According to this article in The Online Citizen, one in three permanent residents renounced their citizenship to avoid serving National Service. There is a suspicion that these renouncers might have subsequently been given favourable treatment in getting a place in our universities. If this suspicion is found to be true, it would make a mockery of the sacrifice that is being made by our male citizens in serving the country.
I understand the difficulty faced by the Government in this difficult situation. They are keen to have more people become citizens or even to remain as permanent residents, rather than to lose them due to National Service. Regretfully, this difficult situation has been created by the Government due to its own inconsistent policies.
A better approach would have been to make it a privilege to serve National Service. Many who had served National Service have said that the experience was beneficial to them in improving their character and maturity. The disadvantage was financial.
It would have been better if the Government had paid a generous allowance for people who served full time National Service - an allowance that is comparable to what they would have earned if they had been working in the private sector. Alternatively, the Government could have given them a housing grant of (say) $30,000 for their 24 months of National Service, which would have helped them to afford a HDB flat. The Government is already giving a housing grant to many people, as the HDB flat would have been unaffordable without the grant. It would have been better for the grant to be tied to the completion of full time National Service.
If such a scheme had been in place, it would have been a win-win situation for most people. Many of the permanent residents would have opted to serve National Service for the generous housing grant and the benefit of character development. Singapore would not have lost so many permanent residents that it would have wished to keep.
I know that the Government would have another difficult question of how to deal with past generations of people who served National Service in earlier years. It would not be difficult to find a fair solution - although I do not have any ready answer. When there is a will, there is a way.
What are your views?
I understand the difficulty faced by the Government in this difficult situation. They are keen to have more people become citizens or even to remain as permanent residents, rather than to lose them due to National Service. Regretfully, this difficult situation has been created by the Government due to its own inconsistent policies.
A better approach would have been to make it a privilege to serve National Service. Many who had served National Service have said that the experience was beneficial to them in improving their character and maturity. The disadvantage was financial.
It would have been better if the Government had paid a generous allowance for people who served full time National Service - an allowance that is comparable to what they would have earned if they had been working in the private sector. Alternatively, the Government could have given them a housing grant of (say) $30,000 for their 24 months of National Service, which would have helped them to afford a HDB flat. The Government is already giving a housing grant to many people, as the HDB flat would have been unaffordable without the grant. It would have been better for the grant to be tied to the completion of full time National Service.
If such a scheme had been in place, it would have been a win-win situation for most people. Many of the permanent residents would have opted to serve National Service for the generous housing grant and the benefit of character development. Singapore would not have lost so many permanent residents that it would have wished to keep.
I know that the Government would have another difficult question of how to deal with past generations of people who served National Service in earlier years. It would not be difficult to find a fair solution - although I do not have any ready answer. When there is a will, there is a way.
What are your views?
Support your views Mr Tan.
ReplyDeleteAs for those who completed NS/reservist long time ago, can credit the "NS Privilege" into their CPF accounts. Or part cash & part CPF. Afterall the housing grants are actually first "deposited" into the CPF a/c, before being debited to HDB.
For those Lau Peng who have passed away, can just deposit the share into his surviving spouse & childrens' CPF.
Where there is will, there will be actionable solutions.
obviously the solution has to be monetary incentive for sporeans and monetary dis-incentives for PRs or those who chose to renounce PR. indeed if there is a will there are many ways. however, as long as the PAP has a strangle hold in parliament, such political will won't be forthcoming.
ReplyDeleteSouth Korea and Taiwan have been reducing their NS obligations of their male citizens. Why Singapore still insist on the 2 years.
ReplyDeleteIf it is only one year, many of our PRs would stay, if the allowance is also attractive enough, coupled with the housing allowance incentive.
Definitely, they would argue "one year no enough to train a rookie".
Full stop. Can't win them in argument, with them " having a strangle hold in Parliament".
As with all desired changes, ensure more opposition entering Parliament come GE 2016, half would make a nice number.
It is a clear cut for the new PRs and the locals but what about those like me. I'm a PR who grew up here, went to NS like the locals but nothing is given to us as we are considered as the neither here nor there.
ReplyDelete