Familiarity is what makes you feel at home in Singapore

by Bertha Henson

SO IT seems some young people at a dialogue yesterday were asking why they should settle down in Singapore when the cost of living is so high. My answer would be: Our standard of living is pretty high too. And good luck on finding yourself a nice paying job that would similarly pay for the living standards here plus all the other benefits of safety, efficiency, and cleanliness that comes with life in Singapore.

Some people will be shaking their heads at my very impolitic answer and respond with examples of a better life elsewhere. Okay sure. But, hey, a view is a view okay?

I liked Minister Chan Chun Sing’s reply on whether citizenship should be reduced to a transaction: What has this country done for me lately? I think the issue deserves further probing. People don’t usually phrase discontent in terms of what the country has done or will do – but what the Government has done or will do. The transaction is between the government and the governed, not quite between the State and the people.

There is a handout mentality that has seeped into the people’s consciousness despite the G’s welfare allergy. You see it when people argue over why they should get more or the same subsidies as others, when they quibble over means-testing criteria or when they bemoan the lack of benefits, which is usually euphemistically dubbed as “support”. The G must be seen to be scrupulously fair to all citizens, regardless of wealth or housing type, before anyone can truly, truly be happy. In fact, it is the lowest common denominator mentality, or a dog in the manger approach.

Mr Chan gave an anecdote which illustrated his point that social cohesion can only come about if people accept that some need more help than others. He juxtaposed two cases who turned up at one of his Meet-the-People session: An elderly man asking for ComCare aid and an angry newly-wed couple who did not qualify for additional housing grants because of their combined income of $12,000 a month. Was the couple chastened by the example of the man who earned just $1,000 a month? Perhaps. But their original complaint was probably based on “how come other married couples can get and we don’t get?”. Plus, I assume, the final resort of all: “Aren’t we Singaporeans too?”

It is bad. And the G is much to be blamed for this, just as much as the people, because of its overwhelming presence in Singapore society. It accounts for the way the people here always think and say that the G should do this or that, or fix this or that whenever anything goes wrong – never mind that civil society or the private sector would be more able to respond than the G. It also comes from the way the G positions itself and its portrayal in the media, as if it must always have the first – and last – word. I have always thought the G should change the nomenclature from Government to State. It is not the G which will be paying for this or that programme but the State. When people say that the G is “very rich” or has “a lot of money”, they really mean money that belongs to the State, that is, all of us.

I’m sure people will say that the distinction will be too subtle but I am suggesting the G newsmakers make a start, especially with the Budget debate. There must be a greater consciousness on the part of the people about where the money is coming from. As Mr Chan said: “If every one of us wants to take the maximum for ourselves, because we believe we are entitled to it, then we have a challenge. No matter how much resources we have, it will never be enough.”

Now, all of this is being said in the context of building a national identity, which cannot be “transactional”, based on the benefits of citizenship or even, as Mr Chan put it, defined through markers like race, language, or religion. He suggested ideals such as meritocracy and multiracialism.

Frankly, I’m not even sure we need any kind of markers at all. We just need to feel that we are “at home” in Singapore. We need to know that we can walk anywhere in the country and feel that we belong here. Familiar faces. Familiar buildings. Familiar ties.

Okay, I know people will point to the foreigners in our midst, still increasing in numbers but at a slower pace. I can only say that they are needed economically and that the G is well aware that there is a tipping point when foreign-ness will displace familiarity.

I am a Singapore citizen because I feel at home in Singapore. May I always feel that way.

 

Featured image IMG_7578  by Flickr user Brian Jeffery Beggerly. CC BY 2.0.

If you like this article, Like the Middle Ground‘s Facebook Page as well!

For breaking news, you can talk to us via email.

The post Familiarity is what makes you feel at home in Singapore appeared first on The Middle Ground.

- Bertha Henson