Health Minister Gan Kim Yong

It was reported in the news today (4 Jul) that CPF members can now withdraw money from their own CPF, but only if they are “severely disabled” and are at least 30 years old.

For these “severely disabled”, they are now allowed to withdraw cash from their Medisave account in CPF, starting in 2 years’ time in 2020. However, this is contingent on them or their spouse to have at least $5,000 in their accounts.

This is the first time members will be allowed to withdraw cash from Medisave since it was set up in 1984 as part of Central Provident Fund contributions to help defray hospital bills.

Those with at least $5,000 in their Medisave accounts will be able to withdraw $50 a month while those with $20,000 or more will be allowed to withdraw $200 a month. Fifty dollars a month is roughly equivalent to buying 20 packets of chicken rice for a month at $2.50 per packet.

The magnanimous Health Minister Gan Kim Yong explained, “When a Singaporean is facing severe disability and, at the same time, facing financial difficulties, I feel that we can afford to be more flexible.”

Indeed, with the CPF rules now relaxed by the Minister and with the extra $50 a month coming from one’s own savings, the “severely disabled” can now afford to buy, say, an extra 20 packets of chicken rice a month.

MP Chia Shi Lu, head of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Health, also added, “I am glad that these Medisave monies will be disbursed in cash for better flexibility for patients and their families.”

In 2020, the mandatory insurance scheme, CareShield Life, will also be kicking in. It is compulsory for people aged 40 years and younger. Under this scheme, those who are severely disabled will get a minimum of $600 a month for life.

Will those who withdraw money have their application for social assistance rejected?

Earlier last month, Sports advocate and politician, Jose Raymond shared a story of a 59-year-old male Singapore who is both visually handicapped and has kidney failure who has had his application for long-term financial assistance rejected by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF).

It was revealed through a letter from MSF that the reason for the rejection of the application is due to the monthly pay-out that the blind senior receives from his Central Provident Fund (CPF) owing to his medical condition.

“The MSF needs to explain its rationale for using the prevailing Public Assistance rate for rejecting someone like the resident above, who is visually handicapped and who cannot earn any other income because of his medical condition.” wrote Mr Raymond and added, “Our citizens need to lead dignified lives.”

In the response to the story, MSF said in a Facebook post that the Social Service Office (SSO) made an assessment of the resident’s needs.

“To determine how much further assistance he required, the SSO considered his sources of income, money received and support provided by family, friends and the community.”

In response to MSF’s post, Mr Jose Raymond said that the MSF has not responded to the core issue. “Why is one’s CPF being treated as income when it assesses social assistance needs, which was stated in its rejection letter?”

Given the above case study, one will wonder if social assistance application will be cut off or denied for those who are allowed to withdraw up to $200 as such withdrawals might be deemed as a source of income by MSF.

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

万事达请区域总监 “偏好会说印地语”

金融服务业者万事达卡(Mastercard)公司,近期在职业社交网站领英(LinkedIn)发布一则招聘启事,为该公司开放银行产品管理寻找区域总监。 这个两周前发布的招聘启事,要求求职者有能力在区域关键市场中奠定开放银行的链接、寻找潜在客户、协调公司同仁和第三方供应商等,看似中规中矩。 然而,招聘条件对于偏好的语言能力,却提及需通晓印度语(Hindi),外加能说流利英语。既然有关职缺乃是针对新加坡的,却要求求职者需通晓印地语,不免显得突兀。 针对本社的询问,劳资政三方公平与良好雇佣联盟(TAFEP)就表示讲探讨此事,向有关公司要求更多详情。 TAFEP也强调,若要在本地招聘,所有雇主应遵守公平服用的守则,也强调该联盟严正看待任何招聘歧视的现象,也会将任何违规情况通报给人力部以采取行动。 而根据劳资政公平雇佣准则,若招聘条件对英语以外的特定语言有要求,那么雇主就应在招聘广告中合理解释,确保他人能充分理解、扩大求职人选的范围,也能避免他人对雇主留下负面印象。 另一方面,本社也已针对此事咨询人力部和万事达公司,以寻求当局回应。 不久前,本社也报导一家公司在劳动力发展局的MyCareersFuture.sg官网,发布招聘员工广告,不过工作条件却提及“欧洲/西方人士为佳”(preferably Europeans/ Westerners),被当局要求更正。

《海时》读者来函具诽谤性指控 遭本社总编要求撤文

今日,《网络公民》总编许渊臣在个人脸书分享,本地英语媒体《海峡时报》刊载一则读者来函,不过内容“包含诽谤性指控”,被前者要求撤文。 许渊臣在昨日致函新加坡报业控股编辑,要求他们撤下有关文章并确保不再重犯。据了解,《海时》已撤下有关文章。 不过,许渊臣表示他并无意要求对方道歉或索偿,他只希望看到对方“把事做对”。他感叹,近期许多针对《网络公民》的含沙射影,导致群众对本社持有不实的看法。 然而,他不怪有关文章作者持有自己的意见,惟批评《海时》既然声称自己是对抗“假新闻的最佳抗生素”,理应对于文章是否包含虚假信息有更好的理解。 有关文章是在上月29日刊载在《海时》的论坛,呼应此前律政暨内政部长尚穆根,指新加坡有必要立法以应对外国干预或影响本地政策或舆论。 据报导,尚穆根曾指出我国或许也得考虑如何限制外国人参与领导特定组织,这些组织都是密切参与我国政治的。“这个做法与我们限制外国人参与倡导议题公共集会和游行等的立场一致。” 他也认为,现今互联网的普及和覆盖面,也使得干预途径影响更为深远。 除了抨击学者覃炳鑫与自由新闻工作者韩俐颖,曾联名申请成立公司,但使用外国资金在新加坡推动民主和人权等课题;尚穆根点名本社聘用外国人撰写有关新加坡政治的负面文章。 不过,许渊臣此前已经回应,作为总编他必须指导和审核批准这些文章,自己也必须对通讯及新闻部负责。 对于雇用外籍编采人员的说法,他回应我国法律并未阻止我们聘雇外籍雇员,再者,《网络公民》从未接受任何外国款项。“所以律政部长是在吠什么?” 日前许渊臣也上载一张照片,清楚展示本社的作业方式。对于有关被指冒犯总理的文章,对于文章导向、如何撰写和角度,都由总编亲自给予指示,茹巴并没有在指示以外添加其他内容,“所以不管他是马来西亚人、新加坡人、印度人等,有差别吗?” “如同我此前对尚穆根的答复,这很明显是是有组织的行动抹黑本社信誉,令人震惊的是,律政部长竟然复述那些亲行动党粉丝专页和恶搞网站,在过去几周以来作出的指控。”

Little things, not money or upgrading, matter

Elaine Ong / To the skeptical, the opposition MPs’ attempts at walking…

Chee Soon Juan slams MP Murali Pillai who feels MPs are not required to let go of their full-time jobs to be politicians

On Monday (18 November), the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) Secretary-General Chee Soon…