Vivian Balakrishnan
Singapore
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not issue advisories on wait times at overseas airports. Travellers may wish to monitor airline and airport websites, as well as news reports for real-time information on wait times and potential disruptions at specific airports.”
“When the conflict in the Middle East deteriorated and commercial flights were halted in March 2026, the Singapore Government mounted four repatriation flights from Muscat, Riyadh and Jeddah to bring stranded Singaporeans home.”
“The Government has stepped up public engagement to explain our foreign policy fundamentals and responses to key international developments to Singaporeans and to hear their views. We do this through dialogue sessions across segments of society, including students, youths, businesses and community leaders.”
“And the larger point during the Committee of Supply was that precisely, because the world is in such a difficult, prickly, volatile and dangerous state, actually, if we keep our wits about ourselves, we maintain unity and we continue to have this clear eye-realistic, but principled, approach, there are many opportunities for Singapore.”
“Well, in short, I completely agree with you. And that is why we have indeed been hosting these events and in your own capacity as a national athlete and also as an official now, you have seen how it works in practice.”
“Since 2022, about half of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) employees are women. The proportion of women in senior appointments has remained stable at about a quarter. We recognise that overseas postings are disruptive for officers with families, especially female officers who bear greater caregiving responsibilities.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,437 lines we hold for Vivian Balakrishnan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 38 of 49.
“One point of clarification. When will the benchmarking of social workers' salaries and VWOs with the medical social workers be implemented? Can I have a rough gauge?”
“When a child is dysfunctional, it is almost always, not just that child who is at risk, but there is another child, another sibling or family at risk. And this family would, in all likelihood, if they are in financial need, have approached the CDC or one of our grassroots organisations or even see us at the MPS. So the different pieces of the jigsaw are there in the sense that we all know different elements of this elephant. What we are trying to do now is to put these pieces together so that we achieve, what Dr Neo said, an integrated platform, information gets shared when we start thinking about solutions, we start thinking about the family, rather than just fixing an individual delinquent, a dropout or a drug addict, or fixing a financial problem on the part of the father or mother. I am putting all these knowing full well that there is a lot more work to be done. And that is why we form this Inter-Ministerial Committee because we realise that we need a common platform. In fact, this Committee will have to go on to engage the community organisations on the ground because, in the end, the hands and feet and the hearts and mind that will be brought to bear will be the people on the ground. They will not be policy makers or even MPs sitting in the Chamber, but they will be MPs on the ground at the meet-the-people sessions. So there is a lot of work to be done. Again, all I can do is to give her that assurance that we recognise, I agree with what she is saying, and we have to work on implementing it. Assoc. Prof. Kalyani K Mehta: Madam, I would heartily thank the Minister for his announcement of the establishment of the accreditation framework for social workers in mid-2008. This has been a long awaited change for the social work procession. Thank you.”
“I announced just now that we are going to amend the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA), basically to allow us to regulate and to get more involved in working with the VWOs running all juvenile homes, or all homes with children and young persons in order to improve standards, maintain quality assurance and to achieve better outcomes. Yes, we are working on this. This is work in progress. The role for the community in dysfunctional families is something which we all instinctively know is the right answer. But it is very easy to say, yes, it is very easy to describe it in this Chamber, but it is very difficult. The Inter-Ministerial Committee is still at work on this and we have no illusions that this is not something which Government can do alone. We need the voluntary welfare organisations. We need the grassroots. We need everyone who is engaged in the community to play a part. Dr Lily Neo has previously raised in her intervention earlier that we need an integrated system, and she is absolutely right. Because if we think what we have now, we have all the different pieces of the jigsaw there. Let me give Members an example. We have learning support programmes in schools for kids who may not be academically inclined. We know who are the kids who have dropped out or are at the verge of dropping out. We know who are the kids who have got disciplinary problems. That is one slice of it. On the other hand, from the Ministry of Home Affairs, we know who are the kids who have been caught shoplifting or the delinquents. By the time they end up in our Boys' Home and Girls' Home, they have actually crossed many rivers of crimes to have reached our shores. So the point is that MCYS also is involved.”
“I will double check the recidivism rate for her. Whatever it is, as far as I am concerned, it is too high. Yes, we are spending more money on security services, and I think this is money well worth investing in. Because, as I said earlier in my speech, we need to provide discipline and we need to provide security. Without that sense of discipline and security, rehabilitation will not work. So, yes, we are spending more money, and we will do so. Having said all that, I also want to caution us against over reacting in a knee-jerk fashion to this rate. Let me give the Member an example. The easiest way for my staff in the Boys' Home and Girls' Home to lower their rate is to be more picky as to who gets admitted to the Home. If we work with more hardcore and more challenging cases, which I believe we need to, it will also mean our recidivism rate may go up. I think there is a balance. I am not obsessively focused on just that rate, although I have said that the current rate, as far as I am concerned, is too high and I want it to come down. But I am not going to lower it simply by placing more barriers and saying, "Why not you go to Prison instead of the Boys' Home so that you don't affect my statistics?" I think she has raised a valid concern. It is a figure we should watch. I am giving her the commitment that we will continue to invest in whatever it takes to bring that rate down. And we need to do so because these are young boys and young girls. If we cannot get them back on the straight and narrow at this early age, they are condemned to a life of misery for themselves, their families and the community, and ultimately, it means a higher cost to us as a society. So we will work on this problem.”
“But, obviously, a foundation is not worth starting if you have only a million or even $5 million to put aside, because the administrative cost of running a foundation could make it not worthwhile. But NVPC's plan is that, by establishing a Community Foundation, by aggregating these million-dollar donations or $5 million donations, we can create an endowment pool with economies of scale and managed professionally. The money would be donated by you but you would still have a say in how the proceeds from that money are used for your favourite causes. In other words, it is a kind of a starter kit for foundations. We hope that once people get used to giving a million, $2 million, $5 million or $10 million, eventually, when they become fabulously wealthy, they will decide to start their own foundations. So this is a new idea which NVPC will be working on this year. If everything goes according to plan, we hope that they will be able to find significant donors who will build up a pool of $50 million and get that going. On the part of MCYS, we have committed to giving them the administrative support and the start-up cost in the first instance so that the people who are donating in the initial years will not feel that they are just paying for administrative cost. The money which they put aside would be used to earn interest, to generate dividends which can then be used for charities and causes of their choice. Sir, I think I have spoken for quite some time now. I was going to suggest that Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon carry on with the detailed queries. But perhaps you might want to take the break now.”
“So I believe that she would have both the professional expertise as well as the sensitivity to make sure that our codes of governance and the rules which they promote be sensible, practical and reasonable. So far, I think the work that they have done is excellent work, considering the pressures and the time limits within which they are operating. If we look in terms of what we are actually asking from the VWO sector, yes, we have got some things which are compulsory, we have many other things which are good to have which we are not insisting on, but we are asking for greater transparency. For instance, if you cannot comply with this best practice, tell us that you have not complied and why you cannot comply. Publish it on your website so that donors can read and make their own decisions as to whether or not you are worthy of support. Let me now turn to a new entity which the NVPC is thinking of starting. This is the Community Foundation. Members would be aware of reports that the number of millionaires in Singapore has increased, partly because of our own economic growth and partly also because globalisation has presented huge opportunities to people with talent and innovative ideas. Even as these emerging newly wealthy people come about, many Members have said that we want them to also contribute back to society. We have a few large family foundations. Members would know the Lee Foundation, Shaw Foundation, Tsao Foundation, Tan Chin Tuan Foundation and now, of course, more recently, the Khoo Foundation. But, unfortunately, we do not have as many foundations as we ought to have. So what we are hoping is that, as these newly wealthy people emerge, we would get them to start thinking about starting foundations.”
“Let me now turn to the management of charities which, again, unfortunately, is a hot issue. We seem to have a regular litany of problems in this area. My first suggestion to all of us would be not to over-react. Yes, there are problems, and, yes, problems will surface from time to time. But we should not jump to the conclusion, as someone has said, that everybody involved in the social service sector or in the boards is a criminal. That is not the case at all. The vast majority are good, well-meaning people. Nevertheless, we do need to have a system. My job in MCYS has been to make sure that, despite all the political pressure to have more checks and balances, more systems, we do not over-react and throttle the sector by over-regulation. What we have now is a Commissioner of Charities. And, as Ms Denise Phua has said, yes, he is heavily overworked, because there are so many charities. I agree with her that the Commissioner of Charities has to adopt a tiered approach and a priority, which means he cannot check every single one. But we can identify those which are bigger, those which are at higher risk if they fail, and we can have a tiered approach, ie, more intensive checks for those at higher risk, but less intensive for those not at such high risk. Secondly, we will, wherever possible, still promote self-regulation in the sector. That is why we have the Charity Council. Although it is appointed by MCYS, it is led by the people sector. Mrs Fang Ai-Lian is currently the Chairman of the Charity Council. I wanted her to lead because not only is she an accountant, but she also has real experience running and being in charge of voluntary welfare organisations and, in fact, being the Chair person of several organisations.”
“But to further address this pay issue, MCYS is now studying benchmarking the salaries of social workers in the VWOs against that of their contemporaries in the public service. In the case of social workers, an easy benchmark is: what is a social worker in a public hospital paid? We have those figures and we can use them as a benchmark. Making their pay competitive in a sense recognises their contributions but it is not a complete solution in itself. We also need to structure the job correctly, make sure their precious time is used most productively and to also make sure that there is a professional track. What does that mean? First, we need to increase the intake of training capacity for social workers in our institutes of higher learning. Then, we also need to make sure they have time to recharge. We have a sabbatical leave scheme so that they can take time out. MCYS will cover part of their time for them to recharge, upgrade professionally. Second, we also have the Professional and Leadership Development Scheme (PLDS) which will groom dynamic leaders to prepare them for leadership positions. In tandem with all these, we are also exploring the possibility of accrediting social workers with a view to eventually licensing them. This will be a big step, and it is not one which I want to make unilaterally. So we will have to discuss with the sector to see how best to bring this about. But it will, I believe, put the sector on a surer footing that this is a profession, there are proper entry criteria, proper training, proper standards, and not anybody can get in there and say, "I am a social worker" but who is actually untrained. It is almost like being a quack doctor. So we do not want to have that situation. But let us manage this transition carefully.”
“I know this sounds politically incorrect. But just think about this. Reflect on the relative roles of men and women and the attendant social problems that result from this. If we can get men to understand that we have to fulfil our responsibilities, the moment a woman has agreed to marry you and have your children, regardless of whether or not you fall in love with her, you have to support her and your children. And you do that first before you go and think about starting another family. That is the way it has been in traditional societies, even in societies with polygamy. But if we start fooling ourselves that simple monogamy will solve everything and what we see in effect is serial monogamy and irresponsible men, then we have not really improved as a society. So much for the politically-incorrect portions of my speech! Let me now move to social workers, because this is another area which many Members in this House have highlighted. Social workers are professionals and they deserve to be treated as such. Last year, MCYS revised the salary benchmarks for social work professionals, and we increased funding to the VWOs by some $11 million, ie, we increased the total funding to that sector to $80 million. And I said, when I announced that, that I would be watching to see how much of that money actually reaches the professionals, ie, both the social workers, the counsellors and the other professionals involved with this sector. We had a 2007 manpower survey conducted by NCSS which showed that 72% of VWOs have implemented or are implementing the salary revisions. I do not have the exact figures, so I do not know exactly how many dollars it has gone up by. But even the remaining VWOs have indicated that they had already adjusted salaries earlier.”
“Because what we really do not want is a situation in which a vulnerable woman or a widow desperately needs to find another man, offer fertility, produce more kids, and they are abandoned by that man and then she has got to go and look for a third or fourth man. Unfortunately, what I am describing is a reality amongst some families on the ground. So the key thing is to reassure women that they do not need to look for or be dependent on another man. I enjoyed the speech by Dr Ahmad Magad. It was a speech in Malay but I hope Members will all listen to the translation. He talked about the problem with multiple divorces, serial reconstituted families, and men unable to afford paying off the alimony in support of their first family going on to find another woman and setting up a second family, and ultimately shortchanging both families. At the risk of being politically incorrect, I will tell Members something I have always shared with my staff, that I suspect most social problems we have in the world today are because of irresponsible men, and the burden almost always falls on the poor women with the children. And we see that in our MPS. We see the woman desperate, the man has gone off having a good time or whatever else he is doing. I do not want to make this a sexist debate, but this is the reality which I see on the ground. Maybe the women MPs can take that cause up. I do not have any quick fix for this. For myself, even before we got married, every single cent I earned goes into a joint account in my wife's name. Every single dollar in my wallet comes about because she gives it to me. I cannot help wondering whether if women insisted that men handed over all their money first, whether it will result in fewer dysfunctional families. Just think about it.”
“But even as we devise this system to transmit information and establish the database, we also have to be mindful if issues like confidentiality and the right to privacy. So it is easy for me to describe it. I will tell you honestly, operationalising that will be difficult. But, nevertheless, we should have a system which identifies proactively children and families at risk. The second thing is, having identified families at risk, to take preventive measures. In the several programmes which we actually already have in place, for instance, the Healthy Start Programme which provides intensive case work centred on the child. Another example is the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme in which we provide up to $100,000 of grants and training support to a family if both parents are low income and really do not have good prospects in the short term to improving their economic status. So far, we have 1,300 families who have come on board and that means that the Government has committed more than $120 million to help these families. We are currently reviewing some of the criteria for eligibility for the scheme. I will tell you that we are not changing the Stop-at-Two policy for these families because we really do want them to focus limited resources on the two children. But one criterion which I am thinking of tweaking is that, for instance, if a person becomes divorced, to allow that woman, even though she is divorced, to carry on HOPE so long as she commits to keeping her family small, ie, not having more than two children. So even if she gets married, as long as she herself does not have more than two, we will continue to make sure at least all or some of the benefits of HOPE stay with her.”
“Families at risk of dysfunction include families where one or two parents are incarcerated, families where there is minor marriage before the age of 18, or, as some of you have also alluded to, serially reconstituted families, ie, you got children by his and hers and ours, and it becomes large and complex, and you will see problems on the ground. Many Members have asked what measures we are going to take. We have formed an Inter-Ministry Committee. Apart from me, Prof. Ho Peng Kee, Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, Mr Masagos, Dr Maliki as well as Mr Teo Ser Luck are in this Inter-Ministerial Committee which includes basically MOE, MCYS, MOH and MHA. There are three principles on which this Committee will do its work. First, there must be holistic support for the child. Second, we must not take away family and community ownership of the problem because we must not make these children of dysfunctional families wards of the state. They must remain members of families. And, third, as some Members have quite rightly said, "do not treat symptoms, identify the cause, and then deal with the root cause". So there will be a couple of things which we will do. First, better identification of families at risk, those who need help. And this means better coordination between the Ministries. I will give Members an example. If one child drops out of school, very often, there are other siblings who may also be at risk. There may be parents who are facing social problems, or financial problems, or absent parents. So we need to have a system in which what happens in MOE's sphere of influence, the message gets transmitted to MCYS, gets shared with MHA and sometimes with MOH, so that there is a coherent system that transmits information.”
“Partly also because the boys whom we are admitting into the Boys' Home now are a tougher sub-group who perhaps, in the past, may have been put in a more rigorous regime in Prison or otherwise. But be it as it may, we need to do more to make sure we bring this rate down. And I also agree with her that a key thing is to make sure discipline is enforced. Because in these homes, if you have no discipline, you cannot ensure security. If you cannot ensure security, boys will have to look for protection through the formation of gangs. So we must not allow that culture to take place. I will be very happy to bring Ms Lim for a guided tour or maybe she can become a volunteer in our Boys' Home and our Girls' Home, and we will take whatever ideas she has on board to solve this problem, because this is a problem worth solving. Another announcement which Members will see in there is that we have decided to accede to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, what it actually means is that now, especially with more of us marrying foreigners living overseas and sometimes, unfortunately, marriages break up and one parent or the other is tempted to kidnap a child from one jurisdiction into the other. By acceding to this international convention, we are trying to put the necessary safeguards so that children do not get kidnapped transterritorially, and that judgments awarded by a court with proper jurisdiction are enforced in other parts of the world as well. Let me move on to the third theme which is dysfunctional families which many Members have also referred to.”
“We have engaged in public consultation the last few months as to what amendments we need to make to provide better protection and make the entire scheme more relevant. Many of the ideas we have received relate to increasing the standards of care in our institutions. I will give Members an example. Currently, there are 24 homes where children, either they are orphans or for a variety of reasons their parents cannot look after them, are placed there for institutional care. Eleven of these 24 homes are gazetted homes and therefore directly regulated by my Ministry. Last year, we realised, especially because there was a problem in one of the ungazetted homes, that there were statutory limits to how far we could intervene in inspection, auditing and ensuring standards. So we have decided that we will license all homes for children and young people. So there will be a board of visitors; there will be minimum standards imposed; there will be checks and balances in place to make sure that no child abuse takes place and that optimal child developmental environment is present in these homes. I listened to Ms Sylvia Lim's query on the rate of recidivism in our Boys' Home and Girls' Home. And I will tell you I share her discomfort with the rate of recidivism. The figures which I have is that 31% of juvenile offenders reoffended within two years of their release from homes, that means, one-third. I was not happy with that figure, although my staff told me that actually this compares very well with the published rates overseas which range between 30%-40%. I said, never mind, even if we are not doing too badly with respect to overseas rates, we still need to bring our own rates down. Why have our rates gone up? Partly these changing social norms.”
“We have also had schemes like the Financial Assistance Scheme for Childcare and Kindergarten Financial Assistance Schemes (KiFAS) for low-income families which make it very, very affordable for low-income families to put their child in kindergarten or childcare centre. I can tell you honestly, especially for dysfunctional family, we can get a child in childcare centre for close to zero, so long as the mother is willing to go out to work. In addition to that, just now I mentioned the Baby Bonus, I also have got some further good news for that. From 1st August this year, we will have Baby Bonus account which will be able to pay higher interest rates. How did I achieve that? It is not my money. Basically, what we did was to use competition. We put up a tender to the banks and we said, "We have these accounts that need to be managed. Give us your best offer and, in particular, we are looking for higher yields and more convenience for parents." So from 1st August, two banks will be operating the CDA accounts. Parents will get a choice as to which bank and, with this competition, interest rates, terms and convenience will go up. More details will be released later on. We will also be working on Student Care Centres. We know that it is quite popular to have Student Care Centres within school itself because it is very convenient. The child does not have to take transport to another place. And we will have to work with MOE and the schools so that we can increase the number of such Student Care Centres within the school compound itself to make it more convenient. The second key theme in our new plans focus on the protection and rehabilitation of children and young persons. We are currently reviewing the Children and Young Persons Act.”
“And they will also have to be properly trained in the certificate or the relevant Diploma in Early Childhood Education. Of course, in the case of childcare centres, because it is not only teaching but child-minding facilities, we need some additional staff. So we will not place as onerous a condition on the academic qualification for those additional service staff who are not necessarily involved in teaching. But I give Members that assurance that we will raise standards. Prof. Kalyani's idea about making some indices publicly available so that parents can make informed choices, it is a good idea. I am not so sure whether we should publish every complaint that goes up because, sometimes, people have an agenda. But we have to find the way to make more information available so that parents can choose which is the most suitable centre for their child. So we will work on her idea. This then brings us to the final point in childcare centres. If you increase the number of childcare centres, if you increase the quality of teachers and you put all kinds of checks and balances in place, what about affordability? Members will know as well as I do that, ultimately, that means prices must go up. I would remind Members of this House, in case you have forgotten, that every child whose mother is working receives a subsidy of $150, if he or she attends a childcare centre. So we call that a universal subsidy. In addition, you will also remember that since 2001, we have introduced the Baby Bonus and especially the co-savings element in which Government matches what you put into that account, and that account can be used for attendance at kindergartens or childcare centres. So additional Government help has gone in there.”
“Those of you who use such centres will agree that closeness, accessibility, is an important factor because you can just walk, you do not need to take a bus or a train, bring and leave the child there and then go to work or do whatever other commitments you have to fulfil. We will work on increasing the number of childcare centres, especially in HDB estates and also near key transport nodes so that people can leave their children there before they go to work. But at this point, I must share with Members one implementation problem which I had on the ground. I want to build the childcare centre in the void deck within my area. I had a petition from the residents who said, "Yes, you can build a childcare centre, but not in my void deck." This has become a variant of the "not in my backyard" syndrome. I must appeal to all Singaporeans. As we say we want to be a gracious and a more child-friendly society, we must give space in our public areas for childcare centres. Do not always complain about congestion and noise. Of course, there will be some congestion and noise. Of course, we will ask the operators to control themselves and try to minimise the disamenities. But let us learn to be a little bit more tolerant, and to give and take. I also heard Prof. Kalyani when she said that quality is important. And the key thing about quality in childcare centres is, like everything else, like most things in life, the quality of the staff, specifically, the quality of the teachers. Yesterday, you heard MOE's announcement that we are going to raise the hurdle for teachers in kindergartens. MCYS decided that we should follow suit and the same criteria will apply for childcare teachers. So that means new entrants must have five 'O' levels, and a Pass in English.”
“And it is our duty to nurture them and educate them to the fullest potential. There is increasing scientific evidence that investing in early childhood development yields a great impact on the child's cognitive, emotional, physical and social development. And many Members have expressed concerns and, in fact, appealed for more investments in the early childhood development centres. I sympathise with all these appeals. So we have decided that we will enhance the supply, accessibility, quality and affordability of centre-based childcare facilities. This means infant care, childcare and student care facilities. As of January this year, we have some 740 childcare centres across the island, that means a total capacity of about 63,000 places. If all these places were occupied, it would mean that we have capacity for 30% of the cohort between the ages of 18 months to six years. But, currently, we have not reached full utilisation. So about 23% of each cohort attends institutional childcare. But this 23% represents an increase because in 2003, only 16% of children were going to childcare centres. So we have seen an increase of some 7% in the last five years alone. I anticipate that this demand will increase and therefore we are planning on having another 100 childcare centres over the next five years. And MCYS will facilitate the development and the roll-out of these additional 100 centres. 2.45 pm But having said that, it is not just a numbers game because people also want these childcare centres to be nearby. Today, 70% of childcare centres in the HDB estates are within 300 metres of their homes.”
“Of these 21 schools, six schools have now reached the status where technically they have to pay GST, because their parent organisation has now grown so big that their revenues exceed $1 million. We should congratulate Pathlight, run by Denise, for having grown so successfully that they have now graduated into the GST class. The other five schools are run by MINDS, which, as Members all know, is a very long-standing and large VWO that has been in this line for a very long time. Denise made the point that by imposing GST on these organisations, they, in turn, have to pass it on to their beneficiaries, and we are, in a sense, penalising them for success. I thought about what she said, and I think she has a point. I will therefore work with MOE – I have not decided exactly who is going to pay for it – to provide additional funding to those schools who now have to pay GST because their parent organisation has become so successful. So, you will not be paying more GST and you should not charge your beneficiaries more in the name of GST. I hope that satisfies her request. The other thing I want to update this House on the Mental Capacity Act. Remember, last year, I floated the idea. In fact, we put up a draft for public consultation. We have been very pleased with the feedback and suggestions that have come back. We are going to make some amendments to that draft and we should be ready to come to Parliament with the introduction of the Bill sometime in the second half of this year. So that is work in progress. Let me now ask Members to move on to the next handout, which is our key initiatives for 2008. Our first priority, the first theme throughout our plans, is to make Singapore a great place for children and families. Our children are our future.”
“What I will say, and the assurance I will give you, is that no child, no disabled child of any family, rich or poor, will have to pull out of the early intervention programme (EIPIC) because of a lack of funds. Yes, we will still do means-testing. Means-testing will be used to determine the level of subsidy which that child is entitled to. But over and above that, if you still need additional help, we will establish – when I say "we", in this case, NCSS and MCYS – another fund. We will put in $3.6 million into this fund and we will call it the Support Grant. And this fund will be used flexibly to enable children from borderline families, who have difficulty coping with the fees that they would have had to pay after means-testing. And we will then chip in and make sure they continue with their education. So, we will implement means-testing flexibly in this area. We have also extended the Foreign Domestic Worker levy concession to the disabled who require care-giving assistance. There were 853 applications last year and 99% were accepted. This meant that MOF has forgone revenue of $1 million per year. As this number grows, the amount of revenue forgone can only increase. In addition, my Ministry has also set aside half a million dollars over the next five years to fund the Caregiver Training Fund, and this has benefited 140 caregivers so far. Because clearly for people with disabilities, the caregivers may sometimes need additional skills and training. Ms Denise Phua also expressed concern about paying GST. For those Members who do not know, there are 21 schools for special education.”
“Let me move on now to people with disabilities. I was a bit upset when Ms Denise Phua said that people with disabilities have been forgotten in this Budget. I am sure she did not really mean it literally. So I asked my staff: what are we doing for people with disabilities? So they showed me this chart [indicating ] which I made sure they did to scale, meaning between the years 2002 and 2006, how much did we spend on the disability sector? They told me – $400 million. Then, I said, "Okay, from the years 2007 to 2011, how much are we intending to spend? How much have we committed to spend on the disability sector?" $900 million. We have not forgotten the people with disabilities. In fact, some others will say that maybe we are spending disproportionately or spending too much on one segment of people of the larger sub-set of people who need help in Singapore. But I do not want to engage in that debate and pit one group versus the other. But, nevertheless, look at it, it is $900 million. How are we spending the $900 million? Primarily in education. Why education? Because we want people with disability to fulfil their potential. We want people with disability to have a chance to make their own living if they can or, at least, to achieve a dignified living, and we want them to gain access to larger society – mainstream society – and to be integrated, and the key to that, I am sure we will agree, is education. So, a big chunk of it on education. Ms Denise Phua also said that she appealed for more flexible implementation of means-testing. Those of you would remember that we introduced means-testing for early education for disabled children about two years ago. It is still being implemented.”
“When their parents fall sick, they have to pay for those bills, whereas a person on public assistance does not have to pay any bills. So that allows me, really with a very clear conscience, to say that there is no reason for anybody in Singapore, if you are truly destitute, if you have no family support, to say that you must go hungry, or that you have no roof over your head, or that you will suffer. Yes, I know there will be cases, you can point out to me from time to time, but those cases are the exception to the norm. And you must point out those cases to me so that I can make sure help goes to them. But the key message is: nobody goes hungry, nobody should go hungry. Our social safety net is robust and multi-layered but, more importantly, is sustainable for the long term. I lived and worked in London for two years – home of the great, from cradle to grave, welfare state. I looked at their housing, I looked at their healthcare, I looked at the lives and the hopes of people on welfare down there. They are not better off; in fact, they are worse off than our people. So, please, while you criticise and whilst you ask for more, put a sense of perspective of where we come from and how we compare to any other country. And I will still say to you, in terms of housing, in terms of healthcare, in terms of educational prospects, in terms of social mobility – this is still the best place in the world. If you are going to be poor, or may be disadvantaged, you have a chance and you can succeed. The story that I told you about my family is not unique – all of you, all Singaporeans will have their own stories – which proves the fact that there is social mobility and there is hope. But do not destroy the foundation upon which we achieved our success.”
“But the truth is they actually received more than what you have asked for. But, if you add up the other two columns, the variable subsidies given by Government and the other subsidies given by community organisations, the number goes up several-fold. Just think about healthcare, for instance. We had a long debate the day before about healthcare. The PA recipients are the only people in Singapore, with a totally blank cheque, as far as healthcare is concerned. For all of Mdm Halimah's pleas, even NTUC cannot secure that for the workers of Singapore; but for the PA recipients, it is totally free. Those of us who work in public hospitals, and I have run SGH, would know if it is a PA recipient, no need to worry, the doctors can do anything they like, and Government foots the bill. So I hope this will show you that the question is not lack of money. Let me move on the next slide, which will show you the amount that a family on public assistance will get. The cash allowance – the first column – for a family (two adults, two children) is $1,020. You look at the right-hand side, all the Budget giveaways. You will see that, in effect, this year, a family on public assistance receives in excess of $1,200, cash and rebates. Then, you include healthcare; more importantly, you include education, and again all the other variable components that community support gives, you get a considerable sum of money. Now, I am not here to make a case that we are treating people on public assistance very generously. But I would ask you this – one of our favourite questions we ask: how much do you give your parents every month? Some of you may be generous, but there are many other people, whether or not they are wealthy, who will give their parents less.”
“Look at the second column which lists the Government subsidies for housing, medical care, rebates for utilities and service and conservancy charges. And, also, later on, I will describe the educational subsidies. Obviously, these subsidies, not everyone gets all of them. It depends on their needs. But these subsidies are considerable. 2.30 pm Then, now, we move across to the third column. I have labelled it "Many Helping Hands" – community expression of support, in a very real way. You look at that column, – the first item there [indicating] that says average hong baos ($27). First, I was very suspicious, and I asked: "Are you very sure, exactly this amount?" And they said, yes, we know of at least three organisations in Singapore that make it a practice to give every PA recipient $100 a year. So that is $300; $300 divided by 12, you end up at least $25. This is just from three organisations. You include all the other organisations out there, you will know this adds up. And then look at the fourth column. I just totalled it up. I asked my staff, just calculate in cash and rebate terms, what has the Government given away this year to PA recipients who you know will generally be old and, obviously, by definition, low income. Because of the way our Budget giveaways are structured, you know it goes disproportionately to them. So you add and , what would you end up with? My understanding, and I have checked it with my staff again this morning, is that for this year, every PA recipient, in terms of cash and rebates, actually gets at least $450 a month. Last year, Dr Lily Neo insisted that $290 is not enough, it must be $400. This year, she has not asked for it yet. But Dr Loo Choon Yong asked for $400. I have never wanted to let the cat out of the bag.”
“" Raise taxes, spend a lot of money and pretend that we have achieved a generous society that helps people who are most vulnerable. Our model is a small, efficient Government, with low taxes, so that people like Dr Loo Choon Yong can still continue cheerfully paying his taxes, because they are actually very low than if he were to live anywhere else in the world. But more than paying low taxes, we want him and people like him to donate money, time and attention to social causes which they care about. So I was very happy when I saw his name and Mr Sim Wong Hoo's name mentioned in the Forbes list of philanthropists. What I am trying to spell to Members is a system in which individuals work hard, individuals look after their families, community organisations care and express the best parts of our heart, while the Government acts in the background carefully, rationally, logically and sensibly to make sure that the overall system functions. That is the context behind which I view every single policy, every single plan that my Ministry puts up. Sir, let me now go through some of these. I ask Members to look at the handout which describes the Public Assistance Scheme. Much angst and many words have been uttered in this House about the quantum of the Public Assistance. Last year, we had a long debate on $290 and whether it was enough. This year, we have raised it to $330. I am sure if Members want to, we can have another long debate as to whether $330 is enough. But I put this up because I want Members to understand and put things in perspective. The cash allowance that we were arguing about, whether it is $290 or $330, is just one component of the overall Public Assistance Scheme. There are three other components.”
“It is not even a dilemma between the rich and the poor, but between head and heart. He said that the head knows we cannot be overly generous; the head knows that we sometimes have to be cruel to be kind. And yet the heart wants the poor to be rich and the weak to be strong. And he said that it is better that now we are preparing for all these problems before they become insoluble problems; the time to do it is now. I also read with great distress Mr Siew Kum Hong's speech. I am a debater. That was a very brilliant debating speech. And I actually share his hopes when he said that he wants Singapore to be a more generous society that helps its most vulnerable members – beautiful words. But the danger was in the rest of his speech when he said, in order to fulfil this hope, we should be prepared to waste, we should be prepared to have a bloated bureaucracy, all in the name of helping people. I believe in getting all the different actors on the social stage to do what they are best at. I believe in a small, efficient, rational, even calculating Government, because that is what governments can and should do best. I believe in a social service sector, a voluntary welfare sector led by many champions, people like Ms Denise Phua, no matter how much I disagree with her on points, I will always respect people like her because they do what they believe in, and they care passionately about it. When we say we want a more generous, compassionate, caring society, the lazy way out is to say, "We want the Government to be generous, compassionate and caring, and the Government can express that generosity, caring and compassionate by simply spending a lot of money.”
“All the wealth in the world will not buy you happiness and success, nor will it eliminate all the social problems which we face. Those of us who do regular meet-the-people sessions, we see people coming with problems. Let me ask Members: do you really think their most fundamental problem is the lack of money? Is it a poverty of material wealth? Or is it usually a poverty of relationships? I think those of us who have been in this and lived long enough will agree that the real and bigger problem is the poverty of relationships. So we all need families and we do need a compassionate society. And if we look around us, and we look at a child, we will know that the greatest predictor for failure is a dysfunctional family, if his parents are not there, if his parents do not care or do not know how to care, or his parents are physically in prison or because of addiction, gambling or whatever, and not there to provide that ballast and the emotional stability for the child. But we also know that it is not just about families, because we all want a more compassionate, caring, a "softer" society. However, Singapore will fail, if our society degenerates into nothing more than a collection of successful individuals just achieving success and earning money for themselves and looking for pleasure and satisfaction for themselves. If we have no shared values, no shared ideals and no dreams, the Singapore experiment will fail, even if we have money and even if we have reserves. One point I want to come back to in today's debate is I want Members to remember Mr Sam Tan's brilliant speech last week. I was not here because I was overseas with the President, but I read his speech three times. He talked about how it is not a dilemma between the young and the old.”
“And bad things can happen to good decent people, and good decent people, regardless of whether it is their fault or not, at some point in time in their lives, they will need help, deserve help, and need hope. The second thing I have learnt from this family story is that one needs family support. Do not talk about MCYS first. The first thought is: who in your family is going to be there, to be with you at times of crisis, at times when everything looks bleak and dark? My grandmother had her two brothers-in-law, and my family has to be eternally grateful to them for supporting my grandmother. The third lesson, a value imbibed from my mother, is that it is all about discipline and hard work. No matter how wealthy or successful we think we are, if we lose that ability for discipline and hard work, we will fail. Life for me has been, in comparison, very much easier and much blessed. But, at least, for me, I think my mum has successfully transmitted those values. My current angst, when I talk about young people, is whether our children or our grandchildren, born in the midst of plenty, spend more time thinking about how to spend their inheritance. And sometimes even in this House, we hear debate that we are a rich country, we can spend more even if it means being wasteful. Instead of coming back to the basics that, yes, we do need safety nets, but we have to start with the family, and we have got to be self-reliant, disciplined and hardworking. Because we must remember that, at the end of the day, even when we talk about MCYS, money is important. Anyone who has been poor, directly or indirectly, will tell you money is very, very important. But money is also not enough.”
“But, nevertheless, his two brothers continued to run the business, committed to giving an allowance and helping my grandmother bring up the children. They were not penniless, they were not roofless, but life was tough and money was tight. My mum had a tough life. She talked about malnutrition. She talked about losing all her front teeth. She talked about getting TB (tuberculosis) as a teenager. She talked about being so skinny that when she married my father, she told my dad, "I'm probably infertile." Of course, she was wrong. She went on to have five of us. But this experience of childhood left an indelible imprint on my mum. For the rest of her life, she could never spend money on herself. She could never really even enjoy taking luxuries. She could definitely not accept wastage. She worked hard. She became a teacher, and I can tell you in those days, MOE was not as enlightened as it is now. I do not think she enjoyed the final few years of teaching, but she slogged through it anyway because it was a means for living. The family was middle class but we were not rich. My uncle went on to become a doctor. He became a GP in Albert Street. Those of you who were treated by him or lived in that area will know that, I think in the first 10-15 years as a GP, he never took a single day off. So what does all this mean and why am I sharing this? I am sharing this with Members so that they will get some idea of what my inner most feelings, values and attitudes are to poverty, to family, to social safety nets, and also to give them a better understanding of what I bring when I contemplate policies and plans in this area. What have I learnt? First, life can be tough, life can be unfair, and life is unpredictable.”
“Mr Chairman, Members of this House, this is my fourth occasion at the MCYS COS. Each year, it gets longer. This year, we have budgeted six hours and 35 minutes for this debate. I do not intend to go that long. What is coming round to Members is a file which contains some handouts, not money, brochures, which will summarise the progress of what we have committed to do last year, and also a summary of what we intend to do in this coming year. So I do not want to go through those details because I am hoping that we can assume them as read. Instead, what I will spend my time doing is to share a personal story, and then attempt to answer some of the more urgent and relevant queries which you have raised. My colleagues in the Ministry will also take all the other questions, and then we will settle it at clarification. First, a personal story – about 80 years ago, in fact, exactly 80 years ago, a young man on a business trip to China fell ill and passed away. That young man was my grandfather, my mum's father. When he passed away 80 years ago, he left behind a young widow. This young widow had two children and was on the verge of delivering her third child, my mum. You can imagine the deep grief, sorrow, fear, helplessness and despair of a young widow, losing a young husband and about to deliver her third child. And because this was 80 years ago, there was no MCYS. We only started 60 years ago. And all those schemes which we debate and quibble about were not present. 2.15 pm My grandfather and his two brothers ran a motorcar and, I suppose, bicycle spare parts shop in Dhoby Ghaut. Because my grandmother was a young widow, she was not going to inherit a share of the business.”
“The Government cannot mandate every enterprise and say, "You must give 20% free time to all of you to think and create and to express yourself." But having said that, as we move into a knowledge-based economy, into a talent resource economy, I cannot mandate when and where you think of new radical ideas. I do not dictate how many hours you should spend ruminating about the future and how many hours you should spend on your job at hand. Sir, I think let us be less prescriptive and less uptight about this. Just understand that you get good people, you give them opportunities, you educate them, you retool them, reskill them and make sure they are current and opaque with what new progress in science and technology offers. At the same time, they also have a connection to their heart and linguistic and cultural heritage. I think you will see real fruits from that kind of environment. So I do not want to be overly prescriptive on this. But I think every employer will know that the race today is to attract talent and you will have to structure your own workplace, your own employment package so that top talent feels fulfilled and challenged working for you. On the Government side, in the civil service, we will of course make our own efforts to do that. But I think each company and enterprise will also have to do so.”
“That is why, in a sense, we are investing in a broader sense in research and development. It is not really about laboratories. Laboratories are easy to build. It is about attracting top brains and then giving them opportunities, the network and bring about the creation of new ideas, new products and new services. Arts and design come into it also. Because top talents want to live in a place that also has cultural relevance and resilience, also a place in which arts and culture are expressed and expressed at the highest level. So what MICA is doing, working with the rest of Government, is creating a Singapore of the future which will be conducive to attracting top talent and getting these top talents to express ideas and products. As what I said just now, we need both the right brain and the left brain. And if we can successfully do that in our next phase of Singapore's development, there will be many, many opportunities for people who today consider themselves artists, but really also need a grounding in science and technology, opportunities for our engineers and technicians who will also understand that you need to appreciate design, culture and language. Even our multi-culturalism is both, not just an economic good, but also an expression of ourselves. So when we talk about branding, I come back to SMS Balaji's point, that it must be authentic. And what we have in Singapore is that we do have talent, we do have some advantages, some branding differentiators. We need to pull it all together into a coherent whole and if we succeed in doing that, we will be all right.”
“The 26 Singaporeans I met last month are all working in San Francisco, Shanghai or Beijing. Google obviously has other employees in Singapore and in fact they do want to expand in Singapore, not just the sales marketing office, but the research and development laboratory. But the key limiting factor again is talent, making sure that they have top talent who can do top-class work because in this sector, it is very, very competitive. But the lesson which I learned there was that we can attract top talent if, firstly, we recognise top talent; secondly, they must give opportunities for these talents to express themselves and, in their own words, to change the world; and, thirdly, it has got to be connected into a global network. My point is that if you look at what we are trying to do in Singapore, we are trying to attract top talent into the infocomm sector. We are trying to get scholarships. We are trying to give opportunities. We are trying to network them. And we are also trying to make sure both local startups, local enterprises and top-class global enterprises establish their presence in Singapore in the full spectrum of jobs, so that the key point is that there will be opportunities. And we believe we can do that. We will be able to attract and retain our own top talent who currently may be attracted overseas. But we can attract them back here and, when they are back here, to actually embark on a process of creation of new intellectual property, new products and new services which can change the world. This is a very difficult challenge, but I believe it is one that we have to do. Because if we do not do that, we will lose the very essence that keeps Singapore at the forefront of technology and what our future hopes are about.”
“The Government actually has a very generous IP regime. For private sector companies, including our local companies who work on Government ICT projects, after the completion of the project, we let them own the IP and the hope is that they will then commercialise it and use the fact that this IP was utilised in the Government successfully as part of their branding and part of their marketing. I think he is right that so far progress on the utilisation of this IP has not been as good as we would hope for it to be. But there is a limit again to what the Government can do. We have made the first step. We let them own the IP. We will help market it. But I think we also have to be realistic. We all know about the world being flat. The infocomm sector is the flatest sector in the world. Any product which you intend to market is immediately available worldwide but it is also exposed to competition worldwide. So this is not a sector where a Government subsidy will suddenly make you competitive. You have got to go out there quickly and show the world that this idea works. I think the fact that we now have an SOE is also another great opportunity for our companies, because this is one of the largest outsourcing projects for the front end, the desktop, the messaging and the networking behind Government infrastructure. I hope that our companies will capitalise on this project to also gain greater market share overseas. And if this project is successful, and I expect it to be successful, I think there will be other governments and other large organisations in the world that will also embark on this course that the Singapore Government has set.”
“I was just sharing a private joke with the Minister for Transport and I think he agrees with the Member that if we can make ERP gantries even more impactful from a design perspective, maybe people will be less angry with the Ministry. That may be wishful thinking. I will give you another example. DesignSingapore has launched a nationwide programme called the "10TouchPoints" in which we were looking for public suggestions on how to redesign public amenities. I did not check whether any suggestions came in for ERP gantries but there were many other suggestions, including recycling bins, bus-stops and other examples. In fact, I believe the winning design was a creative redesign for recycling bins and you will soon see these at our Changi Airport.”
“Sir, for 2005, which unfortunately is the most recent year for which we have official statistics, the value-add of the creative industries in Singapore grew by 8%. It reached a total value of $7.6 billion and therefore contributed about 3.9% to Singapore's GDP. From 2002 to 2005, the value-add per worker in the creative industries grew by 4.8% to reach approximately $75,000 in 2005. Unfortunately, this is lower than the Singapore average of $86,000 in that same year. So this shows that there is still much progress that needs to be achieved in this sector, as far as the creative capacity and the value-add of each worker is concerned. But having said that, the employment in the creative industries now amounts to slightly in excess of 100,000. That is 4.4% of total employment in Singapore. So, that is not an insignificant sector that we need to pay attention to. Let me move on to the issue of design which several Members have referred to. The Design Competitiveness Report, which is based on data supplied by the World Economic Forum, showed that Singapore has improved from No. 22 in the year 2002 to No. 16 in 2005 – not yet in the top 10, but we are making progress. Singapore designers are also winning more international awards. For example, the NUS Industrial Design graduate, Mr Donn Koh, became the first Singaporean, indeed the first designer trained in Asia to win one of the world's most coveted design prizes – the International Braun Prize. Mr Baey Yam Keng asked how the Government promotes good design in public amenities. I totally agree with him. I think we do need to pay attention to this element because, after all, that is what we see every day.”
“For the years 2004-2006, an average of 69.9% of the residents who were discharged from the juvenile homes continued their studies in educational or vocational schools. Those who did not continue with their education upon release were employed, waiting for enlistment into National Service, or had not yet decided whether to continue studying or find employment. For each cohort of juvenile offenders who completed their Orders and were released from the Homes in 2003 and 2004, 38.5% of them re-offended within the two years of their release. The recidivism rate is not available yet for those released in 2005. The Singapore Boys' Home and Singapore Girls' Home provide rehabilitation for young offenders. The rehabilitation programmes are three-pronged. Firstly, we provide specialised treatment programmes that target specific offending behaviours. Secondly, offenders attend educational, vocational and life skills training to prepare them for the future. Thirdly, we work closely with the offenders' families to improve their family relationship. The primary aim is to reintegrate these offenders into the community to lead productive lives. Column No : 435 LTA RULES AND REGULATIONS (SUVs/HID Headlamps) 9. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Transport (a) if he will provide an update on the review by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) on requiring sports utility vehicles (SUVs) fitted with high intensity discharge headlamps to incorporate safety features such as the automatic levelling feature; and (b) if the LTA is going to introduce such rules, whether they will retrospectively apply to SUVs already in use.”
“Those who are not discharged would remain in the welfare homes for long-term care or be transferred to nursing homes if their medical conditions deteriorate. APPENDICES”
“Each year, about 180 persons are committed to the welfare homes under warrants issued by the Director of Social Welfare. This is done after social investigations have found them to be destitute. When beggars or vagrants are picked up by or referred to MCYS, our first priority would be to investigate into their family background, and where possible help them to re-unite with their family. Only in situations where the person has no family, or where his family relations are severely estranged, will the person be deemed a destitute and committed to a welfare home. The Welfare Homes provide shelter, meals, social activities, training and job assignments matched to the residents' capabilities. The Homes also assist residents lead independent lives and re-integrate into society, and where possible, help them to reunite with their families. Residents who can do simple chores will participate in work programmes where they will receive an allowance. The more able residents are given opportunities to go out and work during the day, to prepare them for eventual discharge from the Homes. Residents will be considered for discharge if they have caregivers who are able to take them or if they are able to find jobs and live independently. The social workers at the homes will provide the necessary assistance with housing or employment arrangements. There are currently about 1,750 residents in the 10 welfare homes. About 85% of the residents are above 50 years old with psychiatric illnesses, disabilities, chronic medical problems, or are mentally unfit for work. Such conditions make it a challenge for them to be discharged. However, on average, 70 residents per year are discharged to live in the community.”
“The National Council on Problem Gambling and the Institute of Mental Health are working with the recently appointed International Advisory Panel of gambling addiction experts to enhance counselling and treatment for problem gamblers and their families. Foreigners living and working here may also approach the pilot specialist centres for help if they have a gambling problem. WRITTEN ANSWER TO QUESTION DESTITUTE PERSONS ACT (Welfare homes) 1. Prof. Thio Li-ann asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) how many persons are currently required by a warrant issued by the Director of Social Welfare to reside in a welfare home under the terms of the Destitute Persons Act; (b) what steps are taken, if any, to help them become productive members of society; and (c) whether it is the norm for persons to be discharged from welfare homes after a period of residence and, if so, under what conditions.”
“MCYS has set up two pilot specialist centres operated by Thye Hua Kwan Moral Society and Care Corner Counselling Centre to provide intervention services for problem gamblers and their families. The pilot centres started operations in September 2006. They form the second tier of a three tier system. The first tier consists of detection and referrals from 'ground' organisations like the family service centres (FSCs) and CDCs. The third tier covers medical and psychiatric treatment at the Institute of Mental Health under the Community Addictions and Management Programme (or CAMP for short) for those with multiple addictions or severe gambling addictions. As the two specialist centres have been set up, we do not track problem gambling cases at FSCs. We are tracking the two pilot centres instead. Over a one year period from September 2006 to September 2007, the two centres saw a total of 190 problem gamblers. The majority of the cases, or 93%, were male. Of the 190 cases, 58% of them were married. Also, 42% were between 30 and 39 years old, and the next largest age group are those between 40 and 49 years old, at 18%. In terms of income profile, 35% of the cases earned a monthly income of $2,000 to $2,999 and another 20% earned between $1,000 and $1,999. Out of the cases that have ended their treatment, the centres reported that about one-third successfully completed treatment. The remaining cases did not return to the centres to receive further help, or felt that they no longer needed counselling. This indeed is a challenge faced in addiction intervention work.”
“I have a very short and simple answer to that question - yes. GST REVENUES 4. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Finance (a) what was the actual amount of additional GST revenues collected from July to December 2007, resulting from the increase in GST rate from 5% to 7% from 1st July 2007; and (b) what was the total amount of GST credits paid out in 2007.”
“It is a matter of getting the resources to the people and yet doing it in such a way that we do not undermine the fundamental basis of our society, that in Singapore there is no free lunch, that we are all primarily responsible for ourselves and our families. But, if through bad luck or bad decisions, we hit hard times, the rest of the community will help us out, but without losing our commitment to self-responsibility and the necessity for hard work.”
“(3) For healthcare, the equation is even simpler, because we will cover all their costs, including their transport cost to get to a clinic or hospital. So, there is food, roof and there is healthcare. (4) For education, we have a slew of schemes which will subsidise and provide additional subsidies for transport, school textbooks, examination fees and all the other needs which their children need. In fact, for those on public assistance, the net investment that they personally need to put in for the educational needs of their children is zero because it is not just what MCYS does but what MOE does. And you know that MOE has a very generous financial assistance package. So, the point I am making now is that, yes, we can have an intellectual debate on the numbers. Every year, whoever stands in my place, will have to go through this exercise. But the more important thing is to look at the lived experience. And I feel very confident to say that if, by bad luck, you are going to be poor or your family is going to face unfortunate circumstances, I think Singapore is actually a good place to be in because we will provide you with a good roof over your head, we will make sure you do not starve, look after you when you are sick, and your children will be able to escape the potential poverty trap which, unfortunately, captures so many people in other parts of the world. So I stand here saying that if anybody needs help and if you notice any person or any family which needs help, please raise your hand, call or email or bring them to our attention, because there is no lack of resources in Singapore.”
“(1) Food will be provided for by a combination of the allowance which we provide, and I can tell you that, as of the middle of December last year, that basket of uncooked ingredients bought from NTUC Fairprice which they put in front of me, costs $95 a month. So, any sum of money, cash which you give in excess of $95, is enough to buy the raw ingredients. Obviously, that is just the raw ingredients. (2) You then need somewhere to live, cook and the cost of the energy needed to do so. Members would be familiar with the rental rates in a subsidised HDB flat which these recipients would obviously be staying in, plus the cost of utilities, which of course, we know, has gone up because of oil prices. Nevertheless, that sum which we currently provide in terms of the cash allowance is enough for food and a roof over their heads. There are obviously other needs, eg, clothes, they need to move around, and so on and so forth. The cash component is not a generous amount. It leaves very little margin for mismanagement or waste. I would also say that I am not expecting all our public assistance recipients to live purely on their cash allowance. That is why I went to some lengths just now to explain what the additional sources of funds are. And the reality on the ground, if you actually visit your public assistance recipients in your own constituencies, is that you will see that almost all of them are living on more than what the Government gives in the cash component - a combination of ang pows, additional food, hampers and help from the generosity of the local community and Singaporeans. This means that I can honestly stand here and say there is no reason for any Singaporean to go hungry no matter how needy, poor or unfortunate his circumstances are.”
“I thank the Member for his exhortation for me to complete this review more quickly, and I will do so as quickly as practical. As to his second request, that we conduct regular reviews, we do conduct regular reviews. In fact, Members will recall that we just changed the public assistance rate last year. Now, we have not even reached the Budget debate and we are again talking about whether we need to adjust it. I said just now, and I think it may bear some reiteration, that I am not pegging the public assistance allowance strictly to the CPI. But let me tell Members what I actually do. I told my staff to first go and consult the nutrition department of the Ministry of Health and work out what people need in order to have a healthy meal, not just a subsistence meal but what they need in order to stay healthy. I then made my staff go to the market - actually, they spent most of their time, I think, in NTUC Fairprice - and buy those items which the Ministry of Health has advised are necessary for healthy nutrition. They literally filled that basket and I made them put it in front of me on my desk so that I could see that this is the real thing. That is what I am really pegging at - real food, food needed to keep body and soul together and, more importantly, to maintain health. At the end of the day, there are four things which we want to deliver: food on the table, a roof over our heads, healthcare when we need it, and education for our children - four essential pillars. I think we can argue at the edges about what other things we want to add in the package, but consider these four essential pillars. The next question then is: how are these four essential pillars being provided?”
“" The latest available statistics as at the end of 2006 show that the household income of the bottom 20th percent was still about $1,500 per month. But a review of the income criterion is currently on-going and will be supplemented by the latest figures once that is available, and once that is available, I can then make a decision on whether to shift that threshold. But I should also add that we do not just look at the household income when helping needy families. The CDC case officers would consider the specific circumstances confronting that recipient or that needy family before deciding on how best to help them. So this really relates to her second question on flexibility. I think she will understand from my earlier answer that I have provided for flexibility at multiple points of the delivery chain, at the point of evaluation on the part of the CDC, at the level of the Citizens Consultative Committee and the grassroots, because they can provide additional funds and also with the establishment of the Review Committee chaired by MOS Yu-Foo Yee Shoon. She is referring to another category of people who may be at the borderline who may not yet strictly qualify for longer term public assistance but, at the same time, need more than short-term interim assistance. I have taken this suggestion seriously and we are currently considering whether we may need to have a slightly longer term interim assistance scheme to help families tide over these situations where they may actually be unable to work or be bereft of support for several months at a time. As I said earlier, however, I have not yet arrived at the final formulation and will announce that in due time.”
“Her first supplementary question is really the question of the next parliamentary question. Maybe with your permission, I can address that question*, then we can take any other supplementary that may arise. This is with respect to the $1,500 household income which is used as our threshold. *Question No. 3 reads as follows:- Mr Liang Eng Hwa: To ask the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports in view of the rising prices which have impacted the purchasing power of Singaporeans especially the lower income group, whether the Ministry will consider raising the $1,500 monthly household income criterion for the various financial assistance schemes offered by the Government. As I said earlier, the Government seeks to mitigate the impact of rising prices on low-income families by providing healthcare, housing and education subsidies. In addition, there are also rebates for utilities, service and conservancy charges. We also subsidise many services for the elderly and the disabled. And many of these subsidies are available to those households whose incomes exceed $1,500. So the point I am trying to make is that not all assistance schemes are pegged to that $1,500 threshold. In addition, the Workfare Income Supplement is also available to all workers aged 35 years and above, and whose individual monthly income does not exceed $1,500. So, obviously, if there is more than one wage earner in the household, this household will still qualify for assistance through Workfare. The ComCare Fund programmes are available to low-income needy families who are facing financial difficulties. It is no secret that we target the bottom 20% of households to ensure that, in the words of the Minister for Finance, "it is targeted and efficient assistance that is being provided.”
“In summary, the Public Assistance scheme is part of a broader system and is one that depends upon the community's many-helping-hands to ensure that no Singaporean goes hungry.”
“We also recognise that it is important to be flexible in applying help to the needy. The CDCs, who are our local implementors of the PA scheme, have the flexibility to extend help to needy families that may not strictly meet the PA criteria due to special and individual circumstances. The CDCs can act on a case-by-case basis. And they would take into consideration the family's circumstances, such as the size of the family or the special issues confronting the family. And to ensure that deserving cases do not slip through the net, my Ministry has also set up a Review Committee for Financial Assistance which would look into appeals. The Committee will be chaired by my Minister of State, Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, and it will include the five Mayors. Mdm Halimah, Mr Sin Boon Ann and Mr K Shanmugam are also on this Review Committee. Financial assistance cases can be complex, and this Committee will enhance our system's flexibility in order to help those who are genuinely needy even though they may not qualify on strict criteria. While we exercise flexibility in the evaluation process, I would also tell Members that we do regularly review the qualifying criteria to make sure that they remain appropriate and relevant. Members may also recall that my Ministry has recently launched the ComCare Call on 9th January 2008. This is a 24/7 telephone call service to refer needy Singaporeans to the agencies that can help them. The People's Association is also stepping up its efforts to improve the capacity of the grassroots network to identify and help needy families. Through the ComCare Local Networks, the CDCs will be working with the grassroots and the voluntary welfare organisations in the area in order to improve awareness and enhance cooperation on the ground.”