Singapore’s Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) is a policy that limits the number of households of each race in HDB blocks and neighborhoods. The policy’s goal is to promote social harmony and racial integration by preventing ethnic enclaves from forming.
Why it matters ?
Looking at Singapore’s past, ethnic segregation done by british colonisalist as a form of “divide and conquer” strategy.
Quoting from gov.sg
In 1989, then-Minister for National Development S. Dhanabalan highlighted the emergence of ethnic enclaves in HDB estates, as shown in this image that was published on The Straits Times on 7 January 1989, in a speech to community leaders.
As seen in the image, with a free market approach to housing, different racial groups even down to dialect groups preferred to cluster in certain estates around the island.
These clusters of different racial groups are dangerous to a small nation like Singapore, social mixing of different races is important and has been a priority for the SG government in terms of rhetoric and adverts seen throughout the years.
The Government on its website mentions the strategic importance talking of the benefits, even providing “EIP Affected” owners implemented measures to help those affected (Minorities)
The Housing & Development Board (HDB) and the Ministry of National Development (MND) have introduced EIP buyback assistance to help flat owners who face difficulties selling their flats.
The Government has also implemented measures to help EIP-affected flat sellers. For example, flat owners who have bought another HDB flat but are having difficulties in selling their existing one may be given more time to find a buyer by HDB, on a case-by-case basis.
Unintended Consequences
The Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) in Singapore can have consequences for both buyers and sellers of HDB flats. These consequences include:
- Disparity in supply and demand: The EIP can create a disparity in the supply and demand of flats in a particular area. This can lead to price fluctuations.
- Difficulty selling flats: EIP limits can make it difficult for minority homeowners to sell their flats. This is because they may only be able to sell to other minority households.
- Selling at a lower price: Minority homeowners may have to sell their flats at a lower price due to the smaller demand pool.
- Distorted market: The EIP can distort the market and have serious economic consequences.
- Inequity: The EIP can create inequity for some minority Singaporeans.
- Pressure on minority homeowners: The EIP can put pressure on minority homeowners to sell their flats.
- Pain for both majority and minority communities: The EIP can cause pain for both the majority Chinese community and minorities.
Government intervention with the policy of EIP results in disruption to the market prices of housing, creating a disparity between supply and demand of flats in certain areas.
EIP limits make it difficult more minority homeowners to sell their own flat. The restriction to sales results in inequality with Majority Chinese homeowners able to sell their own flat without much restriction.
HOWEVER, this does not mean that Chinese sellers are not affected. Like how an Indian seller can sell to another Indian homeowner visa vi insert other races. Chinese sellers are equally affected with them only buying and selling to their counterparts.
But this does not discount the fact that minorities have lesser options due to shear demographics.
During policy planning, the trade off for early PAP government was to ensure racial harmony, sale of housing and the EIP issues are an unintended consequence, social safety at the expense of some market free will.
How does it work?
Search Labs | AI Overview
The Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) in Singapore works by setting racial quotas on flat ownership within each HDB block and neighborhood, ensuring a balanced mix of ethnicities by limiting the percentage of flats that can be occupied by a specific ethnic group, preventing the formation of racial enclaves and promoting racial integration across residential areas; once a quota for a particular ethnicity is reached in a block or neighborhood, further sales to that ethnic group are restricted unless the buyer and seller belong to the same ethnicity.
Why its being brought up again ?
If you have seen countless media outlets, there has been another parliamentary spar between politicians once again. That being Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam slamming Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Leong Mun Wai for “racist” comments Leong had previously made in parliament.
The parliamentary arguement was regarding the CMIO policy and whether it had worked for Singapore. Now, I had to dig through countless articles and parliamentary transcripts to find out what LMW actually said, unfortunately i still can’t find out what he said.
But know this, this is a pattern of PAP politicians trying to “correct” the opposition in a debate. It’s a debate, ask question and one answers, discuss the factors and decide, it aint that deep.
There’s a strange editorial trend lately where debates between PAP politicians and opposition members are framed as the PAP “correcting” the opposition. Typically, conversations are presented in chronological order because it’s the most intuitive way to follow an argument.
So when an article flips this order—placing the PAP’s argument first—it feels like a deliberate editorial choice rather than neutral reporting. But this latest piece takes it a step further: not only does it start with the rebuttal, but it also fails to quote what Leong Mun Wai actually said to prompt Shanmugam’s response. How are readers supposed to fairly assess the debate when they’re only given half the exchange?
Reference
