I'm famous...sort of...
TODAY, 18 Sep 2008
A DANGEROUS DIVIDE
--------------------
Mah: Stop demonising workers, residents and start accepting them
LOCALS versus foreigners. Heartlanders versus private home owners. The
foreign-worker furore sparked off in Serangoon Gardens — which has
escalated to a national debate on social tolerance and class — is leading
to a polarisation of Singaporeans that worries National Development
Minister Mah Bow Tan.
Noting how the controversy has "taken on a life of its own", since a
residents' petition began circulating late last month against plans for a
workers' dormitory in Serangoon Gardens, he said: "Some of the debate has
been framed as between one group against another. It will polarise the
ground if we carry on and cause harm to social cohesion."
For instance, he felt, some of the comments about foreign workers eking
out a living in Singapore were "a little over the top ... We shouldn't
demonise them".
"In the same way, some of the comments about Serangoon Gardens residents I
thought were also a little bit beyond the pale. Don't demonise them, they
have concerns ... It's an issue about living conditions in their estate,"
he added.
During a 90-minute press briefing yesterday, Mr Mah instead urged the
public to focus instead on what was constructive: Figuring out how to
balance the economic imperative for foreign workers with their own
concerns.
In recent weeks, comments that have appeared in blogs and letters to the
press have branded Serangoon Gardens residents as "intolerant", "racist",
"snobs" and "smug", while foreign workers were labelled "uncivilised",
"drunks" and "criminals".
Mr Mah said that it was time to "calm down" and look at the issue
rationally.
The key question: How to strike a balance between both Singaporeans and
foreigners, so that the negative social impact would be minimal?
Some have suggested building townships, like an entire HDB estate, to
house foreign workers. But such complete segretation, said Mr Mah, was not
possible in land-scarce Singapore. Nor was it desirable "from a social
point of view".
And restricting the number of foreign workers – as others have proposed –
was "not an option" if Singapore was to go ahead with projects such as the
Integrated Resorts, and building more public housing for citizens, he
stressed.
The Government's long-term approach is to construct more purpose-built,
self-contained dormitories away from residential pockets, to accommodate
the burgeoning numbers of such workers vital to economic growth.
Accommodation needed –in more ways than one
But, for the next two to three years, this migrant workforce – now
numbering around 600,000 – will have to be housed in transitional
premises, all located near residential estates.
And even when these workers move into their new dorms, Singaporeans would
inevitably have to get used to sharing their public spaces, such as on
weekends when workers go out to unwind.
Confronted with their different culture, habits and customs, Singaporeans
will be bound to feel uncertain and suspious, said Mr Mah. That is the
social cost to pay. How to ameliorate this?
Employers would have to do their part by providing adequate housing and
educating them on behaviour in Singapore; while the Government would work
with various agencies to build more gathering spaces for workers, said the
Minister. Already, there are plans to add four or five more such spaces in
Little India to the existing two.
What of the biased attitudes "festering" among Singaporeans?
"I think a lot of it is due to ignorance. These people are here to earn a
living, they work very hard, they need some time and some space to relax,
so we have to try to accommodate," said Mr Mah. Their stories reminded him
of "our own forefathers" from China from India, who too came here and
lived in dormitories, "sometimes in substandard conditions".
But convincing Singaporeans – who may agree with the need for foreign
labour, but protest at close contact with them – to break out of this "not
in my backyard" mentality would be tough, said sociologist Alexius
Pereira, of the National University of Singapore.
Segregating foreign workers into contained dormitories was the
"short-term, lesser of two evils" answer, and there may be "no real
solution".
The never-ending cycle?
He added: "The construction workers are lowly educated, a bit rough around
the edges and, most importantly, only here for the short term. So, assume
you try to integrate one worker – by the time he's used to Singapore or
accepted by Singaporeans, his two-year work permit has expired and he's
gone.
"And the cycle continues."
MP Lim Wee Kiak, who sits on the Government Parliamentary Committee for
National Development and Environment, suggested that employers work with
grassroots leaders to organise dorm visits for residents, to foster mutual
understanding.
Both Assistant Professor Pereira and Dr Lim felt the media, by playing up
crimes committed by foreign workers, had to shoulder some of the blame.
"There is only a few black sheep ... but they have resulted in a bad
public image," said Dr Lim.
Mr Mah, meanwhile, admitted to possibly "poor planning" on the
authorities' part when it came to accommodating foreign workers.
"We plan for a certain level of increase (in the influx) but we never
expected the demand to go up so high," he said. In 2006, the increase in
foreign workers numbers was 55,000, compared to 102,000 last year.
So is Singapore planning adequately, going forward? "If we get more people
to accept the trade-offs, I am confident we can meet demand," said Mr Mah.
A DANGEROUS DIVIDE
--------------------
Mah: Stop demonising workers, residents and start accepting them
LOCALS versus foreigners. Heartlanders versus private home owners. The
foreign-worker furore sparked off in Serangoon Gardens — which has
escalated to a national debate on social tolerance and class — is leading
to a polarisation of Singaporeans that worries National Development
Minister Mah Bow Tan.
Noting how the controversy has "taken on a life of its own", since a
residents' petition began circulating late last month against plans for a
workers' dormitory in Serangoon Gardens, he said: "Some of the debate has
been framed as between one group against another. It will polarise the
ground if we carry on and cause harm to social cohesion."
For instance, he felt, some of the comments about foreign workers eking
out a living in Singapore were "a little over the top ... We shouldn't
demonise them".
"In the same way, some of the comments about Serangoon Gardens residents I
thought were also a little bit beyond the pale. Don't demonise them, they
have concerns ... It's an issue about living conditions in their estate,"
he added.
During a 90-minute press briefing yesterday, Mr Mah instead urged the
public to focus instead on what was constructive: Figuring out how to
balance the economic imperative for foreign workers with their own
concerns.
In recent weeks, comments that have appeared in blogs and letters to the
press have branded Serangoon Gardens residents as "intolerant", "racist",
"snobs" and "smug", while foreign workers were labelled "uncivilised",
"drunks" and "criminals".
Mr Mah said that it was time to "calm down" and look at the issue
rationally.
The key question: How to strike a balance between both Singaporeans and
foreigners, so that the negative social impact would be minimal?
Some have suggested building townships, like an entire HDB estate, to
house foreign workers. But such complete segretation, said Mr Mah, was not
possible in land-scarce Singapore. Nor was it desirable "from a social
point of view".
And restricting the number of foreign workers – as others have proposed –
was "not an option" if Singapore was to go ahead with projects such as the
Integrated Resorts, and building more public housing for citizens, he
stressed.
The Government's long-term approach is to construct more purpose-built,
self-contained dormitories away from residential pockets, to accommodate
the burgeoning numbers of such workers vital to economic growth.
Accommodation needed –in more ways than one
But, for the next two to three years, this migrant workforce – now
numbering around 600,000 – will have to be housed in transitional
premises, all located near residential estates.
And even when these workers move into their new dorms, Singaporeans would
inevitably have to get used to sharing their public spaces, such as on
weekends when workers go out to unwind.
Confronted with their different culture, habits and customs, Singaporeans
will be bound to feel uncertain and suspious, said Mr Mah. That is the
social cost to pay. How to ameliorate this?
Employers would have to do their part by providing adequate housing and
educating them on behaviour in Singapore; while the Government would work
with various agencies to build more gathering spaces for workers, said the
Minister. Already, there are plans to add four or five more such spaces in
Little India to the existing two.
What of the biased attitudes "festering" among Singaporeans?
"I think a lot of it is due to ignorance. These people are here to earn a
living, they work very hard, they need some time and some space to relax,
so we have to try to accommodate," said Mr Mah. Their stories reminded him
of "our own forefathers" from China from India, who too came here and
lived in dormitories, "sometimes in substandard conditions".
But convincing Singaporeans – who may agree with the need for foreign
labour, but protest at close contact with them – to break out of this "not
in my backyard" mentality would be tough, said sociologist Alexius
Pereira, of the National University of Singapore.
Segregating foreign workers into contained dormitories was the
"short-term, lesser of two evils" answer, and there may be "no real
solution".
The never-ending cycle?
He added: "The construction workers are lowly educated, a bit rough around
the edges and, most importantly, only here for the short term. So, assume
you try to integrate one worker – by the time he's used to Singapore or
accepted by Singaporeans, his two-year work permit has expired and he's
gone.
"And the cycle continues."
MP Lim Wee Kiak, who sits on the Government Parliamentary Committee for
National Development and Environment, suggested that employers work with
grassroots leaders to organise dorm visits for residents, to foster mutual
understanding.
Both Assistant Professor Pereira and Dr Lim felt the media, by playing up
crimes committed by foreign workers, had to shoulder some of the blame.
"There is only a few black sheep ... but they have resulted in a bad
public image," said Dr Lim.
Mr Mah, meanwhile, admitted to possibly "poor planning" on the
authorities' part when it came to accommodating foreign workers.
"We plan for a certain level of increase (in the influx) but we never
expected the demand to go up so high," he said. In 2006, the increase in
foreign workers numbers was 55,000, compared to 102,000 last year.
So is Singapore planning adequately, going forward? "If we get more people
to accept the trade-offs, I am confident we can meet demand," said Mr Mah.
Comments