On Jan 4, following a news report about possible changes to the Sexuality Education Programme in schools here, AWARE sent the following letter to Education Minister Heng Swee Keat, Health Minister Gan Kim Yong, Director-General of Education Ho Peng, Health Promotion Board (HPB) CEO Ang Hak Seng and Director of the HPB Youth Health Division Dr K Vijaya.

Dear Sirs and Mesdames,

We read with much concern the recent news article “ Abstinence over contraception?” (The New Paper, Dec 26 2011).

According to the report, the Ministry of Education is in the final stages of revising the Sexuality Education Programme (SEP), and the revamped SEP will have a greater emphasis on abstinence and a diminished focus on contraception.

We write to ask if The New Paper report was accurate, and for more information about the reasons for the revision and the key changes that will be made to the programme.

It is AWARE’s stand that accurate and responsible information on contraceptive methods is a crucial part of sexuality education, particularly for upper secondary students and students in junior colleges and centralized institutes.

According to the 2006 Student Health Survey conducted by the Health Promotion Board, the median age of respondents’ first experience of sexual intercourse is 15. It is vital that young Singaporeans be equipped, at a time when many of them start to become sexually active, with the necessary information on how to protect themselves and their partners from sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies.

Surveys have also found that parents typically do not engage their children in conversations about safe sex. This puts the onus on schools to provide students with the necessary information.

Diminishing the SEP content on contraception will worsen an already worrying situation. According to a Bayer Healthcare survey conducted in 2011, 8 in 10 young people in Singapore do not use contraception when having sex with a new partner. This is one of the highest rates of unprotected sex among the nine Asia Pacific countries surveyed. The survey also highlighted the confusion over contraceptive options among young people in Singapore. Highly unreliable contraceptive methods, such as the “withdrawal” method, were considered to be effective forms of birth control.

It is likely that our youths will engage in pre-marital sex given that the age of first sex engagement is about 15 and that of first marriage is between 27.7 to 30. If our schools do not provide this education, then our youths will turn more to the Internet and their friends, which are both unreliable sources.

It has been accepted that taking a moralistic approach towards sex education will not be effective. The Ministry’s stand in the past has been that as society becomes less conservative, sex education must move forward to provide information on contraception. The Breaking Down Barriers programme was developed in 2006 to address the rising trend of STDs among youths. It is odd that the Ministry would want to back peddle on this sex education programme. Since 2006, society has less, not more, conservative.

AWARE believes it is important for young women and men to have access to reliable information about contraception and be empowered to insist on the use of contraception. This is a fundamental part of their sexual and reproductive rights that should not be taken away from them.

We would like to recommend that MOE consult relevant stakeholders and members of the public in this discussion about sexuality education in our schools, before launching the revised SEP. Educating our youths about responsible sexual behaviour is an important national issue and it deserves input and perspectives from all Singaporeans.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Read the Ministry of Education’s response here.

On Jan 26, AWARE received the following response from the Ministry of Education (MOE), in reply to a letter containing our feedback on alleged revisions to sexuality education in schools here.

Dear Ms Lim,

I refer to your letter to the Minister for Education in which you raised concerns about the news article “Abstinence over Contraception?” (The New Paper, Dec 26, 2011).

I would like to reassure AWARE that MOE’s Sexuality Education programme is not just about abstinence, but helping our young understand the physiological, social and emotional changes they experience as they mature. We believe it is important to help our young develop healthy relationships with the opposite sex and teach them to make responsible life-long choices.

To do that, our review and delivery of the sexuality education programme in school had taken into consideration the sensitivities of our multi-racial and multi-religious society. We have held consultation sessions with parents, school personnel, students, health professionals and religious leaders to listen to their views as well as their concerns.

While abstinence is promoted as the best option for teens, MOE recognises that, beyond knowing how to say no, students need to be taught about the consequences of contracting sexually transmitted infections (STIs/HIV) and teenage pregnancies, and how to prevent them. For this, we have worked very closely with the Health Promotion Board since 2006 on the Breaking Down Barriers (BDB) programme.

Thank you for writing to us. We have noted your inputs. With the support of the parents and the community, we can achieve better outcomes for our young in terms of their sexual health and well-being.

Warm Regards
Grace

Ms Grace Ng
Deputy Director, Guidance Branch, Student Development Curriculum Division
Ministry of Education

Read AWARE’s letter here.

The following are excerpts of speeches made by six female parliamentarians on the subject of ministerial pay. They spoke during the Jan 9 to 18 sitting of Parliament.

Denise Phua
Member of Parliament for Moulmein-Kallang GRC

Although I do not completely agree with the recommendations carried in the Report of the Ministerial Salaries Committee, I cannot, in good conscience, say that the Committee has done a poor job. By boldly recommending pay slashes up to 50% – measures which are hardly cosmetic – the Committee has moved in the right direction.

Like many in Singapore, I thought it was important that if reference was drawn from what I felt was a more punishing private sector in terms of pay and accountability, then it was only right that common compensation principles in that sector be applied.

I am heartened that some of the recommendations I made were considered and applied, and in some cases, enhanced:

• An independent and external Salary Review Committee was set up, for the first time so that executives do not write their own paychecks
• The line of sight linking an incumbent’s Pay and his Performance is now clearer
• The previously simplistic link of Bonus to GDP growth rate is now expanded
• The Salary Benchmarking formula now targets a much bigger group of 1000 instead of 48 top wage earners
• Keeping the annual base pay package to comprise only monthly salaries and a 13th month bonus by removing items like Special Allowance and Public Service Leadership Allowances is a more acceptable compensation practice

I would like to offer 5 recommendations:

1. Peg political pay to a broader base of income wage earners and discard discount

The proposed salary benchmark of the entry level minister, is now pegged to the top 1000 wage earners, instead of 48, in Singapore. A discount of 40% is then applied.

The selection of the 1000 top wage earners, albeit more reasonable, is arbitrary and still smacks of elitism because the base is about 0.05% of the workforce, assuming a workforce size of 2 milion. The application of the discount, whether the current one-third or the proposed 40%, is also arbitrary and often forgotten and unappreciated.

I propose that political leaders’ pay be pegged to a simple top percentile income bracket, eg 10% of 20% of Singaporeans. Discard the discount feature. A quick poll I conducted revealed that more Singaporeans are likely to understand and accept that their leaders belong to the top 10-20% income bracket in our country.

2. Strengthen the line of sight between pay and performance

a. Remove 1 of the 3 components of the Variable Pay Component ie the Annual Variable Component (AVC) and retain only (i) Performance Bonus which relates to the performance of the individual portfolio; and (ii) National Bonus which is linked to how the country performs;

b. Publicise the Key Performance Indicators or KPIs for individual portfolios so that Singaporeans have a better understanding of how they are linked to Performance Bonuses of the office bearers. Developing and publishing KPIs that relate to both the routine operations and new initiatives in, especially essential services such as housing, transport, social services, and education, are important for better understanding of the size of the individual portfolios and promote better quality dialogues;

c. Expand the National Bonus indicators which are now 100% linked to jobs and incomes. This is to reduce the potential of excessive risk-taking or undesirable tactics to boost the numbers. For instance, starting a third casino to boost the economy may well boost all 4 components of the National Bonus – real median income growth rate; real grow rate of the lowest 20th percentile income; lower unemployment rate; and enhance real GDP growth rate; but the move may well be an easier path to developing or own tourism products and is detrimental to the long term competitiveness and social well-being of our people.

3. Review the benefits package and not over-extend the ‘clean-wage’ principle.

It is a little ludicrous that the dental benefit of our Prime Minister and Ministers is $70/- per year and outpatient subsidy capped at $350 a year. Consider the provision of common benefits such as car and annual health screening packages that are typically provided to executives. Let us not over-extend the application of the principle of ‘Clean Wage’ so far that it becomes artificial.

4. Clarify the job scope and expectations of political appointment holders.

One of the underlying factors leading to the constant unhappy undertone when the subject of political pay is discussed in our country is the lack of awareness of the duties of political appointment holders from Members of Parliament to Ministers and even Speakers.

Members of Parliaments have differing views of their roles. The latest episode during which several Opposition MPs opine that it is the job of Government, and not MPs, to directly help their poor and needy residents and referral is the key strategy; caused a debate of its own outside the House. The clarity of duties and goals would be useful even to MPs of the ruling party.

The man in the street, for instance, does not understand the role of the Speaker of the House and does not have sufficient information to comprehend how it equates to a Cabinet Minister.

Clarity is also useful in the case of office bearers who hold multiple portfolios, sometimes up to 3 roles. It takes more than a human being to do 3 roles effectively and leave little time and space for the incumbent to reflect and reform policies where needed.

Instead of sweeping these rumblings under carpet, it is needful to clarify the job scopes and expectations of political appointment holders.

5. Conduct a review of the civil service leadership pay

One of my deepest concerns is that the Review excluded the some 300 top civil servants in the elite Admin Service. The title of the Report is entitled “Salaries for a Capable and Committed Government” but the review has deliberately excluded top civil service leaders specifically the Permanent Secretaries and others in the elite Admin Service.

This is the group that has been often been kept below the radar from public eye though they play a significant role in supporting the Prime Minister and his Cabinet in the development and execution of national policies. Due to their critical role, some of these elite talents are pegged on the same salary band with the ministers.

If and when the recommendations of the committee of political pay review are accepted, some civil servants will receive much higher packages than their ministers. Unlike the political appointment holders, they will continue to enjoy the retention of benefits such as the pension schemes which will be removed from the former.

Paying for top talents especially for those who opt for a career in the civil service is not an issue. However, the same principles of rigour in job evaluation, accountability for KPIs and disclosure must be applied. If private firms and charities are expected to disclose the highest paid executives and their salary bands, there is no reason why there should be a cloak of secrecy over the Admin Service incumbents.

I ask the Prime Minister to commission an independent review of top civil service leadership that will go beyond pay to attract, develop and retain talent for a capable and committed government.

In conclusion, the review of political salaries is a work-in-progress. It needs refinement but it is moving in the right direction. To reject it and to wait for it to be perfect and acceptable to every interested Singaporean, simply may mean that the current system stays. And that to me, is not an option.

Read her full speech here.

Josephine Teo
Minister of State for the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Transport; Member of Parliament for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC

On the pegging of ministerial salaries to the income of the top 1,000th citizen taxpayer, it is incorrect to label it as “elitist”. By itself, the peg says nothing about the value and importance of people at whatever level of income. It makes no value judgement at all.

The correct way to think about the peg is “would we like to draw our top political leadership from that level in our population?” This is how sound HR practitioners think about salaries too, to peg them at the level which you want to draw people from.

Remember that we are talking about people with heavy responsibilities – to oversee defence, our reserves; to manage our economy, maintain law and order; to educate our young, to plan for an ageing society. Again, as HR people would know, having the right person in charge makes a big difference.

We can certainly peg political salaries to the 10,000th or 100,000th. But by doing so, we are also expressing a view that it is good enough for Singapore to draw from those levels for our top political leadership. Singaporeans will have to decide if that is so. Can we find people to fill Parliament and Cabinet at those salaries? Yes, of course. We will find people whatever the salary levels are. The question is whether we will be satisfied with the selection.

Read her full speech here.

Amy Khor
Minister of State for the Ministry of Health; Mayor of South West District; Deputy Government Whip; Member of Parliament for Hong Kah North SMC

We must bear in mind that this is the first time the review has been made by an independent committee comprising well respected and experienced individuals from the private sector, the labour movement and the social sector. The Report is not the work of politicians or civil servants who may be perceived to have vested interests.

This eight-member committee individually and collectively have impeccable management and human resource expertise. In turn, they are ably supported by Mercer, a firm recognised to be an international expert on remuneration issues. They spent seven months painstakingly seeking feedback and deliberating on the issue before coming up with the recommendations.

That this independent, expert committee has, after careful deliberation, chosen to affirm the three principles of competitive salaries, a “clean wage” and the ethos of political service which entails making sacrifices indicate that these are sound principles which we should not easily dismiss. I note that the Workers’ Party has also stated its support for these the principles.

We must also bear in mind that the contentious salary benchmark, the benchmark for entry level Ministers, has been broadened considerably compared to before, although some people take the view that this resulting salary is still too high.

A key contention is why the need to link Ministerial salary to the pay of the top 1,000 Singaporean earners? We should not forget that there is a 40% “public service discount” to the benchmark. The discount would effectively drop the effective salary to maybe the median of the top 2,000 Singaporean wage earners.

The Workers’ Party has proposed what it calls a more “people up approach” in setting Ministerial salaries following what they consider are practices elsewhere in the world. This is based on what they judge as a “reasonable” multiple of a Member of Parliament’s allowance, and this in turn is pegged to the salaries of divisional directors in the civil service, excluding the Administrative service.

The presumption that the Workers’ Party makes is that political service is in the genre of public service. That is only partly true. Political service is more than public service. Civil servants are not subject to the votes of citizens nor do they need to carry the ground in policy making. So, pegging ministerial salaries to civil service salaries is an inadequate mechanism to account for the burdens and responsibilities that come with the job.

In order for the civil service to draw capable people into the service as a career, it also adopts the principle of competitive salaries taking into account relevant private sector salaries at all grades. So why is this principle not acceptable to the Workers’ Party when it comes to pegging Ministerial salaries?

Instead of first pegging MP’s allowance to the pay of divisional directors which is already pegged to market norms, and then arriving at the Ministerial Salaries using some multiple, which is arbitrary, would it not be much more transparent to peg Ministerial salaries to the competitive salaries that the calibre of people we are looking for in Ministers earn, or have the potential to earn, coupled with a discount for the ethos of public service?

Currently as the MP allowance is a percentage of the entry level Minister’s salary (17.5% of MR4 benchmark), the latter is already conversely a multiple of the former! I do not see how their proposed formula is an improvement over the Committee’s recommendation.

What multiple should be applied to the MP’s allowance so calculated to arrive at the Ministerial salary? Arithmetically speaking, if the multiple is high enough, the outcome could be the same as what the committee is recommending which is so in this case where the Workers’ Party has come up with a similar base salary of $55,000 per month for a new Minister.

Another aspect of the Committee’s recommendations that deserves credit is the removal of the pension scheme, the replacement of the GDP bonus with a National Bonus that uses four socio-economic outcomes as measures and five yearly reviews by an independent committee.

All these are direct responses to public’s concerns about the previous salary formula. While welcoming the new national bonus, some economists feel that not all the four indicators reflect accurately citizen’s welfare and could be replaced with other indicators. Yet others feel that the four indicators could be prioritise and given different instead of equal weightage.

Ultimately there is no single formula that can satisfy everybody and a judgement call has to be made. The committee had noted that it had considered a wide range of indicators before settling on the four.

Moreover, the Committee’s recommendation for a regular five yearly review of the salary framework by an independent committee would ensure that the framework remains appropriate over time and that the process remains transparent to the public. The time frame of five years which is about equivalent to a term of government is reasonable as it provides a sufficient time horizon over the length of a typical economic cycle for the Committee and the public to assess the appropriateness of the formula and propose any changes to be made.

Read her full speech here.

Halimah Yacob
Minister of State for the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports; Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC 

I hope that when we discuss this issue, we will look at it in the proper context. We need to link this salary system to the Government’s performance, especially in the effort to assist those who are less well-off. In fact, the Government had also enhanced support to the middle classes. As the proverb goes; the political leadership that fights for the people is like a big piece of wood in the middle of the field that provides protection from the sun and shelter from the rain.

In debating this issue, I also urge you to look at the outcomes that we had achieved over the years and how this leadership had served the people. In just one generation, this Government had completely transformed Singapore.

The Government plays a major role in re-distribution to ensure fair opportunity for everyone. And as we move ahead, I can see that re-distribution role expanding. Other than heavy investments in education, healthcare and housing, we also have subsidies in the form of Workfare, ComCare, Medifund and educational bursaries, to name a few.

I was also very happy to read about the Ministry of Finance’s recent study which shows that social mobility, a subject close to my heart, is still very alive in Singapore. The study shows that children from poor Singaporean families stand a good chance of moving up in life. The son of a father in the bottom 20% of the income earners has at least two-thirds chance of breaking out of his low-income group. And he has a 10% chance of moving all the way up to the top 20% of income earners in Singapore.

As social mobility is closely related to educational achievement, strong government efforts to uplift educational standards and help needy students have paid off. And we are not standing still. Like housing, healthcare and social assistance, education too has gone through a lot of changes, benefiting our people. And I welcome the recent announcements by the Minister for Education that it is looking at ways to help students study in private educational institutions pay for their education. As I know that parents of children cannot get into the public universities, really struggle to support their children. Again, such efforts require leaders in public service with vision and foresight as education is a long-term investment and we need to attract more of such people into public office.

Read her full speech here.

Lina Chiam
Singapore People’s Party’s Non-Constituency Member of Parliament

My first point relates to the formula of pegging the ministers’ base pay to 60 per cent of the median income of the top 1,000 Singaporean income earners. Mathematically, it is not clear how the salaries will go from here. Yes, this is a huge cut now. But there is a possibility that the new formula may even result in a higher base pay than what the old formula could provide, on a long-term basis.

There are many ways that the median pay for the top 1,000 earners can rise substantially in the next 5 years. Wealthy foreign business people could be given Singapore citizenships en masse. It could even be that the median pay for this group will rise much faster than the median of the top 48 earners.

But for me to form a more accurate opinion, I would need to see how the old and the new formulas would apply to the period from the year 2000 to 2010, on a backdated basis.

To do so, the Government would have to provide us with these figures. More importantly are the figures for the ministers’ bonuses as paid out each year according to the old and new formulas.

If the Government and the review committee are truly serious about promoting a ‘clean wage’ approach for Singapore’s ministers, without additional perks and allowances, then they must follow through with the spirit of that approach.

All these data on salaries and the specific amount of bonuses paid out each year must be published and made transparent for public scrutiny. To date, I believe such data is never released.

In the UK, the Freedom of Information Act allowed for the release of details of MPs’ expenses claim for the British public in the year 2009. If we in Singapore want to talk about ‘clean wages’, let’s go all the way – publish the bonuses paid out every year.

My second point, is that ministerial pay should be primarily driven according to KPIs that are specific to their ministerial portfolio.

Each ministry should create a set of KPIs for their minister, and the minister’s pay is to be objectively decided by a formula that is ministry-specific. As a guide, the KPIs for the Permanent Secretary of the relevant ministry, as the most senior civil servant, should be taken into account.

Yes, I know that there is the Performance Bonus component, which is rewarded based on the individual performance of ministers. But it is not clear what the criteria are in attaining this Performance Bonus. The review committee’s report says that “the Performance Bonus quantum will be reduced substantially”. I am not sure whether the bonus formulas are well structured to drive ministers towards fulfilling their portfolio KPIs, and for the purpose of accountability.

The committee’s recommended formula for the National Bonus may be an improvement on the old GDP Bonus formula, but it is still too broad. Some cynics have even speculated that the recommendation for the old formula to be changed has come at a time when Singapore’s GDP growth will be slowing down.

For example, the Minister for Trade and Industry’s KPI for all his bonuses could be Singaporeans’ wage growth. The Minister for Transport’s KPI could be tied with the Minister for National Development’s KPI to control population growth and thereby, vehicle numbers.

Otherwise, the bonus structure gives me discomfort. For example, our transport system might be in disarray, or a major terrorist might escape from prison, but the ministers responsible for these incidents may still collect a full National Bonus, just because the economy has done well due to the good work of other ministers like the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Trade and Industry.

And that brings me to an overarching point – if the Government’s decision is still to match ministerial pay to the top earners of the private sector, then their accountability measures and KPIs must also match the rigour of the private sector.

I turn the focus now to the junior minister’s new recommended starting salary of about $1.1 million per annum, bonuses included.

Mr Chiam See Tong once worked out what ministerial pay should be, in order that ministers would still be able to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle with hardly any “financial sacrifices”. He tabled the figure to be $50,000 per month, taking into account the mortgage and cost of a bungalow, the hiring of servants, two cars, annual holidays, and their children’s education. This was proposal was supported by then-NMP Professor Walter Woon.

To update that to today’s levels, the figure would be about $60,000 per month, or $720,000 per year. That amount, including bonuses, will be a good benchmark to prove their worth for a young minister with a young family. Moreover they still have their MP’s allowance of $192,500 to top it up.

This represents an approach that can be explained to people and be accepted by them.

For some of the new ministers, this new salary could be quite much more than their last drawn salary. Moreover there is no risk factor in the job like what stockbrokers face, for example.

Read her full speech here.

Indranee Rajah
Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC

Everyone agrees that we should have a “clean wage” system. However I find that whenever there is a discussion on a “clean wage” system, there is always a distorted comparison with other countries. The Workers’ Party mentioned that their proposals were derived after reviewing the remuneration systems in 12 developed economies including the UK and US.

Now, the UK and US are the two most often cited examples of where their politicians earn far less than ours. And I thought that because they are cited so often, it is worthwhile to examine the politicians’ remuneration packages in these two countries in a bit more detail. And you will see that in these countries, political office is not only a privilege, it is also about privileges. In fact, our more is less, and their less is more, more or less!

When citing the remuneration of UK Ministers, one must take into account the Green Book. The Green Book is the Guide to the UK MPs’ allowances. The UK Ministers’ salaries may be lower but they get a whole host of allowances contained in the Green Book. Now, I encourage our MPs and members of the public to look up the Green Book 2009 Edition which is available online. It is seemingly transparent, yet totally opaque. It seems to be transparent because the type of allowances allowed are listed out, but it is totally opaque because you have no idea what amounts these claims come up to.

Workers’ Party has cited Britain as an example of a country where information on political salaries and allowances is available and they have stringent disclosure rules. The UK system is not transparent. Transparency on the allowances was only forced upon them after an investigative journalist pursued the matter and even then it was only after years of trying to force disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. The House of Commons resisted it on the basis that it was “unlawfully intrusive”. It took a court action to get the information and it was discovered that the perks came up to millions of pounds.

So I know that the Workers’ Party is not suggesting that we should have the same kind of allowances provided in the Green Book. But the point is this: the UK Ministers have lower salaries precisely because their system gives them the Green Book allowances which are not transparent. So to cite one part of the equation without also citing the other part is not giving the Singapore public the full picture, which is not right.

I move on to the US. It is often said that our Prime Minister gets less salary than the US President. Our Prime Minister makes more salary but he gets far less in terms of the value of the total benefits package of the US President. There is an article on the Internet titled “10 Most Expensive Presidential Perks”. You should read it. It makes for interesting reading. This is what the US President gets and this list is not exhaustive. In addition to the US$400,000 salary, he gets US$100,000 for travel expenses, US$19,000 for official entertaining. The salary is taxable, the allowances are not. And I also saw in Tuesday’s New Paper that he gets an allowance of up to US$1 million a year for “unanticipated needs”. One has no idea what “unanticipated needs” are.

The point is that if you wish to compare what the US President gets against what our Prime Minister gets, then you must take these things into account.

At the end of the day, while I support the Committee’s recommendations and I would endorse the motion – because it significantly brings down the remuneration which was a cause of concern – but at the end of the day, from the public’s perspective, the issue of Ministerial salaries is not about logic, economics or formulas. It is about the connection between Singaporeans and their elected leaders.

In any age, in any country and in any culture, what do people want of their leaders? They want good, capable people of integrity who can provide leadership and have the right technical competencies. They want leaders who they can identify with and, more importantly, leaders who can identify with them. They want leaders who empathise with them, who feel their pain, their worries, will listen, address their concerns, and provide solutions to the problems that people face.

And the thing is this: most people do not earn this kind of salaries. So the instinctive feeling is: how can you connect with me? How can you feel what I feel when you do not have the same financial constraints that I have? How do you know what it is to feel like to live day after day in fear that you cannot pay your rent, your mortgage, or something as basic as food? How can you know what it is like to be afraid that you might lose your job because someone else, a foreigner who is a younger and cheaper option for your employer? How can you know this when your pay is so high? That, I think, is the real issue with Ministerial salaries.

And the answer does not lie in pegging Ministers’ salaries so low that everyone has to struggle alike. No, the answer lies in this. That the Ministers, with the abilities that you have, with the skills that you have acquired, that you place these skills and abilities at the service of Singaporeans and help solve their issues for them. People do not object to good pay when it is well-earned. And if they feel that a Minister is really working hard for the people then they are fine with that. Where they get upset is if they feel someone gets a good pay just because he or she happens to land the job of a Minister, and they do not see a real or visible effort on the part of that person.

What this means is that for each and every Minister, he or she must show that he or she is truly indeed deserving of the pay, and the policies that he or she initiates and implements must address Singaporeans’ needs. Equally important is the Minister’s connection with people. People respond well to Ministers who are in tune with issues of concern to Singaporeans, who identify the solutions and take action on behalf of the people. These are the ones that Singaporeans are happy to work with to achieve a better result for all.

Singaporeans do not appreciate it if a Minister talks down to them or in a way which they feel is patronising or condescending, or who brushes aside their concerns or worries. These, to me, are the key to public acceptance of high ministerial salaries: sincerity, compassion and high performance by Ministers, coupled with a real connection and close bond to the people they serve.

Read her full speech here.

AWARE member Lee Yenyen (pictured below) ponders the damaging gender stereotypes found in the Chinese-language media here.

By Lee Yenyen

Watching an episode of Aunty Lucy left me feeling much infuriation.

For the sake of giving a review, I made myself watch three episodes. Not only did I waste three precious Sunday afternoons, I had to tolerate vulgar insults which killed many of my brain cells.

Such a distasteful programme released for the sake of attracting advertising dollars is a waste of time, a compromise on appeal and a lost opportunity to attract a more discerning audience. The high viewership, and a win at the Star Awards, have only proven an inclination towards tasteless entertainment. The show is full of Low discerning abilities, perceiving what is repulsive to be interesting, and yet it is lauded.

When women gain weight – whether it’s middle-age spread or pregnancy weight –  it is apparently never a good thing.  It’s a curse. If the weight is not gotten rid of, what we’ll see is an obese demon. Who’ll love you then? Who’d want you? Without diets, without makeovers, your fate is to be despised by men and made the subject of jokes. This is a tragedy! Without a man’s love and affection, it’s as though a woman has been thrown into the depths of hell – and she deserves it, for putting on weight and not losing it.

Even if you aren’t shunned by your husband, your appearance will bring looks of disdain from others. A man with a dumpy wife by his side invites comparisons to beauty and the beast, eliciting jokes aplenty.

And then…Aunty Lucy appears. With relentless nagging, she hauls a deluge of such females off to beauty centres for treatments, with no regard at all as to how much the treatments cost and whether the women are able to afford it. Money rolling out of your bank account is still better than your husband having an affair – that would be the real calamity!

After marriage, childbirth, middle age, old age…fear, self-loathing, lack of confidence and guilt all come along…how pitiful for Chinese women!

一系列安娣露西的促销 广告， 看得我无名火冒三丈！

为了评论, 勉强看完三系列。 枉费了三个星期日下午宝贵时间，还有满脑子经受烂言乱语污染的屈辱， 细胞死了还真不少！黄金时间。 为了可观的 广告费， 推出如此烂素质的节目 – 浪费了时间， 也流失了有高品味观众。 收视率的强劲，红星的得奖， 只证明了低级趣味的普遍。觉醒能力之低弱, 肉麻当有趣, 污辱字眼泛滥 , 竟然引来一个“赞”?

讲华语一族， 通常被归化为阿明， 阿花之类。 为搞笑，梁细妹， 粱婆婆出炉了，而且搞得风水起， 得奖连连。于是乎， 近年来， 男儿身不时兴， 兴来男假女身。一炮而红， 一夕名声大噪！ 婆婆下台，安娣上台。

可怜狮城妖娆哥！ 也来作兴。 东施效颦， 麻烦惹上身。

华语黄金时段电视节目， 针对华文教育群？种种 贬低语言，种种嗤之以鼻的 动作， 更让高素质、 国家刻意攘留的环球人才， 觉得无地自容！

能怪三顾茅芦之才， 去留取舍之间，选择不留守吗？

声声呼吁，学好华文华语的政策， 能奏效吗？中华文化几千年历史都让沫黑了。

女性中年发福，孕妇发福，都不 是一种好兆头, 是一种罪孽。谁来爱你？ 谁还要你？ 不减肥， 不作型像处理， 被男人丈夫嫌弃，打骂，抛弃，人人讥笑。没有男人爱，没有男人要，女人给判入了地狱，是咎由自取！

丈夫不嫌弃， 也会惹来异样眼光，闲言闲语。 丈夫是一表人才， 胖嘟嘟的太太，站在身旁， 百份百的野兽配俊男。惹来了笑话会是一篓篓。

如此这般, 安娣露西便出场了。 持着一种恨铁不成钢的苦口婆心， 带着这群处在地狱边缘的女性，一个个盲盲往美容整形院闯， 也不问费用多少, 可否承担得来。

钱由储蓄户口 源源滚滚出, 花钱消灾。丈夫觅外遇， 才真是世界末日！

结婚后， 产后， 中年， 老年。。。恐惧， 自卑，无自信， 罪恶感。。。源源而生。。。可怜了华夏妇女群。

The writer is a life member and former executive committee member of AWARE. The English translation was done by Yip Ka Man.

Are today’s advertisements more sexualized? Or are they moving towards a more gender-neutral stance? Our January 19 Roundtable Discussion explored these issues by focusing on gender representations in the advertising industry.

By Veesha Chohan

Sarah Chalmers, an AWARE volunteer and a member of our Convention On The Elimination Of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) committee chaired the discussion. She opened by reviewing Article 5 of CEDAW, which links gender representations to advertising. Article 5 states that the social and cultural patterns of men and women should be modified with a view of achieving the elimination of prejudices based on stereotypical roles for men and women.

Three students from the National University of Singapore then shared a historical account of product advertising. Through their findings, we can see that there is a lack of advertisements that truly challenge pre-existing gender roles.

Sociology student Bryan Chia spoke about gender issues and sexuality in McDonald’s advertisements. His project was conducted as part of a Gender Studies module in 2011, and his qualitative study focused on gender stereotypes in McDonald’s advertisements. He found that almost all television commercials display some element of sexual stereotyping, due to the need to capture the audience’s attention through using relatable everyday norms, such as that of gender roles.

Singapore’s McDonald’s commercials seem to be shaded with moderate undertones of gender roles that are based on ‘family values’. It could be said that the purpose of these commercials is to “tug at the heartstrings of individuals” who could potentially identify with the protagonist in the advertisement. Most of these commercials highlight the difficulties of being a woman in today’s society.

A recent Singapore McDonald’s advertisement on Chinese New Year specifically mentioned: “My daughter has to juggle her job and look after the family.” In contrast, the men are shown to be sitting at a table during dinner, playing only inconsequential background roles. These commercials powerfully reflect social expectations with regards to the segregation of gender roles.

Sociology student Kellynn Wee looked at ice-cream advertising from both a historical and contemporary perspective. She drew our attention to the different ways in which advertisements have sexualised the female body, comparing the selling of silk stockings in the 1920s to the selling of ice-cream today. Just as silk stockings made legs a sexual asset, ice-cream commercials now use the female body as a sexual reference. The consumption of ice-cream is frequently represented in advertisements as an orgasmic act, for instance, and some ads play with sexual innuendo by not-so-subtly inviting comparisons between oral sex and the act of consuming ice-cream.

Kellynn believes that there is a need to de-naturalise the poses in these advertisements. Such sexualised ice-cream advertisements induce dual appetites implying the consumption of both the ice-cream and the woman.

Ice-cream advertisements have also shifted towards hyper-sexualising ethnic minorities, with cookies and cream ice-cream being marketed with African American women in the United States, for instance. The appearance of women in sexually inviting positions with their faces blocked out almost disembodies the woman. The woman’s body is not connected to her mind nor her emotions.

Social work major Nur Fadilah spoke about alcohol advertising, raising questions about why men seem to be the target audience for alcohol advertisements despite the increase in women’s socio-economic status.

If women appear in these ads, they appear as accessories to the man, who is normally depicted as being physically fit, masculine, and almost always white. According to Nur’s historical account of alcohol advertising, the 1950s was when hegemonic masculinity was linked to the consumption of alcohol.

This hegemonic masculinity was associated with middle-class men who played polo and golf. From the 1960s onwards, the good life for men was represented by women serving men alcoholic beverages while being placed in sexualised positions.

Because most alcohol advertisements are primarily targeted at younger males, women in these ads are generally portrayed as “man-eaters”, “rebels”, “party girls” or “prizes”. These representations of women are highly sexualised. Their body parts are sold to consumers along with the alcoholic beverage itself. Girls in these ads are permitted to be rebellious and daring, as long as they act in a cute and flirty manner. This is in sharp contrast to the representation of men, who are typically depicted as powerful, in control and strong.

Nur quoted prominent author and educator Jean Kilbourn, who believes that despite frequent criticisms that the media’s portrayal of sex is blatant and encourages promiscuity, sex is ultimately trivialised rather than promoted in the media. The problem is that the media tends to present sex as something that is “synthetic” and “cynical”.

Gender-based advertising that codes sex in this way almost inevitably reinforces negative connotations about women. These advertisements continue to marginalise the presence of women and their socio-economic position in society, despite the fact that we are living in a world where women are becoming increasingly independent and economically savvy.

Find out more about AWARE’s monthly Roundtable Discussion events here.

Regime-changing revolutions, global protests, and other landmark achievements: A look back at 2011.

By Veesha Chohan

Three female leaders win Nobel Peace Prize

Liberia President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Liberian activist Leymah Gbowee and Yemen activist Tawakul Karman were recognised for their non-violent struggle to ensure the safety of women and for their right to full participation in peace-building initiatives.

Mrs Sirleaf is the first and only female elected head of state in Africa. Ms Gbowee is a Liberian peace activist and Ms Karman is a leading figure in Yemen’s pro-democracy movement.

Describing this year’s decision as “a very important signal to women all over the world,” the Nobel Committee chairman stated that democracy would not be a viable institution unless women were given the same opportunities as men in contributing to developments in all areas of society.

The Arab Spring: A revolution for women

In the uprisings that took place across North Africa and the Middle East this year, hundreds of thousands of women broke with traditional cultural norms and assumed leadership roles on the frontline of revolutions aimed at overturning oppressive regimes.

Many were beaten, arrested and shot, and there are more struggles to come. As countries like Tunisia, Libya and Egypt re-group in the aftermath of the protests, there are serious doubts about whether these female activists will be able to continue in their leadership roles during the nation-building process, and help ensure that equal rights for women form a key tenet of the new regimes.

Despite daunting odds, there is cause for optimism. In Tunisia, for instance, women played an active role in administering the October election, and all the political parties that won significant seats responded to Human Rights Watch’s pre-election survey reinstating their support for gender equality.

Christine Lagarde becomes head of International Monetary Fund

As the first woman to secure the top job at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), former France finance minister Christine Lagarde was already assured of a place in the history books.

The fact that she replaced the scandal-plagued Dominique Strauss-Kahn – he resigned from the IMF amid a flurry of sexual assault allegations – was a touch of poetic justice not even the most starry-eyed feminist could have predicted.

Lagarde crafted an unusually public and global campaign for the IMF job, using Twitter to reach out to emerging economies like Brazil and India. She also held an online conference where she took questions from followers on Facebook.

Edwin Truman, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, describes Lagarde as an aggressive spokesperson for the advancement of women in all areas of life. As the Eurozone crisis continues to generate global anxiety, Lagarde’s performance will certainly continue to be a subject of scrutiny in the year ahead.

Latin America embraces female leadership

In October, Argentina’s Cristina Fernandez was re-elected in a landslide victory, winning the election with one of the widest victory margins in Argentina’s history and becoming the country’s first re-elected female President.

Fernandez joins Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff and Costa Rica’s Laura Chinchilla as one of Latin America’s current female heads of state. Countries like Chile, Ecuador, Panama and Nicaragua have also seen women ascend to top leadership roles in recent years.

What makes Latin America so receptive to electing female leaders? Analysing the phenomenon in 2006, Slate cites gender quotas as one factor that has helped women to emerge as serious contenders for top government jobs: “Since 1991, 12 Latin American countries have enacted quota laws that in some cases have doubled the number of female congressional representatives. While in the United States women make up just 15 percent of the House of Representatives and 14 percent of the Senate, in Argentina and Costa Rica, women comprise fully one-third of the national congresses.”

Asian women rule the business world

Sabanci Group CEO Guler Sabanci, Pepsico CEO Indra Nooyi, President of Gree group Dong Mingzhu and President of China Power International Development Limited Li Xiaolin topped the 2011 Financial Times Global Top 50 Business Women List.

Outstanding business-women from China and India, in fact, made up over 20 percent of this list.

Singapore also did well, with Chua Sock Koong of SingTel, Olivia Lum of Hyflux and Ho Ching of Temasek Holdings making the list. This is no mean feat. As Forbes put it: “Singapore has a population of just over 5 million population –or 0.07% of the world’s population – yet made up 6% of the list.”

Mara Hvistendahl reveals the danger of valuing boys over girls

In her first book, Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls & The Consequences Of A World Full Of Men, American science journalist Mara Hvistendahl shines a spotlight on the pressing issue of missing women.

Since the late 1970s, 163 million female babies have been aborted by parents seeking sons. Hvistendahl traces the ideas and events that led to the prevalence of sex-selective abortions.

She also makes the provocative claim that female empowerment has led to more sex selection, not less – Women are using their increased autonomy to select sons because male offspring still bring a higher social status in many cultures.

These choices have grave consequences, with gender-imbalanced nations becoming more socially unstable and vulnerable to sex trafficking.

The book raises thorny questions about the notion of choice, perhaps unintentionally, as the Wall Street Journal speculates: “Unnatural Selection might be one of the most consequential books ever written in the campaign against abortion. It is aimed, like a heat-seeking missile, against the entire intellectual framework of ‘choice’. For if ‘choice’ is the moral imperative guiding abortion, then there is no way to take a stand against ‘gendercide’. Aborting a baby because she is a girl is no different from aborting a baby because she has Down syndrome or because the mother’s ‘mental health’ requires it. Choice is choice.”

Slutwalk goes global

This movement emerged in Canada in April, after a Toronto police officer suggested during a public forum that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized”.

SlutWalks have now taken place in more than 40 different countries around the world.

On December 4, SlutWalks took place in Singapore, Hong Kong, Bangalore and Mumbai, with organisers in these cities presenting a united front against sexual violence.

NASA celebrates women’s contributions to science and exploration

US government agency National Aeronautics And Space Administration (NASA) helped put men on the moon, and it has set its sights on boosting female participation in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math (collectively known as STEM).

This year, it launched a new website, Women@NASA, dedicated to celebrating the contributions women have made to science and exploration. The website aims to encourage more young women to pursue careers in STEM industries. In the US, women hold less than 25 percent of all STEM jobs.

The Women@NASA project shares the stories of 32 women from the organisation who have contributed to NASA’s missions, hoping to inspire girls around the world to reach for the stars.

South-east Asian women’s groups reject Obedient Wives Club

Earlier this year, The Obedient Wives Club was launched in Malaysia by the controversial Global Ikhwan group. Branches in Indonesia, Singapore, Jordan, Australia and England were subsequently established.

Despite its swift expansion, the club has not gained traction, instead attracting widespread criticism for its belief that the sexual submission of a wife to her husband will reduce the likelihood of the husband engaging in adultery and other related social ills like prostitution.

Facebook groups established against the club have described its teachings as sexist and senseless. In Malaysia, women’s rights group Sisters-in-Islam and Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Jalil spoke out against the club.

In Singapore, the Islamic Religious Council (Muis) issued a statement that said “happiness in a marriage goes beyond receiving sexual fulfilment from one’s wife”, while Indonesia’s Women’s Empowerment Minister Linda Gumelar called the group a “setback for Indonesia”.

Hillary Clinton discusses democracy with Aung San Suu Kyi

In December, two of the world’s most famous female political figures met to discuss much-needed democratic reform for Burma.

The meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and the leader of Burma’s pro-democracy movement Aung San Suu Kyi marked an incredible sign of change in the South-east Asian country.

Aung San Suu Kyi is currently preparing for a return to politics, having confirmed that she plans to run in next year’s parliamentary elections. Her previous efforts to implement democratic reform and cultivate a decisive win for her party, the National League for Democracy, was terminated due to the military’s crackdown on pro-democracy movements.

Hillary Clinton has endorsed Suu Kyi as a member of the new parliament, supporting the latter’s aim of enforcing a rule of law and releasing all remaining political prisoners.

The writer is an AWARE intern majoring in International Relations at the University of Queensland.

A survivor of domestic violence reviews the new book Nightingale Songs: Survival Stories From Domestic Violence.

Why it is so difficult to walk out of abuse? Because these are some of the thoughts that cross a victim’s mind: Perhaps it is just a passing cloud; you mean, I am a victim of violence? Me? No, it cannot be! What is abuse, anyway?

I applaud the efforts of publisher Marshall Cavendish the publisher, author Kendra Frazier, AWARE, and the survivors who contributed their stories to Nightingale Songs, the first book of its kind in Singapore. AWARE did really great work in its chapter on how victims of abuse can seek help in Singapore. The book also has a very diverse scope that will be of interest to survivors, counsellors, as well as those looking for more awareness and understanding of this issue.

Nevertheless, I would have appreciated a more explicit exploration of the survivors’ stories. Beneath the surface, there is a lot of suffering, agony, anguish, shame, antagonism, guilt, loneliness, isolation, humiliation, hurt, tears, struggle, tension, fear, uncertainty, pain and repeatedly giving the perpetrator the benefit of the doubt, hoping that there will be a miracle one day.

Portraying these intense emotions and conflicts will help people better understand how recovering from such insidious abuse, which usually begins in the family of origin, is extremely difficult. The ripple effects are also more detrimental when they are trans-generational. Acknowledging the co-dependency of family dynamics is one of the keys to healing.

For most victims, getting someone to believe their story is the first step to breaking the cycle of violence. In the longer term, it is important to get the time and space to develop one’s identity and instill respect for differences in individuals, instead of using power struggles to ensure cohesion and adhesion.

Nightingale Songs serenades 2 advocates, 3 counsellors, 2 survivors-turned-helping professionals, and 8 victims.

The chapter on law professor Chan Wing Cheong’s efforts to improve legal protection against domestic violence:

I have been a beneficiary to the changes in the 1996 amendment to the Women’s Charter that includes the continual harassment portion. That granted creditability to the invisible sufferings for me this year.

Paradoxically, by prioritizing family unity, Singapore law sometimes jeopardizes its own protection objectives. Perpetrators almost look more normal than the victims most of the time. Mentorship and support is critical for survivors, and it really helps when there is rising social consciousness in her support network about the typical dynamics of an abusive relationship.

The chapter on former AWARE Direct Services manager Kerry Wilcock:

Homelessness is just as intolerable as the abuse. The transient life for both mothers and their children after breaking away from the cycle of violence can be a very stressful time. It is worse when they are foreigners with limited access to their rights to home, children and money, at the mercy of the native spouse. The innocent and powerless children are the real victims in the crisis. Their inner turmoil, and being forced to grow up beyond their years, is heart-breaking.

The chapters on counsellors Benny Bong and Hamidah S.A.B., and social worker Udhia Kumar:

Bong observes that a perpetrator usually plays a victim’s role at work. These men are usually not in touch with themselves, blaming everything and everybody except themselves. Kumar says that recovery begins when we recognise that the perpetrator is also suffering deeply from inner turmoil.

What we victims want is to STOP the violence. We learned the difference between expressive anger and instrumental anger. The latter is deep-seated, entrenched, enmeshed and simmering.

Teaching respect in healthy relationships is critical. The private is a function of the public and the public an expression of the private.

Counsellor Hamidah believes that better communication and inner assertiveness are vital to helping survivors to recognise subtle psychological abuse, and not tolerate disrespect.

The chapters on survivors of domestic violence:

Yu Ming’s personal history is an inspiration – It is possible to rebuild your life. He notes that ignorance and secrecy pose the greatest threats to the welfare and safety of children in a violent home. Empowering them by teaching them to identify triggers to violence is a more proactive and pre-emptive step. The story of Bob, another survivor, also emphasizes this need for guidance and support.

The women and children caught in such situations need someone who listens, takes personal interest. The power of one such person can help to turn things around.

Survivor Akshaya was taunted and demeaned by her ex-spouse in front of friends and her children. The social isolation she describes is unbearable. I identified with her – I, too, did not realise that I had a right not to suffer, until counselling helped me to think differently. Our aspirations for our daughters are also similar – like her, I do not want my daughter to grow up fragile.

My young daughter was instrumental to my exit to freedom. She stayed sensitive to the fact that she experienced more peace externally than home. One day, she just stayed close to the door, and said innocently: “Mummy, let’s go?” Financial dependence was another enslaving factor. Walking away was not easy.

I remembered my fair share of kneeling down, apologetically begging my ex-husband to save our family, and being given the cold shoulder. The late counsellor Anthony Yeo once asked me what the one thing I regretted was. I said, almost instantly: My marriage. His next question was: Do you think that you will regret your divorce?

For a victim of abuse to get clarity and to give up hope of an equal partnership takes time. Self-love was a valuable lesson that I had to learn.

As the road to recovery continues, I can identify with Elizabeth’s Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde double life of flux. The fear of failure, intimacy and rejection in personal relationships is always there, even in platonic relationships. This sense of restlessness about who I can really trust is a constant struggle.

I completed reading this healing book in a day. It is a great comfort for us survivors to know that we are not alone. There are many others who care.

About Nightingale Songs
To write this book, Singapore-based counsellor and mental healthcare professional Kendra Frazier spoke to survivors of abuse and professionals who help those impacted by violence in their home. Their stories provide useful information for those considering working in the field of domestic violence, especially the importance of self-care, and will resonate with anyone whose life has been personally touched by this issue.

To commemorate the United Nation’s International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Woman, AWARE and Marshall Cavendish launched Nightingale Songs on Nov 25, 2011. This book is the first comprehensive documentation of domestic abuse in Singapore. The launch was part of Stop the Cycle Before it Starts, AWARE’s anti-domestic violence campaign, and was followed by a discussion featuring survivors and experts. Nightingale Songs can be purchased for $19 at the AWARE Centre and all major bookstores.

The problem of human trafficking – including sex trafficking – and the rights of foreign women married to Singaporean husbands were discussed during the Nov 21 to 22 sitting of Parliament. The following is a summary of the key points.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

In response to a question by Member of Parliament (MP) Christopher de Souza, Second Minister for Home Affairs S Iswaran – also Minister for Prime Minister’s Office – provided an update on the National Plan Of Action Against Sex And Labour Trafficking:

Trafficking in persons (TIP) is a significant trans-national crime. Singapore is an attractive hub of economic activity with high people flows, and would be seen as an attractive destination country by human trafficking syndicates.

Singapore formed the Inter-Agency Taskforce on TIP in 2010. The Taskforce aims to identify and implement Whole-of-Government strategies to combat TIP more effectively, both locally and internationally.

The Taskforce is currently developing the National Plan Of Action, which is expected to be ready by mid-2012. This plan will detail strategies to reduce the incidence of human trafficking in Singapore, minimise opportunities available for traffickers to exploit others and heighten our response to trafficking cases.

This strategy will have four key thrusts:

• Prevention of the crime
• Prosecution of offenders
• Protection of victims
• Partnerships with other countries, embassies, NGOs and the private sector

Prevention

• Strict border enforcement, thorough immigration checks, proactive enforcement and public education.
• Police and the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) conduct frequent operations to identify victims and take traffickers to task.
• Successfully prosecuted cases are publicised in order to deter potential perpetrators.
• Ensuring workers in Singapore are aware of their rights and the obligations of their employers. This is done through the issuance of in-principle approval letters prior to their arrival in Singapore, and orientation and various outreach education programmes while they are in Singapore.

Prosecution

• Human traffickers are firmly dealt with under Singapore laws. Police and MOM will continue to work with the Attorney-General’s Chambers to press for deterrent sentences.
• The Taskforce is examining whether new legislation is required to enhance our ability to fight human trafficking. They will consider whether enhancements to enforcement powers, increased victim care provisions and harsher sentences are needed.

Protection

• MCYS and MOM fund shelters and dormitories that offer protection, including accommodation, medical care, counselling and translation services. The Taskforce is looking at ways to improve the victim care and support programmes.

Partnerships

• The Taskforce will continue to work with other countries, foreign embassies and partners, such as Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), to ensure victims are identified promptly and human traffickers are pursued even across borders and legal jurisdictions.
• Beyond operational issues, the Taskforce will work with our partners to explore proactive upstream measures to prevent exploitation, even in source countries.

Read the full speech here.

FOREIGN WIVES

In response to questions submitted by MPs Fatimah Lateef and Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean – also Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs – made the following written replies:

Marriage to a Singapore citizen does not mean that a foreign spouse will get Permanent Residence (PR) or Singapore Citizenship (SC). We look at several factors in deciding the grant of PR or Singapore citizenship to foreign spouses. These include the financial ability of the SC spouse to support the foreign spouse, duration of marriage and length of stay in Singapore.

Foreign spouses who are not granted PR will generally be granted a Long Term Visit Pass (LTVP) for them to remain in Singapore. The foreign spouse is allowed to seek employment while on the LTVP.

MHA is currently studying how we can further help Singaporean families with foreign spouses.

For foreign wives who are widowed or divorced and have sole custody of young Singaporean children, ICA would generally facilitate their continued stay in Singapore through a renewable LTVP. This would enable them to care for and raise their Singaporean children here.

Help is extended to those who face financial hardship. The Singaporean children receive financial assistance from the Ministry of Education and other agencies for their school fees, textbooks and other needs. The family may also be referred to a Family Service Centre which will help them adjust to their new circumstances and help them get back on their feet.

From 2000 to 2010, the number of Singaporeans who applied for Long-Term Visit Passes (LTVP) and Permanent Residence (PR) for their foreign spouses each year averaged 12,100 and 8,700 respectively. Over the same period, an average of 10,300 and 4,600 foreign spouses of Singaporeans were granted LTVP and PR respectively each year. The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority is unable to further breakdown the data by whether the applicants had locally born children at the time of application. The majority of these foreign spouses granted LTVP or PR are from South East Asia.

Read the submitted questions and replies in full here and here.

The following is a press statement issued by the South-east Asia Women’s Caucus on ASEAN, a network of women’s organisations from 11 countries which aims to engage ASEAN in advancing women’s human rights in the region.

Despite the hype surrounding the ASEAN Summit in Bali, women from the region found no signs in ASEAN towards advancing women’s human rights and gender equality. Instead they alarmed with the body’s support for the 2014 chairship of Burma, where cases of women’s human rights violations are mounting, among others. Moreover there are qualms over the civil society space in Cambodia when it starts the chairship next year.

“Although Indonesia has been quite open to civil society, this is not a nice touch as Indonesia ends its term and passes the baton to the next chair,” Rena Herdiyani of Kalyanamitra, a member of the South East Asia Women’s Caucus on ASEAN (Women’s Caucus) put it.

“The Burmese Army’s widespread attacks against ethnic civilian communities, especially against women, is an egregious violation of international law and blatantly shows the lack of the rule of law in Burma. We know that you understand the security of women is not a minor issue, but a major problem that has to be addressed before a nation can progress,” the Women’s League of Burma said. The organisation documented 81 cases of rape this year alone.

The ASEAN Summit ended just days before the 16 Days of Activism against Violence Against Women international campaign.

With this development, the Women’s Caucus is watchful of the drafting of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD). “Women’s human rights must never be a point of negotiations. ASEAN must acknowledge what we are born with, as affirmed by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and other international human rights instruments.” Herdiyani added.

Last month, the Women’s Caucus formally submitted its input to the AHRD, reiterating human rights such as equality and non-discrimination, freedom from violence, sexual and reproductive health and rights, equal rights in marriage and family life, decent work in local and overseas employment and citizenship especially for refugees and women on the move, among many others.

As the AHRD will be deliberated and adopted under Cambodia’s chairship, the Women’s Caucus call for an open and safe space for civil society next year. “We are not just feminists and activists but we are stakeholders of ASEAN, we have to critically engage with the process, especially as ASEAN is increasingly become a part of our daily lives. There is no way we could do this if ASEAN only wants to hear good things,” Kunthea Chan of Cambodian women’s organisation, Silaka asserted.

Find out more about the Women’s Caucus here.

The following is AWARE’s letter to the Straits Times Forum Page, published November 5, 2011

We refer to the forum letter “Improve job security for pregnant contract employees” by Madam Salinahwati Mohd Ali on November 2, 2011.

In her letter, she aired her disappointment at the lack of measures to protect pregnant contract workers. Her contract was terminated twice – when she was less than 3 months pregnant with her second child and when she was 6 months pregnant with her third child.

Madam Salinahwati’s story reveals a gap in the current measures taken by the government to protect pregnant women. Contract workers who are pregnant have been left out of these special provisions.

This lack of protection for pregnant contract workers is contrary to the requirements of the United Nations’ Convention For The Elimination Of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). This Convention, which Singapore is party to, obliges the Government to “prohibit, subject to the imposition of sanctions, dismissal on the grounds of pregnancy or maternity leave”. The State is expected to take steps to ensure that all pregnant women can continue to work. This includes contract workers.

Therefore, it is unacceptable that laws protecting pregnant women only apply to those who are permanent staff. This is a gap. The law should be extended to include pregnant contract workers.

In addition, the law has another gap as it only effected after the first trimester. Thus, employers who fire pregnant women before they reach the fourth month can get away with such discriminatory practices. The law needs to be further strengthened by removing this limitation on the first trimester.

Lastly, in the absence of an anti-discrimination law – which AWARE contends is essential – there ought to be enhanced and targeted public education on fair employment practices among employers. Currently, the Tripartite Alliance For Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP) is active in this area but efforts still seem to fall short as dismissals among pregnant women continue.

AWARE would like to urge all who have been unfairly dismissed or forced to resign at any stage of pregnancy to lodge their complaints with the Ministry Of Manpower’s (MOM) Labour Relations Department by calling 6317-1182 or sending an e-mail to mom_lrd@mom.gov.sg. AWARE also operates a crisis phone Helpline and can be contacted at 1800-774-5935.

Ms Braema Mathi
Chair, AWARE CEDAW Committee

Read our published letter here and another ST Forum letter on the same issue here.