Criteria for Government Subsidies and Assistance Schemes

Ms Lee Li Lian asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Government is considering raising the per capita income cap of $550 for ComCare assistance closer to the $900 used during the haze episode or the $1,100 for the Community Health Assist Scheme Blue scheme; and (b) how are the needs assessed to determine the $550, $900 and $1,100 cut-off lines.

Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the Government doing to mitigate the "cliff effect" of having the eligibility for short-term and medium-term ComCare assistance capped at a household income of $1,700 or a per capita income of $550; and (b) how many households were eligible for assistance as of end-June 2013.

Mdm Speaker, this list is illustrative and by no means exhaustive. It illustrates how we share the fruits of our success with all Singaporeans by providing more for those with less. Our strategy is to have multiple lines of assistance to help fellow Singaporeans with differing needs. These range from broad-based subsidies that benefit many, to targeted assistance for smaller groups who need additional help. The eligibility criteria vary, depending on the target group of beneficiaries and the purpose of assistance.

For essential needs, such as housing and healthcare, or developmental areas, such as early childhood development, education and training, our subsidies generally cover a wider group of Singaporeans, with greater levels of support and subsidies provided for the lower income. The eligibility criteria are developed according to the groups we help. For example, our childcare subsidies cover up to the 67th percentile of households with preschool children while the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) card caters to the lower- and middle-income households earning up to a per capita income (PCI) of $1,800.

There are also programmes that support a smaller group of low-income Singaporeans who need extra support. Examples include ComCare, which provides both short- and longer-term assistance to families in need. Similarly, the income criteria for these schemes reflect the low-income and needy groups that we help. However, there is flexibility within the help system to cater to those who may not meet the criteria but who are genuinely in need.

On the other hand, Workfare has a different objective. Workfare is designed to mitigate wage inequality, rather than to meet certain basic needs. We design the system to help the lowest 30% of income earners or more than 400,000

Page: 29

Singaporean workers in absolute numbers. This scheme allows our lower-income workers to narrow the wage gap and share in the nation's success.

Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked how we avoid a "cliff effect" for ComCare. ComCare applicants are assessed holistically to determine their needs and circumstances, taking into account overall circumstances beyond income. Factors like household size, number of schooling children and medical conditions are considered. We mitigate any cliff effect by having a gradation of assistance given to families who fall within the eligibility criteria. On the other hand, in 2012, more than 1,500 households who did not meet the income criteria were also assisted under ComCare. Those who have other needs that cannot be met by ComCare assistance will be referred to other agencies to ensure that they receive assistance appropriate to their needs.

On Mr Yee Jenn Jong's other query, as at the first six months of 2013, close to 11,800 households are receiving ComCare Short and Medium Term Assistance.

To Ms Lee Li Lian's question, across all Ministries and schemes, we will continue to review the eligibility criteria regularly to ensure that they remain relevant and effective for our target groups.

Mdm Speaker, we are heartened by many Singaporeans who wish to know more and, more importantly, to do more to help fellow Singaporeans in need. Indeed, we must never forget the needy amongst us, no matter how rich our country may be. We can all contribute our part towards this effort to share the fruits of our nation's success and uplift fellow Singaporeans in need. Very often, the needs of Singaporeans who require assistance are multidimensional, beyond a simple income matrix. Social workers, in partnership with volunteers, community groups and like-minded individuals, will understand very well the need to provide flexible, integrated and timely support for such families to walk through the dark valleys of life. We seek to continually improve our care for all Singaporeans, especially the most needy amongst us, in partnership with our fellow Singaporeans.

I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive response and for the table, which helps to provide details of the various schemes and how they target different groups of Singaporeans. Mdm Speaker, I would like to ask a supplementary question.

Page: 30

Even though it is very clearly laid out in the way the Minister explained just now, I think somehow the people who need the help have the impression that the schemes are available on a case-by-case basis. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government will consider communicating the assistance schemes much more clearly to the target groups, so that residents can better understand who the schemes are targeted at, and raise awareness of the availability of the schemes to those in need. It will also give more confidence to residents to come forward if they need help because they are more aware of their eligibility.

Mdm Speaker, indeed, that is one of the key and, perhaps, most important things that we must do in any policy implementation. It is not just about having good policies, it is about closing that last mile, making sure that our communication reaches the people whom we are targeting the message. And in this area, I would like to appeal to all Members of this House to help us and walk this journey with us. Because, very often, the people who are most in need may not read the newspapers, access the Internet or even understand English, but they need people who can talk to them in their language, people who will knock on their doors, check on them to see whether they are okay, and explain some of these assistance schemes to them.

In my own house visits, very often, you will find that families do not even apply for bursary for their school-going children. Sometimes, because they do not know about it; sometimes, they think that other people may look down on them if they apply for such assistance. But this is where we need to do a lot of work to encourage them to come onboard and take up the assistance where it is available. We cannot emphasise enough this point about communication and the last-mile communication. And I urge all Members of the House to join us in this, to mobilise the volunteers and reach out to these groups of people, so that they, too, will understand the help available and they do not need to go through the difficult moments in life alone.

I thank the Minister for the answers and the table. I have one supplementary question. I would like to understand a bit more about the criteria for the $550 per capita income or $1,700 household income cap for ComCare. I would like to know if this is based on any research or international norms, or if this is a definition by MSF about minimum living income. I would like to also know how and when MSF would consider adjustments to these lines that are being set.

Page: 31

Mdm Speaker, in response to Mr Yee's question, let me explain that ComCare provides short- and medium-term assistance to the families in need to supplement the other sources of help that they might have. It is not a uniform scheme whereby everybody gets a fixed amount. The amount that is given out to the respective families actually takes into account various factors like, as I have explained, the family sizes, their other sources of income, their particular needs, for example, in medical, and so forth. So, the criteria that we set here for the per capita income of about $550, for the PCI, of about $1,700 for the family, those are guidelines that we use because these are generally lines whereby, from our experience, people coming to seek help are in this range. And, of course, we will regularly review the criteria, as we have done so in the recent years.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I have a couple of supplementary questions for the Minister. First and foremost, I am glad that the Minister has shared the reasons why some low-income families have not undertaken some of these schemes. I note that there are many of these schemes available but there is also a perception that these schemes are not accessible. So, how can we improve their accessibility? Because for many of these low-wage workers, they are typically daily-rated and do not have documentation, or some may also find it a hassle to go to the CDC or Social Service Offices (SSOs) because of the nature of their job.

The second question is about how we can make it easier to access the schemes. How much does the Government spend or what is the increase in terms of the funding for such schemes? And in terms of the increase in expenditure, what is the impact on taxpayers?

Basically, my second question relates to this. We have always said that we are not a welfare state. We have a lot of schemes available to the low- and middle-income workers. But as we keep increasing the schemes, moving into the middle-income range, for example, would that put a heavy burden on the taxpayers? I want to ask the Minister how is the Ministry planning in the long term, in terms of the sustainability of such schemes.

Page: 32

Mdm Speaker, if I may take the first question on accessibility. Indeed, we need to spend a lot of time and a lot of effort to mobilise the volunteers and grassroots community leaders to come and help spread the message. For example, recently, we have set up a chain of Social Service Offices across the entire island. We will have 10 by the end of this year and, hopefully, 20 by the end of next year. These are all avenues to help improve and increase the number of access points where the needy families can get help.

We are also expanding the network of Family Service Centres from the previous of about 40 to now more than 40, so that families in need can also access help. But, most importantly, it goes back to what Ms Foo Mee Har mentioned just now, which is that we need our volunteers and grassroots partners to know the schemes first so that they can go out and help spread the message because they are our best opinion multipliers.

The other thing that we have to do is to improve our communication. Many of these needy families get the information from other needy families on what are the sources of help available. So, we will try all channels, and we must try all channels, to get the message out. On the other hand, we must simplify the messaging so that it does not matter whether you understand English, Mandarin or any other languages, so long as you get to an access point, like a Family Service Centre or a Social Service Office, you will have the information available to you.

What we want to work towards is that the person applying for assistance should not be required to understand the complexity of the scheme. If they need help, they should be able to approach someone who understands the scheme, and it is up to us who are providing the help to find out which is the most appropriate scheme and package the scheme to help the person in need. So, we do this at the backend but, at the front end, the persons who need help will just need to let the social worker or the social work professionals know the kind of situation that they are in.

Of course, there are other things that we are trying to do better, which is to have an integrated database to avoid having people repeat their case stories when they move from point A to point B. We have an integrated case management across time and across space so that the needy families get the help that they need.

On the second question that the Member asked: what does this mean for us, going forward? Indeed, this is a very important question. We know that

Page: 33

because of the way technology has come about, and because of global competition, there is a tendency in many countries for the gap to widen between the top and the bottom. This means that, over time, we can expect that we will need to do more, not just the Government but the community partners, and so forth. Over time, we must continually find those resources to help the people that we want to do so, which is why I started this answer by saying that our first priority is to make sure that, if you like, the tide goes up and the pie continues to grow so that we have more resources. We are not aiming for economic growth for the sake of economic growth per se. We are aiming to grow the pie so that we have the resources to help the people in need. If the pie does not grow, if we do not have a stable country and the pie continues to shrink, it makes it so much harder for us to find the resources to help the people in our country.

Having said that we have grown the pie, the next thing we must do is that we must have a social compact – a social compact that says that we are prepared to do more for those with less. If you look at the multi-coloured chart that I have just distributed, you will notice that there is a cascading effect, whereby the low-income actually gets the most help, and that is how it should be. We should not be in a situation whereby, because of politics, the middle-income group ends up getting the bulk of it and we neglect the lowest income group. We should have a system, where it is broadly where we are now, whereby the lowest income will always get the most, then we slowly cascade down, and those with the most will also be willing to share more of what they have. Only so will we be able to have a social compact for us to stay united as a country.

But having said all these, let us recognise that this is not easy because, going forward, as our demographics grow older, as our demographics age, the amount of resources that we can command to do many of these things may be increasingly constrained. On the other hand, the needs that we have may be growing quite quickly, and this is where we must make sure that all the schemes that we do are sustainable for the future generation, that the future generation will not be burdened by something that we started in this generation but is unsustainable. On the other hand, that will also require us to make sure that whatever finite resources that we have, whether in this generation or the next generation, that they are most targeted at the people who need it most. We must have this understanding amongst everyone in the society, that this is what we want to do – to always focus more resources on those with less. Only so will we be able to mitigate any widening of the gap brought about by the forces of technology and globalisation.

Page: 34

When the Ministry is conducting such reviews, I would like to find out whether there are any ways, methods or formulas that were used previously to conduct its review, in order to continue to stay relevant. In other words, how are the reviews done?

Mdm Speaker, different Ministries will have different methods of reviewing it. But what I can share, common to all Ministries, is that you do not just look at one particular indicator but at a range of indicators to give us a sense of it. It may not be an exact science but we must try and get as many different indicators as possible to help us do this.

Let me use the example of the childcare subsidies that is under my own Ministry. For example, in the review of the childcare subsidies, we used to have a uniform assistance scheme for many of the people who are eligible, which is a flat rate of $300. Over time, we have gotten feedback from people that actually we should focus more resources on those with less and, indeed, we agree with that. Over time, we have also found, as a percentage of household expenditures, what is a reasonable number that we should have per child per household, and we look at the experiences of other countries and our own experiences. Then there is also the absolute amount that people spend. So, we also look at prices in the market. With all these different indicators, they would give us a sense of what we need to do. In the recent review that we announced in the earlier part of this year – the first quarter of this year – we targeted the most subsidies to those families with the least so that the families in the lowest income group can even send their children to a childcare centre at $3 per month per child. We do all we can to help them and, very often, this $3 is even covered by the community groups. But that also means that, progressively, we will not have the same level of assistance to the rest of the people who are much more well-off. So, there are different ways.

For housing, they will have other indicators, for example, what is the debt-servicing ratio, and how much loans to give to the people. So, different Ministries have different indicators. But common to all Ministries is that they use different indicators to give them a sense of the kind of challenges that the different family groups have in order to derive the various schemes.

Page: 35