Sunday, February 03, 2013
Now I understand why the White Paper on Population, which was supposed to be revealed during the hustings period of the Punggol East By-election, was postponed to last week. The magical 6.9 million projection would definitely have created a huge backlash during the campaigning period and be used strongly against the ruling party.
Personally, I can understand the pressing problem of an ageing population and that of the dependency ratio. Having immigrants to fill up that gap should be nothing more than a short-term solution, while making sure that the underlying problems of low fertility be solved. But, as it seems, relying on new immigrants to buff up the population bulk is becoming the longer-term easy-way-out for the planners.
By 2030, if the projections hold true, about 1 in 2 people are not local-born. This fact, together with the population boom, carries implications that I am very sure that the policy planners would have considered. Here are 3 areas that I'm concerned with:
1. National identity issues. Not everyone will be naturalised to the same extent in a new country. How rooted will the new citizens be? When a war breaks out, to what extent will emotional attachment pose a dilemma? Can new citizens relate to local-born citizens? We are already seeing many conflicts and intolerance between the "they" and "we" now, would this further escalate to a national division by 2030?
2. Infrastructure. You can plan for an increase in infrastructure, but as we've seen, the supply has always been lacking behind the huge demand. We are going to open the floodgates wider from now, and that would need even more schools, hospitals, housing, transport facilities, etc. We can't even cope with the current levels now--hospital beds are still in shortage; housing demand remains hot; transport facilities are downright disappointing! Yes, infrastructure takes time to complete. So, shouldn't the floodgates open at a more breathable rate after ensuring that current demands are met, when we're sure that the quality of life will not take an instant dip whenever an additional newcomer joins the crowd?
3. The Environment. Creating more residential towns means clearing more green land. The lush areas of Bidadari, Tampines North and Tengah will all be gone. Punggol North too. Bukit Brown as well. Further urbanisation doesn't just mean the loss of plants and their native animals, it also means more widespread flooding risks from increased surface runoff and soil degradation. There may come a day when we have very limited 'quiet' areas. Land reclamation will continue at an alarming speed, adding some 8% of land, about the size of 9 Ang Mo Kio towns! What's our integrity level when it comes to ocean protection, which includes the corals and the sea population in our Singapore Straits?
Granted, I may not be looking at the 'full picture' that I ought to, from the country's macro view. And it's definitely easy for me to rant and not consider the difficulties of planning long-term policies. But really, the Population issue is one sticky and sensitive issue that shouldn't be trodden lightly, and the decision made to invite more immigrants will be a grave, irreversible move that we cannot afford to fail once we move full steam ahead. Economic development is an important KPI to a country, but if there are widespread unhappiness amongst the people, or if the social conditions are in arrears, can we still call ourselves a Great Country?
人生是黑白的.
7:19 PM <3
>>>
