The Government should be lauded for enhancing the schemes that
cater to the people with lower-income, people with disability and the elderly. The
increased budget for healthcare expenditure from $4 billion to $8 billion a
year should be especially appreciated. It's good that the Government has realized
that it cannot continue to spend less than 4 per cent of its GDP on healthcare.
Singapore's Department of Statistics Report on Retail
Sales Index reveals that despite the high GDP growth in 2011, the
retail sector remained lackluster. The Report said, 'The total retail sales
value in December 2011 was estimated at $3.5 billion compared to $3.4 billion
in December 2010'.
Budget 2012 could have considered a retail rebate scheme where
retailers could give 5 per cent of the GST back to the consumer as a rebate in
the form of shopping vouchers. Such a scheme would have boosted consumption.
Singapore's consumption remains at 40 per cent of the GDP, whereas it is as
high as 55 per cent in other developed Asian economies.
Such a retail rebate scheme will entice the consumer to keep the
retail scene in Singapore more vibrant.
It is good that the Finance Minister has given assurance that the
economy of Singapore will be restructured on the basis of skills, innovation
and productivity. But there will always be some essential sectors where
upgrading of skills, innovation and increased productivity may be limited. To
tie the income growth of workers in these sectors to productivity growth would
be meaningless.
For example Minister of State for Transport Josephine Teo told Parliament
that despite stepped-up recruitment efforts, fewer younger Singaporeans want to
become public bus drivers. Ms Teo admitted that the reasons for this as being,
'the tight labour market and the
availability of other jobs where working hours would be more conducive to
family life' (see HERE).
How much more skills upgrading can drivers have? How much more productivity or
innovation could be infused into driving buses?
There are quite a few similar sectors
where there can be very little productivity, innovation and skills growth. To
tie in income growth to these factors in these industries will mean that
Singaporeans will find it very difficult to take up jobs in such sectors as
they may not pay meaningfully well. And the jobs in these sectors are essential
and cannot be relocated to other countries.
Budget 2012 could have identified
such sectors and increased funding for such sectors, specifically aimed at
increases in income growth, which may have induced more Singaporeans to take up
jobs in these sectors.
While one can appreciate that that
with the new Budget the Government will now 'give a $120 grant per month to families hiring a foreign domestic
helper to help care for elderly family members who have severe dementia, or are
immobile and unable to care for themselves...on top of the $95 concession in
the Foreign Domestic Worker Levy that all households with elderly persons will
continue to enjoy', the Budget could have aimed to do more for the elderly and
the disabled, like:
1.
Removing the
Domestic Foreign Worker levy for qualified foreign workers who are brought in to care for the
elderly, so that the elderly could be provided appropriate care at home (where
possible) without the need step-down care at nursing home; and
2.
Providing Elder/Disability
Care Tax Credit for qualified elder and/or disability care expenses. As
caregivers make heavy financial sacrifices in spending a large amount of money
each year on expenses for aging relatives, including cost of providing food and
transportation and paying for medical expenses, such a tax credit would be an
added incentive and encouragement for caregivers to provide appropriate care
for the elderly in their own homes.
Budget allocation for such
initiatives would make significant difference in a graying society like
Singapore's.
Another area the Budget could have addressed is the Total
Fertility Rate (TFR) problem, which has also resulted in the high influx of
foreigners.
The TFR problem may be mitigated if the Budget had provided for free education from pre-school
right up to college. By providing 2 months of maternity leave and 4 more
months of childcare leave (which can be taken by either the father or the
mother) for every child born. And by providing free medical care for the child
until he or she turns 21.
Mr Lee Kuan Yew said in June 2010
that America has overcome the TFR problem probably because of 'wide open spaces'
(see HERE).
The Budget could have made allocation for creating more 'wide open spaces',
instead of encroaching on such spaces for the sake of urbanization, which
besides contributing to the TFR problem, has also been blamed for the problem
of flooding.
"This earth can hold only so many people. It's six billion now. It will be nine billion in 50 years. You destroy all the biodiversity, you destroy all the forests. You have to grow more food and this (results in) earth warming... it will destroy our habitat."
- Mr Lee Kuan Yew (speaking at the Singapore International Water Week and the World Cities Summit in June 2010)
Comments