Source: Google map screengrab.

The Manpower Ministry (MOM) defended itself in mainstream media this week (‘Different method used to calculate CPF payout sums: MOM‘, 8 Jul) saying that it uses a different method to calculate the CPF payouts under the national CPF Life Scheme.
MOM’s comments came in light of a recent study conducted by a team of researchers from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYPP) at NUS two months ago. The team led by Assistant Professor Ng Kok Hoe found that an elderly Singaporean above 65 years old would need $1,379 a month in order to meet his or her basic needs.
In particular, the team found that the household budgets necessary to meet basic needs were $1,379 per month for single elderly households, $2,351 per month for elderly couples, and $1,721 per month for a person aged 55 to 64 years old. Note that the amounts assume the elderly senior is in good health.
The sums were derived from focus group discussions involving more than 100 participants from diverse backgrounds, and using a consensus-based methodology known as Minimum Income Standards (MIS). Participants generated lists of items and services that were deemed a basic need through a common consensus. Each item or service was only included if participants agreed that it was a basic need, and could explain why it should be included.
These included personal care items as well as leisure and cultural activities, as participants agreed that basic needs go beyond subsistence. Household budgets were then determined from these lists.
Prof Ng said, “Such income standards can help by translating societal values and real experiences into unambiguous and substantive benchmarks that policy can aim for.”
MOM behaves defensively
Instead of welcoming the study done by the LKYPP’s team in order to help chart future policy changes, MOM defended itself explaining that it uses a “different” method in arriving the CPF payout sums – monthly income for those above 65 to survive in Singapore.
Mr Shaun Goh, Director for Retirement Systems at MOM, commented that the study was “useful for personal goal-setting and retirement planning”. However, the methodology used by LKYPP is fundamentally different from the Government’s method of arriving at payout sums under the CPF Life Scheme, he said.
Goh did not say if MOM agrees with the proposed $1,379 as a baseline figure for old age requirement. He said CPF retirement sums and corresponding payouts have been established by examining actual expenditure patterns reflected in the Household Expenditure Survey (HES), which is conducted once every five years.
This was done at the advice of experts from the CPF Advisory Panel, Goh noted. “Individuals’ needs vary, and members should plan for their retirement based on their estimated monthly income required,” he added.
Those who expect to spend more in retirement may also set aside more savings in their CPF, and Singaporeans can supplement their CPF payouts with other income sources such as private savings, and family, community and government support, he said.
Of course, Goh forgot to mention that another income source is for elderly Singaporeans with insufficient CPF payouts to continue to work till they drop dead. Already, Senior Minister of State for Health Amy Khor wants more elderly Singaporeans to continue working in the name of “offsetting” the low birth rates in Singapore.
“This brings opportunities for greater labour force participation at older ages, and is important for a country like Singapore where birth rates are relatively low,” she said at an international conference recently.
CPF BRS’ monthly payout less than $800
Currently, the monthly payout under the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS) corresponds to the average expenditure of retiree households per household member for the 21st to 40th percentile.
For BRS, CPF members would need to pledge their property to CPF Board. For those turning 55 this year, the BRS is $88,000 and the monthly payout from 65 is a mere $700+.

Many elderly can’t even meet the BRS. For example, Lim Koh Leong, 60, whose plight was highlighted on social media recently only has $70,000 in his CPF. He wanted to take $15,000 out to fund his daughter’s education but was rejected by CPF Board. In the end, he sought help from his family members.
So, in Mr Lim’s case, in 5 years’ time when he hit 65, his monthly payout would likely to be less than $700, since he couldn’t even meet the BRS.
Obviously, those who can’t work or are drawing only few hundred dollars of measly CPF payout every month would be forced to lower their monthly expenses considerably.
For example, it was reported in the media last year that housewife Chuang Pek Yah, 62, who lives in a condo in Bukit Timah, resorted to dimming the ceiling lamp to save utility expenses. She was even considering doing laundry every other day instead of daily. Similarly, 46-year-old taxi driver Kent Chia was “extra mindful” of his household expenditure and his family tried hard to “save where [they] can”.
Perhaps Director Goh expects elderly Singaporeans to use public toilets in coffee shops and hawker centers to save on water, soap and toilet paper for their call of nature. For food, perhaps he expects our seniors to eat grass everyday, helping NPark to save on manpower to cut grass at the same time.
 

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

梁实轩反诉总理滥用程序遭高庭驳回 上诉聆讯明日进行

今年三月,时评人梁实轩申请反告总理李显龙滥用司法程序,被高庭法官驳回。不过其代表律师林鼎仍对此进行上诉。 今日林鼎在脸书更新上诉近况,指出有关上诉将在明日下午2时30分,在上诉庭进行聆讯。 届时,将由大法官梅达顺、上诉法官潘文龙(Andrew Phang)与朱迪柏拉卡斯(Judith Prakash),聆听林鼎代表梁实轩作出上诉陈情。 不过他提醒明日的上诉聆讯,仍不是总理提告梁实轩诽谤的聆讯,而主要是审视,梁实轩是否应获准反告总理滥用司法程序。 分享贴文,去年11月遭总理提告 只因分享一则脸书贴文,梁实轩于去年11月遭总理提告诽谤,指出梁分享的贴文内容毫无根据,诋毁总理人格和声誉。 有关文章指《砂拉越报告》主编克莱尔,在接受访谈时指出在一马公司弊案中,新加坡和瑞士及美国,成了调查对象。但较后《砂》已澄清有关文章内容不实,要求STR纠正。 然而,梁实轩当时纯粹分享贴文,也未留下任何个人评述和留言。他已遵循资媒局指示撤下了贴文,但还是被总理以法律诉讼对付。 对于总理的提告,梁实轩也由代表律师林鼎,在去年12月底反诉总理滥用法庭程序,并向总理索讨“名誉损害”的赔偿。 不过,高庭法官Aedit…

Legal recourse for foreign workers

HOME sets up legal helpdesk for foreign workers. Jonathan Koh.

Stay for 30 months at address when applying for nearby school

Parents who wish to send their children to schools near their homes…

PAP town council “incurred huge deficit” in 1997

If you thought the Workers’ Party’s Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPEC) is…