‘Absence of goodies and Baby Bonus in Budget 2012’

The announcement of Budget 2012 has received mixed responses from Singaporeans.

In his Budget announcement on Friday, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam unveiled a “Budget for the future” but Singaporeans Yahoo! Singapore spoke to felt a number of “goodies” were missing.

Leonard Chong, an operations manager, said that most of the incentives that the government has proposed have no direct impact on him since he is not aged 50 and above.  He also does not run a company and is not from a low-income family.

Chong was referring to the tightening of foreign workers proposed in the Budget and the slew of benefits in line for the elderly, the disabled and low-income Singaporeans.

When asked what stood out for him in the Budget, he said that there was a noticeable absence of “goodies” -- such as personal and corporate tax rate rebates. “Instead, the focus [is] on reducing foreign labour, [and focusing] on elderly workers and lower-income households. I think the majority of consumers will not gain any significant direct benefit,” he said.

“I think this is more of a ‘social budget’ which is targeting the groups that need more help. Given that we are not in a financial downturn, most of the population which is doing ‘okay’ is being left alone,” the 40-year-old added.

Gene Aw, a network security architect, also questioned the glaring absence of a Baby Bonus, in light of the government’s persistent efforts to improve Singapore’s birth rate.

“I did not hear anything mentioned about how the government is helping families with children mitigate the rising costs of upbringing and education; such as the increase in school fees and transportation costs,” said Aw, a father of three children.

“Only the U-Save [in the GST Voucher] is applicable to me which helps me offset the utilities bill. Personally, nothing much was catered for those not in the lower-income [but] overall, it’s good that the budget is doing more to help the ageing and the lower-income,” added the 39-year-old.

Meanwhile, Sulaiman Daud, a Mass Communications undergraduate thinks that the schemes and incentives introduced by the Budget are “reactionary instead of seeking to prevent problems from happening in the first place”.

The 24-year-old also questioned why needy students were not addressed in the Budget, saying that “all our fees are increasing … [and we have a] lack of accommodation”.

Sulaiman was referring to the recent tuition fee hike announced last week by the National University of Singapore (NUS), local polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) for the incoming cohort in Academic Year (AY) 2012.

Does the Budget really benefit the elderly?

Although this Budget lauds itself as being elderly-friendly, senior citizens whom Yahoo! Singapore spoke to were hesitant on the proposed benefits that they will receive.

Amongst the incentives proposed for the elderly in the Budget was the Silver Housing Bonus -- where elderly Singaporeans who opt to downsize their HDB flats will be awarded $20,000.

Said Ng Kim Kuek, 68: “I think [the bonus] is good because there is an additional $20,000 on top of the profit from selling my old flat. We [elderly] don’t need such a big flat… but even though the scheme is attractive, I won’t sell my flat because I’m used to living here.”

65-year-old Paul Loh echoed Ng’s views. “I can see how this appeals for people who are in need of money and are not working... [however] for some people who can look after themselves financially and are retired with their homes all paid, they see no reason to downgrade to a smaller flat,” he said.

Meanwhile, Din, a 52-year-old security officer felt that the increasing Central Provident Rates (CPF) will not help with the elderly, especially those who have just crossed into that age strata and are in their early 50s.

“The take home pay is the issue. Increasing [CPF contribution] for these people means that they will be taking less money home. Some don’t even bring home enough to put food on the table. Many senior citizens in this age range are working part-time and are earning about 50 dollars a day from working at places like McDonald’s,” he said.

‘Our policymakers seem to know what they’re doing’

On the other end of the spectrum, some citizens welcomed the other measures announced by the government.

Justin Tan, an undergraduate from NUS, supports the upgrading of public transport but questioned the large amount spent -- the government has pledged $1.1 billion for a Bus Services Enhancement Fund.

“It was a surprise because I expected a gradual amount [to be] increased annually relative to the success of the program,” the 21-year-old said. However, he added that this improvement is still needed as Singaporeans largely depend on public transport for travel.

Blogger Visakan Veerasamy agreed with Tan, expressing support for the government’s decision to improve the public transport system as he noted that this is a move that showed that the government is “responding to what people on the ground are concerned about”.

However, he too, was concerned with the large amount of money funded in for the upgrading of the public transport system as this is a “complex problem” where “throwing money” at it may be inadequate.

“[But], numbers aside, it’s good to know that our policymakers seem to know what they’re doing, and correct any inevitable mistakes along the way,” the 21-year-old said.

-- Additional reporting by Fann Sim and Chua Yini

Related Articles:

• Budget 2012 round-up
  
• CPF contribution rates raised for older S'poreans
  
• Gov't to build an inclusive, stronger Singapore
• Labour woes to worsen