Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
The ‘row’ over Public Assistance Scheme
Straits Times reported a ‘row’ between Dr Lily Neo and Dr Vivian Balakrishnan in parliament over the Public Assistance scheme. The disagreement was over Dr Balakrishnan’s announcement that the value of PA scheme will be increased by $30 to $290 a month.
What’s the PA scheme all about? According to the MCYS website, it states that:
If you are unable to work owing to old age, illness or disability and have no means of subsistence and no one to depend on, you may seek help under the PA scheme.
I don’t think Dr Neo was wrong in questioning whether the $1 increase a day (actually, it’s slightly less than that) makes any difference. I don’t know of anyone who can survive on $290 a month. Food, basic transport, electricity bills and rent (I assume such folks are too poor to even afford their own roof) surely add up to more than $290 a month. Of course, Dr Balakrishnan gave a whole host of other agencies where aid can be sought, and he concludes that there is sufficient assistance available to ensure that nobody in Singapore goes hungry.
I don’t know what to make of Dr Balakrishnan’s reply. Just take a look at the pre-requisites to qualify for the PA scheme. Honestly, if a person qualifies for the PA scheme that has such strict criteria, I think that person is in an extremely sorry state already. And, to add insult to injury, there isn’t a one stop-place for a person in such a sorry state to seek help. This person has to go to MCYS to get his obviously insufficient $290, and then go off to another dozen agencies to ask for help. Is this the mark of a first-world society?
Yes, Singapore does not believe in a welfare state because it is not a good idea to have large numbers of able-bodied parasites living off welfare. However, that does not mean that we should carry this idea to extremes. If people are OBVIOUSLY in a sorry state and needs help, what’s wrong with giving it to them? I think it’s an insult to a person under the PA scheme to be given an amount that is obviously not enough for subsistence on purpose so that this person will be ‘forced’ to go elsewhere to seek aid, and that this is done in the name of discouraging would-be parasites.
No matter how Dr Balakrishnan tries to package it, I don’t think anyone will agree to such treatment of people who are already in dire straits. I am personally very disappointed with the response of Dr Balakrishnan. Have we forgotten the man who gave $10 to his son to buy 3 packets of chicken rice (a final luxury for his family) before he jumped onto the MRT track and killed himself?
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 10/03/2007 at 10:40 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 5 years ago
hear ye hear ye Aaron. Good post. And guess what, Dr Vivian’s gonna get a pay rise of God knows how much in April for thinking up this policy of $1 increase per month for our destitute. I guess it is a good idea cos it make those poor chaps get off their butts, fill up more forms, and make a bee line for Bread line and other aid agencies, so that they can hone up their ‘work ethics’. What a brilliant move by Dr Vivian. I agree that what Mr Chiam said was right, the opposition did not ask questions for MCYS cos it would have probably led to more attacks on the opposition for being too ‘liberal’ so I am happy they did not contribute to the 5 hours of question / answer time on MCYS. Brilliant.
about 5 years ago
Sad man,
I suggest you read Molly’s entry on how much Singaporean babies are worth. Parents of newborns are given cash that’s almost a year’s worth of handout that a person under the PA scheme receives.
http://mollymeek.livejournal.com/144749.html
about 5 years ago
I think I get it now. Let the really poor suffer with as little public assistance as possible and hope they die off early. Really, they are not upgradable, not trainable, so I guess the plan is to hope they die off as early as possible. Why should the govt put more of their budget to this type of people. They drain the budget, and there is no returns. Whereas the $10bil spent on defence will help draw in more returns on kind. Sorry, but Dr Lateef was saying this is a loving and generous Budget. Sure ended on a flat note no??
about 5 years ago
vivian finally revealed his true colour
about 5 years ago
Hi Aaron
I just want to say beforehand I do agree with your sentiments. But you should know more about the PA scheme.
Any PA recipient will also get ‘free’ medical treatment (i.e. a card to show to the medical staff who should then take care of their expenses – well generally). The children of PA recipients also get ‘free’ education (i.e. schooling expenses are taken care of, as far as possible). PA recipients are also the first target groups of VWOs and other charities during routine or festive sessions (i.e. angpows, food rations, community help etc).
All this of course sound very nice on paper, and in some cases when it all come together, it works out very nicely. Of course, sometimes or most times, it doesn’t. But I just did not want you to go away thinking it is only $290 per month. There are other less obvious benefits involved actually.
If you happen to be at Chinatown or some of the older estates, look closely. The blocks can be full of PA recipients. Look around a bit more in your neighbourhood, and you may notice things that perhaps you can help with. We can’t just rely on the government anymore.
ct
about 5 years ago
The message has always been a ‘self-reliant community’ … what is a government if its fundamental role is not to take care of the country and inspire its people …. how to draw the line between needing help, being in dire straits and plain lazy ????
_______________
C. T. Ho SINGAPORE // Mar 16, 2007 at 11:27 pm
We can’t just rely on the government anymore.
ct
about 5 years ago
Loading comment…