<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR>Enclaves: Social integration the nub of the matter
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->CHARACTERISING as xenophobia the use of only Chinese in service front-lines in last Thursday's editorial, 'Geylang, Chinese and the irrationality of fear', misses the point.
The issue is social integration. Singapore is a model of a harmonious and progressive multiracial society. Our language policy has played a tremendous role towards this end. We have a twin-pronged strategy of enriching individual ethnic languages while promoting mastery of English as a lingua franca to integrate the different ethnic groups in the common socio-economic sphere.
The suggestion that in good time, Chinese nationals in Geylang will gravitate towards English proficiency for economic reasons, as did our Chinese immigrant forefathers, is best refuted by a paragraph in the book, Lee Kuan Yew, The Man And His Ideas:
'One example was the question of... English or Mandarin as the primary language. Left to the popular will, the Chinese, who formed the majority of the population...would have rooted for Mandarin. But this would not be in the country's best interest...He (then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew) therefore went against the popular sentiment of the times.'
English has been the primary language ever since.
This proactive pragmatism was also behind the English proficiency prerequisite for maids legislated in 1985. It came after an influx of non-English-speaking Indonesian maids. The rule was applied across the board, even if they were to be employed by families who understood Bahasa Indonesia.
I have no fear of foreigners and trust the Government's assessment that they are crucial to our economic prosperity. So I welcome them gladly. But for the same reason, their presence should be on terms which do not disadvantage me from integrating with them, and vice versa.
Osman Sidek
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->CHARACTERISING as xenophobia the use of only Chinese in service front-lines in last Thursday's editorial, 'Geylang, Chinese and the irrationality of fear', misses the point.
The issue is social integration. Singapore is a model of a harmonious and progressive multiracial society. Our language policy has played a tremendous role towards this end. We have a twin-pronged strategy of enriching individual ethnic languages while promoting mastery of English as a lingua franca to integrate the different ethnic groups in the common socio-economic sphere.
The suggestion that in good time, Chinese nationals in Geylang will gravitate towards English proficiency for economic reasons, as did our Chinese immigrant forefathers, is best refuted by a paragraph in the book, Lee Kuan Yew, The Man And His Ideas:
'One example was the question of... English or Mandarin as the primary language. Left to the popular will, the Chinese, who formed the majority of the population...would have rooted for Mandarin. But this would not be in the country's best interest...He (then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew) therefore went against the popular sentiment of the times.'
English has been the primary language ever since.
This proactive pragmatism was also behind the English proficiency prerequisite for maids legislated in 1985. It came after an influx of non-English-speaking Indonesian maids. The rule was applied across the board, even if they were to be employed by families who understood Bahasa Indonesia.
I have no fear of foreigners and trust the Government's assessment that they are crucial to our economic prosperity. So I welcome them gladly. But for the same reason, their presence should be on terms which do not disadvantage me from integrating with them, and vice versa.
Osman Sidek
