THE TEMASEK TIMES

News and views from an unique perspective

PAP’s Women Wing proposes ways to boost Singapore’s falling birth rate

Posted by temasektimes on August 24, 2012

The Women’s Wing of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) has released a paper on marriage and parenthood after a series of consultation done with activists, women’s groups and the public.

Among the proposals include making it easier for young couples to form families earlier, reduce uncertainties pertaining to the cost of conceiving and raising children as well as promote joint responsibility in parenting.

The paper also propose a detailed and impressive Married-Couple Temporary Housing scheme which would give young couples the option of renting a flat while waiting for their Build-to-Order (BTO) flats, which typically has a three-year wait.

Speaking to queries from the media, PAP MP Jessica Tan said:

“I’m not saying that the government run all of it. What we are asking is greater government involvement in this sector so that we can drive a little bit more even quality.”

Singapore’s declining birth rate is of primary concern among its leaders with Supreme Leader Lee Kuan Yew imploring his subjects to bear more children during a speech last week.

Meanwhile, there is nothing heard from the Workers Party on the issue whose MPs are nowhere to seen, heard or found of late.

48 Responses to “PAP’s Women Wing proposes ways to boost Singapore’s falling birth rate”

  1. Bimbo's Wing of pappies said

    These women either have no idea absolutely, or they are just ignoring the huge pink elephant in the room!!

  2. Paul said

    TT actually put a photo of TPL who do not want to give birth for 1 year after she become MP… talk about ironic.
    with words like “detailed and impressive”, bashing the WP, TT have once again proved themselves to be a worse mouthpicece than MSN.

    • lima said

      agree to paul

    • mahbok tan THE SINKI said

      @paul – TT hor KBKB only to wayang….!!!
      But who cares , thats their job and being paid to set-up this website….and later hor they feedback to PAP lor….!!!

      We should not give a damn to wat their content , we just need to think for our selves and DO NOT MAKE ourselves miserable with their newsreporting….play along @paul….!!!

      Agree to Disagree with them but think differently……not with the MIW,PAP or their cronies….!!!

      Vote for a CHANGE before we ankat kaki cepat hentak…..left rite left rite left rite….take money and run away….!!!!

    • alam said

      Did TT ever bother to check with SDP or RP on what their thoughts on these issues would be? I guess they can only score own goals…… at least the PAP had articulated their plans……. Is Dr CHEE bidding good BYE to talking about these issues?

      Mod’s note:

      SDP has a proposal on the issue. Go and check out its website. As for the ‘Wayang Party’, it’s ‘Wayang’ time!

      • alam said

        If SDP proposals are sound and good, convince the Singaporeans, get them to approve it and vote you in 2016….. Well putting your so-called policies in your website is just like Wayang? Geitai are better to watch than SDP website….. Like what the Muttons say in Power 987…. “Oi, you stupid or what?” I think the Muttons have more credibility that TT and SDP put together…

      • Pussy Rules said

        SDP wayang untill bankrupt lol wahahahahahaha

  3. Lim said

    You can release papers, do multi-million COI but nothing much will change – trains still conked regularly, army boys die unnecessarily. Why fertility rates fall? The answer is so obvious but solutions too unpalatable to massacre this sacred cow of making profits in every aspect -exorbitant public housing prices, depressed job salaries from influx of cheap PMET, expensive antenatal care, feeding children, education, medical costs, nursery care, etc Why costs won’t go down? Cos need to pay dividends and top bonuses to feed top dogs and cats and billions to invest in bankrupt banks or hotels overseas.

    • mahbok tan THE SINKI said

      Tell her to open her leg wide wide lor….wakakakakaka….!!!

      KNNBCCB …… tok cock only think easy want to make baby arh….. tell that to PM lee see whats the result…????

    • Sinkaypoh said

      well said

    • Lim said

      one example – a family with young children and prams need a car. But does the govt give damn except to control COEs and force prices up so that it is unaffordable for a young family? Expect whole family with babies and all to squeeze into buses and trains – wait and wait so long and squeezed like sardines. Young families need an affordable home – but HDB wants market subsidy for its BTO and only pay lip service in bringing down inflated prices of property bubble. Why have children? Then got to fight with foreigners for place in primary schools! WTHell! Why torture yourself?

    • Shadowskill78 said

      Bingo!!!

    • oldguard said

      If only Cow Boo One can assure us $6 medical bill for open heart surgery. Giving birth should cost half the price than you will see the effect.

  4. SEX MANIAC! said

    MAYBE THE PAPPIES SHOULD ORGANIZE FREE SEX PARTY FOR SINGAPOREANS TO BOOST BIRTH RATE!

  5. tom said

    For once, PAP’s proposal is a thumbs up from me

  6. siao said

    and somehow TT worked in a non-related remark against WP. hilarious. soon this will become a everything also blame WP. like how it is with PAP.

    • stevenadosan said

      Why? Why always wack WP? Something is very wrong! WP has done a great job but don’t expect msm to give coverage to WP. Well Done WP!

  7. Two Cents said

    the older generation were poorer but had more children. please stop blaming… Singapore is really getting to be a complainer’s paradise where the finger is always pointing outwards while they sit on the fence. really sick of all the whinning!!!!!!

  8. Two Cents said

    and by the way… Singapore has employment because big business likes to set up shop here… big business likes to setup shop here because they can find the right personnel to support their operations. Singapore can even barely find talent for the Olympics amongst their own population, do you think that Singaporeans ALONE can support the needs of these big businesses? The unemployment rate is low precisely because Singapore is a business friendly environment; and they are a business friendly environment because the government makes access to the right personnel easy for businesses. if that changes… GOOD LUCK MY SINGAPORE FRIENDS! The world is a competitive place and you have just lost your edge.

  9. Cassandra Wong said

    I think the PAP by showing her face, is going to do more harm than good. Irksome woman. What Women’s Wing? Dun sia suay lah! The typical Singaporean women have so much to juggle. Please dun tell us what to do. They should go and have a dozen kids themselves, including the men! You think it’s so easy is it? Please show us some respect!

  10. PRC designed said

    In my opinion, senior Lee comment on declined birth rate is for justification to junior screwed up migrant policy. Indirectly telling the peoples that without defense, we had already being conqued. Migrant will eventually be part of the Gov’t to rule over us just like “Japenese Occupation ” time.

  11. Gustin Foo said

    I propose a solution: Married Singaporean males fathering 3 or more children get reservist exemption. Ta daa! Problem solved.

  12. ken said

    1)tell LKY that his daughter need to get married and have babies. set example leh……

    2) remove women charter….outdated….

    • mahbok tan THE SINKI said

      U spot on la bro….!!!

      Too clever oso hah susah lei….no body willing to buy…expensive ….. got diamond inside …so precious….!!!

      Why not let nature take its course …… he want to play GOD and give instruction here and there but he is NO god…..will go to his condo no6 in the very near future….and I am waiting for him to come out from it….!!!

    • zhang k said

      Hi Ken, I agree with both suggestions, but how to find a mate for the daughter and what is the latest medical break through in making babies? Having said, the emperor can always decree the next PM or current DPM must marry the daughter.

      3) law to approve 4 wives.

  13. Naivety said

    TPL should set an example herself by having a dozen kids first since her photo is symbolic of this initiative…what do you think?

  14. jt said

    “Meanwhile, there is nothing heard from the Workers Party on the issue whose MPs are nowhere to seen, heard or found of late.”
    As opposed to the other 80+ PAP MPs who are regularly questioning and debating policies?

  15. jacque lee said

    Change the law so that married men can have more than one wife, a few mistresses and girl friends. Also a State campaign to get women to accept husbands having more relationship for greater good of society. Women Charter is outdated and need to be abolished. All mens with means will be happy and you will see lot of pregnant private bankers.

    • Esther Lee said

      Firstly your suggestion is insensitive with regards to gender equality. Both men and women will have feelings of exclusivity towards their partner. If polygamy and multiple relationships outside the boundaries of marriage can be tolerated with respect to the man, would you then also suggest polyandry where a woman can have more than one husband/boyfriends and similarly campaign for both genders to accept that their partners will have more relationships for the sake of society? If you are male you would not be happy; similarly if you are female it would be intolerable.

      Secondly, even if both genders accept this statement and it becomes the way of life, the integrity of marriage (and by extension the family) is damaged. How can we then assert that this is a justified means to an ends, when familial relations are messed up as a result of having multiple partners in a bid to have more children? Will we then teach the next generation the right values?

      In addition, the Women’s Charter was formed on the basis of safeguarding the rights of the female gender within the home, and even if this system has been exploited by others, it is pointless if one throws out the entire box of apples just because of a few rotten apples. One has to also take into account the merits of the Women’s Charter.

      • jacque lee said

        I am not suggesting everybody adopt this life style. Only those who has ability can go ahead. Increasingly especially in the West people are having children without going through marriage – it is only a piece of paper. The new French president got 3 or 4 kids with his former partner Royal – he more than fulfill Singapore needs if he is a Singaporean. Love is very idealistic – almost all men unless he is a catholic priests will have a go if they can get away with it . This is is a fact – whether your father, brother, husband or son. Please remember they will only do it if they can get away with it. Sorry to disappoint you about men.

      • Julie Ong said

        Hello, Ms Esther Lee.

        Gee, I like your argument. As the saying goes: what is good for the gander is also good for the goose! Something like that. Besides, if you are in a multiple relationship it’s really susah (hard, difficult) or as the Hokien speaking citizens might say ‘tow tiah’ (headache). I know well from personal experience when I was multi-dating men. Nothing wrong though. I was always fully dressed! The issue even then is that you have an emotional or passion related problem, namely, which man would you pick? The men in question are gentlemen so how to choose? So, if you’re going into multiple and legalised relationships you’re going to head straight into troubles unlimited. That’s only my view though.

        Young men and women should mingle freely and be more sociable. It makes for a happier life and who knows love may just creep into it. The next stage is commitment. Never fear. It is not as restrictive as you might think it to be. Yes, there are limits but you’ll get used to it.

        This matter is really a personal one. My opinion is just that, my opinion.
        I believe that inspite of the pitfalls marriage or a committed relationship is the better way to go. And babies, Singapura bubs. Lion Cubs, why not??

      • Esther Lee said

        To Mr Jacque Lee (assuming you’re male):
        What you’ve suggested in your original comment was to legalize multiple relationships, specifically for males only. We’re not talking about the sexual urges of the male gender here or how many men out there will have a go at it if there are no consequences; what I’m trying to say here is that your proposed solution is not justifiable in that humans are using each other solely as a means to an ends (in this context, engaging in sexual relations to make babies).

        (By the way, some Catholic priests have been involved in sex scandals too.)

        Taking into consideration your second comment, what you’re saying here is besides the point: by legalizing something is to say that it is for everyone to do, which technically is setting the standard for society at large and encourage them to sow their wild oats. Hence you cannot say that this is solely a choice. Laws and policies made have their implications on the way society interprets them and takes action accordingly.

        If the law were to be changed to grant us this freedom, if I may coin that word, this freedom is meaningless as it would be morally abhorrent. In this sense, staying faithful is not just right because the law says so, but because it is a fundamental moral principle which cannot be justified by another principle other than itself. Granted that the consequences are not felt immediately, but gratification from these acts are only garnered in the short-term. Prominent figures like Tiger Woods and Jack Neo have had their reputations tarnished because they were unfaithful to their spouse. This is not because the law says so, but because the majority of us (including them) know that this is wrong, resulting in they expecting reactions such as outrage and shock at their act from the public at large.

        Even if the proof of marriage is only a piece of paper, this piece of paper recognizes and acknowledges more than just official recognition: it signifies the beginning of another family and gives both parties a sense of being rooted. This may sound idealistic, but this concept is still highly significant even today; it’s either felt by its presence in couples who are already married or considering marriage, or felt by its absence when families are regrettably broken.

        In addition, by saying that all men out there will have a go at it if they could, this is generalization. Even if it were true, it reflects badly of the male gender and all the more laws would be put in place to make sure women are protected from men and men from themselves. You might say that this is contradictory if one is looking towards gender equality as a goal, but this is only the consequence of a vicious cycle as a result of men’s physical urges as you postulated. Hence the following points that you have put forward do not follow.

        To Ms Julie Ong: Thank you!

      • Andrea Ng said

        Hi Esther Lee🙂 I totally agree with what you’re trying to put across and i believe it does make a lot of sense too. It definitely unnatural for a man to have more than one wife/girlfriend… And likewise, for a woman to have more than one husband/boyfriend. Trust that you’ve a stable relationship with your other half to make such a strong stand to how love naturally should be.

        When there’re true feelings for a special someone, men/women will not stray or have the urge/lust to look for more. This is what love is about right (correct me if im wrong, Jacque)?

      • Esther Lee said

        To Mr Jacque Lee (assuming you’re male):
        What you’ve suggested in your original comment was to legalize multiple relationships, specifically for males only. We’re not talking about the sexual urges of the male gender here or how many men out there will have a go at it if there are no consequences; what I’m trying to say here is that your proposed solution is not justifiable in that humans are using each other solely as a means to an ends (in this context, engaging in sexual relations to make babies).

        Taking into consideration your second comment, what you’re saying here is besides the point: by legalizing something is to say that it is for everyone to do, which technically is setting the standard for society at large and encourage them to sow their wild oats. Hence you cannot say that this is solely a choice. Laws and policies made have their implications on the way society interprets them and takes action accordingly.

        If the law were to be changed to grant us this freedom, if I may coin that word, this freedom is meaningless as it would be morally abhorrent. In this sense, staying faithful is not just right because the law says so, but because it is a fundamental moral principle which cannot be justified by another principle other than itself. Granted that the consequences are not felt immediately, but gratification from these acts are only garnered in the short-term. Prominent figures like Tiger Woods and Jack Neo have had their reputations tarnished because they were unfaithful to their spouse. This is not because the law says so, but because the majority of us (including them) know that this is wrong, resulting in they expecting reactions such as outrage and shock at their act from the public at large.

        Even if the proof of marriage is only a piece of paper, this piece of paper recognizes and acknowledges more than just official recognition: it signifies the beginning of another family and gives both parties a sense of being rooted. This may sound idealistic, but this concept is still highly significant even today; it’s either felt by its presence in couples who are already married or considering marriage, or felt by its absence when families are regrettably broken.

        In addition, by saying that all men out there will have a go at it if they could, this is generalization. Even if it were true, it reflects badly of the male gender and all the more laws would be put in place to make sure women are protected from men and men from themselves. You might say that this is contradictory if one is looking towards gender equality as a goal, but this is only the consequence of a vicious cycle as a result of men’s physical urges as you postulated. Hence the following points that you have put forward do not follow.

        To Ms Julie Ong and Ms Andrea Ng: Thank you!

      • Mr X said

        Thank you all for your thought provoking comments.

        Just my two-cents worth on the statement that all guys would want to have multiple wives if they can get away with it. As a male myself, I recognize the apparent appeal this statement has. However, can we really ever get away with it? This view makes out men to be mere creatures who would do anything for self-gratification. But the reality is that there are many men who love their wives. A man who truly loves his wife knows that by lusting after other women, he will cause her hurt. And in general, people who love others don’t want to hurt them.

        Even if a man’s sole aim is to seek self-gratification i.e. he treats his wives as mere sex objects (which is morally apprehensible), he will likely suffer in other ways e.g. having less peace in his family because of quarrels between his wives, or losing the respect of his children because he can’t give their mothers the love that they deserve.

        We may be able to avoid suffering the consequences of our actions for a while, but for better or worse, we cannot avoid them forever.

  16. i love my sg said

    I think she’s being paid too much(or maybe all our mp’s) that they don’t realise that money is actually the primary factor…

  17. sporeoboriginal said

    To the women in PAPs and all, being a “leader” u must lead by example. Try and have more babies yourselfs first and show the public its an easy feat. Dont give stupid excuses by the time saying u got lots of responsibilities and commitmnts. U think sporeans all shake leg izit? Most people work ard 12 hrs a day and take home 1/10 of your pay also have. Lead by example ok? Go read up more leadership books : )

    • seah said

      talking is easy,if i earn what those MP earn the more the merrier.what sporean want is the state to hold half responsibilities for the kid until they reach 21 years old,or else the govt should give a lump sum for the kid ,start with 10 thousand a years after all our country is so rich;shortage of money we should open more Casino ,or up the GST ERP or impose more Tax.another way is dont care ,open our door wider,after all we got the experience to do it,At the present stake those earning a few thousand who dare to bring up children,Children are very expensive to bring up.without a good education,they will suffer,Good education means MORE TUITION,means MONEYS.MONEYS .NO MONEYS NO TALK.WE sporean known what is bringing up children ,Let the foreigners do it,after all they keep praising the govt,and the country to the sky

  18. Simple: get all ladies to wear transparencies and lift the Women’s Charter…

  19. dave said

    I think its excellent move by the PAP women’s wing! They are contributing possible solutions of the pop problem. Its the same never-die spirit that is coming back. I applaud their effort!

  20. @ Dave abv: aiyoh, why the hooha when, simply put, if u want titillation to make babies, then by all means make the conditions sizzle for both men and women to interact. What better ways than transparencies and doing away with the Women’s Charter for unbridled procreation by one and all??

  21. Invictus said

    Do a poll and see how many married MPs have babies and how many have more than 2. If these people,the supposed leaders of Singapore, don’t support the national cause, it wil be hard to expect the rest of the population especially the less economically mobile to bear more kids in expensive Singapore.
    There is a saying – leadership by example.

    • mahbok tan THE SINKI said

      ” Time not enuf ” for the PAP MP’s to make babies….coz now every1 of them toooooo bzzzzz counting how much money in their bank acct. Oso ” Not Enuf to Share ” with more mouth to feed….!!!

      Later , community work some more , meet people session , meet latok Leeiao some more and more n more…so no time to make babies…..!!! But hor lower ranking staff got time to have oral…..here and there …. !!!??? Oso no babies….!!!!

  22. Invictus said

    Do a poll and see how many married MPs have babies and how many have more than 2. If these people,the supposed leaders of Singapore, don’t support the national cause, it wil be hard to expect the rest of the population especially the less economically mobile to bear more kids in expensive Singapore.
    There is a saying – leadership by example ! Are our leaders potraying the right examples ?

  23. NaBey said

    Hello Ms ting, my wife think that if she kiss me she will get pregnant! Until now we are still childless. I try to explain to her how to make baby but she don’t understand. So, I need ur help to demonstrate with me in front of her. OK?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: