Why a PAP MP couldn't fathom a Workers' Party statementThe Workers' Party of Singapore (WP) issued a press release on May Day 2008, signed off by organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong, calling for, in short, the interests of Singapore workers be paid attention to.The next day, People's Action Party (PAP) Member of Parliament for Yio Chu Kang SMC Seng Han Thong, who is also National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) assistant secretary-general, challenged the WP-managed Hougang Town Council (HGTC) not to hire foreigners.With due respect, the bigger challenge was to reckon how any statement could be misinterpreted to great lengths by a labour movement leader.Nothing in the statement suggested that the Singapore government should ban foreign workers or that WP did not welcome them.The WP, as far as I know, has never showed signs of xenophobia, Mr Seng.Given that the word "socialism" is enshrined in the WP's constitution, doesn't that make it a left-wing party rather than a right-wing one like Australia's One Nation Party?Since this is a challenge to stretch our imaginations, could I throw back a personal challenge to the PAP government and the NTUC to have employment only for foreigners and none for Singaporeans?Or perhaps, how about steering Singapore to become another Israel and subsequently demarcate Sentosa as the world's second Gaza Strip or West Bank?Indeed, the HGTC does not have foreign workers - but that is not the point.The point is, your foreign policy, PAP, your foreign policy.The WP is not the government and cannot administer the number of foreign workers entering the country.Everyone is aware that every country on this globe has non-citizens living in it, even closed-door ones like Cuba and North Korea.At the same time, governments implement certain criteria to limit these numbers.Singapore appears to have very lag hurdles and this is what I believe the WP is in object to.To put it in deeper perspective, even if the HGTC were to employ foreigners, it was the PAP government that let them into Singapore.Apparently, this was not understood the first time; hence the WP responded to Mr Seng with a second statement, again by Mr Yaw, reiterating its stand again.This was misunderstood once again and taken to be "a shift its position on the issue on foreigners" and the HGTC "should offer all of its work to Singaporeans and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners", according to the PAP MP.Ahem... weren't you the one who said that the HGTC should not hire foreigners and were shown it was the case, Mr Seng?Now, he extends his challenge to the contractors engaged by the HGTC.What about the idea of HGTC decreeing that Hougang constituents cannot hire foreign maids?Intriguing enough to score two misses but remarkable when the same repeated point is missed twice.Firstly, the HGTC management must be flattered to know that there are people who think they have superhuman abilities to control who their contractors can and should employ.Mr Seng did have a spot on - that foreigners are breaking the rice bowls of Singaporean workers.However, Singaporeans' rice bowls do not have to be protected by zero foreigners, Mr Seng.All that needs are lesser foreigners - and that is the point.Having 10% foreign workers and having 30% foreign workers are two different scenarios, Mr Seng.Hopefully, the WP does not need to issue a third statement.Otherwise, the continuation of rebuttals by the ruling PAP may sound more and more foreign to more and more Singaporeans.