‘Not a good idea’: Singaporeans doubtful about PM’s plan to move beyond baby bonuses to boost birth rate

SINGAPORE: Some Singaporeans have expressed scepticism about Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s latest approach to tackling the country’s plunging birth rate after he said on Monday (June 8) that his administration is looking at moving beyond baby bonuses.

Speaking at a Singapore Press Club dialogue, Mr Wong said his government will place greater emphasis on improving the overall quality of life for families rather than relying primarily on incentives to persuade Singaporeans to have more children, as the country confronts a record-low fertility rate and an ageing population.

Mr Wong acknowledged that governments around the world have struggled to find lasting solutions to declining birth rates. While Singapore has introduced a range of measures over the years to encourage parenthood, he suggested that policymakers should focus on creating conditions that make family life more manageable and fulfilling.

“Think about it less as procreation incentive,” Mr Wong said. “Think more about what are the moves we can make to really make life better for families in Singapore.”

Mr Wong acknowledged that governments worldwide have struggled to reverse falling birth rates despite rolling out a range of initiatives over the years, including baby bonus cash gifts, expanded paternity leave and changes to egg-freezing regulations.

Under the current Baby Bonus Scheme, parents of eligible Singapore Citizen children born on or after Feb 18, 2025, receive a Baby Bonus Cash Gift of S$11,000 for the first and second child, and S$13,000 for the third and subsequent child. The payments are distributed over the child’s first six-and-a-half years through a Child Savings Account linked to the Child Development Account.

For a first or second child, parents receive S$3,000 at birth, followed by S$1,500 at six months, another S$1,500 at 12 months, and S$1,000 at 18 months. Thereafter, S$400 is paid every six months until the child reaches six and a half years old. Families with a third or subsequent child receive slightly higher payouts.

Despite these measures, fertility rates have continued to decline. The issue has become an increasingly pressing concern for policymakers. Earlier this year, the government announced plans to establish a ministerial task force to address what it described as an “existential challenge”. Nearly S$7 billion was also set aside for marriage and parenthood measures as part of broader efforts to support families.

At the same time, Singapore is expected to become a super-aged society this year, with one in five residents aged 65 or older. The demographic shift has raised concerns about the long-term sustainability of the workforce and the country’s population structure.

Mr Wong cautioned against expecting easy solutions or quick fixes.

“We should have some humility,” he said, “It’s a global challenge. It’s happening everywhere in the world. No one has the answers for now.”

Acknowledging that fertility rates are unlikely to rebound significantly in the near future, he said Singapore would continue to remain open to immigration while carefully managing inflows. He also highlighted the role of technology and artificial intelligence in sustaining economic growth and productivity as the workforce ages.

Some Singaporeans responding to the premier’s remarks have expressed doubts about his approach, while some provided a range of suggestions on what the Government can do to encourage couples to have more children. Others questioned whether policymakers have adequately addressed the root causes behind the country’s low birth rate.

One commenter was blunt in their criticism, writing, “There’s never a good idea that comes from PAP.”

Another argued that many solutions proposed by Singaporeans over the years had failed to gain traction. “Over the years, Singaporeans have collectively contribute ideas and solutions to overcome this long-standing issue. Unfortunately, none has been discussed in parliament.”

Others expressed frustration over what they viewed as a lack of concrete action.

“When you create a problem at the first must have a solution in the end,” one commenter wrote, while another remarked that “in the end, the reply is still ‘There is no one solution that fits all’.”

A separate commenter suggested policymakers were failing to tackle underlying issues, saying,

“Talk is cheap, action is expensive and it’s come with great responsibility. If you are merely doing for sake of doings, the plan are not addressing the root cause. Would rather you don’t do anything about it…”

Several respondents argued that direct financial incentives alone would not be enough to encourage couples to have more children, citing the high cost of raising children, childcare and education pressures, housing affordability concerns and the challenge of balancing work and family commitments

Others proposed additional forms of support. One commenter suggested free delivery fees, subsidised infant milk formula, diapers and childcare until a child reaches the age of two. The same commenter also called for greater workplace flexibility for mothers, including shorter working hours during a child’s first year and tax incentives for companies that support working parents.

Housing affordability emerged as another recurring theme. One commenter argued that making public housing more accessible to younger Singaporeans could have a greater impact on fertility rates than cash incentives.

“Make public housing more available to the youth. Simple,” the commenter wrote, adding that income ceilings and eligibility criteria should be reviewed to allow young adults to move out earlier and form families sooner.

The cost of car ownership was also raised repeatedly. Several commenters argued that larger families should receive assistance with vehicle ownership, describing cars as a necessity rather than a luxury for households with young children.

Suggestions included lowering Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices, providing COE exemptions for family cars, and offering subsidies or rebates to larger families.

“For people with large families, please consider subsidies to own a car. It’s really a necessity for family with young kids,” one commenter wrote.

Another said: “Lower COE lah. Cars are not just for the rich. They are meant for families.”

Some commenters advocated broader economic reforms, arguing that improving wages and reducing living costs would help encourage parenthood.

One netizen suggested free childcare and education for third and subsequent children, priority access to housing upgrades, and preferred school placement.

A commenter proposed substantial housing grants tied to childbirth, while another argued that reducing the financial burden on the middle class should be the Government’s priority.

“Reduce financial burden on the middle class, including all related costs to car ownership permanently and meaningfully,” the commenter wrote.

Another suggested that lowering the overall cost of living would have a more immediate impact on family formation.

Going against Mr Wong’s view, one commenter suggested reducing immigration levels to allow wages to rise, while another called for “more jobs for locals”.

Others said the PM should review his own Cabinet to cut costs. A netizen said, “Very simple. Lower prices, lower cost of running the government, a.k.a. ministerial salaries. That will immediately make life better for all families in Singapore.”