Uncategorized
A child is a child
Tan Kin Lian on baby incentives.
Tan Kin Lian / Columnist
I find the incentives implemented during the past years to encourage procreation (i.e. Singaporeans to have more children) to be unnecessarily complicated and discriminatory.
Each time that the Government implemented a new package to address the failure of the past packages, there will be loud howls of protests from parents who missed out.
The parents who fall on the right side of the cut-off date were delighted and thanked the Government for its generosity. This breeds a culture of selfishness, where each Singaporean thinks about his or her personal benefit, rather than what is fair to everybody in society.
Marriage & Parenthood Package 2008
To make it easier for the people to understand the myriads of complicated incentives, the Government published a full page advertisement in a Sunday paper. I am now more enlightened about the incentives but have many more questions.
First, let me list down the headings in this package
Enhanced tax benefits
Qualifying Child Relief (QCR)
Handicapped Child Relief (HCR)
Enhanced Working Mother’s Child Relief (WMCR)
Parenthood Tax Rebate (PTR)
Enhanced Baby Bonus
Baby bonus cash gift
Baby bonus Child Development Account (CDA)
Enhanced Subsidies for Center-based Care
Infant Care Subsidy for Singaporean infants aged 2 to 18 months
Childcare Subsidy for Singaporean children aged above 18 months to below 7 years old
Observations
Here are my observations.
> We have to introduce five abbreviations, i.e. QCR, HCR, WMCR, PTR and CDA, as each incentive needs a detailed explanation on eligibility and other details. In due course, we will see a few more abbreviations created for the other incentives. (Perhaps, this is why Singaporeans are so fond of using all kinds of abbreviations which confuse foreigners).
> The incentives vary according to the child order, the date that the child is born, the citizenship status of the parent and probably other factors that I may not be aware of.
Questions
I now come to my questions.
1. Who is eligible for the enhanced tax incentives? Do they apply to citizens, permanent residents, professional pass holders and work permit holders?
2. What are a Qualifying child and a non-Qualifying child? Some of the incentives appear to apply to a qualifying child and other incentives apply only to a qualifying Singaporean child.
3. How is the child order determined for parents who have a child from the earlier marriages and the current marriage?
4. Does the incentive apply to a legally adopted child? It seems to imply that the parent can claim some incentives but not other incentives.
5. Some incentives apply to a child born on or after 1 Jan 2008, while other incentives apply to a child born on or after 17 August 2008. Are there other cut-off dates that apply to other incentives, but not specifically mentioned?
6. What is a Baby Bonus? Is this a cash payment to the parent? Or, is this money that is locked up in an account to be used for specific purposes only?
7. What is a Baby Bonus CDA? Is this money that is locked up in an account to be used for specific purposes only? Is there a requirement for the parent to make a co-payment into this account?
8. What are a working mother and a non-working mother (as this status affects the subsidy for infant care and childcare)? How is part time work or casual work treated?
It is wonderful that the advertisement includes a hotline (1800 233 2229) for the public to call and seek further clarification.
I suspect that the hotline will be deluged with calls from anxious parents enquiring about their eligibility and entitlements. I hope that the hotline staff can cope with the potential volume of calls.
My wish list
Let me now say how I would do things differently, if I were the person in charge (which I am not).
I would adopt the following principles in designing the incentives:
> treat each tax payer fairly (i.e. regardless of citizen status)
> treat each child equally
> simplify the incentives
Enhanced Tax Benefits
My wish: This will apply to each child within a certain age range, regardless of when the child was born and the birth order of the child. As this incentive is linked to tax, it should be given equally to all tax payers, regardless of citizenship status.
Enhanced Baby Bonus
My wish: As this is a cash payment, it should apply to a Singaporean child born on or after a certain date. This applies to a child that is considered to be Singaporean at birth.
I will remove the requirements for the parent to co-pay into a Child Development Account, so that the child will not be discriminated against, if the parents are too poor to make the co-payment.
If there is the fear that the poor parents will bear more children, then this Baby Bonus can be restricted to a certain number of children in each family.
Enhanced Subsidies for Center-Based Care
My wish: The same subsidy should be given, regardless of the working status of the mother. In my view, the non-working mother should be entitled to a higher subsidy, as they do not have an income, but I do not wish to argue this point.
The working mothers already enjoy the enhanced tax benefits (which are quite generous, especially for those at the higher income). There is no need to make a further discrimination here.
Conclusion
I believe that the failure to achieve the goal of encouraging family to have more children is partly caused by the complicated and discriminatory incentives adopted in the past.
Some parents had privately told me previously that they decided to hold back having an additional baby and to wait for new incentives to be announced, so that they will not miss out by being on the wrong side of the cut-off date. This type of delay must have a negative impact on the birth rate.
The Marriage and Parenthood Package 2008 continues the same complicated and discriminatory approach, although the benefits are now more generous and costly to the nation.
I hope that future packages will be designed to be fairer and non-discriminatory. A child is a child.
Tan Kin Lian also blogs at http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/ .
———–
Indonesia
Miss Universe cuts ties with Indonesia chapter after harassment allegations
The Miss Universe Organization severs ties with Indonesia franchise due to harassment claims. Malaysia edition canceled.
Women allege body checks before pageant. Investigation launched. Safety prioritized.
Indonesia winner to compete in November finale. Height requirement controversy.
WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The Miss Universe Organization has cut ties with its Indonesia franchise, it announced days after allegations of sexual harassment, and will cancel an upcoming Malaysia edition.
In the complaint, more than a half dozen women said all 30 finalists for Miss Universe Indonesia were unexpectedly asked to strip for a supposed body check for scars and cellulite two days before the pageant’s crowning ceremony in Jakarta.
Their lawyer said Tuesday that five of the women had their pictures taken.
“In light of what we have learned took place at Miss Universe Indonesia, it has become clear that this franchise has not lived up to our brand standards, ethics, or expectations,” the US-based Miss Universe Organization posted Saturday night on social media site X, formerly known as Twitter.
It said that it had “decided to terminate the relationship with its current franchise in Indonesia, PT Capella Swastika Karya, and its National Director, Poppy Capella.”
It thanked the contestants for their bravery in coming forward and added that “providing a safe place for women” was the organization’s priority.
Jakarta police spokesman Trunoyudo Wisnu Andiko said Tuesday that an investigation into the women’s complaint has been launched.
The Indonesia franchise also holds the license for Miss Universe Malaysia, where there will no longer be a competition this year, according to the New York-based parent organizer.
In a lengthy statement posted to Instagram, Indonesia franchise director Capella denied involvement in any body checks.
“I, as the National Director and as the owner of the Miss Universe Indonesia license, was not involved at all and have never known, ordered, requested or allowed anyone who played a role and participated in the process of organizing Miss Universe Indonesia 2023 to commit violence or sexual harassment through body checking,” she wrote.
She added that she is against “any form of violence or sexual harassment.”
The Jakarta competition was held from 29 July to 3 August to choose Indonesia’s representative to the 2023 Miss Universe contest, and was won by Fabienne Nicole Groeneveld.
Miss Universe said it would make arrangements for her to compete in the finale, scheduled for November in El Salvador.
This year’s Indonesia pageant also came under fire for announcing a “significant change in this (year’s) competition guidelines” with the elimination of its minimum height requirement after it had crowned a winner.
In its statement, the Miss Universe Organization said it wanted to “make it extremely clear that there are no measurements such as height, weight, or body dimensions required to join a Miss Universe pageant worldwide.”
— AFP
Malaysia
A Perodua service centre in Kuantan, Malaysia went viral for its strict dress code, Perodua responds
A dress code for vehicle servicing? A Malaysian car brand’s service centre dress code signage has puzzled netizens, raising queries about the need for attire rules during a routine service.
The manufacturer responded with an official statement after a flurry of comments, seeking to clarify and apologize.
MALAYSIA: A dress code signage positioned at a service centre belonging to a prominent Malaysian car brand has sparked bewilderment among Malaysian netizens, who question the necessity of adhering to attire guidelines for a simple vehicle servicing.
The signage explicitly delineates clothing items that are deemed unsuitable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, abbreviated pants, and distressed jeans.
The car manufacturer swiftly found itself flooded with comments from both inquisitive and irked Malaysian netizens. This surge in online activity prompted the company to issue an official statement aimed at clarifying the situation and extending an apology.
In a post that gained significant traction on the social media platform, politician Quek Tai Seong of Pahang State, Malaysia, shared an image to Facebook on Monday (7 Aug).
The image showcased a dress code sign prominently displayed at a Perodua Service Centre in Kuantan. Within the post, Quek posed the question: “Is this dress code applicable nationwide, or is it specific to this branch?”
The signage reads, “All customers dealing with Perodua Service Kuantan 1, Semambu, are requested to dress modestly and appropriately.”
Adding visual clarity to these guidelines, the sign features illustrative graphics that explicitly outline clothing items deemed unacceptable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, short pants, and ripped jeans.
Delineating the specifics of the dress code, the signage stipulates that male visitors are expected to don shirts accompanied by neckties, opt for long pants, and wear closed shoes.
Conversely, female visitors are advised to don long-sleeved shirts, full-length skirts, and closed-toe footwear.
Perodua’s dress code sparks online uproar
Following the rapid spread of the post, Perodua’s official Facebook page found itself inundated with comments from both intrigued and frustrated Malaysian netizens, all seeking clarifications about the newly surfaced dress code policy.
Amidst the flurry of comments, numerous incensed netizens posed pointed questions such as, “What is the rationale behind the introduction of such regulations by the management? We demand an explanation.”
Another netizen expressed their dissatisfaction, arguing against the necessity of the rule and urging Perodua to take inspiration from the practices of other 4S (Sales, Service, Spare Parts, and Survey) automotive dealerships.
A concerned Facebook user chimed in, advocating for a more lenient stance, asserting that attempting to dictate customers’ clothing choices might not be in the company’s best interest.
Someone also commented in an angry tone, “Oi what is this? Going there for car service, not interview or working, right.”
As the discourse unfolded, it became evident that while some inquiries carried genuine weight, others chose to inject humor into the situation, playfully remarking, “If I wanted to buy a Myvi, I should buy or rent a formal attire first.”
“I sell economy rice at a hawker centre, I have never worn a long sleeve shirt and a tie… I guess I will not buy a Perodua car then.”
“I guess they will not serve those who wear short pants.”
Perodua addresses dress code controversy
As reported by Chinese media outlet Sin Chew Daily News, the manager of Kuantan’s Perodua Service Centre had acknowledged that the images on the dress code signage were misleading.
In response, the manager divulged that discussions had transpired with the head office, leading to the prompt removal of the signage to prevent any further misconceptions.
The manager clarifies, “We do encourage visitors to adhere to the dress etiquette, but we won’t go to the extent of restricting their choice of attire.”
He also revealed that currently, no complaints have been directly received from the public.
However, feedback from certain customers was relayed through Perodua’s agents.
Perodua also released an official statement by chief operating officer JK Rozman Jaffar on Wednesday (9 Aug) regarding the dress code on their official Facebook page.
The statement stated the dress code etiquette is not aligned with their official guidelines and they are currently conducting an official investigation on the matter followed by corrective measures to avoid the same incident from happening.
Perodua also extends its apologies for any inconvenience caused.
-
Singapore4 days ago
Rahayu Mahzam intends to take legal action over alleged defamatory online post by academic
-
Comments1 week ago
LHL’s 15-minute visit to Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake raises eyebrows among Singaporeans
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Media presence at Lee Wei Ling’s funeral contradicts family’s request for privacy
-
Court Cases4 days ago
Rahayu Mahzam’s role in reviewing redacted messages during Raeesah Khan investigation revealed in Pritam Singh’s trial
-
Opinion2 weeks ago
Police say LHY and LSF free to return, but risk of arrest and passport seizure remains
-
Editorial7 days ago
Lim Boon Heng’s misleading claims & omission in July ST interview on Income-Allianz deal
-
Singapore1 week ago
PM Wong’s budget flight homecoming via Scoot makes headlines, but why?
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Dr Lee Wei Ling, daughter of Singapore’s founding prime minister, passes away at 69