Why Singaporeans are angry over the Zhang Yuanyuan fiasco
October 11th, 2009 | 
Author: OPINION
When Singaporeans protest against the apparent act of “betrayal” by Singapore PR Zhang Yuanyuan who proclaimed her loyalty to China publicly on Chinese TV channel CCTV7, government leaders and agencies are quick to downplay its significance.
The PAP MPs dismissed the concerns of netizens as being “extreme” and defend Ms Zhang on the grounds that she is only a PR and not a citizen.
In an official reply to a citizen, the National Population Secretariat also exonerate Ms Zhang on the grounds that she is still a PRC citizen.
The authorities appear to be completely clueless about the real concerns, angst and frustration of ordinary Singaporeans.
Singaporeans are not angry over Ms Zhang’s loyalty to her motherland, but rather at the liberal immigration policy of the ruling party which has altered the demographics of Singapore completely over the last few years.
Foreigners now make up 36 per cent of the population compared to only 26 per cent 10 years ago.
Armed with a diploma from China, Ms Zhang came to Singapore on a student pass. She is more employable and marketable now in China as a result of her education in Singapore.
The fact that she disregarded her PR in such a callous manner without expressing even a bit of gratitude to Singapore for giving her the opportunity to work here is a bitter pill to swallow for many Singaporeans who are stunned and appalled by the flashing of her blue NRIC on screen.
Are we giving out our PRs and citizenships too easily and cheaply to foreigners who may never understand and appreciate what Singapore stands for?
Ms Zhang is not an isolated case. There are many other PRs like her who choose to return to their homelands after studying and working in Singapore for a number of years.
The ease at which PRs are given to foreigners is simply unbelievable. In the past, only highly qualified professionals are allowed to become PRs. Nowadays, you can find assistant nurses, clerks, tele-marketeers and even coffeeshop assistants who are PRs!
PRs are allowed to live in Singapore for an unlimited number of years as long they are able to find work in Singapore. There is no compulsion on their part to take up the Singapore citizenship.
They enjoy essentially the same rights as citizens except that they are entitled to lower housing and education subsidies and they cannot vote in elections. However, they are able to purchase public housing from the resale market.
Furthermore, unlike citizens, they have no National Service or reservist obligations and neither do their children if they leave Singapore before the conscription age of 18. PRs can simply pack their bags and return home with their monies earned here when there is an economic downturn.
It is an undeniable fact that Singapore needs foreigners to replace its aging and declining population, but we have to be extremely selective in those we invite to take up PRs and citizenships. Do we want to compete with the best talents on an equal footing or the second-rated talents on an unequal footing?
Right now, many PRs have little incentive to become Singapore citizens because it offers them no additional benefits other than a token voting right which they may not even exercise anyway due to the rampant gerrymandering and walkovers.
To entice more PRs to take up citizenship, the Singapore government must convince them that they will be far better off being a citizen than a PR.
A time limit should be imposed on the duration of being a PR, for example 10 years, after which the PR must decide whether to become a citizen to switch back to a work permit to continue working here.
PRs who never intend to settle down in Singapore should not be allowed to purchase resale HDB flats which are after all built to encourage Singaporeans to start a family.
Means testing should be conducted on PRs and for those who earn beyond a certain limit, e.g. $10,000 a month should be barred from buying public housing.
These PRs can well afford private apartments and landed properties and there’s no reason why they should be allowed to compete with less well off citizens for the limited number of flats.
National Service is one of the major stumbling blocks for foreigners taking up citizenship. Its length can be reduced to a year or less to make it more attractive for second generation PRs to become citizens.
Singapore is the richest country in Asia after Japan and we have one of the highest GDP per capita in the world.
Being a first world developed country, we should not cheapen our citizenship by giving them out indiscriminately to undeserving foreigners. Only the creme la crop of the world deserves a place in our society.
Being a small island with no natural resources, we need to capitalize on our precious human resources to compete with the rest of the world, especially China.
Right now, even the second-tier cities in China like Wuxi and Dongguan are catching up with Singapore. Can we stay ahead of China by importing their second-rated talents to replace our own native population?
The government should do much more to nurture our own home-grown talents instead of depending heavily on foreigners.
Our greatest advantage over China now is our level of English proficiency which explains why so many Chinese students are coming to Singapore to study the language, but that slight edge will dissipate in a few years’ time.
As China becoming more affluent, wealthy and prosperous, there will be more Zhang Yuanyuans who will prefer to return and work in China after studying English in Singapore.
Related articles:
>> Official reply from government on the Zhang Yuanyuan fiasco
>> Singapore PRC PR proclaimed loyalty to China publicly
>> PRC resident hung China flag to celebrate its National Day
>> PRC student in Singapore wants more scholarships for foreigners
>> PRC prostitutes solicit for customers on Singapore’s cyberspace
>> ERA: 40 per cent of resale flats buyers are PRs
EDITORS’ NOTE:
If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account ([email protected]). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you!
Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview
Posted in Opinion
IT MEANS SO LITTLE TO BE A SINGAPOREAN THESE DAYS. BETTER TO BE A MALAYSIAN CITIZEN AND A SINGAPORE P.R.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
This is a difficult debate which is not unique to S’Pore. having lived there for 6 years, we understand what it means but it must be acknowledged that very often the PR is the only option to provide a family with some security. Being on a WP is a precarious situation, lose your job and you have 2 weeks to pack. In today’s world, this is a big risk that we have to face. The PEP fixed it nicely and constitutes the best alternative to a PR. Unfortunately or fortunately, it is still an elite pass granted pending your qualifications and income status. For those who fall short of PEP, what option is left ? only the PR…
To close, let’s not undermine the many people on a PR who have a true bond with S’Pore like we had. Many do take a high pride of being granted the magic card. This should not forgotten because of one case of over-the-bound nationalism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It was clarified in Shitty Times today that Zhang studied in a private institute at her cost for 2 years, before taking up the Chinese language teacher role while studying for a degree at the same time…but she did received her PR really quick, just within 2-3 months after application
It seems it was her Chinese employer and the Chinese media’s idea to made up all the stories to glamorize the situation as one who gave up PR to return to China…typical communist mentality and propaganda!
Read on…
============================================
Zhang said she did not flash her identity card for the TV crew to shoot. When interviewing her mother, they had asked her to show it.
She said she enjoyed her five-year stay in Singapore and had wanted to come here in 2003 because she had a ‘good impression’ of the country.
She also wanted to see the world after completing her diploma studies in China.
For two years, she studied English at the Cambridge Institute here.
Later, she became a Chinese language teacher at Julia Gabriel Centre for Learning for three years. At that time, she was also taking a degree course in business management at the Asia Pacific Management Institute.
She lived in a condominium in Upper Bukit Timah with three China friends.
In April last year, she returned home to Beijing to spend more time with her parents, who are reaching their 60s.
‘I’m the only child and my parents are getting old so I decided to go home to take care of them.’ They are both retired.
She said she missed home, and at the same time, saw that opportunities were growing in China. She is now working in a property firm there.
Ms Zhang said she applied for permanent residency in 2006. It took about two to three months to get approval.
‘At that time, I thought it might be easier if I wanted to travel between the two countries.’
She said she made many local friends and even hosted seven of them when they visited China during the Olympics last year.
‘I love Singapore; the environment is very good,’ she said.
Ms Zhang also clarified that she was nominated by her company to join the women militia formation, a highlight of the military parade.
‘But I also wanted to join it. I thought it was a rare opportunity. I’m after all a Chinese and I felt it was my duty to give something back to my country.’
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is so sad that PRs are put ahead of Singaporeans. The PAPies running dogs ask Singaporeans to compete with the PRs but is it a level playing field. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Many PRs are paid less than what Singaporeans need to sustain themselves and their families. Yet after 5 or 6 years, these PRs are able to go home and live quite comfortably. In fact, many of them retire to big landed properties with a couple of servants.
Do these PRs even care that many Singaporeans have lost their jobs because of them and are struggling to put food on the table for themselves and their children. I seriously doubt it. In fact there are trying to bring their families and the whole village over here.
Singaporeans on the other hand are forced to work well into the 80s. It is time we sent most of these PRs back. Those MNCs that are unwilling to pay Singaporeans what they deserved can follow these foreigners back and set up their factories there.
It is as simple as that.
Vote for Change. Vote for opposition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Admin, please post this excellent article up –
Consequences of Voting for PAP
Source:
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/showthread.php?t=2476793&page=2
You voted for PAP, and you get to pay 7% GST instead of 5%.
You voted for PAP, and they peg power to the price of oil even when
80% of Singapore’s power comes from natural gas.
You voted for PAP and your CPF money gets lock up for another 3 years
more than the original.
You voted for PAP, and your ministers demanded a 85% pay raises.
You voted for PAP, and your job went to a foreigner.
You voted for PAP, and your neighbors become foreigners.
You voted for PAP, and your elderly gets to enjoy the dignity of
employment by cleaning toilets, scavenging trash bins for aluminum
cans and selling tissue papers.
You voted for PAP, and your minsters tell you it is your fault that
Mas Selemat escaped.
You voted for PAP, and your government would rather lose millions at
sinking foreign banks rather than to save you from starvation.
You voted for PAP, and not only do your ministers literally spit on
you, but their scions tell you to “get out of their elite uncaring
faces”.
You voted for PAP, and you are amply rewarded with ERPs at your doorstep.
You voted for PAP, and Lee Hsien Loong pledged to fix the oppositions.
You voted for PAP, and you got a Division 3 Prime Minister who needs 2
mentors to hold his hand.
You voted for PAP, and you got a large serving of Mee Siam Mai Hum, at
your own expense.
You voted for PAP, and your salary stayed stagnant for more than a
decade while the cost of living shoot sky high.
You voted for PAP, and you see the foreign kids get a place in school
while you child get zilch.
You voted for PAP, and you find that your public transport is no
longer “public”.
You voted for PAP, and your ministers want to house 1,500 foreign
workers right smacked in the middle of a peaceful neighborhood without
any concerns for you.
You voted for PAP, and the government readily reward your men with
more hookers than they can ever poked in Geylang.
You voted for PAP, and your government happily demands $5000 ang pao
from you when your maid runaway or get pregnant even though you had
nothing to do with it.
You voted for PAP, and your government glorify themselves with Olympic
sized banners of their ghastly faces to scare away ghosts during the
Chinese 7th month, courtesy of your S&C contribution to your town
councils which is suppose to go toward making life in your
neighborhood better.
You voted for PAP, and they protect the interests of the petrol
companies by making you pump 3/4 tank before you cross the causeway.
You voted for PAP, and they see nothing wrong with fining you for
driving a foreign registered car into Singapore.
You voted for PAP, and you discover that world-class super talented
multi-million dollar minister with all the state resources and
manpowers cannot even catch a limping man in this tiny island state
after more than half a year.
You voted for PAP, and you realise that your MP’s job is not to speak
out for you in parliament, but to tell you to tighten the belt, bite
the bullet, eat lesser and work longer.
You voted for PAP, and your kids have to stay with you till 40 years
old, as they cannot afford the cheapest “public” housing.
You voted for PAP, and your government tells you that their
interpretation of subsidies is the profit that they forgo making,
instead of actually paying part of the cost.
You voted for PAP, and everyone in Singapore suddenly got elevated to
Swiss standard of living, except you, and everyone around you.
You voted for PAP, and your neighbors can sell your home for you
(en-block), whether you like it or not.
You voted for PAP, and your organs automatically belongs to the
government (HOTA).
You voted for PAP, and you have to pay administration fee to use your
own money when you are sick (Medisave).
You voted for PAP, and your sons get to spend 2 or more years as free
labour in National Service and 13 more years as reservists, so that
the foreigners can have a safe country to work in.
You voted for PAP, and you found out that each of your son is worth
$30k, because that is what you are going to get if your son die while
serving the foreigners.
You voted for PAP, and you get a grand party every year on 9th August
celebrating more salaries for PAP.Not everyone is invited though, you
will still have to ballot for it.
You voted for PAP, and they tell you that there is a corner called
Hong Lim Park where you can go to talk all you want, other than that,
shut up unless you have something nice to say.
You voted for PAP, and you get a world-bottom “nation-building” press
serving you the latest propagandas, regardless of truth.
You voted for PAP, and in order to buy a car, you have to first pay
for a piece of paper that cost more than the car itself.
You voted for PAP, and you must vote for PAP! You cannot even think
about not voting for PAP. Because a certain inaccurate old man said
that he will call in the army if you don’t.
So vote for PAP. Read the list above again, and vote for PAP. Go
ahead, vote for PAP. More good years eh? Vote for PAP. For Swiss
standard of living. Vote for PAP. Mee Siam Mai Hum ok?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Stupid PAP. Arrogant MIWs. I hope I will be able to see a change in the political landscape in my lifetime.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
jmricca, Great sensible post. PEP should be fixed – DEFINITELY!
When foreigners comes in with family and committed to work here – they too need some measure of RESIDENTIAL SECURITY which will help their employment security as well. Employers may not be that keen to take on someone for just one year and he/she might for forced to leave on short notice in the middle of a critical business project.
Fixing the PEP is a win-win situation. A PEP based on income level and relevant specialised skills shortage and in need is the way to go. For example, IT was a hot skill in demand in Australia but no anymore, so those aspiring an Australian PR based on his/her IT skills will find their application receiving no favours. But nursing is always in demand. PEP to me must be given with a minimum of 2 years at initial point and renewed annually thereafter.
Immigration is also a difficult debating topic, made worse by the compact density of living here and infrastructural pressure of over-population.
The Government’s logic of doubling the population ON ECONOMIC GROUNDS is as patently a lie as insisting carbon dioxide is oxygen and oxygen is carbon dioxide. It even persuaded some with this hoax of lies.
IF AT ALL DOUBLING THE POPULATION CITIZENRY IS NEEDED TO SUSTAIN THE ECONOMIC GROWTH – it is MOVING FEAST OF POLITICAL STUNT AND LIES – WHERE IS THE PROOF THAT THE POPULATION WILL REMAIN AT THE ALLEGED OPTIMUM 6.5 MILLION thereafter. Who says new migrants won;t have sex and reproduce to 10 million a decade later??? Remember, this population growth aim is being engineered by MIGRATION, not by natural population growth of birth increase. So it is very easy to increase within a decade to 10 million from 6.5 million.
How is the Government going to stop that happening? TELL ALL SINGAPOREANS AND NEW MIGRANTS – STOPPED AT ZERO OR I SHALL CASTRATE ALL OF YOU, RABBITS??
The Government, of course, is NOT publicly debating the substance of this massive influx of migration. It is better that the carbon dioxide of a terse false claim of alleged ECONOMIC MOTIVATION silence out the oxygen of voting shift intent of an insidious political chicanery at work.
If numbers matters of economic outcome, we COULD EASILY ACHIEVE
EXACTLY THE SAME OUTCOME via PEP, WP etc. The Saaudi and UAE used foreign workers on practically PEP route – NO PRs for foreigners WITH THE ATTENDANT BURDEN ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOCIAL ECONOMIC BURDEN ON LIVING COSTS FOR LOCALS WHO BUILD UP THIS PLACE – a win win for foreigners and their national interests.
Clearly the migration issue had been hijacked by MSM peddling the lies of incumbent for economic reason rather than political chicanery at work.
Singaporeans are justifiably angry.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I believe Ms Zheng did not ‘renounced Singapore citizenship’ as you commented, as she was only a Permanent Resident, not a citizen. Singapore does not recognise dual-citizenship.
As jmricca pointed out, this is not unique to SIngapore and indeed Australia went through a similar phase of soul-searching in the late 80s when many Australians realised there were many thousands who’d settled in Australia, continued to be PRs and yet retained citizenship of their countries of origin.
Just as the writer of this opinion piece rightly points out the real issue – how easily PRs seem to be granted, and the economic and social ramifications thereof – we should recognise that there are many PRs who have been here for years, who positively contribute to the economy and social structure here and who have not taken up citizenship for a myriad of reasons. These people should not be criticised.
Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater as it were.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is the same kind of rubbish as telling “opposition – you rats should NOT politicise LUP” when political chicanery OF THEIR OWN INSTIGATION had been at work for decades.
Informed Singaporeans in this cyberspace age don’t believe these politically-motivated craps!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
jmricca,
why don’t you put your words where your mouth is? Apply for Singapore citizenship, and give up your existing citizenship.
You want to forge a true bond with Singaporeans? I strongly encourage you to serve 2 years of national service and 10 years of reservist. Oh, plus remember to clear your IPPT every year, or you will have to go for RT – and it is a chargeable offense.
The fact is Singapore PR has become as cheap as a pack of 20c tissue paper. Most foreigners, including your good self, are here solely for economic reasons. Bonding to locals / contribution to Singapore is all secondary.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A well written and balanced article on the Zhang Yuanyouan fiasco, although I would prefer a time limit of 6 years (which is a long time) after which the PR must decide whether to become a citizen or switch back to a work permit to continue working here.
Compare this to the article which appeared in the Sunday Paper today and you will understand why more and more people are getting disdainful of SPH and the Main Stream Media.
Once you have read the comments / articles in TR and TOC you can immediately spot the bias reporting of the MSM.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Basing on what was written in the papers on what Ms.Zhang said and quote “At that time, I thought it might be easier if I want to travel between the two countries.” it just shows what being a S’pore PR is all about and how easy it is to get one. At the end of the day, we all know for a fact who will be the ones remaining on this island in good or bad times. Sad to say that S’poreans with good qualifications who return home from overseas, has difficulty finding work here. My friend’s friend is one example.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
## Anonymous on Sun, 11th Oct 2009 11:08 am
1. Good Opinion piece.
2. Good Points from you too, Bro.
Both are more insightful than that of our S$ million Ministers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Zhang Yuan Yuan stays calm as reported by Shit Times. No surprise there given that China protects all its citizens with all its might,Spore cannot measure up to China’s genuine tender loving care, more of that further on.
Zhang has nothing to be afraid of. She is having the last laugh I might say for easily scoring a Spore PR without any good skills set. Did she sit for a Mandarin accredited teaching course in China before she came here to teach Mandarin? If I am not wrong, such accreditation is available. So what type of skills set standard is Spore Immigration using to award Spore PR residency to her since her PR was awarded before she finished her degree course? Also, did she complete her degree course, no news of that in Shit Times?
If Spore gahment shows that much attention to its fellow
born-into-Spore-citizens, you can bet that the majority of the Spore citizens would have less to complain about. To go thru all that effort to grant her Spore PR & let the China media score a big Public Relations media coup speaks volumes of how China can chop & dismantle the Spore gahment machinery in one piece swiftly!
But of course the Spore gahment does not see it that way. Myopic & afraid of the big bad wolf, China.
This brings me to the amount of care & attention showered by the Spore gahment when national disaster strikes in foreign countries & the amount (or lack of) concern it shows for its citizens. The most recent case being the Padang earthquake, where Spore citizens were expecting a RAF plane to evacuate them but it never arrived. Mindef response in the ST forum was hysterically funny, could not help but was in hysterics after reading it. I can only imagine the stranded Spore citizens in Padang looking up at the sky constantly while the folks organising the operation had aborted it & going home to makan & sleep!
Also, if you look back in time, Spore gahment does the minimal to help during the Phuket tsunami in 2005, most folks had to find alternative ways out of Phuket, ST forum had tons of complaints during that time. Next, was last year’s Nov 2008 Bangkok’s airport closure where Spore citizens jammed phone lines of its embassy but most were told to find alternative means home. Well guess what? China commanded Cathay Pacific to fly its China passport holders to HK & transit from HK to China destinations. It booted out all foreigners on Cathay Pacific without China passports. Now, get this, Cathay Pacific is owned by Swire Pacific, an ang moh family that started its business in China during the Opium War. The descendants of the ang moh family lives in England still & holds substantial shares in Cathay Pacific still together with Air China. But Cathay Pacific was able to bend backwards to accomodate China’s request with absolutely no problems & ceremoniously booted out gwei los expats working in HK as bankers, lawyers etc on holiday or business in Bangkok. This incident was well documented in airline forums.
So, what say you if we get China PR & flash it on Spore TV?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What to do. Our rich leaders think Sinkapore is a long lost province of China!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Temasek Review is as much about bias and propaganda as the PAP they claim to refute. Please do your research and stop spreading lies.
I quote from the article above:
“Furthermore, unlike citizens, they have no National Service or reservist obligations and neither do their children.”
And now I quote from the ICA website.
http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=151&secid=150#ns
”
National Service Liability
Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents are liable to register for National Service (NS) upon reaching 16½ years old. They are required to serve 2 years of full-time NS at 18 years old, followed by 40 days of Operationally Ready National Service per year till the age of 50 years (for officers) or 40 years (for other ranks).
Main applicants who are granted PR status under the first generation Professionals/Technical Personnel and Skilled Workers (PTS) Scheme and the Investor Scheme are exempted from NS. Male children who are granted PR status under their parents’ sponsorship are liable for NS under the Enlistment Act.
All NS-liable males aged 13 years old and above, are required to obtain an Exit Permit (EP) when travelling overseas for 3 months or more.
NS-liable PRs are expected to serve NS. Renouncing or losing one’s PR status without serving or completing full-time NS would have an adverse impact on any immediate or future applications to work or study in Singapore, or for Singapore citizenship or PR status.
Males who are granted Singapore PR, and who were previously Singapore Citizens or Singapore Permanent Residents, are liable to be called up for NS regardless of the type of PR status they have been granted.
“
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
John Cheong on Sun, 11th Oct 2009 11:10 am
Dear Mr Cheong,
Anyone with an iota of intelligence would not compare Australia with Singapore.
Singapore’s population before the 2006 GE was just under 3 million. Now it is 5 million. Singapore took in 2 million foreigners in a matter of just over 3 years. Australia’s population in 2006 was about 20.8 million and is now about 21.3 million. Where is the comparison?? Only a fool would want to a comparison of the situation between the two.
Foreigners working in Australia are paid a minimum wage similar to what all Australians get. In Singapore, foreigners are paid 3rd world wages below levels that can sustain a Singaporean working to support his family. Where is the comparison. Only a fool would make one.
Australia is a democratic country with a free media. The media here is a mouthpiece of the ruling party and people are kept in the dark about everything. Many Singaporean have lost their jobs and are struggling to put food on the table for themselves and their children. No figures on these hardcore poor are published. Australia has a comprehensive welfare scheme to take care of its unemployed citizens. Where is the comparison. Only a fool would make one.
As much as I hate to say it, you are a fool Mr Cheong. Or you could be a running dog of the PAPies. How else could one explain you callous attitude towards the suffering of you fellow Singaporeans because of this mass influx of foreigners.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Winnie,
““Furthermore, unlike citizens, they have no National Service or reservist obligations and neither do their children.”
May not be wrong if the perspective taken is that foreigners that come to Singapore as PR now do not have to undergoes National Service or reservist obligations and neither do their children (if they are above 18 years old).
Now that the answer make you happy ? If the PR comes from Singapore at early age and stay here till their child grown up, and then their children then liable for NS . But many PR NOW are smart to come here now where their children don’t have to undergo NS, let alone reservist. Get the hint ? by then when children about to go NS, just fuck off back to their country.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
jmricca,
My fellow Singaporeans are correct. You are here only for the money. Why don’t you take up citizenship with you family and commit your future and your children’s future to Singapore.
Fact is you know that they money you earn here will go a longer way back home in the Philippines, Burma, Vietnam, India, China or wherever you come from?
As such you have no right to comment on issues affecting Singaporeans. You are an unscrupulous mercenary taking advantage of the plight of poor Singaporeans. I am sure you will be gone when you have saved enough.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To jmricca on Sun, 11th Oct 2009 9:45 am ,
I do not have any issue with people like you who come to Singapore to work and have “a true bond with S’Pore” or “take a high pride of being granted the magic card”
But let that not at the expense of the true pink
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Winnie, NS is a relevant but side show. It is about false economics of population. It is the hoax of population growth = GDP growth when the undisclosed devil in th detail is population growth via migration = votes growth.
There are insidious holes in the equation postulated by false economic prophets as
population growth= GDP growth.
By migration route, it works in PERVERSE as John Cheong on Sun, 11th Oct 2009 11:10 am also pointed out of the Australian experience in the late 1990s and early 2000 BEFORE AUSTRALIAN AMENDED ITS IMMIGRATION POLICY FOR PRs.
Australia found disgustingly that too many Hong Konger and Chinese PRs exploited all avenues of opportunity to the fullest extent to create a new immigration name-sake called “Astronauts PRs”. They applied for PR, got their kids into Australian intitutions of higher learning and qualified by law on “poverty-stricken” criteria of eligibility for preferential (compared to other in-eligible foreign students) favourable Commonwealth Government loan and tuition fee same as native Australians (as the do not lived with their parents who are at the relevant time residing in HK or China doing business). After they graduate, they have, by Australian laws, to repay back the Australian Government like native Australians out of their future employment income in Australia. BUT ALL THESE RICH KIDS DISAPPEARED BACK TO HK AND CHINA WORKING FOR THEIR PARENTS AND MNCs never to return to Australia – the locals were all made a bunch of BLOODY FOOLS usuefully made use of by foreigners abusing their PR privileges.
The moral of this story is this – MIGRATION VIA PR route is like prostitution. You open your legs willingly and give someone opportunity of a joyous access, the customers has the choice of coming back for more or the next better ones. VERY OFTEN AND NATURALLY, THE BETTER ONES PREVAIL. The offer and acceptance is a TWO-WAY TRAFFIC, not the prostitute’s sole determination.
In real terms, the brighter one’s will disappear to better shores. Those unable to get the PRs or find it too tough going and had NO ALTERNATIVE ELSEWHERE will stay on and party at the expense of our generosity.
Those in the middle will stay on as long as the party is NOT wind up and when it is over, return to China or India to party on luxury of savings they accumulate here whilst the party lasts.
We ended up with scrap heaps where the population grew faster but the GDP growth GREW SLOWER because their productivity and contribution are even lesser than local.
The result is that GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT PER CAPITA fall drastically. WE ARE ALL POORER ALONG WITH NEW MIGRANTS.
What advantage is there in GDP for Singaporeans (native born and rubbish-dump quality migrants mainly)??
The only gainers are votes-buyers who sell Singaopore away very cheaply because desperate migrants would be grateful.
What do you think, Winnie?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just one more thing to add. Let us Suppose that Zhang Yuan Yuan aka Round Round, holds a Spore Pink IC making her a Spore citizen. So the fictitious scenario goes like this: She then decides to renounce her Spore citizenship & submitted all her papers to the Spore Immigration. Before she gets the green light to renounce her Spore citizenship, she is back in China & appears on CCTV for the 60th China National Day Parade announcing to billions of China viewers that she has renounced her Spore citizenship & loves her motherland China way too much to part from it. China has immediately given back her China citizen status upon her return to China.
If this is the case, is this counted as TREASON cos the Spore Immigration has NOT granted her approval to renounce it & she jumped the gun to renounce her citizenship? Spore does not recognise dual citizenship & to join a foreign army like China is tantamount to unlawful activity. Is there a lawyer here who can give an insight into this scenario.
What will the Spore gahment do if CCTV has broadcasted the above instead with a Pink IC, would the Spore gahment cry foul OR keep mum? Would it dare to defy the giant China & squeak out? Yes, squeak not shout out?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi time for change,
Anyone with an iota of intelligence may have discerned that I was indeed deploring the current situation where Permanent Residence is easily gained and where citizens are disadvantaged as a direct consequence of this. I do wish you would read more carefully before you shoot your mouth off.
For your information, Australian PR is not easy to get, with a means test and an interview necessary. The points you will need to have in order to get your Australian PR is clearly stated on the Australian Government website (at least it was some time ago when I checked) and certainly the possibility that someone could get a Permanent Residence with no ability but to work in a coffee shop would not happen there – unless you get through on refugee or family sponsorship programmes.
The reason I brought up the Australian situation is that the soul searching we are going through in Singapore is exactly the same as when I lived in Australia in the midst of the recession in the 80s, and when Pauline Hanson turned the spotlight on the One Nation Party some years ago.
Both times, the citizens’ concerns were valid – as they are here in Singapore right now.
The writer of the original piece pointed out rightly, as I highlighted – or did you miss that too? – that there are huge social and economic ramifications of a laissez faire or indeed dangerously casual approach to increasing our population.
If we are to maintain any balance, we have to look at issues like a minimum wage (which I have always supported), better medical coverage (something perhaps only citizens could enjoy) than medisave which I think is rubbish, and even the opportunity for citizens to vote (not this walkover rubbish we currently have to endure).
However, I do know of PRs who have set up home here, have married Singaporeans, have Singaporean children – indeed some of these kids have gone through NS, run businesses which employ locals and so on. These people have truly contributed to our country and should not be vilified.
All these people would have gotten their PRs even if there was a clear and transparent and accountable PR and Citizenship test.
I doubt the average coffeeshop cleaner would pass that test.
Oh by the way, may I presume to accept your apology for insulting me by associating me with the PAP?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am sure there are a lot of readers who are foreigners to Singapore and I sometimes wonder.
Which country makes its citizens feel that being a foreigner is better than being a citizen?
Anyone?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I do not understand why this is not a concern. This is one step forward to become a citizen. NOT A CONCERN!!! These MPs still have the CHEEK to say that!! Disbelief…
What is the reason for issuing the PR status to her? Is the blue IC just a license to work in Singapore as long as any foreigners like? If so, then don’t issue blue IC just issue a life time work permit that do not have any foreign intake restriction.
If blue IC is so easy to be awarded, foreigners will treat it as work permit; a work permit that allows them to work here as they like if not work in the other country. If this is so, where is our dignity as a Singaporean? Feel good then stay in Singapore if not bye attitude is seen on her. Her attitude has shown she has no intention to be a Singaporean. She is basically taking advantage of our current system to suit her selfish needs.
I think there is a serious problem in the PR screening process in Singapore. Person like her is not caught in the screening process… how sad…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For me, i am not angered the incident.
I am not the singaporean mentioned in this article which says singaporeans are angry over the incident.
I am envious of her actually but also feel happy for her.
1. she gets to proclaim on tv her Patriotism to China.
2. she can get a PR cert at such a young age.
I am also Sad rather than angry.
1. PR is so easy to get. This easily leads to a Citizenship.
Indirectly, in this case, citizenship is easy to get.
Once these become new citizens, they are here to stay even as parties, potentially, come and go with time. If 3 million is added, these do not go away tomorrow. They also add more to the population through reproduction.
2. While the opposition steadily but slowly has received more votes over the years, this trend potentially may be / has already changed with the huge influx of new citizens by as much as a few million in the near future if not already so.
new citizens may be happy to come here because of the comparison between their 3rd world environment vs the 1st world environment built by our native citizens.
The trend to Change has been DISRUPTED.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Last night, I took a walk in China Town. Either in those small restaurants situated along the road or in the hawker centre, I found mainland chinese crowding at every corner. It was noisy and they spoken so loudly. The food served in those small restaurants were very different from ours, and they have totally replaced our usual local favourites. As a Singaporean, I felt like a stranger in a foreign place. Surely the feeling would be the same if I were to travel northward to Little India. We invited foreign invasion and Singapore will never be the same.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Winnie
I reckon you do not realize that there are loopholes all over that bunch of stuffs you quoted from ICA.
I have a friend whos a 2nd generation PR, he chose to renounce his PRship and went to Australia for his university education and he is now working in Australia, I suppose citizenship is in his bag already and the rest of us(same age group), born and breed Singaporeans are still struggling in local universities. And thats a good 2 years we are talking about.
I have another junior whos a year younger than me in secondary school, I met him after a few years in university, he is a 1/2 years senior ahead of me.
Of course there are PRs who do serve NS but we have to note that maybe an equal number who chose not to after enjoying their lifes in SG.
Besides the article mainly focus on the 1st generation PRs, I think its a known fact that Singaporean aint as patriotic as other countries’ citizens. And I have to question why is that so, the ease of applying for PRship and citizenship is so appalling that that is no longer anymore meaning in holding the pink ICs, and they lament at the increasing rate of emigrating Sgeans. Look at the immigration policies of the rest of the world and you will know how lax the policies in Sg is. And that truly turns me off. Read more and you will realized how flawed the policies are instead of trying to justified a full of loopholes act.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Its becoming a threat to our local lifestyle.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Is in not an act of treason/sabotage for any person or organization to perpetuate anything that harms
the safety, security and well being of Singapore and its citizens?
Is the ruling party in reality acting in the interest of the country or it is really acting in its own itself to stay in power, only?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There is a similar case in canada, where a canadian citizen became the president of some african country. The difference is canada allows dual citizenship, so it’s still not treason, and they have clear, stricter rules regarding immigration.
A china-born PR who did this is not wrong – the real wrong is the prostitution of the singapore PR to every tom, dick and harry.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Given everyone came to Singapore as an immigrant, ‘real Singaporean’ is a question of semantics and 1-2 generations.
As a naturalised citizen who was a PR for many years, I find that I love the idea of Singapore – clean governance and very moderate racism. Most of the friends and family I know today I met in Singapore, including my wife.
However, anyone who has spent half their life as the citizen of another country cannot just cut all ties overnight and there is no need to. Our parents and family are still back in our origional homes and will stay there.
I am sure my generation will remain ‘divided’ Singaporeans to one extent or the other, but the next generation will be 100% part of the Rojak of Singapore, and that will be beautiful.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
When you use the phrase “labor shortage” or “skills shortage” you’re speaking in a sentence fragment. What you actually mean to say is: “There is a labor shortage at the salary level I’m willing to pay.” That statement is the correct phrase; the complete sentence and the intellectually honest statement.
Employers speak about shortages as though they represent some absolute, readily identifiable lack of desirable services. Price is rarely accorded its proper importance in their discussion.
If you start raising wages and improving working conditions, and continue doing so, you’ll solve your shortage and will have people lining up around the block to work for you even if you need to have huge piles of steaming manure hand-scooped on a blazing summer afternoon.
Re: Shortage caused by employees retiring out of the workforce: With the majority of retirement accounts down about 50% or more, most people entering retirement age are working well into their sunset years. So, you won’t be getting a worker shortage anytime soon due to retirees exiting the workforce.
Okay, fine. Some specialized jobs require training and/or certification, again, the solution is higher wages and improved benefits. People will self-fund their re-education so that they can enter the industry in a work-ready state. The attractive wages, working conditions and career prospects of technology during the 1980’s and 1990’s was a prime example of people’s willingness to self-fund their own career re-education.
There is never enough of any good or service to satisfy all wants or desires. A buyer, or employer, must give up something to get something. They must pay the market price and forego whatever else he could have for the same price. The forces of supply and demand determine these prices — and the price of a skilled workman is no exception. The buyer can take it or leave it. However, those who choose to leave it (because of lack of funds or personal preference) must not cry shortage. The good is available at the market price. All goods and services are scarce, but scarcity and shortages are by no means synonymous. Scarcity is a regrettable and unavoidable fact.
Shortages are purely a function of price. The only way in which a shortage has existed, or ever will exist, is in cases where the “going price” has been held below the market-clearing price.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You know, I something wonder if the obession with age in employment and more importantly the replacement of older workers by younger ones is really just an excuse by the govt to squeeze on us by letting in a massive number of foreigners.
Look at MM.
Look at the type of jobs that this PRC woman has gotten. Is this the kind of job that is in need of replacement by younger people? Has chinese been really well regarded by the authorities?
I thinking the PAP needed these supposedly younger people because they wanted to maintain the ethnic composition and more importantly to prop up the property market.
Maybe the govt thinks s’poreans are ugly and wanted to look at the chinese mei mei more…
in any case, the reason cited by the PAPs is not a good reason.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
On a separate note, CPF life lovers.
Do you know that even companies like BP have closed its pensions plan from new recruits.
Pension plans are very difficult to maintain.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Wan Lu Liu on Tue, 13th Oct 2009 1:32 am
Good article.
Unfortunately, very few understood basic economy. I personally think it should be a compulsory subject to be taught in secondary schools, albeit in a more concise and simpler form.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Up until this article, I have more or less agreed with the opinions of Temasek Review. However the suggestions of this article are downright unrealistic, infeasible and will never be implemented in any shape or form by any government, PAP or otherwise.
Here’s why:
1) no migrant would ever accept the terms proposed. Having no access to affordable housing is the death blow to any immigration plan
2) it is insane to expect a non-citizen to serve national service regardless of how long it is. To expect someone to defend a country other than his homeland is unmanageable in times of real war, and would prove disastrous should Singapore depend on it. I shouldn’t have to explain the reasons for this.
3) you suggest only the best in the world deserves a place in Singapore, but the fact of the matter is: Singapore is not a desirable place to live in for most people and therefore the best in the world aren’t generally going to migrate to Singapore. Second-rate “executives” who can’t make it in their own countries will take up executive positions in Singapore because Singapore treats them like kings, and so they will use Singapore at most until they retire. On the other hand, cheap labour from third world countries will flood Singapore because they get paid higher than their home countries. That’s a fact of life. If you make conditions worse in Singapore for migrants, you won’t get migrants pure and simple.
4) for any country to be “attractive” for citizenship, the people have to be left to evolve culturally by themselves without government interference (like Hong Kong). Singaporeans have to be satisfied regardless of how the cards fall in this situation. The day that Singapore becomes free, make no mistake the GDP will drop tremendously but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. When Singapore becomes a Singapore formed from the dreams of 3 million Singaporeans rather than the dream of one man, is the day that a foreigner can conceive the notion that it could become a place that he can form dreams as a citizen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Tim on Wed, 14th Oct 2009 4:49 am
You made some points I think invite further comment
1. military service for PRs – I agree, very tough call and not practical. PRs are still foreign citizens, I cannot imagine forcing PRs to swear allegiance to foreign (Singapore’s) flag and its defence. I think it is threading on foreign sovereignty to enforce this.
2. Housing – housing restraint is realistic and reasonable but unsatisfactory to foreign PRs. This country faced UNIQUE constraints of land and space like Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, very hard to get PRs and rights to public housing access attached. Here to give PRs to quality migrant to downright rubbish but all got access to public housing. Look at today’s news, 2000 HDB offers for sale – OVERSUBSCRIBED 6 times. Not a satisfactory situation for Singaporean or PRs by any measure by local population to PR is probably is 6 to 1. Without the PRs demand pressure, there is already an ACUTE HOUSING SHORTAGE FUELING TO ATRONOMICAL PRICES. With PRs it piles on. Good for Government, prop up the housing bubble and prop up the banks (housing loan is 40% of domestic banking’s lendings) but population include PRs suffering together.
I submit that citizen’s needs have to be satisfied FIRST before PRs. Why? Only a small proportion of PRs take up citizenship – most are transient in nature for good reasons and motivation best understood by them. This place is way over-rated, a lot of PRs know this. And when host country attract migration by PR route, the success rate is CRUCIALLY DEPENDANT ON THE QUALITY OF THE HOST ECONOMY’S FUTURE. We are a struggling place and non-competitive relative to our major competitors even in this part of the world.IT IS THE MIGRANT WHO HOLDS THE FINAL DECISION TO TAKE UP CITIZENSHIP OR NOT OR DITCHED THIS SHIT-HOLE WHEN IT IS CONVENIENT. Zhang Yuan Yuan episode prove my point. If most migrant are transcient, THEY DO NOT NEED PERMANENT ACCOMODATION for long-term stays. They should only allow to rent or ALLOW TO PURCHASE AFTER 5 years of residency perhaps. The argument is that perhaps after 5 years or more, they will stay put and sink root like our local born.
3, Migration have to be natural – not government induced. When Government induced migration it is askin to PROSTITUTION. Virtous and lesser than virtous and of all grades and motivation comes in BUT THEY IN ULTIMATE FINALITY DECIDES to stay or use this place as stepping stone. Many used us and leave – the worse would be those who kiss and tell after they leave us. They can see that it is a place of one’s man megalomaniac dream, not a citizen dream. Who in this world in the right sense of mind, stays and contribute to feudalism when history has seen enough of evils of monarchies? I would NOT which is why even Singaporeans migrate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@tim on Wed, 14th Oct 2009 4:49 am
You missed the point entirely. The point is to make it RESTRICTIVE for migrants to come into Singapore. Look at other large nations. Their immigrant percentage is probably less than 5%. But Singapore has at least 25% of its population who are immigrants, if not more.
Please don’t talk about our forefathers are all immigrants. That was before this place was even a nation. By the same argument, we should all able to migrate to USA and Australia since all their current citizens are descendants of immigrants?
Once a nation is formed, the rules of a nation will have to be abided. Meaning, making citizenship worth something and making people who seek that citizenship really think about if they really want to throw their lot with the native born and take root here.
In today’s context, Singapore citizenship is merely a stepping stone for mainly PRC Chinese and Indian to get to USA and other western countries, which is harder if they try as Chinese or Indian citizens.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Are you suggesting that anybody who applies for a PR should go through some loyalty test and be asked what are his plans in Singapore over the next 5 years? Its not fair to simply point fingers at PR’s. So what? How many Singaporeans themselves, get educated in this country and head overseas to work? So, basically the country still suffers in terms of brain drain. Dont make it seem like giving a foreigner PR status is a waste of time,and is more of a wrong doing than doing something right. How many countless foreigners have eventually married Singaporeans and made this country their home. Why should a foreigner come to Singapore at all, if he is to be given no rights or any leverages at all? Buying an HDB flat really isnt a big crime. It works out cheaper in the end than paying a massive rent.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@SGJ, buying a HDB is NOT a crime but this place is ALREADY OVER CONGESTED of public housing and space for public housing construction. We had not option not even via very costly reclamation. We can’t move Mount Everest and Mt Everest won’t even “talk” to us let alone negotiate with us.
THE PRACTICAL TRUTH IN LIFE FOR ALL – YOU AND ME INCLUDED – IS THAT CHOICE MUST BE MADE WITHIN CONSTRAINTS AND THE CHOICE THUS MADE WILL DELIMIT FUTURE CHOICES.
We are short of land – we have to live with this contraints. We designed our infrastructures and build them within this constraint of land shortage BUT THAT CHOICE MADE DELIMIT OUR FUTURE CHOICESS because we CANNOT RIP UP the MRT now under construction and those completed to rebuild new and better ones. Neither can we expand our road width by demolishing HDB blocks and commercial buildings on its side to make way for more traffic lanes. To do so cause a lot of discruption, time to rebuild and costly to build to cater for needs of PRs who mostly likely will abandon us for better pastures. PRs are guest here for dinner – YOU DON;T DICTATE TERMS TO THE HOST WHEN INVITED TO DINNER!!
Singaporeans make a lot of sacrifice for PRs, national service for one, disrupted career another which PRs avoided. What else you demand of us?? To make your stay here like a hotel and then leave to suit your convenience of opportunity without thanks?? If you want to SHARE FAIRNESS AND EQUITY, the YOU HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY FOR PARTICIPATING AND REAP THE GAINS BY TAKING UP CITIZENSHIP NOW – YOU STILL DON’T HAVE TO DO MILITARY SERVICE AND DON’T HAVE TO SUFFER DISRUPTED CAREER – two big advantages over the local bor. ARE YOU WILLING OR ARE YOU BITCHING FOR NOT ENOUGH ADVANTAGES THAT SINGAPOREANS ALREADY MADE SACRIFICES TO WELCOME YOU AS PASSENGERS OF CONVENIENCE???
If you can’t made citizenship now, you got 3 years to settle your career option here. And if you still wants to be a passenger of convenience and not willing to take up citizenship, we can still give you a PEP is my suggestion. HOW CAN YOU AS A FOREIGNER DEMAND ONE SIDE COMMITMENT AND SACRIFICE IN PERPETUITY AND YOU MADE NO COMMITMENT TO THIS PLACE WHATSOVER WHILE GAINING ALL THE ADVANTAGES HERE?
If after 3 years, you still got the option of 2 years (as I suggested above) to think about citizenship and share the burden and loyalty to defend this home. If after thi point, you are still unwilling, then sorry, we got no PERMANENT PLACE for you – we are too congested and have no choice. Nothing personal here,SGJ. There are just too many of the EXTREMELY SELFISH KIND LIKE YOU AROUND. Our dinner table caters for 10, not 1000 who came here invited and uninvited or invited but wants dinner every night, not just one night.
The shortage of public housing has hurt a lot of Singaporeans, we don’t need passengers of convenience whose motives are purely transient (by refusing to take up citizenship) to add onto our national burden.
There got to be some loyalty for Singapore. If you can’t like Zhang Yuan Yuan, please leave soon and don’t curse your gracious host after that. We are a civilised, cultured society, not animals from the animal kingdoms with no self-respect, dignity and respect of your human kind.
Is that agreeable to you now. SGJ?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@SGJ,
I am reaching and reasoning with you as you being a civilised, self-respecting and dignified being, NOT AS A BARABARIC ANIMAL FROM THE UNCIVILISED ANIMAL KINGDOM, ARE YOU WILLING TO REASON IT OUT?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I see a lot of very vocal PRs talking about “rights and leverages” owed to them just like SGJ above. In any offer of opportunity and acceptance of that opportunity, there is what is called in law “consideration” and if it is not sufficiently satisfactory or advantages to any willing-seller-willing-buyer negotiation party, they NEED NOT TAKE UP that “contract” offered. NO one is forced to do anything against his or her will.
All PRs here did their calculation and decided that they would venture here instead of another country. And what is the true substance of “consideration” of both in fact and in law?
let me share with all here a quote from a Canadian law website.
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/Contracts/LawArticle-88/Part-3-Consideration-Deeds.aspx
One 1875 English case, Currie v. Misa, offered a definition of “consideration” which is still used:
……some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other.”
PRs (on their side) who came over have not carefully considered their “benefits or profit including the right of residency here??
Singaporeans (on our side) have not endured, suffered or undertaken some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given?? We did our military service, committed to annual training disrupting our career to the advantages of PRs and also to the detriment of our career, don’t we. Do we not suffer loss of higher costs of public housing due to increased population pressures on our public housing ssytems? have we not given responsibility to defending this nation including all PRs in times of war in this country??
Singapore is ONE HOST taking guests of PRs from many countries.
I ASK ALL SINGAPOREANS AND PRs here, IS IT RIGHT, JUST AND REASONABLE OF MUTUAL CONDUCT AND RESPONSIBLITY TO DEMAND AND IMPOSED ON ONE HOST TO MEET ALL THE DEMANDS OF ALL THE GUESTS COMING FROM DIFFERENT CULTURES THAT WE DON’T EVEN SUPERFICIALLY COMPREHEND OF THEIR CULTURES, HABITS, AND PUBLIC CONDUCT INCLUDING DEMANDS THAT WE SURRENDER OUR NATIONAL DIGNITY OF LETTING THEM HUMILIATE OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY ON THEIR NATIONAL DAY ON THE GLOBAL STAGE AS IF OUR PERMANENT RESIDENCY RIGHT IS LIKE A PIECE OF TOILET PAPER??
Before you bark the next demand, think first whether you are behaving like a civilised being or an UNCIVILISED ANIMAL.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Even criminals can get Singapore PR nowadays it seems.
Some PRs committed offenses but they are still here.
I think it is better if I become a Malaysian citizen and then become SG PR. Can it be done? I can save my kids 2 years of their lives like that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So many PRCs defrauded migration laws in Australia and when their visas got revoked (and given the forbearance of forgiveness in not sending them to jail), they sued the Australian immigration department to finality.
That way, they delayed the inevitable outcome and make use of their stay to rort the legal systems and loopholes to financial advantage to the last breath possible.
Just look at this Z list of only some (not all the) failed migration lawsuit starting with “Z’ alphabet surnames compared with names from other nationality. These are ONLY THOSE CAUGHT BY CHANCE or someone reported them in. HOW MANY WHO GOT IN AND NOT CAUGHT????
YOU CANNOT FIND EVEN ONE SINGAPOREAN NAME IN THERE BECAUSE WE ARE HONOURABLE SOCIETY WITH SELF-RESPECTING BEHAVIOUR INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OUR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/MRTA/toc-Z.html
Canadian Supreme Court – the highest court of Canada also heard more than 150 cases of migration lawsuit. It goes to show how determined many PRCs are in abusing the system and fight through the court system to the very end knowing their evidences are false.
Remember the natural father of the poor girl Huang Na who was murdered by a Malaysian. Her natural father was caught as an illegal immigrant, jailed and caned BUT HE CAME BACK ON ANOTHER FALSE PASSPORT and immigration only revealed the truth of this second violation after he left with the late Huang Na’s ashes?? I wondered how many came in on false identity and beat the VERY VERY LOOSE migration checks here.
In my mind, I sometimes wonder how many PRC came here and got a easy PR using false documents and connections in China to cover up when so many cases caught were exposed successfully in Australian courts.
Out of the list I supplied, more than 95% failed in the lawsuits. I would NOT be surprised that there are already criminal PRC PRs in our midst. It is not good for Singapore and also good for the reputation of those genuine good PRC migrants here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0