publichouse.sg

Tools
A+ R A- wide normal
Login
  • Skip to content
publichouse.sg » Home » Categories » Top Story » Community » Immigration – how to draw the line?
  • Subscribe RSS
  • HomeOverview of publichouse.sg
  • About UsOverview of publichouse.sg
  • Categoriesoverview
    • Community
    • Focus
    • Editorial
    • Music
    • Top Story
    • Football
    • Sex Matters
    • Events
    • What Others Say
    • Politics
    • Economy
    • People
    • Health
    • Environment
    • Alternative Life Stuff
    • Finance/Business
    • Entertainment
    • Foreign Desk
  • Store 
  • contactwith us
Friday, 06 July 2012 23:26

Immigration – how to draw the line?

  • Written by  Administrator
  • font size decrease font size decrease font size increase font size increase font size
  • Print
  • E-mail
  • 3 comments
Tweet
Picture from Straits Times Picture from Straits Times

By Christopher Gee

Andrew Loh’s 4th July 2012 blog on Yahoo expresses the view that it is “unacceptable nearly 40% of population is made up of foreigners”. The view is understandable, but it needs to be unpacked. As at June 2011, 63% of Singapore’s total population of 5.1million consisted of citizens, 10% PRs and the remaining 27% non-resident foreigners, according to Department of Statistics data.

Of the non-resident population -- a non-permanent, perpetually revolving group --80% were economically active and employed here on a range of passes, another 6% were students and the rest dependants. The majority of the 1.19 million foreign workforce -- 76% of them or 908,000 -- were Work Permit holders, including 206,000 foreign domestic workers and about 264,000 construction workers. The rest of the foreign workforce held Employment or S Passes. (See MOM website.)

A reduction in the proportion of non-resident foreigners in Singapore, let's say to 17 per cent of the population, would mean immediate vacancies for about 415,000 jobs, the vast majority of which would be incapable of being filled by Singaporeans. The resident unemployment rate (non seasonally-adjusted, again as at June 2011) was just 3.9%, or 81,200 Singaporean citizens and PRs. Improved productivity, higher wages and enhanced training programmes could over time permit a reduction in the number of foreign workers in Singapore, especially in construction. We can certainly slow down the rate of growth of the foreign workforce in Singapore, as the country is already beginning to do. But Singapore will continue to depend on a sizeable number of foreign workers for the foreseeable future. The reality is that there is no easy short-term answer to the question posed in the title of Mr Low's article. A thought experiment may help frame the problem: what if we woke up tomorrow, and all the foreigners were gone?

Who would drive the bus that you take to work? Who would take my blood sample when I do my health-screening examination? Or help build the 43,000 HDB flats currently under construction, and the new general hospital in Jurong? Who would take care of our aged? None of the things we want -- HDB flats available sooner, more hospital beds, more MRT lines and stations -- can be accomplished without foreign workers.

An “us-versus-them” dichotomy in the discourse on foreigners is understandable in the context of contestation for jobs and scarce resources, as well as fears of a dilution in national identity. The upward pressures on the costs of living, the greater congestion in public transport and in parks, the new and sometimes loud cacophony of accents and languages that we overhear in everyday life, have created a sense of disquiet amongst some Singaporeans.

Foreigners, who have historically found locals to be at the very least tolerant of newcomers, are now feeling less sure of their place in this country. Certainly, more needs to be done, not just to provide the right physical, economic and human capital base for Singaporeans, but also to ensure equitable growth and better involve citizens in deciding our future. In the meantime, can we afford to throw out 415,000 foreign workers, let alone 1,157,000 of them, and bring our country to a halt?

-------------------

Andrew's response:

I agree with Christopher that a sudden reduction, as it were, of foreigners or foreign workers will have serious consequences for our economy and society. Which is why my article in Yahoo made no such calls.

I also agree with Christopher that more needs to be done which, incidentally, is what my article had called for - in particular for the Government to let Singaporeans know what its plans are, going forward. The National Population and Talent Division (NPTD), under the Prime Minister's Office, has laid out various scenarios for our population into the future. However, these are scenarios and not solutions. The Government will, of course, take these studies and projections into consideration in forming its various policies. Perhaps it could also share with Singaporeans how it sees Singapore's dependence on these foreigners changing (or not changing), going forward.

The point of my article was to make the case that the negative sentiments about the presence of the large number of foreigners here are based, at least in part, in my opinion, on the uncertainty of where our policies - and our country - are headed with regards to population and economic policies. (Both of which are mutually-dependent, it seems.)

Besides the concerns which Christopher mentioned, if we retained (or even increased) the number of foreigners here, there is also the other side of the equation - namely, the social friction which is occurring. While this may not be as pronounced for the moment, the fear is that it will take root and become a serious problem.

These and other concerns were also echoed by other participants at a recent forum: Is Singapore turning into a xenophobic society?

-----------------

Join publichouse.sg on Facebook:


If you like this article, please consider a small donation to keep publichouse.sg running. Our contributors and we thank you for your generosity.



Published in Community
Social sharing
  • Add to Google Buzz
  • Add to Facebook
  • Add to Delicious
  • Digg this
  • Add to Reddit
  • Add to StumbleUpon
  • Add to MySpace
  • Add to Technorati
Administrator

Administrator

Latest from Administrator

  • Ending the politics of dominance
  • AGC to be joined as party in blogger’s case involving stat board
  • More than a picnic, less than a conspiracy
  • Silence over Sri Lanka’s killing fields
  • Single-identity politics
More in this category: « "Mr Wong had acted very much on his own": Law Society DPM Teo on review of the death penalty »

3 comments

  • Comment Link Peter Lee Friday, 13 July 2012 14:37 posted by Peter Lee

    I agree with Christopher that majority of the foreign work force working in Singapore is economically active. And if at all the foreigners are a burden then they cannot be kicked out at one go rather this is possible in phases. For this first thing Singapore needs to do is create ample human resource to sustain the economy.

  • Comment Link 5starmoon Sunday, 08 July 2012 23:58 posted by 5starmoon

    If we double down foreign labors to 17% of population or 415,000 jobs reduction over a few years, I see 3 anomalies correcting itself instead of getting worse:
    1) S'porean graduates filling up jobs they like and are trained.
    2) Some PMETs that were replaced by cheaper and younger foreigners, going back to their professions from lower paid jobs not related to their trained profession. This is a group of people not under unemployed statistics but under self-employed (eg: real estate & insurance agents), taxi driver, security guards, etc.
    3) Companies that thrives on cheap labor will be shaken-up to become more productive or shut-down.

    Of course, the service, construction, transport, and cleaning sectors would need foreign labors unless their wages are adjusted upwards significantly or a reasonable minimum wage introduced.

  • Comment Link Patsy Saturday, 07 July 2012 00:23 posted by Patsy

    Strange that Gee would ask if Singaporeans would be able to fill up the "immediate vacancies" for 415k if we cut down the percentage to 17%!

    PM Lee's government has always said that the presence of foreigners helps to create jobs foe Singaporeans, because u know, they will have to make use of basic services eg transport, dining etc. in other words, when foreigners are here, more Singaporeans can be employed to fill up these additional positions.

    Likewise, shouldn't it be clear to Gee that when 415k of them leave (pls, nobody is asking for ALL to leave), we wouldn't be needing the same number of Singaporeans to fill in the gaps? In fact, PM Lee's worry is that Singaporeans will be out of jobs!!!

    So you see, pro-foreigner elements seem preoccupied with justifying in all directions why we "need" such an out-worldly high numbers of them. The bigger and potentially explosive problem of social disintegration is simply swept underneath the carpet.

    I am very disappointed in PM Lee's government that seems to pay lip service in addressing citizens' concerns in this area. He does not even bother to tell us the long term target of immigration. Neither is the government serious in closing the many loopholes enjoyed by foreigners and not citizens.

    A good example, btw, is public housing. The government knows that PR foreigners are responsible for pushing up public housing (and bring profits back to their homeland), and yet they prefer to increase supply of BTO to slow down the INCREASING rate of flat prices.

    The problems attendant to the unacceptable high numbers of foreigners cannot be solved by just cutting down the numbers quickly. Gee's article is just too simplistic in its analysis, occupying the extreme opposite side to xenophobic calls.

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated.
Basic HTML code is allowed.

Learn more about our commenting policy(clicking on this link will open up another window)

back to top

Recent Articles

  • Ending the politics of dominance
    Ending the politics of dominance By Tan Wah Piow In his interview with the Straits…
    2 comments Read more...
  • AGC to be joined as party in blogger’s case involving stat board
    AGC to be joined as party in blogger’s case involving stat board The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) has indicated that it has…
    Be the first to comment! Read more...
Subscribe to this RSS feed

Our Sponsors

Categories

  • Focus (14)
  • Hindsight (0)
  • Columnists (0)
  • Editorials (29)
  • Music (23)
  • Sex Matters (26)
  • Odd Man !n (6)
  • Discourse with Dr. Tilde (0)
  • Events (33)
  • Public TV (0)
  • Picture House (0)
  • What Others Say (38)
  • Top Story (16)
  • Politics (191)
  • Economy (6)
  • People (35)
  • Health (4)
  • Environment (6)
  • Alternative Life Stuff (9)
  • Community (385)
  • Finance/Business (11)
  • Entertainment (7)
  • Foreign Desk (8)
  • Subscribe RSS
publichouse.sg © 2011. All rights reserved.

  • Forgot your password?
  • Forgot your username?