Want to treat migrant workers more humanely? Support open immigration

There has been much discussion on the role of migrant workers in Singapore recently, after an outbreak of Covid-19 in workers’ dormitories.

Some public intellectuals and economists have reiterated their calls for the Government to reduce Singapore’s reliance on foreign workers.

Such a sentiment is aligned with a general pushback against open immigration worldwide, as citizens seek to protect their own jobs in this era of globalisation.

In Singapore, many have called out what they deem the inhumane treatment of foreign workers.

Many non-governmental organisations (NGOs), public figures and internet users have called for greater attention to be paid to their living and working conditions, and for the Government to better protect this vulnerable group.

These humanitarian sentiments should be welcome, but many of the same voices also desire for Singapore to rely less on foreign workers.

This is a contradiction.

It is illogical for one to call for foreign workers to be treated more humanely, but at the same time, urge greater government restrictions on their entry, be they through higher levies, stricter work-pass application guidelines or quotas — all of which will see their presence in Singapore dwindle.

This is because immigration restrictions are not beneficial to migrant workers, who typically seek job opportunities outside their countries for a better life. 

In fact, the leading immigration economist Michael Clemens has demonstrated how global gross domestic product — which measures economic output — would more than double only if individuals in poor countries were allowed to freely find work elsewhere. 

As The Economist newspaper said, if we wish “to make the world richer, let people move”.

Immigration freedom, more than free trade or foreign aid, is a powerful solution to Third World poverty, because it allows workers to take advantage of pro-growth policies and institutions absent in their home countries. 

Of course, sensible restrictions, such as on the grounds of security, are justified. 

Otherwise, NGOs, humanitarians and social activists should consistently recognise the merits of open immigration as part of their desire to see foreign workers being treated more humanely.

It is also mistaken to see foreign workers as a threat to domestic job security. Often, low-skilled migrant workers fill jobs that locals do not favour, such as those in construction.

This means that, as Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said, there is a limit to how much Singapore can reduce its reliance on foreign workers without causing undue disruption. 

Highly skilled immigrants, moreover, import capital, ideas and talent for our benefit. On this note, immigrants do not just “take away” jobs of local workers but are useful supplements to the workforce, a pattern that is borne out in many other countries.

The humane position to take on foreign workers is not to limit their numbers, but to allow them the opportunity to find work as they so choose.

ABOUT THE WRITER:

Bryan Cheang Yi Da is the founder of the Adam Smith Center, a pro-competition, non-profit organisation in Singapore. He is also a researcher in political economy and development. 

Have views on this issue or a news topic you care about? Send your letter to voices [at] mediacorp.com.sg with your full name, address and phone number.