The following is Part Two of a two-part response to Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong’s remarks on 4 September (see here) where he urged S’poreans to see things in perspective and to think of the poor.

Leong Sze Hian –

More hospital beds for the poor

In almost every survey done on the elderly and the poor, one of their greatest concerns was the affordability of healthcare.

In this connection, I refer to media reports (“Full house at Khoo Teck Puat Hospital” , ST, Jul 25) that the new Khoo Teck Puat Hospital has been full since it opened recently, and that the bed crunch has been so bad in the past couple of years that non-urgent surgery had to be put off, beds placed along corridors and hours spent waiting for an available bed.

According to the Department of Statistics’ Yearbook of Statistics 2010, the number of hospital beds in Singapore, has hardly changed – from 11,742 to 11,663, from 1999 to 2009.

The number of hospitals only increased by one, from 28 to 29.

During the same 10-year period, the population grew from 3.96 to 4.99 million.

Although the Health Mnistry has said that Singapore will not be caught out by a shortage of hospital beds again, even with the net increase of about 400 beds after the expected opening of the 700-bed Jurong General Hospital before 2015, and the closure of the 300-bed Alexandra Hospital, the total number of hospital beds is only expected to be about 12,613, even after adding the 550 beds from Khoo Teck Puat Hospital.

If not for allowing Medisave to be used for hospitalisation in 12 approved hospitals in Malaysia, since March this year, the shortage of hospital beds may be even worse.

At the current annual rate of growth in the population, at 1.1, 11.5 and 4.8 per cent, respectively, for Singaporeans, permanent residents and foreigners, and the long term target of a 6.5 million population, the shortage of hospital beds may not go away soon.

Perhaps what we may need to do is to spend more on healthcare, as I understand that Singapore’s healthcare spending to GDP is only about 4 per cent, with about 2 per cent of GDP on public healthcare spending in 2008.

In contrast, our neighbour, Malaysia, spent 4.8 per cent of GDP on healthcare in 2008.

The Singapore Tourism Board has been promoting Singapore as a medical tourism destination, with medical tourists to Singapore growing to 646,000 in 2008.

About half of Singapore’s medical visitors come from Indonesia, with the other 30-40 per cent coming from Malaysia and the Middle East. The remainder comes from Russia, China, the Philippines and Vietnam.

Also, more will be done to help Singapore meet its target of attracting 1 million medical tourists a year by 2012.

So, since the number of hospital beds did not increase over the last 10 years, and with the population increasing by 1.03 million plus another 646,000 medical tourists, is it any wonder that the waiting time for poorer Singaporeans seeking medical treatment, may be getting longer?

Billions in investment based on “gut-feel” decisions?

With all the constant rhetoric over the years about helping the poor, what about the billions of investments that we made? How much thought or analyses were made on what some of these billions could do for the poor?

I refer to media reports (“Why Temasek took China project”, Business Times, Jul 3) about Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong’s remarks that for Singapore’s industrial projects in Suzhou and Tianjin, on the government-to-government side, we did not do any economic feasibility study, and that we just felt in our guts that this was something good to do to engage China and that we could make it work.

Given that these were investments in the billions, I am rather surprised that we did not do any economic feasibility study.

What is perhaps even more alarming may be that this is only revealed now after decades, by way of a casual remark by the Senior Minister.

Are our billion dollar investments now still being made based on “gut” feel?

As we contemplate investing in other cities, perhaps now is a good time to evaluate what is the return on investment on our first Suzhou Industrial Park venture.

It may also be instructive if we evaluate our US$1.9 billion investment in Shin Corp which the Thai Government has indicated a keenness to buy back, PT Indosat and Telkomsel which have been deemed to have violated anti-trust laws in Indonesia, SingTel-Optus which at one point was estimated by analysts to have an estimated expected write-down of $8 billion, the US$5.4 billion investment in Dao Heng Bank which at one point had an estimated goodwill impairment of S$1.13 billion, etc.

I think we may be able to learn a lot from the above, with a view to learn from the lessons and not repeat the mistakes in the future.

Specifically, how and why have we failed in respect of regulatory, market, competitive and business intelligence, and privileged insights, in Mergers and Acquisitions’ (M &A) terminology, in our M & A activities?

On a brighter note, at least Temasek’s latest RMB 2 billion (S$400 million) investment through its subsidiary, Singbridge International, in the joint-project “Sino-Singapore Guangzhou”, to build the “China Knowledge City”, which is on the suburban area of Guangzhou city in southern China, had the benefit of the feasibility study done by the Keppel Group which signed the initial agreement in March 2009, before Singbridge’s takeover of the 50:50 joint project between Singapore and China.

Having said that, we should still ask: Could we not have used these billions to help the poor instead, especially given that S’pore’s income gap is among the widest in the world? Or, and if indeed these investments have been successful, how have they benefited the poor and the low-income?

Additional input by Andrew Loh.

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

$100 million worth of GST vouchers to be given to 800,000 eligible households

About 800,000 Singaporean HDB households will receive $100 million worth of GST…

印尼民间团队联手打假新闻 比法律更见成效

邻国印度尼西亚在本周三(17日),举办全球最大规模的单日选举,逾1.92亿合资格选民在票站开站的8小时内完成投票。选举后,寻求连任的总统佐科维和前将领普拉博沃,都宣布胜选,不过正式选举结果,5月22日才揭晓。 至于民调显示,佐科维的得票超过55巴仙,稍高于对手。不过,两位候选人在选举期间可没少受假新闻影响选情,其中西爪哇的警察逮捕了三名女子,他们涉嫌在二月份谣传佐科维蝉联后,将废除呼唤穆斯林祷告的唤礼声(azan)以及禁止妇女包头巾。 三名女子据称来自普拉博沃竞选团队,不过该团队发言人安德雷(Andre Rosiade),已否认他们涉及参与上述三名女子的“抹黑”行为。 他们过去也否认雇用新闻工作者撰写“正面或负面的内容”,“尤其不实新闻”。 印尼记者:法律打假消息治标不治本 印尼媒体人沙弥多在本月13日,接受《今日报》采访时就指出,立法打击假新闻,只能算是即时的解决方案,但不会是打击网络假消息的上策,并质疑法律制裁的威慑能力有限。 “抓了一个人,就有10甚至100人准备好接手(制造假新新闻)。”他补充“法律打假治标不治本,关键是要教育人民懂得分辨假消息,并用适当手段抗衡之。” 沙弥多也是印尼民间“核查事实”(Cekfakta)组织中40多位记者之一。Cekfakta是由印尼24家媒体组成。 这批记者也获得谷歌谷歌新闻室的支援,在选举时进行即时的事实查证工作。 各领域专才协助查核数据 除了记者们的努力外,来自教育和经济界等各领域的专才和非政府组织,也团结一块为核实真相而努力。例如当某位候选人公布某项数据,他们就针对有关课题分析并查核事实或数据的真伪。…

Lawrence Wong claims to follow WHO's advisory while the PM Lee coins his own phrases

Minister for National Development Lawrence Wong has in a recent press conference…

ESM Goh will run in elections, warns against falling back from First to Third World

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong confirmed on Friday that he will…