Recently a friend’s application to have his Singapore PR renewed got rejected. His application was rejected on the grounds that as he has left the country to work in Malaysia, he would have failed the precondition for being a PR in the first place under the “Technical” Scheme (PTS), which require him to stay employed in Singapore or by a Singaporean entity.
Here’s a comprehensive page about what I’m talking about:
www.guidemesingapore.com/permanent-residence/singapore-pr-schemes.htm (I would venture to say that the rest of this website is really counting beans, but hey, that’s what most people do)
Maybe I’m just ignorant, but this is the first time I learn about the 4 “schemes” of being a SPR. To be a SPR, you have to either be “technical” (and employed), “smart” (and have a PhD), “entrepreneurial” (and invest money here), or “artistic” (and be recognized). Too bad for those who don’t fall in these categories… To be fair, the PTS scheme is fairly broad and covers most jobs, but it requires one to continue to stay employed here. This is, to me, a contradiction to the word “permanent” – what if the guy is just gone for a few years abroad?
There are lots of implications of having your PR taken away. You might have relied on your PR status to secure a HDB flat, get your children to school, keep money in banks here, etc. It’s a legal status that shouldn’t restrict your freedom. And just because you decided to take up a job in JB, or become less recognized in your artistic genius, or pulled out some of your investment in your firm such that the total drop to below $1 million, or suddenly you found out that your PhD is a fake, your other commitment in your life might be affected. Add to that the fact you’re only under 1 of the 4 schemes and probably can’t jump from one to another easily.
Maybe I’m thinking too far ahead here, I mean, I understand why policies are created in such chunky manner and administrated always on a case-by-case basis. But what I don’t understand is why a PR status should be taken away from you, unless you did something bad, you know, against the law and stuff. Yes, PR is an entitlement, but it is a requirement no less, even a source of embarrassment when it’s taken away. Why embarrass the very “foreign talent” that the country try so hard to bring in in the first place?
Anyway, so back to this friend, who although is not a Stanford PhD (as quoted in the article would land him with a Landed PR status), he’s a Stanford masters no less. Or look at this another way, take an arbitrary person X, who sort of meet all criteria, except he doesn’t meet any: (i) he worked in S’pore before, and intend to work here in the future, just that he took up a 2 year stint while the PR is due for renew; (ii) he actually runs a Singapore based company, small freelancer shop that requires little to no investment but a business that generates, say, $50,000 annually, and pay taxes for it; (iii) he might have, say, masters degrees or might have started his PhD program without completing it; (iv) he might actually be artistic, say a musician, playing semi-professionally with the pros in town, but not exactly famous for being one. Does reaching 1/4 of the goal for all 4 schemes qualify him for his PR renewal?
And to think that after hearing all those Singaporeans who’s looking at migrating to Australia, that Australia PR having a minimum residency is weird…Share
You Should Also Check Out This Post:
- Honeymoon Diaries #2 – New York City
- Honeymoon diaries #1 - Washington D.C.
- How to vote in GE2013
- Honeymoon - Preamble
- 6 things I learnt in the past 3 years
More Active Posts:
- The 12 Settings of GMail's Tea House Theme (25)
- Singapore MDA Rap Video (18)
- The Singapore PR Conundrum (18)
- Away from home for 10 Years (17)
- Wedding Dinner Emcee Script (Chinese Included) (13)
- Would you care to hire an Orchestra? (11)
- Which File Extension are You? (10)
- Fan Tai Sui 犯太岁 (10)
- Name the No-Name Condo: Kovan Symphony (10)
- Win Free Tickets to Singapore Compose Presentation Concert (9)