<Pic Credit: TODAY>
During the budget debate in parliament, Nominated Member of Parliament Chia Yong Yong expressed her disapproval of giving more flexibility to CPF members to withdraw their savings.
NMP Chia warned that leaning too much to the left and giving out too many benefits will mean that we may run out of money.
Ms Chia, who is a lawyer and the president of the SPD (a social service provider focusing on assisting those with physical disabilities), explained that Singapore should still promote personal responsibilities.
She argued that if a CPF member squandered his or her savings, then that person would become a burden on society and it would be other taxpayers who would have to support them in their twilight years.
“When we talk about personal choice, choice always comes with responsibility. Benefits come with obligations, and when we exercise our personal choice, there is a price to be paid. And Madam, I submit that price should not be paid by someone else,” said Ms Chia.
She also noted that there were many calls recently to "Return our CPF" but she said that the money in CPF was not "our" money as claimed.
Ms Chia pointed out that the CPF savings each member has is "enhanced" and the members are not the only ones contributing to their own accounts. In particular, she argued that there is co-payment from employers and top-ups from public funds.
"Because I am not the only person contributing to that fund, I cannot be the only person to call the shots as to how I am going to spend it. At the very least, I have a moral obligation to spend it wisely." she argued.
It seems that Ms Chia believes that the employer co-payment is actually not "our money". If this was the case, then by the same logic, our employers should technically continue to pay CPF contributions even if we are not actually working.
The reality of course is that the employer contribution is part of the wages that they pay workers and if we are not working, we will not receive that employer contribution. It is still our money.
She also failed to point out where exactly the "top-ups from public funds" came from. If she is referring to the interest earned, such interest could not have been earned if the government wealth funds did not have access to the forced savings of the citizens in the first place. On top of this, they continue to invest the combined savings and receive greater returns than they return citizens in interest. So where exactly does the "top-up" come from?
Related:
Dear TRS, NMP Nominee Chia Yong Yong is the Sister of an Active PAP Member