During the inaugural Progress Singapore Party Talk held by Progress Party Singapore on 10 September, renowned economist Yeoh Lam Keong outlined the problem of poverty in Singapore and proposed several necessary reforms that he says will help lift thousands of citizens up from absolute poverty.
Mr Yeoh, who is best known for being the former Chief Economist of GIC, explained that he had conducted an inter-ministerial study to look at poverty in Singapore back in 2007. Throughout the course of conducting this study, Mr Yeoh said, “To my shock and horror, I realised that the position of the poor in Sg was much worse and much more awful than I can imagine. So that struck me.”
He explained that the findings of the study presented to several senior government officials including two Deputy Prime Ministers and several senior ministers and permanent secretaries. While the recommendations put forth were well-received, Mr Yeoh noted that government was slow in implementing some of the recommendations they had opted to take up, thus leaving many gaps till today.
The absolute poor, Mr Yeoh explained, are counted as such when their regular income does not enable them to lead a decent existence and they are unable to cover their basic needs like food, shelter, utilities, medical services, and education. Not being able to meet those needs puts you below the living wage.
“It’s a painful and shameful experience and disgraceful for the rest of society,” Mr Yeoh lamented.
Mr Yeoh pointed out that while Singapore has seen a gradual decrease of absolute poor over the past few years, the latest estimates are that there are around 250,0000 Singaporeans who are absolute poor. That’s about 100,000 to 130,000 or about 7.5-10% of households in Singapore.
Mr Yeoh then noted that one of the recommendations that weren’t taken up back in 2007 was that poverty be measured properly. This is a crucial step because if we don’t define a problem properly and exactly, we cannot design a solution.
Mr Yeoh went on to outline those recommendations which government can take up to adequately help lift Singaporeans out of absolute poverty.

Increase the Welfare Income Supplement (WIS)

According to his estimates, there are about 60,000 to 75,000 households in Singapore which are absolute poor, even after receiving WIS.
Mr Yeoh described WIS as a ‘great scheme’, noting how it started at $150 a month and has increased to $250-$300 a month. Unfortunately, about 60% of that payout goes into CPF, leaving beneficiaries with only $100-$150 in cash each month when they actually need $700-$800 in cash.
“Yes they moved in the right direction, but in my humble opinion, they did very little. And one of the reasons is, I feel, they don’t have a handle on how much they need to raise it because they did not measure it properly,” said Mr Yeoh.
As for Comcare, Mr Yeoh said it is not enough as it only reaches about 40% of those who need it, giving only $250-$300 a month. This only covers about 25% of the gap, said Mr Yeoh. And even if you add in all the other schemes and programmes, that still only covers about one-third of the gap.
Mr Yeoh suggests that the WIS be increased by about $500-$600 in cash. This would automatically raise the median take-home income above the living wage and ensure that basic needs are covered.
Here the economist asked a pointed question of why Singapore, a country with one of the highest per capita GDP in the world, has so many working poor. The reason, he says, lies in a grave policy error on the part of the government.
“The reason is, aside from the normal international reasons like competition from third world or technology, the main reason is actually that for about 20 years, we made a big policy error in Singapore’s growth. We had a goal for growth policy which let in excessive unskilled foreign workers. So we let in, for a period of 20 years, 1.2 million unskilled foreign workers – and they pushed down Singapore’s labour supply and demand, dampened the wages of people right at the bottom.”
Still, Mr Yeoh concedes that the government has “recognised this error”. Since 2010 when policies were introduced to stem the influx of unskilled foreign labour, real wages have been on the rise. However, Mr Yeoh asserts that it would take too long, possibly 10 years, for wages to reach back to the levels of a living wage. In the meantime, what are the poor to do?
Mr Yeoh emphasised, “I feel that because it is a policy error, it is incumbent upon the government to step in and support these people until the wages rise…and therefore support them until we reach that level where they are no longer in poverty.”
This, he says, can be done by increased the WIS payout. It will cost the government an additional $1.7 to $2 billion or 0.45% of GDP which Mr Yeoh insists is “eminently affordable”. He also pointed out that the cost will taper off as more people start to earn a living wage. The government “can afford to pay this on a declining rate over the next 10 years”.

Increase the Silver Support Scheme (SSS)

The conservative estimate for the number of elderly Singaporeans who are absolute poor is 20,000 to 25,000 households, and that figure is set to triple in the next few decades as baby boomers – the largest cohort – ages.
Many baby boomers are poorly educated to begin with, says Mr Yeoh, and they tend to earn low wages. Crucially, while the first half of their careers saw baby boomers earning a middle-income wage in a middle-income country, policy errors have resulted in this generation retiring in one of the most expensive first-world cities on the planet.
“These are people that built modern Singapore with their hands and their blood and sweat and tears. If we cannot find it in ourselves to see that this is a great social injustice that these people should retire in poverty, absolute poverty, there is something deeply wrong with this society,” chided Mr Yeoh.
For the elderly, the government introduced the SSS in 2011 which is a non-contributory pension. In the beginning, the payouts were $200 per month, now it’s about $250 a month. Again, Mr Yeoh says it’s “excellent” that the scheme was introduced but is “way too little”.
Even with the Personal Assistance (PA) scheme and Comcare, about two-thirds of the problem is not being addressed.
Mr Yeoh concedes that SSS is a good scheme and that all we need to do is put in more money. He suggested increasing SSS by about $500 to $600 a month and having PA and Comcare be means-tested for special needs after the SSS payout.
This would raise the income of the retired poor to above $800 per capita per month, thus covering basic needs. This would still only be about two-thirds of the estimated basic income suggested by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) at National University of Singapore in May of $1,379 a month.
For this, the government would have to spend an extra $800 million to $1 billion a year or 0.2% of the GDP. But as the number of retirees triple, the cost would also triple to about $5.6 billion or 0.6% of the GDP by 2050. This, Mr Yeoh says, is also still “eminently affordable”.

Introduce a comprehensive unemployment protection system

For the third category of poor, Mr Yeoh says there are about 25,000 to 35,000 households that make up the unemployed poor.
The economist cautioned that the future will likely see much higher technological unemployment as AI and info-comms technology make more and more professionals and unskilled workers redundant. He also explained that the gig economy also means there will be an increased number of unemployed poor due to global trends, as people jump from contract to contract, leaving people without an income.
He warned, “We are not future-ready for these trends because Singapore is alone is not having any unemployment insurance among EOCD countries”.
Mr Yeoh explained that Singapore needs a “national comprehensive unemployment protection system” that will either insure the unemployed for three month’s wages to give them a chance to secure employment or at the very least allow people to borrow from their own CPF while they are unemployed which they can later pay back once they have a job.
He added, “In absence of an unemployment insurance scheme, surely this is your money, you should have access to it when you are unemployed and need it.”
Singapore needs a comprehensive national unemployment protection system, Mr Yeoh asserted. “We need it because the future is coming at us very fast.”
The additional cost to the government would be, according to Mr Yeoh’s estimates, about 0.3% to 0.4% of the GDP or about $1.6 billion per year. Again, it’s “not much”.

Eliminating the bandwidth problem and other supporting reforms

He also crucially pointed out that these schemes should be automatically given without people having to apply or reapply for assistance. “The fate of our poor is to fall into the chasm”, said Mr Yeoh but making the assistance automatic will prevent that from happening.
It will also eliminate the bandwidth problem – where the poor do not have the focus or concentration to apply for all these schemes when they’re too busy trying to figure out how to get their next meal. He also suggested the elimination of family-based means-testing which he says is a “terrible thing”.
Making these schemes automatic also eliminates the politicisation of welfare, which Mr Yeoh commends the government for taking steps to reform. However, he noted that he doesn’t think the Community Development Council should be administrators and dispensers of welfare. Instead, the onus should be on the ministries. Attaching the dispensation of welfare benefits to a political party is a “slippery slope”, he warned.
“You are hostage to political fortunes and you should not be. It should be based on needs.”
In total, all three reforms would cost the government about $4.5 billion today or about 1% of the GDP. While this might increase by 0.5% of the GDP as more of the population ages, it will also decrease as the working poor become better off. Mr Yeoh then pointed out that Singapore has a structural budget surplus o about 5% of the GDP or about $20 billion.
He then said, “So we have $20 billion to spare but we cannot spend $4.5 billion or $5 billion on our absolute poor?”
Apart from these three major reforms, Mr Yeoh also noted other necessary supplemental and supportive reforms that can be done from creating more decent and affordable subsidised rental flats, having adequate infrastructure and subsidies for universally affordable out of pocket chronic primary healthcare and long-term care, subsidies on educational out of pocket costs, subsidies on public transport for the poor, and leasehold reform.

The government should do the heavy lifting

Wrapping up his presentation, Mr Yeoh said: “The core of absolute poverty – to me, the most painful and shameful form of poverty – can largely be eliminated easily, affordably but needs a few key government reforms.”
“It’s simple. It will make a huge difference to a quarter-million citizens right at the bottom. It will increase social mobility and equal opportunity to these people,” he added.
He then noted that the heavy lifting of eliminating poverty should be done by the government as they have the resources to do so. This will then free up Volunteer Welfare Organisations (VWO) to do the “valued-added” work that involves the human touch of restoring the dignity of the poor.
“Eradicating absolute poverty is a public good, therefore, like building, roads, like building hospitals, like buildings schools. The government needs to do the heavy lifting financially and organisationally. So what are we waiting for?”

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

黄鲁胜重新受委总检察长 任期至2023年

黄鲁胜昨日(14日)于总统府宣誓就职,重新获委总检察长,任期三年至2023年。 哈莉玛总统于昨日在脸书发图文,图中显示黄鲁胜在大法官梅达顺的见证下,向总统宣誓。 总统称“有信心黄鲁胜能公平正直地履行职责。” 黄鲁胜现年66岁,是在2017年初接替维克拉惹,成为我国第九任总检察长。 黄鲁胜在本地法律界有30多年的执业经验,专长于银行业、企业与金融服务相关法律事务。他也曾经担任海事及港务管理局,以及新加坡国际仲裁中心主席。 曾任总理私人律师 不过,他也曾担任总理李显龙的私人律师。对此,工人党议员林瑞莲曾在国会质问,委任黄鲁胜为总检察长可能存在利益冲突。 当时律政兼财政部高级政务部长英兰妮则辩称,政府是经过详细和严格的挑选后,决定由黄鲁胜出任该要职,并指“我国法律清楚列明该如何处理涉及利益冲突的事件,并严格遵守这些规定。” 而如果有案件是总检察长或副总检察长在担任律师期间曾处理过的,他们将自行回避。

《防假消息法》也管私人聊天群组? 网民感隐私被侵犯“很不舒服”

律政部高级政务部长辉于周二(5月7日)在国会中说明《防止网络假消息和网络操纵法案》细节时指出,散播假信息的交流平台,如私人聊天群组或社交媒体群组,以及端对端(end-to-end encryption )加密,只允许发送者和接收者交流的网站将被屏蔽。这项举措让很多网民感到不舒服,抨击如同隐私被侵犯。 在《防假消息法》辩论中,唐振辉曾表示,聊天群组和社交媒体群组般的封闭式渠道,与开放式渠道一样,是“公共扩音器”。“由于假消息可以被隐藏起来,这些渠道则是故意散布假新闻的理想平台。研究人员认为,在封闭式的空间里,人们更容易受到假新闻感染情绪,因为群体内人士是熟悉和相互信任的。” “因此,草案意识到封闭式平台不一定是私人的。他们不仅可用于个人和私讯,但是也能在同一个时间和数百或数千人交流。” 根据该法案,部长一旦指出某些新闻内容不属实,将有权发布更正令或停止向外沟通,基本上是强迫散布假消息的个人或公司、网站作出更正或撤出有关消息。 他指出,更正令将以通告形式发出,警告人们有关的假消息,有关通告也将列出事实或与提供事实的网页衔接。 他也指出,除了在新闻媒体和互联网中介等平台上公布或放大有关的更正通告,更正通告也可能成为假新闻的警告标签。“有关指示可以针对任何在网上发出假新闻的平台,无论是什么平台,无论是开放式或封闭式的,包括端到端加密的平台。” 根据《防假消息法》,唐振辉说道,有关的指示具备弹性,能够处理散播在未来开发平台上的假新闻。 如独裁统治言论 在有关的信息公布后,许多网民纷纷表示政府采用的《防假消息法》程序,已经侵犯了他们的隐私,感到非常不满。 他们在《海峡时报》脸书专页上纷纷留言,表示对此举感到不安,并且听起来“很像独裁统治”。Mohd Iskandar…

本地男子惊见自家地址 被五名外籍人士冒用

和外籍人士“共享”住址?一名本地男子在查阅人力部官网后,惊讶发现,自己的住家地址,疑被五名外籍人士冒用为本地注册住址。 这名名为鲁再迪(Ruzaidie Dar Surnik )的男子在本月18日,于脸书分享自己的遭遇。他是受到邻居提醒,许多住户曾面对地址被客工冒用的问题,住户要到人力部官网查核,避免自己在不知情情况下住址被冒用。 不过这一查之下,可把鲁再迪吓坏了,发现在官网中显示,有五名来自不同公司,疑是中国籍的客工使用鲁再迪的住家地址,作为居留本地注册地址。 不管是谁,若个人资料,特别是住家地址若被他人冒用,肯定感到不安。鲁再迪就表示,如果有人心怀不轨,例如盗用地址去跟大耳窿借钱、或者做不法勾当,到时警察找上他家该怎么办? 鲁再迪告诉本社,在发现此事后他立即向人力部反映,也表达他的忧虑。对此人力部回应严正看待此事,并会调查和严惩那些提供假个资的人士。同时也会标注鲁再迪的住址,曾被注册为客工的住址。 “登记客工时应向住户求证” 鲁再迪向本社反映,他希望人力部能正视这些问题,在登记客工资料的程序也要加强管制,例如若有住址被客工拿来注册,应先向住户发出通知求证。 鲁再迪也致函这些客工的雇主,反映问题。其中两家公司则回函鲁再迪表示他们会调查有关客工。 至于人力部的官网,也有提供住户查询的线上服务,核实和更新持工作准证者租用住家的情况,若客工已搬走可更新资讯,或反映有无住址被冒用的问题。 鲁再迪也在脸书留言中,和网民讨论,指当中可能有漏洞,或者缺乏监督审核机制,致使一些人士得以任意使用他人住址注册。

National Youth Council partners Redd+E to engage youth purposefully through esports

Earlier this week, the National Youth Council (NYC) forged a partnership with…