Another voice about Singapore.
I ATTENDED a private reunion dinner with a dozen families recently
and left with a first-hand insight into one of Singapore's foremost
problems.
It set me thinking. This year, the republic celebrates its 40th
National Day; what will it be like in another 40 years?
How much of today's Singapore and Singaporeans will remain?
The ladies that evening had gone to the same school in the late 60s
and were now mothers (and a few grandmothers) with children aged 20
to 28.
As the night wore on, I found out that the majority of their
offspring were graduates or studying in universities, half of them
overseas.
I soon learned that most had every intention of remaining abroad.
The parents, mostly conservative people, had spoken of it
matter-of-factly, as if it was a natural thing to do. From a
handful, the number of Singaporean emigrants has turned into a
torrent as globalisation intensified and jobs became harder to come
by in Singapore.
Some are looking for more space, a freer lifestyle and bigger
opportunities - what they think smallish Singapore cannot
give.
All this - rising migration and a low birth rate - has become Prime
Minister Lee Hsien Loong's biggest challenge, totally different
problems his father encountered.
It will change Singapore's demography and its future.
Consider this: every year, 6,000 to 7,000 Singaporeans leave to
settle down overseas, including many professionals. This is 15% of
today's annual births, probably the highest proportion in the
world.
One website survey, which is unverified, has put Singapore's
average outflow at 26.11 migrants per 1,000 citizens, the second
highest in the world - next only to East Timor (51.07).
Fortunately, the loss is replaced by the influx of foreigners,
numerically speaking. For every one who leaves, three or four
outsiders flock in to take his place.
For Singapore, it will mean a larger population and a weaker
national cohesion. The "foreign" content will steadily increase as
the "local" portion declines.
These recent developments offer little hope for improvement:
* Nearly half of all Singaporeans do not think they need to be a
resident to be emotionally rooted to the country.
* Six out of 10 undergraduates said they wanted to go abroad to
live or work mostly for better economic and job prospects, and
enjoy a higher quality of life with less stress. About 7%
attributed it to a lack of sense of belonging.
* An ACNielsen poll showed 21% of Singaporeans, mainly
professionals, were considering emigration, half opting for
Australia and New Zealand.
* Between 100,000 and 150,000 Singaporeans are studying, working or
in business in foreign countries; leaders fear that many of them
will not return.
This failure to build a strong-enough sense of belonging is ironic
considering the state's rapid growth.
In 40 years, it has shot from a backwater to one of Asia's richest
economies, with living standards envied by many.
The dilemma has led to calls for a redefinition of the word
"citizen" to include Singaporeans who have become foreign citizens
or PRs, if they retain a strong emotional home link. This is short
of dual citizenship which is rejected by the government.
In recent years, I have detected a steady shift away from an
inflexible attitude that condemned all Singaporeans who leave to
improve their fortunes abroad as "quitters" or, worse still,
"disloyal" citizens.
It is now accepted that they are not the same as people (a much
smaller number) who have abandoned Singapore for good.
In fact, the opposite may be taking place.
Instead of condemning them, many conservative parents and some
younger political leaders now believe that having its new
generation working long periods overseas, without losing their
loyalty, should be encouraged.
What is making it a necessary evil is the rapid change in the
global - and Singapore's own uncertain - economy, rather than any
domestic argument of right and wrong.
Singapore's future lies beyond its shores and Singaporeans can best
serve their homeland if they are able to seize opportunities
abroad.
Anyway, unlike before, the country can no longer provide jobs for
every qualified youth.
The change in official attitude is evident. It wasn't too long ago
that it set a cap on university places for doctors and lawyers for
fear of unemployment.
Today, with the wider horizon in mind, the goal is to provide top
education to meet a global demand.
"While loyalty to one's own nation is a virtue, the search for a
better life elsewhere is not, in itself, a moral sin," Hansen Yeong
wrote in a letter to the press.
Older leaders like Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong may not have
changed their strong feelings about "quitters" but they have
stopped criticising them in public.
Theirs is one of acceptance of the inevitable and moving to derive
some benefits from it.
A result has been organising ex-Singaporeans in committees in
several world cities to contribute ideas and promote business ties
with Singapore.
Some critics blame the ruling party in part and say unless it frees
more of its control on society, things will worsen.
Sinapan Samydorai, president of civil rights group Think Centre,
said: "It's the failure of the government to understand the will of
the people that leads them to move overseas."
There are, however, other reasons for optimism that the situation
will eventually right itself.
Firstly, the state has set a birthrate target of 50,000 compared to
the present 35,000. It is providing fresh incentives worth more
than half a billion dollars a year, a powerful nudge to reluctant
couples.
Some of those who take up foreign PRs are likely to return home
eventually with a more rounded view of life.
Fong, a woman who had spent five years in Amsterdam, said online
that she now had a better understanding of the good and bad, both
of Singapore (she once disliked) and the West.
Sharing the view was university student Tyco who had lived in the
UK for 15 years since eight. He found it hard to understand people
who say the grass is always greener elsewhere.
He said he was ready to return and rough it out even if a job is
hard to get. "It's home and I miss my chicken rice."
(This was first published in The Sunday Star on Jan 30, 2005)
