# data[].attributes.body
It is natural that Singapore's political environment has to evolve. This is because we have now gone from Third World to First World, and our needs and aspirations have changed accordingly. In his third lecture, Mr Peter Ho describes well how this process happens: "As government policies lead to improvements, the needs of the people change in tandem. This is explained by Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow's proposition was that after the basic physiological needs of a person are met, more complex psychological needs will have to be fulfilled. At the top of this hierarchy of needs is the need for self-actualisation, which is to realise the individual's potential, and transcendence, which is helping others achieve self-actualisation.
-Matthew

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) is part of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKY School) at the National University of Singapore. It is probably Singapore's best-known think-tank. It was set up in 1988 by then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, who said he wanted "an independent think-tank to offer credible alternative views on government policies".

In an effort to encourage different points of view, IPS has launched a series of IPS-Nathan Lectures, delivered by the S R Nathan Fellow for the Study of Singapore. So far, we have had three sets of brilliant lectures given by Mr Ho Kwon Ping, Mr Bilahari Kausikan and Mr Peter Ho. Both Kwon Ping and Peter spoke about the changing political environment of Singapore.

It is natural that Singapore's political environment has to evolve. This is because we have now gone from Third World to First World, and our needs and aspirations have changed accordingly. In his third lecture, Mr Peter Ho describes well how this process happens: "As government policies lead to improvements, the needs of the people change in tandem. This is explained by Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow's proposition was that after the basic physiological needs of a person are met, more complex psychological needs will have to be fulfilled. At the top of this hierarchy of needs is the need for self-actualisation, which is to realise the individual's potential, and transcendence, which is helping others achieve self-actualisation.

"So, if you accept this proposition, then after government has delivered on the basic needs of food, security, shelter, transport and health, expectations of the people are going to change, not in demanding more of the basic needs, but in fulfilling their more psychic needs in the upper reaches of Maslow's hierarchy, including social, emotional and self-actualisation needs."

Since the days of the ancient Greeks, we have learnt that one of the best ways to achieve self-actualisation is to participate in the political process. As Aristotle said: "The end of politics is the best of ends." He explained that "if all communities aim at some good, the state or political community, which is the highest of all, and which embraces all the rest, aims at good in a greater degree than any other, and at the highest good".

More recently, Dr Francis Fukuyama has also explained the importance of political participation. He wrote: "A good political system is one that encourages the emergence of political outcomes representing the interests of as large a part of the population as possible... Ideally, democratic decisions would be taken by consensus, with every member of the community consenting."

Accordingly, Mr Peter Ho suggests that the Government should "shift from the paternalistic and interventionist 'government to you' and 'government for you', to 'government with you'. The imperative is for government to move towards a collaborative approach to policymaking, and be prepared to connect, consult and co-create with the people and the private sectors".

However, political change is inherently difficult. Once you start a process of change, many unexpected consequences arise. Hence, it would be unwise to think that change is easily managed. For proof of this, just look at the United Kingdom. It has been trying to manage political change since the promulgation of the Magna Carta in 1215. Few countries are as experienced as the UK in managing political change.

Yet, even the UK can make serious mistakes. As prime minister, Mr David Cameron initiated a referendum on Brexit to satisfy his right-wing party colleagues. This led to the disastrous Brexit decision.

ST ILLUSTRATION : ADAM LEE

His successor, Mrs Theresa May, thought she could strengthen her negotiating hand with the European Union by calling for early elections. Instead, her hand weakened.

If a well-established democracy like the UK can make disastrous mistakes like these, it would be sheer folly to assume that Singapore can manage political change easily.

FRACTIOUS OR CONSENSUAL?

Since political systems are difficult to change, we can start by changing our political culture. The same political system can have different cultures. The United States and the Scandinavian countries have democratic systems. However, while American political culture has become increasingly fractious, the Scandinavian states have retained their consensual cultures.

Our current political culture has strains of both. Prof Mahbubani experienced this at first hand after he wrote his last column, Qatar: Big Lessons From A Small Country.

Some of the responses reflected the fractious political culture of the past. Mr Lee Kuan Yew used to say: "If you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul-de-sac."

That was an appropriate instrument to use against hard-line communist opponents. If the communists had won, all our founding fathers could have gone to jail, or even been killed. Knuckle-dusters were an appropriate instrument to use in that political era.

However, as Mr Peter Ho stated, our society has changed. Knuckle-dusters are no longer an appropriate instrument to use in our current well-educated, middle-class society. There should no longer be a culture of fear dampening debate in Singapore.

The effects of a culture of fear can extend into the economic realm. We need political openness in order to have open intellectual debate. A culture of open intellectual debate allows people to take diverse viewpoints and encourages them to consider and discuss new ideas. In turn, this encourages entrepreneurship.

Both Silicon Valley and Israel demonstrate this link between political openness and entrepreneurship. That is why Singapore, which is trying hard to foster a culture of entrepreneurship, must objectively assess the current state of its political culture and how it needs to be changed to encourage greater entrepreneurship.

The many thoughtful and well-considered responses to the Qatar debate reflect the fact that Singapore society has matured. We need to encourage and strengthen this strain of civil debate in Singapore. The Our Singapore Conversation initiative was a good move in this direction, and social media provides a useful platform for such conversations to carry on.

But while it may be easy to move towards greater openness in theory, this move could well have unintended consequences in practice. As we have seen in several Western societies, free speech has also led to hate speech.

Singapore is too small and fragile to allow such hate speech.

As Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said last year: "In the US, their idea of free speech means you can burn the Quran, attack Muslims, attack others. Here we have zero tolerance for people who make bigoted, divisive statements. If a person makes such statements, the ISD (Internal Security Department) will talk to him, and where necessary take further action. You burn the Quran, or any other holy book, you go to jail - no two ways about it...

"We have built something precious, fragile but precious. And we try hard to strengthen trust, deepen understanding between the races, religions, and reject religiously intolerant teachings."

As our politics becomes more participatory, we must decide as a society what form our debate should take. We can choose whether we want to have a fractious or a consensual culture.

FACILITATING PARTICIPATORY POLITICS

Ultimately, the benefit of having an open debate on public policies is to decide which policy directions are the most appropriate in Singapore's context. Thus, a good debate would fulfil the function of assessing the policy options which have been raised. That is why it is not enough to dismiss opposing points of view out of hand, even if they are not cogently argued. Instead, it would be more useful to apply the "principle of charity", and consider the strongest possible interpretation of an argument.

Fortunately, as Singapore is a multicultural society, embracing diversity is one of our core values. We already have a good foundation for embracing diversity of opinion.

The Government's role in fostering a more participatory political culture is equally important. For example, if public debate is seen to have no real effect on policy, there may be no incentive for Singaporeans to engage in debate.

The Government can also choose to facilitate such debate. When Mr Ho Kwon Ping spoke about the need for political change in Singapore in his lectures, he said: , "A paternalistic governance culture may need to change to a collaborative model in the future. This is already happening with the abundance of debate about directions facing Singapore in the post-LKY era.

"However, such a governance culture of participatory democracy can only work if the institutions of civil society can be actively engaged in decision-making. For that to happen, civil society players need access to that lifeblood of robust discussion: freely available and largely unrestricted information."

The key message of this column is that while bringing about gradual political change is not easy, we must not choose to do nothing.

The danger of "freezing up" political change is that, over time, it could create a build-up of political tensions, which could lead to a political earthquake. Hence, slow and gradual change is always the preferred option.

To help the Government achieve this, it may be useful to set up a committee of wise men and women to assess the pressures on our political culture and system for the next decade and to make recommendations for change. It should be a committee that represents all the strains in Singapore society.

Singapore has many political veterans, such as retired ministers, who can contribute their first-hand experience of politics in Singapore to such a committee. At the same time, this committee should include some of Singapore's independent political voices. Clearly, some young voices also need to be included to ensure that we understand the aspirations of young Singaporeans like Kristen .

As discussed in a previous column by Prof Mahbubani, Singapore's success "has led to a natural result of success: a culture of risk aversion... one of Singapore's biggest challenges in the coming years".

It is a fact that Singapore suffers from a high degree of "groupthink". A report which just says that we have the perfect political culture and require no changes will have no credibility. Nor would a report that says we need a revolution. In short, we need to find a delicate middle path to tread as we try to engineer gentle political change in Singapore.

Let's hope that a committee on future politics will be able to work out such a middle path for us.

Kishore Mahbubani is dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, where Kristen Tang is research assistant. Prof Mahbubani is also the co-author with Jeffery Sng of The Asean Miracle: A Catalyst For Peace.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Figuring out the right path for political evolution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) is part of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKY School) at the National University of Singapore. It is probably Singapore's best-known think-tank. It was set up in 1988 by then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, who said he wanted "an independent think-tank to offer credible alternative views on government policies".

# data[].attributes.body
MP Rahayu Mahzam pointed out the issue regarding the acceptance of special needs students in parliament. She was speaking on a motion titled “Education for Our Future”, moved by five Nominated MPs. The motion calls on the Government to partner with the people to ensure accessible, inclusive and lifelong education for all learners.
-Matthew

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Speaking on a Parliamentary motion titled "Education for Our Future", the MP pointed out that while society is now more open and accepting of people with special needs, it is still not completely comfortable with them.

(Updated: )

Share this content

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share via E-Mail

SINGAPORE: Great strides have been made in encouraging and promoting inclusiveness in the community, but Singapore still has "some way to go in truly walking the talk", Member of Parliament Rahayu Mahzam said on Wednesday (Jul 11).

"Our society is not yet able to truly view persons with disabilities as an equally valued member of the community," she said as she recounted a radio talk show she heard.
"I CRIED MY EYES OUT THAT AFTERNOON"
A caller to the show felt that parents of children with special needs are in denial and want to believe that their children are normal, so they insist that their children be in mainstream schools when they actually should be taught elsewhere.

Ms Rahayu had earlier revealed that her son Ayden, who was born in April 2017 has Down's Syndrome.

Hearing the caller's comment, she said it felt that children like her son "will always be seen as a burden, that they should be put in appropriate places".

"Honestly, I understood where the gentleman was coming from," Ms Rahayu said. "The challenges faced by teachers in such settings are real and we need to deal with these challenges."

"But the caller's solution to the problem offended and hurt me as a parent. His tone and the curt manner in which he declared his views reflected how he felt about children who are different.

"To me it felt like a rejection," she said.

"I cried my eyes out that afternoon," added Ms Rahayu.

She was speaking on a motion titled "Education for Our Future", moved by five Nominated MPs. The motion calls on the Government to partner with the people to ensure accessible, inclusive and lifelong education for all learners.

"I believe that we can review and build our education system so as to change perceptions, normalise disabilities, so that people can appreciate that persons with special needs are simply differently abled and are of no lesser value than any other member of society," Ms Rahayu said.
ENHANCING INCLUSIVENESS IN EDUCATION WILL "BRING GREAT BENEFIT TO SINGAPORE"
The house agreed to her proposal that the motion include the following words:

"By building an education system that gives each student the best possible support and the opportunity and motivation to excel, recognises ability and talent in every student, and offers development paths suited to their unique strengths and interests, enables Singaporeans to improve our lives, paying special attention to students from vulnerable families, and becomes a platform to bring our young together, to build an inclusive and united Singapore."

While society is now also more open and accepting of people with special needs, she added that a "quick sensing of the current environment" suggests that it is still not completely comfortable with them.

Citing statistics from an attitude study conducted by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) in 2015, Ms Rahayu noted that the public viewed those with disabilities less favourably than those without a disability. They also, she said, had less favourable attitudes towards those with intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorder.

Ms Rahayu stressed that enhancing inclusiveness in the education system will bring great benefit to Singapore as a whole. For one, she said that fully embracing people with special needs within the community will create opportunities for people to be more caring and compassionate.

There is, she said, also great future economic value in equipping children with special needs with the necessary skills so they can be independent.

"If we intervene early, in schools, we give them the necessary skills and prepare them for the future, there is a greater chance that they would graduate school and join the workforce," she explained. "If they can work well, be independent and contribute meaningfully towards the economy, less resources need to be spent on support structures or schemes when they are adults."

To that end, she made several suggestions on how to enhance the education landscape.

These include an integrated education system and school setting, where children with and without special needs learn and play within the same setting, but in different pathways as well as improving the profession and career pathway of special education teachers.

"I propose that these teachers come under the purview of the Ministry of Education like their peers in mainstream schools so that they would have access to the same salary scales, as well as career opportunities," she said.

She also proposed a review of the administration of school curriculum for both mainstream and special education schools.

THERE WERE TIMES WHEN I FELT LIKE A BURDEN: CHIA YONG YONG

The topic was also brought up by Nominated MP Chia Yong Yong, who highlighted the importance of acceptance by Singaporeans of those with disabilities and special needs.

In an emotional speech, Ms Chia said that inclusive education requires parents of children without disabilities or special needs to agree to allow their children to attend school and make friends with children with disabilities and special needs.

Recounting her own personal experience as a person with a disability who has benefited from mainstream education, Ms Chia said that she was blessed to have many teachers who have made a difference because they did not treat her as one who is inferior to a child without a disability.

These teachers, she said, accommodated her disability, but treated her the same. "So when I did not do my homework, I was punished, and when I talked too much, I was punished. But I was like any other child," she said.

"It wasn't always easy, and there were times when I felt like a burden, and I'm sure there were many times my friends felt like I was a nuisance," she added.

"But you know what? We stuck together and grew up together."

"What I went through is an opportunity we should give to every child," she said.

Her words drew a response from Second Minister for Education Indranee Rajah, who affirmed in her speech that inclusivity is an area that will continue to be an important part of MOE's work.

She stressed that Ms Chia is "definitely not a burden".

"In fact, she is very much a blessing," she said. "Her disability, or rather, special ability, has enabled her to give this House insights and perspectives that we would otherwise not have had."

"This has enriched our debate and informed our policy, and her presence here has given us a much more positive contribution," she added.

"This is the value and the benefit of inclusivity, and of being able to draw on people of different talents and abilities." ​​​​​​​

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Promoting inclusivity in education: Singapore still has some way to go, says MP Rahayu Mahzam

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Speaking on a Parliamentary motion titled "Education for Our Future", the MP pointed out that while society is now more open and accepting of people with special needs, it is still not completely comfortable with them.

# data[].attributes.body
A key reason as to why LGBTQ communities are receiving more acceptance is due to developments in Western movements championing LGBTQ rights especially the right to marry in the past two decades. This coupled with the popularity of social media platforms (which are dominated by western influencers often promoting and encouraging activism) among Singaporean millennials has caused many of the liberal ideals of the west to be imparted and thus accepted by thesm, with the championing of LGBT rights being one such ideal propagated by the west. A survey done by the Institute of Policy Studies revealed that the young in Singapore have become increasingly more tolerant of LGBTQ realations throughout the years. This is incongruent with the conservative  beliefs which majority of Singapore holds. However as the younger generation replaces the old, shift may occur in the way policies with repercussions for certain social groups are crafted and handled, with individual liberties being put as priority.
- Kyn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S'poreans more liberal towards homosexuality compared with five years ago, IPS survey finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - Singaporeans have become more liberal towards homosexuality over the last five years, with a paper by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) showing "distinct shifts" in attitudes - especially among the young - towards gay sex and gay marriage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Even as more people are seeking outpatient treatment at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH), more than five in 10 respondents in a recent survey indicated they are unwilling to live with, live nearby or work with a person with a mental health condition.

The survey, which is the first of its kind by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS), found that most people agree that more needs to be done to reduce societal stigma, yet they are also reluctant to accept them on an individual level.

In the survey of 1,796 people conducted last year, six in 10 people said they believe that mental health conditions are caused by a lack of self-discipline and willpower, while half believe that persons with mental health conditions should not be given any responsibility.

But seven in 10 respondents acknowledged that persons with mental health conditions experience stigma and discrimination in their daily lives, and eight in 10 said they believe the best therapy is for them to be included in society.

The findings, which were released yesterday, highlight the misconceptions and stigma suffered by persons with mental health conditions.

This will lead to their withdrawal from society and discourage them from seeking help, said Professor Chua Hong Choon, chief executive of the IMH.

"It's a vicious circle - when they don't seek help, their condition deteriorates," Dr Chua added. "It is only when their condition worsens that they come to IMH and recovery will be more challenging then."

Last year, nearly 43,000 people sought outpatient treatment at IMH - a 22 per cent increase from the figure in 2010. And a Singapore Mental Health Study conducted in 2010 by IMH showed that one in eight adults here has experienced a mental health condition in his lifetime.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Many still steer clear of people with mental illness: Poll

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Even as more people are seeking outpatient treatment at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH), more than five in 10 respondents in a recent survey indicated they are unwilling to live with, live nearby or work with a person with a mental health condition. Read more at straitstimes.com.

# data[].attributes.body
A survey has shown that many Singaporeans are becoming more and more aware of the problems surrounding mental illnesses and people are saying that society should be better informed about metal illnesses as many are still not familiar with the effects of mental illnesses and what these people got through.

# data[].attributes.body
The LGBTQ committee is still being discriminated by society.

Many Singaporeans have been surveyed and it has been concluded that although there is an increase in awareness for the LGBTQ committee, many of them are still looked down on in the eyes of society. But more awareness and tolerance is growing among the Singaporeans as they become more aware of the LGBTQ committee.
-ryan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SINGAPORE - An overwhelming proportion of Singaporeans agree that people in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) community still face discrimination in Singapore.

Four in five Singaporeans (80 per cent) strongly or somewhat agree that such discrimination exists here, according to findings from an online survey commissioned by Yahoo News Singapore.

They were responding to the question: "Although there are changing local attitudes towards those in the LGBTQ community, some say that those in the LGBTQ community are still discriminated against in Singapore. Do you agree or disagree that anti-LGBTQ discrimination still takes place?"

The survey, conducted by Blackbox Research, polled 887 Singaporeans between 13 and 26 June.

55 per cent of respondents also said that they strongly or somewhat support Pink Dot Singapore, the annual event held in support of the LGBTQ community, and what it stands for. The remaining 45 per cent are opposed to it.

The campaign for the 11th edition of Pink Dot - held on 29 June at Hong Lim Park - centred on the theme of anti-discrimination as well as the types of discrimination that LGBTQ Singaporeans face every day.

Its spokesperson told Yahoo News Singapore that the survey findings attested to "what (they) have always known".

"That anti-LGBTQ discrimination exists in Singapore, and that it can occur at home and in the workplace," the spokesperson added.

"The fact that some Singaporeans continue to hold a negative perception of LGBTQ people can be attributed to our censorship laws that prohibit any neutral/positive portrayals of LGBTQ persons in our mainstream media."

Singapore leaders on LGBTQ issues

At the event's official launch in May, a Pink Dot spokesperson said that the anti-discrimination campaign was "a reaction" to views held by some government officials and those in segments of society.

The discrimination encountered by the LGBTQ community in Singapore "is more than an 'unenforced 377A law in the books'", it is "inadequate counselling in schools", "the inability to register LGBTQ societies", and more, said the spokesperson.

In Singapore, sex between men is illegal under Section 377A of the Penal Code.

During the Singapore Summit in September last year, Education Minister Ong Ye Kung had said that the LGBTQ community faced no discrimination " at work, housing and education " in Singapore.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also spoke about the issue during the Smart Nation Summit in June, three days before this year's Pink Dot event. He said, "Whatever your sexual orientation, you are welcome to come and work in Singapore. But this has not inhibited people from living, and has not stopped Pink Dot from having a gathering every year."

Lee was responding to a question raised by a member of the audience on whether Singapore would make its regulations more diverse to attract talent.

"It is the way this society is: we are not like San Francisco, neither are we like some countries in the Middle East. (We are) something in between, it is the way the society is," he added.

In response to Lee's comments, organisers behind Pink Dot issued a statement on its official Facebook page the next day, stressing that they disagreed with Lee's statement.

They argued that the non-profit movement's existence "is not proof that Singapore's inclusiveness to the LGBTQ community".

"Pink Dot exists precisely because members of the LGBTQ community in Singapore continue to face discrimination and inequality in a multitude of ways, on a daily basis," added its organisers.

"This discrimination that we face is borne from Section 377A, along with its trickle-down effects to other laws and policies that govern our society at large."

They also called for Lee and other leaders to come down to this year's Pink Dot and "truly make an effort to understand what the LGBTQ community go through on a daily basis".

"Judging from PM Lee's response, he might not have a full understanding of the discrimination that takes place in Singapore," they said.
Related stories: Pink Dot disagrees with PM Lee, says LGBTQ community faces discrimination Pink Dot organisers urge Singaporeans to make stand #AgainstDiscrimination Over 4 in 10 of those in Asia-Pacific feel same-sex marriage will spread across region: survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
80% of Singaporeans say LGBTQ community still faces discrimination: survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - An overwhelming proportion of Singaporeans agree that people in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) community still face discrimination in Singapore. Four in five Singaporeans (80 per cent) strongly or somewhat agree that such discrimination exists here, according to findings from an online survey commissioned by Yahoo News Singapore.

# data[].attributes.headline
The education system has led Singaporeans to be more inclusive towards people with special needs

# data[].attributes.subject
The education system has led Singaporeans to be more inclusive towards people with special needs

# data[].attributes.body
Enhancing the educational system to suit those that are disabled will bring about great benefit to Singapore as a whole. Schools prepare them to enter the workforce, not only benefiting the country's economy and also allowing them to feel more connected to society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Speaking on a Parliamentary motion titled "Education for Our Future", the MP pointed out that while society is now more open and accepting of people with special needs, it is still not completely comfortable with them.

(Updated: )

Share this content

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share via E-Mail

SINGAPORE: Great strides have been made in encouraging and promoting inclusiveness in the community, but Singapore still has "some way to go in truly walking the talk", Member of Parliament Rahayu Mahzam said on Wednesday (Jul 11).

"Our society is not yet able to truly view persons with disabilities as an equally valued member of the community," she said as she recounted a radio talk show she heard.
"I CRIED MY EYES OUT THAT AFTERNOON"
A caller to the show felt that parents of children with special needs are in denial and want to believe that their children are normal, so they insist that their children be in mainstream schools when they actually should be taught elsewhere.

Ms Rahayu had earlier revealed that her son Ayden, who was born in April 2017 has Down's Syndrome.

Hearing the caller's comment, she said it felt that children like her son "will always be seen as a burden, that they should be put in appropriate places".

"Honestly, I understood where the gentleman was coming from," Ms Rahayu said. "The challenges faced by teachers in such settings are real and we need to deal with these challenges."

"But the caller's solution to the problem offended and hurt me as a parent. His tone and the curt manner in which he declared his views reflected how he felt about children who are different.

"To me it felt like a rejection," she said.

"I cried my eyes out that afternoon," added Ms Rahayu.

She was speaking on a motion titled "Education for Our Future", moved by five Nominated MPs. The motion calls on the Government to partner with the people to ensure accessible, inclusive and lifelong education for all learners.

"I believe that we can review and build our education system so as to change perceptions, normalise disabilities, so that people can appreciate that persons with special needs are simply differently abled and are of no lesser value than any other member of society," Ms Rahayu said.
ENHANCING INCLUSIVENESS IN EDUCATION WILL "BRING GREAT BENEFIT TO SINGAPORE"
The house agreed to her proposal that the motion include the following words:

"By building an education system that gives each student the best possible support and the opportunity and motivation to excel, recognises ability and talent in every student, and offers development paths suited to their unique strengths and interests, enables Singaporeans to improve our lives, paying special attention to students from vulnerable families, and becomes a platform to bring our young together, to build an inclusive and united Singapore."

While society is now also more open and accepting of people with special needs, she added that a "quick sensing of the current environment" suggests that it is still not completely comfortable with them.

Citing statistics from an attitude study conducted by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) in 2015, Ms Rahayu noted that the public viewed those with disabilities less favourably than those without a disability. They also, she said, had less favourable attitudes towards those with intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorder.

Ms Rahayu stressed that enhancing inclusiveness in the education system will bring great benefit to Singapore as a whole. For one, she said that fully embracing people with special needs within the community will create opportunities for people to be more caring and compassionate.

There is, she said, also great future economic value in equipping children with special needs with the necessary skills so they can be independent.

"If we intervene early, in schools, we give them the necessary skills and prepare them for the future, there is a greater chance that they would graduate school and join the workforce," she explained. "If they can work well, be independent and contribute meaningfully towards the economy, less resources need to be spent on support structures or schemes when they are adults."

To that end, she made several suggestions on how to enhance the education landscape.

These include an integrated education system and school setting, where children with and without special needs learn and play within the same setting, but in different pathways as well as improving the profession and career pathway of special education teachers.

"I propose that these teachers come under the purview of the Ministry of Education like their peers in mainstream schools so that they would have access to the same salary scales, as well as career opportunities," she said.

She also proposed a review of the administration of school curriculum for both mainstream and special education schools.

THERE WERE TIMES WHEN I FELT LIKE A BURDEN: CHIA YONG YONG

The topic was also brought up by Nominated MP Chia Yong Yong, who highlighted the importance of acceptance by Singaporeans of those with disabilities and special needs.

In an emotional speech, Ms Chia said that inclusive education requires parents of children without disabilities or special needs to agree to allow their children to attend school and make friends with children with disabilities and special needs.

Recounting her own personal experience as a person with a disability who has benefited from mainstream education, Ms Chia said that she was blessed to have many teachers who have made a difference because they did not treat her as one who is inferior to a child without a disability.

These teachers, she said, accommodated her disability, but treated her the same. "So when I did not do my homework, I was punished, and when I talked too much, I was punished. But I was like any other child," she said.

"It wasn't always easy, and there were times when I felt like a burden, and I'm sure there were many times my friends felt like I was a nuisance," she added.

"But you know what? We stuck together and grew up together."

"What I went through is an opportunity we should give to every child," she said.

Her words drew a response from Second Minister for Education Indranee Rajah, who affirmed in her speech that inclusivity is an area that will continue to be an important part of MOE's work.

She stressed that Ms Chia is "definitely not a burden".

"In fact, she is very much a blessing," she said. "Her disability, or rather, special ability, has enabled her to give this House insights and perspectives that we would otherwise not have had."

"This has enriched our debate and informed our policy, and her presence here has given us a much more positive contribution," she added.

"This is the value and the benefit of inclusivity, and of being able to draw on people of different talents and abilities." ​​​​​​​

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Promoting inclusivity in education: Singapore still has some way to go, says MP Rahayu Mahzam

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Speaking on a Parliamentary motion titled "Education for Our Future", the MP pointed out that while society is now more open and accepting of people with special needs, it is still not completely comfortable with them.

# data[].attributes.body
many people are beginning to disapprove of the government allowing foreign workers to continue in the workforce in the country during the covid-19 pandemic. this is because they fear that the foreign workers will contribute to the increasing number of victims that have been infected and greatly increase the spread of the virus
-ezra

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Senior Minister of Defence announced, on 4 May 2020, the government's requirement that all foreign workers be screened for Covid-19 and the immediate shutting down of all businesses and premises in the event that positive cases are found in these workplaces.

The Health Ministry stated that it did not have sufficient test kits to screen all foreign workers and that its targeted approach was to screen migrant workers in red zones with more than 40 positive cases.

The Health Ministry's daily situation brief has a standard menu of new positives, deaths, discharges, intensive care unit cases and more recently, number of new positives among foreign nationals.

However, aggregate data on Covid-19 positives in foreign workers are only provided as the occasional dessert.
Migrant Workers Numbers
The data on the number of foreign workers in Malaysia, particularly the undocumented ones, is varied.

In a parliamentary reply on 7 October 2019, the then Minister of Human Resources stated that there were 1.994 million foreign workers registered under the Temporary Visiting Work Permit as at 31 August 2019 ( Source: Hansard 7 October 2019).

The Institute of Migration stated in May 2019 "Between 2010 and 2017, the number of documented foreign workers in Malaysia increased from 1.7 million to 2.2 million. Most came from Indonesia, Nepal, Bangladesh, India and Myanmar. At the end of 2018 it also hosted an estimated 2-4 million undocumented migrant workers."

The World Bank, in its 28 March 2019 report, Malaysia: Estimating the Number of Foreign Workers, stated "the Ministry of Home Affairs reported that four out of ten foreign workers are irregular, based on its enforcement and amnesty program operations, suggesting the number of irregular foreign workers be about 1.2 million in 2017 and the total foreign worker population of about 3 million.

"Unofficial data suggests as many as 4 million irregular foreign workers. None of these figures are backed up by rigorous analytical methods, except the estimate by the Institute of Labor Market Information and Analysis, which estimates the total foreign worker population to be 3.5 million using foreign-worker-related insurance subscription data."

The report estimated that "the total number of foreign workers in Malaysia ranged from 2.96 million to 3.26 million in 2017. Among these, the number of irregular foreign workers is estimated to be 1.23 million -1.46 million."

More recently, the Malaysian Employers Federation, in its response to the government announcement on 5 May 2020 stated that the documented foreign workers numbered about 2.3 million.
Covid-19 More Prevalent Among The Poor
There are reports that Covid-19 is more prevalent among the poor in the United States and United Kingdom.

In the United States, "The Bronx, which has the highest proportion of racial/ethnic minorities, the most persons living in poverty, and the lowest levels of educational attainment had higher rates of hospitalization and death related to Covid-19 than the other 4 boroughs" which are more affluent.

Data from the United Kingdom's Office for National Statistics Analysis reveal that those who live in the more deprived areas of England and Wales are more likely to die from Covid-19 than those in more affluent areas. There were 55 deaths for every 100,000 people in the poorest parts of England, compared with 25 for every 100,000 in the wealthiest areas. Whilst mortality rates are generally higher in the more deprived areas, Covid-19 appears to be taking them higher still.

The prevalence of Covid-19 positive cases among foreign workers in Singapore who were not residing in dormitories was 0.05% and was similar to that of nationals and permanent residents (0.03%), compared to 8-9% in foreign workers residing in dormitories. This led to the amalgamation of the data of the foreign workers who were not residing in dormitories with that of the nationals and permanent residents since 20 May 2020.
Health And Foreign Workers In Malaysia
The vast majority of foreign workers in Malaysia are low-skilled and fill shortages in labour intensive sectors of the economy. Notwithstanding the Labour Department's minimum standards, their living conditions are not uncommonly cramped and crowded with poor ventilation, as well as unhygienic with poor sanitation and limited or no access to clean water - all of which are ingredients for the breeding and spread of communicable diseases, and an impediment to the personal measures necessary to prevent spread of Covid-19.

The undocumented (termed "irregular" by the World Bank and "illegal" locally) workers are of particular concern as they are a potential source of communicable diseases, given that they avoid the health screening that is mandatory for all foreign workers.

Whilst there may be challenges in attributing the resurgence of tuberculosis in Malaysia to the foreign workers as they comprise 13% of reported cases, the substantial numbers of undocumented foreign workers who did not undergo tuberculosis health screening as required by the government is a cause for concern.

The chikungunya virus has not been known to be associated with clinical disease in Malaysia. However, with the finding of antibodies in the local population, it has been speculated that the virus was introduced or re-introduced in Malaysia through the movement of foreign workers from countries where the infection is endemic.

A 2019 study by a local research team reported that "healthcare services in Malaysia are often inaccessible to migrant workers. Complex access barriers were identified, many beyond the control of the health sector. Major themes include affordability and financial constraints, the need for legal documents like valid passports and work permits, language barriers, discrimination and xenophobia, physical inaccessibility and employer-related barriers.

"Our study suggests that government-mandated insurance for migrant workers is insufficient in view of the recent increase in medical fees. The perceived close working relationship between the ministries of health and immigration effectively excludes undocumented migrants from access to public healthcare facilities. Language barriers may affect the quality of care received by migrant workers, by inadvertently resulting in medical errors, while preventing them from giving truly informed consent."

Foreign workers in Malaysia have to pay amounts considerably more than the locals when they access health care in the public sector even for basic services like vaccination. Poor or no vaccination compliance among the children of foreign workers contributed to the re-emergence of poliomyelitis in Malaysia in 2019, the last outbreak of which was in 1977.

The International Labour Organization stated that the Movement Control Order has impacted on foreign workers with allegations of unfair terminations, unpaid wages, and uncertainty about employment status. The daily waged workers are the hardest hit with many running out of money and needing to rely on food aid from the government and corporate social organisations.
Covid-19 In Foreign Workers In Malaysia
The Health Director General was reported to have stated on 16 May 2020 that "26,000 migrant workers have been tested for Covid-19, of which there were 1,302 positives", i.e. 5.01% were positive.

On 10 May 2020, he reportedly stated that "a total of 24,125 foreigners have been screened" of which "1,132 were found to be Covid-19 positive", i.e. 4.69% were positive.

Whether these numbers are representative of the actual prevalence of Covid-19 positives among foreign workers is yet to be teased out.

Be that as it, the table below provides estimates of the number of Covid-19 positives among foreign workers according to their estimated numbers and Covid-19 positive rates of 2 to 7%.

The question is not whether foreign workers will contribute to the Covid-19 positive numbers in Malaysia, but the extent to which it will. In short, it is not if, but when.

The corollary is whether the health system will be able to cope with the challenges of the coping with the cases, particularly if there is a surge.

A fundamental issue is whether the Health Ministry's surveillance system is robust enough to enable confident monitoring which, with better analysis and transparency, is vital to gaining and maintaining public trust and acceptance.

The prevalence of Covid-19 cases in Singapore was below 1,000 until 2 April 2020 when it increased exponentially primarily because of the contribution by foreign workers. As at 24 May 2020, 29,363 i.e. 92.87% of the total of 31,616 positive cases, were foreign workers residing in dormitories. There are 323,000 foreign workers in Singapore.

Statements that the known positives among the foreign workers in Malaysia are not in contact with the local population provide scant reassurance. It is difficult to determine if there had been contact with the local population prior to their being tested positive. Their untested colleagues, particularly the undocumented ones, who may be positive continue to interact with the local population.

It is vital to remember always that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes Covid-19, does not discriminate.

The response to the challenge of Covid-19 positives in the foreign workers in Malaysia cannot just rely on testing, which has its limitations. An immediate change in the living and working conditions of the foreign workers would be necessary to prevent further spread. Furthermore, the stick is unlikely to work, particularly with undocumented foreign workers.
Timely Reminder
This was well summarised by the World Health Organization ("WHO") local representative in an interview with a web portal on 11 May 2020 and was reported to have stated that "while the health ministry had provided access to testing and free medical treatment, there had been social stigma and discrimination against certain migrant workers and ethnic communities.

"This is very risky as these populations may hide and not come forward for testing. This makes the virus more likely to spread and can result in difficulties controlling the outbreak. Governments, citizens, media, key influencers and communities have an important role in preventing and stopping stigma.

"The fear of arrest and detention has pushed some workers into hiding, preventing them from seeking treatment, with negative consequences for their own health, and creating further risks to the spreading of Covid-19 to others."
Dr Milton Lum is a past President of the Federation of Private Medical Practitioners Associations, Malaysia and the Malaysian Medical Association. This article is not intended to replace, dictate or define evaluation by a qualified doctor. The views expressed do not represent that of any organization the writer is associated with.

This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of CodeBlue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Senior Minister of Defence announced, on 4 May 2020, the government's requirement that all foreign workers be screened for Covid-19 and the immediate shutting down of all businesses and premises in the event that positive cases are found in these workplaces.

# data[].attributes.headline
The reason for the rising intolerance of foreign workers is not due to economic displacement but due to social displacement. The government allowing foreigners into the country led to us believing that all foreign workers are talented and Singaporeans are useless and less capable then them. This aroused hatred towards foreign workers.

# data[].attributes.subject
The reason for the rising intolerance of foreign workers is not due to economic displacement but due to social displacement. The government allowing foreigners into the country led to us believing that all foreign workers are talented and Singaporeans are useless and less capable then them. This aroused hatred towards foreign workers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BY ZACH ISAIAH CHIA

It seems that globalisation has resulted the rise of nationalism and xenophobia. We see it in the rise of UKIP in UK, New Dawn in Greece, Donald Trump in the US and the Swedish Democrats in Sweden. A recent Op-Ed in the Singapore Policy Journal argued that the local-foreigner divided was threatening to tear Singapore asunder.

In the article, writer Samuel Myat San worries that the foundations of Singapore's multiracial pledge are beginning to unravel with a more pronounced Singaporean-foreigner divide. He explains that racial harmony was forged through strong, sometimes intrusive, political leadership and a national education system that stressed the ideals of tolerance and respect for different races and creeds. Amidst that backdrop, the invective against foreigners online and incidents like that of the physical abuse of foreign workers by an 18 year old seems to suggest a worrying trend of rising anti-foreigner sentiment in Singapore. This is further fueled by a utilitarian view of foreigners that the government adopts ( Singapore's refusal to accept Rohingya refugees, a case in point), which in turn explains why Singaporeans dislike foreigners. Samuel Myant San worries that, "if it continues, various races in Singapore can also view each other through the lens of utility instead of universal brotherhood."
I agree with Samuel on two counts. Firstly, that the justification used to reject the Rohingya refugees is poor and that Singapore should accept some families. Secondly, I agree that Singaporeans have the tendency to view others in a utilitarian sense. I disagree, however, that the Singaporean-foreigner divide is tearing Singapore asunder.
The seeming xenophobia in Singapore is a failure not of policy, but of its implementation. The anti-foreigner diatribe is simply pushback from the people for being treated as economic digits. This is an identity that has ironically helped Singaporeans define themselves independent from race, but one that has also jolted Singaporeans from accepting a utilitarian view of others. (Note: foreign workers here refers to white collar workers and not labourers. Discrimination against labourers who are transient workers involves class and an utilitarian world view)

There are bigots in this country, all countries have them. However, the test of rising xenophobia is whether the message of hate has seeped into the hearts and minds of the average populace. One way is to look at its politics. In the Op-Ed, the author brought up the formation of the Singaporean Firsts party which contested its first general election in 2015. If rising xenophobia was true, the SingFirst party and a number of other fringe parties that inveigled against foreigners (Reform Party, People's Power Party etc.) would have seen a significant swing of support much like UKIP did in the British elections (where it won a stunning 12.7% of the total vote, up from being a solidly fringe player in UK politics). What we observed instead was a clear distance between these parties performance and the more credible, non-xenophobic opposition (such as Worker's Party and Singapore Democratic Party). SingFirst won 21.7% of the vote in the constituencies it contested, versus 39.75% for the Worker's Party.

This 21.7% is extremely low. Looking back to GE 1997, just prior to the push for foreign talent, the anti-PAP vote was 35%. It rose to 39.9% in GE 2011 (the main opposition Workers Party won 46.58% where it contested). In the Presidential Elections of 2011, Tan Jee Say, who can be considered the hard-core anti-PAP candidate obtained 25.04% of the vote. This means that despite the anger that was spewed online, hardcore votes against the PAP have not increased drastically despite the Foreign Talent policy. Instead, SingFirst polled below the national average and WP had a vote swing of 6% that beat the national average of 9%. This can be taken to mean that rising xenophobia is politically toothless and hasn't gained traction.

Foreign worker influx became a critical issue not because of economic displacement, but because of societal displacement. While the argument put forth in the Op-Ed about economic displacement is not wrong, it is not the whole story. The language and the tone that was used in the decade building up to GE 2011 was one of deference to foreign nationals. The power of control (see Cheong Yip Seng's book OB Markers) meant that the local media sold the argument. In local parlance, we bought our own koyok (herbal medicine) and believed that foreigners were all talented. This created the impression to foreigners that Singapore needed them because we were useless and to locals that the government does not believe we are good enough. Therein was a logical flaw. Singapore is the country that produced private sector leaders such as JY Pilay for Singapore Airlines, Goh Cheng Liang of Nippon Paint, Kuok Khoon Hong of Wilmar International and Ong Beng Seng of HPL Group. They began their businesses in the 1960s and 70s, and grew them into national treasures. How is it that the better education system that we have today has suddenly made us unable to grow our own timbre? But this is not the point of the essay.

Taking in foreigners is not a problem. But when locals are made to feel second place, discontent is bound to arise. It did not help that news of foreigners hiring their own made its rounds and were proved true, or that whole departments of Singaporeans were sacked with foreigners hired in their place. In addition, some were shown to have bogus degrees and received their jobs not based on merit but on connections. Hence, rather than just economic competition, the feeling was one of societal replacement. Surveys are useful but must always be taken with a pinch of salt because disclosed preferences may not be revealed preferences. In the 2013 Hong Lim Park protests against the population white-paper, the argument against it wasn't so much economic as it was a replacement of Singaporeans with other people.

Societal displacement came partly because of cultural differences. While the writer is correct that the dignity of a person is not dependent on race, religion or culture, even the most high-minded people will find cultural integration difficult. Integration is a balance between desire and adaptability. I would suggest that the Op-Ed confuses cultural integration with the impression "that one must be the "correct" type of Chinese, Muslim or Indian before being embraced as an equal". New immigrants into a society need to make the effort to assimilate - this is an undisputed reality. Both the immigrant and the new society need to take steps to meet and talk. A xenophobic Singapore would be one where anyone not of a 'correct' colour (Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian) would be immediately rejected. This is not something we see, people like Aleksander Duric, Neil Humphreys and countless others who integrate into Singapore are treated as part of society while bigots like Amy Cheong and Anton Casy were hounded out of the country. The 'cook a pot of curry' event emerged after an immigrant Chinese family demanded a local Indian family to stop cooking curry in their home because it was smelly. Rather than to educate the immigrant with greater tolerance, the local MP and community leaders tried to seek a compromise.

The implementation of policy in the early 2000s did not seem to consider this cultural difference. For example, the early immigrants to Singapore from China were Southern Chinese, the immigrants from China that came in the 2000s were mostly Northern Chinese. The same goes for India. Indian Singaporeans are mostly of South Indian heritage, the foreign labourers brought in from the subcontinent were mostly from South India or Bangladeshi, while Indian foreign talent were mostly from North Indian. The difficulties culturally in India and China are well known (North-South divide, caste etc). Now transplant that to a different society and the problem of integration becomes more complex. When there is a large enough number of immigrants from one culture, there is little need to integrate. It is not uncommon for many local Singapore students in places like London or Brisbane to stick within a Singapore bubble because there are enough of them. The same thing happens when a sizable foreign population is brought in, the term used for white collar workers is expat bubble ( here and here).

So when you have people from different cultures arriving in your country based on the argument that they are better than the locals, but that the local military have to defend them, and your government cannot protect you economically (because this is a global economy), it is not surprising that Singaporeans feel displaced and helpless in their own society. This does not excuse their behaviour, and is merely my attempt at explaining the angst manifested in hurtful slogans. Slogans like "NS for Singaporeans, Jobs for foreigners" or "Scholarships for foreigners, Debts for Singaporeans" should be seen through this lens. Were foreigners the problem? No. The implementation of policy was.

Ironically, this has given Singapore the chance to define its identity. The anger online particularly with Chinese nationals has allowed a nascent discussion on how local minorities feel in Singapore. It has given a podium to the fact of Chinese privilege in Singapore, which local Chinese had not seen but that local minorities have always felt. It has allowed once taboo topics ( Malays in the SAF for example) to be finally tackled in the public sphere, with Singaporeans of other races standing up for their "brothers". Add the fact that interracial marriages (both between locals and with foreigners) are on the rise and we see that Singapore is slowly moving from mere tolerance to understanding. Perhaps when that day comes, we will see a Malay or Indian romantic lead on Channel 5.

The negative lessons in Malaysia, can be a boon for both countries. Young urbane Malaysians are trying to fight for a fairer country while Singaporeans from across the causeway can see what is going on and realise how tenuous racial harmony truly is. Schools do not need to use just the 1964 riots but should direct the minds eye to Low Yat 2015. This movement is still nascent and will take generations, but unlike the Op-Ed, I am optimistic that as Singapore develops its independent history and English becomes more commonly used at home, we will see eventually an embrace of each other as people and not as races that merely tolerate each other.

Viewing people through a utilitarian lens and racial harmony are not the same. The former is a problem regardless of race - people forming relationships of convenience. It might be called networking. Chinese people can view each other in a utilitarian way, as can another race their own. This is not a race issue as much as it is an issue of class and convenience to sort people based on perceived usefulness. A utilitarian will see a rich racial minority and kiss up to them just as they would a rich person from the majority race. Racial harmony can even be achieved on the back of a utilitarian proposition: that peace allows for business and money.

The discomfort with foreign labourer dormitories is not simply a case of xenophobia but of economics and utilitarianism - property value. While there were concerns on security, the overriding concern was property prices. The fear was that having a home next to foreign labourer dormitories or less desirable amenities would decrease property value. This argument reared its head in Serangoon Gardens in 2008, and was the same that appeared when proposals arose to build a nursing/elderly home in Bishan. It was the same reason why there was concern with the growing Vietnamese red light district in Joo Chiat. Conversely, it is the same reason why residents yearn for a train station to be built near their home.

To this end, the Op-Ed is right. This is clearly a utilitarian view of the world. We sometimes forget that people have equal dignity. The 60 year old professor is not more dignified than the 65 year old cleaner. The hunky adonis is not more dignified than the obese man; nor is the the HDB dweller less dignified than the private property owner. Why then do parents bring their children to see the coffin of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, but shield their children from coffins at the HDB void deck? This is the same motivation for the appaling living conditions that foreign labourers are subject to, a fact that was only brought to public consciousness after the 2013 Race Course Road Riot. The fact that some bosses deemed it alright to stuff people like cattles is a clear indictment of the utilitarian world view. All cultures have been fighting this battle for eons, it is not a uniquely Singaporean problem.

This is the same reason (as argued in the Op-Ed) why we can have 6.9 million people on this island but are too small for a few thousand refugees. Refugees with little education and skills are less worthwhile and valuable. I would argue that Singapore can take in a controlled number of families and integrate them effectively into the system. This may begin by giving them jobs that pay a fair living wage and proividing children with access to local schools - with hard work and meritocracy, they will be given a fighting chance to thrive.

The Op-Ed argued that the government set a precedent for utilitarianism with its rejection of refugees. This is not true. Singapore has always been pragmatic and utilitarian even toward its own. In debating the Abortion Bill of 1969, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew was quoted as saying "one of the crucial yardsticks by which we shall have to judge the results of the new abortion law combined with the voluntary sterilisation law will be whether it tends to raise or lower the total quality of our population. We must encourage those who earn less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many children never to have more than two. Intelligent application of these laws can help reduce the distortion that has already set in. Until the less educated themselves are convinced and realise that they should concentrate their limited resources on one or two to give their children the maximum chance to climb up the educational ladder, their children will always be at the bottom of the economic scale. It is unlikely that the results will be discernible before five years. Nor will the effect be felt before fifteen to twenty years. But we will regret the time lost if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic." Even later in 2005 the Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, "at the end of the day, we are so many digits in the machine. The point is - are these digits stronger than the competitors' digits?" Singapore has always been governed with a utilitarian perspective. If Singaporeans view others through a utilitarian lens, the rejection of Rohingya refugees is a manifestation not a cause.
We have callous hearts, but callousness, utilitarianism and xenophobia are not always causal and should not be seen as such. Having felt what it is like to be treated as digits, and having now stood up as a society to ask to be treated fairly, I would like for us as individuals to be empowered enough to take moral leadership and treat all people as equal, regardless or race, language, religion, intellect, class, disability, physique...
Can we?

Baby steps, maybe.

Zach Chia is currently a PhD Candidate with the NTU-Karolinska Institutet Joint PhD Program. A neuroscientist by training, Zach takes a healthy interest in socio-political and international issues. He blogs at touristinmyownland.wordpress.com where he sees Singapore through inquisitive eyes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Singaporeans Xenophobic? - Singapore Policy Journal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BY ZACH ISAIAH CHIA It seems that globalisation has resulted the rise of nationalism and xenophobia. We see it in the rise of UKIP in UK, New Dawn in Greece, Donald Trump in the US and the Swedish Democrats in Sweden.

# data[].attributes.headline
youths are more accepting than the older generation

# data[].attributes.subject
youths are more accepting than the older generation

# data[].attributes.body
youths nowadays are more open to change as compared to the older generation. the younger generation are more accepting to new ideas and expressions. this is due to them being ethnically and racially diverse as compared to the older generation.
-ezra

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Executive Summary

Generations, like people, have personalities, and Millennials - the American teens and twenty-somethings who are making the passage into adulthood at the start of a new millennium - have begun to forge theirs: confident, self-expressive, liberal, upbeat and open to change.

They are more ethnically and racially diverse than older adults. They're less religious, less likely to have served in the military, and are on track to become the most educated generation in American history.

Their entry into careers and first jobs has been badly set back by the Great Recession, but they are more upbeat than their elders about their own economic futures as well as about the overall state of the nation.(See chapter 4 in the full report)

They embrace multiple modes of self-expression. Three-quarters have created a profile on a social networking site. One-in-five have posted a video of themselves online. Nearly four-in-ten have a tattoo (and for most who do, one is not enough: about half of those with tattoos have two to five and 18% have six or more). Nearly one-in-four have a piercing in some place other than an earlobe - about six times the share of older adults who've done this. But their look-at-me tendencies are not without limits. Most Millennials have placed privacy boundaries on their social media profiles. And 70% say their tattoos are hidden beneath clothing. ( See chapters 4 and 7 in the full report)

Despite struggling (and often failing) to find jobs in the teeth of a recession, about nine-in-ten either say that they currently have enough money or that they will eventually meet their long-term financial goals. But at the moment, fully 37% of 18- to 29-year-olds are unemployed or out of the workforce, the highest share among this age group in more than three decades. Research shows that young people who graduate from college in a bad economy typically suffer long-term consequences - with effects on their careers and earnings that linger as long as 15 years. ( See chapter 5 in the full report)

Whether as a by-product of protective parents, the age of terrorism or a media culture that focuses on dangers, they cast a wary eye on human nature. Two-thirds say "you can't be too careful" when dealing with people. Yet they are less skeptical than their elders of government. More so than other generations, they believe government should do more to solve problems. ( See chapter 8 in the full report).

They are the least overtly religious American generation in modern times. One-in-four are unaffiliated with any religion, far more than the share of older adults when they were ages 18 to 29. Yet not belonging does not necessarily mean not believing. Millennials pray about as often as their elders did in their own youth. ( See chapter 9 in the full report)

Only about six-in-ten were raised by both parents - a smaller share than was the case with older generations. In weighing their own life priorities, Millennials (like older adults) place parenthood and marriage far above career and financial success. But they aren't rushing to the altar. Just one-in-five Millennials (21%) are married now, half the share of their parents' generation at the same stage of life. About a third (34%) are parents, according to the Pew Research survey. We estimate that, in 2006, more than a third of 18 to 29 year old women who gave birth were unmarried. This is a far higher share than was the case in earlier generations. ( See chapters 2 and 3 in the full report)

Millennials are on course to become the most educated generation in American history, a trend driven largely by the demands of a modern knowledge-based economy, but most likely accelerated in recent years by the millions of 20-somethings enrolling in graduate schools, colleges or community colleges in part because they can't find a job. Among 18 to 24 year olds a record share - 39.6% - was enrolled in college as of 2008, according to census data. ( See chapter 5 in the full report)

They get along well with their parents. Looking back at their teenage years, Millennials report having had fewer spats with mom or dad than older adults say they had with their own parents when they were growing up. And now, hard times have kept a significant share of adult Millennials and their parents under the same roof. About one-in-eight older Millennials (ages 22 and older) say they've "boomeranged" back to a parent's home because of the recession. ( See chapters 3 and 5 in the full report)

They respect their elders. A majority say that the older generation is superior to the younger generation when it comes to moral values and work ethic. Also, more than six-in-ten say that families have a responsibility to have an elderly parent come live with them if that parent wants to. By contrast, fewer than four-in-ten adults ages 60 and older agree that this is a family responsibility.

Despite coming of age at a time when the United States has been waging two wars, relatively few Millennials-just 2% of males-are military veterans. At a comparable stage of their life cycle, 6% of Gen Xer men, 13% of Baby Boomer men and 24% of Silent men were veterans. ( See chapter 2 in the full report)

Politically, Millennials were among Barack Obama's strongest supporters in 2008, backing him for president by more than a two-to-one ratio (66% to 32%) while older adults were giving just 50% of their votes to the Democratic nominee. This was the largest disparity between younger and older voters recorded in four decades of modern election day exit polling. Moreover, after decades of low voter participation by the young, the turnout gap in 2008 between voters under and over the age of 30 was the smallest it had been since 18- to 20-year-olds were given the right to vote in 1972. ( See chapter 8 in the full report)

But the political enthusiasms of Millennials have since cooled -for Obama and his message of change, for the Democratic Party and, quite possibly, for politics itself. About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works, which had been the central promise of his candidacy. Of those who say this, three-in-ten blame Obama himself, while more than half blame his political opponents and special interests.

To be sure, Millennials remain the most likely of any generation to self-identify as liberals; they are less supportive than their elders of an assertive national security policy and more supportive of a progressive domestic social agenda. They are still more likely than any other age group to identify as Democrats. Yet by early 2010, their support for Obama and the Democrats had reced
ed, as evidenced both by survey data and by their low level of participation in recent off-year and special elections. ( See chapter 8 in the full report)

Our Research Methods

This Pew Research Center report profiles the roughly 50 million Millennials who currently span the ages of 18 to 29. It's likely that when future analysts are in a position to take a fuller measure of this new generation, they will conclude that millions of additional younger teens (and perhaps even pre-teens) should be grouped together with their older brothers and sisters. But for the purposes of this report, unless we indicate otherwise, we focus on Millennials who are at least 18 years old.

We examine their demographics; their political and social values; their lifestyles and life priorities; their digital technology and social media habits; and their economic and educational aspirations. We also compare and contrast Millennials with the nation's three other living generations-Gen Xers (ages 30 to 45), Baby Boomers (ages 46 to 64) and Silents (ages 65 and older). Whenever the trend data permit, we compare the four generations as they all are now-and also as older generations were at the ages that adult Millennials are now.

Most of the findings in this report are based on a new survey of a national cross-section of 2,020 adults (including an oversample of Millennials), conducted by landline and cellular telephone from Jan. 14 to 27, 2010; this survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.0 percentage points for the full sample and larger percentages for various subgroups (for more details, see page 110 in the full report). The report also draws on more than two decades of Pew Research Center surveys, supplemented by our analysis of Census Bureau data and other relevant studies.

What's in a Name?

Generational names are the handiwork of popular culture. Some are drawn from a historic event; others from rapid social or demographic change; others from a big turn in the calendar.

The Millennial generation falls into the third category. The label refers those born after 1980 - the first generation to come of age in the new millennium.

Generation X covers people born from 1965 through 1980. The label long ago overtook the first name affixed to this generation: the Baby Bust. Xers are often depicted as savvy, entrepreneurial loners.

The Baby Boomer label is drawn from the great spike in fertility that began in 1946, right after the end of World War II, and ended almost as abruptly in 1964, around the time the birth control pill went on the market. It's a classic example of a demography-driven name.

The Silent generation describes adults born from 1928 through 1945. Children of the Great Depression and World War II, their "Silent" label refers to their conformist and civic instincts. It also makes for a nice contrast with the noisy ways of the anti-establishment Boomers.

The Greatest Generation (those born before 1928) "saved the world" when it was young, in the memorable phrase of Ronald Reagan. It's the generation that fought and won World War II.

Generational names are works in progress. The zeitgeist changes, and labels that once seemed spot- on fall out of fashion. It's not clear if the Millennial tag will endure, although a calendar change that comes along only once in a thousand years seems like a pretty secure anchor.

Some Caveats

A few notes of caution are in order. Generational analysis has a long and distinguished place in social science, and we cast our lot with those scholars who believe it is not only possible, but often highly illuminating, to search for the unique and distinctive characteristics of any given age group of Americans. But we also know this is not an exact science.

We acknowledge, for example, that there is an element of false precision in setting hard chronological boundaries between the generations. Can we say with certainty that a typical 30-year-old adult is a Gen Xer while a typical 29-year-old adult is a Millennial? Of course not.
Nevertheless, we must draw lines in order to carry out the statistical analyses that form the core of our research methodology. And our boundaries-while admittedly too crisp-are not arbitrary. They are based on our own research findings and those of other scholars.

We are mindful that there are as many differences in attitudes, values, behaviors and lifestyles within a generation as there are between generations. But we believe this reality does not diminish the value of generational analysis; it merely adds to its richness and complexity. Throughout this report, we will not only explore how Millennials differ from other generations, we will also look at how they differ among themselves.

The Millennial Identity

Most Millennials (61%) in our January, 2010 survey say their generation has a unique and distinctive identity. That doesn't make them unusual, however. Roughly two-thirds of Silents, nearly six-in-ten Boomers and about half of Xers feel the same way about their generation.

But Millennials have a distinctive reason for feeling distinctive. In response to an open-ended follow-up question, 24% say it's because of their use of technology. Gen Xers also cite technology as their generation's biggest source of distinctiveness, but far fewer-just 12%-say this. Boomers' feelings of distinctiveness coalesce mainly around work ethic, which 17% cite as their most prominent identity badge. For Silents, it's the shared experience of the Depression and World War II, which 14% cite as the biggest reason their generation stands apart. ( See chapter 3 in the full report)

Millennials' technological exceptionalism is chronicled throughout the survey. It's not just their gadgets - it's the way they've fused their social lives into them. For example, three-quarters of Millennials have created a profile on a social networking site, compared with half of Xers, 30% of Boomers and 6% of Silents. There are big generation gaps, as well, in using wireless technology, playing video games and posting self-created videos online. Millennials are also more likely than older adults to say technology makes life easier and brings family and friends closer together (though the generation gaps on these questions are relatively narrow). ( See chapter 4 in the full report)

Work Ethic, Moral Values, Race Relations

Of the four generations, Millennials are the only one that doesn't cite "work ethic" as one of their principal claims to distinctiveness. A nationwide Pew Research Center survey taken in 2009 may help explain why. This one focused on differences between young and old rather than between specific age groups. Nonetheless, its findings are instructive.

Nearly six-in-ten respondents cited work ethic as one of the big sources of differences between young and old. Asked who has the better work ethic, about three-fourths of respondents said that older people do. By similar margins, survey respondents also found older adults have the upper hand when it comes to moral values and their respect for others.

It might be tempting to dismiss these findings as a typical older adult gripe about "kids today." But when it comes to each of these traits - work ethic, moral values, respect for others - young adults agree that older adults have the better of it. In short, Millennials may be a self-confident generation, but they display little appetite for claims of moral superiority.

That 2009 survey also found that the public - young and old alike - thinks the younger generation is more racially tolerant than their elders. More than two decades of Pew Research surveys confirm that assessment. In their views about interracial dating, for example, Millennials are the most open to change of any generation, followed closely by Gen Xers, then Boomers, then Silents.

Likewise, Millennials are more receptive to immigrants than are their elders. Nearly six-in-ten (58%) say immigrants strengthen the country, according to a 2009 Pew Research survey; just 43% of adults ages 30 and older agree.

The same pattern holds on a range of attitudes about nontraditional family arrangements, from mothers of young children working outside the home, to adults living together without being married, to more people of different races marrying each other. Millennials are more accepting than older generations of these more modern family arrangements, followed closely by Gen Xers. To be sure, acceptance does not in all cases translate into outright approval. But it does mean Millennials disapprove less. ( See chapter 6 in the full report)

A Gentler Generation Gap

A 1969 Gallup survey, taken near the height of the social and
political upheavals of that turbulent decade, found that 74% of the public believed there was a "generation gap" in American society. Surprisingly, when that same question was asked in a Pew Research Center survey last year - in an era marked by hard economic times but little if any overt age-based social tension - the share of the public saying there was a generation gap had risen slightly to 79%.

But as the 2009 results also make clear, this modern generation gap is a much more benign affair than the one that cast a shadow over the 1960s. The public says this one is mostly about the different ways that old and young use technology - and relatively few people see that gap as a source of conflict. Indeed, only about a quarter of the respondents in the 2009 survey said they see big conflicts between young and old in America. Many more see conflicts between immigrants and the native born, between rich and poor, and between black and whites.

There is one generation gap that has widened notably in recent years. It has to do with satisfaction over the state of the nation. In recent decades the young have always tended to be a bit more upbeat than their elders on this key measure, but the gap is wider now than it has been in at least twenty years. Some 41% of Millennials say they are satisfied with the way things are going in the country, compared with just 26% of those ages 30 and older. Whatever toll a recession, a housing crisis, a financial meltdown and a pair of wars may have taken on the national psyche in the past few years, it appears to have hit the old harder than the young. ( See chapter 3 in the full report)

But this speaks to a difference in outlook and attitude; it's not a source of conflict or tension. As they make their way into adulthood, Millennials have already distinguished themselves as a generation that gets along well with others, especially their elders. For a nation whose population is rapidly going gray, that could prove to be a most welcome character trait.
Read the full report for more details.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Millennials: Confident. Connected. Open to Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new national survey focuses on American teens and twenty-somethings who are making the passage into adulthood at the start of a new millennium. These young people have begun to forge their generational personality: confident, self-expressive, liberal, upbeat and open to change.

# data[].attributes.headline
Young people now are getting less conservative 

# data[].attributes.subject
Young people now are getting less conservative 

# data[].attributes.body
With the transparency of the social media and the information online, youths are able to pick out information that helps to make their judgement. Besides morally some feel that it is not wrong to love the same sex.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Singapore society still largely conservative but becoming more liberal on gay rights: IPS survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The findings are part of a wider Institute of Policy Studies survey on race, language and religion. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.

# data[].attributes.body
Through taking in compulsory values in action programs in schools, students get a chance to encounter different groups of people who require help from the society. Through looking at them they will start to realise how blessed they are. As a result they are able to empatise and be more inclusive toward this bunch of people- Terence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Values In Action programme: Helping the needy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the final section of this three-part series, The Straits Times looks at the Values In Action programme in schools. For the final week, we look at two projects by Catholic Junior College and Anglo-Chinese Junior College students and how they planned and learnt from their own activities. Read more…

# data[].attributes.body
The younger generation tolerates LGBT more has been linked to the better education or higher education given to them. It has allowed them to be more liberal towards their views and hence accept other people more easily.

This open mindset of the younger generation has allowed people to finally open up on more sensitive topics such as gay marriage or sex and hence people are more tolerating.

-Yongheng

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S'poreans more liberal towards homosexuality compared with five years ago, IPS survey finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - Singaporeans have become more liberal towards homosexuality over the last five years, with a paper by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) showing "distinct shifts" in attitudes - especially among the young - towards gay sex and gay marriage.

# data[].attributes.headline
By educating more Singaporeans about the disabled

# data[].attributes.subject
By educating more Singaporeans about the disabled

# data[].attributes.body
By educating singaporeans about the mentally disabled, they can further understand their needs and thus come to an acceptance towards their behaviours and live along side them

-Yongheng

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When I was in secondary school, I had a friend who hardly talked about her sister. The only thing I knew about her mysterious sibling was that she lived in the "Tampines home". I naively assumed that her parents were very rich, had two properties and that her sister was living at their home in Tampines.

It was only much later that I realised the Tampines Home was a home for people with intellectual disabilities. It was also at that point that my friend's reticence about her sister suddenly made sense.

When I was growing up in the 1980s and '90s, many families kept their disabled children mostly at home or in institutions - out of sight and out of the public's mind. They did so perhaps out of shame, fear or helplessness.

There were also few reasons to go out as there were few support services, much less job openings, for the disabled, compared to what is available now.

ST ILLUSTRATION: MANNY FRANCISCO

But it was also clearly in response to the lack of understanding by Singaporeans in general.

Given the segregation between most Singaporeans and the disabled, it comes as no surprise that two recent surveys found that a sizeable number of Singaporeans still feel uncomfortable interacting with the disabled and that the latter feel shut out from society.

This is disappointing, especially after all the efforts by the Government and charities to improve the lives of those with disabilities in the past decade.

Just take a look at the findings:

The Lien Foundation survey of 1,000 people on their attitudes towards children with disabilities found that close to two-thirds of the respondents shared the belief that Singaporeans are willing to share public spaces with children with special needs, but are not willing to interact with them.

Public education is needed to raise awareness of disability issues. Over one-third of those surveyed in the Lien Foundation poll said children with special needs are not part of their social circle. Even those who know a special needs child (through friends or relatives) say they are not always comfortable interacting with the child. The most common feelings they have in such interactions are empathy, pity and love.

Half of the parents polled were uncomfortable about their child having to sit next to one with special needs in class.

As for the disabled themselves, a survey of 1,000 people with disabilities, released last Thursday by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS), found that 62 per cent of them do not feel they are included, accepted, given opportunities to contribute or reach their potential by society.

It is no wonder they feel thus, given the survey findings that so many are uncomfortable interacting with them.

It is clear that the calls for inclusion of people with disabilities have not gained traction with many ordinary Singaporeans.

The Government has done a lot more for the disabled in the past decade, like giving more funding for education and therapy services, among other things, for children with special needs.

But the hard - and heart - part of changing mindsets to accept and include those with disabilities remains a challenge. And this is not something that can be achieved just by pouring money into it.

More needs to be done to promote inclusion. And there is some urgency in this, because the number of young children diagnosed with developmental conditions, such as autism, speech and language delays and global developmental delay, has tripled in the past decade. Last year, about 4,000 children were diagnosed with developmental problems, up from about 1,300 in 2005.

Experts have said that about 5 per cent to 6 per cent of children born here have some form of developmental problem. With more diagnosed, more of those with mild conditions will go on to mainstream schools. Also last year, there were about 13,000 students - or about 2.7 per cent of the student population - with mild special needs or learning difficulties in mainstream schools. That's almost triple the number in 2006 .

It is no longer inconceivable that your child may sit next to one with special needs at school.

The number of the disabled in Singapore is likely to rise.

More children may be diagnosed as awareness, detection and capabilities to manage these conditions improve. Singapore is also ageing rapidly, and old age and illness can render a senior disabled.
MINDSET SHIFTS
How does one change mindsets towards the disabled?

It is a no-brainer, but public education is needed to raise awareness of disability issues. Over one-third of those surveyed in the Lien Foundation poll said children with special needs are not part of their social circle. Even those who know a special needs child (through friends or relatives) say they are not always comfortable interacting with the child. The most common feelings they have in such interactions are empathy, pity and love.

This suggests that the lack of interaction and the concerns about their children sitting next to a special needs child spring more from ignorance and uncertainty than prejudice. If so, the best way to change mindsets is through interaction, by creating ways to facilitate meaningful interaction between people with and those without disabilities. This can help correct misconceptions.

Charities that support those with disabilities, such as the Disabled People's Association (DPA) and SPD, have been holding talks to raise awareness about disability issues for years. The DPA goes to schools, offices and other organisations to get the public to understand what people with disabilities are going through and to think of how to ease the barriers.

Some students who attended these talks have gone on to run similar campaigns at their schools, said DPA executive director Marissa Medjeral-Mills.

On a larger scale, the NCSS also launched its disability awareness campaign last Thursday.

Through a website (seethetrueme.sg) and public talks on various disabilities as well as tips on how to communicate and interact with people with disabilities, among other measures, the NCSS hopes to promote inclusion.

Raising awareness aside, there also has been a greater push to promote inclusion and interaction between children with and those without disabilities.

For example, in 2012, the Education Ministry said the 20 special education schools for children with disabilities would be paired with mainstream schools, so that students from both schools have opportunities to mingle, for example, during recess and at school events.

In January, a charity started Singapore's first inclusive pre-school. At Kindle Garden, run by AWWA, children with disabilities learn and play alongside other kids in the same classroom. About 30 per cent of its children from 18 months to six years of age have disabilities, such as autism or Down syndrome.

School principal Lena Koh said both groups of children get along, play and learn together naturally, without fear or hesitation.

"Children do not discriminate or single out children with disabilities," she said. "It's the adults who tend to do that."

The pre-school is filled to its capacity of 75 children and has a waiting list of 138.

This is an encouraging sign. Research shows that children with classmates with disabilities learn how to interact with those who are different from them. They are more likely to develop positive self-esteem, confidence and leadership skills when their experience of such interactions is positive, said Dr Kenneth Poon, associate professor of early childhood and special education at the National Institute of Education.

Hopefully, with more Kindle Gardens around, more parents will find that it is not so scary to have their child playing or studying with a special needs kid after all.

And their children will form the foundation of a truly inclusive Singapore.

And those with disabilities will no longer be apart from society, but a part of it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The hard - and heart - part of inclusiveness for the disabled

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When I was in secondary school, I had a friend who hardly talked about her sister. The only thing I knew about her mysterious sibling was that she lived in the "Tampines home". I naively assumed that her parents were very rich, had two properties and that her sister was living at their home in Tampines.

# data[].attributes.body
With the advancement of technology, many are able to share their stories and struggles in their life. Many  should be able to empathize and understand their hardships and distress. However, that is not the common case in Singapore. People with such mental or physical disability are often grouped together thus excluding them from the daily life of the normal. Using the excuse of the disabled being able to work better and understand each other well due to their common difference from the society but this only adds on to making an wider gap between the 'normal' and disabled.
-leika

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Singaporeans support the idea of inclusion but do not walk the talk, a survey has found.

While most people believe that children with and without disabilities can study together, only half of parents polled are comfortable with having a special needs child sitting next to their own child in class.

Furthermore, only one in 10 Singaporeans is confident of interacting with special needs children.

These were some of the findings of a survey, released yesterday at a press conference, which asked more than 1,000 people for their experiences of inclusion in daily life and early education. The survey was commissioned by local philanthropic house Lien Foundation.

The findings suggest that Singaporeans are tolerant towards, rather than accepting of, special needs people, said Lien Foundation programme manager Ng Tze Yong.

* 30 per cent agree that Singapore is an inclusive society.

* 64 per cent believe Singaporeans are willing to share public spaces but not interact with the special needs community.

* 50 per cent of parents are comfortable with having a child with special needs sit next to their own child in class.

* 49 per cent believe new laws are necessary to better promote the rights of children with special needs.

* 10 per cent are confident of interacting with children with special needs.

"Singaporeans embrace the idea of inclusion, but there is a gap between what we think and what we do," he said.

Inclusion means ensuring that everyone, including those with disabilities, is given opportunities to realise his potential in the same environment.

"Building handicapped ramps, parking spaces and toilets is the easy part. We now need to move beyond that to dismantle the obstacles in our minds and the barriers in our hearts," Mr Ng added.

Asked about the current level of acceptance and degree of social interaction between the public and special needs children, more than half of the respondents said Singaporeans are willing to share public spaces with such children, but not to interact with them.

Only 8 per cent of those polled feel that Singaporeans are willing to go the extra mile to make a special needs child feel welcome.

Yet nearly half of them believe that new laws are needed to promote the rights of such children.

For instance, eight in 10 of them believe it should be compulsory for such children to go to school. They are now exempted from the Compulsory Education Act.

One possible reason why special needs children, such as those with learning and behavioural difficulties or physical disabilities, are not accepted fully in society is the lack of interaction between the public and such children.

For over a third of respondents, such children are not part of their social circle. Only a quarter of parents surveyed report that their children are friends with them.

However, the survey also found that Singaporeans' uncertainty about interacting with special needs children falls when the frequency of interactions rises.

Given this correlation, Dr Kenneth Poon, a clinical psychologist and researcher,said there should be more opportunities for interaction so that friendships and shared interests can form. He said: "Pre- schools are a great starting point to seed this process of change."

Mr Tang Hui Nee, assistant director and head of community services at KK Women's and Children's Hospital, said that it would help if there was more public education, and people had more exposure to such children. Three in four respondents said being informed in advance about the special needs of a child will help them be more understanding when disruptive behaviour happens.

To better understand the needs and challenges of the special needs community, a separate survey of 750 parents of children with special needs is being done and the findings will be released next month.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Singaporeans 'don't walk the talk' on special needs kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Singaporeans support the idea of inclusion but do not walk the talk, a survey has found. While most people believe that children with and without disabilities can study together, only half of parents polled are comfortable with having a special needs child sitting next to their own child in class.

# data[].attributes.headline
there is still room for improvement for achieving greater inclusivity and acceptance towards the mentally and physically disabled.

# data[].attributes.subject
there is still room for improvement for achieving greater inclusivity and acceptance towards the mentally and physically disabled.

# data[].attributes.body
although there are some effective initiatives that includes the mentally and physically disabled in our society, it is still not enough. According to this research report by SMU graduates, most of the people with disabilities have indicated that they need caregivers to help them with carrying out basic movements.  Many of them faced challenges with their transition from education to employment. For example, one of them (cannot reveal identity) had difficulties finding an internship, because he needed constant care from his domestic worker but he was not allowed to bring her to help him. According to MOM’s “employment rules for foreign domestic workers,” it is only legal to ask a domestic worker to perform tasks outside her place of residence if she is caring for a child or an elderly person; there is no mention of a disabled person. Further, the penalty for breaking this rule is fine of up to $10,000.31. Thus, due to this, it is difficult for one with mental and/or physical disabilities to find a job. Hence, there is still room for improvement in our society to achieve greater inclusivity and acceptance towards the mentally and physically challenged.
- rish

# data[].attributes.headline
youths are more educated than the older generations when they were youths

# data[].attributes.subject
youths are more educated than the older generations when they were youths

# data[].attributes.body
Today's Millennials (aged 26 - 40 years old) are far more educated than the Silent Generation (ages 76 - 91 years old) and Baby Boomers (aged 56 - 76 years old). Therefore, the education capacity of the Millennials and the characteristics of Gen Z like "self-confident' and 'independence" allows one them to look at different political views at different points of views unlike conservatives (mostly the silent generation and baby boomers) who would stick to one political viewpoint and refuse to look at the various alternatives. Thus, the youths have a greater tolerance for differing political viewpoints.
- rish

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The past five decades - spanning from the time when the Silent Generation (today, in their 70s and 80s) was entering adulthood to the adulthood of today's Millennials - have seen large shifts in U.S. society and culture. It has been a period during which Americans, especially Millennials, have become more detached from major institutions such as political parties, religion, the military and marriage. At the same time, the racial and ethnic make-up of the country has changed, college attainment has spiked and women have greatly increased their participation in the nation's workforce.

Our new interactive graphic compares the generations today and in the years that each generation was young (ages 21 to 36) to demonstrate the sea change in young adults' activities and experiences that has occurred over the past 50 years.

Our analysis finds several distinctive ways that Millennials stand out when compared with the Silent Generation, a group of Americans old enough to be grandparents to many Millennials:

1 Today's young adults (Millennials ages 21 to 36 in 2017) are much better educated than the Silent Generation. The educational trajectory of young women across the generations has been especially steep. Among Silent Generation women, only 9% had completed at least four years of college when they were young. By comparison, Millennial women are four times (36%) as likely as their Silent predecessors were to have at least a bachelor's degree at the same age. Educational gains are not limited to women, as Millennial men are also better educated than earlier generations of young men. Three-in-ten Millennial men (29%) have at least a bachelor's degree, compared with 15% of their young Silent counterparts. These higher levels of educational attainment at ages 21 to 36 suggest that Millennials - especially Millennial women - are on track to be our most educated generation by the time they complete their educational journeys.

2A greater share of Millennial women have a bachelor's degree than their male counterparts - a reversal from the Silent Generation. In the past half-century, growing shares of both men and women have earned a bachelor's degree. However, women have made bigger gains over the period. Among Millennials ages 21 to 36 in 2017, women are 7 percentage points more likely than men to have finished at least a bachelor's degree (36% vs. 29%). Back when Silents were ages 21 to 36, women were 6 points less likely than men to have finished at least four years of college education. Gen Xers were the first generation of women to outpace men in educational attainment, with a 3-percentage-point advantage among Gen X women ages 21 to 36. By comparison, the Baby Boom generation was the most recent in which men were better educated than women, having a 2-point advantage over young Boomer women.

3Young women today are much more likely to be working, compared with Silent Generation women during their young adult years. In 1965, when Silent women were young, a majority (58%) were not participating in the labor force and 40% were employed. Among Millennials, that pattern has flipped. Today, 71% of young Millennial women are employed, while 26% are not in the labor force. This shift to more women in the workplace occurred as early as 1985, when Boomers were young. Then, nearly seven-in-ten young Boomer women (66%) were employed and 29% were not in the labor force.

4Millennials today are more than three times as likely to have never married as Silents were when they were young. About six-in-ten Millennials (57%) have never been married, reflecting broader societal shifts toward marriage later in life. In 1965, the typical American woman first married at age 21 and the typical man wed at 23. By 2017, those figures climbed to 27 for women and 29.5 for men. When members of the Silent Generation were the same age as Millennials are now, just 17% had never been married. Still, about two-thirds of never-married Millennials (65%) say they would like to get married someday. When asked the reasons they have not gotten married, 29% say they are not financially prepared, while 26% say they have not found someone who has the qualities they are looking for; an additional 26% say they are too young and not ready to settle down.

5Millennials are much more likely to be racial or ethnic minorities than were members of the Silent Generation. Fifty years ago, America was less racially and ethnically diverse than it is today. Large-scale immigration from Asia and Latin America, the rise of racial intermarriage and differences in fertility patterns across racial and ethnic groups have contributed to Millennials being more racially and ethnically diverse than prior generations. In 2017, fewer than six-in-ten Millennials (56%) were non-Hispanic whites, compared with more than eight-in-ten (84%) Silents. The share who are Hispanic is five times as large among Millennials as among Silents (21% vs. 4%), and the share who are Asian has also increased. However, the share who are black has remained roughly the same.

6Young Silent men were more than 10 times more likely to be veterans than Millennial men are today. Although Millennials came of age at a time when the United States engaged in military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, they are far less likely to have served in the military than their Boomer or Silent predecessors. Among men, only 4% of Millennials are veterans, compared with 47% of Silent men, many of whom came of age during the Korean War and its aftermath. The number of young men serving in the active-duty military has decreased drastically since the establishment of an all-volunteer force in 1973, which is reflected in the decreased share who are veterans since then. Comparable historical data for veteran status by generation is not available for women, but contrary to men, the number of women serving in the active-duty military has risen in recent decades.

7Greater shares of Millennials today live in metropolitan areas than Silents or Boomers did when they were young. In 1965, when members of the Silent Generation were young, two-thirds (67%) lived in a metropolitan area, while one-third (33%) lived in non-metropolitan areas. And a similar share of Baby Boomers (68%) lived in metro areas when they were young. By comparison, more recent generations are residing in metropolitan areas at higher rates. More than eight-in-ten Gen Xers (84%) lived in metropolitan areas when they were young and about nine-in-ten Millennials (88%) today live in metro areas.
Note: This is an update of a post originally published on March 19, 2015.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Millennials today compare with their grandparents 50 years ago

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The past five decades - spanning from the time when the Silent Generation (today, in their 70s and 80s) was entering adulthood to the adulthood of today's Millennials - have seen large shifts in U.S. society and culture.

# data[].attributes.body
As people in Singapore are more educated and exposed to social media, they start to close an eye about the traditional values and be more accepting to the LGBT. -Xavier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S'poreans more liberal towards homosexuality compared with five years ago, IPS survey finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - Singaporeans have become more liberal towards homosexuality over the last five years, with a paper by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) showing "distinct shifts" in attitudes - especially among the young - towards gay sex and gay marriage.

# data[].attributes.body
The third ground that generate xenophobic treatment is cultural difference or civilization/knowledge gap. When immigrants comes from another country into a more civilized country, the illiterates (even some educated but peoples’ and places knowledge illiterate) are more likely to act towards foreigners in a more disdain way calling them names because of their way of life that is different from the host country peoples way of living. (Xavier)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Answer (1 of 25): Xenophobia has become a more global term rather than a mental illness. Many political beliefs have been claimed to be causing xenophobic attacks in places like South Africa. But, clinically, xenophobia can be caused by: Weak Upbringing The roots of xenophobia lie in the upbri...

# data[].attributes.body
Although there are some people who are welcome and accepting the foreigners, there are still a majority of Singaporeans think that the influx of foreign workers threatens their career. Thus showing their hostility against them. For example, many foreign tenants in Singapore have difficulties in renting HBDs because of their nationalities. A report on 24 April found that there were more than 160 housing adverts on the website PropertyGuru that clearly stated that the landlord did not wish to rent to Indians and/or mainland Chinese.
This is mainly due to the Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) syndrome, which leads to the xenophobic behaviours and discrimination. Singaporean landlords afraid that foreigners cook 'heavy smell' dishes, such as curry, which affects their future opportunities of leasing housing properties. As a result,  landlords tend to reject offer from foreigners after knowing their nationality.
-Trong

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"I called up several landlords who had listed rooms for rent," Sunil, a Sri Lankan who spent eight years living in the UK, said.

"Things would start out OK, maybe because of my [Western] accent - but the moment they heard my name, they'd blank out. Many said 'sorry, we don't rent to these people', or 'sorry, no room for Indians'."

Sunil, a civil engineer who arrived in 2012, said he was rejected by at least four landlords.

"I told them that Sri Lanka was not India, that I wouldn't eat or cook in the apartment, and that I would be outside all day. But still, they wouldn't offer me a room," he said.

"At that point, I got fed up and decided to only try Indian landlords. I was invited to viewings right away."

'Cleanliness and culture'

Sunil is not alone. A quick glance at online rental listings shows many that include the words: "no Indians, no PRCs [People's Republic of China]", sometimes followed by the word "sorry".

A count on 24 April found that there were more than 160 housing adverts on the website PropertyGuru that clearly stated that the landlord did not wish to rent to Indians and/or mainland Chinese.

The issue appears more common with less expensive properties and on sites where content is posted directly by users, such as Gumtree.

It is not clear how many foreign workers have been affected. However, several expatriates have described experiencing varying levels of discrimination.

One Indian expat said his agent told him that many landlords would refuse to rent to him because "Indians always cook smelly curries". Another Briton of South Asian descent did not experience any direct discrimination, but was warned by his agent that some landlords could be difficult.

Article 12 of Singapore's constitution says:

(1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.

(2) Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens of Singapore on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.

Experts say the article can be used by a citizen against the state, but cannot be relied upon to seek legal redress against another individual or legal entity.

The UN has noted that article 12(2) does not extend its protection to non-citizens of Singapore.

It was something I experienced too, albeit indirectly. When I searched for a flat, my housing agent received a phone call from one landlord who was worried that I was from mainland China, presumably after they learned about my Chinese ethnicity.

I listened to them discussing my background for what felt like an agonisingly long time. After she hung up, I asked her if it would reassure the landlord if they knew I was British.

"It doesn't matter," she said. "They may still think you're a PRC who obtained a British passport."

Mathew Mathews, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, says: "There are stereotypes that people have about different immigrant groups and how responsible they are in terms of the upkeep of a rented apartment.

"There are notions of which groups take care of their homes better, and what cooking supposedly leaves permanent smells in the house. People have notions about what would devalue the property."

Charlene, an estate agent, said it was common for landlords to prefer not to rent to tenants from India or mainland China because such tenants "are not people who are house proud".

"Many don't clean weekly, and they do heavy cooking, so dust and oil collect over the months. They may use a lot of spices that release smells people don't like."

There are also fears that those tenants will illegally sublet to others, she said, adding: "Cleanliness and culture is a very strong factor."

Another estate agent made similar points, saying that landlords were less willing to rent to Indian and mainland Chinese tenants as they believed they would not maintain the property well.

Singapore is an ethnically diverse nation, consisting of 74% Chinese, 13% Malay, 9% Indian and 3% from other groups. However, as 90% of Singaporean households own their homes, a significant portion of renters are foreigners.

Immigration has also become a sensitive issue, amid concern over living costs and rising housing prices, which many locals blame on foreigners.

While many landlords appear to be concerned about heavy cooking in their kitchens, tens of thousands of Singaporeans launched an online campaign to "cook a pot of curry" in August 2011.

The campaign was prompted by media reports of a disagreement between a Singaporean Indian family and an immigrant family from China, over the smell of curry from the Indian family's home. Following mediation, the Indian family agreed to cook curry only when the Chinese family were not home.

"At that point in time, there was a sense among people that there was some kind of injustice committed," says Alfian Sa'at, a local playwright who wrote the play Cook a Pot of Curry (pictured) following the incident.

"People felt it seemed as if it was OK for [the foreigners] to somehow reject curry, which a lot of Singaporeans believe is part of Singapore's society, no matter what ethnic background you're from. There was a sense that the government had favouritism towards new immigrants at the expense of native, Singapore-born residents."

However despite the support expressed for the Singaporean Indian family, it appears that both race and nationality remain important to many landlords. "It is likely that people tend to want to rent out only to people of the same race," Mr Sa'at says. "This is a tricky issue, because obviously a lot of landlords are [Singaporean] Chinese."

Eugene Tan, Associate Professor of Law at Singapore Management University, says: "In the current state of ambivalence towards immigration in Singapore, my sense is that race and country of origin have taken on a stronger accent with regards to how landlords may view Indian/PRC tenants."

Singapore's government places a strong emphasis on racial harmony. Studies suggest that there is relatively little racial discrimination in the public sphere, but things can be different in private.

"The Singaporean state has considerably influenced Singaporeans' willingness to work and be alongside those who are racially different," Dr Mathews says. "Singaporeans have learned to accept the realities of living in a multi-racial and multi-religious society. The private sphere, however, is one which the state has not tried to influence."

A landlord's choice of tenants "would probably fall within people's private spheres in terms of who they would choose to come into their home space".

Attitudes to race came to the fore in December, when hundreds of foreign workers from India and South Asia rioted after an Indian national was killed in a bus accident. The incident sparked a strong response on social media - many made comments denouncing foreign workers, although many others also spoke out against racism.

Of course, rental discrimination exists in many countries. A BBC study in October found that several estate agencies in London would refuse to rent to African-Caribbean people at the landlord's request.

However, while the UK has legislation banning discrimination on ethnic or nationality grounds, covering situations including "buying or renting property", Singapore offers fewer legal protections.

"There is no specific anti-discrimination law that can be used by non-citizens," says Prof Tan.

"Even if there is an anti-discrimination law, there is the challenge of proving discrimination... Indication of tenant preferences in rental advertisements may not amount to discrimination."

In a statement, PropertyGuru said discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or nationality was "absolutely not" allowed under its guidelines.

"There is a whistle-blowing feature for viewers... to report [content] that may be objectionable or derogatory," it said, and objectionable statements would be removed.

Around 1% of listings on its site contained objectionable content, it added.

The Council for Estate Agencies (CEA), a government body that regulates the real estate agency industry, has guidelines stating that agents should "advise their clients against placing advertisements that are discriminatory, offensive or stereotyped in nature against any particular race, religion or group in society".

In a statement, the CEA and the Ministry of National Development said: "We do not condone racial discrimination. There are advertising guidelines in place.

"Some landlords have explained that they face practical considerations renting out their properties, leading to certain requirements in rental transactions."

The statement added: "The Government will continue educational efforts on the importance of mutual respect to preserve ethnic harmony."

Prof Tan believes that the discrimination will reduce over time.

"With more apartments coming on stream in the next few years, landlords cannot afford to be so choosey," he says.

Sunil also believes that views may change over the decades.

"All the landlords who rejected me were from older generations, but I find I'm not treated differently at work, where the people are younger. I think attitudes are changing, it will just take some time."

Helier Cheung's report can also be heard on From Our Own Correspondent

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'No Indians No PRCs': Singapore's rental discrimination problem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"I called up several landlords who had listed rooms for rent," Sunil, a Sri Lankan who spent eight years living in the UK, said. "Things would start out OK, maybe because of my [Western] accent - but the moment they heard my name, they'd blank out.

# data[].attributes.headline
youths are more concern in politic matters

# data[].attributes.subject
youths are more concern in politic matters

# data[].attributes.body
Due to the Covid 19 pandemic, it is crucial to have a good political to lead the country to handle and overcome this pandemic well, as most jobs have been lost and the economy is falling. Hence, most youths are increasingly concern about the way political leaders are governing our country. As Singapore youths are more pragmatic, they are more concern of who is a better leader, and able to bring about greater prospects for our country. Hence, the younger generations are more open to alternative political viewpoints.
- Gen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gen Y Speaks: As first-time voters, this is what we look out for this GE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ahead of the General Election (GE) on July 10, some first-time voters share what they look out for in the political parties and candidates and what issues concern them, among other things.

# data[].attributes.headline
Singaporeans are less opposed to LGBTQ groups

# data[].attributes.subject
Singaporeans are less opposed to LGBTQ groups

# data[].attributes.body
Although the island remains socially conservative, the poll of 4,015 Singaporeans found opposition to gay marriage had fallen to 60 percent, down from 74 percent when it was last conducted in 2013.

“Overall, Singaporeans remain fairly conservative in their outlook, though there have been distinct shifts on issues surrounding homosexual rights,” the Institute said.
Gavin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
KUALA LUMPUR (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Singapore has seen "distinct shifts" in attitudes to gay rights in the last five years, with support for same-sex marriage rising, a survey released on Thursday showed.

Nearly six in 10 of those aged between 18 and 25 believe same-sex marriage is not wrong, according to the survey by the Institute of Policy Studies, a Singapore-based think-tank.

Although the island remains socially conservative, the poll of 4,015 Singaporeans found opposition to gay marriage had fallen to 60 percent, down from 74 percent when it was last conducted in 2013.

"Overall, Singaporeans remain fairly conservative in their outlook, though there have been distinct shifts on issues surrounding homosexual rights," the Institute said.

"This is especially so among respondents aged between 18 and 25, who were much more liberal about moral issues compared to the respondents aged 65 and above," it added.

The poll, conducted between August 2018 and January 2019, focused on people's views on social, moral and political issues.

The findings come amid a renewed push by gay rights activists in the city-state to overturn a British colonial-era law that bans gay sex.

Two Singaporean men have filed separate petitions to court seeking to legalize gay sex since late last year, after India decriminalized gay sex in a landmark ruling.

Previous legal challenges in Singapore to overturn the ban failed but a prominent diplomat last year called on the gay community to renew legal action against the law.

Under Section 377A of Singapore's Penal Code, a man found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man could be jailed for up to two years, although prosecutions are rare.

The law does not apply to homosexual acts between women.

Johannes Hadi from Ready4Repeal, a coalition that campaigns against Section 377A, said removing the law would help the Asian economic hub to retain and attract talent.

"Having Section 377A in the lawbook, even if it's not enforced, makes Singapore looks extremely bad," Hadi, a lawyer, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

"It makes us look old-fashioned, close-minded compared to places like Hong Kong or Shanghai."

A poll of 750 Singaporeans last year by independent market research and consulting firm Ipsos showed 55 percent of respondents still supported the ban.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
advocacy groups / pressure groups / lobbies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
judicial process / court cases / court decisions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Support for gay rights seen growing in Singapore

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
KUALA LUMPUR (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Singapore has seen "distinct shifts" in attitudes to gay rights in the last five years, with support for same-sex marriage rising, a survey released on Thursday showed. Nearly six in 10 of those aged between 18 and 25 believe same-sex marriage is not wrong, according to the survey by the Institute of Policy Studies, a Singapore-based think-tank.

# data[].attributes.headline
Younger Singaporeans being more educated

# data[].attributes.subject
Younger Singaporeans being more educated

# data[].attributes.body
Younger Singaporeans between the age of 18-25 tends to be more educated and therefore being more liberal. They will therefore accept gay relationships. Whereas people which are either Muslim or Christians tends to have a more conservative view -joel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Singapore- The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) released a working paper on Thursday, May 2, entitled, Religion, Morality, and Conservatism in Singapore, which showed that there have been changes in Singaporean society when it comes to issues concerning the rights of the LGBT community, especially among the youth.

The data used in the paper is from a survey on Race, Religion, and Language, which was conducted between August 2018 and January 2019. There were 4,015 Singaporeans and permanent residents who participated in the survey, the first of its kind in over five years.

The study seeks to document and track the evolving trends of views and behaviours towards social and moral issues, including opinions of the respondents toward homosexual sex and marriage. And while Singapore is still generally conservative, its young people are becoming more open to the rights of the LGBT community, which is seen by the following statistics.

- 58.4 percent of respondents between the age of 18 and 25 said gay marriages were "not wrong at all" or "not wrong most of the time". For respondents aged 65 and above, less than ten percent responded this way.

- 34.9 percent of respondents with ages between 18-25 and 47.9 percent of 26 to 35-year-olds said that homosexual sex was "always wrong" or "almost always wrong." Five years ago, when the survey was last taken, 6.4 percent of 18 to 25-year-olds and 72.2 percent of 26 to 35-year-olds responded this way.
-Over 30 percent of 18 to 25-year-olds said that homosexual sex was "not wrong at all". In 2013, that number had been 11.6 percent.

Taken as a whole, 26.9 of the respondent said that gay marriage was "not wrong at all" or "not wrong most of the time".

Respondents who had better education usually tended to have more liberal views, while those who identified as Muslim or Christian tended to respond more conservatively.

The report reads,

"Overall, Singaporeans remain fairly conservative in their outlook, though there have been distinct shifts on issues surrounding homosexual rights. This is especially so among respondents aged between 18 and 25, who were much more liberal about moral issues compared to the respondents aged 65 and above."

The study also says, "When it came to issues such as homosexual sex and gay marriage, 63.6 percent of respondents indicated that the former was at least almost always wrong and 60 percent of respondents indicated similar sentiments for the latter.

Respondents were more open towards the issues of a gay couple adopting a child, and gay couples having a child through surrogacy. Half of the respondents (53.4 percent) indicated that adoption of a child by a gay couple is at least almost always wrong and 56.6 percent indicated that a gay couple having a child through surrogacy or artificial reproductive techniques was at least almost always wrong.

This indicates that compared to homosexual sex and gay marriage, respondents were more open towards, and accepting of, issues to do with homosexual couples desiring children and forming a family unit through artificial reproductive means."

Is Singapore ready to repeal 377A?

The results of such a study might lead to the question concerning Singapore's readiness to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, the portion of the country's law that deems sex between homosexuals to be a criminal act. 377A is considered to be a holdover from British colonial times.

Last year, when India struck down a law similar to 377A in their own country, renewed calls to repeal the law were heard.

Singaporean diplomat Professor Tommy Koh wrote: "I would encourage our gay community to bring a class action to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A."

Other prominent voices who rose up in favour of repealing 377A, include former Attorney-General, Nominated Member of Parliament and Legal Advisor to the President of Singapore and Council of Presidential Advisors Prof Walter Woon, Senior Advisor (University & Global Relations) of NUS, former Dean of Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, former Singapore Ambassador to the United Nations, and former President of the UN Security Council, Prof Kishore Mahbubani, Yale-NUS President Tan Tai Yong, among others.

Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan recently said, "we respect the privacy of consenting adults in the bedroom," while Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam has said, "Singapore...on this issue, it is a deeply split society. The majority oppose to any change to section 377A - they are opposed to removing it. A minority - I have to say, a growing minority - want it to be repealed. The Government is in the middle.

Speaking for myself, if you ask me, in a personal capacity, personal view - people's lifestyles, sexual attitudes, (we) really should be careful about treating them as criminals or criminalising that.

But again it will be wrong for me to impose my personal views on society or as a policymaker. We live our lives, live and let live. If one side pushes, you will expect a substantial push back."/TISG
Read related: Vivian Balakrishnan denies saying that Section 377A is a "silly" law

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Youth in Singapore more open to LGBT rights, though Singapore is still 'fairly conservative'-IPS report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Singapore- The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) released a working paper on Thursday, May 2, entitled, Religion, Morality, and Conservatism in Singapore, which showed that there have been changes in Singaporean society when it comes to issues concerning the rights of the LGBT community, especially among the youth.

# data[].attributes.headline
Singaporeans do not want religious leader to speak up on the LGBTQ+ community

# data[].attributes.subject
Singaporeans do not want religious leader to speak up on the LGBTQ+ community

# data[].attributes.body
Singaporeans feel uncomfortable if their religious leaders speak up on issues regarding the LGBTQ community because of fear it might cause tensions among Singaporeans.Thus instead of rejected the LGBTQ community they have to accept them no matter if they support or dont support them-karthik

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Majority of Singaporeans uncomfortable with religious leaders speaking up on LGBT issues: IPS study

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Christian respondents were the most likely to be amenable to religious leaders being vocal about LGBT issues. . Read more at straitstimes.com.

# data[].attributes.headline
Singaporeans are generally being more thoughtful and caring for people who do not fit well into the society

# data[].attributes.subject
Singaporeans are generally being more thoughtful and caring for people who do not fit well into the society

# data[].attributes.body
Singaporeans pledge to take care of the foreign workers living in dormitories out of compassion.The same compassion allow them to accept the people who are mentally challenged.-karthik

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The livelihood of foreign workers will be taken care of, as Singapore ramps up measures to fight the spread of the coronavirus, said Minister for Communications and Information S. Iswaran yesterday.

Speaking to reporters after a 30-minute dialogue with foreign workers at a dormitory in Jurong, Mr Iswaran said the Government's top concern is their health and well-being, along with that of Singapore residents.

"The second thing is that they have concerns around their livelihood, as well as their welfare, and these are things that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is working with other government agencies, as well as the dormitory authorities to address.

"We want to assure the workers that we are doing our best to address these concerns, and ensure that they are able to navigate this period of closure with some level of peace of mind."

He spoke with about 50 workers from Westlite Papan dormitory in an engagement session, which was also attended by Minister of State for Manpower Zaqy Mohamad.

The session was planned to assuage workers' concerns due to the shutting down of most workplaces from Tuesday to May 4. Some of them might have to suspend work due to these restrictions.

More than 7,000 residents live in the Westlite Papan dormitory.

Dormitories have been a growing concern in this outbreak, with three of the four new clusters announced by the Ministry of Health yesterday being dormitories - Sungei Tengah Lodge, Toh Guan Dormitory and Cochrane Lodge II.

This is in addition to several other clusters that have been previously identified, such as Westlite Toh Guan dormitory, which now has 18 confirmed cases.

On Friday, the Government announced its tightest measures to date to stem the spike in local Covid-19 cases.

Among them was the closure of workplaces, other than those in key economic sectors and essential services, from Tuesday to May 4.

Speaking in Tamil and English, Mr Iswaran said during the dialogue that the latest measures aim to minimise human interaction to limit the spread of Covid-19.

Yesterday, the workers asked questions about whether they may lose their jobs as a result of this pandemic, if other workers who are overseas can return to Singapore to work, and how they can help in the national effort to fight the virus.

Asked by a reporter whether foreign workers were worried that more clusters could emerge in dormitories and construction sites, Mr Iswaran said: "I think anxiety is inevitable. Wherever these clusters emerge, I think there's anxiety.

"That is why we have a very clear protocol on how to manage them. First, in identifying the source during the contact tracing, and then taking other appropriate measures, whether it is quarantine orders, closing down the relevant area for thorough cleaning et cetera."

He appealed to everyone - Singaporeans, permanent residents and foreign workers - to cooperate with the latest measures.

Mr Kong Chee Min, chief executive of Centurion Cooperation which manages Westlite Papan, said that they have been reviewing their measures every day, including distributing disinfectants and putting up educational materials.

He said that MOM had discussed with them about stricter measures that will soon be implemented.

"They have been preparing us ahead of time, so it helps us in terms of planning, including catering of food, delivering it to the workers, having Wi-Fi in the rooms, and managing the flow of workers, so that they are not always being cooped up in the rooms," said Mr Kong.

Mr Mohammad Abu Rahad, 28, a process maintenance worker who lives at the Westlite Papan dormitory and was at the dialogue, told reporters that it is sometimes impossible to practise safe distancing when there are 16 people living in the same room.

"Of course we are concerned that the virus can spread here, but it cannot be helped. What we can do by ourselves is maybe to have people go for meals in smaller groups, or at different timings," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Coronavirus: Singapore to take care of foreign workers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The livelihood of foreign workers will be taken care of, as Singapore ramps up measures to fight the spread of the coronavirus, said Minister for Communications and Information S. Iswaran yesterday. Speaking to reporters after a 30-minute dialogue with foreign workers at a dormitory in Jurong, Mr Iswaran said the Government's top concern is their health and well-being, along with that of Singapore residents.

# data[].attributes.headline
Pushing for more inclusivity for the disabled

# data[].attributes.subject
Pushing for more inclusivity for the disabled

# data[].attributes.body
In his swearing-in speech in 2004, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made a commitment towards building an inclusive society in Singapore and even made special mention of people with disabilities. A national road map - the Enabling Masterplan - was launched in 2007 as a realisation of this commitment.
Gavin

# data[].attributes.body
more movements such as the purple parade raises awareness of the plight of the mentally and physically disabled which gives rise to the compassion of the society which drives them to show support and acceptance - jiaxuan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
THE PURPLE PARADE is a unifying national platform to promote awareness and celebrate abilities of persons with special needs.

# data[].attributes.body
While there are some who are accepting and concern about the well-being of foreign workers, there are still a large number of Singaporeans who are objective and discriminate the foreign workers. For example,  hate comments were made like ‘it’s their fault for not being clean and for their eating habits’ and things like that, there is also this almost worse mindset of ‘they’re driving our numbers up and it makes us look bad on the world stage, and they should go home’. When there was a surge in covid 19 cases, Singaporeans blamed the foreign workers for being unhygienic. This was due to the nature of their jobs such as construction workers in Singapore and their cramped living conditions. Singaporeans have a NIMBY mentality which made them think that those foreigners are inferior to them, leading to a surge in xenophobia among Singaporeans. - Gen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
he dormitories in which Singapore's migrant workers live have, until recently, been almost hidden from view. The vast, steel buildings are mostly on the outskirts of town, tucked inside industrial estates, far away from the city-state's glittering skyscrapers and luxury hotels.

Inside, the men who carry out backbreaking work to build Singapore's infrastructure, sleep on bunk beds, crammed into rooms with as many as 20 people. The biggest dormitory complex houses up to 24,000 workers.

In recent weeks, as the coronavirus has ripped through the facilities, their unsanitary and overcrowded conditions have quickly become the subject of international attention. Singapore, recently lauded for its gold-standard approach to testing and tracing, now demonstrates both the dangers of neglecting marginalised communities, and the vulnerability of nations to a second wave of infections.

On Wednesday, the number of cases surpassed 10,000. This compares with just 200 infections recorded on 15 March, when its outbreak appeared to be nearly under control. Almost all new reports involve migrant workers.

Last week, the country extended a partial shutdown that was introduced at the start of April, with people told to stay indoors as much as possible. All migrant workers have been told not to leave their dorms, and are instead having food delivered by authorities.

"It feels like we're in a prison. [It is] too difficult. [There is] too much heat in the room," says A, who asked to remain anonymous, fearing that he might face repercussions for speaking to the media. Outside, the sound of ambulance sirens could be heard, he adds. None of the hundreds of people living on his floor has tested positive.

Migrant workers collect the food delivered by non-governmental organisation Alliance of Guest Workers Outreach (AGWO). Photograph: Edgar Su/Reuters

When the coronavirus outbreak in China began to escalate in January, it was feared that Singapore, a major regional business hub, would be especially vulnerable. The country acted quickly to minimise the risk of transmission: border restrictions were introduced, an exhaustive contract-tracing programme rolled out and a home quarantine system was strictly enforced. Tests were also made free for all. The country, which avoided sweeping shutdown measures throughout March, appeared to have contained the virus.

But rights groups say little attention was paid to migrant workers who, despite the pandemic, continued to live in close quarters, and spent hours a day travelling on the back of crowded lorries to get to and from construction sites. "The way the workers were stacked in [on the back of lorries], it was like the way goats are stacked in when they are taken to a slaughter house," says B, a second worker, who also asked to be anonymous.

Activists say they raised concerns about the risks posed by the virus to migrant workers as early as February. In March, the campaign group Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2) said the risk of an outbreak among this community was "undeniable".

Inequality laid bare

When clusters began to emerge, the government moved 7,000 workers, mostly people who do essential jobs such as working on power plants, out of the buildings. About 293,000 remain housed in such facilities. Authorities say they will prioritise relocating older people. Cleaning services have been increased to improve hygiene, officials say, and meals are also being delivered to prevent workers needing to use communal kitchens.

The outbreak has brought to the surface the glaring inequality in Singapore, which relies heavily on a workforce of about a million migrant workers to build its famous skyscrapers, and clean its gleaming shopping malls. Most have travelled to the country from Bangladesh, India and other south Asian countries, in the hope of sending money back home. Their lifestyles are a stark contrast to the country's wealthy elite and financial workers.

Kokila Annamalai, a local activist who supports migrant workers, fears that the spread of Covid-19 within the dormitories has fanned the flames of xenophobia and racism. She points to comments made online and in the media. "On top of [the view that] 'it's their fault for not being clean and for their eating habits' and things like that, there is also this almost worse mindset of 'they're driving our numbers up and it makes us look bad on the world stage, and they should go home'," she said.

While such remarks have been condemned by Singapore's home affairs and law minister, Kasiviswanathan Shanmugam, campaigners say official messages have also been unhelpful. Workers have been urged to "be responsible", wear face masks at all times, report symptoms to their dormitory operators and stay at least one metre from one another.

A recent study by Mohan Dutta, a professor at Massey University in New Zealand, suggests such guidance is often just impractical. The overwhelming majority of about 100 workers surveyed said they were unable to maintain such a distance at all times. More than half described their rooms as unhygienic.

Just last week, workers reported that they did not have enough soap to wash their hands.

'I had no idea I would have to live like this'

Workers are generally reluctant to voice complaints. Most take out huge debts in order to work in Singapore, often to find on arrival that they will be paid less than promised. A typical salary is around S$500-750 (£285-£425) a month. They are required to hold temporary work permits, but these are tied to their employer, making them extremely vulnerable to exploitation.

B sold his family land and took loans so he could afford to pay an agency about S$7,000 to work in Singapore, where he hoped he would earn a high salary. As the eldest son, he is responsible for supporting his extended family, as well as his own wife and children. He knew that he would be required to work hard in Singapore, but his body was unprepared for the long hours of heavy lifting on construction sites. He did not expect that he would live, initially, in a container with eight others. "[I] had no idea that I would have to live like this and be in this much pain," he said.

Singapore's skyscrapers were built on migrant labour. Photograph: Edgar Su/Reuters

Now, about a decade later, he says he is at least lucky to share a dorm room with just 12 people - fewer than many of his peers, and a contrast to his previous room, which had virtually no natural light. A also shares a room with 12 others. The heat is so suffocating, that everyone sleeps on the floor, he says. He is afraid to use the communal toilets, which are unclean.

Many in Singapore are sympathetic towards the workers. "They deserve more. They deserve what every Singaporean deserves," says William Lai, a photographer. "I don't know what is going through the minds of these people [who blame workers] ... It is not their fault. They don't want to be affected by this."

In a speech this week, Singapore's prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, said migrant workers would be cared for in the same way as Singaporeans: "We will look after your health, your welfare and your livelihood." Almost all the migrant workers infected have only mild symptoms, he added.

Dutta believes the crisis could present an opportunity to reform how migrant workers are treated, but he added that small tweaks would not be enough. "Substantive changes are needed in how Singapore looks at migrant workers, what rights migrant workers have, and how they are able to advocate for their own health and wellbeing," says Dutta.

B says that, for a start, migrant worker dormitories should be more strictly controlled, with caps on the number of workers allowed per room and per bathroom facilities. "It is not like Singapore cannot regulate it."

"This entire city is built on our labour and on our hard work," he adds. "That tells you what you need to be told about the culture that we bring, and how our culture makes up the clean and sparkling facade of the city."

Workers, he adds, do not expect special kindness, just their basic labour rights.
Additional reporting by Redwan Ahmed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'We're in a prison': Singapore's migrant workers suffer as Covid-19 surges back

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
he dormitories in which Singapore's migrant workers live have, until recently, been almost hidden from view. The vast, steel buildings are mostly on the outskirts of town, tucked inside industrial estates, far away from the city-state's glittering skyscrapers and luxury hotels.

# data[].attributes.headline
festivals and events that cater to the disabled

# data[].attributes.subject
festivals and events that cater to the disabled

# data[].attributes.body
Asked about her hopes for the festival, Ms Mui said that she wants to “show other children who are wheelchair users that you can grow up to be useful”.

“I just hope that I could inspire that one kid whom I work with to be more confident and embrace him or herself for who they are, or that one person from the public to embrace inclusion,” she said.
-Angel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An inclusive arts festival for children, with or without special needs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - Mr Jovan Neo talks about equality a lot. "We are human beings, we are equal, but with different abilities," he said multiple times during an interview with TODAY.

# data[].attributes.body
An increased awareness of different disabilities has led to the formation of companies and businesses that employ the disabled. Such employment allows them to survive and also  allows them to integrate better into society through small steps. Companies such as Adrenalin have up to 30 percent of employees with disabilities. This not just exposes those with disabilities to others, but also allow them to assimilate better into society.
-Stefan

# data[].attributes.body
There are much more articles on people who are mentally and physically on newspaper, social media and live television. People are now more socially aware about them and the government also spend $400 million per year to help these people integrate into workforce and another $160 million to care for their mental health. -Jerome

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SINGAPORE - The Government will focus on integrating persons with disabilities into the workforce and helping caregivers under its third Enabling Masterplan - a five-year national plan for supporting the group.

While the two previous plans focused on increasing support in a range of areas like early intervention and education, employment, care services, assistive technologies and accessibility, the new plan will take a three-pronged approach towards taking care of the disabled: Employment support, caregiver support and an increase of spending on initiatives to support those with disabilities.

All in, the Government will spend about $400 million per year on initiatives supporting people with disabilities, and an additional $160 million in the next five years on mental health issues, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat announced in his Budget on Monday (Feb 20).

Currently, higher-functioning graduands from Special Education schools are matched to special training programmes as part of job preparation.

Under the additional employment support, these training programmes will be made available not only to those with mild intellectual disability and autism, but also those with moderate intellectual and multiple disabilities.

In terms of caregiver support, a Disability Caregiver Support Centre will be set up to support caregivers.

The centre will provide information, planned respite, training and peer support groups, and work with Voluntary Welfare Organisations (VWOs) to pilot programmes for caregivers of newly diagnosed people with disabilities.

Another group the Government is focusing on in its Budget this year is those with mental health conditions.

Mental healthcare services will be provided in polyclinics, and VWOs will be tapped on to set up more community-based teams to help those in need, as well as increase public education on mental health issues.

The number of Dementia Friendly Communities will be increased, with the National Council for Social Services leading efforts to integrate those with mental health issues into the workplace and in society.

To help tie the community together further, more than $50 million has been set aside to support community sports, with a planned expansion of the Sports-In-Precinct Programme that allows Singaporeans to play sports near their homes.

The SportCares Programme, which encourages disadvantaged young people to discover their strengths through sports, will also be expanded.

An additional $50 million in grants will also be committed over five years, to help aspiring athletes.

Another $50 million will be provided to match sports donations dollar-for-dollar.

The Cultural Matching Fund, which currently provides dollar-for-dollar matching for donations to cultural institutions, will be topped up by $150 million.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Singapore Budget 2017: Integrating disabled into workforce and supporting caregivers focus of new Govt masterplan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - The Government will focus on integrating persons with disabilities into the workforce and helping caregivers under its third Enabling Masterplan - a five-year national plan for supporting the group.

# data[].attributes.headline
Singaporeans pushing the blame onto foreign workers

# data[].attributes.subject
Singaporeans pushing the blame onto foreign workers

# data[].attributes.body
Singaporeans are very much aware at this point, of the benefits of foreign workers. However, the recent epidemic has proven that our society is still a very xenophobic one. Many Singaporeans are seen to be blaming foreign workers for spreading the COVID-19, via whatsapp messages which they create or forward. Blaming foreign workers without understanding their situation only goes to show the degree of discrimination of foreign workers that many Singaporeans seem to have. The COVID-19 virus was only spread throughout their dormitories due to their cramped nature, where many workers are squeezed into a single room. However, many singaporeans do not realise that and instead actively push the blame onto the foreign workers.
-Stefan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rise in Covid-19 cases shines a light on Singapore's racist underbelly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The spread of the virus among its migrant workers living in cramped conditions has touched off a wave of blame and scapegoating in society, never mind that Singapore owes its success to this huge low-paid workforce providing many essential services.

# data[].attributes.body
the older generations may be more conservative in their views and thinking hence resulting in a smaller degree of acceptance towards foreign ideas, the newer generations are very much the opposite, due to the access to social media which exposes them to different perspectives, hence shaping them to be more liberal, the youths also receive better education as compared to the older generations, education can shape and widen one's perspectives as well - jiaxuan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Age is a factor in the liberal-conservative divide in Singapore, with the young more liberal than the old, a survey has found.

The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey on religion, morality and conservatism in Singapore, first conducted in 2013, and again last year, found that older people were likely to be much more conservative compared with their younger counterparts.

For instance, among those aged 18 to 25, about 47 per cent indicated they were not opposed to premarital sex. Among those older than 65, only 16 per cent felt the same way.

On homosexual sex, about 49 per cent of those in the younger age group thought it was not wrong, compared with only 10 per cent in the older age group.

In fact, it is in the area of gay rights that the divergence is the most stark.

The survey found that over time, younger respondents were more likely to become more liberal in their views on such issues compared with older people.

In 2013, about 18 per cent of those aged 20 to 24 felt that gay sex was not wrong. Five years on, more than 40 per cent of the cohort, now aged 25 to 29, felt the same way.

This shift to a more liberal attitude in a cohort was much less pronounced among older respondents, a sign that they are slower in accepting issues such as gay marriage.

For instance, in 2013, 11 per cent of those aged 55 to 59 said gay marriage was not wrong. Last year, about 15 per cent of the cohort, now aged 60 to 64, said the same thing.

The results of the two surveys show today's young people are also more liberal in their attitudes on gay rights issues compared with young people polled in 2013.

For instance, the latest survey shows about half of those between the ages of 18 and 25 did not frown on sex between adults of the same sex. In comparison, about 20 per cent in the same age group felt the same way in the earlier survey.

These developments could be the result of growing activism among millennials in the area of gay rights, said the researchers.

Young people are also more likely to know someone who identifies as gay, and have come across the theme of homosexuality in sitcoms and movies from countries where homosexuality is socially acceptable, said the survey authors - IPS senior research fellow Mathew Mathews, research associate Leonard Lim and research assistant Shanthini Selvarajan.

This divergence between the young and the old was also reflected among Christians and Muslims polled, with younger Christians and Muslims less conservative than their older counterparts in general.

Among older Christians and Muslims, there was a hardening of positions, with a growing proportion of older people in these religions opposed to gay sex, the survey found.

Over time, if these trends continue, the young will pull further away from the old, with society becoming more polarised on moral issues along age lines, noted the authors.

This inter-generational divide on moral issues is one area that Singapore society will have to confront eventually, they added.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Younger people more liberal than older respondents polled

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Age is a factor in the liberal-conservative divide in Singapore, with the young more liberal than the old, a survey has found. The Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey on religion, morality and conservatism in Singapore, first conducted in 2013, and again last year, found that older people were likely to be much more conservative compared with their younger counterparts.

# data[].attributes.body
By educating Singaporeans through activities such as nationwide campaigns, this helps to reduce the stigma Singaporeans have against mentally disabled people.(Om)

# data[].attributes.body
In a survey conducted by researchers in Singapore, only a small group of people thought it wrong of moral issues such as gay rights, pre-marital sex and cohabitation. -Jerome

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Singapore society still largely conservative but becoming more liberal on gay rights: IPS survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The findings are part of a wider Institute of Policy Studies survey on race, language and religion. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.

# data[].attributes.headline
Young Singaporeans fear their job security

# data[].attributes.subject
Young Singaporeans fear their job security

# data[].attributes.body
They understand that having foreign talent in Singapore will help to boost its economy. However, many young Singaporeans are saying that they fear that bringing may not always translate to more jobs as they believe that they "take their places" , denying their job security. This has lead to alienating foreign talent and decreasing social cohesion in Singapore.(Om)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Updated: )
Share this content

SINGAPORE: More young Singaporeans polled in a survey were sceptical about the long-term commitment of immigrants to Singapore, despite recognising that the country has benefitted from the presence of foreign talent.

Conducted by local think-tank Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), the survey aimed to study the emigration attitudes of young Singaporeans, polling over 2,000 respondents aged between 19 and 30 during face-to-face interviews between Jun and Nov 2016. This was the second survey of its kind, following one conducted in 2010.

According to the survey findings released on Friday (Sep 28), 55.9 per cent of respondents thought foreign talent used Singapore as a stepping stone to other countries, up 10.4 percentage points from 2010.

Almost half (48 per cent) of the respondents also felt that having too much foreign talent diluted the cohesiveness of society, an increase of close to 10 percentage points from six years before.

However, 62.5 per cent of respondents believed that foreign talent contributed to Singapore's development as much as locals, up 17.1 percentage points from 2010.

"Over time, Singaporeans have come to understand that foreign talent make a contribution economically and they help to grow the pie," IPS deputy director of research Gillian Koh told Channel NewsAsia. "But from the results, people are not sure if it would translate directly to jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans, and also whether it will erode social cohesion."

Respondents were divided into four main clusters based on their emigration attitudes and responses to the survey, namely: Disconnected Stayers (31.6 per cent), Flourishing Stayers (29.1 per cent), the Disconnected (11.6 per cent) and the Explorers (27.7 per cent).

Those in the "Disconnected" and "Explorers" groups had a high level of intention to emigrate and felt that emigration has a positive impact on one's social and economic status, said the researchers.

When it came to attitudes regarding foreign talent, the "Explorers" felt the greatest sense of relative deprivation between locals and foreigners.

"That sense of threat (from foreigners) is the highest from one particular cluster - the 'Explorers', so it's not an across the board ambivalence of views that are held in tension for everyone," explained Dr Koh.
PREFERRED COUNTRIES FOR EMIGRATION
Conducted by Dr Koh, Ms Debbie Soon and Dr Leong Chan-Hoong, the survey also highlighted that the level of intention to emigrate was similar to findings in 2010.

Nearly one in five (18.3 per cent) respondents had thought about emigrating to another country to live there very frequently or all the time, down 2.9 percentage points from 2010.

"Government policy has made it sweeter for young Singaporeans to stay, in terms of educational opportunities, political stability, healthcare, even housing," said Dr Koh.

On the other hand, nearly a third (29.2 per cent) strongly agreed or agreed that they would actively examine the possibility of emigrating to another country within the next five years as compared to 26.4 per cent six years before.

Those with higher education, those who spoke English at home, older respondents and males were also more likely to think of emigrating, the latest survey found.

Key factors which keep young Singaporeans rooted include having family members here, public health and safety, as well as having friends in Singapore.

The researchers also found that Australia strengthened its position as the preferred emigration destination for Singaporeans, with 35.6 per cent or 716 respondents opting for it.

This was followed by New Zealand, the United States and the United Kingdom.

"Populist movements" in countries such as the US and the UK could lead to young Singaporeans thinking twice about these destinations, explained Dr Koh.

"In those destinations, there's been the rise of not just populism, but tribalism and from there a sense of xenophobia, so maybe at the back of young Singaporeans' minds, they will also consider how welcoming those destinations will be."

The survey also saw large improvements in levels of national pride and life satisfaction, with close to 80 per cent saying that they preferred being a citizen of Singapore than any other country in the world, up from 57.2 per cent in 2010.

More than half (58 per cent) of respondents also said that they were satisfied with their life compared to 43.1 per cent in 2010.

While most felt that Singapore would continue to be economically prosperous over the next 10 years, researchers also noted that only 29.8 per cent of those surveyed felt that there would be sufficient jobs and opportunities for every citizen in the same time period.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More than 50% of young Singaporeans believe foreigners use the country as a stepping stone: Survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Updated: ) Share this content SINGAPORE: More young Singaporeans polled in a survey were sceptical about the long-term commitment of immigrants to Singapore, despite recognising that the country has benefitted from the presence of foreign talent.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Locals are afraid that the growing migrant population would affect their job opportunities in the future. Furthermore, some say that the Government is partly to blame as migrants are not given full employment rights, thus making locals view them as inferior. (Geo Yi)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A man carries a poster which translates from the Malay language to English as "Singaporean can't take it!" as he gathers at a May Day protest in Singapore, callling for tighter curbs on the influx of foreigners. Photo: AP

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Singapore activists warn of surging xenophobia as foreigners take the blame for social ills

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A man carries a poster which translates from the Malay language to English as "Singaporean can't take it!" as he gathers at a May Day protest in Singapore, callling for tighter curbs on the influx of foreigners. Photo: AP

# data[].attributes.body
1. Exposure to Social Media has made Singaporeans put aside some conservative values and consider more liberal stances such as acceptance toward homosexuality. (Geo Yi)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S'poreans more liberal towards homosexuality compared with five years ago, IPS survey finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SINGAPORE - Singaporeans have become more liberal towards homosexuality over the last five years, with a paper by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) showing "distinct shifts" in attitudes - especially among the young - towards gay sex and gay marriage.

# data[].attributes.body
There are however signs of rising xenophobia and anti-foreigner sentiments indicating growing intolerance [what drives this/reasons? what evidence is there?]

# data[].attributes.body
Greater tolerance of alternative political viewpoints and among Generation Z  (born after 1995) and Millennials (those born after ~ 1980)[what drives this/reasons? what evidence is there?]

# data[].attributes.body
Greater tolerance and even strong push for acceptance of the LGBTQ community, particularly among those in the 18-35 age group [what drives this/reasons? what evidence is there?]

# data[].attributes.body
Greater inclusivity and acceptance towards the mentally and physically disabled [what drives this/reasons? what evidence is there?]

# data[].attributes.body
RESEARCH any 2 areas. ADD NEW POST (click the plus sign) for each area - your choice.

(1) what drives either growing acceptance or intolerance - research reasons

(2) what evidence is there. You should state the evidence, and link the news article, video etc. Click the hyperlink (paperclip)