A “chicken rice crisis” has sparked gastronomic panic for many Singaporeans this year. The de facto national dish of the city-state consists of poached, preferably fresh, chicken on a bed of rice. This has been scarce since Malaysia halted chicken exports in June. The ban is expected to lift later this month, according to Reuters, but a quick improvement to supply is unlikely.

Chicken is the most widely consumed meat in Singapore. The limited land area of the island means it imports nearly all its supplies, a third from its neighbour Malaysia. For decades, that proximity has meant that every month 3.6mn live chickens have crossed the border, albeit not voluntarily.

Malaysia is also one of the world’s largest consumers of chicken. It has been hit by a severe shortage resulting from world supply problems, rising input costs and clumsy state intervention in markets.

Hopes that chook consignments to Singapore will resume have bolstered shares of chicken suppliers. Lay Hong is up 15 per cent year to date, QL by 8 per cent and CCK Consolidated by 5 per cent.

Chicken prices are strictly controlled by the Malaysian government. That limits scope for poultry companies to profit from sharp spikes in demand. Meanwhile, feed prices have soared because of the Russia-Ukraine war. The Malaysian ringgit is at a five-year low. Input prices will continue to rise.

After domestic consumers have extracted their pound of poultry, Malaysia has a surplus of less than 10 per cent, about half of the historic levels. Food inflation hit over 6 per cent in June, the biggest increase in over a decade. That means the government may tighten price controls. Further export bans cannot be ruled out.

Longer term, Singapore should seek security of chicken rice supply via trading ties to other neighbours. Poultry is Thailand’s biggest food export. The amount rose a tenth last year to a record 4.6mn tonnes. Shares of local producers, including Thaifoods Group, are up a quarter in the past year.

Singapore’s cooks may just have to embrace chilled chickens in place of live or recently-deceased birds.

LGBT+ activists have dismissed Singapore’s decision to repeal a law banning sex between men as “window dressing” that fails to substantially soften the country’s restrictions on gay rights.

The Asian city-state said on Sunday that it would scrap the colonial-era law criminalising gay sex, but also announced plans to amend the constitution to “protect” the definition of marriage as a heterosexual union from legal challenge.

“This continues to entrench the discrimination against same-sex couples and LGBTQ individuals,” said Roy Ngerng, a Singaporean blogger and activist now based in Taiwan, who described the repeal as “window dressing”.

While many LGBT+ rights activists in Singapore cheered the move to scrap section 377A, effectively legalising homosexuality, the planned constitutional amendment underlined remaining hostile attitudes towards gay rights in the global finance hub.

The ruling People’s Action party maintains that Singapore is a conservative society and social benefits are heavily linked to marital status. Young people who want to apply for government subsidised housing, for instance, need to either be married or wait until they are 35 years old.

Jolovan Wham, a social worker and activist, said the plans put the LGBT+ community in a worse-off position. “This is one step forwards and two steps back. I am not sure what the repeal actually does,” he said. Authorities have said the law banning sex between men is not enforced.

“When you enshrine discrimination in the constitution the ramifications are pretty profound. You are saying it is OK to treat us as second-class citizens,” Wham said, adding it would make it difficult to mount legal challenges on issues such as housing, employment and adoption rights.

A statement by 22 groups including Pink Dot SG, Ready 4 Repeal and Sayoni said any constitutional amendment that signalled that LGBTQ+ people were unequal citizens would be “disappointing”.

“Such a decision will undermine the secular character of our constitution, codify further discrimination into supreme law, and tie the hands of future parliaments,” the groups said.

Experts said the government’s attempt to compromise was inevitable. “There is no way the government could have secured or have the buy-in of the population for the repeal without indicating there will be other amendments as well,” said Eugene Tan, an associate professor at Singapore Management University.

“The government is taking the view this is a matter that should be handled by a democratic political process — rather than the courts,” Tan said.

“I don’t think any side has got what they wanted. I think a lot of conservatives are deeply unhappy with the PM’s decision to repeal,” said lawyer Harpreet Singh Nehal, who was lead counsel for an unsuccessful constitutional challenge against section 377A in 2019.

Singapore’s hardening of its position on gay marriage comes as the city seeks to burnish its image as an open, friendly place to do business.

Directly after announcing the repeal of section 377A in a speech addressing the nation on Sunday, prime minister Lee Hsien Loong described the need to attract skilled foreign professionals.

The business community was silent on the repeal announcement. The American Chamber of Commerce in Singapore and the British Chambers of Commerce declined to comment.

Adrianna Tan, a Singaporean professional working for a digital services company in San Francisco, said there was a disconnect between the government’s stance on gay rights and its desire to attract talent.

“I am an educated and skilled Singaporean who tried for a long time to stay and left entirely because of sexuality,” she said.