Yawning Bread. 13 March 2008

Street work ain't for us


    

 

 

Those of us who conceive of Singapore as a neat, orderly place where people obey the rules may find these three pictures rather eye-opening, for all of the people shown here are breaking the law.


 

The young man in the first picture -- from his accent, he sounded Malaysian -- is hawking shirts. On the ground is a sheet over which he has piled his stock. The same sheet is used to bundle up the shirts should he need to move on, and I guess there would be days when he might need to be able to scurry away fast.

Hawking is not allowed in Singapore unless one has a licence. However, the government no longer issues them, so what he's doing can get him into trouble with the police. Where he comes from, this may be an everyday activity -- that's how people make a little money without overheads -- so he may well think, hey, why not in Singapore?

The second picture is even more interesting. Two guys from India or Bangladesh have set up a sewing machine at a street corner, providing an on-the-spot alteration service. Again, this is, strictly-speaking, against the law, but it clearly serves a social and economic purpose.


  

From the picture, it appears that their clients are fellow migrant workers, but I can imagine myself using their services too, as I have often bought trousers off the shelf only to wonder who is going to shorten them for me at a cost that isn't half the price of the trousers themselves.

In Thailand, departmental stores will re-hem the trousers you have bought for no extra charge. You wait 15 minutes and it is done. In Singapore, the departmental store will direct you to the tailoring counter which demands an extra $5 - $10 and say to you, "Come back in one week's time."

And we call Singapore a shopping paradise?

The third picture shows a mainland Chinese guy giving haircuts in the middle of a quiet road beside a construction site on a Sunday afternoon. Once again, you grasp immediately how useful that service is, but what he's doing is illegal too.

None of these scenes would be comment-worthy if they belonged to just about any other Asian country. Yet, they come across as interesting and unusual in the Singapore context. This speaks volumes about Singapore and Singaporeans, about our highly-regulated space and the rarity of us flouting the regulations as cavalierly as these migrants do.

 

Why is that so?

There are three possibilities I can think of. The first is that it is rare for Singaporeans to be so economically desperate that they have to resort to making a living on street corners or open fields. Our unemployment rate is 1.7% of the labour force [1] according to the Department of Statistics. It's a rate that would be enviable to most other countries; in fact, it's so low that one begins to wonder how true it is. This is especially as there are plenty of anecdotal reports of Singaporeans desperately trying to make ends meet. In 2006, for example, it was reported that about 10% of households had no income at all.

In other words, there must be desperate people in Singapore, but why is it that the ones we see on street corners are migrants? Why don't we see laid-off workers setting up a sewing business by the side of the road?

That brings me to two other possibilities -- that Singaporeans just have no entrepreneurial flair, and/or are too law-abiding.

Frankly, I don't think we're that law-abiding considering how often we see smokers puffing away at no-smoking areas, jay-walkers dashing across the road, and commuters eating and drinking on buses and trains. Singaporeans are quite capable of ignoring the rules.

That leaves me with the conclusion that there is indeed a difference between Singaporeans' lack of initiative and people from other poorer, messier countries. We've been acculturated to wait for instructions rather than think up something ourselves. How did that come about?

The next picture will give us a clue. It's the one picture on this page that wasn't taken in Singapore, being a scene I caught last year in Pattaya, Thailand. Someone took advantage of a vacant plot of land along the seaside resort's Beach Road and parked his converted Volkswagon van there.

He also set up tables, lights and a sound system.

Imagine you tried to do something similar in Singapore, do you think you'll have an easy time navigating all our rules?

Do you recall the time when a poor guy tried to sell breakfast and sandwiches out of a vehicle in a parking lot near Orchard Road? It took him months to persuade some government department to approve the idea, and when they did, they called an open tender -- in keeping with government procedure, you understand -- to award the licence. As it turned out, the poor chap lost out on the bidding. So the one who came up with the idea and spent months talking to the authorities in the end didn't get a chance to realise it.

Do you recall the troubles that Ducktours had when they began? Their plan involved vehicles that were half bus and half boat which could roll on roads and plough into the sea too, perfect for taking tourists on sightseeing tours with a bit of a thrill. The road transport authorities refused to approve such vehicles, saying they were boats. The Coast Guard refused to approve them too, saying they were roadsters, and for a long time, the project just couldn't get off the starting block. It took the Prime Minister's intervention to cut the Gordian Knot.

If you wanted to set up a Volkswagon bar, imagine what you'll have to go through. You can expect trouble from the Singapore transport authorities before they license your converted vehicle. You can expect to tear your hair out getting a liquor licence, since they have never issued one for a movable bar. It's just not provided for in the rulebook, they will tell you.

Then there will be a run-around getting electricity, and of course, someone else will catch you for putting tables and chairs on the sidewalk.

Living in Singapore, we hear from time to time about the troubles that people face whenever they wish to do something innovative. We learn from their example never to try anything new ourselves. If you are broke, perhaps it's easier to just queue up at your Member of Parliament's weekly clinic and ask him for a handout.

© Yawning Bread 


 

 

 

Vanishing statistics?

While writing this essay, I did a quick search of the Statistics Department site to see if that figure of 10% of household having no income has changed, but I discovered something really funny instead. A search with the key words "household income" doesn't return anything really useful, except some very old data from 1998 – 2003. In that period, the lowest quintile (i.e. lowest 20%) had an average monthly income of $281. [2]

All the other reports that I clicked on -- and I clicked on some 7 or 8 others --- provided only data pertaining to "Household income from work", i.e. data for those households that have at least one working person. The effect is that households without any working person have simply disappeared from the statistics, and if one is not careful, a cursory glance at the tables may lead one to think that every household in Singapore has some income.

 

Footnotes

  1. Data for Dec 2007, http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/latestdata.html#4 
    Return to where you left off

  2. Statistics Singapore Newsletter, Sept 2005, trends in Household Income and Expenditure, 1998- 2003. http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/papers/people/ssnsep05-pg1-7.pdf  
    Return to where you left off

Addenda

None