Andrew Loh / Deputy Editor

This article is inspired by what Mr Wang wrote on his blog – a very thought-provoking entry titled, “Human rights and the Government baby incentives, Part 1”.

It led me to wonder why exactly Singaporeans would want to have kids, if they are treated as merely an economic necessity.

Mr Wang argues that the Singapore Government’s motivation in wanting to raise the birth rate is “purely economic; the aim is to generate a steady stream of future workers for Singapore Inc” – if Singapore views human rights as an ‘invention of the West”, having no relevance to us in Asia. Mr Wang cites the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) to illustrate an interesting perspective on how human rights actually can inform national policies.

I agree with what Mr Wang says.

In his first National Day Rally speech in 2004, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said:

This is a matter of values, not of incentives… We want people to have babies because you want them and you love them. It’s part of a happy family life.

Despite those words from the prime minister, however, Singaporeans have become cynical about the Government’s reasons. “It’s not because having kids will provide a happy family life”, they might say. “It’s to bolster our economic competitiveness and indeed, our economic survival. After all, no babies means no workers for the future, right? No workers means our economy will be affected.” That’s how the thought process goes. That’s what the Government says all the time. It’s all about the economy. The sweet-saccharine citation of “a happy family life” is just packaging and PR.

This is further reinforced by ministers’ public statements and Government policies – such as allowing the influx of foreigners and immigrants. Two years after the PM said it was a “matter of values”, he admitted, in his 2006 National Day Rally speech:

We are short 14,000 babies… We have to bring in new immigrants. If our population shrinks, Singapore will face a very serious problem… To grow and flourish, we must welcome those who can help us to reach our goals… That is the way to build Singapore for Singaporeans.

And of course, we all know that the only goal that matters here in our tiny island is the economic one, above all else. Why? Because, according to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, “as long as we have a dynamic economy, we can solve our problems.” (Straits Times). Do you understand now the Government’s obsession with raising the birth rate? Think: Babies = future workers = economic growth = dynamic economy = solving problems. That’s also the Government’s and the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) political legitimacy and relevance – if you’re not able to solve problems, who would want to vote for you, right?

In a nutshell, if we have money (economic growth) “we can solve our problems”, and the PAP can stay in power.

Meaning lin life

Therein lies the conundrum; The Government sees Singaporeans as workers for the economy, while increasingly Singaporeans want something more out of life than just being feeders for the economy monster.

The result is a declining birth rate because Singaporeans do not see anything meaningful in slogging away all their lives on the economic front. It’s a seemingly-endless struggle and competition which makes them hesitate and then decide against having kids. After all, if you are tired from the struggle, why would you want to put your kids through it as well? Where is the meaning in life?

That’s the key phrase: meaning in life.

It is so often nowadays that I hear my friends wonder what their lives mean. It sounds almost like a crisis. “I work 15 hours a day and I still am not sure if I will be able to retire. So, why have kids? Just do what we can, eventually die, and that’s it,” one said to me. “Why should I worry about the survival of the economy and what-not when the Government sees us as just workers for the monster? Life should be about more than just work, work, work!” says another.

A Government as obsessed with economic performance as ours cannot understand such sentiments. But even if it does and tries to come up with the solution, it will be an economic one. Thus, we see all sorts of economic incentives being offered, including subsidies and all. They have all failed.

See Singaporeans as human beings. Period.

Perhaps what is needed to solve the problem of a declining birth rate is to see Singaporeans first and foremost and always as people, human beings – and treat them as such. It is, as the prime minister said, about values.

It is about how much we as a nation value Singaporeans as human beings. Period.

And if we do, we will include considerations of the value of human rights.

As Mr Wang said:

In fact, babies are very much like Temasek’s investment in Shin Corp or Merrill Lynch. One day, they might generate good returns, but that will have to be in the very, very distant future. Meanwhile, they are just a huge, constant and bleeding economic loss.

This is not an obstacle if you view babies and parents as humans, and by virtue of being human, automatically having human rights (like those under CEDAW).

Maybe then Singaporeans will see meaning in their lives and would want children with whom they can speak of the amazing wonder of the experience of Life.

At the very least, the Government should pause and think about things outside the economic and not dismiss things like human rights casually or because of political or hegemonic reasons.

I think Singapore has reached a point where it has a lot of economic success and now it has some surplus, and it’s time to start thinking about the more human element.

– Dr Angelique Chan, Sociologist, National University of Singapore. (Channel NewsAsia)

If we are going to emulate Swedish policies on raising the birth rate, shouldn’t we also consider the Swedish approach to human rights as well? As Mr Wang so eloquently argued, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Indeed, it could be what saves Singapore from oblivion.

————-

Read also:Foreigners bolstering Singapore‘s birth rate: report” by Reuters.

Cartoon by My Sketchbook.

——————

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Long-term pass holders including migrant workers will also be eligible for free COVID-19 vaccination: Health Minister Gan Kim Yong

Vaccinations for COVID-19 will also be free for long-term pass holders, in…

SOS Bukit Brown – sorry to hear Tan Chuan-Jin's priorities

The following is a media release by SOS Bukit Brown in response…

NUH issues clarification on claims that pregnant woman was unattended for 15 minutes at EMD

A post went viral recently on Facebook about an incident at National…

与父母联名拥屋 若除名需填补回公积金户头

人力部长杨莉明前日(6日)书面答复宏茂桥议员殷丹的提问,指成年子女与父母联名买公共组屋,如要从共同拥屋权除名,那么买屋用的公积金存款就必须连本带利填补回户头。 她指为了确保会员们有充足退休金不受影响,所以会员们出售组屋时,都被要求购屋用的公积金存款,需连本带利填补回户头。 该政策也适用于那些与父母联名购屋的子女,这是因为他们一旦从共同拥屋权除名,就等同于“售屋”。 杨莉明指出,当局发现许多公积金会员申请拥屋权转让,是因为要和新婚伴侣合买组屋。 “对于这类个案,会员可先办理拥屋权转让手续,在取得新组屋的半年后,才开始公积金填补。”如果会员买的是预购(BTO)组屋,还可以延长数年。 她解释,填补回会员户头的公积金存款,也可用来偿还新组屋。会员可透过父母公积金储蓄填补,或申请建屋局和银行的贷款。 议员质询是否可弹性批准让子女豁免填补 殷丹是询问人力部长,过去五年有多少我国成年子女,在除名和父母联名的组屋时申请豁免公积金填补,以及公积金局会否考虑检讨政策,让这些子女有更多弹性,以选择让父母豁免全额填补。 过去五年,公积金局平均每年接到200份,希望在转让拥屋权时豁免公积金填补的申请。 她补充,如会员无法如期填补,公积金局和建屋局会根据他们家庭的特定枪口,和他们商讨其他选项,例如亲友是否能接受共有组屋的份额,或父母是否同意在经济许可下“大屋换小屋”。