the following is a series of email correspondences between a TOC reader and Ministry of Health:


Email from TOC reader:

I am writing to you in the capacity as a concerned citizen of Singapore. I am one of the many senior citizens who regularly visit KhooTeck Puat Hospital. I am an Indian who speaks the Tamil language.

In one of my visits to the Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, I noticed that the clinic was labeled in English, Chinese and Malay. The lack of labels in Tamil for all the clinics alarmed me as Tamil is one of the four official languages and yet it was not given its rightful place among the other languages. This cultural insensitivity made me feel marginalized by association.

I had written to the hospital’s feedback unit and I received a reply from a Mrs XXX, the Chief Operating Officer/Quality Service Manager, on the 12 April 2011. The letter stated that they had taken note of my concern and they would work with the relevant departments to look into the matter.

However, about 3 months after the letter, I had visited the clinic in Khoo Teck Puat Hospital again and to my absolute horror, they had taken care of my concern in a unexpected manner. They had removed the Malay wordings from the clinics. This is aninsult to my query and both languages.

Is the hospital making an official stand that all are equal in Singapore but the hospital views some more equal that other.

I am well aware that hospitals are given autonomy in many areas. But should this autonomy include the marginalisation of minority languages. It would have cost the hospital just slightly more to add the labels in Tamil and this course of action would have created an inclusive environment. In a singular removal of the Malay labels,thehospitalhighlighted how it rather save pennies than earn goodwill.

I am wondering on what the official policy was for the Ministry of Health on the marginalization of minority languages?

Warmest Regards
XXX

Reply from MOH:

Dear Ms XXX,

The Government believes in an inclusive approach to maintain interracial harmony and social cohesion in Singapore. We do take your highlighted feedback about KTPH seriously and have checked with our hospital on this matter.

The service directory in KTPH’s main lobby is displayed in all four languages to benefit all Singaporeans. Patient greeters serving at the lobby complement these signages by actively directing patients and visitors to their destination. KTPH also encourages all their staff to pro-actively assist visitors anywhere in the hospital if they appear lost or require assistance.

At the clinics, KTPH made the decision to limit signages to two languages to avoid clutter. The choice of languages, English and Chinese was determined based on the hospital’s customer profile. These language signages are complemented by a boarding gate concept using alphanumeric coding like C31, B55 or A82 throughout the hospital to aid those who may not read both languages.

We hope that we have managed to address your concerns.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
XXX
for Quality Service Manager
Ministry of Health, Singapore

TOC reader’s reply to MOH:

Dear Mr XXX,

I am confused on how Khoo Teck Puat’s choice of eradicating clutter over following the four official language policy is a sign of maintain interracial harmony and social cohesion in Singapore.

An inclusive society is one which makes every single citizen feel part of the social fabric. It does not marginalise groups just because they are small in numbers.

To quote you, “The choice of languages, English and Chinese was determined based on the hospital’s customer profile. These language signages are complemented by a boarding gate concept using alphanumeric coding like C31, B55 or A82 throughout the hospital to aid those who may not read both languages.”

If I was an old Indian who only read in Tamil then, I should be satisfied that the need for clutter free environment supersedes the need to include me in society. I should be happy that I have things displayed prominently in one place (well you are a minority so 1 is more than enough). I should be elated that all I have to do is ask for directions and people will help me (well you are a minority so this is as far as we can go).

What I derive from all this is that, Malays and Indians are important but their numbers are too small so ‘we [the organization] should not bother’. Please do feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood the message.

My concerns have not been addressed (a brush off is not addressing one’s concerns).

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

Holiday gift from Scoot and Klook for victims of tour agency closure

It was reported on Wednesday how a 68-year-old cleaner, Madam Teo Ino…

Online users disappointed with LTA for only now considering to ban PMDs with no safety certification

Following a series of fire incidents involving personal mobility devices (PMDs) that…

年轻时有骑脚车被撞后逃经历 余振忠冀探讨完善脚踏车道、提升道路使用者醒觉

前非选区议员余振忠: 个人代步工具(PMD)近日由于一些“错误”的原因频频上头条。个人代步工具一开始较低调,但随着陆交局2013年为了能够鼓励步行与骑脚踏车,而开始有所增长。最后,当局于2017年时通过《活跃通勤法》,允许个人代步工具用户及送餐公司使用行人道,并且限速每小时15公里。 自此,行人道意外大增,也促使政府数度反复政策,直至今年11月5日起,电动滑板车才正式禁止在行人道上使用。 那我作为一名驾驶者、脚踏车、行人以及个人代步工具用户,我分享我个人看法。 我也是偶尔使用个人代步工具而已,那是我女儿的,她平常用来通勤到她距离不到一公里距离的上班地点。当然,在电动滑板车禁令发布后,由于路线无法与自行车连接后,她索性将之兑换成现金。比较可惜的是,这确实是她上下班最便捷的方式,而且我也数次使用她的个人代步工具,用于短途行程,过程都相当顺利便捷,而且没有出现过任何事故。 与此同时,自我年轻开始,我也是一名脚踏车骑士,除了可以做运动,它也可以让我通勤。我对于骑士上路的安全性一直相当担心,因为我们的道路本来就对骑士非常不友善,而且开车司机往往相当不耐烦。我有此担忧,也是因为我年轻时曾发生过严重车祸,当时我仍在上大学,正在我家附近,勿洛地区附近骑脚车。一辆载着工人的罗厘飞快地从我身边掠过,擦撞我脚车的侧面,也把我撞倒在路上。 年轻时骑脚踏车曾出车祸 当时我明显听到工人以福建话向着司机表示,“撞倒了,快点跑”,是的,就是所谓的肇事逃逸。一切发生在电光火石间,我来不及看见车牌号码,我的脚车手柄也损毁了,身上还带有伤痕,但庆幸没有任何骨折。在惊吓后,我将手柄放回去,再推着脚车回家。自此之后,我变得相当谨慎。换言之,我也会开始降速。 当我加入国会时,我针对脚踏车道与共享道路课题提出更多建议与呼吁。我记得在我其中一次的发言后,时任淡滨尼集选区议员伍碧虹向我透露,她听到我的发言后感到欣慰,因为有更多议员为骑脚车的人发言了。她表示这段时间来,只有她一人在倡导这件事,而当时的淡滨尼社区被誉为是新加坡首个脚踏车市镇,拥有比其他社区更多的脚车道。 然而,无论是在我、还是她或是其他人的反映下,政府给予的回应是,“我们确实有在新加坡大部分地区设立公园联道”。是的,这是一项相当好的休闲设施,但它能解决日常通勤工作、购物或载孩子上下课吗?不,多数都无法做到,所以还是必须回到危险及不友善的道路上行驶。 脚车用户通勤、出行的不便 因此,当我每次看见国家发展部为私人地产拨出资金进行升级时,我就纳闷为何他们不考虑提升脚车道呢。据我所知,弗兰克园(Frankel…

狮城成亚太区第二劳碌城市 东京位居榜首

调查显示,仅次于东京,新加坡成了亚太区最劳碌的东南亚城市。 据悉,该项调查时基于研调公司Kisi的数据所进行,由Instant Offices再度分析。根据Instant Offices调查显示,东京列为榜首,而新加坡紧随其后,第三名则是邻国马来西亚首都吉隆坡。 该调查分析40个国际城市的数据,工作强度评分指标包括通勤时间、上班时间、工时、每周工作的时数以及休假天数。 其中工作时数最长的城市为吉隆坡,约每周46小时左右、而新加坡则位居第二,约每周44.6小时. 此外,东京的通勤时间为51分钟、而新加坡则是44.5分钟;而新加坡的每周上班时间则超过48小时,名列榜首。 比起亚太地区拼搏的精神,澳洲则显得相对悠闲,据结果显示,悉尼与墨尔本的每周工作时数为39.8小时,比起亚太地区的城市更显宽松。 然而,世界快乐报告(World Happiness Report)和世界价值观调查(World Values…