Same old argument about the PROs (revving up economy by providing
the much-needed labour, both the high skilled ones that we lack and the
low-skilled ones for jobs that locals shunned ) and CONs (competition for good
jobs, homes, overcrowding of public space, compreomise social cohesion, and erosion of
national identity) of admitting too many immigrants, This national identity
argument is of interest here as it brought up the cautionary eg of Dubai, where
only 10% are locals. Our govt has always emphasised the need to maintain a
strong Singapore core, made up of citizens who are born and bred here, as these
are the ones most in touch with our values and have a direct stake here. This diminishment of our core has in recent
years been exacerbated by low marriage rate, low fertility rates (1.21), brain drain, and increased
influx of immigrants.
The importance of this core group is seen in the colourful metaphor employed in article 2. Only the core of the apple is linked to the stalk, which connects the fruit to the tree (and its roots) from which it is derived. Hence, the day Singaporean citizens become a minority in our country which is awashed with immigrants, is also when there is nothing to hold us to the tree we sprung from (i.e. we become a hotel, not a home).
Article 3 is about the same issue….It argues against the
need for Singapore’s population to reach 6.9 million in order to sustain our
economic growth. A lower population of 6
million (hence lesser need for immigrants) will suffice, as seen in examples of
small successful cities like Toronto and Stockholm. The way to achieve this
without overpopulating Singapore and admitting too many immigrants is to
restructure our economy, to wean off cheap foreign labour by moving into less
labour-intensive, more capital intensive industry that capitalises on
technology to raise productivity, i.e. move up the value chain. Note again the comment on fostering identity
so that Singapore does not become merely a hotel, but a home.
Sample qn: The key criterion for good government is how well the economy is managed. Is this a fair assessment? (Cambridge 2012)
 |
| article 1a |
<< Home