PUBLIC ASSISTANCE SCHEME

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE SCHEME:

(Review of eligibility criteria): 1.

Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports whether his Ministry will review the current stringent eligibility criteria for public assistance so that more needy Singaporeans who need long-term financial assistance will benefit from the Public Assistance Scheme.

2.

Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports in light of the rising food prices amongst other things (a) what is the Government doing to help those on the Public Assistance (PA) Scheme cope; (b) whether the PA Scheme takes into consideration the rising Consumer Price Index which is expected to escalate in the coming year and taking last year's inflation into account, the $290 payout should go up to at least $313; and (c) whether the Government has done any study on the spending habits of this group to determine how much they spend on food as a proportion of the PA received.

The Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I will take Question Nos. 1 and 2 together as they both relate to public assistance.

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: In early December last year, I stated publicly that the Government is monitoring the impact of price rises, especially on those

Column:202

Singaporeans who are most needy, and that we would provide more assistance.

Yesterday, the Minister for Finance reaffirmed both what we are doing and also our commitment to do more for those who need most help and we also emphasised that we would do so in a targeted and efficient manner. I am not yet ready to make any substantive announcements today. So I want to set the expectations right. Nevertheless, I think it would be useful for us to review what we are currently doing, the thinking and the philosophy behind it. I do not expect to have a full debate today, but I am sure we can have a robust and useful discussion in the weeks that follow and especially during the Budget debate.

The Public Assistance (PA) allowance is just one component of the overall safety net for persons who are unable to work, and for those who do not have family support.

Apart from the cash component, PA recipients also receive free medical care through Medifund as well as the Primary Care Partnership Scheme, which allows them to see private practitioners in the neighbourhood. They stay in subsidised rental flats. They benefit from rental, service and conservancy and utilities rebates. And Members would also remember that they received disproportionately more of the growth dividends under the Progress Package as well as the GST credits from the GST Offset Package.

PA recipients also receive extensive community support. For example, Dr Lily Neo, after our most interesting and robust discussion at last year's COS debate, now runs a Meals and Groceries Programme in her constituency which provides an additional $30 a month through meal and groceries vouchers for needy PA recipients in the Kim Seng-Kreta Ayer division. In addition, community

Column:203

organisations such as the Bo Tien Welfare Services and the Thye Hua Kwan provide free meals and food rations to PA recipients. The Shaw Foundation, the Hong Leong Foundation and the Singapore Buddhist Lodge, for example, also give out annual hongbaos to PA recipients regardless of race or religion. PA recipients may also receive home help or befriending services provided by the voluntary welfare organisations.

Let me now touch on the impact of rising prices. My Ministry closely monitors the impact of the changes in the cost of living on our PA recipients, but we do not peg the PA allowance to the CPI per se . Instead, we monitor the cost of items which the typical PA recipient will need. A review is currently on-going and is likely to be completed this year.

At the same time, we also recognise that some PA recipients may have additional needs. Since 2005, MCYS has empowered the Citizens Consultative Committees (CCCs) to play a larger role in helping the PA recipients through the CCC ComCare Funds. From January to September last year, the CCCs helped a total of 6,514 cases through this Fund, and spent slightly more than $1.1 million doing so. On average, each case that comes for help received about $150 per month. Adequate resources have been set aside for the CCCs to provide such assistance, and I can add that most grassroots organisations have not fully utilised the ComCare budget that has been set aside for them.

We also recognise that it is important to be flexible in applying help to the needy. The CDCs, who are our local implementors of the PA scheme, have the flexibility to extend help to needy families that may not strictly meet the PA criteria due to special and individual circumstances. The CDCs can act on a case-by-case basis. And they would take into consideration the family's circumstances,

Column:204

such as the size of the family or the special issues confronting the family. And to ensure that deserving cases do not slip through the net, my Ministry has also set up a Review Committee for Financial Assistance which would look into appeals. The Committee will be chaired by my Minister of State, Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, and it will include the five Mayors. Mdm Halimah, Mr Sin Boon Ann and Mr K Shanmugam are also on this Review Committee. Financial assistance cases can be complex, and this Committee will enhance our system's flexibility in order to help those who are genuinely needy even though they may not qualify on strict criteria. While we exercise flexibility in the evaluation process, I would also tell Members that we do regularly review the qualifying criteria to make sure that they remain appropriate and relevant.

Members may also recall that my Ministry has recently launched the ComCare Call on 9th January 2008. This is a 24/7 telephone call service to refer needy Singaporeans to the agencies that can help them. The People's Association is also stepping up its efforts to improve the capacity of the grassroots network to identify and help needy families. Through the ComCare Local Networks, the CDCs will be working with the grassroots and the voluntary welfare organisations in the area in order to improve awareness and enhance cooperation on the ground.

In summary, the Public Assistance scheme is part of a broader system and is one that depends upon the community's many-helping-hands to ensure that no Singaporean goes hungry.

Mdm Halimah Yacob (Jurong): I would like to thank the Minister for the explanation. Indeed, I think there are many schemes that are good such as the HOPE scheme which has helped 500 families so far. I would like to ask the Minister a follow-up question - whether the Ministry would look at reviewing existing guidelines in the provision of help

Column:205

scheme in two areas. The first area is whether the review could be done with regard to the salary capping which currently most of the financial schemes are pegged at $1,500. There are a lot of families now earning $1,600 or $1,700 who need help but they are not getting help because of this income limit. The second area I would like to ask the Minister is whether the Ministry will also provide greater flexibility because the current PA assistance is very stringent - it is long term. The other schemes are short term. But there are people who need something in between. Will the Ministry consider reviewing guidelines with regard to helping people who need in-between assistance, ie, medium-term assistance, and not short term or very long term?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Her first supplementary question is really the question of the next parliamentary question. Maybe with your permission, I can address that question*, then we can take any other supplementary that may arise. This is with respect to the $1,500 household income which is used as our threshold.

Question No. 3 reads as follows:- Mr Liang Eng Hwa * : To ask the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports in view of the rising prices which have impacted the purchasing power of Singaporeans especially the lower income group, whether the Ministry will consider raising the $1,500 monthly household income criterion for the various financial assistance schemes offered by the Government.

As I said earlier, the Government seeks to mitigate the impact of rising prices on low-income families by providing healthcare, housing and education subsidies. In addition, there are also rebates for utilities, service and conservancy charges. We also subsidise many services for the elderly and the disabled. And many of these subsidies are available to those households whose incomes exceed $1,500. So the point I am trying to make is that not all assistance schemes are pegged to that $1,500 threshold. In addition, the Workfare Income Supplement is also available to all workers aged 35 years and above, and whose individual monthly income does not exceed $1,500. So, obviously, if there is more than one wage earner in the household, this

Column:206

household will still qualify for assistance through Workfare.

The ComCare Fund programmes are available to low-income needy families who are facing financial difficulties. It is no secret that we target the bottom 20% of households to ensure that, in the words of the Minister for Finance, "it is targeted and efficient assistance that is being provided." The latest available statistics as at the end of 2006 show that the household income of the bottom 20th percent was still about $1,500 per month. But a review of the income criterion is currently on-going and will be supplemented by the latest figures once that is available, and once that is available, I can then make a decision on whether to shift that threshold.

But I should also add that we do not just look at the household income when helping needy families. The CDC case officers would consider the specific circumstances confronting that recipient or that needy family before deciding on how best to help them. So this really relates to her second question on flexibility. I think she will understand from my earlier answer that I have provided for flexibility at multiple points of the delivery chain, at the point of evaluation on the part of the CDC, at the level of the Citizens Consultative Committee and the grassroots, because they can provide additional funds and also with the establishment of the Review Committee chaired by MOS Yu-Foo Yee Shoon.

She is referring to another category of people who may be at the borderline who may not yet strictly qualify for longer term public assistance but, at the same time, need more than short-term interim assistance. I have taken this suggestion seriously and we are currently considering whether we may need to have a slightly longer term interim assistance scheme to help families tide over these situations

Column:207

where they may actually be unable to work or be bereft of support for several months at a time. As I said earlier, however, I have not yet arrived at the final formulation and will announce that in due time.

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Two supplementary questions. Given that the PA recipients are those that for various reasons are unable to work or cannot work, I would like to ask the Minister whether this review of the PA allowances can be completed earlier. He mentioned that this is due by end of the year. Eleven months from now is rather long, given that some estimates of the CPI for this year could be as high as 6%. My second question is whether the Minister is prepared to consider, going forward, to institute a systemic review of the PA allowances on a regular basis, perhaps devise a formula that takes into account the CPI which I think is

a good proxy, and peg the changes to the PA allowances to it accordingly.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I thank the Member for his exhortation for me to complete this review more quickly, and I will do so as quickly as practical.
As to his second request, that we conduct regular reviews, we do conduct regular reviews. In fact, Members will recall that we just changed the public assistance rate last year. Now, we have not even reached the Budget debate and we are again talking about whether we need to adjust it. I said just now, and I think it may bear some reiteration, that I am not pegging the public assistance allowance strictly to the CPI. But let me tell Members what I actually do.
I told my staff to first go and consult the nutrition department of the Ministry of Health and work out what people need in order to have a healthy meal, not just a subsistence meal but what they need in order to stay healthy. I then made my

Column:208

staff go to the market - actually, they spent most of their time, I think, in NTUC Fairprice - and buy those items which the Ministry of Health has advised are necessary for healthy nutrition. They literally filled that basket and I made them put it in front of me on my desk so that I could see that this is the real thing. That is what I am really pegging at - real food, food needed to keep body and soul together and, more importantly, to maintain health.

At the end of the day, there are four things which we want to deliver: food on the table, a roof over our heads, healthcare when we need it, and education for our children - four essential pillars. I think we can argue at the edges about what other things we want to add in the package, but consider these four essential pillars.

The next question then is: how are these four essential pillars being provided?

(1) Food will be provided for by a combination of the allowance which we provide, and I can tell you that, as of the middle of December last year, that basket of uncooked ingredients bought from NTUC Fairprice which they put in front of me, costs $95 a month. So, any sum of money, cash which you give in excess of $95, is enough to buy the raw ingredients. Obviously, that is just the raw ingredients.

(2) You then need somewhere to live, cook and the cost of the energy needed to do so. Members would be familiar with the rental rates in a subsidised HDB flat which these recipients would obviously be staying in, plus the cost of utilities, which of course, we know, has gone up because of oil prices. Nevertheless, that sum which we currently provide in terms of the cash allowance is enough for food and a roof over their heads. There are obviously other needs, eg, clothes, they need to move around, and so on and so

Column:209

forth. The cash component is not a generous amount. It leaves very little margin for mismanagement or waste. I would also say that I am not expecting all our public assistance recipients to live purely on their cash allowance. That is why I went to some lengths just now to explain what the additional sources of funds are. And the reality on the ground, if you actually visit your public assistance recipients in your own constituencies, is that you will see that almost all of them are living on more than what the Government gives in the cash component - a combination of ang pows , additional food, hampers and help from the generosity of the local community and Singaporeans. This means that I can honestly stand here and say there is no reason for any Singaporean to go hungry no matter how needy, poor or unfortunate his circumstances are.

(3) For healthcare, the equation is even simpler, because we will cover all their costs, including their transport cost to get to a clinic or hospital.

So, there is food, roof and there is healthcare.

(4) For education, we have a slew of schemes which will subsidise and provide additional subsidies for transport, school textbooks, examination fees and all the other needs which their children need. In fact, for those on public assistance, the net investment that they personally need to put in for the educational needs of their children is zero because it is not just what MCYS does but what MOE does. And you know that MOE has a very generous financial assistance package.

So, the point I am making now is that, yes, we can have an intellectual debate on the numbers. Every year, whoever stands in my place, will have to go through this exercise. But the more

Column:210

important thing is to look at the lived experience. And I feel very confident to say that if, by bad luck, you are going to be poor or your family is going to face unfortunate circumstances, I think Singapore is actually a good place to be in because we will provide you with a good roof over your head, we will make sure you do not starve, look after you when you are sick, and your children will be able to escape the potential poverty trap which, unfortunately, captures so many people in other parts of the world.

So I stand here saying that if anybody needs help and if you notice any person or any family which needs help, please raise your hand, call or email or bring them to our attention, because there is no lack of resources in Singapore. It is a matter of getting the resources to the people and yet doing it in such a way that we do not undermine the fundamental basis of our society, that in Singapore there is no free lunch, that we are all primarily responsible for ourselves and our families. But, if through bad luck or bad decisions, we hit hard times, the rest of the community will help us out, but without losing our commitment to self-responsibility and the necessity for hard work.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister, given that our economy is now a lot more globally orientated and that external shocks impact us beyond our control, will the Ministry now adopt a more pre-emptive as well as a benefit-of-the-doubt approach in granting short-term social or bridging assistance so that Singaporeans faced with immediate or unforeseen difficulties financially will not sink even deeper into a financial crisis and, therefore, create other sorts of problems, such as having to sell their flats and so on?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I have a very short and simple answer to that question - yes.