TAKE away the financial jargon and all the numbers being bandied about, and what last week's lengthy debate on the Central Provident Fund reforms indicated was a growing dichotomy between what the people of Singapore want from the Government, and what it is willing to give.
From the call on the Government to contribute in part — and even in full — to the upcoming annuity pool and to provide better returns than the upcoming 1-percentage-point guaranteed interest rate for CPF funds, to outright demands for a national pension plan or fund for the aged, the plea from Singaporeans for the Government to dip into its financial coffers even more was loud and clear.
The Government, however, stood firm on its longstanding aversion to anything resembling welfarism. As Second Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam reiterated in his speech in Parliament, the state will help Singaporeans make sure they have enough in their retirement piggy bank, but filling it up must be the responsibility of every citizen — not the Government.
But can this social contract between the Government and the people stand the test of time?
As Singaporeans grapple with an ageing population and the besiegement of the forces of globalisation, one can only expect such calls on the Government — that has, in recent years, presented itself as one that cares — to do more to get louder.
They look at other countries that have been generous in dealing with ageing populations and wonder why Singapore has to be unique. The South Korean Government, for instance, recently announced it would offer cash incentives of 300,000 won ($490) to companies for each worker that they employ beyond the retirement age of 60.
They read about the well-filled state coffers — from the strong reserves to the healthy returns achieved by government investment vehicles Temasek and GIC — and they see no reason why they should not get what they perceive as their fair share of it.
They lament that having slogged all their life to help build the nation, they still have to fend for themselves when they're old.
And sceptical of how many actually do live past 85, they wonder why the Government cannot do more to help care for this small group of old and frail in the country.
To many, things don't seem to be working in their favour. Already, as many as seven in 10 Singaporeans have below $60,000 in their combined CPF accounts, while most are already bemoaning the fact that they would have to wait longer than expected to enjoy their retirement savings, thanks to the upcoming delay in the draw-down age of the Minimum Sum.
By all accounts, the Government has not been tight-fisted. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong himself said on Sunday that the 1-percentage-point increase in interest, to be paid out to the first $60,000 in all CPF accounts, is "100-per-cent risk-free" and that one would be hard-pressed to find a better deal elsewhere in the market.
The $700-million bill to pay for the CPF changes will be funded by the Budget, not on reserves. And on the whole, the Government has spent $11.7 billion on Budget surpluses and Goods and Services Tax offset packages since 2001.
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan also drove home the point that a large portion of the Government's assistance to the people comes in the form of subsidised housing, which has allowed Singaporeans to own their own home — an asset that can be cashed out upon retirement.
But these reminders are cutting no ice with the disgruntled.
Perhaps to the man on the street, such a circuitous way of giving simply does not register. Take the Goods and Services Tax hike for one. The Government raises the tax, but gives offset packages.
Still, everyone remembers the hike, but who speaks of the aid?
And why shouldn't the Government give more directly to the people? Why not channel the $700 million being used to fund the CPF interest rate increase to set up an old-age fund instead, as some MPs have suggested during the debates last week?
The thinking behind the Government's actions is, as expected, one of taking ownership and responsibility — not just relying on handouts but playing a role in planning for one's own retirement.
Good intentions, no doubt, but they are as confusing as they are well-meaning.
After all, it is understandable that a people so used to intervention by the Government in so many aspects of their life — just how to use their CPF monies is a case in point — finds dissonance in the message that their retirement is their responsibility.
Having been told all their lives that the Government knows best, they are now told they have to fend for themselves. This, they find hard to swallow — especially when one is old and "boh geh" (or toothless, in Hokkien), to borrow what a grassroots leader said on Sunday.
The task of preparing for an ageing population is a huge challenge. But an even bigger challenge for the Government, as it tackles the looming problem head-on, could lie in managing the expectations of Singaporeans.
And in convincing Singaporeans that this is a responsibility to be shared by the old, their children and the Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment