It's not the PRs who need to be managed better
Thursday, September 9, 2010 at 4:17PM The idea to "encourage" (interpret that however you will) more Permanent Residents to take up Singapore Citizenship was mooted by Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, who said that PRs who reject the offer will not get their PR status renewed. The initial estimate of 10% of the PR population who will be "encouraged" was walked back by SM Goh's press secretary, who clarified that was "not a target", but rather for "illustrative purposes".
In my opinion, this is nothing but a populist stunt aimed at placating the voting public's escalating anger at the PAP government ultra-liberal immigration policies. This is what Singaporeans want to hear, that Permanent Residency should be a stepping stone to citizenship instead of a springboard to another country, that their numbers should be controlled, and that there should be a price to pay for being a PR and not taking up citizenship.
There are good cases to be made for the first two, but I am very curious about the last. The perception is that PRs get a better deal compared to citizens, but even that is not a solid argument, given that citizens really do get more, on paper, out of public subsidies. Only two things come to mind when it comes to the difference between PRs and citizens: taxi driver licensing and National Service, and I doubt the former is that big an issue, so it boils down to military service, or rather, continual service even as a civilian. And it obviously does not help that the distinction between PRs and transient workers is increasingly blurred over time.
But encouraging PRs to take up full citizenship does not remove the perception that NS disadvantages the citizens, nor does it make the Permanent Residency scheme any more modern or suitable for Singapore; balancing the need for strong national defense with the needs of the citizens and necessity to attract talent should be the goal, and that means a lot of policies need to be evaluated. The fact that SM Goh's press office walked back his statements bear testament to the political understanding that cosmetic tweaks to PR and immigration policies are untenable and impractical.
Some will argue for a fully professional uniformed services, which is something I'm in favour of, and certainly more equitable than forcing PRs to serve NS. I am also supportive of a minimal residency period before granting PR status, as well as opening up the possibility of dual citizenship, which seems to be a taboo topic even in our non-existent debate on immigration policy.
But without any information, there cannot be rational discussion. The conditions for successful PR applications appear to be very inconsistent; I know a PhD holder whose skills are not widely available in the world, let alone Singapore, and who has resided here for more than 2 years, whose PR application got turned down twice. And then there are some others who have set foot on this island for barely 6 months and were practically gifted PR status on a silver platter.
The inconsistencies alone are worth looking into, because no one knows how the decision to approve or deny PR applications is arrived at. We might as well be rolling dice, or use a Magic 8 Ball, and arrive at the same decisions, which makes it one massive farce of a national policy; that is how "black box" our policies are.
The PAP government wants us to trust their decision that the status quo is the best they can do. I would say everyone — citizens, PRs, transient workers — deserve better than blindly putting our trust in processes that are not transparent or consistent. Only when we have open processes can we have fruitful debate, and hope of tweaking or changing existing policy.
It's not the PRs who need to be managed better, it's our processes that govern the PR scheme, and the people making the decisions behind it. Giving more power and oversight to the same people who are making this scheme a policy and political bomb, to deny renewal of PR status, only appeals to those who have been blindsided by populist anger, and accomplishes nothing but provide a superficial appearance that the PAP is trying to do right by Singapore's citizens. And that itself is an injustice that must be righted at the ballot box.
Reader Comments (2)
Well argued.
If you look at the ethnicity of those granted and rejected PR's, you will be able to see a trend.