In June 2024, according to Singapore government statistics, our population crossed 6.04 million, with Singapore citizens making up 3.64 million. Our city is already one of the most densely populated countries in the world. Overcrowding and the failure of our infrastructure to effectively deal with the population load has led to escalating housing prices, diminished job opportunities, over-extended public transport and healthcare systems, increased stress and a general lowering of quality of life for Singaporeans. The approach of the People’s Action Party (PAP) government over the last two decades has not addressed these challenges meaningfully. The government’s White Paper on Population failed to tackle Singapore’s demographic challenges because it has not departed from the policy fundamentals that gave rise to the present situation.
The PAP government announced its intention to increase the population to 6 million by 2020 (it had originally announced 6.9 million by 2030 but abandoned that narrative due to public criticism). Despite the pandemic which temporarily halted the inflows, the 6 million figure has already been reached last year. During the last GE, the PAP again refused to give a population parameter that they were aiming for. The daily lived experience of every person in Singapore who does not live in a mansion in Ridout Road speaks to the considerable strain on our resources and infrastructure. This further lowers the overall liveability of this island.
A new approach is needed. The current government’s population policy that appears to place economic growth as its main objective and gross domestic product (GDP) as its key performance indicator cannot handle the totality of factors that promote quality of life. Population management is a central feature of a country’s total policy framework and therefore requires a more holistic, systemic and future-oriented methodology, capable of linking various policy outcomes into a coherent whole, always with the welfare of individual Singaporeans and their families at its heart.
As such, an arbitrarily selected population figure should not be the starting point of the debate. Policy-making must remain dynamic in relation to changing economic, social, demographic and global/regional conditions. The proper approach to population policymaking is to address the task from the standpoint of the fundamental outcomes generated by the whole complement of national policies rather than within its own four walls.
The Singapore Democratic Party proposes such a programme. We believe that a government’s approach to population should focus on an immigration mechanism designed to attract and retain the best talents while preserving the obligation to provide citizens with a fair and equitable labour market. It should additionally address those factors that lead to a better quality of life, principally through ensuring that the cost of living is manageable. Supporting these objectives is an actionable programme to better manage our needs for a rapidly changing world as well as enhance the Singaporean identity. Finally, the nation should move away from GDP to more holistic measures of well-being, and align policymakers’ incentives with Singaporeans’ well-being.
A nation should always ensure that the well-being of its citizens is prioritised. We therefore propose the implementation of a Talent Track Scheme to ensure that only foreign professionals whose skills and credentials are rigorously verified may work in Singapore. Businesses seeking to hire foreign professionals will be required to demonstrate that the competencies they seek are not available within the Singaporean candidate pool. Fair employment laws will also be passed to protect the interests of workers. This policy should significantly reduce the number of foreign workers in our midst while maintaining a high quality workforce.
The push factors that lead to significant emigration are a good indicator of the areas of policy that are not meeting Singaporeans’ needs and that lead to a suppression of the Total Fertility Rate (TFR). These factors include the price of social goods, such as housing and health care, and the quality of the education system. Ensuring that housing is affordable and reducing the waiting time for flats, facilitating access to good health care by managing costs, and reforming the education system to ensure an all-rounded and creative educational experience are Singaporeans’ principal concerns; these factors influence their loyalty to Singapore as well as their ability and willingness to start families. The housing issues are addressed in our housing policy.
The developmental work of a responsible government requires deeper study and policy development around changing population demographics, in order to ensure that Singapore crosses its current demographic hump with increased life expectancy in a smooth and sustainable way. This way fewer people dying young will be seen as a blessing and a boon for our country rather than a “problem” which needs to be dealt with. There have been numerous attempts by the government including the baby bonus, slightly increased paternity leave and various grants and schemes but these have not had any impact on our TFR.
Citizens and new immigrants should both feel a sense of belonging, loyalty and pride in their country. Policies that entrench ethnic and other differences work against this. The selective Ethnic Integration Policy should be abolished, and the race identification on our National Registration Identity Cards should be removed, as has been done in other countries.
Sensible immigration limits will allow Singaporean culture to strengthen and flourish, and facilitate the organic emergence of a Singapore Identity that new immigrants can take pride in being a part of. A population policy that leads to a majority of residents being foreigners will, on the other hand, cause the Singapore Identity to constantly remain insecure – this inevitably has a detrimental effect on the loyalty and sense of belonging that future generations have towards this country.
It has long been established that GDP is a blunt tool in its use as a measurement of the well-being of our citizens and their families. A new index, drawing on the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) methodology, facilitates a more holistic indicator of national progress by factoring in the costs (such as increased crime and vice, family breakdowns, decrease in mental health, etc.) that go into producing GDP growth. We clearly have a lot of talent in our civil service and if this is focused on improving the quality of life in Singapore, the barriers to starting a family will come down and our existential fertility decline will be reversed.
Alongside a more coherent and comprehensive measure of well-being, such as the GPI, the remunerative incentives of Cabinet ministers and senior administrators should be realigned to ensure that citizen well-being remains the essential measure of the success of policies and programmes. This could be translated into programs (such as universal healthcare and educational reforms which prioritize holistic development over test taking skills) which ensure a better living environment with less stress on the infrastructure and population and a genuine increase in quality of life for everyone in Singapore.
Establishing a more systematic and comprehensive suite of policies that seek to ensure Singaporeans’ holistic well-being through better study and progress measurement will broaden the approach to population management. Our country’s economic growth and our citizens’ welfare are both of great importance. The policy measures outlined above will initiate a deeper and more meaningful policy framework directed towards achieving a better quality of life for Singaporeans, a more sustainable economic model, and a resilient Singapore.
