Opinions of the Primary School Registration System
-
CayennePepper:
MOE will tell us that there are enough schools for all... and that primary schools are the same... My friend's MP was a previous Minister of Education, and when she asked for help to get into a certain school, that was the official reply...
The Education Minster is not as consultative as KBW.. He and his ministry has been silent throughout the P1 registration.. :pokeeye: -
chatty:
Hihi, I think you've misinterpreted Chief's writing. He does not think (at least not totally) the idea of having a \"Singaporeans First\" policy is the best one.
Maybe Chief can start an online petition here to gartner the support of all Singaporeans to moot to our Singapore government and MOE the need to have a \"Singapore First' pro-Singaporean policy for P1 registration. When the online petitions gartnered enough signatures (say 20,000), then we will post it or email it to Mr Heng or even the PM.phtthp:
any suggestion ... how to make the new Education Minister and MOE to come to KSP site here, read all the comments ?
and to activate something to the current situation, before it worsen ?
For us, the P1 registration is over, with our kids in the school of our choice, but if we don't proactively do something to prevent this situation from worsen, then we are not helping our children's children...or our future generations. Let's do something now, however small our efforts may seem to be.
Gone are the days when anti-government sentiments are a taboo, I believe all Singaporeans are educated and matured enough to know that it's OK to have alternate views and opinions from the government, who has promised that they will listen to us MORE during the GE 2011.
let's spread the word and do something for our young ones. :celebrate: -
MumandMe:
That's what I think so too.
Hihi, I think you've misinterpreted Chief's writing. He does not think (at least not totally) the idea of having a \"Singaporeans First\" policy is the best one.
-
Khordan:
Finally, rather than expect a system that can be fair to the 40,000+ kids who are registering each year (I have news for you, there will never be a system that can be fair to all), I do have respect for those who just quietly go and do what needs to be done to 'game' the system; create chances for themselves in earlier phases through PV, or other routes. Perhaps that's why many consider the new immigrants such a threat. Unlike many Singaporeans who just sit back, complain and expect the Government to fix it for them, these PRs & FTs just go and do what's needed and get what they need. I guarantee you that no matter how you 'stack' the odds against them, they will work out a way to game the system and get the child into the school of their choice.
I read that you are in support of those who game the system. I beg to differ. As PM Lee mentioned, no one system is sacrosanct. While it is true no one system can please everyone, policy makers must ensure the original system in place is being observed in its true spirit. To me, it is precisely that loopholes are being exploited by those who found a way to \"game\" the current system that it needs to be reviewed. Rules are man-made, and we have to allow for changes to suit the present time.
I am not against the PRs, but it bothers me to know there are many (PRs or otherwise) who rent a place near their schools of choice or make a (false) statutory declaration to increase their odds of getting into the school. This is undeniably a loophole that needs to be addressed. That many PRs fall under the category of those who \"rent a place to be near the school of choice\" is accidental. -
puff:
what if (2) was a husband who is a sailor, go other country have mistress (USA) and don't want to divorce you (SG) cos he don't think it is necessary, and now wants to send his kids with the mistress back for you (SG) to look after ... LOL
Hmm my understanding if I change both scenarios into a more close to heart exampleKhordan:
Just curious...
These are two real-life scenarios.
1) A is a Malaysian citizen with Singapore PR. He has studied in Singapore since primary school (he was an ASEAN scholar) all the way to NUS. Since graduation, he has worked in Singapore and has since married a Singapore citizen. His kids were born before the law was changed so his children are Malaysian citizens and Singapore PRs. He does not wish to change his citizenship as he is proud to be a Malaysian but calls Singapore home as this is where his family is.
2) B is a Singapore citizen. After NS, he went to US for his University degree and has worked in the US since. He married an American citizen but never renounced his Singapore citizenship (not because of any loyalty to Singapore, just that there as no reason to convert). His children are thus entitled to Singapore citizenship. He is considering sending his kids to Singapore to study because he thinks the US system is crap. He has family here who can help to take care of them.
So, are we saying that B is more worthy of a place in a Singapore school compared to A, even if B has contributed NOTHING to Singapore (even through taxes) while A has been contributing to Singapore for his entire adult life?
1) A man who want to stay with you but dun want to commit into marriage.
2) A husband after married cannot live with u n will be constantly overseas to work.
Who is more worthy? My choice will be (2) :evil:
which one then is the greater of the 2 \"evils\" ? :evil: -
Until the law was changed a couple of years ago, children are only entitled to Singapore citizenship if their father is a Singapore citizen. Children born to Singaporean women and a non-Singaporean man are not entitled. When the law was changed, it was not applied retroactively. So, A's children are not entitled to Singapore citizenship unless A himself takes up citizenship.
B has never been back to Singapore except for short holidays. He has never done a day of Reservist/Manning/IPPT/etc.
Anyway, that's my point. A's kids are more Singaporean than B's kids by any objective measurement, except for the colour of their IC. So, why do we naturally assume that a blue IC denotes someone of being 'less Singaporean' & less deserving?
And for those who still insist that B is more deserving because his IC is pink, well, this person does exist and is a family friend. In the end, he did not send his children back to Singapore to study because he didn't want there to be a record of his children enjoying any benefit of citizenship. The day they turned 18, each of his children renounced their Singaporean citizenship & took up US citizenship. So much for loyalty to Singapore.puff:
Actually, I disagree. If we take citizenship to be a marriage, then 2) is a husband who has an affair but refuses to divorce his wife nor marry his mistress. :rotflmao:Hmm my understanding if I change both scenarios into a more close to heart example
1) A man who want to stay with you but dun want to commit into marriage.
2) A husband after married cannot live with u n will be constantly overseas to work.
Who is more worthy? My choice will be (2) :evil: -
tankee:
For (A) , the children have to serve NS as they are 2nd generation of PR . In most of cases, children will convert to Sporean after the NS and turn 21 yrs old .
it is not about the parents, but the children.Khordan:
Just curious...
These are two real-life scenarios.
1) A is a Malaysian citizen with Singapore PR. He has studied in Singapore since primary school (he was an ASEAN scholar) all the way to NUS. Since graduation, he has worked in Singapore and has since married a Singapore citizen. His kids were born before the law was changed so his children are Malaysian citizens and Singapore PRs. He does not wish to change his citizenship as he is proud to be a Malaysian but calls Singapore home as this is where his family is.
2) B is a Singapore citizen. After NS, he went to US for his University degree and has worked in the US since. He married an American citizen but never renounced his Singapore citizenship (not because of any loyalty to Singapore, just that there as no reason to convert). His children are thus entitled to Singapore citizenship. He is considering sending his kids to Singapore to study because he thinks the US system is crap. He has family here who can help to take care of them.
So, are we saying that B is more worthy of a place in a Singapore school compared to A, even if B has contributed NOTHING to Singapore (even through taxes) while A has been contributing to Singapore for his entire adult life?
For the Parents , Msia would be their 2nd home for retirement. -
MumandMe:
Sorry, but just to be clear. I am not supportive of people who defraud or cheat the system. These folks should be caught and dealt with.I read that you are in support of those who game the system. I beg to differ. As PM Lee mentioned, no one system is sacrosanct. While it is true no one system can please everyone, policy makers must ensure the original system in place is being observed in its true spirit. To me, it is precisely that loopholes are being exploited by those who found a way to \"game\" the current system that it needs to be reviewed. Rules are man-made, and we have to allow for changes to suit the present time.
I am not against the PRs, but it bothers me to know there are many (PRs or otherwise) who rent a place near their schools of choice or make a (false) statutory declaration to increase their odds of getting into the school. This is undeniably a loophole that needs to be addressed. That many PRs fall under the category of those who \"rent a place to be near the school of choice\" is accidental.
When I mentioned that they 'game' the system, it means doing what is necessary, within the rules of the system, to improve their chances of getting the school of their choice. This includes PV, GRL, or whatever. Making false declarations by PRs or citizens, is wrong and should never be tolerated.
BTW, in the only case that has been caught so far of a person renting a house near the school of his choice and making false declaration, the guy who did it is a Singaporean. -
Khordan:
so the million dollar question is ...Until the law was changed a couple of years ago, children are only entitled to Singapore citizenship if their father is a Singapore citizen. Children born to Singaporean women and a non-Singaporean man are not entitled. When the law was changed, it was not applied retroactively. So, A's children are not entitled to Singapore citizenship unless A himself takes up citizenship.
Actually, I disagree. If we take citizenship to be a marriage, then 2) is a husband who has an affair but refuses to divorce his wife nor marry his mistress. :rotflmao:
B has never been back to Singapore except for short holidays. He has never done a day of Reservist/Manning/IPPT/etc.
Anyway, that's my point. A's kids are more Singaporean than B's kids by any objective measurement, except for the colour of their IC. So, why do we naturally assume that a blue IC denotes someone of being 'less Singaporean' & less deserving?
And for those who still insist that B is more deserving because his IC is pink, well, this person does exist and is a family friend. In the end, he did not send his children back to Singapore to study because he didn't want there to be a record of his children enjoying any benefit of citizenship. The day they turned 18, each of his children renounced their Singaporean citizenship & took up US citizenship. So much for loyalty to Singapore.puff:
Hmm my understanding if I change both scenarios into a more close to heart example
1) A man who want to stay with you but dun want to commit into marriage.
2) A husband after married cannot live with u n will be constantly overseas to work.
Who is more worthy? My choice will be (2) :evil:
are you \"A\" ? hahaha
as for PRs ... i PREFER the older generation (the golden oldies, mostly from Malaysia) than this recent generation
one is nicer ... other mostly not so nice (some even got the attitude as if \"you owe them\"[in hokkien]
enuff said ... lest i get flamed or called a racist *oops* -
The present system does not bar one who rents a place near a school of choice and uses that address to register at the school.
That only one has been "caught" doing this is pertinent to the discussion. I believe the number is certainly grester than one. BTW, where did u get the data that only one has been caught doing this?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login