The Thumb

Singapore

In November 2010 Singapore's Attorney-General demanded a minimum 12-week jail term for a British author who had published a book critical of Singapore’s judiciary: Alan Shadrake. Taken to court, Shadrake stood his ground. He offered a qualified apology during his sentencing in the High Court but he swore that he would never disavow his book, Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice In The Dock.

They threw him in jail—albeit for only five weeks—alleging that statements in the book impugned the impartiality, integrity and independence of Singapore’s judiciary. In Singapore? The bastion of crony capitalism?

In Asia, Governments use criminal defamation laws to silence critics. In Singapore, the Government’s view is that any statement that damages the reputations of its leaders hinders their effectiveness to govern. It has always maintained that restrictions on speech and assembly are necessary to preserve economic prosperity and racial and religious harmony in the multi-ethnic city state of over five million people.

To maintain control—and that control can at times be tight—Singapore applies capital punishment by hanging for offences such as murder, drug trafficking and the unlawful use of a firearm.

If you do write something critical—in a book, or on a blog or say something out of turn at Speaker’s Corner—the chances are high that you will be reined in. May your gods help you if you dare to write a slogan or paint a princess on the side of a train with a spray can: covering the town with graffiti is punishable by caning.

Singapore is tightly controlled. It is also one of the world's richest nations. It has one of the world's highest annual incomes per head: $65,000. It has a low violent crime rate. It is the fourth leading financial centre in the world, after New York, London and Hong Kong. It is in the top ten most expensive countries in the world. (Placement in 2016? First) It has the highest percentage per capita of billionaires. Where success is measured in stability, calm, and money, it does not pay to tip over the trough.

Give credit where it is due: Singapore has succeeded where many have failed. For many, it is a paradise. It works. I can walk anywhere, any time, and I am safe. Name another city or country where that is possible? Go on! Name one?

Only a politician or a preacher would believe that everything is rose. There is always a balance. The gloss is only one side of the coin. You can google it and find statements claiming that 26% of Singaporeans live below the poverty line.

Poverty? In Singapore? What is that line? The Central Provident Fund, which manages Singaporean’s pension funds, puts it at $1,500 a month. In 2012 the Department of Statistics found that the average household expenditure on basic needs was $1,250 a month for a four-person household. This was average spending on food, clothing and shelter for those living in a one- to two- room flat.

If you can make ends meet, are you ‘poor’? $1,500 a month is a poverty line? When you live in the world’s most expensive cities, everything is relative. Make some comparisons. In the US, the monthly poverty line is just under US$1,000 for one person rising to $2,000 for four people: ball park with Singapore.  Poverty in developed nations is a different beast to poverty in the developing world. You can certainly be poor in the richest and most expensive cities in the world on a figure that would make an African salivate.

Nine million children die each year of hunger, mainly Africa and South Asia. No one dies of hunger in Singapore.  One third of children in developing countries (1.8 billion) live in poverty: 600 million of them live in families who earn less than one dollar a day. No children live like that in Singapore.

Such figures makes a mockery of Singapore’s $50 a day, particularly when, if you are homeless, your government gives you accommodation. Elderly, abandoned people are looked after. They can share two room flats provided by the Government, nominally charged at around $20 a month. If you can’t afford that, you are still helped. A child dying of malnutrition in Africa should be so lucky.

Is the accommodation provided to the needy salubrious? Definitely not. High rise living has its drawbacks; but it is a roof over your head. In a place where everyone lives in each others back yards, and privacy is at a premium, you make adjustments.

Poverty is poverty wherever you are: it is all relative. Has Singapore eradicated poverty? In a sense yes; however, that is not to say that there are no genuine cases of desperation. There are, and Singaporeans would be ill advised to ignore the fact.

These figures relate to Singaporeans: not foreign workers. Most domestic slaves—sorry, maids—get on average $578 a month and no days off. By way of comparison, in Hong Kong it is two thirds of that amount.

Maids are needed of course: to wash cars, walk the dogs and care for the children of Singaporeans desperate to make money in a place that demands too much of it just to live decently.

$578 a month seems so little in this wealthy country. It costs you triple that and more to get your maid and you fork out almost the same amount each month to the government for the privilege. Get a Filipino maid and you also have to pay $7,000 as a bond to the Philippines Government. There are whole malls devoted to maid agencies. They are mushrooming like skin cancers on a surfer’s butt.

Is this exploitation? Could it once have been called slavery? This is a vexed issue and is a problem not only in Singapore. Most Asian countries can be accused of virtual slavery when it comes to domestic helpers. Slavery continues in indentured labour.

Let’s accept the premise for a moment that there are ’relatively’ poor people in Singapore. Few Singaporeans realise how false and exploitative their society is. Few know how badly some do in one of the world’s richest countries. Singapore's incredible economic progress over the decades has meant that people cannot see the detritus. It cannot see those who have been lost by the side of the road. They listen to their government: it speaks the truth. Right.

Poverty is a phenomenon that people do not wish to see. Why? Many do not encounter it personally. Many tend to wave aside because it is not part of their daily consciousness.

Most agree with, Professor Kishore Mahbubani, Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, who, in 2001, declared that Singapore had eradicated poverty. Most, but not all. Students from the Nanyang Technological University took the matter up and went to rental flats in poorer estates in Circuit Road and Jalan Kukoh.

They produced videos about the lives of the poor, meeting not just elderly folk abandoned by their families but also families with young children.

What did they find? Elderly people sleeping on the floor because their mattresses were infested with bed bugs. Rats infesting flats that the single occupants could not maintain. Families living in Government subsidized accommodation with little more than cheap mats. Furniture? TV?  What was that? Some switched off the power at night as they could not afford electricity.

The students learnt that while most Singaporeans enjoyed the benefits of economic growth that has lifted incomes for the majority, pockets of less well-off individuals and families remain, often out of sight in this gleaming metropolis. Not only did they remain but cases were on the increase. This put the lie to the Professor’s thesis.

Ask a Singaporean the question: ‘Is there poverty here?’ and they will look at you blankly. Such effrontery. How can you even think it? Most Singaporeans do not see poverty. Most do not know people in financial hardship. With an income gap made wider by globalisation and technology advances and a burgeoning inflow of foreign workers in the last decade, wages at the bottom have shrunk while those at the top have rocketed. In mid 2014, the number of billionaires rose by 4.7%. This was trumpeted as a major achievement.

It is interesting that the majority of these wealthy people are not Singaporeans but PRs: permanent residents. They are here from all over the world. Why? In a word: tax. These are the members of the Tanglin Club. This august establishment limits membership by Singaporeans to 50%. How equitable. How socially cohesive.

It is not just the wealth gap that is the issue. The education system itself has also played a particularly important part. More children of well-off families go to the top schools. This adds to social stratification.

Why can’t people see it? If the average Singaporean could step out of their air-conditioned vehicles and walk some of the back blocks of this amazing city state, they would see the poor. They would see the cardboard shelters under overpasses. They would see the humpies in the remnant forests. They would pass beggars. They would encounter bag ladies and bag men. It is not a pretty sight. For me, it always jarred: impossible! This is Singapore.

Much of poverty’s invisibility comes from its very nature. Poverty in Singapore is largely made up of the working poor—people who work but earn very low wages and the elderly poor—people who have lived on a pittance throughout their lives and are now either retired or unemployed. Their plight is often exacerbated as their families have abandoned them.

In a country where success is touted as the norm and is expected as a birthright, it is impossible to think that there can be poverty.

There is a third possible reason: Singapore's justifiably lauded public housing policy may have played a part, as even the poorest typically have a roof over their heads. If you have a house, how can you be poor?

In another country, most people would not hesitate to help a person devoid of shelter. If he knew that the beggar had housing, he might demur. Almost all Singaporeans live in a flat; they are housed; do they really need money?

What people don’t realise is that for many, little or nothing is the norm. Count the number of elderly people pushing dilapidated carts round the streets of Singapore loaded with cardboard and cans. It has nothing to do with a sterling community spirit that espouses environmental responsibility: these people scrabble for a few cents.

Singaporeans do not talk about poverty because poverty implies backwardness, underdevelopment and failure. To admit that there are poor people is tantamount to being critical and admitting failure.

It all begs the question: why not speak about it? Why not look for it? No one wants to be critical. Ask Alan Shadrake. Ask any of the many bloggers who have been taken to court for unjustified criticisms on the net.

Despite the fear of recrimination, the issue is not ignored. There are writers to the Forum pages of The Straits Times who argue the pros and cons. Even the Catholic Church acknowledges that there is a problem. In 2013, Caritas Singapore launched a poverty awareness campaign. In Singapore? Again: shock! Horror! Surely not!

Sadly, surely so. Like Hong Kong, in Singapore the wealthy prosper. The not so wealthy get by but lose ground. The poor get poorer.

The hurdles facing the poor are horrendous. Even the middle classes are feeling the pinch. Singapore has the highest out-of-pocket expenditure on health.

Its University tuition fees are the second highest in the world: only Ireland is higher priced. Several countries have free tertiary education including Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.

Under Gough Whitlam, even Australia had it before the Liberals decided to ditch the policy.

Singapore’s housing is the fourth most expensive in the world. Add it all up, and of the ten most expensive cities in the world, in a report by the Economist in 2014, the most expensive was? You guessed it: Singapore.

Suicide rates? On a par with Australia’s. At least its divorce rate is half that of Australia at round 30% but fewer Singaporeans marry. The birth rate continues to drop.

Has religion got much to do with it? 2014 figures showed that Buddhism had lost ground. Only 33% claimed it in 2014 census figures, down from 41% the year before. For the rest, Christianity expanded the most: by 3.7%. Hindus remained stagnant. Islam barely quivered. The only significant ‘other’ group showing growth was the group nominating ‘no religion’.

Christianity was the mover and shaker, mega million dollar fraud cases against sleazy pastors notwithstanding. In a country where con men are hounded to the courts, religious cons have a free rein. Is that unusual? Sadly, in our weird world where faith is a flag of convenience that masks logic and reality, no.

That is something to keep in mind when, as a poor Singaporean, you marvel at the staggering opulence of your temple, mosque of cathedral.

Welcome to a world where heaven—and a decent life style—can be unattainable.