Social Service Offices: One-stop helping hand

One-stop social service: 30,000 needy families already better off
In nearly two years, the new service offices have helped many lower-income households, though Insight finds there are still wrinkles to be ironed out
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 7 Mar 2015

IN NOVEMBER 2013, Madam Choo Lay Ting and her husband Richard Ang stepped with trepidation into the recently-opened Social Service Office (SSO) in Boon Lay, in what was once part of a Housing Board void deck.

The couple needed financial help, and badly - Mr Ang, now 50, used to be a chef but had been out of work for over a year after breaking both ankles in a fall. Madam Choo, now 41, took care of their two young children at their rented one-room HDB flat.

They had asked their MP, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Lawrence Wong, for help and he suggested they visit the new SSO, only a 10-minute walk from their home. The SSOs were being set up in HDB towns to bring social assistance closer to needy Singaporeans. The Boon Lay office was one of 10 opened by then.

Previously, they would have had to trek to one of just five Community Development Councils (CDCs) - often crowded and not at the most convenient of locations - for ComCare assistance.

The Angs found the brightly-lit Boon Lay SSO to be welcoming - for one thing, it allows walk-ins, unlike some organisations that require a referral. Receptionists advised them that it would be about half an hour before an officer could see them.

The couple went on to spend an hour with a social services officer, who asked intensely personal questions about their finances and family history, but in what they felt was a respectful, polite way.

Six weeks or so later, in January, the family received the first of monthly $200 cash grants.

Welcome to the new and accessible face of Singapore social assistance. The Angs became one of 30,300 households last year to receive financial help from SSOs, which were launched during the Budget of March 2013 and come under the Ministry of Social and Family Development.

And the SSOs' reach is likely to be much greater, if the offices tracked non-financial aid they helped to provide, such as in counselling and anger management.

The first SSOs were made up of converted offices in CDCs - previously responsible for administering ComCare, the national aid fund whose assistance includes monthly cash grants and rental fees. The first dedicated SSO opened at Kreta Ayer in August 2013.

The scheme has blossomed from the initial aim of 20, to an expanded 24 offices by this year, in HDB towns islandwide. The aim is for at least 95 per cent of those in need to be able to access social services within 2km of where they live or work.

The Singapore Budget over the years

Budgets that built a nation
Singapore's first post-Independence Budget was delivered in December 1965, as the country grasped its national purse strings for the first time. Fiona Chan and Marissa Lee chart the story of Singapore's growth and prosperity through 50 years of annual Budget statements.
The Straits Times, 7 Feb 2015

Since 1965, Singapore’s annual revenue and spending have grown tenfold. But even as the economy powered from Third World to First, the Government was always careful to balance its Budgets.

BARELY four months after Singapore was abruptly turfed out of the Malaysia federation, the new nation's first Finance Minister rose in Parliament on Dec 13, 1965, to deliver its inaugural Budget.

On the face of it, it was an unenviable task. Newly independent Singapore faced stiff economic challenges: despite having no natural resources and no more hinterland, it had to create jobs and better housing for its citizens, which required policies enabling trade and industrialisation.

Yet, in a speech that lasted for an hour and 20 minutes, Mr Lim Kim San revealed that Singapore was well-placed financially to face its uncertain future.

Its official foreign reserves were 15 times its external debt - "a position which is strong by any international standard", he said.

Although it had been only six years since the island obtained full self-government in 1959, this was due to "prudent budgeting and careful allocation of resources" in that time.

External debt stood at 59 million Malaya and British Borneo dollars - the currency Singapore shared with Malaya, Brunei, North Borneo Sarawak and Riau at that time - while foreign reserves were more than 15 times that, at M$914.7 million.

Fifty years later, as Singapore prepares for its Golden Jubilee Budget on Feb 23, this financial fortitude has not wavered.

The country has gone from Third World nation to First World metropolis - with per capita gross domestic product (GDP) shooting up from just $1,734 in 1966 to more than $69,000 in 2013 - and has done so without running large deficits or incurring external debts.

Its coffers bulge with decades of budget surpluses - the result of 50 years of judicious Budgets, as well as revenue from land sales and some income from investing the national reserves.

The latter two are not included in the yearly budget position presented to Parliament.

Yet ask any Singaporean what they expect in the upcoming Budget, and few will mention these economic intricacies.

Rather, many view it as a lottery of sorts where they might get goodies such as one-off cash payouts, depending on the "lucky" target group each year.

No payouts for some with tighter Workfare criteria

By Toh Yong Chuan, The Straits Times, 30 Jun 2014

NOT ALL workers earning below the ceiling of $1,900 a month get help from the Workfare scheme started in 2007 to supplement low-wage workers' income.

Some 20,000 of them earn less than that amount, but do not qualify because they own more than one property or their spouses earn more than $70,000 a year.

The Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board disclosed the figure for the first time in reply to queries from The Straits Times last week.

These workers have been excluded from Workfare after the criteria of the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme was tightened last year.

"The tightening of the WIS criteria was to ensure they are focused on low-income households," said the CPF Board.

When Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam announced the additional eligibility criteria in his annual Budget Statement last February, he said these better-off individuals "are not the target of the WIS scheme".

The CPF board said 408,000 workers received Workfare payments for work done last year, down from 420,000 in 2012.

But despite fewer workers, the total Workfare amount handed out rose from $459 million in 2012 to $628 million last year. The CPF Board said that this is because the payout ceilings have risen by between $350 and $700 per worker.

Under the scheme, workers earning $1,900 and below each month receive income supplements of up to $3,500 a year, depending on age. Older workers receive more.

Member of Parliament Zainal Sapari supports the tighter Workfare criteria. “It ensures that Workfare goes to those who really need the extra help.”

OCBC gives staff $3 million in Wage Credit payouts

By Chia Yan Min, The Straits Times, 19 May 2014

LOCAL lender OCBC is handing out $3 million to about 1,500 staff members - the bank's first payout from a government scheme introduced last year to help firms restructure and cope with a tighter job market.

The bank is believed to be the first major company here to completely refund its Wage Credit Scheme payout to its workers.

OCBC's employees - most of whom will receive between $1,000 and $3,000 - can either credit the money to their Central Provident Fund accounts or invest in shares via the bank's Blue Chip Investment Plan.

The payouts are part of the $3.6 billion Wage Credit Scheme introduced in the 2013 Budget.

Under the scheme, the Government subsidises 40 per cent of the pay rises given to Singaporean workers earning up to $4,000.

It expires next year.

The first tranche of payouts went out to companies in March, with 74,000 employers from a range of industries receiving about $800 million in total. Some 75 per cent of the cash went to small and medium-sized enterprises.

The 1,500 OCBC employees make up a quarter of the total staff strength across the bank itself and its OCBC Securities unit, and they will get the payouts in the next two months.

"The amount... may not be large but we hope to contribute to his or her long-term saving or investment plan," said OCBC chief executive Samuel Tsien.

Income + wealth inequality = More trouble for society

Data and studies on the wealth gap are needed to address inequality

By Robin Chan, The Straits Times, 11 Feb 2014

MUCH attention given to inequality in Singapore in recent years has focused on income inequality. There is a good reason: Singapore’s income gap, as measured by the Gini coefficient for income, is one of the widest among developed countries at 0.478.

The Gini measures how income is distributed in a society. The closer the Gini is to 1, the more unequal the distribution of income.

To narrow this gap, the Government has made efforts to raise wages at the bottom and increase taxes on wealth at the top. Among other things, it has given cash handouts and supplemented incomes with Workfare Income Supplements for low-income earners.

It is also working with tripartite partners to boost incomes for low-wage sectors. It recently required cleaning companies to follow wage guidelines for cleaners’ starting pay.

In addition, the Government has started extracting a bigger pound of flesh from the rich through the tax system. Last year’s Budget introduced more taxes on high-end assets, including luxury cars and homes.

Some analysts are predicting more such moves to help lessen the income divide in this year’s Budget on Feb 21.

But the income gap is only one part of what separates the rich from the poor. Another – possibly more alarming – factor fuelling economic and social inequality is wealth inequality, according to a number of recent studies.

Wherefore wealth?

INCOME often refers to earnings from work, although it can include income from other sources such as rent. Wealth measures income accumulated over time, so it tends to have a cumulative effect over years. Wealth also includes assets in the form of property, stocks and inheritances. All these can grow in value separately from income.

A person with zero income can be very wealthy. A person may have $10 million in assets (and is hence considered wealthy) but can have zero income in a particular year – if he is not working and does not collect rent or dividends from his assets. Income and wealth must be taken together for a fuller picture of a household’s true economic power.

American think-tank Pew Research Centre last December published a report on wealth inequality which said: “Most researchers agree that wealth is much more unevenly distributed than income.”

It cited data showing that the top one-fifth of United States families earned about 60 per cent of all income but owned nearly 90 per cent of all wealth.

A separate report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) last October said that the ratio of private wealth to national income in the world has more than doubled since 1970. This means wealth is growing more quickly than incomes.

“Household wealth is very unequally distributed – even more so than income,” the report said. “In advanced economies, the top 10 per cent own, on average, more than half of the wealth (up to 75 per cent in the US),” it added.

This means wealth is “arguably, a better indicator of ability to pay than annual income”, the report said.

Another reason the wealth gap is as significant as – if not more significant than – the income gap is that a build-up in wealth can become entrenched over time and is harder to redistribute.

For example, a rich family with houses worth $10 million can pass them on to their children, who may use those houses as collateral or capital to buy more property or build businesses to accumulate another $20 million for their descendants. And the cycle goes on.

So while wealth inequality has received less mention in Singapore than income inequality so far, it is arguably an even more important challenge facing our society.

Mind the gap

SO HOW wide is the wealth gap in Singapore?

Risk burden too heavy on the public

Non-Constituency MP Gerald Giam is the Workers' Party's point man on health-care issues. He speaks to Andrea Ong about what he thinks needs to change in health-care financing and public transport policies, and the difference between being moderate and sitting on the fence.

The Straits Times, 18 Jan 2014

What outcomes do you hope to see from the review of national health insurance scheme MediShield?

Three days after the MediShield Life review committee was set up, I made an adjournment motion speech in Parliament where I gave a few proposals about how we can improve MediShield.

It's a good thing that they are looking at expanding the coverage to ensure everybody is covered, even those with pre-existing illnesses. But my concern is the new premiums. I accept that increased coverage will come at a cost, but the question is, who should bear the cost increases?



This is why I proposed a MediShield premium subsidy for vulnerable groups of people like the elderly with low income, people who have exhausted their Medisave accounts, people with disabilities and low-income people who already qualify for other government help schemes.

I also suggested pre-qualifying them so they don't need to apply separately for subsidies. Experience shows that when you require people to apply for subsidies, many end up falling through the cracks because they may not be aware of the schemes or how to apply.

Will pre-funding, that is, getting people to pay higher premiums when they are young, work?

Pre-funding is something to be considered, but it also comes with its risks. Not everybody who is young is earning a lot. If you increase the premiums for the young, you might end up hurting certain groups of people who are already struggling. Pegging premiums more in line with income would be more appropriate than looking at age alone.

Easier for needy elderly to apply for help: Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund

By Lim Min Zhang, The Straits Times, 30 Jul 2013

NEEDY elderly people in Singapore are finding it easier to apply for wheelchairs and other aids they require.

Before July 1, all applications for subsidies under the Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund had to be approved by the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC).

However, under enhancements that kicked in at the start of this month, there are now 114 places where they can get approval for various subsidies under the fund.

These include National Kidney Foundation dialysis centres, community hospitals like the Ang Mo Kio-Thye Hua Kwan Hospital and senior activity centres.

The move has cut processing time from two weeks to about one.

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and Dr Amy Khor, Mayor of South West District, visited three families who have benefited from the scheme in Marine Parade yesterday.

There have been 702 beneficiaries since the start of the month, which also saw 130 per cent more applications than last month.

"I'm pleased that we are able to provide more assistance to the seniors," said Dr Khor. "We want to continue to work to review our assistance schemes to make help more accessible and easily available to them."

The fund stood at $10 million before being topped up with $40 million, announced in February's Budget.

Elderly people living in three room or smaller flats are automatically eligible for a 90 per cent subsidy on devices that cost $500 or less. They pay the remaining 10 per cent of the cost of the device.

Singapore companies coping with foreign labour cuts with effect from 1 July 2013

New foreign labour cuts since July 1 put even more pressure on firms here. But companies are coping. In a five-part series, The Straits Times looks at how they are doing it.

Help yourself, please

By Amelia Tan, The Straits Times, 22 Jul 2013

SOUP Restaurant executive director Wong Chi Keong admitted he would have pooh-poohed opening a self-service Chinese restaurant when he entered the food business two decades ago. To him, it was a fast-food concept.

But he changed his mind a year ago, and in March this year, the chain opened two self-service eateries - Potluck and Cafe O - in Jurong East's IMM mall.

"The rules of the game have changed. If you want to continue to play, you have to adapt," he said.

Restaurateurs have been pushed to embrace self-service because the food and beverage sector is buffeted by higher levies and stricter quotas for foreign workers.

From this month, the maximum proportion of foreigners in a service firm is 40 per cent, down from 45 per cent before - although this applies only to new hires.

To combat this squeeze, at least five restaurant groups have launched, or are in the midst of starting, manpower-light concepts.

The aim is to let workers spend less time attending to customers so they can multitask and do other tasks more efficiently.

Raising productivity through wage rises

ASK NUS ECONOMISTS

By Liu Haoming, Published The Straits Times, 4 Jul 2013

Do increases in labour productivity lead to wage increments, or is it the other way around?

Improving productivity, particularly labour productivity, is a major focus of Budget 2013. The rationale behind this is that an ever increasing living standard is only sustainable if labour productivity keeps increasing.

Labour productivity is measured by the value-added per worker. This reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of labour in the production and sale of output. So, if a chef cooks a $200 meal in an hour and the ingredients of the meal cost $50, the labour productivity, or value-added, of the chef would be $150 per hour.

Although we call it labour productivity, it is actually attributable to both the chef's service and the physical capital used in making the meal, such as kitchen equipment and rooms to host customers. Clearly, an employer will not pay the chef more than $150 per hour for his services.

In a perfectly competitive labour market, wages are equal to labour's contribution to the value-added, which is proportional to labour productivity. Increases in labour productivity will always lead to wage rises.

However, wages and labour productivity do not always move together. The relative bargaining power between employees and employers determines the gap - or the wedge - between wage and productivity, which has varied considerably. In the US, Dr Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute found that the wedge has increased only gradually over time due to a slower rise in wage rates. Between 1973 and 2011, labour productivity increased at an annualised rate of 1.56 per cent while the average hourly wages increased by only 0.87 per cent.

The disconnect between productivity gains and real wage increments has also been observed in many other countries. For instance, while the real wage in Germany and Japan remained flat between 2000 and 2008, productivity had increased by 10 per cent over the same period.

A large gap between wages and productivity is not necessarily always bad news for workers.

Two million Singaporeans to get letters on Budget 2013 benefits in July 2013

By Debbie Lee, The Straits Times, 29 Jun 2013

TWO million Singaporeans will receive letters from the Government from Monday informing them of the benefits they will receive under Budget 2013, the Finance Ministry said yesterday.

These include GST Vouchers in the form of:

- Cash payments of between $100 and $250 for citizens whose annual income is at most $24,000 and living in homes with an annual value of $21,000 and less.

- Medisave payments of between $150 and $450 for citizens aged 65 and older living in homes with an annual value of $21,000 and less.

- U-Save utility rebates of between $45 and $65 for HDB households.

A one-off extra payment of GST Vouchers for all three categories will also be given this year. For example, a Singaporean who receives $250 in GST Vouchers in cash payment will get another $250.

In addition, all Singaporeans aged 45 and older will get a $200 top-up to their Central Provident Fund Medisave accounts.

The vouchers and top-ups will help citizens and Singaporean households cope with the rise in the cost of living, the ministry said in its statement.

It also said that starting next month, the U-Save rebates will be given quarterly (July, October, January and April) instead of twice a year.

Ask DPM Tharman

Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam gave a wide-ranging interview on topics such as politics and the economy to The Straits Times last week for its current affairs website Singapolitics. 

Full transcript of the interview with DPM Tharman on 12 Apr 2013.

FOREIGN WORKERS: Keep it at one-third

FOREIGN WORKERS: One-third cap is it

By Aaron Low, The Straits Times, 19 Apr 2013

THERE are no further plans to tighten the foreign worker policy unless their numbers rise well above the targeted one-third level, said Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

The Government, he added, is determined to cap the number at this level, even as many sectors will always need foreign workers.

Locals, including permanent residents, accounted for about 66.4 per cent of employed workers as at December 2012. Foreigners, excluding domestic workers, formed the remaining 33.6 per cent.

"Keep the ratio of foreigners in the workforce to about one-third over the long term. And if we achieve that, we won't need to tighten further," said Mr Tharman, who is Finance Minister.

He accepted that sectors such as construction, health and marine struggle to find Singaporean workers, but there is a clear need to "reduce reliance on manpower" in those sectors.

The Budget and what it means for S'poreans

By Aaron Low, The Straits Times, 8 Apr 2013

EVERY year, usually in February, Singapore's Finance Minister presents Parliament with one of the most important economic and political documents of the year: the Budget.

He also gives a speech to Parliament to explain the Budget.

The document is an accounting of the Government's expenditure, such as building MRT lines or paying civil servants, and revenues, mostly taxes collected from firms and individuals.

It is also a means for the nation's leaders to communicate the biggest policies of the day.

It is a closely watched event, with the media and analysts scrutinising every detail of the document. Many Singaporeans watch it live via various platforms.

In other countries, especially in European nations such as Italy, Spain and Portugal, Budgets have taken on much greater significance as these countries are heavily indebted to foreign investors.

They have to adhere to strict rules about how much more they can borrow and what they are supposed to spend their funds on. Break a rule and it could mean the collapse of an entire economy, with foreign funds drying up.

By contrast, Singaporeans do not have to worry about whether the Government is facing trillions in debt, or preparing to implement tough austerity measures.

Instead, the main question on many Singaporeans' lips is: "What's in it for me?"

WorkPro: 14 firms join $170 million scheme to get Singaporeans back to work

By Royston Sim, The Straits Times, 8 Apr 2013

FOURTEEN companies have signed up for a new programme launched last week to encourage Singaporeans to rejoin the workforce.

The companies include the Singapore Recreation Club, printing firm Unique Press and education centre Cerebral.

The programme, called WorkPro, will provide $170 million in funding for employers over the next three years.

Speaking yesterday at an event aimed at getting women back to the workforce, Acting Manpower Minister Tan Chuan-Jin urged more employers to tap the various forms of support that WorkPro provides.

He said: "WorkPro will help employers create more progressive and work-life friendly workplaces. This will make it easier for working women to strike a balance between work and family, as well as create more flexible jobs for women who want to return to work."

Minister of State for Manpower, Dr Amy Khor, also speaking at the event, said many women leave the workforce to take care of their family but may want to return to work when their children are older or if there are flexi-work arrangements.

Change? Yes, but just how and where?

It would help if voters are given a better sense of where leaders are heading, and why

By Warren Fernandez, The Sunday Times, 7 Apr 2013

Nike says Just Do It. Standard Chartered Bank declares it is Here For Good. BMW proclaims its cars the "ultimate driving machine".

In today's hyper-media world, it is all the more critical that organisations and brands are clear what they stand for, and communicate this to those they would like to serve.

The same goes for politics, even though selling policies and getting buy-in for them is obviously not quite the same as selling soap or shoes.

So, United States President Barrack Obama stood for change in 2008, rallying supporters with resonant cries of, "Yes, we can". Closer to home, Singapore's leaders once held out a bold vision of attaining a "Swiss standard of living", while Malaysia had its Vision 2020. Mr Goh Chok Tong's call to foster a "kinder, gentler society" when he took over as prime minister in 1990 also went down well.

It might seem simplistic and overly reductionist, but when done well, a good slogan, or more elaborately, an overarching narrative, can help focus minds and frame perceptions about deeper changes that are taking place.

Besides, politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. In the absence of any conscious effort to shape this narrative, the gap is likely to be filled, perhaps in unintended and even unfortunate ways. Once perceptions stick, they are hard to shake off or change.

So, it is worth pondering: What is the underlying storyline for politics in Singapore today?

What makes a S’porean? A debate returns

By Simon Tay, Published TODAY, 8 Apr 2013

Debate has returned, for both the Government and citizens, about what it means to be Singaporean.

The issues do not relate only to culture and the arts, but have broader implications for the political and economic paradigms in Singapore as well.

What spurs this resurgence of a soul-searching debate that has been with us since the earliest years of nationhood — and perhaps more importantly, what is different about it this time? What implications will this have for the way the debate is conducted?

REASSURING BOOSTS

The key signs emerged with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), recently constituted and fresh from its first Budget debate last month.

With the change of name from what was formerly the Ministry of Information, Communication and the Arts, the arts community fretted that their vocation was no longer in focus. It also protested a decision last year to pull out of this year’s world-renowned Venice Biennale.

Sportsmen wondered, too, if their passion was receiving less emphasis because of the name change, in addition to past delays over the Sports Hub and other facilities.

The Government’s Budget recently passed in Parliament will provide reassurance. Spending on sports will go up an extra S$400 million over the next five years, to benefit both top athletes and the many more who take up recreational sports. Arts groups will see the available grants double over the same period to about S$94 million. The museums too will get a boost, with S$62 million to acquire and preserve artworks and artefacts. Even participation in the Venice Biennale will resume come 2015.

The Ministry’s title has changed, yet the budgetary allocations show not only constancy but also substantial growth in emphasis invested in the arts, culture and sports, to bring them to a new level. It would be wrong to suggest that nothing has changed.

Will taxing the rich more really help the poor?

By Rachel Chang, The Straits Times, 6 Apr 2013

THIS year's Budget announced an intention to spend more on the poor - but also to collect more from the rich.

In raising "wealth" taxes on those buying investment properties and conspicuous consumption items such as luxury cars, while in turn promising more social spending, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam seemed to some to be playing Robin Hood - which has drawn a polarised reaction.

While some hailed it as fair redistribution, others worried that it marked the start of a chipping away of Singapore's capitalistic, competitive environment.

In any case, the latest "wealth tax" hikes are more symbolic than revenue-generating, because they bring in measly amounts compared to the broad-based taxes like the Goods and Services Tax (GST) or income tax, say experts and observers.

The tax hike for investment properties will bring in $72 million more a year, while that for luxury cars is about $150 million. This is a fraction of the $6.9 billion collected in income tax last year, says Ms Jill Lim, tax partner at Deloitte Singapore.

Ernst & Young transaction tax partner Russell Aubrey notes: "It's really more of a social measure about equality than a revenue measure."

But to further tax the rich to fund social spending in the years to come might be a political and economic battle that the Government may not have the stomach for.

The Budget debate last month gave a glimpse of how divisive the issue is, and battle lines ran not just along party lines, but through the ruling People's Action Party (PAP).

Room at the top - for rich to pay more taxes

Some among the rich argue - or would at least agree - that they should pay more
By Han Fook Kwang, The Sunday Times, 7 Apr 2013

If you asked someone whether he was willing to pay more tax, you would probably be expecting a rude answer - it seems like asking if he wants to have his bones broken.

It turns out though that it isn't such a no-brainer, and there are people who are not only prepared to pay more but who will also argue quite vociferously why they should do so.

The most well-known is American billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has long argued that the United States' tax system needs to be overhauled because wealthy people like him are not paying enough tax.

According to him, the tax rate on his income amounted to only 17.7 per cent in 2011, way below the 32.9 per cent average of what his own office staff, including his secretary, were paying.

That's because a large part of his income came from stock-related earnings, which in the US attracted a flat tax rate of 15 per cent.

This was how he put his case in a piece he wrote in 2011: "Our leaders have asked for 'shared sacrifice'. But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

"While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labours but are allowed to classify our income as 'carried interest', thereby getting a bargain 15 per cent tax rate...

"These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It's nice to have friends in high places."

The world's most successful investor, who is worth US$53 billion (S$66 billion), wants a more progressive tax system where the rich are taxed a much higher rate.

He isn't alone in making this call.

A new PAP or a party returning to its roots?

Populist or pragmatic? Whatever your perceptions of the PAP, the results of the recent Budget and White Paper debates have marked a turning point of sorts for Singapore’s ruling party
By Amir Hussain, TODAY, 6 Apr 2013

Some observers have described it as “populist” and “politically driven”, others called it “pragmatic” and responding to the times. And while there were those who felt that the People’s Action Party (PAP) Government’s recent measures — which have a socialist slant — and various eye-catching suggestions by its Members of Parliament were a collective reaction to the results of the 2011 General Election, there is also a view that the party was simply honouring the social compact where the Government takes care of the people and responds to their needs.

Nevertheless, political analysts and Members of Parliament TODAY spoke to were clear about one thing: The first three months of the year — a frantic 90-odd days where big decisions for the country were made and debated upon during the White Paper and Budget debates — marked a turning point of sorts for the PAP. Some analysts went as far as to say that a “new” PAP has emerged in response to political realities.

Other experts and PAP MPs, however, stressed that the party’s fundamentals, including an aversion to the moral hazard of a welfare state, have not changed.

National University of Singapore (NUS) political scientist Bilveer Singh said: “There is a perception and tendency to conclude that there is a leftward shift in the PAP, this is more apparent than real.

“The PAP has always been a highly pragmatic party and it is a party that adopts policies that are correct and necessary rather than ideological and dogmatic. To that extent, the issue of whether there is a left, right or centre shift in the PAP is simply irrelevant.”

Heed history’s ghosts of city-states

By Pravin Prakash, Published TODAY, 5 Apr 2013

There has been debate ever since the General Election in 2011, and particularly since the Population White Paper’s release, about a disconnect between the governed and the Government in Singapore.

It has surfaced even in government discourse. In a recent interview with The Washington Post, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong acknowledged that the Government would have to “work in a more open way”, given “a different generation, a different society, and the politics will be different”.

And during last month’s debates over the Government’s Budget, it is notable that the Education, Health and National Development Ministers — among others — called on Singaporeans to get involved in shaping the future of the education system, healthcare financing and public housing policy. The ongoing reviews of these three hot-button areas signal the Government’s impetus to address key sources of discontent.

Will this have any effect in repairing tensions? That remains to be seen, but surely the inability to understand each other effectively is something both must seek to resolve. History suggests that the need is an urgent one.

THE FALL OF CITY-STATES

The rise of Singapore as a prosperous city-state was premised on the marriage between effective leadership and a committed, hardworking populace.

A quick glance at history reveals, rather tellingly, that the fall of great city-states has often been partially premised on a disconnect between people and government.

Family Matters to reach 2 million Singaporeans by 2015

More funds for family life programmes

By Priscilla Goy, The Sunday Times, 31 Mar 2013

Some $3 million will be set aside over the next three years, for family life education programmes in the community.

This was announced by Acting Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing on the sidelines of his visit to a Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) centre at Redhill yesterday.

The FamilyMatters@Community scheme, launched earlier this month, will be expanded to co-fund 80 per cent of the costs to run approved programmes, up to $600 an hour, but capped at four hours. In the past, the Government funded only line items, such as speaker fees and refreshments.

Funding guidelines will be more flexible to include hands-on and interactive activities as well as programmes for singles, instead of just talks and workshops. But the family life education component must occupy at least half of the programme duration.

All organisations, except commercial or for-profit family life education service providers, can apply for the scheme starting tomorrow.