Population
The exodus continues
Foreigners more than make up for increasing local outflow; unfortunately it doesn’t help consolidate nationhood. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Feb 24, 2008

YEARS of strong economic growth have failed to stem Singapore’s skilled youths from leaving for a better life abroad, with the number topping 1,000 a year.

This works out to 4%-5%, or three in 10, of the highly educated population, a severe brain drain for a small, young nation, according to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.

Such high-end emigration is usually associated with less better-off countries where living conditions are poor. Here the opposite is the case.

Last year the economy created almost 200,000 jobs, far in excess of the 38,000 births recorded.

The future doesn’t look better, either, despite Lee holding out promises of “a golden period” in the next five to 10 years.

Lee believes the exodus, which has been worrying him for two decades, could only grow because “every year, there are more people going abroad for their first or second degree.”

The emigration rate, one of the highest in the world on a per capita basis, is a blow to the government, particularly to Lee, who takes pride in building up this once poor squatter colony into a glittering global city.

They are people who abandoned their citizenship for a foreign one, mostly in Australia, the United States and Canada.

It is particularly serious for two reasons. First, Singapore is a young nation that is working hard to consolidate its nationhood and its people, and second, its defence lies in a reservist army.

This is made up of young men who have served two years of compulsory military training when they reach the age of 18. Any big outflow will badly affect security, not to mention the economy.

Adding to a declining birth rate, the problem of emigration, which appears to have worsened during the past few decades as people became better educated, will further reduce the base of this well-trained people’s army.

Hundreds of thousands of foreigners and permanent residents who have come to Singapore help make up the numbers, but they do not have to serve national service.

The emigrants, mostly professionals, don’t leave Singapore out of poverty but to seek a better, less pressurised life.

Lee recently said the brain drain is touching close to this family.

Lee’s grandson, the elder son of Prime Minister Hsien Loong, who is studying in the United States, has indicated that he may not return.

Over the years, the children of several Cabinet ministers have also made Britain or the US their home.

Lee, aged 84, has often spoken on the issue with emotions, once tearing when referring to the losses.

However, he has offered no reasons for the exodus beyond economic opportunities, although the government more or less knows what they are.

Singaporeans who have or are planning to emigrate are given a host of 10 questions and asked to tick the three most important ones. They include the following: -

> High costs of living

> Singapore is too regulated and stifling

> Better career and prospects overseas

> Prefer a more relaxed lifestyle

> Uncertain future of Singapore.

Some liberal Singaporeans believe Lee himself, with his authoritarian leadership and unpopular policies, is largely to blame.

Singapore’s best-known writer Catherine Lim calls it a climate of fear that stops citizens from speaking out against the government, saying it could eventually lead to the decline of the state.

She praised the government for its economic achievements but added: “A compliant, fearful population that has never learnt to be politically savvy could spell the doom of Singapore.” Globalisation, which offers opportunities in many countries like never before, is a big reason for the outflow.

Many countries, including populous China, are making a special effort to attract foreign talent.

Others who leave were worried about the future of their children living in a small island, and look for security and comfort of a larger country.

The exodus is more than made up – at least in numbers – by a larger intake of professionals from China and India.

“The trouble is many of the Chinese then use us as a stepping stone to go to America, where the grass is greener, Lee said.

“But even if we only keep 30%-40% and lose 60%-70%, we’re a net gainer,” he added.

He believed, however, that the Chinese would cease to come in 20 to 30 years’ time, when China’s living standards rise to match Singapore’s.

Some feel the large presence of foreigners, and the perks they enjoy over locals in military exemption as well as in scholarships, are themselves strong push factors.

They see the foreigners as a threat to jobs and space, undermining salaries and loosening the nation’s cohesion.

“I just feel very sad to see the Singapore of today with so many talented, passionate Singaporeans moving out and being replaced by many foreigners,” said one blogger. “I feel sorry for the future.”

Others point out the danger of an easy fix in numbers without regard to quality.

“Foreigners treat this place as a hotel, when the economy turns they will leave,” said a teacher who is seeing more and more foreign students in his class.

Lee recently made a passionate appeal to youths to think hard about their country. He said they had received education and opportunities provided by Singaporeans who had worked hard for it.

“Can you in good conscience say, ‘Goodbye! Thank you very much?’ Can you leave with a clear conscience? I cannot,” he said.

(The Star published this article under the hadline “Goodbye and thank you” on Feb 23, 2008.

Comments

Have receives this comment from a Malaysian doctor working in UK.

Dear Mr Seah Chiang Nee,
I thought your column in today's STAR is extremely interesting, and particularly pertinent to my personal circumstances.
All too often, people attribute reasons for emigration to general poverty (economic, individual financial, healthcare, etc).
I am a Malaysian doctor, and have lived in the UK for over 13 years now. As the only and eldest son of Malaysian Chinese parents (one of 3 siblings), I am expected to return to Malaysia for various reasons. My parents aren't poor. I have just told them that I do not intend to return to Malaysia, and would like to live in London instead.
However, they are unable to comprehend or accept my decision, particularly as they lead prosperous lives in Malaysia.
Your article is particularly apt, as it illustrates that in the current day and age, there are many other reasons for emigration, beyond economic strife.
Even PM Lee Hsien Long's eldest son (and we know the importance of this person's role in the families of our culture), is contemplating not returning to Singapore.
I think people forget, that as general quality of life improve, one seeks other forms of fulfillment. That is just part of natural human development. Certainly, somewhere like Singapore (where I spent 8 years my pre-university education), still has relative poverty of thought, freedom of speech, diversity of opportunities, depth of culture amongst other things. Thank you for your pertinent article.
In the current 'shrinking' world that we live in, where travel and communication is almost universally accessible and available, I certainly hope that people around us will have a more open-minded perception of emigration. That it is not simply attributed to economic opportunities.
After all, all of us seek different forms of fulfillment. As we (particularly Asia as a region) move upwards in life, hopefully one's choice of what is a better 'quality of life' can be better respected by the people around us. Emigration is often no longerabout survival, but about choosing what one sees is a better 'quality' of life. Kind Regards,
Chien

Dear Sir,
I'd just like to comment on your amazing article that you have written about the emigration rate in Singapore.
I am a 'Singaporean' studying in Malaysia in my final year before I am forced to return to my 'homeland' to 'serve' it.
I have never lived there and yet am still sent back to report for duty and hearing all my thoughts written out in an article in such a succinct manner actually made me have a little party in my head.
Just adding to everything you have said, I personally think it's the strict rules that they imply which adds to the pressure.
People are forced to believe one view rather than the whole view, you know?
Every-time, I am 'forced' to go back to Singapore to get an exit permit simply so I can continue my studies in Malaysia not only irritates me, but angers me a little.
Having never staying in Singapore for over 5 months in my lifetime... In addition to this, being a Drama student, I am forced to delay my studies by 2 years?
This essentially delays my career! This will never be forgiven in my opinion. Of course, there are some out there who want to complete their service as there is a sense of pride there, but for those who are totally against it?
I guess time is the only answer, whether it is my two years service, or 10 years down the road to when Singapore might realize, that their decline - is not coming by their creation of more lenient rules, and investing in this and that...but that the problem is with the people themselves, and their right as civilians of this world - their freedom.
Thank you once again sir,
Ben

Dear Seah Chiang Nee,
My two-cents worth on the above subject :
I have always wondered what it means - "leaving to go abroad for a better quality of life".
In my view, one does not stay very long in one place if one feels that one does not quite belong there. This can also be extrapolated to mean that the place is also an uninteresting and boring place.
In a similar context - on a national perspective - if there is little freedom of discussion, debate, and involvement in affairs of the states, and any other subjects or issues under the sun, in whatever shades or colour, at whatever level of intelligence, by whichever resident on these fair lands of Singapore and Malaysia, there is little that can be said to support it being an interesting and exciting place. You don't feel like its a great place if you have no say. You font feel like you belong if you don't have a say. It doesn't seem to be like your home or room. You seem to be only a guest. And guests depart when the time comes.
You feel at home, you identify with the "home" when there is freedom to be yourself and voice your views no matter how limited or unintelligent it may be. A place also where you can grow without feeling initimidated.
Imagine a family where the children are encouraged to talk and discuss any subject under the sun without feeling they will be penalised or punished or ostracized or viewed suspiciously or harshly (but with a benign smile and twinkle of the eye instead), can only be a healthy, functional, and warm environment for all. It all just depends on this head of the house and a, equally wise first woman of the house.
Is there any reason why residents under this roof, should not feel good, have a keen sense of self esteem and worth, identity, belonging? Or of a confidence that they are allowed to grow in understanding and knowledge of the complexities of many less-than-easy-to comprehend issues of life, society, politics, death, religion, and what have you that concerns them in this earthly domain. Idealistic? I think not.
Compare this with a dysfunctional family whose heads of the households are too busy with making a living or living their own little lives, with little interest or knowledge in building family ties that lead to the positive intangibles mentioned in the fore-going paragraph. Ingredients for a rather lifeless, boring, uninteresting, uncultured, unintellectual, uncivilized familial environment, wouldn't you say?
I look at Singapore and Malaysia and I see two families where the children, even though grown up as they are, have little say in terms of voicing their opinions - whether right or wrong, intelligent or or not so clever - in the mainstream medias. Such overly tight control over the medias contributes basically to an "oppressive" (albeit benign) atmosphere. One does not feel like one have a stake in the country. For to have a stake is to have a say on the policies and decisions of the country from national to local councils' decisions. And of which there is an equally interesting and well edited reportage of such discussion and debates and commentaries available at the same time. It is when MPs and bureaucratic heads are no longer allowed to feel by the fourth estate that they are inviolable Gods or demi Gods, then I think we have arrived. Then indeed political debates, for example, is a live "on-line", "real time" tool of national building. (Of course at the end of the day, we know there is only one elected party whose job is to govern. So no big deal if we have a lot of noisy chatter)
"Man shall not live by bread alone" perhaps aptly sums it all up.
It is probably the one major reason - subconsciously or consciously - why the anglo-saxon countries seem more appealing to many outsiders. I certainly felt it when I returned back to Malaysia. there is a loss of interest and excitement and ability to "connect" with the place you are in. It was like going outside the mainstream unlike NZ where no matter which part of the country you are in, you feel as part of the whole. The mass media does not make you feel left out. Here there is a sense of being a faceless, unknown and unimportant digit; a "masses" for the exploitation by unscrupulous vultures.
So, to advance to the next lap or phase in development policy, would be to advance to a heightened sense of belonging, participation, and knowledge of their ownership of this two fair lands. Open up and develop the media as knowledge drivers. We need to develop this to provide continuing education to all stake-holders.
Vigorous, dynamic, exciting, intelligent debates and discussions on just about any subject under the sky. This is truly what a really open society is about. Not the "open society" so narrowly defined by LKY earlier. Its a new generation, a new time. There needs a re-definition for Singapore and Malaysia on this matter.
Time to loosen control. The children are grown up. Should we hold them from going forward to 2020?
Henry Lee
Seremban