HDB Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) Model: Keeping public housing in prime locations affordable, accessible and inclusive for Singaporeans

Subsidy clawback, 10-year MOP for new prime location HDB flats to keep them affordable, inclusive

By Michelle Ng, The Straits Times, 27 Oct 2021

Future Housing Board (HDB) flats built in prime, central locations will be subjected to a 10-year minimum occupation period (MOP) and additional subsidies will be clawed back by the Government upon their resale.

These are among the key measures under a new prime location public housing (PLH) model, aimed at keeping prime HDB flats affordable and inclusive, announced by National Development Minister Desmond Lee on Tuesday (Oct 26).

The first Build-to-Order (BTO) project under this model will be located in Rochor and launched next month.

The pool of resale buyers of these prime HDB flats will also be limited to households who earn not more than $14,000 a month and at least one applicant must be a Singapore citizen.

Under the PLH model, fewer flats may be set aside under HDB's Married Child Priority Scheme, which gives priority to applicants whose parents or children live in the same area.

Currently, up to 30 per cent of new flats are set aside under this scheme for families buying a flat for the first time.

At a media briefing on Tuesday, Mr Lee said the new model is to keep public housing in prime locations affordable, accessible and inclusive for Singaporeans, both at the initial purchase and at subsequent resales on the open market.

The PLH model will apply only to future public housing in prime locations and not to existing flat owners.

There will be at least one prime location public housing project launched each year, but the exact proportions will differ year on year, as it depends on site availability and the overall supply of flats across all towns, said Mr Lee.

In order for HDB to launch these prime flats at affordable prices at the BTO stage, it has to provide additional subsidies on top of the those provided for all BTO flats, said Mr Lee.

All subsidies are factored into flat prices when they are launched as BTO flats.

"But the concern is whether this would lead to the lottery effect, excessive windfall gains and whether it would be fair to BTO buyers in other parts of Singapore, who would not get these additional subsidies," he said.

A record number of HDB flats have changed hands for at least $1 million this year.

In the first nine months of this year, there were 174 million-dollar HDB flats, compared with 82 for the whole of last year, which raised eyebrows and set off concerns about home affordability.

They came on the back of a buoyant HDB resale market, in which resale flat prices also hit a record high in the third quarter of this year.

To address these concerns, the Government will claw back additional subsidies provided to PLH flats.

Flat owners will pay a percentage of the resale price to HDB when they resell their home on the open market for the first time, he said.

This will apply only to those who bought the flat from HDB and not to subsequent resale transactions.

The exact percentage will be announced at the launch of the Rochor BTO project next month, which is the first site under the PLH model, and may be adjusted for other projects in the future, he said.

Other prime locations for public housing include the future Greater Southern Waterfront.

However, buyers who want one of these flats on the resale market will have to meet the prevailing eligibility conditions for buying a flat directly from the HDB.

These include having at least one applicant who is a Singapore citizen, meeting the household income ceiling of $14,000 and not holding a private property or sold any in the last 30 months.

Singles above 35 years old will not be allowed to buy these PLH flats. This is in contrast to current rules that do not place limitations on singles above the age of 35 buying resale flats.

"Without such restrictions, the resale prices of these homes in prime locations may rise beyond the reach of many Singaporeans over time," said Mr Lee.

These conditions on the resale pool will also act as safeguards to prevent sellers from adding the subsidy recovery to their asking price in the hopes of trying to maximise gains, he added.

“Buyers will be a circumscribed group of people who meet BTO eligibility requirements, so that means not anyone can buy. And buyers will also have to bear in mind the impositions on subsequent resale on him or her,” he said.

“So that will ensure that the moderated market for the prime location public housing flats is functional.”

To ensure buyers are genuinely buying the flat to live in, instead of hoping to flip it for a windfall, the MOP for prime location HDB flats will be extended to 10 years, up from the current five.

Owners will also not be allowed to rent out their whole flat at any point in time, even after the MOP is over.

These conditions will apply to all flat owners who purchase BTO and resale flats under the PLH model.

Making ours an uplifting society: Tharman Shanmugaratnam

One that uplifts everyone through opportunities in life, uplifts the low-paid, and uplifts the spirit

By Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Published The Straits Times, 16 Jan 2021

Covid-19, like an X-ray beamed into societies all over the world, has exposed many fractures. It has also widened them, as the pandemic and economic crisis hit those already disadvantaged the hardest.

Governments with the capacity and finances have been able to soften these unequal blows. However, as we now rebuild, we must do more than recover from this crisis. We must tackle the longer-term, more embedded challenges that will outlast Covid-19.

Many advanced nations have seen decades-long stagnation in standards of living for the majority. What's equally troubling has been the loss of relative social mobility: where you end up in life relative to others depends on where you start, and especially on how poor or well-off your parents are. As a result, faith in meritocracy, or in how people can advance in life through education and better jobs, is also on the wane.

These trends have weakened the sense of togetherness in many societies. Where there was once a strong sense of "we", there is now "them versus us". In some places, "them versus us" is not only about the rich or highly educated versus the rest. It also taps into racial or religious antipathies, which then have a life of their own. We have to recognise these changes happening around the world, and prevent them from taking root in Singapore.

We must do the utmost to make ours an uplifting society - one that uplifts everyone through opportunities in life, one that uplifts the poor and vulnerable, and one that uplifts the spirit.

Keeping society fluid

It requires a strong sense of collective mission, and continuous refreshing of strategies. But we should keep two issues foremost in mind. First, to achieve relative social mobility, with people being able to move up in life and exchange places with others, we must also have absolute mobility, where everyone can see things getting better. We must have that escalator that takes everyone up. It helps everyone accept that no one's place on the escalator is fixed, and others may catch up from below or move ahead of them. It also supports a sense of solidarity, because people can see that life is not a zero-sum game, and are willing to have more done to help those in greater need. As many societies are seeing, once that escalator is broken, everything begins to fray, and people turn resentful.

Second, to tackle inequality on any lasting basis, we must address unequal opportunities, above all, and not just unequal outcomes. Surveys around the world show that most people accept some inequality of outcomes, if it reflects differences in effort, ability or entrepreneurial contributions. But the inequality of opportunities is a different matter. It is the bad cholesterol in the system. We have to be especially concerned about unequal opportunities early in life, as they have a way of ingraining advantages and disadvantages that last through life.

However, we do need to temper unequal outcomes as well - and in particular, avoid people getting trapped in a permanent underclass. When parents have weak and unpredictable incomes, their children tend to have a less secure upbringing, and can easily fall behind and lower their own aspirations. In other words, outcomes in one generation shape opportunities for the next.

GE2020: Tharman sets out plans for a more united Singapore

Social mobility remains the key, but Govt and community must take responsibility for all
By Lim Yan Liang, The Straits Times, 8 Jul 2020

Singapore can emerge from the COVID-19 crisis as a better and more inclusive society, which allows everyone to move up an escalator of rising skills and wages to better lives, said Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

To do so, the Government would have to play a key role, making deeper interventions earlier, to help level up children from less fortunate families from an earlier stage in their lives.

There would also be more help for workers to boost their productivity so that they continue to see their skills and wages move up over the years, said the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies.

While government policies are important, Singapore should retain a social ethos where people take pride in standing on their own feet, while also taking responsibility for one another, he said.

In a speech on strategies for an inclusive society and social mobility, live-streamed on the People's Action Party's Facebook page yesterday, he outlined Singapore's particular approach towards tackling inequality and ensuring security through every stage of life - from early childhood to working life to the retirement years.



"The aim of all our strategies, economic and social, is to have a more fair and just society, where young people have hope, regardless of what social backgrounds they come from... where everyone can advance in their careers regardless of what qualifications they start with, and where our seniors can look forward to living life fully in retirement, and living life with a sense of security," said Mr Tharman.

Stressing that the COVID-19 outbreak had made this a more important issue, since it was "fracturing societies", he said this goal could be achieved only through programmes that could be sustained across generations.

"This is about real programmes - real programmes that we keep improving, learning over time what works. Never perfect, but constant improvement."

Since social mobility is key to Singapore's fabric, and most inequalities kick in when children are very young, the Government is levelling the playing field with plans to double expenditure in the pre-school sector over the next few years, said Mr Tharman.

It is also preventing a digital divide by ensuring that every child, no matter how poor, has access to broadband Internet and a laptop or computer at home. "We are achieving real progress, but there's a lot more to do," he added.



For those in working life, Mr Tharman highlighted another Singaporean approach that has stood it in good stead: "a massive infusion of skills at every stage of one's career".

Singapore has also managed to keep unemployment numbers much lower than those in other developed countries even during the COVID-19 crisis. The wages of its average worker have risen by a third over the past decade. The wages of low-income workers have risen by even more.

"Fundamentally, because we have raised productivity," said Mr Tharman.

Finally, he touched on the issue of security for seniors.

Mr Tharman said that in every election, there will be politicians who make "very nice-sounding promises" on what should be done to help seniors, including for Central Provident Fund payouts to start earlier or for the Government to pay more of Singaporeans' healthcare costs, such as by subsidising MediShield premiums.

But many of these measures will only end up hurting the very people they are trying to help, he added, resulting in higher tax rates for middle-income households, because nothing comes for free.

"Some promises look appealing, but they actually lead to greater inequality over time," he said. "Think hard about the need for a fair system, a progressive system, and a sustainable system. And that's basically what we're trying to achieve in Singapore."



People have to play their part, too, he said. Singapore could emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic a more inclusive society if everyone finds a way to help others, whether they are the elderly, the less privileged or the less educated.

He urged the younger generation to be more involved in their neighbourhoods and in society, and take part in the Singapore Together movement, which Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat launched last year for citizens to actively help shape policies.

"For our younger generation, in particular, this is actually a challenge for a generation: building an inclusive society, that doesn't just mimic efforts in other societies, but does it our way - does it in a way that doesn't impose a heavy burden on Singaporeans at large," he said.

"It's not about the Government; it's about Singapore Together. Find your niche, find your passion, the areas you want to work in. And let's help spiral up our whole system, our whole society," he urged.

"It can be done. We can emerge from COVID not more divided, but with a more cohesive society."

National Broadcast: SM Tharman Shanmugaratnam on A Stronger and More Cohesive Society

Singapore to strengthen social compact to keep society united
Tharman spells out steps to stave off social polarisation and despair in the face of crisis
By Grace Ho, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 18 Jun 2020

Singapore cannot defy the global economic downturn. But it must "absolutely defy" the loss of social cohesion, the polarisation and the despair that are taking hold in many other countries, said Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

Even as the COVID-19 pandemic ravages economies, he said Singapore must strengthen its social compact by helping those who have lost jobs to find work, by keeping social mobility alive and by assuring Singaporeans that help is at hand when they meet difficulties.

Mr Tharman, who is Coordinating Minister for Social Policies, also said mature workers would get special help in finding jobs so that no employer rejects them on account of their age.

Speaking yesterday from the Devan Nair Institute of Employment and Employability, in the fifth of six national broadcasts by ministers on Singapore's post coronavirus future, he said job losses and disrupted schooling have widened social divisions around the world.

He cautioned against thinking that Singapore is immune to these trends: "No society remains cohesive simply because it used to be."

The Government's first priority is to save jobs and help those laid off to return to work. This, he said, cannot be left to market forces.



Mr Tharman, who helms the new National Jobs Council that oversees efforts to help Singaporeans stay employable, said this is why the Government is working with companies, sector by sector, to take on Singaporeans through temporary assignments, attachments and traineeships.

"No amount of unemployment allowances can compensate for the demoralisation of being out of work for long," he said.

Special attention will be paid to workers in their 50s and 60s, and the Mid-Career Pathways programme will be scaled up so that they can prepare for more permanent jobs, he added. But this is a national effort that requires employers to change their thinking.

Mr Tharman said: "No Singaporean who is willing to learn should be 'too old' to hire. And no one who is willing to adapt should be viewed as 'overqualified'.

"Our workers will be able to build on their skills and experience, and we will have a more capable and motivated workforce, with a strong Singaporean core, that every employer can rely on."

He added that good schools are critical to social mobility, and Singapore must never become a society where social pedigree and connections count for more than ability and effort. "There is nothing natural or preordained about social mobility," he said, noting that successful countries have found this harder to sustain with time. "It therefore requires relentless government effort, quality interventions in schools and dedicated networks of community support to keep social mobility alive."

Hence, the Government is equalising opportunities when children are young, such as by expanding the Kidstart programme to help lower-income families. Plans are also afoot to equip all secondary school students with a personal laptop or tablet by next year, seven years ahead of the original target.



A strong spirit of solidarity is also important. Key to this, he said, is strengthening support for lower income Singaporeans at work.

He pointed out that cleaners, security officers and landscape workers have seen their wages increase by 30 per cent in real terms over the last five years under the Progressive Wage Model. The eventual goal is for every sector to have progressive wages, with a clear ladder of skills, better jobs and better wages for those with lower pay.

Those in short-term contract work should also have more stable jobs, better protection and the chance to progress in their careers, he said. "It may lead to a small rise in the cost of services that we all pay for. But it is a small price for us to pay for better jobs and income security for those who need it most, and a fair society."



He noted that the social compact is also about the "self-effort and selflessness" that must be strengthened in the country's culture.

"It is about the networks and initiatives that we saw spring up in this COVID-19 crisis... And it is about how we draw closer to each other, regardless of race, religion or social background. It is how we journey together. A forward-looking, spirited and more cohesive society."

Streaming into Normal and Express in secondary schools to stop in 2024; to be replaced by full subject-based banding

Subject-Based Banding (SBB) to replace streaming in schools
Students can take up subjects at higher or lower levels, and graduate with common cert
By Sandra Davie, Senior Education Correspondent, The Straits Times, 6 Mar 2019

Forty years after streaming was introduced in secondary schools, the Ministry of Education has taken the momentous step to do away with the Normal (Technical), Normal (Academic) and Express streams.

In their place will be full subject-based banding, in which students take subjects, at a higher or lower level, based on their strengths.

The ministry will start full subject-based banding in about 25 schools next year, and apply it to all secondary schools by 2024.

All Secondary 1 students in the 2024 batch will take subjects at three levels - G1, G2 or G3, with G standing for "General". G1 will roughly correspond to today's N(T) standard, G2 to N(A) standard and G3 to Express standard.



Through their time in school, and as they further develop their strengths and interests, they will be able to take a combination of subjects across different bands.

When they reach Sec 4 in 2027, the students will take a common examination and graduate with a common secondary school certificate which will be co-branded by Singapore and Cambridge.

Education Minister Ong Ye Kung said: "With full subject-based banding implemented, form classes reorganised across the board and a combined secondary education certificate, we would have effectively merged Express, N(A) and N(T) streams into a single course. The Express, N(A) and N(T) streams, and their labels, will therefore be phased out.

"So, from three education streams, we will now have 'one secondary education, many subject bands'. We will no longer have fishes swimming down three separate streams, but one broad river, with each fish negotiating its own journey."



With students taking up subjects of varying combinations, the ministry hopes schools will group students in different ways and not just academic abilities. This will bring more social mixing and encourage students to help one another.

Explaining why the ministry was doing away with the Normal-Express divide, Mr Ong said that streaming was introduced 40 years ago during an "efficiency-driven phase" to cut down on student dropout rates.

Attrition rates have come down from about a third of every cohort in the 1970s to less than 1 per cent now. At the same time, the ministry recognises that there are downsides to streaming, said Mr Ong.

"Entering a stream that is considered 'lower' can carry a certain stigma that becomes fulfilling or self-limiting. Students can develop a mindset where they tell themselves, 'I am only a Normal stream student, so this is as good as I can be'," he said, pointing out how, over the years, several MPs have brought up these pernicious effects of streaming.



This point was also highlighted by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in a Facebook post yesterday, when he said that streaming has some drawbacks: "It lacks flexibility, and students in the slower streams may become demotivated. Banding overcomes these difficulties, while enabling each student to learn at the pace which suits their aptitude and level, depending on the subject."

Mr Ong said that while there are some students who are very strong in every academic subject, most have uneven strengths, and even specific weaknesses. "It is just the way humans are. The challenge of our education system is to cater to that."

But the move to do away with streams is not the culling of a sacred cow, but rather an incremental move, he added.

Over the years, subject-based banding was gradually extended, and Normal stream students who took higher-level subjects have performed comparably to their Express counterparts.

Mr Ong said the ministry has been grappling with this trade-off - between customisation and stigmatisation - adding that changes should be thought through in education.

He said: "We should never stay frozen for a long period, only to make sudden big changes years later. So, any change analogous to the slaughtering of any animal is most likely a bad idea."

He ended his speech by saying that in making this change, the ministry was guided by the belief "that no child's fate is fixed, and in an environment that encourages growth and development, and promotes holistic education, they will fulfil their potential to be sons and daughters of Singapore whom we are proud of".

Singapore 50 years ago, and now: An Asian middle way?; Fruits of economic growth used to build fair, inclusive society, says Indranee Rajah

A Harvard professor with a long acquaintance with Singapore reflects on its socialist roots and says it should continue to show the world a middle way.
By Steven Kelman, Published The Sunday Times, 10 Feb 2019

In 1971, one year out of Harvard University, I spent two weeks in Singapore as part of my first trip to Asia. I had been lucky to win one of two "travelling fellowships" Harvard awarded to graduating seniors - allowing travel wherever one wanted, with the only requirement being to write a report when done.

Almost every winner used the fellowship to travel to Asia, because even then it was common for young Americans to travel to Europe, but much more so to Asia.

In Asia, Singapore was one of my longer stops along a route also taking me to Japan and India (one month each), Hong Kong (two weeks), Korea, Thailand, and Indonesia (one week each), and Nepal (three days).

The most interesting thing about my decision to visit Singapore at all, and to stay a full two weeks, was that it came about because of my admiration for the People's Action Party (PAP) government, which mixed strong opposition to communism with commitment to socialism.



Since junior high school, I had been very interested in politics. I had always been on the left, but at age 16, my path diverged from other political students in my high school because of disillusionment with Cuban leader Fidel Castro's embrace of dictatorship. I rejected the brutality and inhumanity of communism.

Instead, staying on the left, I became a convinced social democrat, in the tradition of the German Social Democrats, British Labour, and especially the Swedish Social Democrats.

Sweden was my first love then. An American writer in the 1930s had dubbed Sweden a "middle way" between communism and fascism. They had chosen a welfare state to promote equality and social justice while gaining the productivity and innovation benefits of keeping industry in private hands. I actually started studying Swedish in my junior year and had spent time there on a scholarship after graduating.

What brought me to this tiny speck of land 15,000km from America in 1971 was that Singapore became my second love.

This was a time when, in the context of opposition to the Vietnam War, Asian communism was on the ascendance. Many Western young people admired revolutionary leaders such as Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh and China's Mao Zedong. I learnt that Mr Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore had beaten back the communists, but remained an advocate of socialism.

In 1968, the first time I went to Sweden, Mr Lee spoke at the congress of the Socialist International, the organisation of social democratic parties. In 1970, the PAP re-affirmed its commitment to socialism, stating Singapore had made significant strides towards achievement of "our socialist goals, a more just and equal society". The PAP's frugal style and hatred of corruption, symbolised by the white garments activists wore, also appealed to me.

Stopping communism, promoting social justice, and being honest were noble causes for which the PAP was struggling. To me, Singapore was an Asian middle way, offering the world a path between communism and unfettered capitalism.

I wanted to visit to learn more. I had read about two social achievements, government-subsidised housing and its role in encouraging industrial development at Jurong.

While there, I gave myself a young social democrat's tour of Singapore.

Singapore among the top countries in educational mobility: OECD 2018 report on equity in education

Singapore students outdo their parents in education levels
Republic lauded for education mobility, but disadvantaged students trail local peers
By Amelia Teng, Education Correspondent, The Straits Times, 24 Oct 2018

Singapore ranks among the top in the world when it comes to upward mobility in education, with nearly six in 10 adults attaining higher qualifications than their parents.

According to a report by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) released yesterday, across all age groups, those with more qualified parents are likely to end up better educated than their peers. But the gap in Singapore has shrunk considerably over the years.

In the 1950s, someone born to parents with only upper secondary education stood a less than 20 per cent chance of completing tertiary education. Now, such a person has about a 60 per cent chance of making the grade. For those born to at least one parent with tertiary education, the figure has grown from over 70 per cent to more than 90 per cent.

The OECD report also pointed out how disadvantaged students here whose parents are less educated do well compared with their peers around the world. About half of 15-year-olds from Singapore from the bottom quarter here scored among the top quarter of students globally.

Many of them also have core skills in science, reading and mathematics, according to Programme for International Student Assessment results.

However, the study also showed that only one in 10 in this group is able to keep up with the best of his local peers in the top quarter of performance.

Many disadvantaged students in Singapore also tended to be clustered in the same schools.

In its report on equity in education, OECD highlighted how disadvantaged students around the world face a variety of barriers to learning, from a lack of resources such as books and games, to access to early education.

Equity in education - Breaking down barriers to social mobility from EduSkills OECD

But Singapore stood out because of "the enormous strides made by adults with low-educated parents", it said. "Even disadvantaged adults in the two youngest cohorts were more likely than not to complete tertiary education - among those with low-educated parents, the probability of completing tertiary education was 51 per cent for adults aged 36 to 45, and 58 per cent for adults aged 26 to 35."

The Ministry of Education (MOE) said yesterday that it is heartened to see that education mobility across generations has improved over the years, as it opened up pathways to technical and vocational education, and ensured that every school and institution is well-resourced.

It also said that students from less affluent families here fare well compared with their peers in other countries and in absolute terms.

But it acknowledged the report showed that more work needs to be done to ensure good social diversity and mixing in schools.

The ministry emphasised that all schools are well-resourced and much has been invested in providing high-quality education to disadvantaged students.

Ben Davis playing for Fulham as an English national, not as a Singapore citizen: Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen explains why MINDEF rejected footballer's application for National Service deferment

Thailand born Ben Davis, 17, is playing for Fulham as an English national, not as a Singapore citizen

His father, Harvey Davis had "consistently refused to indicate" when his son would return to serve National Service

Harvey Davis had also indicated that Ben would still sign the contract with Fulham if deferment were not granted and would consider the option for his son to renounce his Singapore citizenship in order to pursue his football career






Parliament: Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen explains why request from Ben Davis was rejected
Minister sets out fundamentals of NS policy and lists 3 reasons for denying deferment request
By Muhammad Sazali Abdul Aziz, Correspondent, The Straits Times, 7 Aug 2018

Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen yesterday laid out in Parliament the fundamentals on which the national service (NS) policy is based to explain why the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) turned down young footballer Ben Davis' request to defer his NS so that he could play for Fulham Football Club in the English Premier League.

He said that in order to ensure Singapore's national security, every male Singaporean must serve NS, and at the time required to under the Enlistment Act, without regard to his personal convenience and considerations: "The Enlistment Act is blind to 'personal convenience and considerations', no matter how talented the individual, no matter how exceptional his circumstances."

To preserve equity for all national servicemen, MINDEF will defer individuals very selectively, and only if their deferment serves Singapore's interest first and foremost, never their own, he added.

Dr Ng was responding to MPs' questions sparked by the public debate on Ben's case. The 17-year-old signed a two-year professional contract with Fulham in June after his deferment request was rejected.

Speaking on the long-term deferment for swimmers Joseph Schooling and Quah Zheng Wen and sailor Maximilian Soh to train and compete at the Olympics, Dr Ng said their deferment was not open-ended or unconditional. Clear expectations were laid out on the standards required for their training.

"They will have to return to serve NS, and if they do not meet the standards agreed upon, deferment will be curtailed. These strict conditions are necessary because even for these individuals who can bring glory to Singapore, there are detractors who think it is unfair for anyone to be deferred."



In Ben's case, Dr Ng listed three reasons for MINDEF's rejection of his NS deferment application. The first is that he is playing for Fulham as an English national, not as a Singapore citizen. He was born in Thailand to an English father and Thai mother before moving to Singapore with his family when he was five. He became a Singapore citizen in 2009.

The former student of the Singapore Sports School left the Republic to join the London-based club's academy last year. In his profile on Fulham's website, the youth is said to "hail from Singapore", but his nationality is listed as English.

The second reason is that Ben's father, Mr Harvey Davis, had "consistently refused to indicate" when his son would return to serve NS, if it is deferred. He had said Ben could be offered a new contract or sold or loaned to another club, so the family could not "commit to a date" for his return.

Third, MINDEF said Mr Davis indicated that Ben would still sign the contract with Fulham if deferment were not granted - as he did - and would consider the option for his son to renounce his Singapore citizenship in order to pursue his football career.

"MINDEF could not find any valid grounds to approve the application for deferment by Mr Harvey Davis for his son. There is no commitment to serve Singapore or our national interests," said Dr Ng.

"To grant deferment to Mr Ben Davis to pursue his personal development and professional career would be unfair to the many others who have served their NS dutifully as required, and not at a time of their choosing.

"The application by Mr Harvey Davis for his son's deferment is to further his son's professional career first and to the longest extent possible. Singapore and her interests, including his son's NS obligations, are secondary considerations, if at all."

Differentiate between relative and absolute poverty to fight inequality

Associate Professor Teo You Yenn describes the desire for decent jobs, better housing and other conditions as "basic needs" (Let's talk about meeting needs, not just equality of opportunity; May 30). These needs are absolute not relative.

Whether 10 per cent or all of the population have these needs unmet doesn't change the fact that our Government should strive to provide better jobs, better housing and better lives for the people.

Inequality does not change this.

When Singapore was young and undeveloped, there was less inequality, as many people were equally poor - in fact, it was probably even more urgent for the Government to make sure that basic needs were met, because more people could not meet them.

Just because inequality has worsened does not make these priorities any more or less important.

It is important to distinguish between absolute poverty and relative poverty when thinking about inequality because it affects the sort of policies we implement.

If we believe that absolute poverty should be ameliorated, policies should gear towards some redistribution to ensure that those at the bottom of society get a minimum standard of living.

The challenge for all societies is to define what that minimum standard is and how much to redistribute. These disagreements are the reason for divisions in political ideologies and parties.

Relative poverty, or inequality, is a lot more complicated.

One could, for the sake of a thought experiment, imagine a nation of millionaires where everyone's basic needs are met, but a predominance of billionaires causes income inequality to be very high.

In such a scenario, it would be absurd to argue for a redistribution of income to equalise outcomes.

However, it does not mean that all is well in such a state.

Inequality causes division and stratification in society.

In this instance, the right policy will not be redistribution per se, but rather, to reduce stratification.

For example, building better houses per se in such an imagined nation will not be as urgent as ensuring that people of all income levels reside in close proximity with one another, and are forced to interact.

The priority will not be to equalise outcomes, but to ensure that society remains cohesive.

It is, thus, imperative for us to think clearly about inequality and not mistake relative poverty for absolute poverty.

Mixing up the two will result in inappropriate policy responses that solve neither problem.

Calvin Cheng Ern Lee
ST Forum, 6 Jun 2018

President Halimah Yacob’s Address at the opening of the second session of the 13th Parliament on 7 May 2018

4G leaders must fire up young to build Singapore's future, says President Halimah Yacob
They have to earn the right to lead and forge bonds with the citizens, she says
By Tham Yuen-C, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 8 May 2018

Singapore is not yet done with nation building and its fourth generation of leaders must "fire up and mobilise" young Singaporeans who are eager to take up the challenge of forging a better future, said President Halimah Yacob.

In a speech billed as the younger leaders' vision of the direction in which they want to take the country, Madam Halimah said that as a new generation of Singaporeans comes of age, the 4G leaders will have to work with them to respond to the challenges of their times.

"They dream of a bright future, and pour their energies into exploring fresh horizons and building a better world. They want to see their parents age well," she said in her inaugural address as Parliament reconvened yesterday after a five-week half-time recess.

"They hope for a fairer and more equal society. As proud Singaporeans, they want to see this small island nation stand tall among the community of nations."

She said the 4G leaders "must grow with the people they represent, be open to diverse views and ideas, and have a clear purpose and unity of action".

They have to earn the right to lead and forge bonds with citizens, she said. "That right cannot be inherited. The trust between the people and their leaders is not automatically passed on from one generation to the next."

Pointing to the challenges ahead, she continued: "Their duty is clear, but the path will not be easy. There will be times of hardship, when they must demonstrate leadership and resolve. There will be moments of truth, when they have to stand firm on principles and ideals while seeking practical resolutions.

"They will need to listen to the views and feelings of the people, and by their words and deeds, show that they have heard; yet never fear to lead and mobilise public opinion to support difficult policies in the long-term interest of Singapore."

The 30-minute speech, which in broad strokes sets out the Government's priorities for the second half of the term, was largely drafted by the younger Cabinet members - and mediocrity was not on the cards.

"We may be tempted not to go for bold changes, but instead be content to tweak things at the margins," said Madam Halimah, noting that the new leaders may feel there is more to lose now, as Singapore is at a more advanced stage of development.

"That would be the wrong approach," she said.

Looking ahead, there are five priorities, she said. They are: Securing a place in the world for Singapore, building a world-class city, developing a vibrant economy, forging a caring and inclusive society, and nurturing a distinct Singapore identity.

The President, flanked by Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin and Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, representing the different branches of government, was addressing a packed chamber in Parliament House.

One flute, three kids - Who do you give it to?: Singapore Budget 2018

The moral choices behind our Budget allocation speak volumes about who we are as a society
By Adrian W.J. Kuah, Published The Straits Times, 28 Feb 2018

Much of the commentary on Budget 2018 has focused on measures such as the impending hike in Goods and Services Tax, raising the top marginal Buyer's Stamp Duty and, of course, the one-off SG Bonus arising from the $9.6 billion budget surplus.

But Budget 2018 has also been notable for its silence on several issues. Commentators have lamented that more could be done to address inequality and poverty, as well as to support families having to care for the elderly.

One line of argument came from Associate Professor Donald Low, associate dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, in his commentary ("To justify GST hike, emphasise universal benefits"; Feb 21). He wrote: "Perhaps most significantly, the Budget speech did not articulate a social policy vision, or a new social compact, that would persuade the majority of Singaporeans to accept a tax increase."

Well, yes and no.

Prof Low is right to say that no new social compact was articulated. But, through the various continuities and the reinforcement of key fiscal principles, one can clearly see a social policy vision - albeit one that has remained largely unchanged for a long time.



How best to understand "social policy vision"? Perhaps a thought experiment by economist and philosopher Amartya Sen, in his book The Idea of Justice, can help us flesh out this abstract concept.

This is the scenario:

You are the authority figure and you come across three children - A, B and C - fighting over a flute. They cannot decide who gets the flute and so they want you to decide for them. One by one, they make their respective cases to you.

Child A says: "I should get the flute. I'm the only one here who can play it. And after all, the point of the flute is to make music. The other two can't play, so why should they get it?"

Then, Child B says: " I made the flute. I provided the materials for it. I spent time and effort making it. It is the fruit of my labour. How could you possibly take this from me and give it to someone else?"

Finally, Child C says: "Of the three of us, I am the poorest. I have nothing in this world. Even though I don't play the flute and I didn't make it, you should give me the flute. Because, then, you would have improved my lot in life immeasurably."

Which child you give the flute to, and the reasons and qualifications behind your decision, says a lot about how you define social justice and fairness.

(It goes without saying that you can assign the flute only to a single child. Sharing the flute is not an option, nor is selling it and splitting the proceeds.)

Singapore must maintain social mobility: PM Lee Hsien Loong

PM Lee sounds warning on growing social divide
Singapore will wither if society is rigid and stratified by class
By Ng Jun Sen, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 6 Feb 2018

Singapore's politics will turn vicious, its society will fracture and the country will wither if it allows widening income inequalities to create "a rigid and stratified social system", said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

"The issues of mitigating income inequality, ensuring social mobility and enhancing social integration are critical," he wrote in a reply to a parliamentary question from Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio GRC).

"This is why this Government will strive to keep all Singaporeans - regardless of race, language, religion or social background - together."

Mr Gan asked Mr Lee about the current state of income inequality and whether the Government has plans to prevent this income gap from creating divisions along class lines. He also queried if an inter-ministerial committee can be set up to look into better integration of all social classes in Singapore.

To the last, Mr Lee said a specific committee is not necessary as government ministries already seek to tackle these challenges in "a concerted and coordinated effort".

"As globalisation and technological disruption have widened income inequality, the Government has over the years intervened more aggressively to support the less well-off," he said, citing both long-term policies such as education, home ownership and affordable healthcare, as well as targeted, means-tested programmes such as the Workfare Income Supplement scheme.

Mr Gan's questions come after an Institute of Policy Studies report last December, which concluded that Singapore's sharpest divides now are along class lines, rather than race or religion. It found that people were more likely to share ties with others of a similar educational background or housing type - common indicators of socio-economic level here.

"If what the study is saying is true, then it is timely that it is detected and we should (strive) to resolve the gaps before they widen too far," Mr Gan told The Straits Times.

In recent weeks, the issue gained renewed attention. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam named slowing social mobility, and an ageing population, as the two big challenges that Singapore faces. Last week, a new book, This Is What Inequality Looks Like by sociologist Teo You Yenn, was launched, generating debate about how Singapore's competitive education system could perpetuate class differences.

In his reply to Mr Gan, Mr Lee said income inequality in Singapore has declined slightly over the past decade. The Gini coefficient fell from 0.470 in 2006 to 0.458 in 2016 - and the figure was 0.402, after accounting for government taxes and transfers. A value of zero indicates perfect equality, while a value of one suggests maximum inequality.

To fund increased social spending, "significant changes" have been made, from introducing GST in 1994 to increasing the reliance on Net Investment Return Contributions as a source of revenue, he noted.

In terms of social mobility, every citizen in a fair and just society must have the opportunity to do better and move up in society based on his efforts and talent, said Mr Lee.

"Some degree of income inequality is natural in any economy," he said. "But in a fair and just society, this inequality must be tempered and complemented by social mobility. Nobody should feel that his social position is fixed based on his parents' income level or position in life."

Education is a critical plank of the Government's efforts, he stressed, whether in building up pre-schools and having schemes like KidStart for children from poor families or giving out bursaries and getting people to go for training via SkillsFuture.

Meanwhile, the Government takes a "deliberate and proactive approach" to measures that encourage mixing among classes, such as in planning where facilities like hawker centres and playgrounds should be sited.