extravagant price tag that comes with the dish, we will pay. Sadly today, this is not the case. Once news spread that the chef is from China, we will immediately assume that the food is unhygienic and not fit for human consumption. At least, this is the case for the people around me. My friend once a foreigner, has settled in Singapore many years ago as a student, and has become a citizen of this country and has also served NS. After graduation, he held a bartending job calling a monthly salary of $1,500.00. Just in May 2009, he was sacked - reason being the pub was hiring TWO girls to replace him; the girls were paid a measly $400 a month. How worth it for the pub. Not so for my friend. Now this is substantial evidence that PRs are usurping jobs meant for Singaporeans. Jay Tan  Read More →

From our Correspondent An obviously unhappy and peeved Singaporean by the name of Teo Kueh Liang had written to the Straits Times Forum on 28 October 2009 asking for stringent criteria to be set to gauge the potential of prospective citizens and PRs! Mr Teo implored the authorities to make it mandatory for prospective citizens to commit to a lengthy period of community service as a test of their loyalty to the country they want to be part of. "This will also help them understand Singapore history. Those who are not interested will drop out automatically," he wrote. He also suggested widening the gap in public housing benefits between citizens and PRs. For instance, a PR should be eligible to buy only resale three-room flats or bigger. His letter won approval from the majority of netizens who posted on the Straits Times Discussion Board. GreatestAsia expressed skeptism at the loyalty of PRs: "Dear Mr Teo, there is no loyalty. Majority of the PR-PMET have plan to move back to their home country, or move to a third country eventually. Most PR-PMET have bought property in their home country after they earned some money in Singapore." His views were echoed by MaluforSG: "To all the PRs reading this column, stop being hypocritical - touch your own heart and tell me what was the main reason you left your own country and work in Singapore?Eaglefly shared his experience with some Malaysian PRs: a) Better Pay? b) Better Job Reference for later career path? c) A good jump start for you, an opportunity to make quick bucks ,go back sudden wealth, immediately out of proverty cycle in yr own homeland - therefore a better life back home. I hve NO DOUBTs about PRs coming from Developed Countries ,cause, 70% of these category of PRs are truly, with some unique skills and adequately educated and exposed.. However, I am sorry to say, I begged to defer ,when PRs are coming from Developing Countries -( with the exception of those who hve been educated in first World country ,but are citizens of a Developing country.) I am not surprise that with the RMB value adjusted ,some China PRs may very well changed their mind coming here. I am not surprise if S$ is devalued overnight, potential PRs will give it the missed. Even our Malaysian friends. Just look at Australia, even Singaporeans who wish to migrate there are not having an easy time to obtain permit to work there - the Control and Evaluation Process is very Stringent. Look at Singapore - its so easy and cheap. If you disagree, then tell me if you can also confidently say that your same application to work in Australia would also be easily approved,...as easy as those from Singapore. You would also be view as Contributing economically there also - same basis of argument ? Come On, its basically a "You scratch my back, I scratch yours " Contract between you and SG." Eaglefly shared his stories of Malaysian PRs "exploiting" the system:  "There are plenty of stories of Malaysian PRs who after working here for more than 15 years have returned to Malaysia, due to the strong Sing dollar exchange rates to retire. Same as many singaporeans buying or retiring there. What is the point of of offering PR to Malaysians when they are only interested in making money and leaving after a spell, knowing that they WANT to lived in terrace or double storey landed property which singapore can NEVER offer them. The contributions from Malaysians is that jobs shunned by singaporeans are taken by them is concrete factor (all is bumkum) as the businesses have lengthened the working hours and not increasing the wages by same margin, classic sign of goal post being changed, from 8 hours to 10 and later to 12 but wages kept the remain same, which primary scholl boy would want that kind of working hours and same salary as their fathers once had. This is the issue which labour unions and manpower ministries should address IMMEDIATELY. Stop blaming singaporeans for being lazy or calculative or any other reason as THEY are not VALID." legolass supports a more stringent criteria for PRs: "Don't forget the non-monetary buy equally substantial benefits given to PRs. PRs should NOT be given the same priority as citizens for Primary 1 Registration. There should be a minimum period of stay in S'pore before a foreigner can be given PR status. This is the case for countries such as UK, Australia, Canada, etc. At present, a foreigner can obtain S'pore PR within months of arrival. Applicants should be made to sit a test about S'pore history and also be tested on English comprehension." code22xx is worried at the increasingly "dominance" of PRs: "Looking at national statistics, you can see the higher average income of PRs than citizens. And with their increased numbers, it seems over dominate our society. Got money, got numbers, got higher job posts & prospects, got measurable contribution. It really seems like we been colonized!!" Despite the widespread resentment on the ground at the relentless influx of foreigners, the ruling party is adamant that its liberal immigration and pro-foreigner policy is here to stay. Unlike other countries like Australia and Canada which requires prospective immigrants to take and pass an English proficiency test before they are allowed to even work there, there are no such regulations in Singapore. A PRC national by the name of Zhang Yuanyuan came to Singapore on a student pass and obtained her PR within 2 months of applications. She has since returned to Beijing. To add salt to the wounds of Singapore, their leaders appear to be completely oblivious to their concerns and frustration. Minister of Community, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan launched a $10-million Community Integration Fund last month to help new citizens integrate into Singapore society. The Community Integration Fund will help to sponsor projects such as cultural gatherings, seminars and social outings for the newcomers and Singaporeans. The Ministry of Information, Communications and Arts (MICA) had called a public tender last Thursday to develop a “New Citizens Survival Guide”, part of a kit to give newly-minted Singapore Citizens and PRs a "positive experience" of settling here. Ironically, Singaporeans will be ultimately paying for these state programmes to make the foreigners feel "welcome" in their own homeland. With no opposition in Parliament to check on the ruling party, it is able to pass bills and implement policies (too) smoothly without consulting the people. Unless Singaporeans realize the need to reclaim their political rights, they will have no choice but to continue "sponsoring" foreigners for language courses for a long time to come.   Comments source: ST Discussion Board   Related articles: >> MICA to develop welcome kit for new citizens >> Proposal to spend 10 million dollars to help new citizens integrate >>  Why should Singapore taxpayers pay 10 million dollars to help immigrants integrate? >> Singapore arts groups decline to be propaganda mouthpiece for National Integration Council   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    Read More →

By Abdul Gafoor, Social Correspondent A closer look at the share of Singapore’s economic pie that goes to workers as incomes throws up another paradox. Singapore’s economy itself has grown more than 30 times. Despite the fact the country has been working hard with full devotion to continually continue high economic growth rate for over five decades, employee’s income share in GDP, has only reached around dismal 41%. In 2008 it reached 44% but is unlikely to remain at that level. If one compares this with the developed countries, that is more than 50% and healthy levels are around 60% or more. What basically this means is that despite the economy growing continually and rapidly, the share of labour income has not reached adequate levels. The government, politicians and policy makers for five decades have been naively and stubbornly believing that by growing the economic pie at a fast and high rate continually, workers will enjoy their rightful returns. The government, politicians and policy makers may argue average incomes have risen very high over the same five decades. That is true but each of this serve a different purpose. Achieving high average income will give a higher standard of living if the necessary set of outcomes, which I discussed in earlier article, are achieved. Achieving a healthy or adequate share of GDP as labour incomes will empower the labour with choices and stability. It will also allow them to spend adequately enough to make them a strong contributor to domestic demand. The reason why the government has been refusing calls to give greater importance to domestic demand given the high volatility of external demand is purely because of this. The workers are just not getting enough of the pie they produce to become a force within the domestic economy to reckon with. Singapore’s continued chase for high economic growth rates will not change this situation in another fifty years. What is required is major changes to the economy and labour force. Instead of blindly and foolishly adding cheap labour in multitudes to the production process, the labour force requires quality labour who have higher productivity. Instead of having six $800 foreign worker waiters manning a restaurant, the employer should aim to have three $1,600 highly competent local waiters who can do all the jobs and work with ease and competency. Employers need to restructure work and jobs so that each employer can achieve high output in given 8 hour work day instead of achieving high output over long dreadful working hours. Competency and marginal productivity is what employers should aim to seek from their employees. On the MNCs front, the government must not just aim to draw in companies that invest big dollars. It must ensure the companies are able to hire locals for high skilled jobs and/or also compensate the workers highly according to the job done. If MNCs are to come here, hire foreign labour for the high skilled jobs and locals or also foreigners for the average skilled jobs and expatriate much of the profits, what real gain does Singapore and Singaporean labour really have? Singapore companies, led by GLCs, government associated companies and government agencies also need to restructure their organisation structures and compensation structures. They have to shed the primitive top power centric, middle empty structure and bottom heavy where CEOs and directors are paid hefty sums and the average worker is underpaid. They not only need to rebalance power structures, they also need to rebalance compensation structures. However all these reforms will never ever happen in the lifetime of the current government. The elites will resist it. The politicians and policy makers will never see any merit in it and will never want to change the status quo. Rather they will chant the mantra of continual high economic growth endlessly. About the Author: Abdul Gafoor is a researcher based in the United Kingdom. He hopes to return to the Singapore he once knew as a child one day.  Read More →