Schooling Races To Capture Olympic Record And Singaporean Hearts

I have been thinking of a couple of things that have given Singaporeans reason for joy and celebration as well as some serious introspection.

The 13 of August 2016 would be forever etched in the minds of Singaporeans. The mood among Singaporeans from all walks of life, has been rather celebratory and for good reason. Our golden boy of the swimming pool, Joseph Schooling, has penned his name firmly into the annals of Singapore’s sporting history with a breathtaking win in the 100 m butterfly event in a new Olympic record of 50.39 seconds at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Photo Credits: MediaCorp okto Channel

Many Singaporeans got up early on the fateful Saturday morning to catch the race “live” on TV and rejoiced with him and his elated parents, May and Colin Schooling, as they witnessed years of strenuous, unforgiving training, sacrifice and unshakeable self-belief pay off in Joseph achieving Singapore’s 1st ever gold medal in the Olympics.

What made this win significant as well was Joseph beat his childhood idol, Michael Phelps of the U.S. into second place by almost a second. Two other world class swimmers, Chad Le Clos of South Africa and Lazslo Cseh of Hungary tied with Phelps in second place which in itself was very unusual.

Photo credit: MediaCorp okto Channel

The welcome home party at Singapore’s Changi Airport was raucous and overwhelming. A special motion was moved in Parliament to recognise Schooling’s achievement, culminating in an open top bus parade which started off from his home neighbourhood at Marine Parade.

Source: Channel News Asia: Joseph Schooling is Singapore’s First Olympic Champion

Singaporeans of all races, religions and backgrounds took pride in Schooling’s amazing achievement and were unabashed in their joy and gushing with praise for their champion. The fact that Schooling is of Eurasian descent and therefore his Olympic feat finding less of an emotional connection with Singaporeans of a certain race was never an issue. Singaporeans, no matter the race – Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian or any other race – were equal in their expression of joy that a fellow homegrown Singaporean was able to achieve Olympic glory.

So you can understand my uneasiness when I read the media reports this past week on the findings of the Channel News Asia-Institute of Policy Studies survey on race and relations in Singapore.

Among the main findings were some that I found personally disconcerting. Some of these are the fact that the majority of Singaporeans are still uncomfortable talking about racial issues which has led to some unanswered questions about religious and cultural practices among the various races in Singapore.

One in three among the minority races in Singapore felt discriminated against. More than half of minority respondents in the survey agreed with statements such as “people have acted as if they are better than you”. About 60 per cent of all respondents had heard racist comments. Under half of the respondents noting that such comments were made by workplace colleagues and friends. [Source: CNA 2nd Report – Racism Still A Problem for Some Singaporeans]

And in the last of the CNA-IPS reports, the survey concluded that most Singaporeans would still prefer a President or Prime Minister of the same race as themselves. [Source: CNA 3rd Report – Most Singaporeans Want Someone of the Same Race As Prime Minister, President] 

However, the majority still supported multi-culturalism in Singapore and that all races should be treated fairly and with respect. The majority still felt that success did not depend on your ethnicity.

While race relations in Singapore is still a work-in-progress (and will always be in my view), it is good to note that the government is acutely aware of this and continues to seek ways to bridge gaps between the races here.

In any multi-ethnic, multi-religious country, the natural sway is for the majority group to exert its influence in the country’s political, social and economic sectors. It may even be argued that the minority groups have to make the effort to fit into these sectoral constructs as best they can so that they do not become irrelevant or marginalised.

However, the Singapore government has so far, not taken this for granted and has deliberately taken steps to ensure the minority groups are engaged and their concerns are heard and inter-ethnic bonds are continually strengthened.

But I sense there is a renewed urgency among the political elite to up the ante where improving race relations here is concerned. There is a new Channel News Asia documentary called Regardless of Race presented by none other than PAP MP, Minister of State, Communications and Information & Education and Chairman of OnePeople.SG, Dr Janil Puthucheary

The documentary featured a social experiment that was carried out which though simple in its aim and logic, turned out to be rather impactful in its revelation to the participants. You can check it out in the video link below:

REGARDLESS OF RACE – SOCIAL EXPERIMENT

What was revealing was that members of the minority races were surprised to find how much they underestimated their own feelings of being undervalued because of their ethnicity and how the majority race (Chinese) have never viewed themselves as being privileged just because of their race even if that is the reality in Singapore. A simple but stark illustration of this is to hear how Chinese Singaporeans felt discriminated or slighted while being in a foreign country either as a tourist or for work purposes, where they are not the majority race. The incidents they experienced are not very different from what minorities in Singapore may face.

I personally believe our Singapore youths can do much more to learn about the various ethnic groups in Singapore and to differentiate race from religion, ethnicity, language and nationality. So an Indian man may not necessarily be of the Hindu faith, may not necessarily have a beef restricted diet, neither does he necessarily have to speak Tamil, nor does he have to be born in India. And yes, he need not necessarily be dark-skinned, even though the majority are.

Perhaps the best illustration of understanding the nuances of race, ethnicity, language and nationality was the recent Olympics. In table tennis, China showcased its dominance in the event in a startling manner, not just because it swept the gold in the men’s, women’s and doubles events. China-born players represented 21 other countries, including France, Luxembourg, Canada, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Congo, Qatar and Singapore, in the event.

Being Chinese meant little to them compared to the flag they represented. They fought hard to win and to represent their country with pride. And their countrymen cheered and supported them whole-heartedly. There are just some things that transcend race, religion and ethnicity. Joseph Schooling showed us all what that was. And that is being Singaporean.

What Do We, The Electorate, Really Want After GE2015?

As polling day draws near, I pondered my duty as a citizen and although I had a fairly good idea which party I would be voting for, I felt a need to give myself a chance to hear out the incumbent PAP candidates one more time before going to the ballot box. It would also give me a chance to get a sense of the ground at my constituency (not that this has a bearing on how I will vote but more out of curiosity), the newly formed electoral division of Marsiling-Yew Tee.

So on Saturday, 5 September 2015, after dinner, I headed to the PAP rally at Choa Chu Kang Secondary School with my wife and two sons. A fairly decent crowd gathered with several rows of chairs set up right at the front of the stage all already occupied by the early birds.

Mr Alex Yam addressing the crowd at the PAP Rally at Choa Chu Kang Secondary School on 5 Sept 2015

As I listened to the rousing speeches of the PAP candidates, in particular Mr Alex Yam and Mr Lawrence Wong, my thoughts drifted back to my personal encounters with them. Mr Alex Yam is the MP for my ward, Yew Tee. He has a calm demeanour, his face always wearing a warm, welcoming smile. He has a kind heart and a willingness to listen and help the sick and the disadvantaged in his ward. He always has a warm greeting for my wife and son whenever he meets them at community functions, calling them by their names. Under his leadership, Yew Tee is being slowly transformed into a humane and compassionate community.

Just citing 2 examples of this, which he recounted during his rally speech – The first, about how his grassroots people tried to help a girl, suffering from kidney failure, to get a kidney transplant was especially heart-warming. When a kidney with a right match was finally found, the hospital said that it required a kidney to be donated in return which the girl’s mother readily agreed to. Unfortunately, her mother grew very ill and was not able to donate her kidney, thus scuppering the girl’s hopes of a kidney transplant. Mr Yam went on to state that he will be launching a scholarship under the girl’s name (I assume she has passed on), to be given to 30 students with no bonds to serve other than to commit to 30 hours of community service.

The other example Mr Yam cited was that of a girl who is suffering from a disease, which results in severe fits, bone fragility, anaemia and enlargement of the liver and spleen. She requires a special milk powder which is very expensive and once again Mr Yam went to his constituents for help (see video below).

Video credit: People’s Action Party Facebook

Besides his compassion for the unfortunate, Mr Yam showed courage in 2013 when he spoke about his conviction to flush out loans sharks and runners from his constituency. Then he had posted on his Facebook page, “You threaten my residents, means you threaten me and my 500 volunteers. I don’t like threats and we certainly don’t take them lying down.”

My encounter with Mr Lawrence Wong was a very brief one, during a youth film awards event by SCAPE, last month. However, even in that brief time, he struck me as a friendly, sensible, open man who showed a genuine interest in the people he was speaking to and what they had to say.

Mr Lawrence Wong speaking at the PAP Rally at Choa Chu Kang Secondary School on 5 Sept 2015

Before the skeptics reading this post conclude that I am just another feeble minded voter with an irrational fear of supporting the opposition even if they are responsible and have the heart to serve the people, let me just say this. I do have a lot of empathy for what some opposition party candidates say they want for the people of Singapore. Several members of the Workers Party, SDP and DPP, have put forth some very compelling ideas on how to improve our health, transport, social, immigration and foreign labour policies even if they may lack the financial wherewithal of implementing those policies.

Mdm Halimah Yacob speaking at the rally at Woodlands Stadium on 9 Sept 2015

Nonetheless, these are policy ideas that, I believe, will make even the PAP sit up and take notice. But isn’t that what the elections are about and should be? Political gladiators battling each other in the arena of ideas seeking to outwit their opponents by exercising their art of persuasion and thereby drawing the greatest applause from the spectators (the people). This is one election, where I can say we Singaporeans can be proud of because our country has matured enough to have a system that allows such a contest of ideas with both the PAP and opposition candidates not taking each other for granted but engaging each other on substantive issues.

Mr Lawrence Wong addressing the crowd at Woodlands Stadium Rally on 9 Sept 2015

But besides the core, substantive issues being debated during this elections, we also see several opposition candidates calling for a more humane and compassionate society where we look out for each other, where we seek to progress together. One example of this is SDP’s Dr Chee Soon Juan when he highlighted the collective pursuit of happiness in our society is possible through a story about African children involved in an anthropological study.

And then there is SPP’s Mr Benjamin Pwee (DPP Sec-Gen running under the SPP banner), who said that in the final analysis what people yearn for is to have an MP who will listen, who has empathy and with whom they can connect with.

Video credit: Inconvenient Questions – http://inconvenientquestions.sg

So then I pondered again – isn’t it interesting that when we strip away all the political posturing, loud theatrics of animated speeches at rallies and the colourful use of allegorical language to represent ideas and/or to denounce opponents – when we strip all that away – what people deep down, really want is to connect with their MP in a way that they feel they are being listened to and that their MP possesses compassion and values of humanity that they hope to get comfort from not just individually but as a society. And if you managed to experience that with The Worker’s Party candidate or a Singapore Democratic Party candidate and after much thought you want to vote for him or her, then I say so be it and I trust that you have done right by yourself and your dependents.

The crowd at the PAP rally at Choa Chu Kang Secondary School

Well, there is one more day of electioneering to go and more chances for us all to get a measure of the PAP and all the other opposition parties. Even if that maybe the case, based on my personal experiences with the incumbent MP in my GRC, Mr Alex Yam, I see very little reason for a change in who I want representing me in Parliament. You see, like most people, I sense a connection with my MP and I know that he has the people’s welfare at heart. No prizes for guessing which party I will be voting for come 11 September 2015.

3 +1 Things To Note For SG GE 2015

1 September 2015 was Nomination Day and what a day to kick off the hustings in Singapore Elections 2015. After all nominations papers were filed MediaCorp’s Channel News Asia then aired a “live” telecast of a forum featuring 7 candidates from 6 political parties – 2 from PAP (Ms Denise Phua & Mr Lawrence Wong) and 1 each from the Reform Party (Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam),  National Solidarity Party (Mr Lim Tean), Singapore Democratic Party (Dr Chee Soon Juan), Singaporeans First Party (Mr Tan Jee Say) and  the Workers’ Party (Mr Perera Leon Anil).

There are at least a couple of firsts in this elections. For the first time, all 29 electoral divisions will be contested. This is also the first elections in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era and it does seem a little odd not having him around either at the rallies or on TV giving his assessments of PAP candidates and how he thinks PAP will fare against the opposition.

But viewing the “live” telecast of the forum on Tuesday (1 Sept 15), it soon became apparent to me that 3 main issues could most likely define this elections and possibly how the electorate could vote. 

• 1. Immigration and its attendant challenges 

It became quite clear after the opening statements from the 6 opposition party reps that immigration is THE issue which will get more than its fair share of airing in this elections. The influx of foreigners has been linked, if not directly blamed, for a host of other heartaches – lack of job opportunities, low wages, over-crowded MRT trains, high housing prices, inadequate essential infrastructure to deal with increase in foreigners, higher stress levels, etc. The PAP representatives did their best to explain the need for foreigners but it was met with firm riposte from opposition party reps.

The Marsiling-Yew Tee contest between PAP and SDP

• 2. Track Record vs Policies For The Future

The PAP wants voters to judge them by their track record or what it terms, the report card, detailing all that they have achieved for the people of Singapore on things like health insurance (MediShield Life), wages for lower income and older workers (Workfare Income Supplement), housing (the various policies to increase supply and cap rising prices), securing jobs and being industry ready (SkillsFuture, a national initiative to encourage tertiary students to acquire industry skills through apprenticeships and Earn & Learn programmes), etc. The WP rep questioned if this is really the best way to judge how worthy a party is of the electorate’s vote as a report card is by its very nature, retrospective. The WP would prefer looking at future policies and initiatives which the party wants to implement as more effective in garnering support and votes as they give a glimpse of how lives of people will be affected.

• 3. Local Municipal Matters vs Representing People’s Views In Parliament 

The PAP wants voters to judge them both on how the MPs have run the town councils as well as their performance in parliament, in being the voice of the people. The opposition parties appear to place more importance in the latter, in better representing the people’s concerns and establishing more debate before bills are being passed in parliament. In these aspects, the PAP is the very antithesis of the opposition parties, maintaining that greater opposition numbers in parliament is no guarantee for better policies. The PAP holds that most people are more concerned about municipal issues and how well their townships are run because these issues directly impact on their everyday lives.

SDP Rally at Choa Chu Kang Stadium on 3 Sep 2015

And finally, the character of the candidate especially where it concerns honesty and integrity. While I feel this is not a key election issue, I do acknowledge that it will hover like a fog over the entire duration of this elections. The SDP has called for clean electioneering and for all parties to steer away from name-calling and gutter politics. The PAP, on the other hand, while supporting the call for clean electioneering, has reserved its rights on calling out on any candidate it feels has fallen short of its high standards of integrity – something that it obviously feels all Singaporeans have the right to know before they vote.

About a week to go before the people go to the polls and a truly exciting hustings can be expected over the weekend.

And to end off this post, I chanced upon this website where you can find out details of the schedule of all the rallies and view videos of the rallies if you were unable to attend them personally. Alternatively you can check out Toggle.

Seeking Solace in Humanity’s Bounteous Bosom

I do believe that June 2015 will be a month that will be etched in my memory for a very long time. Most of it has to do with what happened in Singapore or to Singaporeans but epoch-making world events also helped to mark this month as a special time that would not be forgotten so easily.

Firstly, Singapore hosted the 28th SEA Games from the 5-16 June 2015. The successful hosting of the Games was a testimony to Singapore’s well known strengths in management and organisation. Our athletes did splendidly and managed 2nd place in the overall medal tally with 84 gold, 73 silver and 102 bronze to emerge as the nation with the most bemedaled athletes.

My most favourite moment of the Games was when Veronica Shanti Pereira took the gold in the 200 metre sprint in track and field, clocking a new National record of 23.6 seconds. Being a runner myself in my school days, I can appreciate that Veronica’s success came on the back of real hard work, sacrifice and a lot of sweat and tears. But winning the way she did, beating pre-race favourite and 100 metre champion, Kayla Richardson from the Philippines, in front of the home crowd at the new National Stadium, must have felt special, not just for Veronica, but for hordes of Singaporeans who have been starved of seeing a home grown talent win a track gold for a long time. Glory Barnabas last won the gold in track, incidentally in the same event, in 1973.

The spirit of the Games, the way the athletes performed and how Singaporeans from all walks of life came together to support the athletes and each other as spectators and volunteers, made this a special SG50 event, very aptly reflected in the songs of the Games, 2 of which caught my fancy – “Unbreakable” and “Greatest”, the latter sung by Daphne Khoo, who is a Mass Comm, alumna from the School of Film & Media, Ngee Ann Polytechnic

The celebratory and upbeat mood was dampened perceptibly early in the Games when tragic news emerged of the loss of lives following the 6.0 magnitude Sabah earthquake on the morning of 5 June 2015. 10 Singaporeans – 7 school children, 2 teachers from Tanjong Katong Primary School and 1 adventure guide, perished as boulders and rocks descended upon them at Mount Kinabalu while on a trekking expedition. Monday, 8 June 2015 was declared a Day of National Remembrance, with all state flags flown at half mast and 1-minute of silence as a mark of respect observed at all venues of the SEA Games.

What was truly remarkable of these 2 events – one evoking joyous celebration and the other infusing grief and melancholy – was that they served to rally Singaporeans of all races, religions and backgrounds, new citizens and born and bred Singaporeans, to come together and support each in a way that members of a close knit family support each other. The warmth of Humanity lifted the spirits of our athletes and soothed the anguish from the loss of fellow Singaporeans. Humanity triumphed wonderfully.

But then a few world events made me question just for how long can Humanity sustain the warmth emanating from its bounteous bosom.

A 21-year old white male from South Carolina, USA, Dylann Roof, shot dead 9 people in an African Methodist Episcopal Church in a racially motivated attack. One of the victims was the church minister Reverend Clementa Pinckney, a long serving South Carolina senator and civil rights leader. We are well into the 21st century, nearly 150 years after the end of slavery in the U.S. and it makes me wonder what made a young man like Dylann commit this heinous hate crime.

More recently, series of coordinated terrorist attacks across 3 continents, purportedly bearing the indelible mark of the militant group, the Islamic State (ISIS), shocked the world.

Scores of people were killed – 37 tourists, mainly Britons and Germans, killed on the beachfront of a hotel resort in Tunisia, a suicide bomber detonated a bomb in a Shite mosque in Kuwait after Friday prayers and the beheading of man, a manager who worked in a factory of a U.S. gas company near Lyon, a city in south-east France and whose decapitated body was found as police arrested a man, believed to be a worker at the factory, for trying to blow it up.

Such attacks, allegedly perpetrated by militants fighting for what they believe is a divine cause to right the perceived wrongs done unto Muslims and their God, represent Islam in a very bad light, especially since we all agree that Islam is, essentially, a religion of peace. By planning and executing these attacks during the sacred month of Ramadan, these militants sought to exact maximum damage and publicity for their twisted and misguided cause, attempting to write a narrative that runs counter to the basic tenets of Islam.

Has the warmth of Humanity’s bosom dissipated quickly, never to return?

As I pondered this question, agonising to comprehend the tragedies unfolding before me, in greater numbers and frequencies, I realised that, alas, Humanity is the net sum of all actions by every single human being on this Earth.

As Mahatma Gandhi once said, “You must not lose faith in Humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty”. As long as the number of good acts outnumber the number of bad acts, Humanity has a chance of surviving and spreading its warmth to all.

Another development that could very well re-define our societal norms and they way we look at the institution of marriage and the traditional family structure is the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow same sex marriage in all 50 states of the country. The 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision to legalise same sex marriage was met with thunderous applause from gay rights groups and sparked immediate queues at the registry of marriages at local government offices.

President Obama said the decision “arrived like a thunderbolt” and called it “a victory for America”, obviously delighted that he’s come good on one of his earlier campaign promises to bring dignity and equal status to all same sex couples, even as he laments the embarrassing lack of progress on race issues.

I feel that this development in the U.S. is sure to test the unity and harmony of our largely conservative society in Singapore with a more active and vocal gay rights movement which is growing increasingly confident of pushing through its agenda.

My hope is that Humanity plays her part in calming our senses and giving all of us a chance to think through not so much of what divides us but seeking to accentuate that which unites us. And if this requires us to live and let live, then let us appreciate that there are just some battles we can never win and be prepared to take the losses as long as those who sit in the opposing ideological camps, do not launch missiles into the other camp, destroying their opponent’s right of abode in their own sanctuaries.

As long as Humanity endures, we have a chance to live harmoniously as one. I will like to end by taking heart from with this quote by Nelson Mandela from his book, Long Walk to Freedom: Autobiography of Nelson Mandela,

“I am fundamentally an optimist. Whether that comes from nature or nurture, I cannot say. Part of being optimistic is keeping one’s head pointed toward the sun, one’s feet moving forward. There were many dark moments when my faith in Humanity was sorely tested, but I would not and could not give myself up to despair. That way lays defeat and death.”

Singapore Lions XII Wins Malaysian FA Cup Final

A historic moment in sport achieved by the Lions XII team in the Malaysian Super League’s FA Cup final against Kelantan yesterday, winning 3-1 for first time in the Cup’s 25 year history. All the more meaningful as this SG50 Year. Well done Lions!

What’s telling for me was the Kelantan team had its full complement of foreign players deployed – I believe there were 2 Brazilians and 1 Nigerian. But our Lions XII players stood tall. were up for the challenge and persevered.

Singaporeans are proud of you. 🙂 Here are the highlights.

Remembering Lee Kuan Yew 1923 – 2015

No matter what we may say about him, one cannot doubt his commitment, dedication and loyalty to Singapore and her well-being.

Rest in peace, LKY.

SGBudget 2015 – SkillsFuture: A Perspective

The recent budget announcement in Parliament by DPM and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was probably one of the better budgets I have personally witnessed in terms of its goals, the clarity of its purpose, the breadth of its impact on the various sectors of society and economy and its boldness in tackling the challenges that Singapore will be facing (or is already facing)  in the future.

Strengthening social security, boosting retirement savings for seniors, enhancing financial support for the lower tier of the aged, building a skills-based meritocracy and supporting and enhancing innovation and internationalisation efforts of Singapore companies – these are the main areas of Budget 2015. Providing financial support for these key areas will go some way into assuaging people’s concerns raised in numerous feedback and meet-the-people sessions over the last few years.

However, for this post I would like to focus on just one area which has drawn probably the most attention and discussion among Singaporeans thus far – building a skills-based meritocracy via the SkillsFuture initiatives.

The Budget 2015 unveiled a slew of incentives to:

a) encourage life long learning so that it does not remain a buzzword but it actually takes hold across the majority of our resident population through the SkillsFuture credit of $500 for each Singaporean above 24 years of age from 2016 onwards. Top-ups will be made at regular intervals thereafter

b) provide students with more assistance in discovering their strengths and interests by providing them access to specially trained Education and Career Guidance Counsellors from MOE and Polytechnics

c) support fresh graduates from polytechnics and ITE through the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme. Graduates will be matched to companies in a 12-18 month programme with graduates getting a sign on bonus of $5000 and companies, grants of up to $15,000

d) support the aspirations of mid-career Singaporeans and executives through generous educational and training subsidies as well as SkillsFuture Study Awards and Fellowships

These incentives and support schemes look encouraging and I feel they go directly into tackling the wider systemic issues of the mismatch between the labour market and industry demands. Also the issue of the aspirations of an increasingly more educated workforce is being addressed albeit by requiring individuals to scale up in terms of their skills to match industry demands.

It is interesting that the SkillsFuture initiatives try to cover not just younger workers and professionals but older, mid-career ones as well.

But how effective these measures will be in actually producing tangible results on the ground is still left to be seen.

Acknowledging that no amount of grants and financial incentives can bring about a mindset shift, DPM Tharman called for a change in our economic and social culture as we are still very much a society that is ordered by academic results.

And this echoes what was pointed out in my previous blog, “ASPIRE-ring For A Brave New World” where I cautioned that a fundamental change in the way we approach education, work, career and ultimately, life, is needed if we want our society to be a skills-based meritocracy where every individual will have a chance to fullfil his/her potential by continually improving his/her  skills and knowledge.

Lifelong learning is one aspect of the cultural change that is slowly taking shape but has yet to take hold like it has in other first world countries. Budget 2015 cited the example of Senthilnathan Manickam, aged 41.

“He graduated from Ngee Ann Polytechnic’s Film Sound and VIDEO COURSE. After some years of working on corporate videos and TV programmes, he felt he needed to specialise, to differentiate himself from the field. He chose to specialise in high-speed cinematography, and is making a name for himself in the field in Singapore and abroad. As Senthil puts it: “There isn’t one path but many paths to achieve your dreams and be successful. Don’t give up. You always learn something new every day.”” (Source: http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2015/bib_pc.aspx)

Next, the issue of the industry and job market pricing university graduates higher than ITE and Polytechnic graduates. I can understand if its for entry level executive appointments. But for mid-level and higher executive appointments I feel that employers have to start looking at experience, skills attainted and character traits that fit with the job specifications.

DPM Tharman also conceded that ageism is a concern and said “I think we have to tackle ageism in Singapore. There is sort of a quiet, unstated discrimination among the mid-careers and those who are in their 50s. Mid-40s and 50s, it’s usually not so easy for them to get back in,”

We have to start building a job market based on skills and knowledge irrespective of age, gender, social, ethnic and religious background and less on purely academic standards.

But will employers make the mindset change? And will ITE and polytechnic graduates sign up for the much vaunted SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme to gain the skills that will be valued by industry?

While several ITE and polytechnic students have expressed interest in signing up for the programme several others have also voiced concerns that if employers’ fixation with academic qualifications remains, it would deter them from applying for the programme, according to a report from TODAY by Amanda Lee.

So if ITE and polytechnic graduates don’t bite at the Earn and Learn apple and employers become reluctant to invest in employees for fear that they will not stay, we have the makings of a vicious cycle where the stakeholders of SkillsFuture will remain unengaged, making little progress towards the stated goals.

This is where I hope employers will seize the initiative to break this cycle by taking a chance and a leap of faith that SkillsFuture will be effective in the long term. It basically necessitates a commitment by employers to invest in people; a commitment to develop, nurture and mentor their employees to show them that they have a stake in the company and that they are valued for their skills and contributions. I believe this commitment by employers will earn them a reciprocation of equal measure from the beneficiaries of their investment.

DPM Tharman summed it up nicely in this video clip taken from MediaCorp Channel 5’s Budget 2015 show, Ask The Finance Minister, where he coaxed employers to invest in people. I hope employers will take heed.

ASPIRE-ing For A Brave New World

In August this year, the Singapore government accepted the list of 10 recommendations put forward in a report by the ASPIRE (Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review) committee led by Ms Indranee Rajah, Senior Minister of State for Law & Education.

Among the recommendations –  to help students make informed choices about their educational pathways and careers, development of more online learning resources in the polys and ITEs, development of programmes focused on life skills aimed at strengthening student’s leadership, character and resilience, introduction of work-and-study programmes a.k.a. place-and-train programmes as well as Continuing Education and Training (CET) programmes to deepen skills after graduation.

Embed from Getty Images

ASPIRE’s fundamental objective could be summarised as follows:

It is to ensure every Singaporean is able to contribute to Singapore’s overall development and progress by fulfilling his/her potential according to his/her talent and interest.

While the ASPIRE recommendations are all logical and sound given this objective, the ASPIRE committee was under no illusions regarding the enormity of the challenge that lies ahead in implementing these recommendations.

The challenge does not lie in the nuts and bolts of the government-post-secondary institutions-industry machinery implementing the recommendations but in the hearts and minds of our people. This is where ASPIRE has to work its magic and changing mindsets is not something that can be done overnight. This is a long term project – perhaps even stretching over a generation or so. But what makes this project so monumental and more importantly, why is it so important that Singapore achieves the objective?

Firstly, Singaporeans have long been weaned on the work hard-do well in school-get a good job ethos which has worked well for us as a nation until now. Children have been advised (and lectured :-() time and again that the only way to success in life is to get good grades in school, go to university and get a high salaried job in the government service or MNC.

Embed from Getty Images

In the past decade, the Ministry of Education has worked hard both to correct this misguided notion of success by way of policies and programmes in schools and post-secondary institutions, to create multiple pathways to success. One example is the lining up of educational pathways like the 6-year IB diploma programme and the setting up of specialised schools like the School of the Arts and the Sports School.

But old habits die hard indeed, especially those that are so entrenched in our society that they are widely recognised to be an integral part of our culture,

We are, after all, the nation of “kiasu” people (“kiasu” means “afraid to lose” in Chinese). This character trait is so ingrained in our collective psyche that we have even created a comic character called Mr Kiasu which evolved into a TV series later.

The good grades, being exam smart, the insane hours and money spent on extra tuition, the paper chase – these are all perceived to be pre-requisites for a better life and being “kiasu” we do not want, for one minute, entertain the possibility that this idea, in and of itself, could be flawed and that the reality could be very different, if only we have the courage to choose a different pathway to find success and happiness.

The problem is that many people are discouraged from taking the risk of choosing a different path. Why? Because they perceive that there are not enough decision-makers out there in industry and even in schools and educational institutions, who believe that taking a different pathway can and should lead to success. Some of these same people may even offer an excuse that the current HR policies or government incentive schemes are overwhelmingly in favour of the status quo – i.e. people who have taken the traditional paper-ridden pathway.

Embed from Getty Images

So how do we then resolve this problem? We have to make that cultural change as a nation. At the risk of sounding repetitive ad nauseum – this is a huge change, a tidal wave, not a surfing wave.  We have to start singing the same tune. We have to start celebrating people finding success on different pathways. Scholarship schemes have to make the playing field more level for these “mavericks”. HR managers have to start giving more weight to achievements and character traits rather than paper qualifications when assessing candidates for jobs.

So one may ask, why are we even embarking on this endeavour when we know that there are risks involved (political and social) and the rewards forthcoming only years, if not decades, from now?

The reason is simple. Its because we risk even more if we don’t. The majority of us who are not academically gifted enough to enrol in the “A” grade universities, will not have our aspirations met. We will stop believing in the dream that Singapore is a land of opportunity and if you are hungry enough and are willing to work hard, you can also succeed. And once that dream is broken, people will start to look elsewhere to fulfil their dreams.

But there is also another phenomenon that is occurring which is forcing our hand in this great shift. The paper chase, fuelled by our “kiasuism”, has spawned a new generation of job-seekers armed with university degrees who feel entitled to good jobs, paying good salaries. And when these jobs become elusive, they become disenchanted and feel let down by the government.

Graduate unemployment is beginning to be a concern for Singapore. Even though the numbers are not as high as in other East Asian economies like South Korea or Japan,  something needs to be done before the numbers soar incurring a heavy social cost.

The other thing that has emerged is that inspite of the increasing cohort university participation rate, Singapore continues to face a talent and skills mismatch in the job market which forces it to look for more foreign talent.

This then begs the question as to whether our overall educational infrastructure is geared properly to support the needs of our industry. Are we producing too many university graduates and too few polytechnic and ITE graduates with the relevant technical knowledge and skills to be gainfully employed in the job market? Are employers willing to recognise and reward these skills in the market such that students are willing to consider switching to non-traditional, non-degree pathways to fulfil their career ambitions?

Embed from Getty Images

These are some of the questions and challenges that we will face as ASPIRE tries to move its recommendations on the ground. Expect resistance from all parties – students, parents and employers. But pushing ahead undaunted and keeping the faith will soon become the treacly mantras that the government, as the party taking the lead in effecting this cultural change, will be chanting. Expect the chants to grow louder and more frequent in the years to come.

The greatest challenge Singapore and the world faces right now

Building a more harmonious and inclusive society which balances the diverse needs of its various members with the overarching guiding principle being mutual respect for fellow members and the continuous pursuit of finding more common spaces in the society. This is perhaps the biggest challenge mankind has ever had to deal with and will ever have to in future.

Two events in these past weeks have put the spotlight on this challenge in a striking way.

The first is the Israeli air strikes on Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip following its conflict with Hamas which governs the territory. Hamas is widely seen as a terrorist organisation by many Western countries chiefly because of its failure to outrightly recognise Israel’s right to exist as an independent nation with Jerusalem as its spiritual and religious centre.

This is an age old conflict complicated further by historical territorial claims and the movement of the native peoples due to invasions and wars in the political tinderbox that is the Middle East.

Why would nations want to inflict such pain and suffering on innocent children? – photo courtesy of aljazeerah

Here is a classic case of different groups of people with different religious backgrounds and ethnicities (Israeli Jews and Palestinian Muslims) who are are fighting each other for what they both claim is their homeland. There is no easy solution especially when religious beliefs frame and even define the crux of the conflict.

Innocent children are often the tragic victims of war – photo courtesy of firstpost.com

Faith which is a central foundation of any religious belief does not conform to any rational or logical reasoning or line of argument. In short, faith dictates that followers of any religion, take the leap of faith and do not question the main tenets of their religious beliefs. What’s more – these religious beliefs have been in practice for thousands of years and many thousands of lives have been lost in the defence of these beliefs. It is naive and dare I say, wishful thinking, to dismiss these beliefs with purely intellectual salvoes.

Let’s switch the microscope to Singapore. In the past couple of weeks we have witnessed the country splitting effectively into 2 camps in the aftermath of the National Library Board’s (NLB) decision to “pulp” 3 children’s books which contain narratives pertaining to alternative or non-traditional family structures centred around same sex parents/partners.

After vociferous protests from both the LGBT quarters and people who are not gay or pro-LGBT but just pro-books, the Singapore Minister for Communication and Information, Mr Yaacob Ibrahim, overturned the original NLB decision to pulp the children’s books and directed NLB to place 2 of the children’s titles in the adult’s section.

And Tango Makes Three – photo courtesy of http://www.nydailynews.com

Placing the books (And Tango Makes Three and The Swan Express) in the adults section gives the opportunity for parents to exercise discretion in allowing their children to read the books under their supervision. This was seen as a better solution to directly “pulping” the books which is tantamount to censorship.

This “middle ground” decision, however, did not find favour with some members of the pro-family camp which was quick to express its disappointment that the LGBT movement appeared to have made a small inroad in its quest to being part of Singapore’s mainstream culture.

But where is this pro-family camp’s anger and disappointment coming from? Could it be because this camp believes, as do many Singaporeans, that the traditional family structure is the basic building block of our society and is the cornerstone of Singapore’s growth as a strong and prosperous society? Wasn’t the traditional family structure put forward as part of our national value system which all Singaporeans should strive to uphold? Or have things changed so much that we have to review our national value system?

An inclusive society means one where members are willing to compromise without giving up on their values – photo courtesy of lisabauman.blogspot.com

Whatever it is, I believe Singaporeans have to deal with issues such as this in a calm, sensible and inclusive manner while respecting our fellow Singaporeans, no matter what their beliefs and value systems are.

Noone can change the fact that s/he is of a particular race or religious background. These irrefutable facts about a person do frame how one thinks about issues especially those pertaining to morals, value systems and lifestyles. And no person should have to apologise for the way s/he leads his/her life according to his/her beliefs and value systems.

Happy National Day

My National Day wish for Singapore is for us to arrive at a consensus on how we resolve conflicts, to design a framework to discuss and debate issues and settle competing and diverse needs in a rational and sensible manner. We need to make space for more middle ground. We need to create more room and time for common space. We should be a nation with an insatiable appetite to find things that unite us and are common to all of us and in time, we will be able to create a mountain of commonalities which will dwarf the things that divide us. Majulah Singapura!

ASPIRE: Realising the Aspirations of Singapore Youths

Next year Singapore will celebrate its 50th year of independence. 50 is, I suppose, a significant milestone for a country and is a good time for citizens to reflect on Singapore’s achievements, her setbacks, to consolidate and start planning for the future. It is also a time to celebrate and that is what SG50 is about. Singaporeans are invited to send their ideas of how we can celebrate as a nation this special birthday through the SG50 website.

Well, I did my fair share of pondering and drew up a wishlist for myself, well, actually, more accurately for my children, on what I hope Singapore to become in the coming decades, specifically in the area of education.

Recently I attended a parents engagement session, one of many feedback sessions conducted all over Singapore by ASPIRE, the acronym for Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review.

The acronym is very appropriate as it deals with the aspirations of students in the polytechnics and ITE as well as the nation as a whole.

Briefly the ASPIRE Committee was set up by the government to review the polytechnic and ITE education sector and get it ready and equipped for the challenges of the new [digital] economy. Industries change and adapt to these challenges by adopting new technology, increasing efficiencies, developing new talent and investing in skills upgrade and training.

A key challenge of this new economy is to ensure that our polytechnic and ITE graduates are industry-ready not just in terms of possessing the technical skills but also the soft skills like communication skills, being able to work in teams and having EQ.

During this discussion, several parents expressed their educational and career aspirations for their children, first from their own perspective and then from the perspective of their children.

Some differences were evident from the responses for both perspectives. Most parents still thought that a university degree is important for their children’s career advancement. There were mixed views on whether the pursuit of the degree should begin right after securing the diplomas or after gaining some work experience.

However, parents were almost unanimous in agreeing that polytechnics and ITEs should retain their core applied learning pedagogy and enhance their industry-linked training focus.

2 issues received greater attention in the ensuing discussions.

One – How can we better engage our students (potential students)  in the polytechnic/ITE sector to ensure that their aspirations are not left floundering because of the rigidity of the educational system?

Two – How can we better enhance the industry exposure and training for our students so that they have the skills to add value at the work place and have career advancement which would allow employers to retain them for a reasonable number of years?

Dealing with issue #2 first – one model that was put forward for the parents to consider  was the German model where students are put in an apprenticeship programme for 1-2 years with companies. This apprenticeship is a structured study-and-work programme whereby the student works 3 days of the week and comes back to school for 2 days to acquire the theory and book knowledge.

This has it’s pros and cons. The plus points are that such a programme will offer the students increased industry exposure and an excellent opportunity to obtain the industry-relevant skills. Good student-apprentices could be identified by the companies which may even offer them full-time employment upon graduation or sponsor their further studies (degree programme).

One of the costs of such a programme is the need for greater collaboration among the government, companies and polytechnics and ITEs to build a structured programme which delivers a high quality apprenticeship which does not dilute the academic rigour of polytechnic and ITE education. Other concerns include according proper academic and industry status and recognition to the programme, ensuring the apprenticeship has an assessment system that is fair, objective and consistent, ensuring there is a critical mass of companies willing to be part of this programme and that companies have a tangible incentive to be part of this programme.

The last 2 points on critical mass and tangible incentives deserve closer scrutiny. It is essential that companies in this new polytechnic and ITE educational landscape, realise that their roles are going to be different. Company supervisors will not just be bosses to the students, handing them work to do while supervising them as they are currently under internship programmes. They need to be mentors, passing on not just technical skills but gilt edged advice distilled from their many years of work experience to the students. Proper training plans should be carefully drawn up so that they are structured and leveled up over the 1-2 year period exposing students to different areas of work or varying levels of complexity.

On the point of tangible incentive, seeing how the roles have changed and indeed expectations are higher under this proposed programme, I feel it is only fair that the government offer some tax incentives to companies willing to partner polytechnics and ITEs in this programme. This could draw in the numbers which would address the critical mass issue.

However, I also see the need for the Education Ministry to introduce a special division that will have jurisdiction over this apprentice programme to train company supervisors to be able to

(i) develop structured training plans and

(ii) to become good mentors

This special division will also act as a mediation centre in the event that there are disputes arising between students and the companies or between the companies and the polytechnics/ITEs.

Now what about the Issue #1 – How can we make the aspirations of our students a reality?

I feel that this is an urgent issue that needs immediate attention. We have to be able to look at each and every student and offer them a decent shot at realising their fullest potential in the sector of their choice which they have the greatest interest in.

Some of you reading this will probably snigger and see it as a politically correct ideal which has little resonance on the ground. But success in overcoming great challenges almost always has it’s roots in a simply stated but potent idea.

I do not have the numbers to substantiate this but based on my personal experience as well as my experience as a polytechnic lecturer, I sense that there are many students who feel lost and directionless as they try to manoeuvre through the complex maze that is the current educational landscape.

Yes, the basic pathways have been defined for all to progress from primary school to secondary and post-secondary and finally tertiary institutions/universities. But there are a fair number, I feel, who “fall through the cracks” because they have not been sufficiently engaged and counseled.

Parents and educators (teachers) play a crucial role in identifying students’ passion and areas of interest. More has to be done in further studies and career counseling and it has to happen earlier at the minimum, at Secondary 3 level. Why Sec 3 level? Because this gives students enough runway to pursue their dreams – apply for courses they are interested in and do work that they are passionate about.

If student “A” knows that s/he is interested in animation and doing creative work on the computers, s/he could have benefited from a session with a further studies/career counselor who could pull out the relevant courses in ITE and polytechnics which offer these courses and check out their minimum entry requirements.

This could serve as an incentive for “lost”students to work harder in school in order to meet these entry requirements and qualify for these courses and eventually work in an industry which they are passionate about.

Aside from career counseling, a greater push is needed from schools to identify students’ interests in the allocation of modules or electives in the specialised schools or when students want to join a certain CCA or when a student works in a certain project in school.

Say for example, there is a student who has a keen interest in computers and is widely recognised as the computer “whiz” kid in class but is an average performer academically. This student should be given a chance to use his/her “gift” by offering him/her computer-related electives or when work is delegated in projects. Our schools can and should do more in recognising the “gifts” in our students and refrain from citing purely meritocratic reasons for denying them an elective or a chance to join a particular CCA which aligns well with their “gifts”. 

Education has a special place in the hearts of all Singaporeans because it is through education that we realise our aspirations. It is through education that we build our character, become good citizens and exemplary workers and professionals .

I see education simply as a journey where we (parents and teachers) guide our young to a place where they have many doors to enter or to a place where there are fewer doors but these are the doors they are happy to open and continue on their life journey.

Teachers are the chief stewards in our young’s educational journey and we should try our best to make their aspirations a reality, a noble and worthy aim of ASPIRE and one which is firmly on my wishlist for Singapore as a prepare to celebrate our 50th birthday.

New Age Class & Cultural Prejudice Has No Place In Singapore

The Anton Casey saga that raged across Singapore over 6 days ending in the Briton leaving Singapore for Perth with his family, demonstrated the awesome power of the Internet. Not only did Anton leave Singapore, “fearing for his life” citing death threats but he also parted ways with his employer, wealth management company, Crossinvest (Asia).

For the benefit of those unaware of the biggest story both in cyberspace and our print newspapers over the past week, Anton Casey’s descent into self-immolation first began with his offensive Facebook post about public transport users (MRT), referring to them as “poor people” and saying he “needed to wash the stench of public transport off me”.

Enraged netizens slammed him for his remarks and some of them decided to become cyber-vigilantes and exposed details of his wife, former Miss Singapore Universe beauty queen, Bernice Wong and his Gilstead Road home address, mobile phone numbers and place of work.

In less than a week, the resulting firestorm which also attracted comments from a Singapore minister and calls for calm and restraint from an official from the Singapore Kindness Movement, parched Anton Casey’s initial bravado and he finally succumbed to the searing online vitriol and public scorn by fleeing Singapore for the safer clime of Perth.

Given the ongoing debate regarding the burgeoning number of foreigners in Singapore and the resulting keener competition for limited resources in Singapore, the Anton saga would work into the hands of those who have been calling for not only reducing the number of foreigners but also clearer differentiation between Singapore citizens and temporary residents through benefits and privileges.

Its interesting to juxtapose this local saga with what a Time correspondent described as a developing phenomenon in the United States. Suketu Mehta in her article The Superiority Complex, says there is a new strain of racism that  is emerging cloaked in the protective armour of cultural pride.

Mehta cites a book recently published by “Tiger Mom”, Amy Chua and her husband Jed Rubenfeld, entitled The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America.

Chua and Rubenfeld propose 3 factors as to why Chinese, Indians, Jews, Cubans, Nigerians, Mormons, Iranians and Lebanese are superior when it comes to succeeding in America:

a) a superiority complex
b) insecurity
c) impulse control

aka the Triple Package.

Those lacking this Triple Package include African Americans, Appalachians and Wasps.

So the Chinese and Indians in America (new immigrants) are doing well because they think they are superior to others, have a nagging sense of insecurity that forces them never to be satisfied and are able to control their impulses or resist temptation to quit in the face of adversity.

This proposition does not, from the outset, carry the usual racist slurs or diatribe, perhaps because it is presented as an intelligent piece of research work and also because the authors say that it pertains not to race or IQ but to ethnicity.

But Mehta views it otherwise calling it the “new American racism” and a “pernicious line of thought”.

Her chief criticism of the book is that it fails to take into account factors other than ethnicity, like historical, political and social realities.

So the new “racism” is now parading as cultural or class superiority. This seems to be evident from Anton’s ill-willed Facebook posts where he pours scorn on the “poor people” who take public transport. The new age “racists” do not appear to be attacking a particular race anymore but it seems to be targeting a particular class of people or  culture. In Anton’s case, it is even less comprehensible, as he is married to a Chinese Singaporean and the term “racist” will be a misnomer where he is concerned or so it seems.

Singapore has to be vigilant about this new strain of social disease and should stamp it out and not give it room to grow or take root.

Our new immigrants and temporary residents must learn to assimilate into our Singapore culture and respect our diversity of races, religions and cultures. Both Singaporeans and foreigners must acknowledge that there are different perspectives of what we define as success and that different classes of people and indeed different ethnic groups, may have vastly different life goals and expectations of what a good life should afford them.

Contrasting Reception for Multiple Award Winner “Ilo Ilo” From Local and Overseas Markets

When Ilo Ilo won the prestigious Camera d’Or prize at the Cannes Film Festival in May this year, I was pleasantly surprised. This was a film made by a Singaporean film-maker, Anthony Chen (and a Ngee Ann Polytechnic alumnus) – his first feature film about a heartland family living through the 1997 Asian economic crisis with their Filipino maid.

Members of the arts community here and Singaporeans in general, celebrated this win.

Anthony Chen Wins The Camera d’Or at Cannes for his film Ilo Ilo

Chen’s recent win of four awards including Best Picture and Best New Director at Taiwan’s Golden Horse awards (Chinese moviedom’s equivalent of the Oscars), surprised a few critics including Chen himself.

Some people even called it a turning point for Singapore cinema and film industry.

But is it really?

Don’t get me wrong. I am delighted that a Singapore film has finally achieved the recognition it deserves at the highest level globally. Ilo Ilo was produced with a budget of about $700,000, supported financially by a Singapore Film Commission funding scheme and Chen’s alma mater, Ngee Ann Polytechnic.

This is a film that was devoid of all the traits of a Hollywood blockbuster and targeted at the average Singaporean viewer neither is it a true blue arthouse movie. It did not have a big name star neither was it infused with a good dosage of slapstick comedy which Singaporeans seem to lap up. There was no romantic leading man or lady because there was no romantic sub-plot in the narrative.

What it has, though, is some straight shooting, honest to goodness story-telling without the usual drama and twists that we come to expect of films that generally do well at the box office.

A scene from the movie Ilo Ilo

When I thought about this more deeply, I figured how very Singaporean this film was, in every sense of the word. I mean not just because it was made by a Singaporean but also how it was made (budget wise) and how the narrative was kept simple and honest to reflect the filmmaker’s own childhood experience. Chen fought the temptation to resort to gimmicks in order to “spice” up the script just so that it will be more commercial.

It was almost like Chen set out to dress up an autobiographical documentary and parade it as a film. But don’t people go to the movies to suspend their disbelief and be transported to a world that they rarely go into? Or am I just being boringly predictable in terms of what movie-goers really want.

This is where I started to draw some parallels between Ilo Ilo and Singapore. If you were to think of Singapore and how it regularly punches above it’s weight-class in the global political arena, you begin to see some similarities between Ilo Ilo’s string of film awards and Singapore.

Singapore is often seen as a clean and efficient city state where everything works and where we are a hub or centre of excellence for commerce, finance education, etc. Honesty and integrity in government are not just buzzwords but ferverntly pursued and upheld to the highest order.

I could’nt help but feel that Chen took a leaf from the Singapore book on governance, in terms of how he stuck to the things that he felt reflected truthfully his growing up years.

He felt that these were things that Singaporeans could and should relate to as well.

But the box office takings of Sing$1.2 million after a couple of months on 15 prints is not exactly a ringing endorsement from Singapore’s movie-goers. Going by industry estimates, Ilo Ilo has to top $2.1 million just to break even.

By contrast, Jack Neo’s army comedy sequel, Ah Boys To Men 2, became the top grossing local film of all time, garnering $7.9 million at the box office. This was a film made on a budget of about $1.5 million.

Conversely, Ilo Ilo was more successful than Ah Boys in terms of sales to overseas markets. It has already sold in 20 territories abroad which could prove vital in not just ensuring the film breaks even but perhaps also making a modest profit. The movie is doing especially well in France where it grossed 600,000 Euros and is getting good reviews in Taiwan. Gross revenue so far is an impressive $3 million as a result of these overseas box office takings.

Whatever it is, Ilo Ilo has certainly put Singapore on the world map in terms of what our filmmakers can do, small budget, notwithstanding. Chen’s unprecedented wins at Cannes and Taiwan will spur future filmmakers to pursue their craft, open the doors to international markets for future Singaporean filmmakers and maybe, just maybe, embolden financial institutions to support their creative pursuits.

Ilo Ilo wins 4 Golden Horse trophies

ROI or what financiers term return on investment, need not be solely based on dollar terms. Maybe financiers, by definition, are cynics and because of that they cannot look past the dollar sign. But you know what they say about cynics – they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Singapore, the Little Red Dot, can certainly appreciate the value of Chen’s achievement.

Key to Singapore’s Success is Character Development of Our Youths

As National Day approaches, I started reading about how we Singaporeans are getting ready to celebrate this important day in our calendar of public holidays.

As I pondered past national day celebrations, I could not help but think back about the newspaper commentaries written by 2 prominent people. These commentators wrote about our Singaporean youths and how they fared in the globally competitive talent market which Singapore is.

First, we had Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, the former Head of the Civil Service, saying in a Straits Times op-ed, dated 27 March 2013, entitled, Let’s Get Our Young Talent Job Ready, in which he said that our young graduates have “acquired gourmet tastes but have no clue how to fry an egg”. He further lamented that “instead of punching above our weight, we performed below our knowledge potential. Today we have thousands of young graduates becoming property agents or relationship managers selling esoteric products.”

Then we have Mr Han Fook Kwang, Managing Editor of the Straits Times, the Singapore daily, who said in a commentary in The Sunday Times dated, 30 June 2013, Do Singaporean Workers Deserve Their Wages, that several foreign-born heads of companies in Singapore were lamenting the lack of  quality workers here. Specifically a head of a German MNC noted the lack of drive in the workers here compared to workers in other countries. In fact he said that Singapore workers were far down the hunger index chart compared to their German and Chinese counterparts.

In addition, Mr Kwang’s friends and colleagues also felt that Singaporean workers did not possess good communications skills and had poor reasoning and critical analytical skills. Mr Kwang further says that schools need “to make students less obsessed with doing well in exams and better at learning how to acquire skills and knowledge relevant in today’s fast changing world are so important.”.

I could not help but agree with these 2 gentlemen’s thoughts on the critical changes that our education system needs in ensuring that we continue to produce graduates who are job ready and possess the necessary skills that would justify every last penny that companies pay  to secure their services in the job market.

However it is not just a responsibility that should fall squarely on the shoulders of the educational institutions. Parents are just as responsible if not more, in ensuring that their children are learning the necessary values important to guide them into successful lives and careers and not just focusing on their children doing well in school.

Below is my original parenting tips piece that I wrote for the July 2013 issue of a bulletin produced by the polytechnic for parents which focuses on character development in our children.

Character development starts at home and should be reinforced in schools and is probably the key to producing the Singaporean core of graduates that we need to ensure Singapore continues to succeed in the foreseeable future.

——————————————————————————————————————-

Character Development In Your Child

Character development is probably one of the most difficult and yet one of the most important responsibilities that parents shoulder in the overall development of our children.

Sometimes as parents we take it for granted that as long as our children stay out of trouble in school, they are on their way to developing good character.

But what is good character?

Good character (in the context of character development) refers to qualities that will enable children to grow up to be happy, well-adjusted and full-functioning members of our community.

Character is defined by values we as a community live by. Most of these values are universal irrespective of our race, religious background or nationality.

Here are 6Rs I believe are important for my children’s overall growth and development:

6 Rs

Respect – to love and respect yourself, your parents, peers, people in general

Rectitude – to have honesty & integrity and to be upright

Relationships – to build bonds with the community and to develop empathy

Resilience – ability to recover from disappointments

Resolute – to be undaunted, determined, steely work ethic

Resourcefulness – to develop the ability to think creatively to solve problems

Communicate With Your Child

It is important that as parents we communicate constantly about developing good character traits with our children.

Share with them your own life experiences and how they shaped your character and helped you to develop one or all of the 6 Rs.

Personally, I share with my children my experiences in school especially the times when I represented my school in the National School Track & Field Championships. The hard, punishing training, the camaraderie of my team-mates, the sense of being one whether in victory or in defeat – all these experiences helped shape my character and the person I am today.

Character Development Opportunities in Our Daily Lives

Be on a lookout for these opportunities everyday. It could be a community call for action to help distribute N95 masks to the elderly and needy.

It could be a run-for-a-cause event to help raise money for the under-privileged.

It could even be an instance when your child asks you to buy an expensive item. These are moments you can use to teach your child about building good character by being involved in the activity yourself.

For the record, I asked my son to start saving for the item by doing chores at home or setting aside some of his daily allowance.

 

Be A Good Role Model

Parents are the best role models for their children and in many cases, the only role models.

Role models are important because children often look up to grown-ups they are close to as extrapolations of themselves.

As parents, we should be mindful of that and strive to manifest the 6Rs in our daily lives if we want our children to develop good character effectively.

Life-Long Process

Character development is an on-going, life-long process. It does not end when someone reaches adulthood because life’s challenges will continue to shape our character.

As parents, it is our responsibility to provide our children with life experiences to help forge their character.

Like 19^th century German writer and poet, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe once said, “Character develops itself in the stream of life”.

Women, Work-Life Balance and Leadership

Last month, I was happy to be involved in the nationwide exercise to get Singaporeans to talk about their aspirations about the Singapore they want in 15-20 years time and beyond, what is officially called Our Singapore Conversation.

One of the topics that was discussed was that of work-life balance, what I’m conveniently going to refer to as WLB in this blog. There was no argument that WLB is an important issue that needs to be tackled because it is at the heart of the White Paper on Population which was recently debated in Parliament.

Women are the primary care-givers at home, manage most of the household matters and are also expected to contribute to the household income by being gainfully employed. A very tough act to follow. Which is why many are either choosing to be full-time home-makers or to work full-time with no intention to get married or have children.

Singapore’s TFR or Total Fertility Rate of between 1.2 – 1.3, is well below the replacement level of 2.1 required to have a stable population and is one of the lowest in the world.

But how can we achieve TFR of 2.1 when there is’nt a sturdy support infrastructure in place in Singapore for women to marry and procreate and continue working? When women do the sums in their heads it just does’nt add up. The opportunity costs of giving up a career or foregoing that promotion in anticipation of one’s greater role as a mummy at home is not compensated by the greater perceived social or personal well-being and happiness of raising a family.

As our Speaker of Parliament, Mdm Halimah Yacob said, “we must never put women in that position where they have to choose” between one or the other.

This is a multi-faceted problem which is linked to other broader issues like the role of men in society, the role of fathers and husbands at home, the availability and easy accessibility of child-care centres, flexi-work arrangements at the workplace, etc., etc..

But perhaps the one, single and quintessential question that women and society have to answer is perhaps what Mdm Halimah has already alluded to. Why can’t women have it all? Why should they have to choose between career and family?

This is now a global debate which has caught fire, ignited by a couple of renowned women leaders interestingly, from the media industry.

Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook, has written a book, entitled, LEAN IN: Women, Work and the Will To Lead, where she addresses these very questions and got some very strong reactions. In the book she maintains that women often hold themselves back when it comes to career advancement in the workplace because they “lean back” instead of “leaning in” when it comes to assuming leadership positions in the workplace.

Sheryl Sandberg

Business Insider gives a great list of controversial quotes from the book which you must take a look at.

But many women felt that Sandberg was out of touch with the regular ordinary women who are not wealthy, do not have access to the connections and people of influence like she had, who are not married to wealthy men and who do not have domestic help who take a considerable load off  supervision of the household.

Joanna Coles, Editor-in-Chief of Cosmopolitan, however, came to Sandberg’s rescue by saying that all Sandberg was doing was to bring the issues of the lack of women in leadership positions in industry and WLB to the forefront of our national consciousness and to spark a national (and international) conversation on these matters.

In order to get a general feel of how extensive this problem is, we could perhaps look at MasterCard’s Index of Women’s Advancement

If Sandberg is to be the judge, Singapore, like many of the other Asia-Pacific countries in the survey  done by MasterCard, fares poorly in the survey which seeks to measure how far women are from men in terms of socio-economic parity, in three areas – employment, education and leadership.

An index of 100 indicates that women from the country are equal to men and a score below 100 indicates inequality in favour of men and a score above 100 indicates inequality in favour of women.

Overall, Singapore had an above average score of 67.5, which was below those for Australia and New Zealand with scores of 76 and 77.8 respectively. What was surprising was the Philippines had the best score among all the 12 Asian countries surveyed, with 70.5, but all showing that parity with men is still a distance away.

MasterCard Worldwide Index of Women’s Advancement 2013

In terms of overall leadership, Singaporean women, garnered a score of 36.5, lower than NZ, Australia and the Philippines. Looking more deeply, in terms of business ownership, Singaporean women had a score lower than China, Vietnam, Thailand , the Philippines, NZ and Australia. Under business leadership, women here performed better but still lost out spectacularly to their Filipina counterparts who topped the survey with a stunning score of 114.3, indicating a reversal in the gender inequality norm.

Detailed Breakdown of the MasterCard Index of Women’s Advancement

It is clear from the above figures that Singaporean women (and women generally) have some ways to go yet to reach socio-economic parity with men.

But the question again is whether women are their biggest obstacles in the fight to reach equality with men especially in the area of leadership in industry and government? Are they not “leaning in” enough as Sandberg puts it? To tackle issues head on, to be competitive, to crave and trumpet success because it goes against what they have been programmed to be from young – to be nurturing, peacemaking, inclusive and understated.

As a man I feel like I am disqualified from answering this question, especially since it appears that Sandberg is calling for women to act more like men in the workplace, which according to some feminists, is the ultimate insult.

But just to add more spice into the mix, there is another corporate leader who is making waves and ruffling more than a few feathers – Ms Marissa Mayer, CEO of Yahoo, another media company.

Marissa Mayer

She hit the headlines when she cancelled telecommuting at the workplace at Yahoo after returning from a 2 week maternity leave following the birth of her son in September 2012. The uproar came about because it flew in the face of the well entrenched WLB movement which supported things like telecommuting, flexi-work arrangements and other family-friendly HR policies.

However, Mayer was hired by Yahoo specifically to do a job and that is to rejuvenate the struggling company. And telecommuting policy has to be applied with discretion as there are some job specs that just cannot be done from home.

Furthermore, the CEO of U.S. electronics retail chain, Best Buy, Hubert Joly, did the same thing and it hardly raised a whimper, which led some to question whether the tirade against Mayer was rooted in gender-based bias.

So it appears that when women do make the tough decisions, they do so at the risk of being judged as uncaring, not being pro-family, or even being too aggressive. As a result women become ever conscious of their actions thus “leaning back” instead of “leaning in” and getting the job done in the most effective way possible.

At least that is what Sandberg appears to be saying and its something that women all over the world should be taking some time out to ponder and reflect on and generate a national conversation of their own and get the men involved as well while they are at it.

Singapore – Why So Serious?

Do Singaporeans take themselves too seriously and lack the ability to laugh at themselves?

Are we so self-absorbed, moody, prudish and so focused in chasing our dreams that we forget to take some time off to chill out and smell the roses?

When I raised this with my friends, some of them replied that Singapore is not the place to “chill” and “smell the roses” but to make money while you can.

We seem to be on a treadmill where we are constantly thinking of earning more money, buying our dream home or car, getting a degree and so on and so forth. Have we forgotten the little things that make life beautiful and liveable? Have we become too serious for our own good?

I ask these questions in the light of some recent news that made our headlines in both mainstream and social media.

The first is the news about a Gallup survey that said Singaporeans are the most unhappy people in the world, more correctly, the least likely to report having positive emotions. The survey polled 148 countries and Singapore fared worse than Haiti, Afghanistan and even Syria, where there is currently a rebellion.

By the way, Panama ranked number one, as the country with the most people who report having positive emotions. The Latin American countries fared very well in this survey, taking 8 out of the top 10 places.

In a similar Gallup poll last year, Singaporeans were also ranked as the least emotional people in world i.e. people who showed the least emotion, either positive or negative. Filipinos were judged to be the most emotional.

I think concert organizers, emcees and “live” show hosts may nod their heads furiously in agreement with the latter seeing how difficult it is to get spontaneous applause from a Singaporean crowd.

There were a spate of other related media events which seem to question the Singaporean threshold for pranks, parodies and satires.

One of them was the Ken Kwek’s film, Sex.Violence.Family Values. The Media Development Authority (MDA) banned the film because one of the 3 short comedic stories which the film was made up of, was racially sensitive. This was later overturned by the Films Appeals Committee and the film was given a R21 rating with edits.

Film enthusiasts and local proponents of greater creative freedom of expression in the arts applaud the move because they feel the film uses satire to highlight a social ill – racism.

Then there was the termination of The Married Men’s increasingly popular morning radio show on Hot 91.3FM.

The show’s popular prank segment called “Kena Pluck” backfired when a listener complained about the DJs going too far in carrying out the prank . The lady who was pranked had applied to do an early childhood degree in a foreign university and the DJs pretended to be consulate officials who were doing a background check on her to ascertain if she was “eligible” to do the course.

They asked her if she hit children to which she denied doing so. The DJs then advised her that it was OK to hit children from poor families because they lacked the financial muscle to sue her in court.

The DJs then asked her if she was willing to do “favours” in order to get her visa application approved, something that is politically sensitive given all the media publicity surrounding government officials caught in sex-for-favours corruption cases.

Fans of The Married Men were obviously unhappy and a Facebook appeal against the ban is currently ongoing. Some of fans actually asked people to “chill” and to not take life so seriously. Sound familiar?

I started thinking about this a little more deeply. I know that there were some people who feel that the “Kena Pluck” segment is not appropriate at all and should never be incorporated into The Married Men’s show.

But if that is so, then why do we have the Just For Laughs – Singapore edition shown on Channel 5? This is basically the Singapore series of the very popular Canadian prank show Just For Laughs. [click on the YouTube logo at the bottom right of the screen].

I think its very funny and some of the pranks are really testing the boundary between humour and humiliation, but those who were pranked always managed to laugh at the end when all is revealed (or maybe it is a case of “what choice do I have?”).

So perhaps it is not so much whether prank segments should be shown or heard in our media but what type of pranks are being played on viewers or listeners. And inherent in this is our ability to manoeuver the OB (out-of-bound) markers i.e. the boundaries that separates what is sensitive (and therefore should not be discussed) and what is not.

Sociologists will tell you that humour is often determined by the cultural context of the area where people live or originate from. Customs, social mores and values determine the thin and often porous boundary between humour and mockery.

Perhaps no other society manifests this dilemma more than the countries in the Middle East.

Can you play a prank on an Arab gentleman or lady without either of them feeling insulted?

We have such a narrow view of the Middle Eastern people’s concept of humour because the popular media stereotypes them as serious, unsmiling, having very strict social rules concerning inter-mixing between men and women.

But Maz Jobrani, an American stand-up comedian of Iranian descent, used this as the subject of his act in Doha, Qatar last year, to great comedic effect. I was certainly entertained as were all the Qatari men and women in the audience.

Check out the TEDTalks video below and you will see how the humour stayed within the safe boundaries of what is acceptable in the Qatari and wider Middle Eastern culture. What I thought was great was the audience was able to laugh at themselves without taking offence because the humour was expertly crafted to suit the audience’s taste.

Humour and laughing at ourselves would not be complete without discussing Mr Alvin Tan and his girlfriend, Ms Vivian Lee. Mr Tan, a Malaysian, was a former ASEAN scholar and final year Law undergraduate at NUS. He had his scholarship terminated for his explicit blogs on sex.

Mr Tan and his girlfriend were unapologetic and proceeded to start their own Youtube channel discussing anything and everything about sex in their own unmistakeably irreverent manner and their own brand of humour.

They feel it is their mission to get Malaysians and Singaporeans to be less prudish and more open about taboo topics like sex and feel more comfortable talking about them.

Some people view their actions as purely fun and harmless. But others feel that they should be socially responsible to their audience and warn them that whatever tips they maybe handing out about sex is only their opinion and should not be taken as expert advice.

Whatever the case maybe, I think Singaporeans, in general, could use a good dose of humour in their lives. It has been medically proven that laughter is the best medicine.

Laughter is contagious. It helps to relieve the stresses in our lives and binds us as a community.

And in the spirit of laughing at ourselves here’s a joke about men (from a woman’s perspective) which my wife and I suspect, many women, just love. And I hope it tickles your funny bone too!

“Men are like fine wine.  They all start out like grapes, and it’s our job to stomp on them and keep them in the dark until they mature into something you’d like to have dinner with.”  Source – http://www.jokes.com/