Let us start from the root of the political matter that is currently facing our government: population shrink. The Prime Minister laments that there is a shortage of babies being born to replace the current population and our younger generations do not actively want children, or at most one per couple. He goes on to search for statistics from other ‘Confucian societies’ and then dish out solutions such as engaging the services of ‘mei po’ (matchmaker) and experiencing the ‘happiness of family life’. The next few days, the various ministries announce plans on the increase in child benefits and subsidiaries for childcare and IVF treatments. Also, a CNA article reports about a crane-operator’s increment in monthly earnings from $250 to $3000 over 30 years, whose three children are now working as a lawyer, a football coach and a teacher.

So, where do gay men and women figure in this childbearing frenzy, while heterosexual couples find themselves in their bedrooms fulfilling the Prime Minister’s crane call? There are two strands of thought that I have come up with: (1) the acceptance of gay people and child adoption for gay couples. (2) the technocratic transformation of society and a higher standard of living.

The first solution for population growth is to allow gay people to have or adopt children. It does not matter if gay people are attached or single because if a single person has the financial and emotional commitments, and if the government is already increasing the number of childcare centres, then a surrogate father or mother can reproduce the infant while the single father or mother can bring up the child. (Refer to the case of Ricky Martin [1], who has had twins using a surrogate womb.) Also, gay people are equally deserving of being parents via a donor sperm or egg or via adoption. If there is such a vast population in China (1.3 billion as stated by the Prime Minister), there must be children up for adoption in which gay couples can consider. In the same manner that the government is willing to convert Chinese athletics into Singaporeans, they should be willing to look into child adoption from China for gay men and women. All gay couples need to do really is to pass the Home Study Report. How straightforward.

So, it is a win-win situation, isn’t it? Gay people get accepted and the government gets a boost in population growth. That is if the rest of the population are willing to be educated about homosexuality and allow homosexuals and their children to do family activities like going to NTUC for grocery shopping or to Golden Village to watch the next instalment of Harry Potter movies. Then, the notion of family happiness will not just be within the family but within society at large because the level of diversity will increase and citizens will become more open-minded. Perhaps I am carving out a utopian state?

From a more realistic perspective, I shall investigate why the government wants a population growth at a time when the Prime Minister is well aware of the locals complaining about the presence of foreign workers (note: this is the renewed term for ‘foreign talents’) and increasing taxes and prices. If there remains constant inflation, which means that health and education expenses will increase with every additional child, then one possible solution should be to reduce population growth and increase the standard of living.

Primarily, it must be delineated that the government’s policy is deeply stemmed from late capitalism. If its population is its capital, then its aim is to increase its human profit; and what better way there is than to induce capital increase via biological reproduction. Remember, Singapore has been a knowledge-based economy (KBE) with a high investment in human capital. Therefore, if there is a lack in human supply, then profits in all other economic aspects of the GDP will decline and the government will not be pleased. Our Minister Mentor has already stated explicitly that it is ‘money politics’ that he is and has been focusing on. In short, no people, no money.

So, for gay people who have no chance of bearing children and contributing to Singapore’s shrinking population, why would the government consider our viewpoints at all within and without the parliament? We continue to be the pendulum on the desk in the prime minister’s office. Seriously, given the limited amount of usable living space, Singapore is already too crammed for any population growth even if the size of Singapore has increased after the acquisition of Pedra Branca. I think what the government needs to do is to look into transferring manual work into electronic procedures, which I suggest could include self-check-ins and outs at supermarkets, food courts and cinemas with our Ez-link cards. In other words, to live life as much like a cash-free and service-free society as it is possible. With technocracy, our standard of living will thereby increase without the hassle of changing nappies and sleepless nights.