JUNE 8 — At four in the morning — for 20 years — my grandfather would leave his flat on Chander Road in Little India and walk to the bus terminal on Mackenzie Road. There he would start his shift as a bus driver, conversing to commuters in a mix of Malay, English and sometimes if he happened upon a familiar face, in his mother-tongue of Bhojpuri.

This man, who had been born in a village in Uttar Pradesh, had travelled over-land to Burma, and in the manner people ebbed and flowed over borders he found his way to Singapore.

He went from the poverty of rural India to a modest, rented flat in this South-East Asian entrepôt and it became his home. It would be where his eldest son — my father — was born and where my father would thrive.

From cramped shared housing with extended family, my father propelled himself forward — starting as a deep sea diver off oil-rigs and eventually becoming a successful executive in a petrochemical MNC.  I often think of my father as the epitome of the Singaporean dream. And he is not alone — like the forebears of so many Singaporeans, he came from harsher circumstances but rose up on account of hard work and the opportunities provided by this city.

For the past 40 odd years, this has been the Singapore narrative.  But recently there’s been a sustained challenge to this narrative — from online forums to Facebook posts — more and more people are questioning whether Singapore really does provide hope and opportunities for those willing to work hard.

Chinese tourists pose for photos with the Marina Bay Sands casino and hotel in the central business district of Singapore May 26, 2014.. — Picture by Reuters

And these questions come, not just from migrant workers, recent immigrants and new citizens who still flock to Singapore in the thousands, Malaysians included, but from citizens with a multi-generational allegiance to this city.

In the midst of the recent Parliament session, People’s Action Party Member of Parliament Inderjit Singh asked in an incisive commentary posted online whether today’s youth can continue to see their future in Singapore. “The most important task ahead for the government and this parliament is to improve the lives of the average Singaporean and to show our young that this is their home where they will benefit most from the opportunities that arise and that this country is their best hope of finding a good life,” he said.

On one hand, it seems unpatriotic to reduce your allegiance to your country to a matter of pure economic opportunity or wealth accumulation. Singapore is not my city because it will make me rich, it is my city because it is my home.

However, the fact remains — Singapore is not an ordinary nation. It is in many ways a business, and a large part of its identity is based on its economic viability.

As it has no intrinsic resources, the principal source of this viability lies in its ability to attract and retain people on the basis of opportunities.  But clearly such a clinical, transactional, and meritocratic approach, has not been very successful of late, as there is disaffection on both sides of the divide: Singaporeans and the so-called “Others.”

This issue cuts to the heart of the dilemma facing Singapore today.

Should Singaporeans be seen as stakeholders with an automatic right to be the prime-beneficiaries of Singapore’s growth or should the country continue on the path of least economic resistance — offering opportunities to the foreign population that can most efficiently drive growth?

The answer, for most Singaporeans, seems clear: the country should look after its citizens — the people whose toil and commitment, from my grandfather and my father — has brought the nation to its current prosperity. 

But is it so simple? Privileging one group because they got there first and limiting the migration of potential future Singaporeans will, in the long term only reduce Singapore’s economic growth and its status as an entrepôt.

So, the question remains: where do we find the balance? How does the city-state continue to succeed on its own terms without alienating its people, and those who will come from other shores to contribute to its growth?

In this column, I will explore this Singapore dilemma looking at developments in the  city state as they arise and the effect on Singaporeans and their closest neighbours in the region.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.