More evidence of CCS's hypocrisy in ST interview

[Sammyboy RSS Feed]

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

However, critics were not convinced by Mr Chan’s arguments. Last Fri (8 Nov), he called The Straits Times for an urgent interview at his office in the hope of resolving once and for all a contentious debate over how best to help the needy.

At the interview, Mr Chan again reiterated his position that any measure, be it the Gini co-efficient or, an absolute or relative poverty line to measure the number of poor, has its flaws and can give a very false picture of the situation in a country.

A single definition of poverty such as a poverty line based on a fraction of median income may create more problems than it solves, he said.

Instead of a single poverty line or even a single layer of assistance, Singapore favours giving multiple lines of assistance to help Singaporeans across the spectrum, in help schemes that are layered and overlapping with one another.

He called this the “kuih lapis” approach, signifying the the various types of benefits handed out by the government to different groups of Singaporeans in need. Some of the examples are childcare subsidies, housing subsidies, education subsidies, Workfare, ComCare, Public Assistance, etc.

What this all means is that while Singapore has no official measurement of what constitutes poverty here, there are many yardsticks used to help the various groups of Singaporeans.

“This is our philosophy of having multiple lines of assistance across the entire spectrum rather than having one line,” he said.

So, who exactly are the poor in Singapore? Mr Chan replied that there are two groups that need the most help:

Temporary poor: those who for different reasons fall into hardship temporarily – they can be helped with some temporary assistance such as ComCare
Chronic poor: those who have been poor for a long time and can’t get out of poverty – helping them requires a multi-faceted approach from sorting out their housing situation, helping them get a job and making sure their children go to school etc.
Mr Chan said his ministry will be launching a coordinated approach to package help for this group of what the Government calls “vulnerable families”, starting with “the most intense cases”, such as families who end up in trouble because of drug problems.

But when the ST reporters asked him how many such families there are in Singapore, Mr Chan declined to give a figure, saying he would rather not draw a line at where the help would stop.

“Your question is how many people are there (in poverty)? My question is how many people have I avoided getting there because they have jobs, because they have housing, because they have medical care. That is the real big question to ask,” he said.

“So I hope people don’t ask, ‘Are you hiding (poverty), do you not dare to define it?’ No, what’s there to hide? You want to know, I will tell you everything.”

It’s strange that he made that last statement in his interview with ST when moments before, he declined to give a figure to the ST reporters when they asked him about the number of “vulnerable families” his ministry is targeting to help.

- http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/11/17...ty-line-issue/


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.