International Business & Economy CPF and the cost of voting PAP

CPF and the cost of voting PAP




- Advertisement -

By: Tan Jee Say

Finally after more than 20 years, the Government has admitted that the CPF Investment Scheme (CPFIS) has failed to achieve its objective of enhancing the retirement savings of CPF members. Instead, 45 per cent of members made losses in the last 10 years while 80 per cent obtained less than the 2.5% return guaranteed in the Ordinary Account.

This is one of the major costs of voting the PAP. Before the 2011 GE, I had proposed a fundamental change to the CPFIS by ensuring a minimum annual return of 4-5% as follows:

“…..the Government should be made to issue long dated bonds offering attractive yields in excess of 4 or 5 % in which Singaporeans can invest with their CPF funds and private savings…..Safe Government bonds should be the only form of investment permitted for CPF savings. Allowing people to use their CPF money to invest in stocks and shares listed on the SGX is ‘unconscionable’ as it is like ‘sending lambs to the slaughterhouse’, a point made by retired top Mandarin Ngiam Tong Dow.” (from page 19 of my essay “Creating Jobs and Enterprise in a New Singapore Economy“)

- Advertisement -

PAP has always boasted that its schemes are carefully thought out and are for the long term good of Singaporeans. The failure of the CPFIS after more than 20 years of its operation, is one more example of how hollow is PAP’s claim and how thoughtless and clueless they truly are.

- Advertisement -