By: Ravi Philemon

There were many highlights in Budget 2011.  For one, I think it was funny that the MPs almost fell over backwards cheering the abolishment of radio and TV license.  It was long overdue in my opinion – at least a decade overdue.  Why were the MPs not calling for this in parliament earlier? The other highlight was the $600 – $800 the government was giving in cash to all Singaporeans by 1 May 2011, which made me make an educated guess that the General Election will be called 2 – 3 weeks from this disbursement.

Budget 2011 is definitely a populist budget, perhaps prepped for the General Election to give a feel good effect to the voters as they go to the polls. But it is a populist budget which has fallen short; at least in my opinion.

For one, the Budget did not address the suffering retail sector which has not fully recovered from the last recession.  The Department of Statistics Singapore indicated that compared to December 2009, retail sales increased by 8.6% (excluding motor vehicles).  But this is a poor comparison as 2009 was a recession year and people will naturally tighten their belts in a recession year.

There is intense competition among the retailers in Singapore partly because the ratio of retail space to population size is much higher than in neighbouring countries such as Hong Kong. The cost of doing business is high (mainly due to spiraling rents), but productivity is low.  Even though the consumers have become increasingly sophisticated and demanding the service quality of retail industry is low. There is also intense competition from overseas retailers.

Against this backdrop, the Budget could have done a little bit more for the retail sector in Singapore.  I would propose that the government consider a rebate system where the retailers could give 5 per cent of the GST back to the consumer as a rebate in the form of shopping vouchers.  Such a scheme will entice the consumer to keep the retail scene in Singapore more vibrant.

By reducing the marginal tax rates for the first $120,000 of chargeable income, the government has significantly reduced taxes for upper-middle income families. I am worried that such reductions will leave the government unable to play its essential role of promoting the common good of essential community services/support.

Although such tax cuts may help in attracting in more foreign talents into Singapore, it would also mean that the tax cuts may provide an excuse for the government to raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST) further for public assistance, when GST for providing public assistance should actually be pared down.

Singapore continues to spend less than 4 per cent of its GDP on healthcare, which is unrealistic.  Even the Health Minister agrees that it is unrealistic to expect national spending on healthcare not to increase to below 10 per cent of GDP. Against this setting, it is disheartening to note that the Budget had allocated a much smaller percentage to healthcare when compared to other developing countries (it is ok that the comparison is not with developed countries as the FM had indicated that his target is to be a first rate developed country is only in 10 years time).

As studies have shown that two-thirds of seniors over the age of 65, who receive long-term care rely exclusively on family, friends and other informal caregivers for helps including everything from shopping, to cleaning to taking medication, to getting to doctors’ appointments and even financial helps, the Budget should have considered the following for those who are in the for the middle-income tier:

  1. Remove the Domestic Foreign Worker levy for qualified foreign workers who are brought in to care for the elderly, so that the elderly could be provided appropriate care at home (where possible) without the need step-down care at nursing home.
  2. Provide Elder Care Tax Credit for qualified elder care expenses. As caregivers make heavy financial sacrifices in spending a large amount of money each year on expenses for aging relatives, including cost of providing food and transportation and paying for medical expenses, such a tax credit would be an added incentive and encouragement for caregivers to provide appropriate care for the elderly in their own homes.
  3. Create a Programme and Registry of Certified Geriatric Caregivers. There is a need to create a programme to train Certified Geriatric Caregivers, who are not full-fledged nurses, as there is no need for all the caregivers for the elderly to be registered nurses. Creating such a programme and a registry for properly certified and licensed caregivers, will ensure the availability of qualified caregivers for the elderly and it will also reduce the high manpower costs involved with hiring registered nurses.
  4. Create Retirement Communities which is a community-based model for aging in place which experts say is an alternative to nursing homes and assisted living centers run by large service providers. Such a community of subscribed members, allows the elderly to stay in their own community as they age, by organizing and delivering programs and services that allow them to lead safe, healthy productive lives in their own homes.

Budget allocation for such initiatives would make significant difference in a greying society like Singapore and Budget 2011 should have considered these.

I like how the FM concluded his speech by saying:

“But whichever way the Government intervenes, we will only succeed if we preserve and strengthen the things that Singaporeans value most – family; everyone aspiring for a better life and feeling they can get there by working hard; and a sense of community.”

The key words there being “feeling they can get there by working hard”; because to ‘get there’ by sheer hard work is going to be an illusion for many.

A survey in 1953-54 found 19 per cent of all households in Singapore to be in absolute poverty.  A similar survey in 1982-83, found 0.3 per cent to be in absolute poverty.  Much of the alleviation of poverty and income inequality in Singapore happened in the 1970s and the 1980s. Towards the end of 1980s, surveys show that most Singaporeans described themselves as middle-class.

That was possible because upward social mobility through hard work was possible for the majority in the 70s and the 80s.  Since the mid 1990s though, there has been less intergenerational income-based social mobility. And it will be even more difficult from the 2010s onwards.  This is because education, training and the availability of appropriate opportunities in this decade gives the upper-middle and the upper income families an advantage in manoeuvring through the system, while modernisation of the economy, depression of wages brought on by foreign workers and increasing government regulation has made it more difficult for the poor to get a head-start.

Budget 2011 is not comprehensively designed to give the less advantaged this head-start.  It cannot be comprehensive because the policies are designed with fear; fear that policies will be abused, fear that work ethics will erode, etc.

Against this background, it is more important for ordinary Singaporeans to only ‘feel that they can get there by working hard’.  So, even though comprehensiveness has been compromised to placing a few hundred dollars of hard cash in your hands (probably just in time before the General Election); and even though in all probability Grow and Share concept may mean that the million-dollars salaried Ministers get a bigger share of the GDP pie than the average Singaporean; I will take it as I probably will not be able to change anything else.

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

王瑞杰说要不是健全储备收入,消费税恐提高至15巴仙

日前(15日)副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰出席新加坡管理大学法学院参与由民情联系组(REACH)和亚洲新闻台携手举办的《群策群力·共创未来》对话会,在回答与会者提问时表示,如果我国没有这些年来累积的稳健储备,消费税调涨就不只增加两巴仙而已,可能还要调至至少15巴仙。 今年2月,财政部长王瑞杰公布2019年财政预算案时表示,将把消费税从7巴仙调至9巴仙,这是因为政府在医疗服务、基础建设以及国安的开销负担都已增加,且未来还可能进一步增长。 王瑞杰续指,消费税或将在2021之2025年间提高,即指下一届大选后。 在对话会问答环节中,有民众向王瑞杰咨询,政府是否回扩大改善税制的努力,使之更具备累进的倾向(注:累进税指的是收入越高,被课税的税率也越高)。 对此王瑞杰回应,目前我国最大的财源收入,来自净投资回报贡献(NRIC),远超过消费税、个人所得税或企业所得税。 他说,正是因为早期建国领袖在新加坡表现良好时,有妥善保管这些储备,使得如今它能够提供更多的收入。 “如果我们国家沒有这些(储备),消费税可能不只会從7巴仙调至9巴仙,甚至应该到15巴仙,而且还可能不够,所以我们必须谨慎处理。”他说。 对于王瑞杰的以上论述,许多网民表示不感到惊讶,在英媒《今日报》的脸书,许多网民留言消费税调涨九巴仙已经是噩耗,而且未来还会增长,他们只得为此挣扎求存。 也有网民挖苦,副总理是否还要人民感谢他,所幸消费税只调涨区区两巴仙? 网友Robert Ridzuandowski :…

SCCB: Singapore companies’ payment delays deteriorate for 3rd straight quarter

According to the report by Singapore Commercial Credit Bureau (SCCB) on Tuesday…