Poverty in Britain

There is poverty and there is poverty.
 
A couple of days ago my husband told me about this new story:
 
Meet the unemployed mother-of-two who borrowed £1,700 from EIGHT payday loan companies to buy 'hundreds' of Christmas presents... and now she says she can't pay any of them back
 
Today a commentator made her point here:
 
PLATELL'S PEOPLE: A self-indulgent mother and the myth of 'starving' Britain

I used to get people like this at my surgeries. Because they do not work for wages, they spent time organizing, or thinking of organizing, parties for their children.

It was important for some mothers to ensure that their children have every material comfort they have. Never mind who ultimately pays for it.

They know that with young children they would be classed as 'vulnerable' which means that the council will not throw them out of their accommodation.

This is a downside to a comprehensive welfare state.

Straits Times edit: Marriage and manners

In view of the storm kicked up by a certain 'infidelity' website that wanted to set up in Singapore, I sent the following piece, exhorting the benefits of pre-marriage counselling (marriage preparation courses) to Straits Times which published a very watered-down version.

The original letter here, followed by the Straits Times version:

=========

Marriage and manners

I am excited to be home soon to attend my nephew’s wedding.

I gave him and his fiancée the same advice I had found useful: Too many couples spend more effort preparing for their wedding day, and not enough for a lifetime of marriage. So, spend more time working on their marriage rather than on their wedding.

Older Chinese women used to say, “If you marry a chicken, follow a chicken. If you marry a dog, follow a dog.” Today this can be seen as belittling the position of women.

But at the heart of this saying is the very important concept of commitment. Commitment (along with family honour) was important. Parents ensured that children married someone who was well-matched to give their marriage a fighting chance.

The fatalistic chicken-and-dog saying is equivalent to the Christian marriage (not just wedding) vow to “to have and to hold, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part”.

Keeping a relationship of whatever nature going is hard work. Marriage is hard work. There will be times when we feel that we are not ‘in love’ any more. That is when we have to make an even bigger effort to love.

Marriage preparation courses help us to anticipate and identify potential crisis points (illness, unemployment, money and children problems, temptation, etc). Fidelity comes from remembering that we have not married a ‘Mr/Miss Right’.

We are marrying a ‘Mr/Miss Left’: one who has left all others to stick with just one person. And this person – you and I – will never be perfect, never ‘always right’.

“Manners maketh man” sounds like an old English saying.

Yet good manners in word and deed (ie no physical or mental abuse) exhibited by husbands towards their wives (and vice-versa), and to their children and neighbours, will naturally become the behaviour that children will model when they step out of their family.

The Chinese call this jia jiao (family education), a derivative of the Confucian concept of li.

From this perspective, good manners is not merely about giving up one’s seat on public transport. It goes to the very heart of our relationship with our spouse, our children, the wider family, rippling out to the nameless thousands that we encounter in our lifetime.

=========

 

I thought, "Not bad, in under 400 words I was able to tackle a current issue 'marrying' my Christian understanding, the 'manners maketh man' adage which I had been contemplating, and good old Confucian ethics. So I was disappointed to read this version (reduced to 254 words) on Straits Times Online, leaving out the most crucial point about marriage preparation courses:

=========

Marriage is hard work, try good manners

MY NEPHEW is getting married soon and I gave him and his fiancee some advice that I had found useful.

Too many couples spend a lot of effort preparing for their wedding day and not enough for a lifetime of marriage. More time should be spent working on the marriage.

Older Chinese women used to say: "If you marry a chicken, follow a chicken. If you marry a dog, follow a dog."

At the heart of this saying is the very important concept of commitment.

Keeping a relationship of whatever nature going is hard work. Marriage is hard work. There will be times when we feel that we are not "in love" any more. That is when we have to make an even bigger effort to love.

Fidelity comes from remembering that we have not married a "Mr or Miss Right".

Instead, we are marrying a "Mr or Miss Left" - one who has left all others to stick with just one person, and this person will never be perfect.

An old adage states that "manners maketh man". Indeed, good manners in word and deed exhibited by spouses towards each other and to their children and neighbours will naturally become the behaviour that children will model after when they step out of their family.

From this perspective, good manners is not merely about giving up one's seat on public transport. It goes to the very heart of our relationship with our spouse, our children, the wider family and everyone we encounter in our lifetime.

===========

Moral of the story: Straits Times Forum letters are often so edited that it totally loses the objective of the letter writer. Reader, beware.

Inspiration for Servant Leaders

The notion of servant leadership is not new to Christians. Jesus came to serve and not to be served. So there he was, washing his disciples' feet.

While attending a very private ceremony, attended by a very small number of people, I was overwhelmed not only by the sense of history but also a deep sense of gratitude to God. I was possibly the oldest mother there.

Given that so few would have experienced this event I wrote 'Servant Leaders' to share with fellow Singaporeans. Straits Times Forum ran it as 'Respect those who serve us' (13th September 2013). It is unusual to have two words edited into five words.

As expected, the brickbats came from 'forummers' who imputed a less-than-honourable motive to my writing.

First of all, there is nothing wrong in being proud of one's offspring. I will not apologise for expressing my pride in his achievement.

To pretend that I was not proud of his achievement would be dishonesty and gross injustice to a young man who had worked very hard to overcome his physical, intellectual and emotional obstacles -- painstakingly, one by one -- over several years, and also the part played by his school teachers, special educational needs co-ordinator, music tutors, pastoral workers, etc. etc. who had implicit faith in him.

More importantly, if forummers cannot see what I am actually trying to say to, and about, the people that matter, then I am -- slowly but surely -- losing hope in the future of Singapore.
===
Respect those who serve us
ON SUNDAY, my husband and I were very proud parents as our only child was "admitted" to the roll of scholars at the oldest independent school in Britain.

What caught my eye was the place of the head porter in this ceremony - he led the party in and out of the venue.

During tea, I observed how polite the head boy and officers were to the catering staff.

These school leavers are likely to go on to become the movers and shakers of society, yet treated the servants with utmost respect.

What would the world be like if all leaders - political, commercial and intellectual - behaved in the same manner?

Contrast this to my frequent observations of how our domestic helpers are treated as "invisible" beings.

If we want the world to be a better place, then we must teach our children to respect those who serve us. If we need to bring in people to take up the jobs Singaporeans shun, is it because we have become too difficult to serve?

Respect, like charity, begins at home.
===

In anthropological literature we read of 'rituals of status reversal'. For example:

"Men use the authority vested in their office to misuse and abuse the incumbents of lower positions and confuse position with its incumbent. Rituals of status reversal ... are thought of as bringing social structure and communitas into right mutual relations once again." (Victor Turner 1969:178)

These rituals might involve leader-designates being humiliated by the people over whom they are about to rule, or when there has been dissension so that the 'unity that has been sundered by selfish strife and concealed ill-feeling is restored by those who are normally thought of as beneath the battle for jural and political status' (Turner, 1969:184).

Some might say that these are merely symbolic and only entrench hierarchy. Be that as it may, this does not detract from the fact that my husband and I were suitably impressed by the good manners displayed by senior staff and pupils towards those who are usually considered of lower social standing. Eat your heart out, Max Weber.

To be fair, the editor kindly sent me a draft of his edit. But I was away at conference and was not able to respond to him before it was published. The original letter, for what it's worth here:

Servant leaders
Last Sunday my husband and I were very proud parents as our only child, a special blessing considering our age at marriage, was ‘admitted’ to the roll of scholars at the oldest independent school in Britain. We were witnesses to a ceremony that has taken place for more than 600 years!

What caught my eye was not so much that the old school boy, a renowned banker, who laid hands on my son proclaimed words of authority in Latin, but the place of the Head Porter in this ceremony.

He led the party in and he led the party out.

During tea I also observed how polite the head boy and officers were to the catering staff.

I was hobnobbing with the elite of a very elitist school and leavers are likely to be the movers and shakers of society, and yet the lowest servants are treated with utter respect, and at times, ceremony. How marvellous is that?

What would our world be like if all leaders – political, commercial and intellectual – are all prepared to cross the road to help someone who had fallen into a muddy ditch? Metaphorically.

Contrast this to my frequent observations of the invisibility of some of our nameless home helpers.

If we want our world to be a better place, then we must teach our children to respect those who serve us. If we need to import people to run our services because Singaporeans are refusing to take on these jobs, is it because we as paying customers have become too difficult to serve?

Respect, like charity, begins at home.

'Central area weighting' for low-wage workers?

After an international anthropology conference I came home from Manchester in a train full of tourists who were taking home expensive Man Utd merchandise and found one of my letters has been published:

'Central area weighting' for low-wage workers? [not sure how long ST would keep this online]

After the last letter which I had complained sounded anaemic after editing, the editor had kindly (bless his heart, and many thanks if you are reading this) shown me an edit of the letter before it was published. I was even able to add in a further sentence towards the end.

The published version here (just in case ST takes down the original link above):
===
DURING my recent three-week visit to Singapore, I could not help but notice the many posters seeking staff at retail and food and beverage outlets.

A staff member told me it was almost impossible to hire anyone to work in the "central" area as job-seekers consider it too expensive to travel and eat there.

Employers do not like hiring students because they tend to quit soon after being trained, while older workers look down on the $5.50 an hour offered to them.

I pondered over whether it is possible to live in Singapore on a monthly wage of $1,500 for a year. After deducting the Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution, that would mean having a take-home pay of $1,200.

The cheapest room I could find for rent was one in Bukit Merah, going for $800 a month.

If I were to live on $1,500, would I be able to travel to the "central" area and eat with my remaining $400? Remember, there is often a "no cooking" rule when renting units.

I decided that on $1,500 a month, a worker could do two of these - rent, travel or eat - but not all three.

Then, there is the cost of leisure activities (for good mental health), clothes, toiletries, tax, training (for a better job) and putting aside something for a rainy day.

Of course, there are the periodic Workfare payouts for some. But what other help do workers get at the end of every month?

Are Singapore employers allowed to give workers a "central area weighting" or other kinds of subsidies not subject to tax or CPF deductions, just as some employees get a "London weighting" to ameliorate the costs of working in London? This should be restricted to low-wage earners so that the privilege is not abused.

More importantly, are consumers willing to pay more for their goods and services, so that workers can afford to work?
===

The original had a mention of 'minimum wage':

===
I am not a fan of the ‘minimum wage’ either. It is a heartless policy.

Oral history accounts tell of how employers took into account the personal circumstances of their trusted employees and often raised their wages when employees got married or had a new baby.

Minimum wage in the UK means employers think that meeting the legal requirement should be the full extent of their generosity. Taxpayers now make up the shortfall with ‘Working Tax Credit’ while employers (unfairly) keep all their profits.
 ===

My husband was furious when he read some of the online comments on the Forum page. (Let's just say we are very protective of each other.)

I cannot understand why every time I write something in the press in support of the downtrodden and disadvantaged in Singapore, I get slammed for being 'elitist' and told to 'go home'. So I am particularly grateful to those who write in support.

Clearly Singapore is my home -- I have a passport to prove this when I could have become British many years ago -- and I write and critique what goes on because I feel passionately about and for the people who call themselves 'Singaporeans'.

Incidentally I think working adults should be entitled to having their own rooms and not have to share. Particularly where people might work on shifts, for good mental and physical health, it is not ideal to share a room with someone who's not a spouse.

So, what have I done wrong this time to warrant such negative comments from some readers??

What's so 'maju' about this 'Majulah Singapura'?

Just back from three weeks in Singapore where Google refused to let me log in because I refused to give them my (brother's) mobile phone number.

Putting the new National Day song aside, I sent this to Straits Times, but they were not interested:

=======

Dear Editor

As soon as I heard the first words of ‘Majulah Singapura’ I instinctively stood to attention, as I was taught to do in school.

Funny, I thought, I missed hearing the distinctive drum roll and the fanfare introduction.

I had stumbled upon what appeared to be technical run-through of the NDP while on the roof of the Esplanade Theatres on the Bay.

Less than half-way through, I could take it no longer and started ranting at my companions.

I was appalled by this dirge-like rendition of ‘Majulah Singapura’ which was aspiring to be ‘God Save the Queen’.

Mr Zubir Said wrote a rousing national anthem that expresses vigour, vision and vitality.

 It admonishes singers and listeners to move forward, aspire, reach for new collective goals.

If the original ‘Majulah Singapura’ represents a purposeful march towards a prosperous future, the rendition I heard was a slow, aimless amble, much like the young Singaporeans around me who drag their feet as they propel their flip-flops forward*.

I thought lowering the key of the original composition to make the high note more reachable – thus showing a poverty of aspiration – was bad enough.

The plea from this proud Singaporean: Would the NDP organizers please, please revert to the original tempo?

National Day is the time to rally Singaporeans together. We need an anthem that helps drive a vision, not a folk tune to slow-dance to.

============

I wonder if the rendition I heard was merely an accident. Do you know of anyone who attended rehearsals and might be able to tell you about the slow-burn Majulah Singapura?

*Is it the heat or just a lack of general purpose? But we were struck by the way many people, particularly the younger ones, appear to amble about, oblivious to other pedestrians who need to be somewhere else fast.

Make your daughters read this (!)

I sent this to Straits Times knowing that they were unlikely to publish this. They have not. 

 

===============

Six inches behind time (the way students dress)

I chanced upon a link about the way female students at a local polytechnic dressed.

 

Only after I had cast my ‘anthropological gaze’ at it did I realize that the story was at least a year old.

 

I am more than six inches behind time.

 

Where are the mums and dads who are supposed to say “You’re not going out dressed like THAT!”?

 

Have they abdicated in unison?

 

From the photos it appears that while most young Singapore girls dress quite modestly where their tops are concerned, they seem intent on flaunting their legs and knees and thighs.

 

I would hazard a guess that these are all actually ‘good girls’. They are conscious of how breasts have been sexualized. So they cover up there.

 

But these are innocent girls. Naïve even, with no sexual experience, and therefore they do not – yet – understand the attraction that exposed thighs have on men.

 

Why is it not unusual for women in some tribal communities to walk around with their breasts exposed? Yet post-puberty women always have their pelvic region covered.

 

Breasts are for nurturing babies. There is no shame in letting them hang out.

 

Thighs, on the other hand, are something else.

 

In ironic contrast, breast-feeding in public is frowned upon in Singapore but young girls feel free to wear very short, very tight shorts, or belts masquerading as skirts.

 

I am not saying that young Singapore girls should only wear burka-like tents.

 

The favourite excuse is that the hot weather makes girls resort to shorts.

 

Take it from me, sister, that the coolest, most comfortable way to dress in this weather is a loose-fitting dress in old-fashioned (preferably organic) cotton, silk, linen or new-technology fabric that wicks sweat away.

 

Cinch the waist with a scarf or belt to smarten up.

 

Flip-flops say you are slip-shod. Ditch them.

 

Some people say that we should dress such that other people would respect us.

 

I say we should dress ALSO to show that we respect others.

 

If there is convention or a dress code stipulated, follow it. [see below]

 

Love your neighbour as yourself. So think: how much do I love myself?

 

===============

 

My son and I attended our first 'Black tie' event last week. It was his 'Leavers Dinner'. We had to go to a suit hire place to hire his 'dj' (dinner jacket, or tuxedo). (Until he stops growing there is no point in buying/making him his own dj.)

 

His dad was alright as he was used to such events and had a wide selection of cummerbunds, matching bow ties, etc to go with his 'Black tie'.

 

Hours before the event, son said, "A few boys in my class thought 'Black tie' meant wearing a black tie."

 

True enough, a couple of boys and dads came wearing a black tie (reserved for funerals, actually), and one dad came in denim jeans and waist-coat. Their sons were in Black tie, though.

 

Our young men looked terribly smart and us mums could only look at them with such pride.

 

In modern urban society the school has done well to organize a series of 'rites of passage' activities.

 

The boys had all been away for a week on an adventure trip: separation from normal society, the first time that many of these boys had been away from home for this length of time.

 

They experience all sorts of testing: transition, learning the skills for adult life, overcoming sense of trepidation -- will they succeed in rowing two days down a river. Much less painful than circumcision.

 

Black tie dinner: they are reincorporated into adult society, wearing adult clothes, practising adult etiquette. They could even choose 'red' or 'white' non-alcoholic drinks.

 

Goes back to one of my 'parenting slogans': time and place for everything. 

Wool over left-wing/right-wing

I disagreed with an 'Opinion Writer' about his definition of 'left-of-centre' in a recent piece. This letter was published in Straits Times online today:

ONE can hardly qualify Singapore in the 1960s to 1980s as "clearly left-of-centre" ("Are Singaporeans ideological prisoners?"; last Saturday).

In Britain, where I now live, being left-wing means expecting the government to do everything. Being right-wing means one is expected to look after oneself.

If Singapore had ever been left-of-centre, then my late father would not have had to borrow from loan sharks to buy textbooks and school uniforms for his children.

One notion of the left-wing/right-wing divide blurs into the socialist/capitalist dichotomy.

Yet, leaders of British trade unions who lead the socialist section draw obscene salaries, supported by the ordinary man in the street, who earns a pittance.

My preferred definition of the left-right divide in Britain today is based on risk.

Leftists take no risks. Many of them draw larger salaries than the prime minister.

No amount of right-wing ram-raiding could break through these cosy - some say "incestuous" - relationships within such close-knit, closed-shop citadels of left-wing power.

When local chains of high street shops failed, it was entrepreneurs who risked their own money to reopen shops and rehire staff.

Higher risks often lead to higher profits. Left-wingers neither like nor understand that.

When people take on low-paying jobs instead of relying on benefits, they are taking a gamble that their work ethic would rub off and make a difference to the lives of their children.

When my father borrowed from loan sharks, he was taking a risk to invest in his children.

When he went to the abattoir every morning, he had to decide: one pig or two, and which pig to pick/risk to ensure the highest return on his investment.

This was not left-of-centre behaviour.

It's an anaemic and soul-less version of the original below:

One could hardly qualify Singapore in the period 1960s-1980s as ‘clearly left-of-centre’.

Left-wing where I now live means ‘expecting the government to do everything’. Hole in the ground, leak in the roof, obesity in young people, generations of poverty, it’s all the government’s fault.

Right-wing equals an expectation to look after oneself. It also has the negative connotation of supporting the bankers, businesses that pay no tax, and overpaid politicians who make fraudulent expenses claims.

If Singapore had ever been left-of-centre, then my late father would not have had to borrow from loan sharks to buy textbooks and school uniforms for his children.

One notion of the left-wing/right-wing divide blurs into the socialist/capitalist dichotomy. Yet leaders of trade unions who lead the socialist section draw obscene salaries, supported by the ordinary wo/man-in-the-street who earns a pittance.

My preferred definition of the left-right divide in the UK today is based on risk. Leftists take no risks: trade union leaders, senior civil servants, CEOs of local councils and NHS hospitals, directors in the BBC.

Many of these people draw larger salaries than the Prime Minister. Imagine that happening in Singapore. It is not as if we have a choice of not paying our income tax, council tax or TV license.

Left-wing academics (and there are many) do not even have to risk their reputations. When an academic paper about my organization was published and I found it to be riddled with factual, methodological and logical discrepancies, they refused to publish my response.

No amount of right-wing ram-raiding could break through these cosy – some say ‘incestuous’ – relationships within such close-knit, closed-shop citadels of left-wing power.

When local chains of high street shops fail, it was entrepreneurs who risked their private money to re-open shops and re-hire staff.

Higher risks often lead to higher profits. Left-wingers neither like nor understand that.

When people take on low-paying jobs instead of relying on benefits they are risking a gamble that their work ethic would rub off and make a difference to the lives of their children and children’s children.

When my father borrowed from loan sharks, he was taking a risk to invest in his children.

When he went to the abattoir every morning he had to decide: one pig or two, and which pig to pick/risk to ensure the highest return on his investment.

This was not left-of-centre behaviour.

Why bother to insist that writers use under 400 words -- which I did -- and then reduce it to 300 words?