Wednesday, April 30, 2025
29.9 C
Singapore
type here...
Subscribe
Home Blog Page 5194

Survey: nearly 70% feel the authorities are doing enough to prevent exploitation of migrant workers

The Independent
-
0
Survey: nearly 70% feel the authorities are doing enough to prevent exploitation of migrant workers

The Little India riots have left people questioning the government’s white paper on population, particularly its stance on migrant workers.

In a 2011 survey of 1000 Singaporeans, the International Labour Organization found that nearly 70% feel the authorities are doing enough to prevent exploitation of migrant workers and about 85% felt the government should have more restrictive policies towards immigration.

While 82% believed migrant and national workers should be treated equally, around 58% said migrant workers cannot expect to have equal pay for the same work and 78% said unathorised migrant workers cannot expect to have any rights at work.

However, close to 90% of respondents felt that migrant workers were needed to fill labour shortages and about 78% thought migrant workers made a net contribution to the economy. When assessed with the KAP Barometer, which measured knowledge, attitudes and practices, just 39% of respondents demonstrated support for migrant workers.

Despite these results, activists and non-government organisations are pressing for better migrant workers rights.

During a forum on 23rd December, Dr Rusell Heng, President of Transient Workers Count Too, discussed the ways employers exploited migrant workers. These included arbitrarily setting low wages and substituting contracts for less favourable ones when the workers arrive. “The law is inadequate and inadequately enforced,” he said.

On his blog, former Nominated Member of Parliament Mr Calvin Cheng wrote that immigration was necessary to meet the challenges of an ageing population and shrinking workforce, and to develop Singapore’s infrastructure. However, he added, “the best way for the Government to convince the population of these facts is not to merely present its vision for a rosy future, but to be honest about the costs involved.”

Among these costs include assimilating migrant workers. Mr Cheng felt the government now had two choices. The first is to be “completely honest” about the population policy’s costs with the people of Singapore. If the people find these costs too much to bear, the government should develop a “Plan B”, accounting for an aged, not ageing, population with a small work force and small immigrant population.

“There is no perfect solution and both sides in the debate must be honest about the costs of the options available,” he pointed out.

Dr Eugene Tan from Singapore Management University offered a different view. “While Calvin views the government has now having two choices, I see it as a dire situation where the Government has no choice.”

He said the government had to present the costs of the current population policy and prepare the Plan B. “The harsh reality is that Singapore cannot do with zero immigration. This might be hard for some to accept. But can we even dare to think of there being no foreign domestic workers, no foreign construction workers, cleaners, no foreign nurses, no foreign bus drivers?”

Addressing the costs of immigration, Dr Tan asked if it were fair for Singaporeans living in Little India to “be subjected to an influx of ten of thousands of workers every weekend”. Likewise, he wondered if it were fair to refuse to meet the “psycho-social, recreational, and other needs of the foreign workers who slog six days a week”.

Dr Tan cautioned that there are trade-offs to increased and decreased immigration, and questioned whether Singaporeans are prepared for the trade-offs that come with decreased immigration. He asked whether there would be enough Singaporeans to fill construction jobs, even with significantly higher wages for locals – and if so, whether Singaporeans would be prepared to “foot higher bills for everything”.

As for Dr Heng, his focus is not on “complex demographic issues” about which TWC2 “has no special expertise”.

Instead, he says, “TWC2 holds that for whoever Singapore as a society – meaning government and people – has allowed to come and work here, be it one or one million, Singapore should treat them fairly and with civility. If Singapore society falls short on that, that is where TWC2 sees it has a job to do: to ensure foreign workers’ rights are protected.”

[yop_poll id=”5″]

Residents Remember Chiam See Tong

The Independent
-
0
Residents Remember Chiam See Tong

It was supposed to be a Christmas walkabout for the Singapore People’s Party (SPP) in Potong Pasir and Bishan last Sunday (Dec 22) morning.
Within hours, however, when SPP’s secretary-general Chiam See Tong and Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Lina Chiam showed up, the trip had become a mini Meet-the-People’s session on the go.
In Potong Pasir, residents immediately came up to give the Chiams their well-wishes before they started complaining about their current Member of Parliament (MP), Sitoh Yih Pin.
Some even took the chance to share with the Chiams issues they faced ever since Sitoh took over the reins.
One middle-aged resident whom The Independent Singapore spoke to and does not want to be named said that she did not think Sitoh would do a better job than See Tong.
“Chiam See Tong has helped us in many ways – – he upgraded our lifts and didn’t cancel the upgrading project even after Sitoh and the People’s Action Party took over Potong Pasir.” Said the same resident.
Residents Wish Chiam See Tong a Speedy Recovery
SPP Christmas Walkabout 5
This is the first time in months since Chiam See Tong has stepped out in public to meet and greet people.
Previously, See Tong was unable to come out and meet people – – an activity he has always enjoyed doing – – as he was recovering from a hip injury.
His wife, Lina, has been going around Potong Pasir, talking to the residents, while he was confined to bed rest, recuperating from his injury.
One resident who is in her sixties came up to shake See Tong’s hand told him to get well soon so he can run in the next General Elections.
Another resident, who happened to be ex-colleagues with Lina, came to greet See Tong and thanked him for being their ward’s representative for 27 years. She also told him to get well soon. Just before she left, she gave See Tong a pat on his back to thank him for all that he has done to improve their livelihood, including helping them to upgrade the lifts.
Needless to say, Potong Pasir residents still remember Chiam See Tong and everyone treated him like their close friend.
What about the residents of Bishan estate?
They too, wished Chiam See Tong a speedy recovery while party members and volunteers went around with Santa Claus to hand out presents, balloons and sweets to the children.
An elderly gentleman who resides in a single-room flat in Bishan thanked Chiam See Tong for bringing his party’s A-team to contest against former Deputy Prime minister, Wong Kan Seng, and his team of elites.
And yes, everybody welcome the Chiams and SPP in spite of their party’s electoral defeat in the 2011 General Elections.

***

Truth or Dare? Run the Gauntlet, Torch the Ashes, Raise the Phoenix

The Independent
-
0
Truth or Dare? Run the Gauntlet, Torch the Ashes, Raise the Phoenix

Singapore’s foremost political leader once famously stated [1]:
“What political party helps an opposition to come to power? Why should we not demolish them before they get started? Once they get started, it’s more difficult to demolish them.  If you are polite to me, I’m polite to you but I’ll demolish your policy. It is the job of every government to do that if you want to stay in power.”    
The elder statesman has candidly explained that a ruling party which is in power would want to stay in power. One way to stay in power is to demolish opposition before they get started.  For once they get started it is more difficult to demolish them. 
Singapore’s ruling party has stayed in power for over 50 years. So firm has the PAP’s grip been that since the first post-independence general elections were held up to the 2011 general elections, there were never more than 4 elected Members of Parliament from the opposition.  Currently, there are just 7 out of 87.
With respect, I do not agree that it is laudable for a ruling party to seek the demolition of opposition parties.  When a political party wins the mandate to form the government, it takes on the responsibility of serving the nation. The ruling party must serve the nation in priority to its own interests. 
Is it in the interest of Singapore to have weak opposition political parties and feeble civil society organisations?  I do not think so.  Allowing circulation of differing ideas and opinions will build a more robust nation, one which would have the full complement of solutions for its problems.
Systems to guarantee plurality in politics are entrenched in many democratic nations.  For instance, in Germany, Sweden, Canada, Australia and other democracies, political parties are entitled to receive subsidies or cash grants from the government for their political activities. [2] Such government grants help to ensure the survival of political parties, their ability to play their part in the political process and the continuance of healthy competition for political office. 
Laws and regulation are necessary but must not curb healthy political competition. Sad to say, we have many laws which have the adverse effect of stifling the activities and growth of opposition political parties and non-partisan civil society groups.  One of which is the Political Donations Act (Act) [3].
According to the Elections Department [4], the Act seeks to prevent foreigners from interfering in Singapore’s domestic politics through funding of candidates and political associations.  
The Act imposes an onerous compliance regime on both the political association and its donors.  
A political association is defined to include not just political parties, but also non-partisan groups like The Online Citizen (a socio-political website) and MARUAH (a non-governmental organisation). 
An organisation which is deemed to be a political association can only receive donations from Permissible Donors.
A “Permissible Donor” is defined as a Singapore citizen not less than 21 years of age; or a Singapore-incorporated, Singapore-controlled company, the majority of whose directors and members are Singapore citizens and which carries on business wholly or mainly in Singapore.
Onus is on the political association to verify that the donor is a Permissible Donor before accepting the donation.
Hence, in order to comply with the Act, the political association has to request the donor for his NRIC and to give his personal details. In the case of a corporate donor, the political association would need to inquire or do checks on the company’s business, directors and shareholders. All these inquiries are an intrusion on the donor’s privacy and discourage the donor from making the donation.
Political associations can only accept less than $5,000 in anonymous donations per financial year. Any anonymous donation which will bring the total of anonymous donations beyond $5,000 in that financial year, will have to be returned or surrendered to the Registrar of Political Donations (Registrar).
If the political association receives a single donation of an amount not less than $10,000, or multiple donations from the same donor the aggregate of which is not less than $10,000 in a financial year, it must submit a Donation Report to the Registrar giving the name, identity number and the address of the donor and the date, value and description of the donation.
In addition, a donor who has made multiple small donations with an aggregate value of $10,000 or more to the same political association in a calendar year, is himself also required to submit a Donation Report and a Declaration Form to the Registrar. Failure to do so is an offence under the Act.
I am not clear how the requirement to report donations of $10,000 or more serves the stated aim of prohibiting foreign donations. It is clear though, that such a requirement makes donors wary of making other than small donations.
The Act is yet another hurdle for opposition parties, by making it difficult for them to raise funds for its activities. 
It is a ‘Hard Truth’ that money is necessary for democratic politics. Political parties need funds for their activities. Lack of funds inhibits the activity and growth of the political party.  
It is evident that the opposition cause has many supporters and well-wishers, and the numbers are growing. 
If only some of the many supporters would be convinced to brave the gauntlet of making political donations, I believe that it would spark such a huge game-change, that the phoenix will rise from its ashes.  
Then the promise we saw in the watershed general elections of 2011 will be allowed its fulfilment in 2016.  
References: 
[1] “HARD TRUTHS TO KEEP SINGAPORE GOING” (2011) by Lee Kuan Yew, at page 82
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_subsidies ;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_funding
[3] Cap. 236, enacted on 15 February 2001
[4] http://www.eld.gov.sg/registry.html

 About the Author

 The author is the Secretary-General of the National Solidarity Party (NSP).  This article was written in her personal capacity.  She appeals to readers to consider making a donation to NSP. Click on this link to donate now:  http://nsp.sg/donate/

 
 

The Sook Ching massacre and War memories of Singapore

The Independent
-
0
The Sook Ching massacre and War memories of Singapore

2012 marked the seventieth anniversary of beginning of Second World War in South-east Asia and the fall of Singapore to Japanese in February, 1942. The government commemorated this by organising various memorials, trails and ceremonies for educating the younger generation about the War. Few months back, the issue came to light again when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on a visit to Tokyo spoke of his experience of mass grave sites of Sook Ching massacre being uncovered in 1962.

The National Heritage Board's (NHB) placard at the Civilian War Memorial

The National Heritage Board’s (NHB) placard at the Civilian War Memorial

Sook Ching massacre
Sook Ching massacre, as it came to be known, was carried out by the Kempeitai (Japanese military police) to screen and eliminate anti-Japanese elements in Singapore during the Occupation. The National Heritage Board’s (NHB) placard at the Civilian War Memorial, which is dedicated to all those who perished during the Japanese Occupation of Singapore between 1942-1945 states, ”Among the civilians who lost their lives were numerous Chinese targeted by the Japanese under the Sook Ching (literally to ‘purge’ or ‘to eliminate’) operations. On 18 February 1942, large numbers of Chinese were forcibly assembled at designated mass screening centres. Many were unjustly accused of involvement in anti-Japanese activities, or arbitrarily condemned. No one will ever know how many were taken away and massacred. Unofficial figures put the number of dead at about 50,000.” As detailed in recently-released NHB’s World War II heritage trail brochure the Kempeitai used the roads in the vicinity of Hong Lim Complex as a Sook Ching registration centre, where Chinese men between the ages of 18-50 were summoned and subjected to prolonged mass screenings. Those who “failed” the screenings were taken to remote beaches for execution – three prominent ones were in Punggol, Sentosa and Changi. The largest massacre site was the Siglap area in the eastern part of Singapore, where five mass war graves were exhumed in 1962. This became an urgent issue in post-War Singapore leading to a demand by the Chinese Chambers of Commerce for a Chinese-style monument to honour the victims.

One of those sites was besides his school, which had bodies of people killed during the Japanese Occupation, Lee noted, while adding,” One factor which colours Japan’s relationship with many of its neighbours is the history of the Pacific War. After the war ended, Japan did not fully reconcile its relations with the countries it had invaded. For many years this unresolved issue made it difficult to build trust and confidence. Prime Minister Murayama’s formal apology in 1995 was thus an important step in helping Japan put the history of the war behind it.”
Lee’s comments come at a time when Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has time and again defended the right of Japanese leaders to visit the controversial Yasukuni shrine and pay respect to the country’s war dead on August 15, which marks the anniversary of the end of Second World War.
Japan is not the only country which can be accused of practising “selective amnesia” about its War time history, as Singapore too had an interesting turn of events in relation to its War memories. Kevin Blackburn, associate professor of humanities at National Institute of Education in Singapore, elaborates in his book, War Memory and the making of modern Malaysia and Singapore.
“Ironically, then, the same Singapore whose government sought to dampen and control war memory in the 1960s, would enter the 21st century with a proliferation of museums, plaques, memoirs, and media productions about the War,” he writes.
Blackburn explains that Singapore’s War memory in the 1960s was successfully harnessed by the People’s Action Party (PAP), when Chinese Chambers of Commerce demand for a Chinese-style monument to honour Sook Ching massacre victims resulted in the Civilian War Memorial at the Beach Road depicting common suffering. “One of then PM Lee Kuan Yew’s motives for harnessing wartime emotions had been to avoid interference with investment,” he writes. The government even adopted a ‘Learn from Japan campaign’, though much to dismay of some of PAP’s own members of the wartime generation, Blackburn adds.
But things started changing in 1980s triggered by the 1982 textbook controversy, in which Japan was revealed as unrepentant about its wartime atrocities by attempting to expunge the portion from its history books. Singapore reacted too and the government here introduced the first official history textbook in 1984 detailing the Japanese Occupation of Singapore. Importantly, Blackburn adds,” By the 1990s, Singapore had a mixture of foreign investment and was no longer heavily dependent on Japanese capital, as in 1970s.”
Thus, the fiftieth anniversary commemorations in 1992 witnessed for the first time a Singapore television documentary Between Empires, which depicted wartime atrocities with focus on Chinese as victims. This was followed by the Chinese-language television series Heping De Dai Jia  in 1997, which was based on the history book of the same name published in 1995 by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Even February 15 – designated as Heritage Day in 1992 – was re-designated as Total Defence Day in 1998. Some schools and Fort Siloso on the Sentosa Island staged mock Japanese attacks to teach children about war-time atrocities.
The NHB did its part too. It identified fourteen war sites and unveiled permanent plaques on them in 1995 to mark the significance of the sites in relation to the War. Six more were added last year in February, as part of NHB’s effort to commemorate the seventieth anniversary of the Fall of Singapore. The NHB now organises a Second World War heritage trail through 50 war sites (including 20 with permanent plaques) including the Sook Ching massacre sites.

The Civilian War Memorial at the Beach Road, depicting common suffering
The Civilian War Memorial at the Beach Road, depicting common suffering

The Civilian War Memorial has four parallel pillars that taper together at the top. The pillars signify the four major ethnic groups in Singapore – Chinese, Malays, Indians and Eurasians, and the joining near the top represents unity and shared suffering. Unveiled by the then PM Lee Kuan Yew on February 15, 1967, the 222-foot high structure is a also burial chamber that contains the remains of many of the unidentified victims of Sook Ching massacre. Ceremonies are held every year at the Memorial on February 15 to remember and honour the victims.
 
 

Blackburn claims in his book that the approach taken by the Singapore government sought to impose a unified, and unifying national story of common wartime suffering into an embryonic nation. “But the myth-making and unifying approach had its costs. Hence, the retelling of the Sook Ching story through the Civilian War Memorial resulted in that site’s core nature (as a burial place for thousands of overwhelmingly Chinese massacre victims) being downplayed. By making it a largely abstract design of four pillars dedicated to the dead of all communities, its value as an emotional symbol of real and specific massacres was weakened. The therapeutic value and emotional force of sites and ceremonies has thus lessened in Singapore, even as their unifying utility has been enhanced by state re-narration of events and their meaning,” he concludes.
 

Chiam's Christmas Walkabout

The Independent
-
0
Chiam's Christmas Walkabout

The Chiams were out and about meeting the residents of Bishan, Toa Payoh and Potong Pasir in their usual party fashion over the weekend of 22nd of December to send their Christmas greetings.
They were out in force with about twenty party members bringing a message of love and hope to their constituents.
When asked what were his greatest achievements, Chiam said,  “it was forming political parties: the Singapore Democratic Party, Singapore People’s Party and Singapore Democratic Alliance – to contest and win in the General Elections in order to keep the ruling People’s Action Party in check.”
Despite his frail health, Chiam is steadfast with his commitment of keeping the PAP in check. He is determined to expand the space for the opposition movement.  However, that will depend on the caliber of new blood into the party ranks and the executive council.
Political watchers are keeping an eye on the upcoming party conference in January 2014, where new CEC members are elected.

New Internet radio in Singapore

The Independent
-
0
New Internet radio in Singapore

SINGAPORE – Chat Chat Media Pte Ltd will be launching a Singapore internet radio known as The Live Radio after more than one year of testing and preparation. It is a radio devoted to the Top 40/Pop music from 18 Jan 2014onwards. The radio will be available from Monday to Saturday, 7am till 10pm.
The Live Radio will opening up the first local talents programme in the Singapore internet radio to encourage and allow local talents of any type to showcase and perform on-air. This programme will go live starting from 3rd February 2014,Monday to Friday 4pm – 7pm.
The station will also constantly be inviting new youth to join The Live Radio as they give opportunity to local citizen as young as 16 to learn and experience the Singapore radio industry. A total of 10 resident deejays will be on board to present the shows; including Gibryon, who previously is a formal presenter from SPH Radio’s Hot FM 91.3.
The Live Radio is also proud to have the youngest director and founder of the station, Lin Junhong, at the age of 19 this year, from setting up a radio studio to building the station’s show quality.
Those who would like to tune in to the station can access the website at:
www.TheLiveRadio.sg

Government’s Treatment of Deportees Undermines Security

The Independent
-
0
Government’s Treatment of Deportees Undermines Security

Workfair Singapore is deeply concerned the deportation of the seven acquitted of rioting was carried out by non-transparent Executive action. The Law Ministry’s response (Law Ministry responds to calls to justify repatriation, Today 24 December 2013) raises concerns for Singaporeans’ rights before the courts.

The seven deportees were acquitted and then warned. This is a contradiction: if they were acquitted, they are innocent; if so, a warning indicates such weak culpability as to suggest they are not a security threat. Therefore, they do not meet the undesirability test in Immigration Act Section 8. Section 33 allows for ministerial appeal against deportation. We invite the ministry to clarify if it applies here.
In deporting them, the Law Ministry claims it took “firm and quick action” to avoid “additional social and security risks” caused by a “recurrence of an incident”. It has not made clear on what foundation these claims rest since the seven were acquitted.
A warning is an entirely administrative judgment formed without transparent recourse to the evidence. It is not appealable. The implications of such administrative powers for Singaporeans are obvious.
Administrative action must meet the tests of legality, reasonableness and rationality. Without the right to challenge the warning or deportation, we are denied the ability to test whether the state has met these criteria.
Due process is not based on whatever the law states at any given time but on adherence to the principles of justice. If found innocent an accused should not be subject to extra-judicial action.
Justice should never be subordinated to cost or the possibility of abuse: the remedy is fine tuning procedures to make them more efficient.
Justice cannot be guaranteed to Singaporeans by denying it to immigrants. The security of Singaporeans is best promoted in a transparent, non-arbitrary system available to all.
We agree that every country has the right to determine its laws. However, those laws must uphold justice at all times for all people. The system cannot be “firm, just and fair” unless the Rule of Law is preserved and due process observed.
While we note that working here is a privilege extended to foreigners, it nevertheless carries reciprocal benefit. Low-waged migrants, almost half the workforce, contribute immensely to Singapore’s wealth and smooth functioning. To deny them the basic protections of due process underlines the exploitation many migrants experience.
The Law Ministry’ defence of the deportations is based on the letter rather than spirit of the law and therefore contrary to justice. Our security is achieved by all branches of the law working together to protect every individual. The administration should not divide the legal framework among different classes of people, different provisions of the law, and different powers of government agencies.
About Work fair Singapore
We are a group of civil society volunteers concerned about the rights of Singaporean and migrant workers. Through our activities we are working towards the improvement of labour conditions in Singapore. For further information please email [email protected] or visit our blog http://workfairsingapore.wordpress.com.

Lawyer Ravi strikes

The Independent
-
0
Lawyer Ravi strikes

 
For those wondering where lawyer M Ravi is as the Little India riot controversy continues to boil, here is the answer. He has just filed an application challenging the deportation order of an Indian worker, Rajendran Ranjan, on the grounds that the worker had not been given adequate opportunity to exercise his rights under Section 33(2) of the Immigration Act.
The application also wants to challenge the administrative power of the government to exclude the court’s jurisdiction when deciding on such matters.
Ranjan was one of those acquitted after being charged over the riot.
 
 

MARUAH concerned over lack of justice and fairness for migrant workers

The Independent
-
0
MARUAH concerned over lack of justice and fairness for migrant workers

MARUAH panelIn the wake of the Little India riots and the crackdown that followed, MARUAH organised a public forum on Monday at the Marketing Institute of Singapore to discuss these topics. Titled ‘Foreign workers, Justice and Fairness,’ it was chaired by MARUAH’s Vice President Mr Siew Kum Hong.
MARUAH President Ms Braema Mathi spoke about justice for foreign workers. She said the riots have “given us many moments for reflection” on what Singapore wants for migrant workers.
“What kind of society do we really want?” she asked. If Singapore wanted a common value system for citizens and migrant workers, she elaborated, then justice must be “accessible to all.” However, current law gives the state “a clear route to deportation” but not “a clear route to justice”.
She felt the authorities were jumping to conclusions without involving the public. “What is the evidence that have put all these foreign workers in different tiers: advisory, deportation, to be charged? Who made the decisions? This has to be a transparent and open process.”
Mr Siew decried the courts’ inability to check government power. “In most common law countries, the courts have determined that they can review administrative decisions. In Singapore, we have gone down a different path. The government has changed the law, saying the courts do not have this power. The courts have retreated. As a lawyer, this offends my sense of justice.”
 
Unfair labour practices
Dr Russell Heng, President of Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2), described the exploitation of foreign workers, homing in on low-wage South Asian male manual workers. Employers could arbitrarily set low wages and substitute contracts for less favourable ones, he argued, because Singapore does not have a minimum wage law and no recourse for migrant workers.
Should workers lodge complaints, the Ministry of Manpower’s response is left to the frontline official’s discretion. Thus, he said, Singapore law is both “inadequate and inadequately enforced”.
“There’s a lack of symmetry of power between employer and the foreign worker.” Dr Heng said employers could send workers home without proper reasons, while workers had to work to pay off the debts incurred to come to Singapore. While Dr Heng stressed that exploited workers were in the minority, he highlighted that TWC2 alone deals with 2000 cases a year.
Mr Jolovan Wham, representing Workfair Singapore, was afraid the riots would open the door to greater “social control mechanisms” in the name of security. Employers and the government, he said, could use the riots to justify measures that would further restrict the mobility of foreign workers.
Mr Wham also discussed repatriation companies. Employers hire these companies to “abduct” nuisance foreign workers and hold them until they are repatriated. While this practice is technically illegal, Mr Wham believes the government condones such behaviour.
Social activist Dr Vincent Wijeysingha recalled a time when he questioned a Ministry official about repatriation companies. “She said, ‘they provide a useful service’.”
 
Lack of information
Discussing the availability of data concerning migrant workers, Mr Wham lamented that information “just comes out in dribs and drabs, it’s not contextualized and not segregated.”
Mr Siew expounded on this theme, saying that the government maintained information asymmetry to give themselves an advantage during policy debates. “The government will only answer the questions they want to answer. Until we have a Freedom of Information Act in Singapore, our ability to get information is held hostage to what the government wants.”
Mr Alex Au, speaking as a member of TWC2, said civil society could gather data without relying on the government, but it was a labout-intensive exercise. “We at TWC2 have plenty of ideas to do research, we just don’t have the manpower.”
 
The citizen and the foreigner
In the question and answer session that followed, law student Seraphina asked, “Is it better for foreign workers to work here and get paid, if only a pittance, or should they not work and not be paid at all?”
Mr Heng replied, “I think the reality is rather more nuanced than that. Singapore needs foreign workers, and whoever we let into this country we should treat fairly and equally.” Individual workers were driven by their personal decisions, he said, and many could not find jobs at home. “In those countries where they are coming from, NGOs and governments also have a job to do…to take ownership of their problems and ensure their workers are treated equally.”
Mr Wham felt local workers also benefited from proper treatment of foreign workers. “One of the reasons local workers are displaced is because migrant workers are easy to exploit. These problems are interconnected.”
He argued that migrant workers will be able to accept working for long periods at low pay, and companies would prefer to hire them over Singaporeans. “I have seen workers who are paid two dollars an hour. How is the Singaporean worker able to compete with these kinds of wages?”
“Talking about costs…is the mantra the government has used,” Ms Mathi replied. “That is the wrong discussion by our political leaders. What we need to talk about is how to do the right thing by the citizen and the foreigner.”
Mr Vincent Law from non-profit group HealthServe rounded off the presentations with a prepared statement. The riots sparked the examination of issues pertaining to the “invisible workforce”, Mr Law said. “Give them their dues, give them a sustainable policy to live and to work and to assimilate them into our society.”

SEA Games surprise wins a wake-up call

The Independent
-
0
SEA Games surprise wins a wake-up call

By Michael Y. P. Ang
There has been much talk about how SEA Games champion rower Saiyidah Aisyah heroically overcame the odds to win Singapore’s first-ever individual rowing gold last Tuesday.
There is similar buzz about golden milestones in equestrian, cycling, judo, men’s marathon, etc.
The unexpected victories in less-popular  sports have thrown the spotlight on how the Singapore Sports Council (SSC)  decides to fund national sports associations (NSAs).
Athletes’ performances are not the only  criterion for determining the amount of funding an NSA receives. Hence, the  Football Association of Singapore (FAS), despite our footballers’ continued  below-par performances, will always receive a huge slice of the pie because of  football’s special status in Singapore.
The same applies to another core sport,  badminton, although its funding is not primarily due to its “core” status  because it had some SEA Games successes in the past.
Under the SSC’s current funding model,  there can be little argument against the amount of funding for table tennis, given its Olympic silver and numerous high-profile titles.
However, if the government is serious  about building a strong sporting culture among Singaporeans, the discrimination against less-popular sports must stop.
If the SSC continues to give minimal  funding to these sports, especially when they have not won medals for a long time, would this not prolong Singapore’s wait for a medal to  emerge?
Perhaps that is why it took so many years  for Singapore to strike gold in rowing, equestrian, cycling, judo, etc.
Foreign Sports Talent (FST)  Scheme
Football, badminton, and table tennis rely  heavily on imported athletes for various competitions. After more than a decade of using such athletes, football and badminton have yet to surpass the  achievements of their pre-FST days.
Table tennis did win an Olympic silver,  but such a medal is not new to Singapore – we already have one in weightlifting  from the 1960 Olympiad.
Some may argue that imported athletes help  homegrown ones improve. True, but do we need them to become naturalised and take  the place of homegrown players in national teams in order to raise  standards?
How about SEAemploying foreign  athletes as sparring partners for our badminton and table tennis  players?
Others may argue that Singapore’s  China-born paddlers win championships and medals that inspire native-born  players like Isabelle Li and Clarence Chew to excel.
This might be true, but who inspired  Singapore’s newly-crowned champions in rowing, equestrian, cycling, judo and men’s marathon, medallists in diving, and female sprinters?
Singapore spends millions to house, train, and reward China-born paddlers, yet continually spend minimal amounts of money to nurture native-born Singaporeans in other, albeit less-known,  sports.
Surely, this is not the best way to build a thriving sports culture.
Which do Singaporeans value more – the triple gold medals won by rower Saiyidah, equestrian show jumper Janine Khoo and cyclist Dinah Chan (all native-born) or the impressive Olympic silver won by  three China-born paddlers?
Should politicians continue to function  as sports administrators?
The presidents of the FAS, Singapore Badminton Association, and Singapore Table Tennis Association are People’s Action Party politicians. Are they the best choices for their respective posts?
Should politicians continue to take on the additional task of managing national sports associations instead of devoting more time to what they are elected to do – running their constituencies’ affairs?
The Under-23 Lions’ semi-final loss to Thailand last Thursday marks their seventh consecutive failure to reach the  final, while the badminton team fell below expectations, earning just one bronze  despite having imported players. Singapore’s table tennis gold medals were  primarily the result of fielding China-born paddlers.
In contrast, the glittering achievements of the national governing bodies for rowing, equestrian, cycling, and judo were  solely the result of the talent, skill, perseverance and passion of native-born  Singaporeans.
Furthermore, these governing bodies are run by everyday Singaporeans, not  politicians.

1...5,1935,1945,195...5,235Page 5,194 of 5,235

The Independent SG

Singapore News

Cost of living, home affordability, govt accountability are top concerns for GE2025—survey

0
SINGAPORE: A survey from Milieu Insight released shortly before...

Neighbour won’t spay her cat — now their area is full of mess and strays, says resident

0
SINGAPORE: A frustrated resident took to an online forum...

Job seeker asks: ‘Is it really that hard to get hired now, or is it just me?’

0
SINGAPORE: A job seeker who has been applying for...

Singapore negotiating US concessions on pharmaceutical exports and high-end AI chips access

0
SINGAPORE: Singapore is negotiating concessions with the United States...

Business

Singapore Politics

Gan Kim Yong promotes “Not a Stranger” hashtag after Punggol GRC resident appears to snub him in viral video

0
SINGAPORE: Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong has promoted...

WP’s Jackson Au: ‘You can be good in Parliament and good on the ground’

0
SINGAPORE: Jackson Au, a candidate for The Workers’ Party...

Parliament needs more female members: Sylvia Lim

0
SINGAPORE: Workers' Party (WP) chairperson Sylvia Lim has called on...

Quality of PAP ministers ‘leaves very much to be desired’: Chee Soon Juan

0
SINGAPORE: Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan...

© The Independent Singapore