colmt
“Having higher aspirations in life is a reason why Singaporeans find the cost of living here expensive, despite real wages having gone up,” the TODAY newspaper reported Minister of Defence, Ng Eng Hen, as having said on Saturday, 10 May.
Dr Ng was speaking at a Singapore Medical Association (SMA) dinner. He was responding to a question from an audience member about the rising cost of living in Singapore.
“If you look at household goods, per household, what people have – handphone, TV – has actually gone up,” the minister said. He added that now, unlike the past, “mobile phones are almost an essential item for children.”
According to TODAY:

“That Singaporeans find costs of living expensive due to higher aspirations is a reason that will not please people, including himself, said Dr Ng, as the reason is ‘objective’ and does not address ‘issues of the heart’.”

In recent months, the issue of cost of living in Singapore has been in the spotlight, especially after the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) released a report in March which ranked Singapore as the most expensive city in the world to live in. [See here: “Sing on a shoestring”.)
eiu
The EIU report drew a dismissive response from Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the next day.
Mr Tharman said reports like that of the EIU “are meant to measure cost of living for expatriates in various parts of the world, and thus do not reflect those of local residents.”
He said, “In the last five years alone, if you take our middle-income households, our median households, their incomes have gone up faster than the CPI index, the cost of living. In fact, it’s gone up by 10 per cent in real terms.”
But Mr Tharman’s reassurance may be little comfort to the average Singaporean who feels the pinch on a daily basis.
In the last few years, as costs escalated, low- and middle-income Singaporeans felt the pinch the most.
In a March 2011 report, the TODAY newspaper said:

“From basic necessities to hawker meals, from holidays to that new car, from healthcare bills to expenses related to starting and raising a family, it seems that Singaporeans are certainly feeling the pinch of higher prices, according to a Today survey of voters living in the heartlands. Eight in 10 of the respondents said they were worried that such expenses were getting much more expensive.”

And in February 2013, a poll by the government’s own feedback unit, REACH, found that “cost of living issues are the top concerns of Singaporeans.”
col2013b
The fears and worries continued into 2014, with even the younger ones expressing concerns about the cost of living and whether they will be able to find jobs which will pay enough to meet such costs.
In March 2014, the Straits Times reported that “nine out of the 15 young people” it interviewed at a dialogue session with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said they worried they would not be able to afford “basic goods”, namely a flat and a car.
This came “amid rising costs and more intense competition for jobs and at work”, the paper said.
One of the youths interviewed said she “[hoped] to be able to take care of my family and myself with my meagre salary in the future.”
youths
The issue is evidently serious and important enough for PM Lee to mention it on two major occasions so far this year – in his speech at the NTU Ministerial Forum in January; and in his May Day message recently.
“We think in Singapore that we invented the ‘cost of living’, but we did not invent the ‘cost of living’,” Mr Lee said in January, adding that other countries also face the issue. He nonetheless acknowledged that in Singapore “many people worry about job security, cost of living, whether they can do better than their parents.”
In his May Day message, Mr Lee said, “If you compare to any other country in the world, I think we are doing well but we are going through changes, difficult ones and it has brought stresses and strains, competition, anxiety, widening income distributions, worries over cost of living.”
In trying to explain the reasons for Singaporeans’ fears about the issue, Dr Ng perhaps has lost sight of the reality on the ground for the average person. Indeed, his argument is in fact an old one which was used by the government in the past.
In an article in the Straits Times in February 2005, Ms Ling Chien Yien wrote about why Singaporeans complain about the cost of living, and why government statistics do not reflect reality. Her reply could very well be in response to what Mr Tharman had said (see above):

“Statistics may show that growth in income is faster than increases in living costs. But in reality, the middle- and low-income families find it hard to share this optimism. Their complaints against the heavier burden of living costs and price hikes are not without reason.”

In his reply, Chen Hwai Liang, then Press Secretary to the Prime Minister, offered arguments similar to those of Dr Ng’s:

“While costs have gone up modestly, they have not been the main reason that households have felt pressure. Nobody wants to turn back the clock to the days before air-conditioners or handphones, or when only a small minority could afford overseas travel, even though costs might have been lower then.”

Mr Chen added:

“The way forward is to create more prosperity and growth, so that Singaporeans can get better jobs, and attain the higher standards of living that we all aspire to.”

Still, to effectively blame the cost of living on Singaporeans’ “higher aspirations” or perception, as Dr Ng evidently did, is “disingenuous”, says blogger Ng E Jay.
“Dr Ng Eng Hen is widely off the mark,” Mr Ng wrote on his blog in response to Dr Ng’s remarks.
“The high cost of living in Singapore is not a matter of perception alone, and neither is it merely a result of Singaporeans having higher aspirations and expectations in life.”
Two of the causes, he says, are rental and the cost of raw materials.
For example, “businesses, faced with increased rental costs, have no choice but to pass the costs onto consumers, or risk shutting down.”
“That is why the prices of so many of our daily necessities and conveniences of life have gone up so quickly,” Mr Ng wrote. “Hawker fare and prices at food courts have soared in recent years precisely because of rapidly rising rentals.”
He said that “unlike many developed countries where the cost of living is indeed beyond the government’s control, inflation in Singapore is instead generated by the government’s policies.”
“The government has taken in so many foreigners but not increased the supply of housing, and social and educational services to accommodate the increased demand,” Mr Ng said. “It does not take a genius to figure out why prices have risen so rapidly. The government has failed to build infrastructure and increase the level of social support ahead of demand. In the end, it is the citizens who suffer.”

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

An ageing population? – Part 4

~by: Gordon Lee~ Welcome to the last part of this article. In…

STB: Singapore is ‘business as usual’ despite impact on tourism by Covid-19

Singapore has not been spared from the impact of the Covid-19 viral…

“反对党团结仍是一大挑战” 毕丹星对吴明盛隔空喊话?

“我们的目的不是要摧毁政治对手,而是远高于此:追求全体国人更好的新加坡。而工人党处理反对党政治的方式就反映这点。” 工人党秘书长毕丹星回溯2013年榜鹅东补选,工人党前秘书长刘程强曾指“道不同不相为谋”,感叹促成反对党团结的困难。 毕丹星在脸书发文,分享一则来自《亚洲新闻台》的报导,内容是蓝彬明指责某反对党成员在与送餐员对话会上的做法“不负责任”。 毕丹星先是在帖文中称,不同政党和个人都有不同的理念,工人党的基本信念则是,不论政府谁当家,反对党都是议会民主的一部分,扮演重要的制衡角色。 故此,他解释该党目的不是要摧毁对手,而是让国人的新加坡更美好;他也相信国人乃至他们致力合理说服的行动党支持者,都认同“忠实反对党”这种处理方式。但他坦言并非所有反对党都有同一信念。 针对近期的电动滑板车禁令禁令风波,他先是说明自己和费沙议员,曾前往探访因被改装电动滑板车撞上而不幸身亡的王女士家属,以及那些反映因PMD事故受伤的居民,也提到孩童安全的隐忧。 他也阐述本身对电动滑板车禁令,以及送餐员生计倍影响的观点,认为送餐服务特别是为低收入者提供工作机会,让他们得以养活家庭,也是正当的职业。他相信调整政策后个人代步工具仍能重新回归,但在提升基础设施上恐怕知易行难。 他指工人党作为本土政治版图的“小角色”之一,应明确本身的政治目的,也指在更大程度上也解释尽管有良好友善的讨论和关系,反对党团结仍是一大挑战。 吴明盛反驳蓝彬明:打破7千人饭碗才严重 虽然毕丹星未点名,不过他的言论似乎是针对此前盛港西单选区议员蓝彬明,在脸书抱怨有反对党成员在与送餐员的对话会上,把课题政治化。 蓝彬明在本月12日于选区与送餐员对话,他在帖文中指有关反对党成员将问题政治化和炒作在场人士情绪,认为“这是不负责任和可憎的。”,并指这么做对任何人都没有帮助,也在此时理应协助送餐员群体的当儿分散注意力。 吴明盛稍早前则在脸书录视频反驳自己没政治化议题,反指“人们的温饱是政治,饭碗是政治,当你打破7千人的饭碗,那才是严峻的政治状况。”他也质疑让送餐员改用其他代步工具是否能解决问题。…

Three more migrant worker dormitories gazetted as isolation areas, bringing total to 12

Another three foreign worker dormitories in Singapore have been declared as isolation…