Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[pirate]

pirate:

(7) Promoting Singaporean friendly immigration policies (this one I actually understand!)

[quote]Our immigration policy takes into account factors such as the individual’s family ties, economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile, ability to contribute and integrate into our society, and commitment to Singapore. How exactly are these factors being computed? Can we have a more transparent point system like that in other countries? I ask this because all MPs must have seen many people during their Meet-The-People sessions to appeal for LTVP, LTVP+ and PR for their foreign spouses. Some have been married for years to Singaporeans and have Singaporean children, yet they continue to be denied PR and sometimes LTVP+. We were often not told why in the rejection letters. - Per NCMP Yee Jenn Jong[/quote]I am going to stick my head out and assume that the WP is saying that they want to lean towards granting PR (and even citizenship) to foreign spouses of Singaporeans, especially if they are parents to Singaporean children.

Personally I am in broad agreement with this. However, we must understand and agree with how this will work out on the ground and the issues that may arise.

I read somewhere that 75% of marriages between a Singaporean and a foreigner involves a Singaporean man marrying a foreign wife from an Asian country.

It is likely that most of those spouses who are not granted PR or even LTVP+ are:
(1) married to Singaporean men (or women) from the lower or lower-middle income groups
(2) from non-traditional countries, for example countries like Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Cambodia, maybe China and India
(3) not highly educated, hence probably do not speak much English.

The issues that may arise are:
(1) it is possible that these spouses, if granted PR or citizenship, is more likely to seek government support, whether in healthcare subsidies or other form of economic aid
(2) these spouses may face difficulty integrating if every Singaporean expects them to be able speak English
(3) over time, they may wish to bring their parents over to Singapore; are we going to say no?

On the other side of the coin,
(1) it may turn out that PR or citizenship status will allow these spouses to work in Singapore, thereby reducing the household's need for support. It is possible that these households, with a single low-income earner and children may already need state support in any case even if we do not grant the foreign spouses PR or citizenship
(2) it is likely that these spouses, although not highly educated, may be more resilient and willing to take up jobs that other Singaporeans may shun
(3) it is possible that these spouses, with Singaporean children, have a greater vested interest to make the effort to integrate despite not knowing English
(4) children of mixed marriages may in time to come become bridges to the countries their mothers or fathers originate. They may well be better able to exploit or help Singaporean companies to exploit commercial opportunities in those countries. If we truly believe that our system of meritocracy allows children from low income families to have the opportunity to climb up the social and economic ladder, we must also believe that this is possible.

But do the rest of Singapore agree? Are we going to complain that they speak too loudly in a foreign language etc? Will we complain if the spouse is a man that he does not have to do national service? :scratchhead:

Lastly, are we going to exclude foreign spouses who had worked in Singapore as FDWs? :scratchhead:

[JannettLee]

3Boys:

raysusan:

http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/379316_608040349212552_165554393_n.jpg\">

How does this not count as propaganda that does not even stand the slightest scrutiny. Just a number of empty promises, cast a few strawmen in the PAP's direction, and voila, everyone taken hook line and sinker.

People will believe what they want to believe. Since when did the g'ment say that elderly are not productive? Have they not been trying to raise retirement age for years? And how many people have agreed with that?

On paper, those WP's suggestions sound promising. If go deep into each point, it's very difficult to implement them and chances of achieving all promises are slim as they are linked to one and another and also take longer times. No wonder government tried to avoid those approaches and took the easier way out to take in more population (which is more readily available and achievable). However, I do recognize what WP had pointed out that those consequences for having new Singapore citizenship, of which, I think government must have plans in place to tackle those foreseeable problems.

[JannettLee]

WeiHan:

Transient foreign workers (as oppose to increasing immigrants) is less of an issue for me for the fact that they can move out anytime when the need for them is longer there. Again, it has to be considered in an industry by industry basis, for example, for construction sector, if there is a need for increased foreign workers so that we can improve our badly needed infrastructures, then there is will be no capping in that particular industry. However, for other sectors where it is possible to encourage more local citizens participation, there should be a tighter control. So I can't say that I agree with WP completely. It has to be considered in a industry by industry basis.


As for granting of citizenship, it has to be taken with much greater care than foreign workers as these people will be granted priviledges and rights and the effect is deeper.

I do agree with the Transient foreign workers/FT approach as the needs for having one skills-set to another may be evolved from one time to another and we must also consider an industry by industry basis. Do monitor industry by industry and only open up for those talent/workers for industries that are in need.

In addition, I'd suggest to have a preference but not limited to Singaporean workers/talents scheme for those business/industries in Singapore for local market/businesses such as retails/banking/local constructions industries/etc that can't be moved out of Singapore (these jobs should be protected for local Singaporean). For those MNC/Manufacturing/OEMs/etc, I understand that they may need foreign talents/specialists/experties and these businesses can be moved out of singapore if they can't find appropriate talents/competitive manpower costs to do the job.

[crony.026118in.026118ksp]

All these ostriches have lots of hot air suggestions after burying their heads under the hot sand for too long


Anything non-PAP is like genius to them even though they are most alike with dodo birds

[JannettLee]

Also, there should be a differentiation in treatment between citizen and the rest la. Don’t let others to laugh at us stupid!


I remembered the crying 李佳薇! must be laughing all the way to bank in her homeland now.

[crony.026118in.026118ksp]

For every Li Jia Wei that goes back to her home country with a Singapore passport, there are more born and bred ‘pure’ Singaporean who benefited more and left the country and give up Singapore passport. You call them the quitters and you have the whole list of them on the website, like a who is who, many of them scholars

[dorisp]

Imami:

I am opposite. When I was in primary school, I sang all those national songs loudly and happily but looking back, I don't think I love my country then. After I got married (yes, much older), I then realized how lovely my home land is and I began to love it. Sure I complain like most sgporeans. But I won't migrate to any other country.

:snuggles:

[MR06]

3Boys:

From LLL


\"In a recent ST report, Singapore sees an average of 12,000 abortions a year, and 4 out of 10 women who went for abortions were single women. Reducing the discrimination against single mothers may reduce the likelihood of single mothers having to resort to terminating their pregnancies for fear of lack of support. Furthermore, for a country suffering from a fertility crisis, each child should be valued, and not punished simply because he or she is born to unmarried parents.\"

Are we as a society, ready for this?

She is not encouraging promiscuity, just suggesting accepting the product. I don't see why sweeping the dirt under the carpet by getting rid of the product should be considered a more noble solution.

[MR06]

Imami:

limlim:

[quote=\"ammonite\"] wah, reading this is tougher than PSLE papers. My Hokkien - fail ah! :oops:

it's not Hokkien.. or majority is not..

I think it's hokkien le.[/quote]Never mind hokkien or teochew.... one word came to mind ..... chapalang.

[MR06]

crony.in.ksp:

All these ostriches have lots of hot air suggestions after burying their heads under the hot sand for too long


Anything non-PAP is like genius to them even though they are most alike with dodo birds

Don't lump the two. Very different species hor!
Ostriches at least run as fast as their legs can carry them. They know how to flee from their enemies.
Dodo birds can't differentiate enemies from friends, let alone sense potential danger to themselves and their forest friends.

Ostrich
http://i48.tinypic.com/5xsd1z.jpg\">

Dodo
http://i48.tinypic.com/j0iej8.jpg\">

Don't sully the image of the ostrich!