We refer to the article “Needy students to get close to $8 million this year under ST School Pocket Money Fund” (Straits Times, Oct 2).
14,000 needy students
It states that “More than 14,000 needy students are expected to receive some $8 million dollars to help them with food and other expenses in school this year.
The Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund (SPMF), which gives a monthly stipend to students from low-income homes, said the estimated $8 million disbursement is a 60 per cent jump from the amount of money given out two years ago.
More money will be disbursed this year because the fund was extended to post-secondary students last year. The amount given to primary and secondary school students early this year was also raised.”
Why not only for Singaporeans?
– According to the SPMF’s web site – “To qualify as a beneficiary receiving pocket money, the child/youth must be:
A Singapore citizen or permanent resident”
We understand that almost all other financial assistance schemes are for Singaporeans only. So, why are PRs eligible? If the assistance is confined to Singaporeans – can the criteria be less restrictive, such that more Singaporeans may qualify?
Most restrictive criteria amongst all schemes?
Since we are on the subject of criteria – “(the child must be) from a family whose per capita net monthly household income is not more than $450. This means that the net family income divided by the number of family members should not exceed $450 per member each month. For example, if the father is the sole breadwinner in a family of five and his take home pay is $1,000 a month (after CPF), the per capita family income is $200”.
In this regard, we understand that the SPMF’s criteria is the most restrictive, of probably all the financial assistance schemes.
For example, ComCare’s criteria is “Families with a monthly household income of $1,900 and below, or a per capita income of $650 can also qualify for assistance if they meet all other criteria”.
So, why is SPMF’s criteria ($450) – $200 less than ComCare’s $650 per capita income?
Only help for 2 years?
As to “providing them with school pocket money for at least two years. In exceptional cases requiring additional help, SPMF will extend the financial assistance to up to four years”
– Why is it that the term of assistance is only for 2 years – and up to 4 years in exceptional cases?
Form our experience doing volunteer work in financial counselling over the last decade or so – we have come across many cases of financial stress when SPMF assistance is terminated after 2 or 4 years.
Since a child generally goes through about 13 years of education – why do we have this “2 years” restriction?
Until now, some criteria don’t make sense?
In fact, the criteria previously was arguably even more strange – “Secondly, post-secondary students who wish to receive aid in the past needed to have either tapped on the fund previously or have a sibling who is drawing on the fund. In future, all who meet the income criteria can qualify. This change will benefit new applicants and those from single-child families”.
Why was there a need for either to “have a sibling who is drawing on the fund” or “to have either tapped on the fund previously”?
Were those who did not “”have a sibling drawing on the fund”, or “tapped on the fund previously”, less deserving – until only now with the changes announced?
Number needing assistance increase more than 3 times?
Notwithstanding the increase in financial assistance (probably to cover inflation) and the widening of the scope of cover – don’t you find it rather alarming that for a developed country like Singapore – the number of students helped increased from 3,375 in 2001 to 14,000 now?
The assistance disbursed increased from $0.9 million in 2001 to the $8 million projection for this year, as reported in the subject news report.
How much reserves?
How much reserves does the STPM have, as we do not seem to be able to find it in the 2013 annual report?
Donations exceeded disbursements by $25.7 milliom, excluding interest and other expenses
We totaled the donations from 2001 to 2013 and the figure is $65.9 million.
Similarly, the total disbursements for the period is $40.2 million.
The donations have exceeded disbursements every year.
However, for the last year, after deducting other expenses – the net deficit was $316,511 against a surplus of $1.9 million in 2012.
S Y Lee and Leong Sze Hian
P.S. Come with your family and friends to the 5th Return Our CPF protest on 25 October 4 pm at Speakers’ Corner https://www.facebook.com/events/446619505476438/
