Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 4:18 PM
To: PM LEE
Cc: AMY KHOR ; <a title=”bokkoh ; BTMAH ; <a title=”contact ; CHAN CHUN SING ; <a title=”charles_chongyf ; CHEN SHOW MAO ; <a title=”choonhock ; CIVIL SERVICE HEAD ; <a title=”newseditor ; CUE ; <a title=”davidong ; DPM TEO ; <a title=”tharman_s ; EDWIN TONG ; <a title=”faisal ; GAN KIM YONG ; <a title=”gan_thiam_poh ; GEORGE ; <a title=”gerald.giam ; J J ; <a title=”jayakumar89 ; KATHERINE ; <a title=”Lawrence_Wong ; LAY CHER ; <a title=”lee_kuan_yew ; NICOLE ; <a title=”ong.teng.koon ; PATRICK TAY ; <a title=”enghuat.png ; PRITAM ; <a title=”ravi ; Seah Chiang Nee ; <a title=”sitoh ; SPH CHUA MUI HOONG ; <a title=”jiankang ; SPH HAN FOOK KWANG ; <a title=”yuanyi ; SPH RCHANG ; <a title=”chinlian ; ST LOCAL ; <a title=”stnewsdesk ; STANLEY ; <a title=”sylvia ; THEREALSINGAPORE ; <a title=”tinpeiling ; TOC ; <a title=”andrew ; TODAY ; <a title=”reachus ; ZBLOCAL
Subject: 20131129 Government should not assume immigration policy is working, statistics needed Re: 20131003 Will new citizens contribute to ageing population issue?
Dear PM Lee
I refer to my email to the PMO on 3 Oct (enclosed) detailing my concerns as well as the relevant statistics needed to keep track of our immigration policy.
No relevant statistics pertaining to new citizens
The NPTD keeps repeating the reasons for Singaporeans to accept new citizens and this appears to be for economic reasons only. In NPTD’s publications (below), there is no relevant statistics to confirm our immigration policy has worked.
Eg. Page 8 of Our Population, Our Future link proudly proclaims “Immigration helps to supplement shortfall in births” but remains unsupported by statistics.
Figures confirm immigration policy is flawed?
The chart below shows the age profile of PRs mirrors that of citizens. Since new citizens are selected from the current pool of PR, would not new citizens contribute to the ageing population, with the biggest group of PRs aged between 30 and 50?
Incomplete information on new citizens
“From 2007-2011, 53 per cent of new SCs were under 30 years old”. Our Population, Our Future With 47 per cent of new citizens above 30, NPTD claims our new SCs are “generally young and have good educational qualifications”. Those above 35 can hardly be termed ‘young’. Strangely, there is information on the educational qualification but none on the age profile, marital status, etc. of new SCs.
From 2007 to 2011, there were 43,385 (47 %) new SCs. Without statistics on the profile of these new SCs, the government cannot be certain they will not exacerbate the ageing population issue.
Have new citizens contributed to an increase in TFR/ageing population issue?
Possible undesirable outcomes:
1 A foreigner married couple who do not plan to have any children.
2 A foreigner family with 1 child becoming Singapore citizens.
3 A foreigner married to a citizen without any intent of setting up a family.
4 Singles aged 35 and above
The government seems to have ignored the above are possible scenarios.
But the government keeps track of most policies
Every policy needs to be monitored as they have social ramifications.
Private transport deregulation – After a decade of deregulation, 10 year car loans had become commonplace. The government stepped in earlier this year and imposed drastic measures to curb car loans by halving the longest tenure to only 5 years and the loan quantum to only 60 per cent. This confirms it has been keeping track of policies. Car loan curbs: What were they meant to achieve?
Even ‘Stop At Two’ policy
The ‘Stop at Two’ programme, which targeted lowly-educated and low-income women began in 1969. link Because the government had been monitoring its progress, its ‘success’ was recognised at an early stage.
‘Have Three or More’ replaced the ‘Stop at Two’ in 1987 in an attempt to reverse the damage i.e. a declining TFR.
But no statistics for new citizens as a group?
The chart below shows our TFR has remained below the replacement rate for 26 years since the introduction of ‘Have Three or More’ coupled with a liberal immigration policy.
Our immigration policy appears to have failed, unless there are statistics to prove otherwise. Should the government continue with such a policy?
What if the TFR remains at about the same level when the population increases to 6.9 million?
The government must keep track of all its policies in order to serve citizens better. This is not a choice. If statistics on new citizens show an unfavourable outcome of our immigration policy, the government should consider other options.
All policies need to be monitored and statistics are crucial to determine if policies have worked. There are supporting statistics for other policies but strangely no relevant ones for new citizens. (with regard to age profile, TFR to show it is not counter productive)
Has our immigration policy worked? Without the relevant statistics, the government is merely speculating on the results of its immigration policy which has far-reaching implications.
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 10:11 AM
To: PM LEE
Cc: AMY KHOR ; <a title=”bokkoh ; BTMAH ; <a title=”contact ; CHAN CHUN SING ; <a title=”charles_chongyf ; CHEN SHOW MAO ; <a title=”choonhock ; CIVIL SERVICE HEAD ; <a title=”newseditor ; DPM TEO ; <a title=”tharman_s ; FAISAL ; <a title=”gan_kim_yong ; GEORGE ; <a title=”gerald.giam ; INDERJIT ; <a title=”jjauto ; JAYA ; <a title=”Johnny_LIM ; LAY CHER ; <a title=”ykbaey ; MP ZAINAL SAPARI ; <a title=”nicole.rebecca.seah ; NYS ; <a title=”enghuat.png ; PRITAM ; <a title=”ravi ; RICHARD ; <a title=”muihoong ; SPH GAO ; <a title=”hanfk ; ST CHINLIAN ; <a title=”jonkwok ; ST LOCAL ; <a title=”stnewsdesk ; STANLEY ; <a title=”sylvia ; TAN CHUAN JIN ; <a title=”admin ; TOC ; <a title=”andrew ; YAHOO ; <a title=”zblocal
Subject: 20131003 Will new citizens contribute to ageing population issue?
Dear PM Lee
The government has repeatedly stated that one of its concerns of an ageing population is there will be fewer working citizens to support the growing pool of elderly.
(e.g. The Straits Times article “Fast-ageing S’pore, fewer to support aged” dated 27 Sep) To arrest the population decline, our ultra loose immigration policy allows foreigners to be easily granted citizenship to the tune of 18,830 annually since the last 6 years.
From 1987 to 2006, the intake of new citizens averaged 8200. link (page 6) Including the upsized intake during the last 6 years, the total number of new citizens since 1987 is about 277,000. (8200 X 20 plus 18830 X 6)
Will new citizens contribute to the ageing population issue?
Assuming that the average age of new citizens between 1987 to 1997 is 35, will they not be contributing to the pool of elderly Singaporeans (by then aged 65 and above) between 2017 and 2027?
A worse scenario would of course be the 113,000 new citizens during the last 6 years turning 65 in around 2050.
Why isn’t the government keeping track of its immigration policy?
In April, I queried the NPTD on the fertility data of new citizens for the past 5 years. NPTD replied that it does “not differentiate between new citizens and other Singaporeans with regards to fertility data”. Query to NPTD It appears the government is more concerned with their potential economic contributions than potential issues in the future. (Issues will arise when female new citizens do not produce, males remain single, etc.)
Without relevant statistics, the government may not be aware that its policy could actually exacerbate the ageing population issue.
A valid question: are the objectives of our immigration policy met? The government needs to have and also disclose the following statistics of new citizens.
1 Summary profile of different age groups.
2 Number of single adults, those already married and children.
3 Number of children given birth to by new citizens.
4 Number who has remained single.
5 Impact of new citizens on our TFR.
The government has to keep track of a policy it has implemented ostensibly to resolve the issue of an ageing population. Is the immigration policy effective in addressing the stated problem? Without the relevant statistics, the government can only speculate.
Thank you and have a nice day.
A convincing counter argument to our immigration policy – The ugly truth about TFR and foreign influx…