Liberalizing the Parliament Sector

It is my humble opinion that it is wrong to protect the jobs of MPs and Ministers and that like all other jobs in Singapore, these should also be open to our much valued Foreign Talent (FT). There are many reasons, some of which are listed below.

The Argument from Meritocracy Theory: Since Singapore has placed so much emphasis on meritocracy, in other words, letting the most able man do the job, why should we make the jobs of MPs and Ministers be different from jobs like engineers, consultants and IT analysts? Afterall, there are only about 3 million citizens in Singapore compared to the millions and millions of FT in the world. It takes no genius to figure out that choosing from a larger pool should ensure that we have better quality MPs and Ministers.

The Argument from Efficiency Theory: One reason why the government here thinks that it is a good idea to welcome FT is that it enables businesses to lower their manpower costs. Is not your Indian and PRC engineer much cheaper than your Singaporean engineer and not only that, they are willing to work twice as hard since they have no family here and they are unlikely to job hop as well. Oh, and not to forget, the male FT don't have to go for In-Camp-Training unlike the troublesome Singaporeans. The same must apply to Ministers and MPs. I am sure we can easily find some Indian or PRC professionals and government officials who are willing to do the jobs for much less than the millions we are paying the Ministers and MPs. We can therefore reduce our fiscal expenditure substantially.

The Argument from White is Good Theory: Singaporeans are well known for our great reverence for the white men. They are known by Singaporeans to be more generous, gracious, smarter, more eloquent, sexier and smell much better than the average Singaporean descended from rickshaw pullers, sepoys and fishermen. Since we worship the Americans and Brits so much, why not ask them to run our country instead? Though they might quote even higher pay than our Ministers but that's ok since they are supposedly smarter than Asians and therefore more efficient, thus satisfying the previous argument.

The Argument from Attracting FDI Theory: If one is to sum up the economic policy of Singapore in the last 40 years and probably for the next 20 years, it would be this sentence "Attract FDI at all costs". It is all about FDI. Never mind if the poor becomes poorer. Never mind if local companies are squeezed, never mind if even the white collars are increasingly finding it difficult to adapt and survive as well, so long we can attract all those MNCs we so rever to throw money here, everything else is secondary and the good would just follow. Since FDI is the most important thing to us, we should also see that allowing FT to become Ministers would only make Singapore a more attractive place for FDI! What better way to assure investors than to let them run the country!

The Argument from Cohesive and Inclusive Society Theory: The Ministers and MPs here have certainly made a lot of effort to be seen as one with the people, for example by doing their walk about, attending MPS, etc. What better way to show cohesiveness than to also open your jobs to competition from foreigners! Then the politicians here can once and for all silence all those critics that they don't understand what the people are going through and that their jobs are protected from competition unlike the man in the street.

I am sure there are more reasons for liberalizing the Parliament Sector just like there are so many reasons why we should welcome all FT regardless of reason, capability, background and attitude to milk as much money from Singapore as they could. I look forward to the day when my PM is an American, my Foreign Minister is an Indian national, my Finance Minister is a PRC national and all my women MP are Eastern Europeans.