dorm1

While the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) was focused on legislations to regulate foreign workers dormitories which have 1,000 or more workers, Members of Parliament (MPs) were more concerned about the living conditions of those in smaller dormitories.

In Parliament on Tuesday, MOM Minister Tan Chuan-jin was urged to extend the scope of the Foreign Employee Dormitories Bill to include smaller dormitories and other accommodation for these foreign workers.

The Bill, which was being read for the first time in Parliament, will require operators of bigger dormitories “to get a licence which requires them to take steps to control the movement of workers, provide social and recreational facilities and have quarantine plans in place, in case of an infectious disease outbreak, among other requirements”, the Straits Times reported.

Tan
Tan

Mr Tan explained that the Government is introducing legislations to regulate the bigger purpose-built dormitories because more such dormitories will be constructed in the coming years.

The Government has announced that nine more dormitories will be built in the next two years, which will add a further 100,000 beds to the existing 200,000 beds in the 40 dormitories currently in operation.

According to reports, there are some 770,000 work permit holders in Singapore, excluding domestic maids who live-in with employers.

About half of these, according to news reports, do not need dormitories because they either commute between Singapore and Malaysia, or live in HDB flats or quarters in private estates.

The remainders are in sectors such as construction and marine who need dorms to live in.

MPs were thus more interested in the immediate situation these workers are in, given that some of them are housed in deplorable and makeshift dormitories across the island.

Altogether 11 MPs spoke in the debate in Parliament on Tuesday, and raised concerns over recent media reports of the atrocious living conditions of foreign workers.

Workers’ Party MP for Aljunied GRC, Pritam Singh, suggested that the Bill included “a separate category or categories of licencing for premises that operate as smaller foreign employee accommodation below the threshold number, so as to bring many more dormitories and places of accommodation for foreign workers under a licencing framework.”

He also suggested that some dormitories should be run by the Government, to lend support to small and medium enterprises who might find the costs of putting their workers up at purpose-built dormitories expensive.

“The entry of the Government into this sector can be modelled along the entry of Ministry of Education into the kindergarten business, which is to provide good pre-school education and more importantly, to catalyse improvements in this sector,” Mr Singh explained. “If deemed appropriate, a fraction of the foreign worker levy can be used to establish such dormitories with a subsidy for small companies that show real and sustained productivity improvement in their operations.”

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Ang Mo Kio GRC), cautioned that the government should not adopt a “double-standards” policy whereby larger dormitories are subjected to more stringent rules than smaller ones. This, he says, may result in standards in these smaller ones to slide.

Other MPs highlighted that conditions at smaller dormitories tend to be worse.

Mr Singh raised recent incidences where foreign workers not only had to put up with crowded conditions but who had also lost their lives when disaster struck in these dormitories.

He recalled recent news reports of how, for example, on 6 December 2014, “four Malaysian foreign workers who were employed as cleaners died in a fire at a Geylang Lorong 4 shophouse, in Singapore’s worst fire in 10 years.”

tampines“The Malaysian Star newspaper, STOMP and a Today article reported that premises was occupied by some 100 foreigners from China, India, Bangladesh and Malaysia, partitioned into 11 units of rooms each occupied by about 10 people,” Mr Singh told the House.

He also raised the incident which was reported by the New Paper on 29 December that eight blocks of HDB managed flatted factories at Tampines Industrial Park A, comprising of workshops, furniture manufacturers and warehouses – were operating as “secret dormitory” for 1000 foreign workers, in clear violation of HDB rules.

“On 21 November 2014, the Straits Times reported that a spot check by the Migrant Workers’ Centre found more than 50 construction workers from Bangladesh and India crammed in two small apartments in Selegie Road with the report adding that the ‘men slept shoulder to shoulder, amid rotting food and soiled clothes’,” Mr Singh said.

selegie

There were also “several reports on unhygienic and overcrowded foreign worker housing” including “an incident of a Punggol HDB construction site where hundreds of workers had to use choked and broken urinals.”

Another press report covered the plight of about 5000 workers living at Tuas View Square “in factory-converted dormitories infested with rats and mosquitos.”

Singh
Singh

Mr Singh said that while foreign workers stay in a variety of places, including temporary housing at construction sites,  these are “all unregulated by an omnibus act of parliament.”

And this, he added, is “notwithstanding the spaghetti bowl of guidelines and restrictions governing such accommodation from the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF), Public Utilities Board (PUB), the Building and Construction Agency (BCA), National Environment Agency (NEA) and the Housing and Development Board (HDB).”

According to a Straits Times report last August, it said that “overcrowding is common, where bosses cram in more workers than the stipulated maximum.”

“There are too many makeshift shelters for government officials to conduct checks,” the newspaper said.

And in another report in November on the lack of proper dormitory space for foreign workers, the Straits Times said there are “tens of thousands of workers who continue to live in deplorable conditions” in makeshift dormitories.

However, Mr Tan told Parliament that while he acknowledged “the anecdotal examples of poor living conditions”, he “stressed that this does not mean the situation is dire across the board,” the Straits Times reported.

“I think it is important for the House not to have the wrong impression that there is widespread mistreatment of foreign workers,” Mr Tan said.

geylang

In the meantime, no arrests have been made with regards to the deaths of the four foreign workers in a fire in a dormitory in Geylang on 6 December.

The police had said that it was investigating the incident.

Subscribe
Notify of
5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Afghan Star – risking their lives to sing

After 30 years of war, Afghan Pop Idol is taking the nation by storm. Jewel Philemon.

为减少糖尿病比例 我国或成首个禁含糖量高饮料广告国家

为了能够制止糖尿病比例上升,我国成为首个禁止含糖量非常高的包装饮料的广告的国家。在含糖量高的饮料必须贴上“不健康”的提示警告。 无论是瓶装、罐、二合一或三合一的即溶饮料、汽水、果汁、酸奶等饮料,若含糖量超标,将需换上营养包装。 《海峡时报》报导,卫生部高级政务部长唐振辉今日(10日)宣布上述消息,并表示鼓励换包装是为了民众能够作出更明智的选择,同时也促使业者将饮料的含糖量减少。他指出,包装上将会贴上含有不同颜色的标签表示含糖量等级。其中已有30多个国家开始实施这项措施,例如智力在实施该项措施后,其不健康饮料的销售量降低25巴仙。 当然含糖量并非是饮料上唯一成为不健康饮料的因素,其中也包括其他的因素,如饱和脂肪。而不健康的饮料将会贴上“不健康的标签“,但针对健康饮料可以用该标签作为广告。唐振辉表示,鼓励生产健康饮料的业者妥善使用该标签,为自己的饮料大力推广。 唐振辉表示,每天多喝250毫升的单链结合蛋白(SSB)会增加高达26巴仙的糖尿病风险。日前,也有调查指出,新加坡人每日都会从含糖饮料中,摄取的超过六茶匙的糖分,同时也导致了新加坡主要健康问题。 当局也将随着法国的措施,推出以字母和颜色区分的标签,共五个等级,A级为最健康、E级为最不健康。目前当局策划将强制C到E级较不健康的饮料印上标签,A级和B级则无需这么做。E级高糖饮料则将被禁止在所有大众传媒打广告,包括电视、网络、纸媒或是巴士站等户外场所。 专家:糖税有利于抑制民众过多摄取糖分 尽管一直在劝导民众减少摄取糖分,但许多业者在饮料上并没有降低至每250毫升5茶匙的平均含量,甚至部分饮料还超过了每250毫升8茶匙的糖分,而高含糖饮料又尤其受到民众欢迎。 对此,卫生部与健康促进委员向4000多名公众、厂商和专家等,征询有关四大减糖措施的看法包括强制性贴上营养标签,宣传限制、征收糖税、以及禁止高糖分饮料。七成以上的人支持强制性贴上营养标签,逾八成的人支持分级标签。 在质询期间,饮料业者曾强烈反对对高糖饮料征收糖税或实施禁令,并声称不会因此而减少糖的消耗。而也有人提出该四项措施除了针对饮料以外,也应该针对所有含糖食物。 卫生部指出,有人担心即使禁止了含糖饮料但消费者可能也会用其他食物来代替糖分所需。 新加坡国立大学公共卫生学院院长Teo…

Business ethics – honesty while making profits

We have to cultivate a strong sense of business ethics, says Tan Kin Lian.

State Courts Building at 1 Havelock Square closes after 44 years; New State Courts Tower fully operational from 16 Dec

The iconic State Courts Building at 1 Havelock Square closed its doors…