Debated in Parliament on 4 Feb 2013.
Debate resumed.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Thank you, Mdm Speaker. The White Paper on Population, which was recently introduced by the Government, has presented a number of challenges that we have to face together in the next 15 to 20 years. Among the concerns of the Malay/Muslim community is the ability to cope with the cost of living and the proportion of Malay/Muslims in Singapore as compared to the other races or communities.
I admit the Government has laid out a number of initiatives and assistance programmes to help Singaporeans cope with the cost of living, especially for those with low income and who have relatively large families. The assistance programmes, such as ComCare, CHAS, CFAC, KiFAS and so on, have been implemented. These schemes are comprehensive but there may be many more of us who are not aware of these assistance schemes. So, I would like to urge the Government to collate all the information on these schemes, and to see how an individual or a family that needs help from one scheme can be automatically considered to receive assistance from the other relevant schemes. This will require close cooperation between the Government bodies and departments.
Here, I would also like to take the opportunity to touch on the perceptions that the Government has ignored our Malay/Muslim community in terms of not making enough effort to look for new citizens or permanent residents of Malay origin from Malaysia or Indonesia, or Muslims from outside the Southeast Asia region.
Personally, I know a Javanese Indonesian student who graduated from our local university and who was offered to be a Singapore Permanent Resident. He
Page: 118
accepted the offer but told me that he will not accept the offer of Singapore citizenship, if it was offered later. He wanted to remain as an Indonesian citizen because that is where he came from, that is where his family resides and because he sees a brighter future for himself in Indonesia as compared to Singapore.
On behalf of our Malay/Muslim community, I feel this is an issue that needs closer attention from the Government. How can we attract Malay university graduates or Malay professionals from Indonesia and Malaysia to become Singapore permanent residents or citizens, especially when the Singapore population needs to be augmented? Many Malay/Muslim Singaporeans are concerned that the number of the Malay/Muslim citizens or population will decrease further, at a time when the overall population in Singapore needs to increase.
A common feeling amongst many members of the Malay/Muslim community is that a decrease in our population will affect racial stability and inter-racial relations in Singapore. How Malays see their place in Singapore will also be affected if they become the smallest group of minorities here. This issue requires a suitable solution and I am touched by the Prime Minister's promise that the Government will ensure that the proportion of Malays in the overall population of Singapore will be monitored and will be maintained.
To address this perception, what the Government can do next is to share information and data about the number of new citizens and permanent residents of Malay origin from this region, or who are Muslims, as well as initiatives taken by the Government to attract more citizens, permanent residents or new immigrants that can increase the number of our Malay/Muslim community in Singapore. With that, I would like to end my speech in English.
(In English): Mdm Speaker, I wish to reiterate that I hope the Government will implement measures to help Singaporeans start their families and manage the costs involved in doing so and help older Singaporeans be gainfully employed even in their golden years, before we resort to bringing in more foreigners or new Singaporeans or PRs. I am confident that when the Government continues to make strides in demonstrating this, Singaporeans will be assured that the Government truly has the interest of Singaporeans and our shared future above everything else which I believe is really the case. And unlike the hon Member Mr Faisal Manap, I think the measures are anything but half-hearted. I hope that the Government will take into consideration these
Page: 119
recommendations to the White Paper.
Yes, our TFR is low. Yes, fewer are getting married. Yes, we have to convert to being a global city. Yes, the Government has the guts to push a necessary though unpopular measure through.
But, let us not dilute ourselves into an identity-less group of Singaporeans. The Singaporean core must remain strong, vibrant; that core must be in the cockpit, that core must be the driving force, not in the passenger seat. If we achieve that, then ratios and figures are much easier to manage and justify as being to the Republic's advantage.
Mdm Speaker, we need to preserve, nurture and progress a Singaporean core as we move to converting our island into a significant global city.
We must not dilute our Singaporean identity – Singaporeans must be the key ingredient to how Singapore is portrayed to and understood by the rest of the world. This responsibility and privilege must be accorded to Singaporeans, with PRs and residents playing a complementary role. Every few years, Singaporeans must be able to look back and say "My life, my family's life has improved; there is a happy future for us."
We cannot just become stronger economically. We need to become stronger as a people, as a Nation of Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans have understandably raised their concerns as to the projected 6.9 million population by 2030. These include increased competition for jobs, an influx of foreigners to the possible erosion of our unique Singaporean heritage and identity, as well as very real infrastructure constraints, especially in housing and transport. This is why it is essential to stress from the outset of the debate that what we also want to preserve is a high quality living environment for all Singaporeans. We want Singapore to continue to remain one of the best cities in the world to live in, and a country we can proudly call home.
Important questions to be asked are: how are we going to continue to build and nurture a strong Singaporean core that retains the nation's values of resilience and hard work? How do we do this while being held together by a strong and cohesive national identity that will stand us in good stead against
Page: 120
the challenges of a global world?
While economic growth is essential to our continued survival and thriving as a nation, we have to ensure that such growth is sustainable. Topping up our population with foreigners cannot be the sole or even main means by which this is achieved. An unregulated population explosion will bring with it attendant ills, such as the dilution of our Singaporean identity and heritage, not to mention longer term economic disadvantages, such as lowered productivity and suppressed wages for lower income Singaporeans, if left unchecked.
The second point, Mdm Speaker, the key tenets of meritocracy and multi-racialism cannot be harmed. In a large population, people will try to climb to the top through contacts or clan-nish ways. I have seen this in Europe in my time there spent over four years. This segregates rather than unites. Meritocracy, that is, hard work, honesty, perseverance – must continue to be a cornerstone of the Singapore way; it should be applicable to foreigners in the exact way it applies to Singaporeans. No two paths.
The importance of meritocracy as a guiding principle for Singapore's public policy formulation must be underscored especially in the context of our multi-racial society where perceived racial inequality can give rise to unwanted tensions and divisions.
As our Prime Minister Lee put it when some Singaporeans questioned the value of meritocracy during the debate on the academic system of the PSLE last December, "If we're not looking at merit, what are you going to look at?" It is this system that allows individuals and communities to progress regardless of their disadvantages or disabilities and, more importantly, levels the playing field across the different ethnic and racial groups that make up the core of our Singaporean society.
Crucially, this principle of meritocracy must apply without discrimination to Singaporeans and foreigners.
Third, Mdm Speaker, Armed Forces and Police, and the Civil Service must be staffed with Singaporeans of high calibre. Foreigners cannot dominate – even indirectly – the heart of defence or policy making. No compromise must be made here, even as we move to the next lap, 2030. I am sure the Government and I are on the same page on this.
Page: 121
Fourth, the Singaporean core must benefit – roads must get better, not worse. Rail lines must get better, not worse. Public transport must over accommodate high load, not fall short. The Singaporean must feel he or she is benefiting – otherwise why are we doing this?
To add some balance, I add that before we can talk about raising our standard of living, we must realistically acknowledge that a higher standard of living that goes towards the welfare of all Singaporeans can be achieved only if there is a strong foundation for sustainable economic growth. So, growth – it is a pre-requisite. This will, in turn, ensure that the nation is able to thrive and compete amidst the challenges of an increasingly globalised world.
However, if we accept that economic growth fuelled in part by population growth is an objective of the White Paper, then it goes without saying that such growth must translate into tangible benefits for the Singaporean core. At the most basic level, we must ensure that our domestic infrastructure and amenities have sufficient inbuilt capacity to take on the projected increase in population without being unduly strained. Good and affordable housing must continue to be one of our top priorities. We must keep in line with our aspirations to build one of the best public transport systems in the world – a key feature being the doubling of our public transport network to about 360 km by 2030, so that eight in 10 homes will be within a 10-minute walk of an MRT station. This is an excellent aim – and timely.
While improvements to the system cannot be made overnight, the Government must also take into account the legitimate concerns of the people and provide concrete benchmarks and timelines against which our progress on this front can be measured. Given Singapore's unique space constraints, we must continue to invest resources to tackle our land challenge and come up with practical solutions to create new land capacity while keeping Singapore a highly liveable Garden City for work and recreation.
Fifth, Mdm Speaker, with a flood of non-Singaporeans beaching on our shores, the demand for property will sky rocket. If left unregulated, prices will gallop away, leaving Singaporeans who may not have as much liquid cash left unable to afford such high prices. This will be foolish. We need a stringent way of regulating the property market beyond the combination of Additional Buyers Stamp Duties (ABSDs) and loan-to-capital ratio. We need a predictable system which allows Singaporean demand to predominantly dictate the prices of resale private and HDB homes. How? One possible way is tailoring the Australian model to our local needs. I have spoken about this twice in Parliament and three times counting to date. Foreigners there can only buy select new developments
Page: 122
and, thereafter, can only sell to locals. This way, a large foreign resident population will not be able to hijack control of property prices. Presently, our policies are reactive. What we need is a forward foot stance – anticipatory, predictable and sustainable regulation. We must get this right.
The mega increase in the supply of flats is again an excellent cure. But, my point here is, let us be armed with a predictable regulatory regime.
Sixth, which is my last point, Mdm Speaker, if the Government believes this slew of policies, including a possible 6.9 million by 2030, is necessary for the Republic's very survival, then couple that belief with a concerted effort to allow Singaporeans to enjoy the fruits of the policy by ensuring more than adequate public infrastructure built in advance of demand. Otherwise, we will just be chasing our tail right through to 2030. Chasing one's tail is a meaningless pursuit. So, let us ensure we do not.
As mentioned earlier, we need to focus on building good and affordable housing, and implementing creative solutions to work around our space constraints. We should strive for greater mobility with enhanced transport capacity and connectivity. Above all, we need also to ensure that different groups across society are well-protected and taken care of. Singapore must continue to be a city for all ages and a place we are proud to call our home.
In conclusion, Mdm Speaker, yes, our TFR is low. Yes, fewer are getting married. Yes, we have to convert to being a global city. Yes, I say this again, the Government has the guts to push a necessary but unpopular measure through. But, let us not dilute ourselves into an identity-less group of Singaporeans. The Singaporean core must remain strong, vibrant – that core must be the impassioned driving force. If we hold the reins, together, as one united people, then Singapore's definition of what is possible will continue to ensure our continued and relevant sovereignty in a rapidly changing world. Then ratios and figures are much easier to manage and justify as being to the Republic's advantage.
Page: 123
PAPERCUTS