http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/09/24/uniquely-singapore-f1-or-f9-are-our-ministers-also-confused-by-the-annuityerm-longevity-insurance-scheme/
Uniquely Singapore, F1 or F9: Are our
ministers also confused by the annuity
erm
Longevity Insurance
scheme?
Posted by theonlinecitizen on September 24, 2007
By Andrew Loh and Leong Sze Hian
Just when we thought the confusion was over!
Do you get the feeling that this annuity
erm
sorry
this
Longevity Insurance thing is messed up?
Even the New Paper reported that Singaporeans liak bo kiew
(literally: catch no ball, meaning: dont understand or do not
grasp). (link)
One suspects that even those who should be absolutely clear about
it also liak bo kiew the MPs and the ministers.
35 days after the National Day Rally speech (19 August):
- the announcement 2 days later (21 August) by the Minister of
Manpower that shocked the nation, with the Compulsory Annuity if
you live to age 85.
- the Minister without Portfolio studying the aging issue, makes an
about-turn that some will be exempted form the Compulsory Annuity.
First that those chronically ill may be exempted. Then later, that
those who have enough in their account may also be exempted.
- the Manpower Ministers ministerial statement in parliament that
the Compulsory Annuity has become Longevity Insurance, and that the
floor rate on all CPF accounts (Ordinary, Medisave, Special and
Retirement accounts) will be only 2.5 % in 2 years time, compared
to the guaranteed 4 % now on the Medisave, Special and Retirement
accounts.
And now (22 September), the Minister of National Development says
that even those under the HDB lease buy-back scheme will have the
Longevity Insurance built into the scheme.
Since it was said at the National Day rally speech that We will
pay you for the tail of the lease and you get some money out, a
lump sum upfront and then the rest pay into CPF, some form of
annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life., why is it
that those on the HDB lease buy-back scheme who will have some
form of annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life, in
exchange for giving up the ownership and equity of their HDB flat
to HDB, will also have to take the Longevity Insurance?
Why does one need Longevity Insurance when one already has some
form of annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life?
Or will those on the HDB buy-back scheme be exempted from the LI
scheme, just as those who are chronically ill as mentioned by the
Minister without portfolio?
So, those who will be exempted are the rich (because they have
enough for retirement), the chronically ill (because they are going
to die soon) and those who sell back their flats to HDB (because
.
?).
The rich who have other means may be exempted from the Longevity
Insurance, but the poor who have only one 2 or 3-room HDB flat to
fall back on in their retirement will have to take the Longevity
Insurance, despite already having a life annuity under the HDB
lease buy-back scheme?
Do all the MPs know about these? Do the ministers really know what
they are talking about?
6 months for answers
To top it all off, the Manpower Minister has appointed a committee
and given them 6 months to look into all this. Shouldnt the
government have undertaken such a study before making all these
announcements, confuse everyone and then when asked, say that the
answers and details will only be known after the study, 6 months
later?
Why make such momentous and significant announcements before a
comprehensive study was done?
All the flip-flops and about-turns are they symptoms of poor
policy formulation?
Why wasnt a comprehensive study done before the policy
announcement?
Was the CPF Board surprised by the ministerial announcements?
No wonder, the New Paper said that most people liak bo
kiew!
Carefully considered
Now, in a Channelnewsasia report headlined CPF reforms carefully
considered, govt can deliver: PM Lee, one would have to ask: If it
was carefully considered, why is there a need to set up a
committee after the announcements, ask it to look into the LI
scheme and say that the details will only be known 6 months into
the future?
What does the PM mean when he said CPF reforms carefully
considered? Who carefully considered it? Why is it that whoever
carefully considered it still need a committee to work 6 months
to study it?
Going forward, lets hope the Longevity Insurance Committees
deliberations and findings, and subsequent policy implementation
may be of a higher standard befitting a government which only
recently declared itself unique, special, extraordinary and
world class.
It shouldnt be too much to ask for - after all they are the ones
who insisted on being paid the highest salaries on the
planet.
Do our ministers also liak bo kiew?
