A botched-up selling job
Ill defined, poorly-explained, Singapore's foreign talent policy is very much misunderstood; a poor selling job. By Seah Chiang Nee
Apr 30, 2002

When the government refers to foreign talent, Singaporeans see neurosurgeons, software designers, bankers, R-and-D researchers and other world-class, super-achievers.

Many don't view ordinary degree-diploma holders from China, India or elsewhere as belonging to the description. Maybe PhDs or Masters.

There are two reasons for this. Firstly, this was the way it was explained to them that Singapore needs very special skills not available locally.

Secondly, with 60 per cent of them now receiving tertiary-education (and still rising), they don't regard an influx of people with similar qualifications as a big deal.

To them, foreign talent should be people like accomplished bio-scientists, who can lead us into the new medical research world, or I.T. software inventors or engineer designers or entrepreneurs who can start and build a business empire.

They don't see many of these (a fair number are, of course, here.) At any rate, they have special abilities and public resentment is not directed against them.

Instead when they go to work they see colleagues from abroad with professional visit passes doing ordinary work like they themselves are doing so they ask each other: "What foreign talent? They're no better than us!"

Misunderstandings surface; friction arises.

The policy, as I see it, is more than just about top-rate, world-class people - although this is the first priority target.

Take in an entrepreneur-engineer or a banker and he will bring in or create many jobs for Singaporeans. That's true.

These specialists are harder to come by, measuring only in the few thousands. With luck, it may rise to tens of thousands.

However, the immigration policy has another equally important target, a far bigger group, more visible people with a degree or diploma.

Many of these are young, eager men and women that the city-state needs to become globally competitive. They come with their own new ideas from abroad.

Taking in a large number in times of declining employment is also controversial and so it is less spoken about.

As a result of the ill-defined foreign talent policy, Singapore is sometimes laughed at for being misled by the foreigners: "These guys from China or India (or wherever) are no talent. They are very ordinary like us."

It is embarrassing to these workers from abroad, too. Among the few foreign professionals that I've met, not one revel at being called "foreign talent."

In fact, they are embarrassed by this term. Others are annoyed at the implication that they are over-representing their abilities.

All these point to a good crucial policy that is ill-defined and poorly explained to the public.

In fact, "foreign talent" should not be used to describe the policy unless the government means it, i.e. when it is referring to world-class scientists, researchers or world-class achievers; otherwise, why not simply call it Singapore's "immigration policy."

This immigration policy aims at attracting two basic categories of foreigners. It also covers, of course, a transient low-skilled workers like maids and construction labourers, who have to leave after a period of time.

(1) The crème de la crème of talent sought by almost every country; Singapore joins in the fight.

They are the researchers, surgeons, special designers, academics, bankers, scientists, entrepreneurs and other world achievers; most of them (not all) probably with Masters or PhDs.

They, of course, include exceptional musicians, performing artistes or sports men or women. Hopefully everyone brings in his family.

With only 83 engineers and research and development experts for every 10,000 workers, Singapore is trying to produce more quickly - but many are still needed from abroad.

"In most cases, people who are urgently needed we can process their papers within one week," said a government official recently.

(2) This 2nd category of qualified young people meets several objectives. The first is to ensure enough workers for higher-tech employers, like nurses, I.T. technicians and lab assistants.

They will include people with multi-skilled experiences not available locally, for example an I.T. engineer, who is also experienced in marketing.

Or a manufacturing engineer who is able to supervise production in China or India. Almost every month, I am told of companies needing such multi-experienced people. In many cases, they can't find them.

And when they are not here, they go elsewhere.

Another crucial reason for taking in such a big group - over a long term - is to rejuvenate and increase an ageing, declining population and replace the thousands of Singaporeans working or emigrating abroad.

More important, they arrive with their own knowledge of foreign markets; many of hem infuse new ideas into the local work or service scenes.

And one more benefit that some locals don't like to hear; they force Singaporeans to compete and reduce excessive job-hopping..

For hundreds of years, America has been unbeatable for generating new things for the world. It is a marketplace of ideas.

That is due largely to its readiness to take in foreigners from the four corners of the world, from the top brains to the ordinary shopkeeper or taxi driver.

Most become average citizens and a few do brilliantly well. But in chasing "The American Dream" they have collectively transformed the US to become The Country of the 20th Century.

It looks litke a title it will keep for another 100 years. Its closest rival is too far behind.

In contrast, a closed-door, homogenous nation like Japan is stagnating principally because it keeps out foreigners and the English language (hurting its achievements in information technology.)

It now wants to open itself up to foreigners.

Even top Chinese cities like Beijing and Shanghai - with their vast work-forces) now say they want to attract qualified foreigners to bring in outside ideas - and they are prepared to pay market salaries.

A top US columnist recently worried that Sept 11 would result in America cutting down on its immigration intake, especially of talented Arabs and Muslims. If it does, its future will suffer.

These talents will go elsewhere and compete with it, he says.

Singapore has actively pursued an open door immigration policy not to everyone's liking.

Some 750,000 of its 4.1 million population are foreigners although three-quarters are low-skilled workers.

Roughly a quarter are professionals on visit passes; the rest are lower-skilled workers and maids.

Today it wants more - despite the economic downturn, including people it once ignored - musicians, actors, sportsmen and women as

Closing the door to the world will be a poor choice.

But it is wrong to classify all the 150,000 who are here on professional visit passes as "foreign talents."

Seah Chiang Nee