Mr Speaker Sir, while I acknowledge the intent behind the Bill, there are two areas in which I wish to seek further clarity.
First, the Special Needs Savings Scheme introduced by this Billallows parents to nominate their children with special needs to draw a monthly cash payout, receive medisave transfers or a combination of the both after the parent has passed on. The statutory provisions as they are drafted give wide discretion to the CPF Board and MCYS to decide the amount and method of making the payouts to the nominee. Three parties – the parent, the Board and MCYS – could potentially be involved in the decision on how much to pay the SNSS nominee and how these payments should be made. It should be kept simple: the parent’s wishes expressed in the nomination should come first because parents will know the needs (which include financial needs) of their children best. If the parent’s nomination is unclear, only then should the MCYS be allowed to exercise its discretion. This will reduce the risk of slip-ups in coordination between the Board and MCYS. What areas of concern does the Board have that makes it necessary for the wide discretionary powers?
I also note that under the proposed S 25 (1C), the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports will decide whether the child qualifies as a nominee under this scheme. If the Minister does not issue the certificate of eligibility, the applicant can apply back to him for reconsideration under S 25 (1E). There is a concern that this avenue of re-consideration may not be effective since according to the Bill, the re-consideration is being done by the same person who made the decision in the first place i.e. the Minister. I note that the Minister can delegate one or both of these powers to others as allowed by section 25(1H). How does the government intend to ensure that the re-consideration is done with fresh eyes and is not just a formality?
Second, CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals are an important source of regular income to retired Singaporeans. However, the proposed changes to sections 27Q and 77(1)(o) allow the Board to pay the CPF Life payouts and the Minimum Sum withdrawals by a member who reaches 55 into that member’s account. Our retirees need their CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals in cash for their living expenses. Could the minister clarify why does the Board need the power to pay these payouts and withdrawals to the member’s CPF account instead of in cash? It is rather strange when a member can finally withdraw and enjoy his hard-earned savings from CPF at 55, only to have the Board put it back into his CPF account. Under what circumstances will theBoard exercise these powers?
Thank you.