AMENDMENT TO CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND ORDINANCE

Mr S. V. Lingam asked the Minister for Labour whether he will consider amending the Central Provident Fund Ordinance to enable contributors to withdraw monies due to them from the Fund if (a) they are disabled without being permanently incapacitated from ever continuing in employment; or, (b) they are unemployed for periods of less than two years and are unable to establish that they will never be re-employed in order to enable such persons who so desire to start their own business and thereby cease being burdens on the welfare services of the Republic.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Central Provident Fund Ordinance was introduced for the specific purpose of making provision for employees in their old age, and it was not originally intended that they should be allowed to withdraw before they reached the age of 55. However, provision has been made to permit withdrawals on death or where it appears unlikely that an employee will contribute to the Fund again. If the request made by the hon. Member to allow withdrawals for the purpose of starting their own business in the two specific cases mentioned by him is permitted, it would completely defeat the intention behind the Ordinance. Further, it is pertinent to point out that if withdrawals are permitted for the purpose, their is no guarantee that the sums received, which are generally not substantial, will not be lost or frittered away. If this were to happen, the workers concerned would not have anything to protect them in their old age and they would, in all probability, become a burden on the welfare services of the Republic. In the circumstances, it is considered desirable that no change should be made to the law at present.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, what is the position regarding those who intend to leave Singapore for Malaysia for good? Can they withdraw their money?

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: If a person leaves Singapore permanently and is not coming back, it is quite possible for him to withdraw his money from the Central Provident Fund provided that he can show proof that he is not coming back to stay in Singapore any more.

Mr Ho See Beng: Mr Speaker, Sir, if a bona fide contributor to the Central Provident Fund is in a very difficult situation where he is in need of money, will the Minister consider allowing him to withdraw not the whole sum but, say, 50 per cent or 75 per cent of it in order to meet his needs? For instance, take the case of someone who might need a few thousand dollars to buy a house. In the present circumstances, unless he reaches the age of 55, he cannot touch his Provident Fund. I think on this aspect there must be flexibility in the application of the C.P.F. Ordinance.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the C.P.F., as I have said earlier, is mainly for a person's old age. It is not meant for insurance of any kind. If it is for a loan to start a business or just to tide him over some difficult periods, a bank or a finance company is apparently the answer.

Mr Ho See Beng: This is a very unsatisfactory answer. You go to a bank -

Mr Speaker: Mr Ho, I have, in fact, been allowing more supplementary questions than is usual because we have only 13 questions on the Order Paper today. But we must have some semblance of observance of the Standing Order. Your last question, Mr Ho, I am afraid, was not a supplementary.

Mr Lee Teck Him: (In Mandarin): I have heard the Minister say that the Provident Fund is for a person's old age. But he may be unemployed at the age of 30, and financially he is in hardship. So how can you expect him to live old enough to get his C.P.F.? In my view, there should be some provision to amend the existing C.P.F. laws.