Source: Terry Xu

by Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss
Straits Times reported that “Ground efforts” see donation of 1.3 million reusable cloth masks to our migrant workers.
After reading that ST report, it has now occurred to me that the two previous national distribution of free masks did not extend to our migrant workers.
Why did the Government issue free masks to one group of local residents (Singaporeans or non Singaporeans who have home addresses) but left out another group of local residents (migrant workers)?
In the two earlier island wide rounds of mask distribution, residents with home addresses (with no distinction made as to whether Singaporeans or non Singaporeans) were eligible to collect the free masks. As migrant workers do not have any “home addresses”, so this large group of local residents did not feature in those exercises, even as other non-Singaporeans who had home addresses were eligible to collect the free masks.
Mask-wearing is not only for the personal protection of the individual, but has now become a key national defence strategy against the virus. So much so that mask-wearing was made mandatory with effect on 14 Apr 2020. The Government even warned that non-Singaporeans caught breaching these rules might have their work passes or permanent resident status revoked.
I wonder how the migrant workers would have been expected to comply if they were not eligible to collect free masks at the two earlier national mask distributions? I suppose the Government was (is?) leaving it to the employers (or whoever) to do the needful i.e. to purchase masks for their migrant workers.
I should use the present tense “is” because according to the ST report, the masks currently being distributed to our migrant workers are not Government-issued, but donations from philanthropic resources.
Of course, better late than not that this gap is being plugged.
What is at stake is both the personal safety of the individual as well as the need to ensure that the national defence line is not breached.
Perhaps the Government should and could have played a bigger and more intervening role, and at an earlier stage, to ensure the protection of our migrant workers against the virus. This is ironic. Our Government has often been criticized for being too intrusive and overly interventionist in many other civil and private citizenry areas.
I do not think we will ever have a cogent explanation for why our Government left out our migrant workers in the national free mask distributions. This is just one of many mysteries.
Granted, hindsight is 20/20. But even as we look forward to focus on solutions, I think it is beneficial to look back to learn from lessons taught by past errors.
In this regard, it bears repeating that our migrant workers are a part of our community. It is erroneous to regard “them” as a separate community from “us”. If we hold on to that erroneous thinking, we do so at our peril.
1st Mask Distribution was 1 – 9 Feb 2020:

“The Government will give more than 5.2 million masks to over 1.3 million households. Each household will get four masks. All local households in private and public housing estates will be eligible.”

2nd Mask Distribution was 5 – 12 Apr 2020:

“The Government will be distributing one reusable mask to all residents with registered home addresses.”

14 Apr 2020:

“It is now mandatory to wear a mask when stepping out of the house, with some exceptions.”
“Individuals who are caught refusing to wear a mask will be fined S$300 on their first offence, while those who flout the rule a second time will be fined S$1,000. Egregious cases will be prosecuted in court.”
“Foreign residents caught breaching these rules might have their work passes or permanent resident status revoked.”
“Now that we have distributed the mask to everyone and generally people have started to adjust to the new requirements or the advisory, we are making it mandatory for all.”

19 Apr 2020:

“masks will be distributed to 400,000 workers living mostly in dormitories and 250,000 domestic helpers”

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

防火安全修正法一读 500旧楼或强制安装警铃消防喉

防火安全修正法案昨日在国会一读,其中要求所有建筑物必须安装重要防火安全设施,直接影响了500栋建立于70、80年代的老旧建筑物,以及一些如医院和疗养院等高风险建筑物。 防火安全修正法令中提到需要修正的部分有三大类,即加强建筑物的防火安全;更好地使用民防资源,让部队能更专注于处理高风险的环节;为了让业界更了解防火条例,简化监管程序。 赋予民防部队更大权限 修正部分赋予了民防部队更大的调查和执法权力,在加强建筑物防火安全方面,强制要求所有建筑物业主增添防火设施,包括那些老旧建筑物和高风险建筑物。 而供应商和生产商必须获得证书,证明受管制的产品符合防火标准,否则将被指控为使用或是促使他人使用违例材料。 若修法通过,民防部队将强制要求业主为包括办公室、工业建筑和购物中心等,在1991年或2002年消防条例实施前建设的建筑物中,安装警铃系统和消防喉。 在有关条例前建设的建筑物一般没进行过增建和改建工程,且面对着如住户密集或高年龄层的住户等高风险。 因此,民防部队需要酌情评估如何翻新有需要的建筑物,并在必要情况下允许业主采用不同的解决方案或更长的时限。 民防部队也能够直接进入涉及触犯条例的场所、调查任何涉案人士等,对违例者采取行动。因此若他们发现建筑物内存在严重的火患风险,如居住区过渡拥挤、逃生到被阻等,可在首次发现时,无需发出任何消除火患危险通知书(Fire Hazard Abatement Notice)的情况下,就对业者进行提控。…

Singapore’s GDP growth drops to 0.1% in Q2, lowest since 2009’s Great Recession

As the world’s economy takes a deeper dive as it prepares for…

【冠状病毒19】全球疫情正恶化 谭德塞忧一些国家出现自满

世界卫生组织本周一称, 全球新冠疫情正在恶化,过去10天中有9天各国向该组织报告的新增确诊病例数超过10万,7日新增病例数为疫情暴发以来最高。 各国向世卫组织通报的病例多达700万例,近40万人死亡。 6月7日,7日新增病例中近75巴仙来自10个国家,其中大部分集中在美洲和南亚。 但他也警告,在情况好转的国家,“最大威胁就是自满”。 研究结果显示,全球大多数人仍易感染新冠病毒。世卫组织继续敦促各国密切监测疫情发展,特别是在一些国家开始恢复举行各种大规模集会的情况下,以确保疫情不会反弹。

Massive fire at Jurong Island involving oil tank, visible from mainland.

An oil tank caught fire on this afternoon on Jurong Island. The…