By Leong Sze Hian


In the article, “Our way, not the Nordic way: DPM Wong”, the Deputy Prime Minister dismissed calls for more cash incentives and parental leave to help raise Singapore’s declining birth rate.  (Today, Feb 26)

Mr Wong Kan Seng, described as Singapore’s “population czar” in the report, “pointed to studies that show no conclusive link between improved fertility rates in a country and generous leave policies or state expenditure.”

Perhaps Mr Wong could cite the “studies” he mentioned? Mr Wong gave as examples Sweden and Germany to substantiate his point. While the two countries spent 3 and 2.8 per cent of GDP on family support, their Total Fertility Rate (TFR) are 1.9 and 1.4 respectively.

While these may be below the replacement rate of 2.1, these figures are nonetheless higher than Singapore’s 1.16.  The examples of Germany and Sweden may thus show that spending more of the GDP on family support may indeed contribute to an increase in their birth rates.

How much does Singapore spend as a percentage of GDP?

Shouldn’t we be focusing on the outcome for Singapore, and try to learn from the positive experiences and statistics of other countries, rather than dismissing such family-friendly policies out-of-hand?

What may interest the Singapore Government, and Mr Wong,  is that the Nordic countries’ incentives, as I understand it, are basically unbiased with regards  to income and education.

In contrast, some of Singapore’s procreation policies are skewed in favour of the higher income and higher educated, such as:

Tax rebate and relief which benefit the higher income more. More than 60 per cent of Singaporeans do not pay income tax, which obviously include the low-income earners.

Matching grant for Child Development Accounts. Poor and lower-income families may not even have enough to survive on a daily basis, so how will they be able to  come up with the cash to top-up the accounts and enjoy the “matching grants”?

Childcare and kindergarten subsidies which never seem to be able to catch up with increasing childcare and kindergarten fees and related costs.

In addition, the notion that giving more financial incentives to the higher income and educated may be “statistically” flawed. Statistics have always indicated that the lower-income and lower-educated are the ones who tend to procreate more.

If you are lower-income, the benefits may make a world of difference. But, if you are highly paid, how much more motivation is there for you to procreate by dangling more financial incentives?

So, perhaps we should learn more from the Nordic countries and other countries, by giving the same procreation benefits, regardless of income or education.

Mr Wong highlighted singlehood as the one issue which “has the greatest impact on our TFR.” Compared to the Nordic countries, where there is “social acceptance” of babies born out of wedlock,  Mr Wong says such acceptance is not still part of Singapore society.

I feel that what is perhaps more important is to focus on the outcome for the children, rather than whether one is married or not. Also, co-habitating couples may “go on to marry after a child is born”.

From a statistical perspective, there may be no causal relationship between higher TFR and the phenomena of babies born out of wedlock. In other words, there may be no statistical basis to say that the higher TFRs was due significantly to the society’s norms of human relationships.

So, let me put it another way. Will Singapore  spend more like the Nordic countries  only when our society accepts single parenthood, in order to raise the TFR?

I believe Singaporeans in general do not discriminate against children whose mothers are unwed. Rather it is government policies on maternity leave, financial assistance, etc, that may be discriminatory.

I think without a doubt, a child in a poor or lower-income family in Singapore today may arguably be worse off than a child of any family in the Nordic countries – whether his parents are wed, unwed, co-habitate or “wed after”.

To say that “it’s clear the problem of the TFR… lies in the rising trend of singlehood” may be another example of a flawed “statistical” causal relationship premise. There are many countries with this trend, but not the corresponding outcome of having one of the lowest TFR in the world like Singapore.

Spending peanuts to make babies?

We have been increasing our TFR package from $500 million in 2001, to $800 million in 2004, and $1.6 billion three years ago.

But, at $1.6 billion, it may still be less than half a per cent of GDP, compared to Sweden and Germany’s 3 and 2.8 per cent.

Selective “statistical denial”?

Mr Wong then cited Taiwan’s example to debunk the claim that leave policies have an impact on the TFR.

“Despite offering generous paid leave,” the Today report says, “Taiwan has the world’s lowest TFR at 0.91. Conversely, even though the United States government offers no paid leave, the country has a high TFR of around 2.1, the replacement rate”.

This is again a flawed argument.

There may be various reasons for the different birth rates between Taiwan and the United States. For example, Americans work much shorter hours than the Taiwanese and Singaporeans. This may have an impact on procreation. So, to selectively pick certain countries, citing just one factor as the conclusion that it may not work in Singapore, is at best “poor” statistical reasoning.

If the “population czar” in charge of improving our procreation keeps citing arguably “statistically” ïndefensible conclusions, is it any wonder our procreation policies keep failing?

Support TOC! Buy Leong Sze Hian’s book here!

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

With 4 million people, Croatia are in World Cup Final. Singapore?

by Bobby Ng KH With a population of four million people, Croatia…

民主党推出全新官方网站 冀与选民支持者更紧密联系

民主党推出全新官网网页,冀望能透过量身定制的官网与选民和支持者保持联系,特别是让手机用户有更优质的体验。 该党称随着选举来临,需走在网络竞选宣传前沿,有关该党活动、与选民互动都能即时在官网新鲜释出,故此欢迎选民、支持者浏览该党专页网址:yoursdp.org 另一方面,民主党也在本周一透露,将在本月28日(周六)下午2时至3时,假Colonial@Scotts场地,推介民主党竞选宣言,欢迎支持者选民出席。 “政治宣言是一个政党愿景和使命的宣言,发表其政见和政策献议,这也是出版这份宣言刊物的重要意义-显示民主党把新加坡改变得更好的意愿。”

居民忧杜佛森林被开发 李智陞:保育绿地或发展不仓促决定

国家发展部长李智陞表示,在规划乌鲁班丹时,政府也有相同的考量,在保留大自然空间和为国人建造未来家园之间取得平衡。 日前,政府宣布计划明年在乌鲁班丹、芽笼、比达达利、登加、兀兰等多个地区推出约1万7000间预购组屋单位供买家申购。 也有居民和环保份子担忧,杜佛森林可能被开发作为住宅区。 对此,李智陞在与国家公园局人员、新加坡自然协会会长林肖恩、关注生态多样性的本地青年组织“Singapore Youth Voices for Biodiversity”联合创办人方俊强等人,走访乌鲁班丹后,在脸书上 发表相关意见。 他表示,无论是保留自然空间,或是未来建造住宅都是重要的需求,不应该仓促做决定。 因此,当局也会在规划时考量各方意见,包括居民、环保分子、购房者等人。 此前建屋局的环境基准报告显示,杜佛森林含有丰富的生态,包括120种植物与158物种,包括飞禽、蜥蜴、两栖类、哺乳动物、昆虫与蜗牛的栖息地,其中涵盖了不乏濒危动植物。…

IPS releases 2-yr-old survey results endorsing Minister Ong’s view 1 week after he said to bring in more FT

In an interview with Bloomberg on 19 Sep, Education Minister Ong Ye…