Are you happy you have been heard by MOE...

[concern2]

jheng:

leo:

Actually today I read the newspaper article about this and I feel sad. I know of a close friend who is PR. The increase of $50 per child will be significant to her. And it is not that she and her husband does not want to convert to citizen.


And I am sure there are more of this kind of cases.[/quote

Just curious, what is stopping your friend from converting to citizen then?

jheng, many cases I know is that they still think their homeland is home, not here. Singapore is only a place to make money. Every holiday, you see the long queue at the causeways, they're going to a place they call home.

[nansk]

concern2:

nansk:

[quote=\"limlim\"]Will gender ratio tilt towards 1 side as more PR girls becoming citizens..?

Are you aware that sons of PRs are also required to serve NS? And yet there are lots of parents of sons who:
1. apply for PR
2. continue to live/work in Sg even after their sons turn 12.

That means, they are willing to let their sons serve NS - sons who may not go on to take Sg citizenship.

So, what you are implying is not necessarily true.

Are you sure? I don't believe.[/quote]Which part do you not believe?

1. sons of PRs are also required to serve NS
This is the policy. Go check the Mindef web site.

2. parents of sons apply for PR
This also you cannot disbelieve, because Sg PRs do have sons. Go check with ICA if you still refuse to believe the statistics.

3. PRs continue to live/work in Sg even after their sons turn 12
For this, I only have anecdotal evidence. But even if there are only a handful of cases, those parents atleast, do choose to let their sons serve NS.

Surely you don't want allPRs to apply for citizenship?! :scared:
The population of Sg would increase to unsustainable levels.

[concern2]

nansk:

1. sons of PRs are also required to serve NS
This is the policy. Go check the Mindef web site.

I would have thought this would be voluntary. Do you have the link to the specific page? TIA. No hard feelings.

[nansk]

concern2:

nansk:

1. sons of PRs are also required to serve NS
This is the policy. Go check the Mindef web site.

I would have thought this would be voluntary. Do you have the link to the specific page? TIA. No hard feelings.

NS can never be \"voluntary\".
[quote]Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and PRs are required to register for National Service (NS) at age 16½....
...This requirement applies also to male children who are granted PR status under their parents’ sponsorship. [/quote]From http://www.contactsingapore.sg/students/live/residency_and_citizenship/ and http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=151.

[concern2]

nansk:

concern2:

[quote=\"nansk\"]
1. sons of PRs are also required to serve NS
This is the policy. Go check the Mindef web site.

I would have thought this would be voluntary. Do you have the link to the specific page? TIA. No hard feelings.

NS can never be \"voluntary\".
[quote]Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and PRs are required to register for National Service (NS) at age 16½....
...This requirement applies also to male children who are granted PR status under their parents’ sponsorship. [/quote]From http://www.contactsingapore.sg/students/live/residency_and_citizenship/ and http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=151.[/quote]Does this mean that the son of a parent with a Singapore PR status, even if he is living in other countries (e.g. US), has to come back at the age of 16 to register for NS?

[leo]

jheng:

leo:

Actually today I read the newspaper article about this and I feel sad. I know of a close friend who is PR. The increase of $50 per child will be significant to her. And it is not that she and her husband does not want to convert to citizen.


And I am sure there are more of this kind of cases.[/quote

Just curious, what is stopping your friend from converting to citizen then?

Hi, one of them just got the PR recently, and it is only after appeal by MP.

[nansk]

concern2:

nansk:

NS can never be \"voluntary\".
[quote]Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and PRs are required to register for National Service (NS) at age 16½....
...This requirement applies also to male children who are granted PR status under their parents’ sponsorship.

From http://www.contactsingapore.sg/students/live/residency_and_citizenship/ and http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=151.

Does this mean that the son of a parent with a Singapore PR status, even if he is living in other countries (e.g. US), has to come back at the age of 16 to register for NS?[/quote]The policy covers male children with dependent PR status (i.e. sponsored under their parent(s) PR) regardless of where they are living.

[verykiasu2010]

concern2:

Does this mean that the son of a parent with a Singapore PR status, even if he is living in other countries (e.g. US), has to come back at the age of 16 to register for NS?

if the son of the SGP PR is also a PR, this PR son (born in SGP) must come back to SGP to serve NS regardless where he stays. By law. No excuse

[concern2]

nansk:

The policy covers male children with dependent PR status (i.e. sponsored under their parent(s) PR) regardless of where they are living.

So means provided they (the male children) live in Singapore under their parent's sponsorship?

So the parent could, essentially, end the sponsorship before the child turns 16, perhaps, send overseas to study, then, if the child wishes to, come back to Singapore as professional to get a different PR status for himself?

Makes me wonder again the percentage of the children under PR status who are actually in NS vs citizens. Please understand that I am not discrediting PRs who are serving NS. Just want to clarify some doubts in my mind.

[corneyAmber]

Quote:


A more sensitive issue, however, is the perceived difference between citizens and permanent residents (PRs) when it comes to NS.
On the face of it, not much separates citizens and PRs when it comes to NS. It is mandatory for citizens and second-generation PRs to serve full-time national service for about two years from age 18. (First-generation PRs are 'administratively exempted').
NS-liable PRs are second-generation PRs. If they fail to register or enlist, they are deemed NS defaulters like any other citizen who defaults on NS. If convicted, they face a jail term of up to three years and/or a fine of up to $10,000.
But some PRs choose to renounce their PR status rather than do NS. Those who do so without serving NS face 'adverse consequences', says Mindef.
It is this escape hatch of being able to renounce one's PR status that is a cause of some resentment among locals, says Dr Leong Chan-Hoong, an IPS senior research fellow who spearheaded the think-tank's survey.
So the term 'adverse consequences' needs clarification and assurance that it is a sufficient deterrent.

Last November, Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said that about a third of male foreigners who became PRs under the sponsorship of their parents renounced their PR status prior to serving NS.
These PRs - some 4,200 people - were warned about the consequences of their action at the point of renouncing their PR status. 'Their failure to serve NS will be taken into account when they subsequently apply to study or work in Singapore,' said Dr Ng.
It is generally understood that 'adverse consequences' refer to the difficulty associated with getting one's PR status back or obtaining a work visa to work in Singapore.
But Mindef has not explicitly spelt out what the 'adverse consequences' are. For instance, will a former PR who renounced his PR status to avoid NS but is highly skilled, still be able to obtain an Employment Pass? Or is there a blanket ban on such people getting a work visa in Singapore?
Writing to the press in December, Mr Sreedharan Sechachalam said he knew of renouncers who got into the National University of Singapore's 'highly competitive medical school to which, every year, some straight-As Singaporean students fail to gain admission'. He added that some renouncers were even admitted to speciality training programmes sought after by many Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans.
Mindef replied to Mr Sechachalam's letter, without addressing the specific cases but repeating the same premises regarding renouncers: they will face 'adverse consequences' and their failure to serve NS would be taken into account when they subsequently apply to work or study here.

To alleviate some of the resentment Singaporeans feel over this issue, two suggestions have surfaced. First, a security bond should be considered......
A second suggestion is that NS-liable PRs be subject to the same rules as citizens who renounce their citizenship - that is, they cannot renounce their residency until they have served NS.

The two measures are reasonable, given that NS-liable PRs have, like citizens, enjoyed the benefits of living in Singapore.
National University of Singapore sociologist Tan Ern Ser supports both ideas. The issue is as much about integration as fairness, he says, adding: 'Citizens want to be fairly treated. If young PRs have enjoyed the key privileges accorded to citizens, Singaporeans expect them to share in the responsibilities of citizenship as well.'
Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean told Parliament in 2006 that NS-liable PRs are 'like Singaporeans in many ways' as they had studied alongside their Singaporean counterparts and benefited from living in Singapore.
It is true the two measures mooted will discourage some potential PRs from rooting themselves firmly here. If so, their fledging roots never went very deep in the first place. More pertinently, the measures will go some way towards alleviating some of the unhappiness about PRs and NS.
In his 2006 Parliament speech, DPM Teo stressed two enduring principles about NS: It is universal, meaning all young and fit Singaporean males will have to serve NS; and it is equitable, meaning everyone will be treated equally. If NS is a fellowship forged among a band of brothers from a shared crucible, these two hallowed principles should apply to both citizens and NS-liable PRs.

The Straits Times

*************************************************************
The red highlighted part was the loophole on how second generation PRs got away with NS and 1/3 of them did so. The highlighted in orange, not sure if it is put in place yet as I cannot confirm the date of this article from ST.