SILVER JUBILEE FUND (SINGAPORE) (REPEAL) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

The Minister for Community Development and Sports (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, although the economic crisis has now receded, there are indications of a growing need for short-term financial assistance in the fast-changing new economy. The number of applications for financial assistance to MCDS and the CDCs has grown in the past one year, despite the end of the recession. It is still too early to say if this trend will remain or if there are more fundamental socio-economic factors at play. My officers will monitor any significant changes in the types and numbers of applications.

It is important to adapt our social safety net to meet the challenges of the new economy. Fundamentally, we must help families overcome their difficulties through job training and re-skilling, job placement, family casework, and their children's early development and schooling. However, many of them will still need temporary financial assistance to tide their families over a difficult period. Some charities, the Community Chest, the VWOs, the CDCs and other groups have been providing this help.

However, some aspects of our social safety net must be re-designed to weather the turbulence of the New Economy. Today, apart from the Government funded Public Assistance scheme catering mainly to Singaporeans requiring long term financial help, two charity funds provide relief to many families in temporary financial difficulty.

The first is the 25th Anniversary Endowment Fund or 25th AEF for short, which helps low-income families in various ways. Under this Fund, the Rental and Utilities Assistance Scheme (RUAS) helps families in financial difficulty obtain waivers of their rental and utility arrears and provides grants for their monthly payments until their situation improves. The 25th AEF also funds the Centre-based Financial Assistance for Childcare Scheme (CFAC) which provides children from low-income families early development opportunities while enabling their mothers to return to the workforce. There are currently about 600 families under RUAS and about 400 children under CFAC.

The second charity fund is the Silver Jubilee Fund or SJF. It primarily provides a basic allowance for destitute persons, under the Special Grant scheme. All Special Grant recipients are non-citizens who are considered Permanent Residents. They are mainly the elderly or those unfit to work and without other means of support. There are currently about 190 such cases.

Sir, my Ministry has been reviewing ways to strengthen the social safety net for low-income families and to help them break out of the poverty cycle in the long term. The 25th AEF was constituted in 1991 by Trust Deed from the balance of the funds raised during Singapore's 25th Anniversary celebrations. The SJF was set up in 1935 from funds raised during the Silver Jubilee of King George V, and historically it has been managed under statute. These two charity funds have similar objectives in serving the destitute and low-income families in Singapore. Merging these two funds will bring together their administration, reduce overheads and ensure their combined resources are optimised to meet changing needs. With the delegation of social assistance schemes to all CDCs next year, a common fund will streamline the approval processes for people to get help faster.

My Ministry is therefore intending to set up a common fund, by pooling together the proceeds of the 25th AEF and the SJF. This new fund will be targeted at helping the needy and continue to fund existing schemes such as the Special Grant, RUAS and CFAC schemes. The new fund will also support selective programmes run by Voluntary Welfare Organisations (VWOs) for low-income families, with emphasis on those programmes that help build their capacities to break the cycle of poverty.

An endowment fund by way of a Trust Deed will be set up, so as to give more flexibility in meeting the needs in the community. The combined balance of these two charity funds is estimated to be $44 million, while the gross expenditure is expected to be $2.5 million a year. My Ministry is currently working on plans to augment this sum with Government funds. Our plans for the new fund to uplift low-income families will be announced in due course. As the first step, however, towards the formation of this new fund, the SJF (Singapore) Act will have to be repealed.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I decided to speak on this Bill because it seems to me that the Bill did not clearly set out to what purpose or to what use the monies in the Silver Jubilee Fund would be put to. Incidentally, we have not been told how much there is in this Fund. I do not know why we have not been told that. But this is a charity, and I think the Minister recognises that this is a charity fund. And if one looks at the preamble to the main Act, you will find "And Whereas the subscribers to the said Fund agreed that it should be devoted to the relief of distress in the Settlement of Singapore:". So there was an agreement that it would be devoted to the relief of distress in the Settlement of Singapore. And again, if you look at section 18 of the Act, one finds that the Committee would inquire into cases or classes of distress brought to its cognizance and may at its discretion grant relief or assistance out of moneys at its disposal. So in form and in nature it is a charity.

The Minister speaks in general terms about the fund being merged with the other fund in existence, the 25th Anniversary Endowment Fund, and used to help lower-income families and to promote schemes to help them. I think the purpose and the use to which the moneys are going to be put should be spelt out more clearly in this Bill. It cannot be left in a vague phraseology that it shall be used to help lower-income families. The fund says it is for the relief of distress - distressed families who are in need of help - and that is why this fund was set up. I am sure whoever advised the Government on this Bill have no doubt of the doctrine of cypres that where a charity fund is to be wound up, an application has to be made to the court specifying the purposes to which the moneys are to be used. And the court's permission is sought before the moneys are actually put to any other use, because this is a trust created and agreed to by those who subscribed that the moneys would only be used for one purpose and, that is, to the relief of distress. If it is to be used for anything that goes beyond that, then clearly the court's permission should be sought. The court would have to decide whether these purposes accord with the wishes of those who set up the fund because that is the whole essence of the trust - that those who subscribed gave it for a specific purpose, and you have got to honour that trust, and not use it for anything other than for what it was agreed. So to just say, as it says in this Bill, that the moneys in the account shall be paid into such fund as the Minister may direct is too wide, and there is no guarantee that the trust placed by the subscribers and those who paid into this fund will be honoured in the disposal of the funds.

Dr S. Vasoo (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank you for allowing me to say a few words.

Sir, as usual, the NCMP wants to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Do you know the law, Dr Vasoo?

Dr Vasoo: I do not need to know the law fully. But all I know is just ---

Mr Jeyaretnam: Obey the law!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order.

Dr Vasoo: All I need to know is that we want to reduce bureaucracy. We do not want to have too many funds where the poor, the disabled and others would not know where to go. But all we want is the ability to administer a more efficient service and therefore as I see, the whole proposal is to try and bring these two funds together so that the poor, the disabled and others who need the fund can get it as quickly as possible. It is done in a very concerted manner, and that is the basic objective that we have to look at. The Member is trying to keep something which is already out of date. The crux of the issue is: would the poor get help as quickly as possible? Are there adequate funds that would be available to help them? This is the basic issue that we have to address. The repeal of the Act, Sir, is one way to address too many set-ups where it can be very confusing for the poor to get the help required.

Sir, I support the Bill to repeal the Silver Jubilee Fund Act. I see that there is little fund left for it to continue. But with the amalgamation of this fund of $44 million, many poor and disabled and those who need help could be given the necessary support. What I would like to know is the fate of these 190 individuals who are now getting support from the Silver Jubilee Fund. How is help going to be extended to this group of people? Will the proposed fund be open to families and individuals who do not qualify for public assistance and would help be accorded to this group of people?

With that note, I support the proposal to repeal the Act.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I have got one question for the Minister. He says that the number of applicants seeking aid has increased. May I know what is the increase in the number of applicants?

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: I would like to thank Members for their comments. With regard to the fears expressed by Mr Jeyaretnam, I can give a guarantee that people in distress would still be helped.

Mr Jeyaretnam: You cannot use it for any other purpose.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Yes. And if it is (used for other purpose), he can come to Parliament and question me again.

With regard to the question by Dr Vasoo, whether the proposed fund can be used for those not under PA, the answer is yes. Indeed, the 25th AEF has been used for RUAS. It is used for temporary relief of those not under PA, but yet need help to pay for their arrears in rent and utilities. As I mentioned earlier in my speech just now, the fund of $44 million would be augmented; we will come back to Parliament to ask for more funds to help more needy people.

With regard to the 190 persons that are currently under the fund, they will continue to be helped. As I mentioned earlier also in my speech, for all intents and purposes, the number of people under the existing fund will continue to be helped.

With regard to Mr Jeyaretnam's question about how much we have in the fund, the amount is $5,168,439 as at June this year.

Mr Chiam asked for the number of people seeking aid. Yes, it has increased. Actually, the average number of applicants for help last year, for example, was about 220 per month. But so far this year, it has gone up to 250 a month. So that is the extent of increase in the number of applicants that we have. We are watching this trend to see whether it stabilises or increases, and if they do, what are the causes for this increase.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Abdullah Tarmugi].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.