MEDICAL BENEFITS FOR WIDOWS OF GOVERNMENT PENSIONERS
Parliament of Singapore · 16 February 1989 · 7th Parliament
Official Report, 16 February 1989, Vol 52, Issue 9 · Open in the reader (summaries, search, filters)
Mr Leong Horn Kee asked the Minister for Finance whether he will allow the wives of government pensioners to continue enjoying medical benefits after the death of the pensioners.
The Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau): Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have mentioned before in this House in 1986, medical benefits are extended to the pensioner and his wife because of the continuing relationship between the pensioner and the Government as his former employer by virtue of the pension payable to him. When the pensioner dies, his pension stops and his eligibility for medical benefits for his wife will also cease.
Since April 1986, all appointments in the Civil Service except those in the Designated Services are made non-pensionable in order to reduce the long-term burden of Government. If we were to provide medical care for the existing number of around 6,500 pensioners' wives for approximately five years, which is the estimated period whereby females might outlive the males, the estimated cost to Government could exceed $40 million. In view of the cost which ultimately must pass on to the taxpayers, there is a limit to which the Government can continue to take care of the welfare of pensioners and their family members. Therefore, the Government is not able to change the long established rule that the wives of Government pensioners do not enjoy medical benefits after the death of the pensioners.
Mr Leong Horn Kee (Thomson): Sir, does the Minister have the percentage figure of the additional cost to Government versus the total cost of benefits that are given to the civil service as a whole in a year? If the percentage is very small, would the Minister not consider in favour of the pensioners who have served the Government diligently for their whole life?
Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: I do not have the percentage figure in hand. The principle is not so much whether it is a small percentage or large percentage. As long as we are responsible for the disbursement of public funds, I think we have to draw the line somewhere, the principle being that if we extend on these grounds for one category of requests, it would be very difficult not to do the same for others.
Source: Singapore Parliament Official Report (Hansard) for 16 February 1989. Republished on SGParliament.