The P65 Blog

I must confess I have not read the full text of the NMP Sadasivan’s speech (might I be so bold as to suggest to legislators that brevity is the better part of eloquence!) and so will reserve my comments for when I have actually waded all the way through the rhetoric and know what I am talking about….

In the mean time, though, the fact that the pledge – at least the ‘regardless of race’ bit – is still more aspiration than reality was driven home to me in yet another occurrence of an incident that I am afraid I have come across several times.

I have a friend in his mid thirties who is an equity strategist in a multi-billion dollar hedge fund, an MBA from a world renowned business school and owns 3 residential properties (last I knew) in condominiums along the prime East Coast area which he rents out while he lives with his newly wedded (equally well qualified) wife in a rented apartment in a modest condominium in the vicinity.

Have you built an image in your mind of the profile of this person? What race do you think he is? Hold on to that image a moment.

Well, let us see how that compares with reality. He is, in fact a Singaporean citizen of Indian origin. Like me, he came to Singapore almost a decade ago and having embraced the people, the work ethic and the culture of this country, he became ‘Singaporean by choice’. It was not a cynical decision. Both he and I felt that Singapore was the one country (and we’ve both traveled and lived in a fair number of countries) that matched our idea of what a country should be. We both share the same feeling when our flight is landing at Changi – that we’re Home.

His misfortune, though, it appears, is despite his obvious qualifications – and very down to earth demeanour – he happens to look rather Indian.

He called me up last night somewhat agitated. He’d been looking for a new apartment to rent, and his agent had short-listed a few that met his criteria. You would think that with his profile – well behaved, wealthy, excellent education, enviable job etc he would be a dream tenant. But no. He was on the phone telling me how yet again, the moment the landlord became aware of his race, negotiations abruptly ended. There wasn’t even any euphemism employed. He was told, quite point blank, that Indians were not welcome as tenants. And we’re talking about landlords who obviously were wealthy enough to own a swanky apartment in a top-end East Coast condominium. The criterion for exclusion was just one – race.

He wanted to know if I had come across such blatant discrimination before. And the sad fact is, I had. I have heard such stories a number of times. Discrimination based on race is still practiced at a personal level in our society – as is discrimination based on religion. I have heard people say with fiery conviction that they would never consider marrying someone of a certain religion. I have heard others convey that they would find it almost impossible to accept a daughter marrying a man from a certain religion.

While such sentiments are certainly not as harmful as an official policy of discrimination like in apartheid South Africa, and hopefully not that widespread in the people, the fact that they do exist and are expressed in situations such as my friend’s does give one pause.

Even the word “tolerance” has a passive – somewhat negative – connotation. “Tolerating” people with different races and faiths from us – like “putting up with” some sort of inconvenience that we just have to bear with, though we’d rather not. I would banish the word tolerance and replace with one more active, more positive – and look for a society where we don’t merely tolerate but embrace, include, and be indeed one people regardless of race, languages and religion.

When in matters of renting property, of marrying ourselves or our children it matters not what race, language or religion the other party professes, then we as one people will truly be living the pledge.

From what I have seen, we’re getting there, but for now, it probably is still an aspiration.

Dear friends who have been actively engaging my thoughts and sentiments, (TC, Oxford Dude, Angelina, Adrian, sgcynic, , Miss Liberty, Singashadow, Anlibeth, Wai Tuck, skeptic, Tan SM)

First and foremost, i would like to sincerely thank you for taking your time to read my 2 cents of personal thoughts and feelings about my views on life and Singapore as a young Singaporean.

I understand and empathize with the frustrations you go through, the bread and butter issues, i am no scholar nor do i come from a well to do or perfect family, but just like you all, I am Singaporean. I struggle with family and finances too.

I was lamenting to my friend recently that i found it extremely depressing when 90% of the comments i see here have been very angry and negative. She replied to me that Singaporeans are a spoilt and complain alot.  I found this to be justifiable considering the negativity I have received when i share my personal views. Before anyone gets all angry first.. WAIT till you finished reading my whole message!

I share a facebook post, credits to C.E below and bring to attention certain areas which jumped out at me..

=======================================================

Recently, there was an article on CNN about anonymous bloggers coming out story. They featured a few bloggers who have been anonymous until recently. They decided to reveal their true identities for a variety of reasons.

The recent incidents don’t just give us insight into how the world has changed today. In the past, we had writers write using a pseudonym because of reasons like gender. Today, some bloggers have been hiding behind the mask of anonymity for also a variety of reasons.

Recently, a judge ruled that Google had to give up the name of one of their bloggers on Blogspot. First amendment rights people are probably screaming foul!

We’re so consumed by the idea of freedom of speech, opinion and our rights that we forget something. Spidey’s uncle Ben puts it best “With great power comes great responsibility”. So where’s the power you might ask? If there’s no power in the written word, why do we have a saying that goes “the pen is mightier than the sword”, or why do we still have contracts that bear the written word?

If the written word wasn’t powerful, why did the Nazis go after German students who were writing and distributing pamphlets that went against their values?

Whether we are hiding behind the mask of anonymity for whatever reasons, we have to remember that what we write does carry power. It carries the power to influence.

I often meet people who tell me how frustrated they are that our newspapers in Singapore are censored. I smile and say that we as a society as a whole lack the maturity and the social consciousness to write and read objectively. I am glad to a certain degree that my home newspaper is somewhat censored. Even with the degree of censorship, I have witnessed how journalists here in Singapore have not been socially responsible.

So why am I writing about this now? I was recently reminded of what Martin Luther King said “Our lives will end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

This matters to me because as a trained journalist who had to take courses in ethics, law, writing, inter-cultural communications, human communications etc. I feel saddened whenever I come across a writer who totally has no respect for the written word and uses it callously.

Maybe they don’t teach what I learnt in journalism school anymore. But I sure remember that my professors taught me that as a writer, my words carried power. They taught me that because it carried power, I had to learn to know what kind of responsibility that carried.

Don’t undermine the power of the written word. Take time to process what you read, ask questions. Ask why did the writer pen down what he/she wrote. Ask what actions, emotions or thoughts can be a result of the author’s writing? Ask, on what basis did the author base his/her writing on? Ask, why should you change your point of view? Ask, on what basis are you basing your point of view on?

Good writing is never derogatory. Good writing provokes thoughts, questions, emotions, actions.

==================================================

Below are the 3 points that really impacted me when i read my friend’s post. Deep down, this is what i truly feel about sharing my views here and engaging yours as well.

1) we have to remember that what we write does carry power. It carries the power to influence.

Just as how you and I are able to share our thoughts freely, what we say has the power to influence. Every comment, every post, with it your words carry weight. That is why i always value everyone’s views and thank you for them, even the negative ones.

Ultimately, I am not sure whether it is “cool” to just agree with all the negative sentiments, or whether it is to avoid being blasted by other netizens for saying something positive about Singapore.

But the fact is that this is our country! Rather then bathe in the pool of negativity, why cant we still be objective and positive, remind ourselves about the good that Singapore has but yet still work on her flaws and see our lives and our country improve?

Any psychological research shows that a positive mind is better in any situation over a negative one. Half empty all we see is doom and gloom, but being half full we keep the faith and see this country transform into one we can be proud of to call our home. One that your children and my children, your families and mine will call Home and cherish.

2) I was recently reminded of what Martin Luther King said “Our lives will end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

Even when faced with this multitude of negative sentiments, I choose to believe that you air your views because you care about this country. Our country. It concerns our livelihood, our friends, our families. And that at the end of the day, this is our lot.

When i travel to third world countries, i always wonder why I was born in Singapore and not these other countries? Why am i given an education and my basic needs all taken care off? Why do i have so many opportunities compared to those who struggle to find their next meal? Surely I am blessed so that i can be a blessing to others.

These are the things that matter, the poor we see in our estates, the less fortunate families or even the outcasts of society. Instead of waiting for someone else to help them, why dont YOU join me and make a positive difference in their lives.

Whether it is youth at risk, the homeless, autistic children, single mothers or even humanitarian missions in third world countries. You and I have the ability to be pro-active and transform Singapore and this world.

From volunteering at a VWO, NGO, a charity or initiating a community project, I have learnt not to underestimate simplest efforts can mean so much to someone else.

3) Don’t undermine the power of the written word. Take time to process what you read, ask questions. Ask why did the writer pen down what he/she wrote. Ask what actions, emotions or thoughts can be a result of the author’s writing? Ask, on what basis did the author base his/her writing on? Ask, why should you change your point of view? Ask, on what basis are you basing your point of view on?

Last but not least, i hope with the above statement, you dear readers can see where i am coming from. Just like my friend C.E, i am someone who believes in Singapore, Singaporeans and truly I care about this country i call Home. And i want it to be a better place for myself and my children.

Yes we want to see Singapore changed, but the best place to start is with ourselves. And that these sentiments we share, good and bad, we can translate them into positive action.  And i hope you dear readers would join me in being this positive change.

“To know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived this is to have succeeded.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

I was at a community meeting recently and while discussing the issue of unemployment rate and more the government can do for Singaporean job-seekers, a friend who is a retailer stood up to raise her concern (she lamented in jest that she has been raising the same issue for many years, apparently).

She shared that she has been looking for staff for her new retail outlets, but it seems no Singaporeans would want to take it up. She recounted how those whom she interviewed turn down the job because they wanted only five day work week, no work on weekends, high pay, and staff benefits. She couldn’t fill the positions so she and her management team had to double up as sales assistants at her outlets. She turned to foreign labour to fill the positions Singaporeans don’t want, but was told she would need to hire more Singaporeans in her shops before she could hire foreigners!

It’s interesting to hear this account against the backdrop of many Singaporeans losing their jobs and turning to the government and VWOs for assistance, and yet, other retail business owners like my friend are facing the frustration of a shortage of staff.

So what is the real situation of our retail business today – are the jobs in this sector really bad? Why do Singaporeans shun away from retail-related jobs? Will business owners who turn to foreign labour to meet their business needs be slammed for not taking care of fellow Singaporeans? What can the government do to help?

Just who’s business is it anyway?

I read with great interest  the transcript of the speech delivered by newly appointed NMP Viswa Sadasivan on his maiden speech in parliament and the reply by MM Lee and education minister Dr Ng (all of which can be googled online)

I enjoyed how he encapsulated his speech through the dissection of the pledge. Mr Sadasivan brought up many points which i thought echoed the sentiments of the day that surround the many opinions my peers and myself share of Singapore. One area of his speech in which particularly stood out to me was the aspect of identity as a Singaporean, and rootedness.

As a youth in Singapore, many have complained that we have been apathetic. Perhaps in a sense that is true, because everything is already there and provided for (i sometimes take what i have for granted until i dont have it). There isnt anything to fight for (perhaps only in ecconomic sense), not like in the times of the pre 65 era where indepence peace and stability came at a price of fighting off communism, racial tensions and even colonial rule.

I am heartened that both MM and Dr Ng’s replies focused on defending what we’ve built together as a nation. Personally not having gone through the Merdeka era, i have no idea the struggles our founding fathers faced, and will never know why is it they so fiercely defend the building blocks.

Perhaps the closest glimpse i have of this struggle is seeing first hand how a young nation such as Timor Leste after 7 years is still battling in fighting within the government resulting in the people whom suffer the most (i.e lack of infrastructure, basic needs)

I agree that although we go forward, we cannot neglect our foundations, although we are building upwards, we also need to remember to build downwards.

I once remember an analogy of an ice berg, where what you see above the waters is only 10% of the ice berg whereas the substance and form and what gives it is enormity is the 90% that is below the water.

tip of the iceberg?

Contrary to many people’s views that MM and Dr Ng’s replies were less than satisfactory, i think it is important to see where they are coming from. After all, a person’s views stem most of the time from their personal experiences. Something which i will not fully comprehend as i have never shared in their personal struggles.

Overall, I personally thought Mr Sadasivan addressed too many concerns in one sitting, and perhaps this diluted the gravity of each point he tried to address.

I absolutely agree that more transparency can be given and better explanation of government policies (in a way everyday men can understand and in a more peacable and humble attidue).

For whatever reasons whether for ecconomic sense or national security’s sake the government is not as transparent as we hope on some key issues, i think we cannot take for granted the honest and upright (having integrity) government which has been the pinnacle of Singapore’s success thus far. (i say even detractors would have to agree that this reputation of being honest and having integrity is important and worth defending)

Do we need a leap of faith or do we need to be brought back to earth?

I say both is important. And with our uniquely Singapore history, somehow we will need to transcend gravity and have both at the same time.

This entry is really a response to one of the comments on my very first post, posted by Angelina. It resulted in a very interesting exchange between Angelina and Contempleteur and for those who are interested in this, just go through the comments. Angelina’s original questions are in bold.

Angelina and Contempleteur, I don’t know who you are (I’ve realized you’ve both used dummy email addresses), but I appreciate your ideas nonetheless and figured it merited a proper post:

Dear Angelina and Contempleteur,

I’m really enjoying the exchange. Angelina, it was mid-morning on a working day when I last checked this site to upload my second article, and I did not think I could do justice to your email in the midst of the short break I was taking, especially since I needed to check the proper context of some of the issues you raised. However, I need no further invitation/ provocation to dive in, so here goes

Politics:

1. Do you have any comment on Mr Goh Chok Tong’s statement that ‘Anug Sang Su Kyi is part of the problem’ in Myanmar?

1. Any person who has made the kind of sacrifices Aung Sang Su Kyi has made deserves both respect and sympathy. In my lifetime, other leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Megawati Sukarnoputri and Benazir Bhutto have had similar sacrifices, and at various points in their career, would have attracted similar sentiments.

2. The quote above, attributed to SM Goh, is therefore likely to infuriate any reader. However, true intellectual honesty requires taking any statement in its full context. It is important to understand what the person is actually saying before you choose to agree or disagree.

3. I found the following report on the PMO website which provided some context for what I suspect is SM Goh’s actual view on the issue (rather than one sentence out of context): http://www.pmo.gov.sg/News/Transcripts/Senior+Minister/Views+of+Asia+Middle+East+must+change+SM.htm

4. The actual point he was making on reconciliation appears to be that he thinks the military and Aung San Suu Kyi need to come together to arrive at a sensible plan to move forward and both are a necessary part of the solution. A refusal to engage by either party is unhelpful to the process.

5. Personally, I am in favour of a gradual transition of power myself, and the only way I can see this happening is if Aung San Suu Kyi and the military manage to find some common ground to make it happen. In order to do so, stubbornness and intransigence are often unhelpful. In negotiations, it is usually better to find something the people on the other side of the table need and to offer it to them – this appears to SM Goh’s main point.

6. The next question is what position Singapore, as a foreign ASEAN country should take in relation to Myanmar. Generally, if one is interested in assisting countries transition to democracy, I am extremely sceptical of the effectiveness of sanctions and international condemnation. It may make us feel good to condemn what we perceive as the ill practices of our neighbours, but this often just forces the rulers of the said country to dig in their heels and hold on to their positions, shutting out the rest of the world. The isolation from the rest of the world often assists the said rulers. Apart from Myanmar, the isolation of North Korea, Cuba and Iran from the international community has generally resulted in immense suffering for the people of those countries with little impact on the power of the rulers.

7. In contrast, changes, both major and minor have taken place in the outlook of various countries as a result of being welcomed into the international community. Reagan, Thatcher and Gorbachev reached across the iron curtain to end the cold war, and this process eventually triggered the democratization of the USSR and led to the ideological victory of the capitalism/ democracy. Nixon first opened the doors to China in the early 1970s, a process that slowly saw China integrate itself into and become a major player in the world community, with its people enjoying greater prosperity than they would have dreamed possible 20 years ago. The independence of India came about not only because of Gandhi’s civil disobedience, but also because he was prepared to sit with the colonial masters and negotiate terms. The example of South Africa is one that you and Contemplateur have discussed – suffice it to say that whatever the relative bargaining powers of the parties concerned, there was substantial dialogue between Mandela and De Klerk, at which both made compromises to assist the eventual transition of power.

8. Myanmar is inching closer and closer to democracy. I am looking forward to the upcoming elections and hope that it will mark the beginning of a new era. However, the transition is a delicate process and it is my deepest hope that both the military and Aung San Suu Kyi and her party would be part of this process.

2. Can we call our Govt ‘democratically elected’ if more & more MPs are nominated instead of being elected by the people?

9. Democracy takes a great many different forms in various countries. I think the key point about the UK and the US is that some of the people who make up the government may have no direct mandate from the people. This includes the key cabinet members in the US, and in the UK, the entire upper house of Parliament (the House of Lords).

10. However, in both these countries, the majority of representatives are required to stand for elections and most of the law makers were therefore elected. The same is true for Singapore. I believe that each country’s own style of democracy is often a result of its own unique history and no two countries are identical.

3. How can GRC help improve the Governance of Spore?

11. Personally, I am not sure of the extent to which Singaporeans would vote on racial or religious lines, but I am extremely sensitive to the fact that if minorities are not represented in Parliament, there is a potential risk that issues specific or unique to their communities may not get heard.

12. One danger of democracy is the ‘tyranny of the majority’. Most people forget that Hitler was originally elected to power democratically, and in a few short years, managed to carry out the most gruesome policies ever on a minority race that had been living in the country for hundreds of years. All it took was the intolerance of one charismatic individual to change a relatively peaceful co-existence that had prevailed for centuries.

13. The GRC system, in a sense, is one way to ensure that Parliament will always have some minority voices.

4. How do we get to hear oppositions’ voice if our mainstream news media are all for ‘nation-building’ (as in telling only nice stories while burying the bad)?

14. I am not entirely sure how fair these stereotypes of the Straits Times are. Quite apart from the Temasek and GIC losses, the Straits Times pulls no punches in its review of MPs, and includes interviews and quotes from opposition members. It also gives air time to individuals who wish to raise civil issues and I understand there was a fairly full coverage of websites such as TOC (the team which runs this includes a Worker’s Party member).

Economics

1. Is Economics directly correlational to quality of life of the general population of Singapore? if not, why the bother?

15. One needs to understand economic growth in its proper perspective. Developed countries may grow their GDP at 1 – 2 % a year. Developing countries on the right track may grow at figures north of 8% a year. The reality is that people feel these changes slowly, even if one if growing at the fastest rate. Your life does not get better overnight, but over the course of a few decades, if growth is steady, you will see a marked difference.

16. My guess is that if most people speak to their parents and grandparents, they will find their lives are greatly better than what it used to be in the generation before ours. I remember stories told by my parents when they were growing up in the 1950s and 1960s. Many people lived in kampongs without proper running water, electricity or sewerage facilities. Flooding was common as there was no proper drainage. Many of the parents of the children of their generation had little formal education and not everyone could read or write.

17. In our generation, most people live in HDB flats with all the basic amenities available. Most people have a basic education, and a much larger proportion have tertiary education. We face a different set of problems, but as to whether the quality life has improved as a result of sound economic management, I think the answer is a resounding ‘yes’.

2. Is it sustainable for Spore to depend largely on foreign investment, with no trading off?

18. I’m not sure about whether Singapore depends ‘largely’ on foreign investment, nor do I understand what you mean by ‘trading off’. However, I agree foreign investment has played and ought to continue to play an important part in Singapore’s development.

19. The reality about economic cycles is that as time passes, businesses and industries rise and fall. For example, 50 years ago, aviation and automobiles were young growth industries and companies such as General Motors and Ford were growing companies. Now, these same companies are on the brink of bankruptcy but new companies such as Microsoft in the 1980s and 1990s and Google in this decade are rising stars.

20. The question for Singapore is what we do in relation to the inevitable booms and busts of capitalism. As old businesses become obsolete or die out, it will be vital for us to continue to attract enough new work for our people, and it will not be possible to develop this purely organically. With our small population, it will be impossible for us to continuously develop successful new industries from scratch – the law of probability is against us. In large countries like the US, for every company that makes it like Google, there are likely to be numerous failures – but they have a large enough population that they can afford these failures. Singapore does not have that luxury.

21. However, with a generally well educated population, it would be possible for Singapore to provide the necessary support for international businesses looking for expansion. Thus, as capitalism brings new businesses to the fold to replace old ones, we can provide these new businesses with a skilful, educated and hardworking population to assist in their expansion. In so doing, we provide Singaporeans with jobs that will help them maintain and hopefully improve the standard of living they have become accustomed to.

Q3. Is it good for our economics to have state owned businesses?

22. The concept of a state-owned business, in so far as it harkens to the socialist days of Europe and the Communist bloc in the Soviet Union, naturally brings to mind ideas of inefficiency and general economic decline. However, I think there is a fundamental difference between a ‘state-owned’ and a ‘state-operated’ business.

23. The situation today is a very different one from the old communist bloc days. The governments of many countries, including Singapore, China, Dubai and Malaysia, have formed companies to manage the funds of the State. In this regard, it is becoming increasingly common for sovereign wealth funds of these countries to own stakes in various companies. It is also common for sovereign wealth funds to invest more heavily in their own countries because they understand these businesses better – any investor would do that, including Warren Buffet.

24. One important difference is that when the State is an investor, through a sovereign wealth fund, it is just like any other shareholder. It holds the management of the companies in question to account like any other shareholder. If they do not perform, they can be asked to leave. In this sense, the state, as investor in a business, plays a wholly different role from the state as the operator of business, which was under socialism/ communism. The focus on profits, at least I the state is an intelligent investor, should remain notwithstanding that it owns a large stake in the business.

On Social issues:

Q1. Who should help look after the disabled, the ill, the pensionless elderly widow and the orphaned in society?

25. I agree with Contempleteur that the family is one of the most important building block of society and should be the first port of call for anyone in distress. Having said that, the State should also provide a safety net for those who are truly in need.

26. This is a tough balance because an overly generous welfare system would result in abuse. In many parts of Europe, there is an extremely generous welfare system, and although this has been cut back over the years, it still remains. For example, I have heard of university students who are able to claim unemployment benefits during their summer holidays, as long as they claim to be looking for a job, then use the proceeds to go for holidays. The taxpayer suffers for this and pays income taxes that are more than 2 to 3 times what would their counterparts in Singapore would pay. This is in addition to sales taxes which could be more than double our GST.

27. I think in Singapore, the idea is to consider all those who are truly needy on a case by case basis. The aim seems to be to provide people with enough support to meet their daily needs, but not so much that it takes away the incentive to work. Of course, if the person has no capacity to work (which may be the case for the examples you have picked above), then the benefits tend to be more generous.

2. Is it good for mothers of very young children to have fulltime work and leave the care of their young to non-professional minders who are not even required to pass basic first aid?

28. This is a decision every mother faces, not only in Singapore, but across the world. In Singapore, just as in UK, US and Europe, it is possible to get professional trained minders, but this is usually prohibitively expensive. The more common result is for women in all these countries to take a less demanding job and spend more time with the family.

29. I should add that I am also one of those men who sees no reason the woman should bear the entire burden for raising children, and thinks there should be no issue if, in a particular case, we have a house-husband rather than a house-wife. However, the reality is that in most cases, it is the woman that makes this choice.

30. In Singapore, the availability of domestic help gives women more options. Personally, I would not want to leave my children purely under the care of domestic helpers alone, but if, for example, retired grandparents are around to assist, this may in fact be quite a practical solution that permits the woman to pursue her full time job. My own mother was working full time the whole time I was growing up, but happily, my grandparents were often around to take care of me while my parents were out.

31. Personally, this is a decision every family should be free to make on its own. I’m not sure this is a matter for state involvement or legislation.

Anyway – that’s my two cents

Cheers,

Vikram

On Monday, I spectacularly failed my driving test. In the UK you’re allowed up to 15 minor faults – of which I only received 2…and zero serious faults. Despite having a lesson on Saturday where I managed to do my left hand corner reverse manouver with no problems at all….during the test I was brought to the same ‘corner’ to carry out my manouver and I started panicking when traffic flow started to get heavy and magnificently ‘over-steered’ to such an extent that half the car ended up on the wrong side of the road – and there I was thinking that taking up an ‘automatic’ license would be much easier than going the whole hog of taking up a ‘manual’ license….anyways the reason why I’m sharing this is not so much about the test…but to share one of the many discussions I had with my driving instuctor over the course of the last 4 months or so.

Martin specialises in ‘auto lessons’, other than the likes of ‘anti-manual’ drivers such as myself, the bulk of his students are from the disabled community – and its a mixture in terms of the disabilities, some are physical and some are mental. For those with mental disabilities, he has to make a judgement on whether they would be a hazard on the road for example he had a schizophrenic student who refused to look at the traffic lights and in the end he had to make it clear to the student’s family that he should not be on the road….as for students with physical and mobility issues…he has had his training car modified to allow the steering wheel to be replaced with a ‘joystick’ type steer….the accelarator can be changed to the left side of the brake pad depending on which leg had greater strength etc.

Some of his students have their own cars/vans and I found out that in order to properly ‘kit’ out such vehicles can cost up to £60,000. This in a country where you can get a brand new Suzuki Swift for just under £10,000 – and second hand cars at an even lower price. I remember being really shocked when he told me the cost but he added that for the majority of the disabled drivers who need special vehicles, the cost is covered via government and charitable grants.

He also added ‘but that’s what equal opportunites are’

And I am in complete agreement with him. By providing members of the disabled community with such vehicles they are given an element of mobility in their lives…this allowed them to become independant….get into employment etc and lead full lives just like any other able-bodied person.

However special schemes are not just extended to the disabled community, the Welsh Assembly for example has been proactive in encouraging women and people from ethnic minority communities to apply for public appointments. The aim is for public bodies to reflect the make-up of the community that they serve – and they have provided training sessions to help applicants from under-represented groups fill up application forms and learn interview techniques. Forms are available in large print, braille and in Welsh.

Equal opportunities isn’t about giving people an advantage, it is about levelling the playing field so that elements that you have no control over e.g. gender, race, disability  do not put you at a disadvantage.

We need to be careful that we do not lose sight of our aim to level the playing field and start using those very same elements as an advantage for some. Promotions and job appointments should be based on talent, ability, track record etc any other way will defeat the principles of equal opportunities and meritocracy.

PS I’ve been booked for a re-test for end of September. Hopefully I’ll be able to pass on my 2nd try!

I was at the National Day Preview and during the event, the voice-over appealed for the audience to make a contribution to Community Chest by filling up the angpow that came with the NDP Fun Pack. For a couple of hours before the start of the programme, volunteers from the Community Chest went around the gallery stands with large collectiom boxes to be passed through the audience from one end of each row to the other end.

As I was filling up the angpow, I was thinking to myself that this year’s collection must be bad since the economy hasn’t been doing well, and everyone is tightening up their purse strings. There’s already so much to worry about – where got time to think about charity?

To my pleasant surprise, the box took a long while to reach me. All around, I could see individuals and families dipping into their wallets to pull out the familiar red coloured note and inserting into the angpow. I thought I would be one of a few people, but as it turns out, I’m but one of the many who put an angpow into the passing box. And the best part of it all – I didn’t sense that there was a social pressure, or a “face factor”, or that the commentator did a good job in soliciting (in fact – the voice over sounded very bland, amateurish, and was not polished). People gave because they wanted to.

It reminded me about a remark a friend made about Thai people several years ago, about how even the poorest of them all would make a special trip to the temple and give generously to charitable causes (such as giving the poor a proper burial). I remember smiling in silence and lamenting to myself – if only I could say the same about Singaporeans.

I’m not sure just how much Community Chest raised that National Day Preview weekend, but I was moved by what I saw that day. What I saw that day gave me a sense that we are a people who may be preoccupied with advancing ourselves, but even in difficult times, we will still look out for others.

I look forward to meeting that same friend again so I can share what I saw.

I was reading the online articles on PM’s Lee National Day Rally speech and his focus on race and religion. Deep in my heart, I believed it’s a timely reflection. This brought me back to this incident not too long ago which involved a promotion exercise.

A total of 5 guys were promoted to a supervisory level , which was a new post. Formerly all of them were rank and file workers. Although promotions are stipulated clearly in Industrial Relation Act as Management Prerogatives,us unionist never see it as a hindrance to highlight to the management if a worker is due or deserve a promotion. Back to the 5 guys, naturally the union was happy that all of them were promoted after a year long negotiation to create that new supervisory post. Out of these 5 guys who were promoted, 4 were Chinese and one was a Malay. This was when the problem started.

Some of my Malay colleagues weren’t happy with the result of the promotion exercise. In total, there were another 4 Malay guys (with additional certification and experience in covering supervisory duties) who also applied for the post. Two of the Chinese guys who got promoted has got no additional certification while the rest possessed one. Moreover, both the Chinese guys were reluctant parties when it comes to covering ‘acting duties’ as supervisor when they were still rank and file workers. I heard some accusation of racial bias although the union didn’t received any formal grievance letter (a standard procedure) on this issue.The union was in a dilemma.

As a unionist, irregardless of colour or nationality, if he is our member, we do not challenge the promotion. I felt that I needed to be very tactful in addressing this sensitive issue. As with all promotion exercise, each candidate goes thr’u a vigorous interview session and selection procedure. Coincidentally, the interviewers comprised of a multi-racial panel. I reasoned with some of the unhappy workers that although the two guys may not have the qualification, probably they did better than then rest in the interview. I downplayed any racial overtones or racial bias in the issue.

I encouraged them to keep upgrading themselves and to look at the bright side.End of the day, if you believe in the meritocracy system, your hard work will get noticed and paid off. There’ll be no reason for the management not to promote you, I told them.

I eventually managed to convince them and after a few weeks, the issue was a thing of the past. I was glad that the issue doesn’t escalate into something serious and the workers accepted it in a sensible and matured manner. But I told myself, we must never be complacent. What happen if we faced a similar issue in the future?Are we prepared? Even if there is racial bias, how do we prove it? Or are we in denial that it doesn’t exist in workplace?

From the way I looked at the issue above, its probably a case of over-reacting on part of the workers , thinking race was the issue here. It’s normal to be emotional when you have very high hope on achieving something but failing in the end

It’s quite similar with the recent no-Malay-NMP issue when it started appearing in Malay newspaper sometime back. The statistics had proven that there were years when we had no Malay NMP. Nobody lifted a finger then. I know we do have leaders or capable people in the Malay society but if they refused to be nominated as an NMP, can we blame the system?

Hi everybody,

A short introduction of myself. I’ve always wanted to write a journal/blog to share my involvement/insights in the labour movement or Union work , HR policies and a thing or two about leadership . It’s not that I don’t give my comments on the net but it’s mostly on music blogs or forums (my other favourite pastimes).

For those who knows me in person, I breath and live about union work whenever we talk about the worker’s plight.

I joined as a union member in 1996. Dissatisfied with the plight of my fellow colleagues and wanting a change, I decided to give a shot at the union elections in 2003 at my workplace. I’ve been actively involved in the union work since then.

2007 opened a new chapter in my union work. After joining Young NTUC, we formed our own youth chapter with a total number of 13 committee members from various branch in my union.

I’m technical officer in the power generation industry and also currently studying part-time at UniSim.

Really looking forward to see this P65 blog grow!!!!

I am a third generation Singaporean. Apart from my paternal grandmother who was born in Malaya, the rest of my grandparents migrated to Singapore prior to World War 2 from various parts of Kerala in India. The people from Kerala are known as Malayalees and our language is Malayalam. According to the Singapore Malayalee Association website, there are about 30,000 of us in Singapore, which makes us an extremely small group.

Even within the small Malayalee community here, there are different religious groups all with ancient traditions. As Kerala is a coastal state on the South West Coast, it attracted a wide variety of people who came to trade and the religions practiced in Kerala include Hinduism, Catholicism, Christianity (including Anglicans, Mar Thoma and Syrian Orthodox), Judaism and Islam. There is also evidence that Jainism and Buddhism once flourished in Kerala, though these groups may have since been absorbed into the Hindu fold.

I had a somewhat divided Malayalee heritage. My father’s side of the family was Hindu and my mother’s side of the family was Christian. I understand that after they met and decided to get married, they both decided to put religion aside and bring up their children in secular fashion.

Although I was not religious myself, religious festivals were very much a part of many of our broader family events. I remember going to both temples and churches for the weddings and funerals of my relatives. Our family used to celebrate Christmas, Deepavali and Onam (a Malayalee festival) with our wider family. Sometimes with a party, other times, with simple family gatherings. I played the role of page boy at my aunt’s wedding in church and was one of the people assisting in the last rites of my Hindu grandparents. 

To me,  I was engaging in these traditions out of respect to my extended family – the traditions were important to my family, and my famiy was important to me,  so I honoured the traditions. They were also wonderful opportunities for the broader family to get together.

Accepting differences was easy for me and as such, it was not difficult for me to accept, relate to and make friends with people of different races and religions because it was an inevitable part of my upbringing and my mixed family heritage.

However, this was not always the case in my family. At the time my parents were planning to get married,  in the 1970s,  I understand there was concern from both their parents that they were marrying out of their religious group.

My father’s Hindu roots trace back many hundreds of years in Kerala. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nair)  Likewise, my mother’s side of the family was Christian and attended both the Anglican and Mar Thoma churches, the latter tracing its origins as a Church to Jesus disciple St. Thomas. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar_Thoma_Church)

I am guessing it was a difficult decision for both my parents to make at the time – in a sense, they both had to break from their past to build their future. However, after some years of courtship, and many ‘meet the parents’ sessions, my respective grandparents warmed to the idea and gave their support to the marriage.

Some compromises had to be made.  I believe my parents had to wait for some of their younger siblings to get married first,  in case their marriage outside their respective communities ruined the odds of their siblings getting married.  To allay the concerns of both sides, they got married in a civil ceremony rather than a religious one.

By the time I was born, I saw none of these early tensions.  I have memories of childhood in the 1980s, with both my grandfathers enjoying their drinks and nuts together. My grandmothers too got along very well together, and both were excellent cooks.   They had obviously found common ground to relate on,  notwithstanding their differences. 

I remember receiving nothing but warmth and affection from both sides of the family while growing up.  Subsequently,  one of my uncles married a Chinese lady and now has two teenage children, and one of my cousins is also about to marry a Chinese lady. They have also been welcomed into and accepted by the family.

I wonder whether my own experience may be a microcosm of the larger Singapore story over the last three generations. During my grandparents’ generation, the first immigrants, people stayed very closely within their communities, as defined by both race and religion. There was general cordiality, but ideas such as marriage outside the narrowly defined community would have been unthinkable.

My parents, part of the post-war baby boom, were born in British ruled Malaya and grew up during the early years of independence with friends from diverse ethnic groups.  Inter-racial and inter-religious marriages were more common, but still required some work given the values of the previous generation.

In my generation, and certainly with my background, I have grown up mixing freely with people who have very different racial and religious backgrounds, in completely ‘colour-blind’ fashion.

At least from the experience of my family,  I realized this religious tolerance was something that had to be developed with conscious effort in the generation before mine.  It seems to me that it was done when my parents and grandparents managed to find common ground despite their differences.

I certainly hope that this is a process that will not be reversed or lost in my generation.