~ By Tan Kin Lian ~

I read about the priority scheme for Primary 1 registration with mixed feelings. While I am happy for Singapore citizens who get priority over permanent residents (PRs), I have empathy for the latter as they will now be discriminated against. Of course, the PRs enjoy not having to serve National Service, but there is a saying "two wrongs does not make a right".

Generally, all forms of discrimination are bad and should be avoided. Discrimination is negative and leaves a bad taste among the people who are discriminated against. Where possible, it should be avoided or kept under the radar – so that it does not become a hot issue.

In our National Pledge, we aspire to build a society based on "equality and justice" – and our society includes permanent residents and foreign workers who deserve to be treated equally and justly, as much as possible.

I support one type of discrimination based on income, i.e. higher-income earners should pay a larger share of their income through taxation. I also support the levy that has to be paid to employ foreign workers, and would extend this levy to permanent residents, if this is deemed as necessary.

Apart from the difference in taxation and levy, I prefer that all residents in Singapore be treated equally and justly on their access to education and healthcare. We do not want to see a foreign worker denied of basic treatment because he or she is not insured for any reason, such as being temporarily out of work.

For the same reason, I do not like the "means testing" that is being applied by the hospitals on citizens. Why impose this burden on the hospital workers to explain to a citizen why he or she should get a higher or lower level of subsidy based on the type of house they live in?

Let me now deal with the issue at hand – the limited places in primary schools of top choice. The root of this problem is the competitive environment, even before a child goes into primary school. It is unfair that some people can get access to better schools compared to others – I find this to be another form of unfair discrimination.

I can understand the concern of parents who want their children to do well but a discriminatory and self-centred system is not good for our society.

Almost 60 years ago, I attended a primary school near my home. It was a neighbourhood school that attracted students who lived nearby. There was no need for the parents to worry about arranging a school bus or to drive their children to school. Most students walked to the school and walked home after school. They fared well in life – some become doctors, actuaries and top civil servants.

The discriminatory practices adopted in our government policies over the past five decades have brought us to the present day situation. While we have some positive aspects in our society, including our economic well-being and high quality of infrastructure, we also have the negative impacts such as the relatively poor quality of work-life balance, high cost of living, widening income gap and low birth rate. Do we really want to continue this trend? 

I feel strongly that we need to adhere to the key pillars of equality and justice so that a better society can be built for the people of Singapore.

 

Image Source: Channel NewsAsia

________________________

You May Also Like

HDB to upgrade 230,000 flats with more contemporary and better quality fittings

Residents whose Housing Development Board (HDB) flats are eligible for upgrading under…

Govt says S'pore will gradually reopen its borders; Netizens disagree and implore Govt to reconsider the decision

Singapore would gradually reopen its borders to enable Singaporeans to conduct essential…

孙雪玲形容假消息如新病毒,为《防假消息法》辩护

內政部兼国家发展部高级政务次长孙雪玲于昨日国会中发表声明,并将假消息形容为“新病毒”,并以“新疗法“一词为法案辩护。 她认为,假消息如同新病毒一般,会迅速传染而且影响面积广泛,目前我国正受到网络假信息的感染,而对付“新病毒”则需为其提供有效的“新疗法”,目前提呈的法案就是打击假消息的新疗法。 她表示,日前与高级政务部长唐振辉及工人党领袖毕丹星,一同参与了英国国际假新闻与假信息委员会听证大会,与八个不同国家代表一起探讨如何应对假信息。他举例说明,目前网络假信息是全球面临的现状,许多国家如法国或德国也有专门针对假信息与数字平台制定新法律,对其进行监控。 她说“所以我们的举措并不另类,打击网络假信息也是十分常见的,新加坡和其他国家一道,正在努力对抗这种新病毒,保护国家的健康“ 她认为评估新法案的好坏应探讨两方面:第一,新法案是否比现有的法案好;第二,新法案是否对症下药及有没有副作用。 称新法创新,也更符合需求 另一方面,针对刘程强所提出的质疑,孙雪玲也逐一回应,认为部长之前已解释了现有法律如新加坡广播法是23年前实施。当时并没有网络社交媒体与平台,故无将网络媒体平台纳入该法中。而新法案的好处恰恰可将网络媒体平台也纳入其中。 再者,以往的措施是以屏蔽信息为主,而新法案则是以更正假信息来澄清事实,收到更正假信息指示的网络媒体平台只要将真信息附上,便可免于刑事制裁。 孙雪玲说 “这是第一个创新的做法,因为其他国家所采取的主要措施是要求网络公司把网络信息撤下。“ 她认为,相比之下,新加坡所提出的法案更加包容,也更加符合新环境的需要。 而新法案就如同多了一盏灯,提供了更多信息来做参考,来判断一件事情的真伪。所以新法案不仅不会影响言论自由,而是提供了民众更多的渠道,获取信息。…

总理调高退休、重新雇佣年龄 淡马亚揶揄形同鼓励“工作致死”

今早,《联合早报》以《承前启后  克服天地局限》为题,报导总理李显龙的国庆群众大会演讲。总理阐述将在2021年起,逐步提高年长雇员公积金缴交率、未来100年气候暖化问题以及政府将确保学前教育费减低。 针对总理的国庆群众大会演说,新加坡民主党很快就录制视频回应,该党主席淡马亚揶揄调高退休和重新雇佣年龄,形同鼓励“工作致死”。 他说,国人原本期待总理能提出强而有力的建议,应对当前瞬息变幻社会和地缘政治的挑战,但不幸的是国人再次失望。 他表示,总理声称国人要工作到70岁, 但是根据新加坡移民关卡局2018年的统计,因主要死亡原因去世,华裔的死亡年龄中位数(median)为78.3巴仙、巫裔71巴仙以及印裔68.7巴仙。 淡马亚反问,总理也没有拿出理据,能够证明新加坡人难道真得并无意享受退休生活?没有探讨国人究竟愿不愿意花时间享受他们奋斗的果实、含饴弄孙、去做义工或者是有闲暇时间去旅行、玩玩麻将等等。 “反之,我们的总理和部长们坚持要我们一直工作到70岁。” 淡马亚说,曾经询问过前任人力部长,是否放心让一个已年届70岁的脑科医生做手术?还是乘搭由70岁老司机驾驶的公共巴士?但是该部长坚称,这些年长雇员可以接受在培训。 但是,淡马亚曾询问这些巴士司机和脑科医生,他们不认为自己到了那岁数还能再学习新事物,他们更希望能领取足以填补公积金的退休津贴。 教育方面,李显龙指政府目前在学前教育上每年10亿元的投资,下来几年将翻一倍。李总理指出,政府也将确保至少80%的学前教育学额由政府资助,与住房和医药一样给予高比率津贴。 不过,淡马亚指出,这反而让人想起新加坡人常说的自嘲谚语:“给你个鸡翅,拿走你整只鸡”。…