This is our country, our home - we do not have anywhere else to go. Indeed most of us would not want even if we have a choice. But then, why should we? This is our birthplace - where our grandparents, and for some, like myself, our parents came to start lives and homes. This is where we have friends and our rootedness.
All the talk, and some more rowdy than we had wanted or expected has missed the fundamental point. We are descendents of immigrants too. We have been, and remain welcoming to foreigners. Our behavior, as I have been explaining to many foreign friends is defensive - of our way of life specifically.
But why this reaction against them. I am not just talking about over the loss of jobs or livelihood. That is quite understandable if not reasonable. A friend said it best when he gave the example of our overcrowded MRT trains - it is that our personal spaces have been encroached. He compared it to Japan where overcrowding is a common occurrence too but the people respect the boundaries. They keep their basic civilities.
What we are up against is the little things that are negatively changing our living conditions - speak gently (read - not scream) into mobile phones, make effort to be hygienic - (wear some kind of deodorant), insist that we speak in a language because they did not or could not learn English in time. The Singapore that we are familiar with, and one that we so look forward to as a 'developed' society is moving away from us.
So it is with some relief that I listened to PM announced the measures to underscore even further, the Singaporeans First Policy. We need to have 'positive discrimination' - it is a term used some 2 decades ago by then President of SAFRA, our former foreign minister George Yeo when he explained why NSmen must be given their recognition for defending Singapore - when questioned over the benefits proposed.
We must as a people reassert our way of life. Not in a belligerent way but help our foreign friends living in our midst realize that they can add much color to our tapestry but not impose their bad habits on us. Policies that are being re-looked need time to take effect. We must assure them that we are not xenophobic but a famously tolerant society - but we are an intelligent too - taking in the good but rejecting the bad.
The media both mainstream as well as social, can play a critical role in this aspect - we need to highlight positive examples of value-add in the foreign inflow but also flag bad behaviors that upset the social equilibrium that we work hard to achieve.
I was asked recently how this Foreigner-Singaporean divide will play out. Some aspects that had been superseded are unfortunately irreversible. These will take time for adjustments, and hopefully incident-free. On the whole, we need at least 5 to 10 years for the kinks to even out. I am not referring to the completion of the new flats or mrt lines. Those hard power. We need resilient soft power to work it's way in the current fabric of society.
Monday, August 15, 2011
It's About Ownership (Letter to Forum Page - (Published)
I can fully empathize with Ms Jacqueline Wong on her unpleasant experience with the bank regarding the interest on her loan.
My experience with another bank is equally frustrating. I was strung through the whole gamut of service - branch, officer and phone calls to customer service centre. Yet, the matter still saw no light.
While it is fine and good to spend millions of dollars on training to improve service quality as well as the even more on flashy advertising campaigns and branch renovations, organizations must recognize that it takes just a simple act to erase all these efforts - staff not taking ownership of customer needs.
My experience with another bank is equally frustrating. I was strung through the whole gamut of service - branch, officer and phone calls to customer service centre. Yet, the matter still saw no light.
While it is fine and good to spend millions of dollars on training to improve service quality as well as the even more on flashy advertising campaigns and branch renovations, organizations must recognize that it takes just a simple act to erase all these efforts - staff not taking ownership of customer needs.
National Service (Letter to Forum - unpublished)
The Editor
Forum Page
The Straits Times
Ms Looi Pek Hong spoke for all Singaporean parents in her letter of 12 August 2011. My siblings and I wonder how our parents dealt with the stresses of sending the 5 of us through our NS and subsequently 'reservist' training. Each of us have our own personal stories that could have been the 'phone call' or 'visit by a soldier' in the wee hours of the night that she alluded to. For this reason, our hearts go out to the family members, especially the parents of our fellow Singaporeans who died in service.
It is therefore quite right and understandable that National Service evoke such strong emotions amongst citizens. NS is not just a duty - for some, unfortunately, it is also a sacrifice of life. It is also for this reason among others that many make all kinds of attempts to avoid NS.
But for those who have served, NS is about our fundamental duty as Singaporeans. It is the place we build bonds of friendships that last a lifetime. It is also the best 'university of life' - where we learn about human nature - at its best and its worst. It is also where we develop discipline - ask any family member of how NS has transformed the men of their lives. Lives are lost in NS for various reasons - equipment failure due to technical faults, human errors, poor health or simply irresponsible acts of fellow soldiers. Each life lost is one too many.
All measures possible must be taken to ensure that training while being realistic do not compromise safety or worst, lives. The onus must be on everyone from commanders to fellow soldiers to regard each life as their own. If everyone takes ownership of their duties diligently, I am sure the unfortunate can be brought to a minimum.
Forum Page
The Straits Times
Ms Looi Pek Hong spoke for all Singaporean parents in her letter of 12 August 2011. My siblings and I wonder how our parents dealt with the stresses of sending the 5 of us through our NS and subsequently 'reservist' training. Each of us have our own personal stories that could have been the 'phone call' or 'visit by a soldier' in the wee hours of the night that she alluded to. For this reason, our hearts go out to the family members, especially the parents of our fellow Singaporeans who died in service.
It is therefore quite right and understandable that National Service evoke such strong emotions amongst citizens. NS is not just a duty - for some, unfortunately, it is also a sacrifice of life. It is also for this reason among others that many make all kinds of attempts to avoid NS.
But for those who have served, NS is about our fundamental duty as Singaporeans. It is the place we build bonds of friendships that last a lifetime. It is also the best 'university of life' - where we learn about human nature - at its best and its worst. It is also where we develop discipline - ask any family member of how NS has transformed the men of their lives. Lives are lost in NS for various reasons - equipment failure due to technical faults, human errors, poor health or simply irresponsible acts of fellow soldiers. Each life lost is one too many.
All measures possible must be taken to ensure that training while being realistic do not compromise safety or worst, lives. The onus must be on everyone from commanders to fellow soldiers to regard each life as their own. If everyone takes ownership of their duties diligently, I am sure the unfortunate can be brought to a minimum.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Enough Already - Cyberspace vs Personal Space
MP Penny Low must have wished that she was not the one in the photograph taken during the singing of the national anthem at the national day parade last evening. In a very direct way, this episode shows how social media can be a boon and a bane for modern society.
For purists, doing anything other than singing our national anthem is a very solemn affair and it should be. For the moderates, surely she could be looking at her mobile for many possible reasons.
I say Enough Already - we are bombarded by so much information today - both on and offline - and not just by way of text but also audio-visually. I am not exactly what netizens would regard as PAPies or PAP troll - but I have to say we must surely guide how this inevitable political maturation process ought to evolve.
I say let us really filter what is truly important. What is even more importantly, the truth. My way of responding to half-truths, speculation or just net gossip (i.e. it is not important other than for yakking) is to just read, laugh and move on.
This process is important - we need to take ownership of what is really vital to us and act on them. Equally, we need to stop being the audience of those who seek attention by making irresponsible comments hoping they will sound intelligent.
Human nature, alas will always be the same - no matter how technology has evolved. We need to develop in tandem - that would be the mark of civilization.
I am reminded of what the late Dr David Marshall said once in a forum when describing a prominent opposition politician - (paraphrased as I cannot recollect his exact words) - he is so dead set against the PAP that even if he sees one sitting with the angel, he would deny his presence by insisting that the glowing lights of the angel has blinded him.
In the same vein, many have commented that while the social media offers many good ideas, there is of course much noises (meaning=nonsense) hiding behind the veil of anonymity. I say show faith - act on those good ideas that were expressed non-anonymously - and people will respond accordingly in order to be taken seriously.
Just some thoughts :-)
For purists, doing anything other than singing our national anthem is a very solemn affair and it should be. For the moderates, surely she could be looking at her mobile for many possible reasons.
I say Enough Already - we are bombarded by so much information today - both on and offline - and not just by way of text but also audio-visually. I am not exactly what netizens would regard as PAPies or PAP troll - but I have to say we must surely guide how this inevitable political maturation process ought to evolve.
I say let us really filter what is truly important. What is even more importantly, the truth. My way of responding to half-truths, speculation or just net gossip (i.e. it is not important other than for yakking) is to just read, laugh and move on.
This process is important - we need to take ownership of what is really vital to us and act on them. Equally, we need to stop being the audience of those who seek attention by making irresponsible comments hoping they will sound intelligent.
Human nature, alas will always be the same - no matter how technology has evolved. We need to develop in tandem - that would be the mark of civilization.
I am reminded of what the late Dr David Marshall said once in a forum when describing a prominent opposition politician - (paraphrased as I cannot recollect his exact words) - he is so dead set against the PAP that even if he sees one sitting with the angel, he would deny his presence by insisting that the glowing lights of the angel has blinded him.
In the same vein, many have commented that while the social media offers many good ideas, there is of course much noises (meaning=nonsense) hiding behind the veil of anonymity. I say show faith - act on those good ideas that were expressed non-anonymously - and people will respond accordingly in order to be taken seriously.
Just some thoughts :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)