Current Affairs 6 Summary

This article talks about the reduction of heathcare subsidies for permanent residents (PR). The PR healthcare subsidies will begin decreasing from late this year onwards in phases. TODAY also then interviewed PRs, who said that even though they were disappointed with these changes, they understood that this was a way the government is using to react to the citizens unhappiness. The Members of Parliament then responded to this change by saying that more help will be given to PRs who are average or below average earners, but agreed that a larger distinction between PRs and citizens is needed, as this differentiation is also seen worldwide.

Commentary
After the absolute priority given to citizens for Primary 1 registration, this seems to be another way the government is trying to win over unhappy citizens in the light of the 2011 General Election. Personally, I feel that this is not the way for the PAP government to be going about winning voters over. While a sharper distinction between citizens and PRs should be present, implementing populist measures are just making our government going the way of many countries which have a two-party system. I think the issue at hand should not be reducing the benefits of PRs to make Singaporeans feel more prioritized, but rather dealing with macro problems which citizens face. For example, instead of reducing the benefits of the PRs, more benefits should be given to Singaporeans. However, these benefits should not be absolute priority, as these only serve to undermine the PR system. Although many Singaporeans will be pleased at the greater distinction between Singaporeans, PRs and foreigners, I feel that the populist measures would not be sufficient enough to win votes over in the General Election, especially with bigger problems such as MRT breakdowns and flooding plaguing the country. The government of the old would definitely dismiss these populist measures as short-visioned, and would work towards making the future better for future generations. However, the new government seems to be solving problems as they come. I believe that this reduction in healthcare subsidies for PRs is only the first step from the government in reaffirming their Singaporeans First policy. Hopefully, future changes will be more directed towards boosting the Singaporean identity, and not to just encourage PRs to convert to Singapore citizens. Also, apart from benefits given to lower income Singaporeans, the lower income PRs should be taken into account too, especially with this reduction in healthcare subsidies.

Finally, I believe that the government should strive to work towards achieving a Singapore that Singaporeans can feel at home in, rather than just throwing benefits to make Singaporeans feel like they are prioritized. After all, Singaporeans being Singaporeans, will begin to ask for more, and gradually, when the government reaches a limit that it can gives, they will begin to complain once again and not vote for the PAP government. Such is the limitations of populist measures, and this is something that the government should consider before implementing these rather radical changes.

Healthcare subsidies for PRs to be revised

by Tan Weizhen
04:45 AM Apr 12, 2012

SINGAPORE - Come April next year, most permanent residents will only get half the healthcare subsidies that citizens receive, announced the Ministry of Health (MOH) yesterday, as the Government continues to sharpen the distinction between citizens and PRs. The Government had earlier indicated that subsidy rates for PRs would be adjusted when it announced enhancements to healthcare subsidies during the Budget debate last month. Yesterday's announcement comes two weeks after the Ministry of Education gave citizens absolute priority over PRs in Primary 1 registration. The changes will apply to inpatient services, day surgery and specialist outpatient clinics in the public hospitals, as well as intermediate and long-term care services. To mitigate the impact on PRs, the changes in the public hospitals will be implemented in two phases - in October this year and April next year. By April 2013, PRs will see their subsidy levels at the public hospitals and national centres drop by between 5 percentage points and 19.5 percentage points, depending on income level. For instance, a patient in the Class C ward, earning a monthly average income of between S$3,201 and S$3,350, will get a 39.5-per-cent subsidy next year, down from the current 59 per cent. In comparision, a citizen gets a 79-per-cent subsidy. Adjustments for the intermediate and long-term care sector will be implemented in the third quarter this year. PRs will get a subsidy of up to 55 per cent, while citizens will get up to 80 per cent. "For lower-income PRs, some of whom may be members of citizen households, the Ministry is mindful of the impact of the subsidy adjustments on their bills," said the MOH. It has moderated the adjustments to the subsidy framework for this group. PRs told Today they were disappointed but understood the Government's actions. Marketing manager Irene, who goes by only one legal name, said: "There is indeed some level of disappointment as I've been PR for many years, paying the same taxes as Singaporeans. As a PR, I haven't been contributing any less than Singaporeans. However, I still feel it is a good move as there must be a difference between citizens and PRs, or people will become unhappy," said the 32-year old. IT consultant Calvin Boo, 42, felt the Government is reacting to citizens' unhappiness.

"It may hurt the PRs who may be your average earners. If the hospital bill size is large, a 20-percentage-point cut can mean a lot," he added. Members of Parliament said more help should be given to low-income PRs. Member of Parliament Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade Group Representation Constituency) suggested hospitals look at helping this group on a case-by-case basis, while MP Chia Shi-Lu (Tanjong Pagar GRC) called for more social safety nets for PRs. Both, however, agreed that the changes to create a sharper distinction between citizens and PRs are necessary. Dr Fatimah said: "If it's too minor and just a token difference, then it makes no sense. Such differentiation is common all over the world, so we are not unique." "It is not being anti-PR, but why should anyone be a citizen if he doesn't get much more perks? It is not being punitive, but rather a nudge in a certain direction, and to remind PRs if they apply for citizenship, they get quite a bit more," said Dr Chia.