A Whole-of-society Approach Towards Addressing Discrimination

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Apologies for the delay. After a full day of discussing racial harmony and social cohesion, I think this Adjournment Motion topic on addressing discrimination does appear to parallel much of what we deliberated and segue quite nicely to the end of the Parliamentary day.

Mr Speaker, when we speak of discrimination, it can stir unease and discomfort. It can be confronting to our own biases, shine light on our unconscious prejudices and it tends to be a topic that needs to be tread sensitively at times. Amidst the diversity of our own backgrounds, ethnicities, cultures, upbringing and life experiences, all of us have blind spots and shortcomings relative to the view of others around us.

On that basis, all of us also consider different positions because we are indeed varied and diverse ourselves. Sometimes, we converge in our viewpoints. At other times, we may disagree and vehemently so. However, we must continue to be active in reaching out to the others, especially if they are different, take effort to know them well and make a genuine attempt to build trust amidst our differences.

Pandering to reductionist stereotypes, painting a group or community with a broad brush and dismissing negative experiences as an exception rather than a lived reality, can funnel us towards a worldview that is unjust, prejudicial and ignorant. We must protect our society against discrimination if we want to continue to be a society that is cohesive and one of high trust.

Last month, we debated in this House on the Workplace Fairness Bill where we legislated against discrimination at the workplace through 11 protected characteristics. This is a step in the right direction, but the debate over the Bill also brought up a few key points.

Firstly, the work towards addressing discrimination cannot possibly be said to start and end only at the workplace. Often, the root of any discriminatory view would have been seeded much earlier in a person. It arises from a broad-based societal view that informs how we see our neighbours, our classmates, our colleagues and people who are different from us.

Secondly, characteristics of potential discrimination are not necessarily exhaustive to the 11 that are listed in the Bill. Though the characteristics are already broadly scoped and covers most groups, it is more important that we, as a society, develop a genuine willingness to appreciate diversity of individuals in our midst and possess a readiness to see them for their strengths, rather than focus on the differences along the lines of the said characteristics.

And thirdly, not all decisions that go against a particular individual or a group are a function of discrimination and injustice. In the context of the workplace, it is necessarily a competitive hiring process and employers have to take a view that considers their business needs as well. Protected characteristics aside, really, the spirit of such decisions must be underpinned by fairness and transparency in the hiring process, benchmarked against ability and value proposition of the prospective employee.

Similarly, in any society, especially one as diverse and multicultural as ours, I think it is important to acknowledge in this Adjournment Motion that not all decisions will always be in one's favour and where they are not, they are not necessarily a function of discrimination, per se.

How then do we stem discrimination more effectively? In fact, we do want to celebrate our differences; our respective traditions, our heritage and cultures; they mean a lot to us. We also want to harmonise our rich diversity and we want to draw collective strength from all backgrounds, perspectives and ideas.

With these differences, however, there will be some tension and propensity to recognise that we are not the same, that we, too, are filled with our own biases and sometimes, prejudice can rear its ugly head. Certainly, discrimination is not something we can sweep under the carpet nor pretend that it is not there. As a society, I think we do reasonably in balancing this, compared to many other parts of the world that is filled with much polarity and prejudice today.

It remains a work in progress and something we certainly cannot take for granted or leave to chance. I offer five ways for us to consider in addressing discrimination as part of our forward-looking aspiration as a young nation that espouses justice and equality as deep rooted values in our national pledge, no less.

First, it is important that our work against discrimination starts young and in our schools.

Our efforts to expose our young to the varied life experiences of others, whether they be of individuals with disability or special needs, of different races, religions and cultures, or of different age groups and caregiving roles must start in school.

I now wish that when I was in school, I had met someone like my learned and hon friend, and fellow Nominated Member of Parliament, Mr Ong Hua Han, earlier. Not at a cursory hi-bye level, but really to get past any initial awkwardness and have a meaningful conversation and friendship at depth, to learn more about his view of the world from the chair that he sits and appreciate better the genuine struggles that I may have taken for granted.

My view is that if more of our students have the opportunity for such exchanges with people who are different from their own lived experiences, their ability to challenge their own stereotypes will change more easily and society will be better for it in time. Among others, this could be related to disability, mental health, racial or religious identity, language, nationality or different socio-economic status.

On this note, I also wonder if there is scope to improve the opportunity for growth and leadership for minorities and the disabled in our schools. How many head prefects have there been in our schools where it came from someone who was a minority or disabled? Can one imagine a student in a wheelchair, notwithstanding his or her physical limitations, but with an inspiring leadership ability to also be the class chairman?

If there was a younger version of Singapore's most decorated Paralympian and former Nominated Member of Parliament, Ms Yip Pin Xiu, could or would she be considered as her school's swim captain or part of the leadership committee of her co-curricular activity?

Second, we can and must do better in telling more stories of success and challenge more robustly discriminatory narratives. We must empower minorities and marginalised groups through mentorship and guide them to seize readily available opportunities. We should make attempt to amplify their success stories to challenge any negative stereotypes that present a false view of their actual potential and ability.

This is because role models are powerful and important to inspire others and to open up pathways to help people believe that they too can do it. When one starts from a position of being discriminated against and representation from that particular group is limited at the onset, the tide can only turn when we facilitate examples of success and affirm our stand as a society, through lived examples and stories, that discrimination is not okay.

In this regard, it does two things.

First, it gives an example and confidence to those at the margins and from minorities that they too can succeed. Whether we would like to admit it or not, what discrimination does is that, over time, it suppresses and pigeonholes groups to a diminished role rather than allow them to flourish and fulfil their real and true potential.

Stories can be powerful in breaking that mindset, especially among those who hesitate not for their lack of ability, but for a lack of self-esteem and confidence in themselves.

Second, when we tell enough of such stories of success, it reminds the remaining majority to confront any long-held discriminatory biases that do not hold true. For example, in the area of disabilities, when we hear of the incredible stories and achievements of those awarded the Goh Chok Tong Enable Awards over the years, one cannot help but be inspired by what these individuals have achieved in spite of their life challenges. Among the prior recipients are an architect with projects not just in Singapore but in China, India and the Middle East, a chef at a Michelin star restaurant and a banker, all of whom struggle with some form of disability but have achieved much the same, if not more, than many of us.

Third, we should strive for more common spaces that allow broad-based interactions and reduce opportunity for marginalisation of any particular group. Could we encourage more sports and common activities where disability matters less or does not matter at all to the outcome of the activity? If I had a go at e-sports or a game of chess with my hon friend, we would see ourselves as equal in the game. In fact, I may not stand a chance.

It is the case that for sports, specifically, the Paralympics, as a movement, has been an enabler for inclusivity and participation for those with specific impairments. However, I think we could do more to promote activities where everyone has an equal and good chance at enjoying and succeeding in that activity without concern of a handicap or a differential ability. It gives us room and space to also have conversations and experience one another as equals. This is something I think we can do better to explore.

Additionally, for traditional and cultural-based events, the practical and honest truth is that, more often than not, it is championed by participants of the same ethnic or cultural community. By an overwhelming majority, it is likely that in activities, such as the Chinese Orchestra, Silat, Sepak Takraw or Indian dance, it is participated by specific groups of individuals.

So, could we encourage more cross-cultural participation in our schools or community activities and challenge the urge to silo these activities within a narrow band of participation? Is there any way to better foster diversity in participation and encourage a wider inclusion for such activities?

Fourth, beyond the workplace, it is important that we strengthen efforts to address any gaps in our legislature and policies.

In the last Sitting, we discussed workplace fairness; and in this Parliamentary Sitting, we also discuss issues related to racial harmony and how we will not allow nor tolerate discriminatory behaviours or actions of hatred and ill will on the basis of race, to take root in our society. We also have parallel laws for religious harmony today.

Beyond the law, perhaps, it would be helpful to also look at other sectoral practices with potential smirks of discriminatory practice as well.

For example, how can we better improve the state of insurance policies for individuals who are disabled or inflicted with mental health conditions? In relation to refusal, loading and exclusionary criteria for insurance plans, are individuals with specific disability and mental health conditions assessed fairly or are there instances where decisions are taken too conservatively such that insurance coverage is unfairly onerous or even impossible?

It needs to be the case that if we are serious about eroding discriminatory practices, we should continue to review and be ever circumspect about our legislative positions and policy frameworks to encourage systemic parity and fair access, especially for marginalised groups.

My fifth and final point, Mr Speaker, is a call for the Government, being the largest employer in Singapore today and one that permeates influence in a variety of sectors relating to society, to take the lead in challenging discriminatory narratives and for itself to shape positive ones proactively, simply because it has the remit, scale and opportunity to do so.

It has been the case that the Government has been forthcoming towards greater representation of minority communities and marginalised groups, but I think we can do more. I am sure the examples I share will require more study but in the spirit of wanting to aspire to remove discrimination entirely, I think the examples that follow are worth some thought.

First, imagine how the worldview of a young student can be shaped and informed, for the better, in my opinion, if inclusive hiring practices and accessibility support is available in our schools such that it allows even for a wheelchair-bound principal or teacher to educate comfortably in our classrooms? Or how stereotypes are challenged when a teacher from a minority community teaches the second language of the majority in Mandarin, or vice versa?

Second, if we consider that the Government has shifted to be more inclusive now in all of its functions, could it potentially mean that National Service, as an example, would be possible for a male amputee or one with a disability but who is otherwise well, functional and able to serve the country in a non-combat role?

I would venture that this is not a far-fetched idea where remote technology, cybersecurity and digital systems form a strong part of our defence and security strategy, and not all tasks require the full extent of physical ability. If this were possible, would that not signal to others about our seriousness to be a cohesive and inclusive society and how important the institution of National Service is for us as a symbol of universality and collective unity as a people?

Third and finally, it bears considering how widely representative and diverse the leadership at all levels of our Public Service is today. Is there a lack of representation in certain sectors and can we do better? If there is a lack, I think it is important to study this and to find ways on how we can encourage more broad-based participation from minorities or groups at the margins so that there is access to a diversity of views for decisions taken in Public Service. When hiring and representation is broad-based and inclusive, then there is also opportunity for greater diversity in leadership to emerge from the Public Service. Ultimately, this benefits Singapore as a whole.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, we are not immune to bias and prejudice. We are products of different experiences and surely, we want to be able to celebrate our own unique identities and cultural backgrounds. However, it should not be that we ever allow ourselves to divide as a result of that difference. We should not allow our blind spots and stereotypes to propagate discriminatory practices due to our ignorance of the other.

We may prefer sameness and familiarity in our comfort zones, but we must also recognise that there is strength in diversity and a richness to that.

Most paintings, Mr Speaker, are beautiful because there is much diversity and a celebration in the conglomerate of colours that make up the painting. Even in monochrome colours, a skilled artist plays with a variety of tones and textures. It takes skill, a lot of work and training to flow and blend the different parts of a painting to achieve the beautiful end result.

If paintings were all made with a very broad stroke of one colour, little tone and no texture, and we make a harsh assumption that all other forms did not, could not or must not fit into the painting, we allow discrimination to take hold and prevent us from adding colour to our lives and from making it more beautiful and enriching for ourselves and for the people around us.

I urge all Members of the House to consider how we form our biases today and where our blind spots could be in hope that we could work together towards eradicating all manner of discrimination, whether they be in the corridors of our Housing and Development Board flats and our homes, at work in our offices, among students in our classrooms or just in our everyday conversations. [Applause.]