Jonathan Koh

Reena Rajasvari, 50, has been visually impaired for twenty-two years. Struck by glaucoma – a group of diseases that damaged her optic nerve – she gradually lost her vision in both eyes when she was 28. From afar, however, no one would suspect she is any different from able-bodied people. Her gait is steady and upright, and she wears a huge smile. She answers questions eloquently and speaks with passion. She has been pursuing this cause of granting transport concessions for the disabled since 1999. In 2000, she approached a Member of Parliament to help her speak to SMRT.

“I thank the government and transport operators for giving us the best transport system”, she says, addressing the 60 odd people who turned up at the event at Hong Lim Park. “But how can we use (the transport system) if there is no concession?” Most of the disabled people are either not working, or in the low income group, she says, clarifying that they are “not asking for free (transport), just subsidies” and concessions to ease their burden – this being especially important in the current economic crisis.

Hefty transport costs

Reena (picture, left) is actually one of the more fortunate disabled people who are employed. Her telemarketing job earns her around $700 a month. But she has to travel to work by taking two buses and the train, spending over $200 in transport fares each month, around 30% of the wages she earns.

Another visually impaired speaker, Junaidah Ramli, adds that “the cost of living is very high” in Singapore. As such, she hopes that “the transport operators will hear (them) out”.

She also urges transport operators to be “more helpful to guide disabled people”. There was once a bus driver, in his attempt to help her up the bus, took away her cane, making her ‘disoriented’. Handicapped by her inability to see, she occasionally takes the cab, paying even $50 on one occasion. She earns “$300 and below” every month.

Responses from public transport operators

The fight for transport concessions is not likely to be easy though. SMRT operator’s reply to Reena in 2000 was: we have to be “prudent about extending any travel concessions beyond the present eligible groups” because “concession fares are cross-subsidized by full-fare paying passengers with no direct subsidy”. In short, SMRT’s reply was ‘no’.

Organizer Challengeds’ Alliance Network’s (CAN!) spokesman Ravi Philemon says that it is “unfair that the disabled, already earning so little, have to pay as much as an (able-bodied) adult person”. He notes that concessions are already being given to the elderly and NSmen and there are no reasons why it cannot also be given to the disabled. He hopes that once the petition is forwarded to the Minister of Transport, more can be done to help the disabled.

TOC understands that SBS Transit, a private bus operator, is already looking into offering concession fares to commuters with physical disabilities. Though no firm proposals have been drawn up, it is likely that such concessions, if granted, will not be extended to the visually or hearing impaired. Whilst Reena acknowledges that some bus drivers ‘give concessions out of compassion’ to the blind people, this practice is technically not legal.

She says that “many disabled people are hence not coming out of their house” due to the heavy cost of transport, becoming ‘disconnected’ as a result.

Other woes

Other than feeling the pinch of paying unsubsidised transport fares, the disabled also find it hard to obtain employment, especially so in this economic downturn. For Wong U-Wen, who is hearing impaired, his job search which started mid-April last month has been particularly ‘frustrating’.

He has studied, lived and worked in the United States for the past 20 years, serving the Center for Disability Rights in upstate New York. When his H1B visa (a non-immigrant visa that allows US employers to hire foreign employees in highly specialised occupations) expired, his employer did not have enough time to apply for the US green card on his behalf. He had to return to Singapore.

In response to a question I wrote on my notepad, “What kind of job are you  looking for?”, he writes briefly: “Whatever I can get. As long as I can do the job to the best of my abilities.” 

Offering help as an individual

1.     If you believe that the disabled should be given public transport concessions, you can pen your signature here: 

2.     Also, a research and advocacy group is working on a project which aims to derive practical solutions to the problems the disabled face in Singapore. This group is currently working on research right now, and really needs to know what the people with disabilities or their friends/families have to say about the current situation and problems. Suggestions, opinions, support and criticism are all welcome. Please email your responses to [email protected] and kindly help to spread the word.”

—-

For more pictures, visit TOC’s Facebook here.

—-

 

 

 

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

二不足龄缅甸女佣 上周坠楼客死异乡

本地客工权益组织情义之家(HOME)揭露,有两名缅甸籍女佣,在上周不幸坠楼身亡。 情义之家义工马金莲(译音)接受《缅甸邮报》采访,来自缅甸勃固省的19岁女孩,在上周从公寓坠楼,她到此为雇主工作仅20天。 在上周六,另一名已在新加坡工作18个月的少女,从公寓九楼处坠下,同样年仅19岁。然而,在其护照上的注册年龄为25岁。 情义之家也协助死者家属安排后事以及把遗体运回缅甸。 自去年至今,共有三名年龄20岁以下的缅甸籍女佣在新加坡不幸坠楼,客死异乡。 去年六月12日下午,一名缅甸女佣辛玛乌,危坐公寓19楼窗外坠下丧命。其好友揭露死者生前留下求助字条,上面列出三餐时间,时间不固定,,有时候甚至没得吃午餐,只能吃两片面包和水。 由于出现客工权益遭侵害的情况,缅甸自2014年起,就已禁止向我国输出女佣。然而,仍有一些中介继续把女佣送到新加坡。 五万缅甸女佣在新 根据缅甸海外就业机构联合会和客工权益组织的数据,在新加坡,约有五万名缅甸籍女佣。 虽然缅甸女佣的每月薪资是460-500新元,但是他们首七、八个月的薪资,却还要先上缴给中介机构。 缅甸政府至今仍拒绝出口女佣的申请。即便如此,仍有缅甸人远赴他国如阿曼等地当女佣。 本社在今年六月,报导半岛电视台(Al…

乐施会回应李智陞:新加坡税制宽容大企业避税

我国社会即家庭发展部长李智陞昨日反驳乐施会公布的贫富不均指数,坚称政府政策已见成效。不过,乐施会贫富不均政策负责人麦斯罗逊今日回应,新加坡的税收政策影响是跨国界的,乃至成为了富有企业的避税天堂。 在早前的贫富不均指数报告中,乐施会指出,新加坡是世上最富有国家之一,但是在消弭贫富不均的努力上,全球排名倒数第九,排名还低于孟加拉、优于老挝。 至于在落实扶贫累进税制的政策上,我国完全包尾(第157名),部分原因与我国的税制有关。 侵蚀他国可供投资医疗教育的收入 “新加坡有害的税制,正侵蚀着其他区域(发展中/落后)国家的收益。这些被规避的税收,足以让这些国家投资在学校和医院的建设。罗逊在接受路透社采访时,这么指出。” 李智陞早前回应,我国国民拥屋率高、医疗成效领先全球,说明政策是否见效,比国家拨款多少在社会开支更重要。 税制方面,李智陞指出,新加坡人普遍承担的所得税偏低,几乎一半人口不缴任何所得税,但是这些群体却能从政府获得高素质基础建设和较多社会援助。 对此,乐施会认为我国应终止宽容富人的税收。新加坡增加个人所得税达2巴仙,但是对于收入最多者的最高征税率仍维持22巴仙。再者,一些不利措施也导致一些大企业,在我国可以在海外避开数十亿元的税收。

黄鲁胜重新受委总检察长 任期至2023年

黄鲁胜昨日(14日)于总统府宣誓就职,重新获委总检察长,任期三年至2023年。 哈莉玛总统于昨日在脸书发图文,图中显示黄鲁胜在大法官梅达顺的见证下,向总统宣誓。 总统称“有信心黄鲁胜能公平正直地履行职责。” 黄鲁胜现年66岁,是在2017年初接替维克拉惹,成为我国第九任总检察长。 黄鲁胜在本地法律界有30多年的执业经验,专长于银行业、企业与金融服务相关法律事务。他也曾经担任海事及港务管理局,以及新加坡国际仲裁中心主席。 曾任总理私人律师 不过,他也曾担任总理李显龙的私人律师。对此,工人党议员林瑞莲曾在国会质问,委任黄鲁胜为总检察长可能存在利益冲突。 当时律政兼财政部高级政务部长英兰妮则辩称,政府是经过详细和严格的挑选后,决定由黄鲁胜出任该要职,并指“我国法律清楚列明该如何处理涉及利益冲突的事件,并严格遵守这些规定。” 而如果有案件是总检察长或副总检察长在担任律师期间曾处理过的,他们将自行回避。