Howe Yoon Chong
Singapore
“Accidents, unfortunate as they are, can never be completely eliminated, but the accident rate will be kept to the minimum. INQUIRY INTO DEATH OF PTE V. RAJENDRAN 8. Mr J.B.”
“I am not as sanguine as my friend, the Member for Delta, who said that if you encourage them to do breakdancing, they will break their necks; so you will have no old people and there will be no old people problem. No.”
“That is the reason why there is a sense of immediacy when we suggested that it should be implemented with effect from the 1st of July, although we have not even set down the framework for the Coordinating Department. There is also the statement that it is a breach of faith to defer the CPF withdrawal age.”
“They cannot even help themselves! You may want to pray for him! Let me now come to the Member for Kebun Baru who has moved an amendment. He, I presume, wrote his speech even before he heard me speak.”
“The Member for Moulmein was most vehement when he said, "You talk so much of it. How is it that when civil servants retire (he was referring to teachers, I presume) only a few selected are allowed to be re-employed and even these few, though they have the same qualifications, are re-employed at different rates?" Do I repeat you right?”
“The problem that he does not understand is that while we give dignity to our citizens, he wants our citizens to be cringing and crawling, begging for State doles and stipends and for politicians to dish out various things so that they can go round and say, "i now dish you this. I now dish you that." We do not want that.”
The complete record
Every one of 141 lines we hold for Howe Yoon Chong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Accidents, unfortunate as they are, can never be completely eliminated, but the accident rate will be kept to the minimum. INQUIRY INTO DEATH OF PTE V. RAJENDRAN 8. Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister of Defence and Second Minister for Health if he will make public the report and findings of the Singapore Armed Forces Board of Inquiry into the death of Pte V. Rajendran of the Singapore Armed Forces on the 9th November 1983.”
“Jeyaretnam asked the Minister of Defence and Second Minister for Health (a) whether the inquiry into the loss of the BAC Strikemaster plane of the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) on the 8th of May 1984 has submitted a report on the loss and, if it has, will the Ministry of Defence make available to the House the report; (b) whether any investigation or inquiry has been made into the loss of the Hunter plane of the RSAF on the 17th of May 1984 and, if so, with what results; (c) how many planes belonging to the RSAF have been lost over the last ten years; and (d) whether he will make a statement about the loss of the two planes and whether the RSAF has taken any steps to guard against such losses in the future. Mr Goh Chok Tong: It is established parliamentary practice in the United Kingdom, on which ours is based, not to disclose information which jeopardises essential defence interests, including operational defence matters, Also following British practice, the Ministry of Defence does not publish Board of Inquiry reports. Doing so would raise security problems. These considerations apply with particular force to RSAF matters, since details of airforce operations are naturally not for public disclosure. Nevertheless, each time a major aircraft accident occurs, the Armed Forces Council convenes a Board of Inquiry to investigate the case thoroughly. No difficulties are glossed over, and any shortcomings uncovered are put right. This was the case with the Strikemaster and Hunter accidents, for which Boards of Inquiry were convened on 10th May, 1984 and 26th May, 1984 respectively. Everything practical which can be done to guard against aircraft losses is already being done.”
“The numbers of medical practitioners registered each year, from 1971 to date, under sections 9(l)(c) and 9(3) of the Medical Registration Act, are given in the Appendix below. Of the 131 medical practitioners registered under section 9(l)(c) of the Act, 69 are still working in Singapore. 49 are in Government hospitals, 17 in private practice, 2 in the Singapore Armed Forces, and 1 in the Singapore Family Planning and Population Board. A total of 374 medical practitioners were registered under section 9(3) of the Act since 1973. These were either medical experts who came to impart their skills to our doctors, or medical trainees or scientists who came for research or postgraduate study. At present, 21 are still in Singapore, and all of them are in the Government hospitals. Appendix DOCTORS REGISTERED UNDER SECTIONS 9(l)(C) AND 9(3) OF THE MEDICAL REGISTRATION ACT YEAR SECTION 9(1)(C) SECTION 9(3) ______________________________________________________________ 1971 1 ) ) Not ) Available 1972 3 ) 1973 13 8 1974 10 26 1975 9 24 1976 7 15 1977 13 57 1978 11 42 1979 11 28 1980 8 40 1981 12 41 1982 14 30 1983 11 41 1984 8 22 ______________________________________________________________ TOTAL 131 374 ______________________________________________________________ LOSS OF RSAF PLANES 7. Mr J.B.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am perfectly clear on the point that the Member for Moulmein is making. What I suggested to him was this. Look at it from a longer term point of view, and not keep on looking at it as if there is going to be, all the time, an annual increase in salary until you get to the retirement age when you are no longer worth your salary, in which case, you will be at the mercy of the employer. But if you had planned for the worker to be trained earlier, you could have shunted him to a second career, a third career or a fourth career. Besides, there is not the bald statement in the Report that all employees who are retired should be re-employed at lower pay. As I have said, it depends on the productivity and the merit of the person. If he is worth more, he should know himself that he will be worth more, he can get a better job, he can be paid more. There should be nothing to it. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to say that I have listened to Members, and I have taken down all the notes. The one hour that you give me does not permit me to answer every one of them. But all the points that have been made by the hon. Members of this House during the three days of debate have been taken down. I will probably have to got a team of people to study them very carefully to try and see what can be done after having taken into account the views that have been expressed in this House, before it is possible to prepare a proper White Paper that will set out Government policy and to submit that Paper to the Government for approval. [Applause]”
“Retired, joined the ranks of senior citizens. I am afraid that time does not permit me to go on answering and, therefore, I have to retire.”
“I am not as sanguine as my friend, the Member for Delta, who said that if you encourage them to do breakdancing, they will break their necks; so you will have no old people and there will be no old people problem. No. I do not think we can ever encourage that because if he falls and breaks his neck but does not die, you will have an invalid on your hands; which is much more costly. Never think of this kind of short-cut solutions. Now, I have to seek the indulgence of the Member for Whampoa. I cannot give him the analysis of figures that he sought just now because, as I said, this was done by the University dons, and maybe he can seek from his colleagues. I think the name was quoted. I do not know whether he is still with the University.”
“7 million CPF accounts and if a few of the contributors could not pay their PUB or Housing Board instalments or Housing Board rents, that is a very small figure. That is not true. His figures were quoted in the usual way, statistics to prove whatever he wants to prove. There may be 1.7 million CPF accounts. But of these CPF accounts, some of them are dormant, some of them are accounts of people who have left and hoping to come back; and some of them have not contributed for a number of years. So the actual number of active accounts is about 900,000. Therefore, the figure of 40,000 out of 900,000 is quite different from 40,000 out of 1.7 million. [Interruption] It comes to the same thing. Do you not think 40,000 of our citizens constitute a significant number of people we must look after? If you think that is true, then the others do not matter because you should be very grateful that you have all the others able to look after themselves. But we are the Government. We must look after these 40,000. That is our problem. All this time I have been trying to make out in the Report that we are not looking at the problems today because very fortunately for us, we, the elderly of this generation, the senior citizens of this generation, are a very small minority. We only constitute 4.7% of the population. We are, what you call, the fittest who managed to survive. A lot of our contemporaries have either died because of illness, disease, like malaria or other tropical diseases, or were taken away by the Japanese, or have migrated, or have repatriated to their countries of origin. What is left today in the form of senior citizens, 4.7%, will not constitute a problem at all.”
“I did not produce any baby, mind you! The problem here is two-fold. One is that we legislate that there is a responsibility on the part of children to look after their aged parents. That we know is probably draconian. If the son or the daughter does not want to look after the parent or love the parent, the most you can do is to fine him or her and make him or her pay a regular maintenance fee. But that is not important. The important thing is that if eventually there are homes for the aged sick and the children put their parents into these homes and the children do not pay, what can the homes do? Evict them? You cannot evict the aged sick. And if there is no law to say that the children are responsible, who is responsible? So there must be this law to say that we can catch hold of the children. In fact, we went even one step further. We say that if the home is run on a commercial basis and you want to claim back the sums owed to the home for the maintenance of the aged sick, the Government will pay first, and then the Government will take steps to get it back from their children who are responsible. If we do not have a law to say that the children are responsible for the maintenance of the elderly parents or sick parents, then you cannot even take action against them, as in Western societies which our friend, the Member for Anson, wants us to follow. You cannot get anything. He will look at you this way and say, "So what?" Let us look at this afternoon's various suggestions. The Member for Bukit Merah came out with various points saying that we have not done enough. I do not want to go through all that he has said. But I would like to pick up one or two of his points. He quoted some figures. He said that there were 1.”
“There is also no contract between parent and baby, and yet we require the parent to look after the baby. If you do not look after your baby, you will be charged in court. There is no contract. I do not know what he is arguing about.”
“The answer is based on the mortality rates that are now current. A male, irrespective of whether he is Chinese, Malay or Indian, at 55 years today has a 92% chance of living up to 60 and an 80% chance of living up to 65. So it is not as bad as he made it out to be because his figures frighten everybody. For a female today at 55 years of age, she has a 95% chance of living to 60 and an 88% chance of living to 65. So the vast majority will live to 65 to draw their CPF. You go out to the street and if a car runs over you, you die too! There were various questions as to what is the Ministry of Health doing about dove-tailing these various recommendations with the National Health Scheme and with the Medisave Scheme. If you look at the problem carefully, you will find that one fits into the other. So there is no problem except that we may have to expand the various community health services and assistance programmes that will be organized at the community level in order to provide them. Various Members have suggested that the proposals of the Committee to legislate for children to look after their parents were either good or not good. We have got two views. The Member for Kaki Bukit said that even if the father had not looked after the son, the son should have the forgiveness in him to look after the parent when old. I fully endorse that statement but I do not know whether the son will feel the same. We have to be fair. If he does not want to do it, we cannot charge him in court and punish him. But if he wants to do it, very good. This is not important. We are not legislating filial piety, even though the Member for Anson feels that it is unfair. Where in the case of marriage there is a marriage contract, in the case of father and son, there is no contract.”
“Your figures were pinched from some book. Right? For Chinese males, 86.8% will live up to 55 years. Indian males, 59.4% will live up to 65 years.”
“A male person, aged 40 years, would be expected to live 71.5 years although 40 years ago when he was born the life expectancy then was only 55 but because he managed to live through all the difficulties of the last 40 years, today he can expect to live even longer than the child who was born today.' That is how you calculate life expectancy. [Interruption]. If you can tell me your age, I will tell you how long you can expect to live. Between the ages of 65 and 69, if you are alive today, you can expect, on the average, to live another 12.3 years. I hope that satisfies the Member. Furthermore, the expectation of life at each age improves with time owing to improvements in the state of health of the population. Therefore, although the expectation of life of persons born in the 1940s was around 50 years of age, the expectation of life to these same persons who are now in their 40s will be around 72 years of age. So you improve as you get along. If you manage to survive, then your chances are better than even the ones who are born today. The Member for Thomson brought up a question. He said a Chinese at 55 today will not have more than 13% chance of living to 60. Is that correct? What is your statement?”
“" They should not hold on to the old idea that "once I get a job I am holding on to it, because the longer I stay the more pay I get, and I will not get out. I do not want to be trained." These are the problems that involve the attitude. I do not know whether you would be able to change it in 10, 15 or 20 years. This is not something that we can give you the answers overnight. In fact, for the whole problem of the aged, we cannot find the answers. We can only keep on trying to make adjustments to accommodate and to take care of the problems at the time that we meet them. In the meantime, hopefully, there will be more research done. There will be more studies done to find out how to solve these problems. Hopefully, as I said to the doctors, they may be able to find some cure for senile dementia. Then there is the problem of life expectancy. I note that two hon. Members raised this problem. One is the Member for Clementi and the other is the Member for Thomson. The Member for Clementi said it is wrong to assume that those in their 40s today have the same life expectancy as those at birth. It is clear that he did not understand what life expectancy is. Let me read the definition of life expectancy: The expectation of life at a specific age refers to the average number of years of life remaining to the survivors of that age. The index is computed by applying the age specific death rates prevailing at the year of computation. The expectation of life at any given age improves with increasing chronological age since persons reaching the older ages are those who have survived the mortality risks of the earlier ages that they have lived through. For example, based on the 1980 mortality rates, a male child at birth is expected to live 68.9 years.”
“So now, how do we get this attitude changed, that he should now be able to switch over to payment at a rate for the job, or payment for merit and productivity? You will find that you meet most of these problems in the less skilled manual work which requires dexterity, because after a certain age your dexterity declines. But in terms of other jobs, particularly the managerial, and the administrative and executive jobs, there is no problem in getting a job for a person who has had long years of experience. In fact, other employers are prepared to pay more for him. There is no such thing as legislating for extension of the retirement age, because some people may not want employment to be extended. They want to be free, to be on their own. That is one of the reasons why we say, "Let it be negotiated, but encourage employers to change the attitude towards people who have retired, who are 55." Actually 55 is not old. The chronological age should not be used as a determinant. It should be how the person is physically and mentally. How to provide for the retraining of older workers? We have suggested that EDB should be one of them using the Skills Development Fund. We have suggested that the Ministry of Labour, working with the other Government departments like VITB and others that train people, should work out schemes whereby people, even before they retire, should be told, "We have got schemes to retrain you in so many alternative skills. If you have got to a situation where you think that you have reached the limit of your capability, it is time for you to think in terms of a second career, a third career or even a fourth career.”
“I agree that the employer's attitude must also change. Most employers, when they look at the man who is 55 or 60 coming for a job, will say, "You have worked so long for that company. You are 55 years old. You are already retired. You are too old." There it goes, and the old man feels that he is hopeless, he is useless, and he is unwanted. So why try? There is also the attitude of the NTUC which we must try to correct. If a worker, after retirement, is prepared to apply for a job and the job offers him less than his last drawn salary it should not be looked upon as a lowering of his status or something that is infradig for him to accept. If you remember, over the years, your treatment of your members has been that the salary can only go up; it cannot go down, whatever the vicissitudes of the economy. At most it is stationary. It cannot go down. It can always go up and every year, irrespective of whether or not there has been an increase in skill, increase in productivity, increase in merit, the NWC award applies because you negotiate it for the whole company or for the whole industry. Employers are very calculating fellows. They know exactly what a worker is worth. If you say that the present agreement is retirement at 50, and he has got an employee who at 30 has already reached his peak but at 40 he is, what in the industry they call, a middle-aged misfit, blocking the way of the better and brighter young fellows, and not producing enough to justify his salary but nevertheless for the next 10 years has to be paid more and more with each passing year, the employer cannot wait fast enough to get the fellow off. You cannot get him to change his attitude to re-employ that fellow. He cannot do it.”
“Never mind. If the Government does not show the way, how can the private sector follow? I agree that the attitude of the Government must also change. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“The Member for Moulmein was most vehement when he said, "You talk so much of it. How is it that when civil servants retire (he was referring to teachers, I presume) only a few selected are allowed to be re-employed and even these few, though they have the same qualifications, are re-employed at different rates?" Do I repeat you right?”
“You have not been, is it not? You are not qualified to do so. The Member for Rochore also asked us, "Why does not the Government lay down the boundaries or the limits within which the CPF can be used for retirement", because we are now using it for too many things. As the Minister for Labour said, "We have on the one hand people saying that CPF is for old age, keep it for old age. On the other hand, we have got people saying that CPF is a good saving. Let us use it for this, that and the other - for education, for a lot more of other things." The Member for Telok Blangah said, "If you can use it for local travel, why can't you use it for overseas travel, to go to Mecca?" It is not true. You cannot use it for local travel. You can use it to buy SBS shares as an investment. If you sell that investment, you have got to give it back to the CPF. Your SBS share entities you to buy a season ticket, and you got to pay for that ticket. CPF money does not go to pay for the season ticket. So that is not true. Then comes the various proposals which Members were very generously dis- posed towards me. They said, "Well, in order not to make this fellow feel so uneasy, we allow him a compromise, ie a partial withdrawal at 55." The various alternatives have already been outlined by the Minister for Labour, and I do not want to belabour you and waste time on them. Employment - this is the important recommendation. How to assure older workers that those who wish to continue to work after 55 will be able to continue to work? There is, what I would call, a need to get over the attitudinal stumbling block. Clear the attitude first. At the moment, there are stumbling blocks on the part of the employer, on the part of the employee, on the part of the Government.”
“Please do so. I am in sympathy with my Muslim Members who said that it is difficult for the Muslims to do one of the five major important things in their life, ie to go to the Haj, and not having the money to do so they therefore look forward at age 55 or so to withdraw that money. But, as I say, this is a society where we cannot legislate only for ons type. Therefore, I am very much gratified that the Member for Kolam Ayer came out and said that there should be a special scheme whereby we can persuade the Muslim CPF contributor to contribute from a very young age, $20, $30, $40 or $50 each month, so that over a period of years of CPF collecting their money, earn interest, and eventually when he gets to 45 or 55 years he can go on his Haj. I fully support that idea and I hope the Minister for Labour will direct his CPF people to work that out for him. But it does not come into the old age problem. These are for the young people. The Member for Kampong Chai Chee claimed that when they are past 55 or 60 years they cannot go round Kaa'ba so many times. I do not know whether he is doing sacrilege to it. Maj Fong Sip Chee: I have not been to the Haj.”
“That is the reason why there is a sense of immediacy when we suggested that it should be implemented with effect from the 1st of July, although we have not even set down the framework for the Coordinating Department. There is also the statement that it is a breach of faith to defer the CPF withdrawal age. I think some later speakers say, "It is not a breach of faith. It is perfectly within the law to do so." If the Member for Anson thinks it is a breach of faith or a breach of the law, he will probably take us to court. There should be no problem with him. He is very fond of taking people to court.”
“So you add together, it is 3.1%. If you remember, in the earlier figures we gave you, and I think the Member for Whampoa highlighted it, there were 2% - 3% of people aged 65 and above who are what you would call "aged sick" and are now in old folks homes. The Member for Whampoa argued with me that the figure 3117 should read 3860, or something like that. This 3.1% is more than the 3,000-odd. 3% of 170,000 is about 5,000. Do you or do you not consider this number significant? I cannot give you the number of people who lost less than 100% of their money. As the Minister for Labour says, "Yes, if every one of our citizens can look after himself, we have no problems." But there will be a small proportion who will not be able either to husband their resources properly, manage their finances or invest their money properly. These are the people who, if we do not take care of them or prevent them from doing this, that or the other, are likely to land themselves in trouble and in need of help. And who are the people who help them? Those people who are able to take care of themselves. They are the other balance of the society, is it not? So do you want it, or do you not want it? This has nothing to do with fair play or trying to blame the majority for the sins of the minority. Nothing of that kind. We are going to face a problem. As people grow older, there will be more and more old people, and more and more of them will be in need of help. There will be less and less younger people. The dependency ratio is getting lower and lower. Who is to help the old? If we do not plan now, if we do not make the necessary provisions now, by the time we come to the year 2010 or 2020, it may be too late.”
“He thinks that the moment you put him into a Government-owned home, with Government paying for the old folks home, then the problem is solved. As the Member for Kampong Chai Chee says, "Amen". I am sorry I have to go rather piecemeal instead of answering every one of the Members because many of the things that were said were repeated two or three times, some contradictory. So I have got to look at it from the point of view of what I have collected over the last three days. One question that was raised was, what evidence have we got to show that many people have lost their savings through speculation or have squandered the money that they have withdrawn from the CPF? Many Members have asked that question: the Member for Thomson, the Member for Jalan Kayu, the Member for Bukit Ho Swee, the Member for Alexandra, and also the Member for Bukit Merah, and one or two others. We do not have any concrete evidence but there are two things I would put to them. They must have had people going to them and saying, "This has been done." Anybody who is a lawyer must have had to deal with cases of people who have lost all their money, or must have dealt with clients who said, "That fellow owes me money. He could have paid it because he withdrew his CPF but he squandered it." There was a survey done by a University group sometime in 1981. They took the number of people who withdrew their money at 55 over the period 1970-80, and they discovered that 2.1% lost their money in business. Of the age group 55 who withdrew their money, 2.1% lost their money totally. The survey only looked for the chaps who have totally lost their money. Those who lost 99% did not count. Those who totally lost their money 2.1%, and those who went and speculated and totally lost their money 1%.”
“The Member for Rochore also said that Government is requiring the employer to pay too much in terms of 25% CPF, 4% Skills Development Fund, 2% Payroll Tax, making 31% and that this money is being locked up and the Finance Ministry does not know what to do with it. And therefore the money is taken out of circulation. All these arguments are probably more appropriate in a discussion on the Budget rather than in a discussion on the Report on the Problems of the Aged. We know that he has got his pet ideas about what should be the way to solve the health problem, what should be the way to solve the welfare problem. He feels that most of these services should be paid out of the revenues of the State. Even if we have the revenues of the State to pay for the services for the aged, by the time we come to meet these problems, we have not got the necessary manpower. Neither have we got the kind of manpower to look after the old. A person who studies penology, that is, the science of putting people in jail for committing a crime, will tell you that the major deprivation of a person who has been convicted of a crime .is his freedom. Your puffing an old elderly sick person into a place where he has got no more freedom is a greater punishment than anything else that you can do to him. The State can only do that - build old folks homes or homes for the aged and put these people in, and then put in rules and regulations that they will have to follow. That is not the way you want to treat your parent! I hope the various quotations from the good book by the Member for Whampoa have struck fear into the head of the Member for Anson for ever daring to say such things. He claims he is a caring person, but he does not care what happens to the old fellow.”
“Many Members have accused me of having rose-tinted glasses, and I think the Member for Alexandra even said that I have telescopic lenses, but the lenses had dropped. It is not true. We are very much on the ground. Let me come to the Member for Rochore. His first attack was that this is a plan drawn up by civil servants who have no CPF to worry about because they are safeguarded and protected by their pensions, and therefore they could only suggest that you dip your fingers into the CPF kitty to solve your problems. We are not. We are not in any way saying that the CPF, ons out of 35 recommendations, is going to solve your problems. The other 34 must come in. The more important one is changing the attitude of the society which is one of the five elements that I have told the House - the society, the government, the community, the family and the elderly themselves. Their attitude towards old age and the process of growing old must now change. The Member for Whampoa says, "Why do you use 65? That is European." It is true. But we must always remember that our life expectancy is getting on to be equal to the Europeans. Thanks to our higher standard of living, better housing, better health and medical facilities, we are getting on very near to the Europeans. Our males today, at 1982 figures, are living to 69.8 years, and females 73 years, which is almost equal to the European, which is only 70 and 74 years. There is little or no difference at all. So if the retirement age of 55 was fixed at a time when the life expectancy was 50 or 55, surely it is legitimate and logical that we should now raise the retirement age and also raise the withdrawal age for CPF. But I am told by the Member for Ayer Rajah that logic is not necessarily right. I do not know what is right after this!”
“The employer will be in a better position to dictate if he is to decide the exact payment. If the employee is not careful, he can be done in. So our safeguard for the employee is that whatever the employer decides to pay him, all the various statutory rates and statutory payments into the CPF, Skills Development Fund and payroll tax must be borne by the employer, so that the employer would not diddle the employee. At that time the employee was not in a strong position as he was before to argue, because the union would have accepted that this person has retired. So we think that this will be an added protection for him. If you feel that the employee should have less in the form of a total package of CPF payments plus the take-home pay, then by all means you can always tell the employee, "Take a bit less", because in the existing law I am told that CPF balances can be withdrawn every year or every three years. So there is no problem about the money being held once you are past your retirement age. On the other hand, if you allow the employee to take on jobs without CPF, at the end of the year he may have nothing set aside for him. He might feel, "Why is it that other people work and have CPF balances and I do not have?" So after a lot of discussion, we overruled the objections of the employers and we put this down. Today I am totally surprised that an NTUC representative would argue word for word exactly what the employer wanted. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, in this House you have heard after three days of debate different views being given. It is very much like the case where two persons looked out through the window, one saw bars and the other one saw stars. So it depends on whether you have got a short sight or a far sight.”
“- everything with me except on two minor points. One is the CPF which has been very well debated. The other point is that he thinks the re-employment of elderly workers need not require the employers to pay full CPF contribution. This again has been picked up by various Members, as the debate went along. I think the Member for Moulmein went to great lengths. And when he spoke just now, he sounded exactly like the employer - that we have to argue at great length to convince the employer on our Committee. What he is doing is to try and do the elderly workers in of their CPF. Let me explain a little so that those of you who have raised this point will appreciate what discussions had gone on. Before I go on, the NTUC had a very steady representation on this Committee of mine. So we know what the NTUC thinking is. It is not that we did it without the NTUC's participation. We feel that the employer is always in a better position to set the payment for productivity and for merit than the employee. But we also feel that the employee will know what his or her worth is. A workman is worthy of his hire. So when the retirement age is up, it is natural for the employee to decide whether or not he wants to keep on working for the employer. And it is also natural for the employer to decide whether or not the retiring employee should be re-employed and at what terms. The assumption, as I suggested to the Member for Wham poa, is that for the next few years at least, we will have reasonably good chances of full employment. So this is for the next few years. I hope that during the next few years the Coordinating Department would have been formed and they will be monitoring what is going on. So this is for the interim.”
“They cannot even help themselves! You may want to pray for him! Let me now come to the Member for Kebun Baru who has moved an amendment. He, I presume, wrote his speech even before he heard me speak. And in issuing that statement, he covered three-quarters of the ground which I have covered in my statement, and he practically agreed on - An hon. Member: Everything!”
“And we make it clear that Government is neither the most effective nor even an efficient organization to do these kinds of services. The missionary, the religious, the voluntary and philanthropic societies can do very much better and probably at very much lower cost. That is the reason why we geared it towards supporting them. The Member for Anson read this Report of the Committee and, for reasons that are best known or unknown to anybody, he stopped shod at a certain page where he saw a Table with Type C. He then said, "What is the Government doing about it? Why doesn't the Government extend help?" Because if he turns to the next page, Sir, he will find that there is a lot of help being extended. Maybe his particular copy stops there and is as blank as his mind! He claims that Government has done nothing, that Government is going back on its word. Government is this, Government is that. And here is a Report that is all the time suggesting that this is a problem which neither the Government nor the individual can solve. It needs all five parties, the Government, the society, the community, the family and the elderly themselves. An hon. Member: What about the Workers' Party?”
“He has probably given me the most reassuring advice that I can get from a doctor, ie we must plan in terms of looking after the people. He has said that we have not done enough in terms of the Home Nursing Foundation. And I would like to take this opportunity to tell the House what proposals are being made for the Home Nursing Foundation. The Home Nursing Foundation is to be expanded to draw in volunteer social and health workers to provide a wide range of medical, health and rehabilitative and nursing services for people on a community basis. I hope that once the medical profession begins to pick this up, and we can get a few people who will act as catalysts, this scheme can go on and various health and welfare services that the elderly needs will be provided. I have tried to explain time and time again that helping the aged, providing care and support for the aged, for the elderly, who need this care and support, is not something that we can get by setting up a Government department, build an old age home and then put the people in and say, "Well, here you are. You work daily from this hour to that hour. This is your shift. That is your shift." And your old people will be well looked after. That is not so. Looking after the elderly, particularly the sick elderly, is a labour of love, of compassion, of charity. I do not think, whatever we may feel about our own people, that we can buy this by employing people on a regular salary basis. It has to be done, as I say, by people who have got the mission, nary zeal, who have got the compassion, who have got the charity or who are socially-minded social welfare voluntary workers. These are the people who can do the work best.”
“I would suggest to the Member for Anson that he should take our advice which has been the practical experience of 25 years. When we look at the Western society, we should look at it from the point of view of what they have done. We must gain from their negative lessons. That we want to learn. That means, learn from them what not to do, because they are in no position today to tell us that they are on the right track. We are in a position to tell them that our way is right. And the sooner the Member realizes that the better. We have dignity. We have been able to solve our unemployment problem. We do not have the kind of inflation that they have. We do not have more than 10% unemployment, and we have more than enough employment, so that we even import guest workers to help us. In spite of what the Member for Whampoa says, I am assuming in the Report that for the next few years at least we will have full employment. We do not in any way think that this broad canvas will allow us to find all the answers that Members want. Therefore, in the process we recommended that there should be a Coordinating Department that will have under its wing various Government entities and departments and statutory authorities, all of which have dealings with looking after the problems of the elderly, to come together. And from there they will do studies. We even went further to suggest that there should be more investigations and research into geriatrics and gerontology. There should be constant monitoring of all the developments that are going on so that at any ong time the policies of the Government on looking after the aged can be adjusted to suit the needs as things begin to change. I am particularly grateful to the Member for Ayer Rajah. He is a doctor.”
“The problem that he does not understand is that while we give dignity to our citizens, he wants our citizens to be cringing and crawling, begging for State doles and stipends and for politicians to dish out various things so that they can go round and say, "i now dish you this. I now dish you that." We do not want that.”
“In order to be able to have this national policy, the Committee recommends that every individual must start planning as early as possible for old age, paying particular attention to his health, his employ- ment and his financial independence. Persons aged 40 and above should begin to make adjustments now so that they will be ready for the problems that they will face as they grow older. The Committee identified the need for the society, the Government, the community, the family and the elderly themselves to do their individual parts or their respective parts. It is not an effort only of the Government, as the Member for Anson wants us all to believe when he purveys his beautiful idea of a caring society. "I care for you. The more you are becoming poor, the more I care for you, the more you vote for me!" So eventually, like Great Britain, the whole blooming nation is probably being cared for. Right? That is what he wants us to do. He says that is what is going on in Britain, so why do we not follow? "If the State cares for the people, the various charitable associations will not stop. They will also care. Everybody cares. So we want to produce a whole nation of people, all being cared for by the State." What is to remain if everybody has to be cared for by the State? If we have got 2.5 million people all cared for by the State, who cares for these 2.5 million people? The Member for Anson! No, our policy is different. We want to put backbones into every individual, every citizen, so that he cares for himself and cares for his family as well. That is the dignity and self-respect we want to build into our citizens, not to be suppliant, invertebrate and dependent, lying in bed. This is what the Member for Anson wants the citizens of Singapore to be. We do not want that.”
“We did not consult him. I am sorry. Let us come back to the Report. I must thank the House for being so generous with their time and effort in giving us a cross-section of what they think of the Report. And, as I said earlier, the major point was CPF. I am indeed grateful to the Minister for Labour for coming forward and doing valiant service to try and solve some of the problems that Members have raised. I am not in charge of the CPF, so I cannot direct what should be done. I am only the Chairman of this Committee and I made the recommendations in the form of a Blue Paper. It is open for discussion. I am indeed glad that Members have come forward with their views. We have got all their views in now and we probably have to consider every one of them. Let me reiterate again. What was the purpose of this set of recommendations? The Committee tried to do what was required of it within its terms of reference, and what it recommended was to set up a comprehensive national policy for the aged for the Government to consider. Briefly, this national policy aims at keeping every elderly person mentally active, physically fit and functionally independent for as long as possible. And further, to encourage him, from as young an age as possible, to save enough money to give him financial independence and security and to remain in the mainstream of society. That is the gist of the recommendations. CPF is only one of the 35 recommendations. I am, to a certain extent, very much gratified that out of the 35 recommendations, Members saw fit to run down only one of them, but in running that one down they have put enough venom into it to justify all the others that they did not run down.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have got a very unenviable job. What my Committee has painted is a very broad canvas showing you the whole problem, and we have suggested to you a very simple infrastructure that will tackle the problems of the aged. The Member for Bukit Merah says there are no problems: that we should be more positive. I do not think so because he is probably looking at the problem with tinted glasses. Even if everything goes well, as some of my doctor friends in this House will admit, once past 75 there will be problems whether you like it or not. These doctors at the moment cannot find you the answers. They can only prevent' you from dying, at very high costs. Do think about that! Ponder over that problem - at 75 and over, more and more people will be suffering from senile dementia, and there will be no cure. The doctors will not let you die; you will be alive, and it will cost you and your family plenty of money. We are today bringing up more and more people who will live longer and longer. Many more will live past their 75th year. Ponder over that. As I have said, we have painted a very broad canvas. But in the House, hon. Members have asked me to say, "Why don't you be like Van Eyck? Show me the eye of that soldier in the picture. Also show me the colour of his eye, and also what is reflected in his eye", as the Member for Whampoa wants me to do! For his enlightenment, it is very simple. Those Tables were drawn up by University dons who did the job for us. We are not the experts who drew up the Tables. We have to depend on consultants.”
“Tomorrow, 3rd July, 1984, Sir. Mr Speaker: So be it. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr Howe Yoon Chong]. Adjourned accordingly at Nineteen minutes past Six o'clock pm.”
“Members of this House added to those already expressed by various organizations and individuals ever since the Blue Paper was published in February-March 1984 will help the Government to decide on the national policy to be adopted for the elderly. Singaporeans must be prepared to face the wider issues now even though the problems may become acute in 20 to 30 years' time. They must anticipate these problems before it is too late. They will have to take decisions, some of which may be seemingly painful, to meet the difficulties ahead. Unless these difficult decisions are taken at this juncture, the Government and people of Singapore will have problems on their hands and the elderly, especially those less able to look after-themselves, may be in grave jeopardy. Already the overwhelming problems faced by countries with an ageing population are causing these countries grave concern and many of them are at a loss to find solutions. Singapore has in the past 25 years taken many unpleasant decisions that are necessary in order to deal with difficult situations. We have some time before the problems of an ageing population are upon us. We must anticipate these problems and take preventive measures, some of which may affect individual plans. Singapore's present prosperity has been built on a people prepared to take difficult decisions in the long-term interests of the society even when they require the acceptance of immediate sacrifices. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 5.05 pm”
“Every effort must be made through moral education and other means to enable this system to be maintained and strengthened. Through moral education, the inculcation of filial piety and the encouragement of general reverence for old age, Singapore may yet be able to counter the effects of westernization, urbanization, industrialization and other present day influences that will bring increasingly difficult problems to our ageing population. Legislation is recommended to be introduced to compel children to be responsible for the maintenance and care of their aged parents. Various tax concessions are also suggested to make life easier for the elder to keep on an active way of life. In drafting this Report, the Committee consulted and received valuable advice from members of the public, from representatives of employers' associations, trade unions, religious and charitable organizations, the Council of Social Services and various Government Ministries and Statutory Boards. Many of these representatives were invited to serve either as members or as advisors to the Committee. The press assisted by running articles highlighting the increasing problems of an ageing population. Public reactions to the Report have so far focused mainly, if not totally, on the recommendation concerning CPF withdrawal. Other recommendations that received attention include the raising of the retirement age, and to a lesser extent, legislation to require children to look after their parents. Mr Speaker, Sir, the House may wish to address itself to the whole range of specific recommendations of the Committee and to the wider issues of the difficult problems of a "greying population" that will confront us and our children. The views of the hon.”
“In the areas of maintaining good health and providing care and support for the elderly, the Committee made a series of recommendations. The need for health and medical care in old age can be reduced with proper physical and health education which can teach individuals from young to adopt good health habits and proper life-styles. Such health education can contribute towards the prevention of the major diseases and ailments and perhaps enable the elderly to delay or postpone the ageing process. Regular medical examinations can serve to detect diseases before they do untold damage or to reduce their severity. They help the elderly persons to monitor their own health closely and to reduce the need for care and suppon services in old age. Community groups and charitable and religious bodies should attract more volunt.eer welfare workers to provide a wide range of welfare, medical and social services to supplement family efforts, or to give such assistance as to make it possible for families to accommodate and care for their weaker and less ambulant elderly members in their own homes. Providing such services is a labour of love and will only have meaning and satisfaction to both giver and recipient when done with compassion, kindness and sensitivity. The well-being of an aged person can best be maintained by the love and care shown to him by his family. Paid workers seldom provide such services satisfactorily. The Committee believes that Government is not the most effective or even the efficient provider of care and suppon services for the elderly. Volunteer and charitable bodies can do a much better job and lower cost. The family system that held the Asian society together for so long is now subjected to strong and divisive Western influences.”
“The consequences would then be rapid deterioration of their physical and mental faculties with greater risks of infection, premature and rapid ageing and decline, plus diseases, complications and senile decay. These will add burdens to the family, the community, the Government and the society. The Committee's recommendations, in fact, involve every sector of our society and require each sector to play its respective part in helping the elderly. Each sector had been given different assignments. The two specific assignments given to the elderly themselves were: (a) that they should keep themselves independent, physically fit, and active so as to lead a normal and busy life for as long as possible, and (b) that they must have financial independence and security. Should the elderly be able to shoulder these functions satisfactorily without the need of CPF balances, then the problem does not arise. There will be many in our society who can do this and who are in this happy position. But if the CPF balances are the major, if not the only item of savings on which many must depend for their financial security in old age, then surely these CPF balances should be retained for as long as possible, rather than to be paid out at 55 to be spent quickly on luxuries, on travel or on some other form. of enjoyment. Improvements in medical science and in living standards in our society have made it possible for the average person at 55 or 60 to look forward to 15 or 20 more years of life. Their health might not have improved, even though there is no doubt that their expectancy of life has increased. The added need for medical treatment and hospitalization with advancing age is unavoidable.”
“For those who were 50 and above, their protests were understandable - they could already have made plans to utilize their CPF balances. Hence, the Report did suggest special arrangements for graduated withdrawals which were, however, not deemed satisfactory by those who were affected. But for those in their 40s, the protests were on the ground that they could make better use of their money than just leaving it with the CPF to earn interest. Sir, the Committee is realistic in accepting that in 20-30 years' time, the problems of the aged will have no simple or clear-cut solutions. It therefore directed its efforts to make it possible for the elderly to continue to live normal active lives, with dignity and self-respect for as long as possible. Whatever that can be done to help them in their effods to continue to be active, to have the opportunity to earn an income, or to give them support in case of need should be done. In the view of the Committee, all five sectors: (i) the society, (ii) the Government, (iii) the community, (iv) the family, relatives and friends, and (v) the elderly themselves, must play their part. The main thrust of the Committee's recommendations is directed at all these five sectors working jointly and in close cooperation and collaboration to make it possible for the elderly to live active normal lives for as long as possible. The cooperation and active participation of these parties must go together to assist and support the elderly who will constitute a much larger section of our population in 20-30 years' time. Should thd elderly not be able to surmount their problems and difficulties, they would lose confidence in themselves and become withdrawn and isolated.”
“The difficulty is that, in our type of political system, it is not easy for the Government to make the differentiation as between individuals and for the Committee to suggest different sets of recommendations to apply to different groups of people. The Committee's recommendations of necessity applied to the average citizen in general, with a bias for those less fortunate or less endowed who are required to struggle for a living and who can just maintain themselves over and above the normal problems and difficulties that daily confront them. The problems of the elderly, particularly those confronting our society 20-30 years from now, should be taken in their totality to appreciate the issues at stake, We should not focus special attention on a specific issue like the CPF balances, otherwise we may not see the wood for the trees. Opponents to the deferment of the age of withdrawal of CPF balances must first show that CPF members on retirement at 55 years have sufficient savings for them to take care of themselves for another 15 years or more, Even if this is so, the deferment of the CPF withdrawal age is not proposed merely to provide for sufficient savings in old age. One of the reasons why the Committee has recommended the deferment of the CPF withdrawal age is to encourage every able-bodied person to keep on working for as long as possible. This is to enable a person to increase his financial independence and, equally important, to keep him mentally active and physically fit. It is not meant solely to see a worker through the remaining years of his life. This issue also aroused much public indignation from those in their 40s and early 5Os.”
“It asked many questions before coming to this decision: (a) Whether the generation of people now in their 40s had adequate savings to see them through what must be difficult days when they get to their 60s in about 20 years' time. (b) Whether the CPF balances were, in fact, their only savings. (c) Whether they realized that by that time (20 years hence) moral values and social attitudes could have changed, and that they might not be able to rely on their children or relatives for support and care should they need them. (d) Whether they had any plans to safeguard their health and to maintain financial security for the remaining years of their life after 60. The problems and difficulties facing future generations of elderly people are complex and complicated. They would have been overwhelming, if not for the undaunted human spirit in many of us. The Committee early realized that the elderly as a group were not homogeneous. Each person is, in fact, an individual in his or her own right. There were, even on the Committee itself, two members who were well into their 70s who not only needed no assistance or support whatsoever but could take care of all their problems, including their health problems that came with age, and could continue to serve the community and to contribute invaluable services to society. They also looked as if they could go on indefinitely or at least well into their 80s. Hence, whatever recommendations the Committee made in its Report, they could not have referred to these two individuals and the many others in our society who are like them.”
“But since the problem of the ageing population would be threatening us in 20 to 30 years' time, perhaps by then such a measure would be more acceptable. Mr Speaker, Sir, I now come to the most controversial recommendation. The recommendation "that the age at which CPF contributors be allowed to withdraw their savings should be deferred first to 60 and later to 65" has sparked off widespread criticisms and protests against the Report. The public's reactions and sentiments against this proposal were vehement. There was a general outcry. With one voice and in many tongues they made themselves heard loud and clear that they were definitely against what they regarded as an attempt to deprive them of the right to get their hands on their own money. Everyone wanted to enjoy their life-time savings while they were still young enough to do so. Many feared that by the time they got to 60 or 65, they would be too old or too weak to spend their money. Another point was that by raising the withdrawal date without raising the retirement date, workers would during the period between their retirement and their receipt of CPF balances be left without any income to maintain themselves. Further, there was the ever-present risk of inflation and the decrease in the purchasing power of their money. Deferring CPF withdrawals would mean getting less value for their money and leaving a bigger estate for their children. All these protests and arguments have a kind of skewed logic in that they ignore totally the very purpose of the CPF, which they must all know is to provide for old age and not for enjoyment.' The Committee made their recommendations with the best of intentions, looking not so much at the present but rather 20-40 years from now.”
“We are all aware that many complications already exist with regard to the continued employment beyond agreed retirement age of workers who have been paid on the basis of their length of service rather than on increased effort and productivity. Our present system of remuneration entitles the worker to annually enhanced wages for no increase in effort or productivity. The suggestion is that both the employers and the workers will need to change their attitudes towards employment. For the worker, the acceptance of a new job or a different kind of work, even if it means less remuneration, must not be looked upon as down grading or lowering of status if he has already retired. For the employer, a worker who has retired from the job and is now over 50 or 55 years of age must not be looked upon as old, useless and unemployable. The important point here is that the elderly must be kept active and occupied, They need not remain in their old jobs or even work for their former employers but they must not be deprived of the opportunities to work. Facilities must be available for the counselling and retraining of older workers so that a worker can take on a new job that will enable him to be employed well into his sixties and beyond. Individuals must be encouraged from young to save for old age. Instead of withdrawing the CPF balances in a lump sum at 55, the Committee suggests that there should be an option for retired persons to participate in arrangements which, after settling all outstanding payments, would provide an annuity to ensure a steady income throughout life. The Committee had all along been informed, however, that such an option would not be popular at this stage of Singapore's development.”
“They should maintain contacts with friends and relatives and have hobbies and recreational pursuits or participate in religious, cultural and social activities of the community to avoid loneliness and isolation. For the elderly to have a sense of financial independence, they must continue to work not necessarily full-time or in the same job but to keep active and be occupied to have some source of income for as long as they are physically and mentally able to do so. Continued employment will not only enhance their financial position but help the elderly to remain physically and mentally fit much longer. The Committee also recommended that the retirement age be raised. But since this is a complicated matter with different implications in different employment situations, it suggested that the arrangements be worked out through negotiations between employers and employees with Government setting the pace. Older workers should also be provided with more employment options to suit their age and physical and economic conditions, for instance, in part-time work, in working at home or working on alternate days, and other arrangements, to encourage them to continue to contribute to the productive effort. Many may have lessened responsibilities and commitments and, for the sake of their physical health or to suit their own preferences, they may be willing to do a trade-off between less work and more leisure. These suggestions point to the need for efforts to be made to keep elderly people occupied and active for as long as possible. Whether the retirement age should be raised or should be changed is not the crucial problem.”
“It recommends therefore that admission to institutions should be confined only to aged persons who, for reasons of physical and mental infirmity, require the kind of constant care and attention that cannot be provided for at home. A better measure will be to encourage and assist aged persons to live with members of their family and to continue in employment and work for as long as possible. Should they be retired, they must have work to do that can keep them active and occupied and in close touch with friends and relatives and with members of their community. Instead of admitting the elderly to institutions in the misguided hope that the problem will end there, the Committee advocates that a national policy be adopted to encourage elderly individuals to be physically fit and mentally active to enable them to retain their normal living arrangements for as long as possible. Society has often classified the elderly with the sick and the disabled. This is a myth that should be discarded. The attitude of society towards old age and the attitude of the elderly themselves towards their own physical and health conditions and their capabilities to continue to contribute to society and to work, to keep active and occupied should be changed. It would be a tremendous waste of resources to isolate the elderly from the mainstream of society. The Committee is of the view that we must inculcate at the earliest age possible the need to plan for and maintain good health throughout life. People must also plan long before retirement to have adequate savings and assets that can enable them to have financial independence to continue leading an active normal life after retirement.”
“These demographic trends have far-reaching political, social and economic consequences. The problems of loneliness, isolation of the elderly, of high medical treatment and hospitalization costs to keep them physically fit to remain functionally independent will escalate. This can impose a tremendous strain on the resources of the country. And appropriate measures and policies must be designed now to cope with these problems. Singapore has not been faced with the problem of a "greying population" before. We should study the experience of other countries. The Committee noted that a number of western countries deal with the problem of their aged by confining them to institutions. This is a totally inadequate solution. Institutional care is unsatisfactory Homes for the Aged can be built but experience all over the world has shown that this is not the kind of place where the elderly should be kept. The general trend in even long established welfare states is to move away from Homes for the Aged and only permit homes for the aged sick who need constant care and professional attention which family members cannot provide. Most of these states accept that it is best to let the elderly remain in the familiar surroundings of their homes and to be cared for by their families with help and assistance from community health assistance programmes and voluntary welfare programmes where necessary. Singapore should learn from their experience. The Committee on the Problems of the Aged believes that confining an aged person to an institution should only be a last resort. It accepts that under certain circumstances, institutionalization cannot be dispensed with altogether.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the Motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The Motion reads as follows: That this House, having noted the Report of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged -- A Blue Paper by the Ministry of Health, February 1984, as contained in Paper Misc. 3 of 1984, approves the recommendations of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged. The ageing of the population is a matter of serious concern to everyone. It concerns not only the aged but also society as a whole. It is for this reason that the Prime Minister in June 1982 appointed a Committee on the Problems of the Aged to study the wider issues and problems to be faced by Singapore as a result of a "greying population" and to recommend ways and means to meet the problems foreseen. The magnitude of the problems to be faced by our children and our children's children can be best seen in population projections into the next fifty years. Please see page 10 of the Blue Paper. In 1980, the proportion of the very young (O to 14) and the elderly (65 and above) in our society accounted for 27% and 4.7% respectively of the total population. 68.2% of the total population were economically active, between the ages 15 and 64. If present demographic patterns continue in the next fifty years, the proportion of the very young (O to 14) is expected to decline to 20% in 2030, the economically active age group (15 to 64) to 61% and the proportion of elderly (65 and above) is expected to quadruple to 19%. Put another way, this means that while there were 15 working persons (15 to 64) to support one elderly person in 1980, the number of working persons to one elderly person will fall to only three in the year 2030.”
“Right, we will try and finish it. Sir, this is a difficult area in medicine where Government can never do enough. For one thing, chronic renal failure is a long-lasting ailment. Its treatment is expensive and possible cure depends only on the availability of donated kidneys. The Government can only do as much as within its resources, within the limits of its manpower and finance for those who are now suffering renal failure. The public, voluntary and community organizations and philanthropic foundations can play their part in facilitating kidney donations or in raising funds to defray the high cost of operating dialysis stations. What is more important is the influencing of public opinion to accept that kidney donation is the proper course to adopt and that kidney donation to save lives should not raise any qualms or objections from relatives of victims of accidents or cases of brain death.”
“One at the Singapore General Hospital with 10 stations which can handle 40 patients in two shifts. Another at Alexandra Hospital with 11 stations handling 44 patients in two shifts. And the new one at Tan Tock Seng Hospital with 10 stations started work in January this year with public donations. This unit handles 40 patients in two shifts. In addition, the National Kidney Foundation has a dialysis centre with 15 stations which can serve up to 60 patients. Patients who can afford can obtain kidney dialysis service at some private hospitals. Haemodialysis, however, is no substitute for kidney transplant to achieve a better prospect for cure. A successful kidney transplant will not only give renewed hope to the recipient but will also create, as the Member for Thomson has said, a vacancy for those waiting their turn for dialysis. The Government, together with the National Kidney Foundation, will continue to encourage kidney donations. Towards this end, the Ministry of Health last year formed and trained a group of kidney persuaders to obtain more kidney donations. As a result of this programme and the donation of 15 cadaveric kidneys from abroad, in 1983 we performed 25 kidney transplants. This is more than can be done in other years. We should, however, strive to do more. But this can only be possible with better public response to the appeal for kidney donations.”