Everyone must play a part to help the disadvantaged

Straits Times 

Published

Oct 22, 2018, 5:00 am SGT

Updated

Oct 22, 2018, 9:56 am

Many years ago, our neighbours discovered an elderly couple living in a ground floor flat in complete darkness, with only a piece of mouldy bread between them.

Their water and electricity supplies had been cut off.

This couple were reported to the relevant authorities. But instead of letting them starve before the system kicked in, neighbours rallied around them.

Some took to providing subsidised hawker food food. My father bought a hosepipe that allowed us to run water from our third-floor bathroom tap to this couple's unit.

We must be careful that discussions on subsidised hawker food do not descend into what is so prevalent these days: virtue-signalling.

Sure, we are concerned for the disadvantaged. When was the last time we, each of us, rich or poor, politician or commoner, did something practical for our neighbour or a stranger, to make his life more bearable?

If we are cooking a meal, does it take that much to cook a little bit more and take it to a neighbour who has nothing to eat?

If a community has identified vulnerable individuals needing proper nutrition regularly, would it not be possible to mobilise volunteers to cook on a rota basis?

I believe in small and minimal government that takes care only of life beyond the means of individuals, such as national defence.

But this is possible only when citizens are willing to do their bit.

==

EMBARRASSMENT! This was written in the context of the continuing discussion on hawker centres. But the words in red were inserted by a junior editor (?) into the fourth paragraph after I requested that they gave some context to the edited letter. Only after the print edition was out did I realise that they had made the mistake. Emailed immediately to request a change. This is the online version (minus the deleted words in red). The following is the original letter.

The Good Samaritan strikes again

Many years ago our neighbours discovered an elderly couple living in a ground floor flat with only a piece of mouldy bread between them, in complete darkness. Their water and electricity had been cut off. Apparently they were going to eat that bread and commit suicide.

This couple was reported to the relevant authorities. But instead of letting them starve before the system kicked in, neighbours rallied round.

Some took to providing food. My father bought a length of hosepipe that allowed us to run water from our third-floor bathroom tap to this couple. My job was to turn on and off the tap when I got the signal.

The Chinese have a saying when inviting someone home to eat on an impulse, “It’s just another pair of chopsticks.”

We must be careful that the discussion on NTUC/Foodfare does not descend into what is so prevalent these days: virtue-signalling.

Sure, we are concerned for the disadvantaged. When was the last time we, each of us, rich and poor, politician and commoner, did something practical for our neighbour, or a stranger, to make his/her life that much more bearable?

If we are cooking a meal, does it take that much to cook a little bit more and take it to a neighbour who has nothing to eat?

If a community has identified vulnerable individuals needing proper nutrition regularly, would it not be possible to mobilise volunteers to cook on a rota basis?

Perhaps money could be raised and disbursed to a few stay-at-home parents in the neighbourhood to buy fresh ingredients to cook for these people.

This way the stay-at-home parents get something for their input and the vulnerable gets their meals.

Perhaps there are already social enterprises in Singapore where the vulnerable/disadvantaged are themselves trained to cook for others.

I believe in small (minimal) government where the government only takes care of life beyond the means of individuals such as national defence. But this is possible only when citizens are willing to do their bit and not ‘tai-chi’ this to the ‘gahmen’ or someone else.