Photo: One of the many homeless in Singapore. Edited version of article published on Vol. 14, issue 10 of The Nanyang Chronicle. Photo extracted from online source.
On a busy Sunday afternoon, Chan Ai Eng, 71, was selling tissue at a crowded street near Bugis Junction. The skinny arch-backed woman carried a large plastic bag filled with packets of tissue. The pale sinews on her arms were almost visible; her translucent skin wrapped around her limbs like parched leather. With a diminutive voice she pushed her wares to bystanders, who waved her away.
Lonely and abandoned, Madam Chan is a forgotten ghost treading the land of rapid modernisation. She is homeless, wandering from place to place, unsure of where she will stay for the night. If she is lucky, kind hawkers will treat her to a free meal. But more often than not, she pays for food with the meagre sum she earns.
Living on such a subsistence level, she has fallen out of the scope of the budget speech, which was delivered by Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam on 15th February 2008. In it, he mentioned how a budget surplus meant that needy Singaporeans stand to gain by receiving ‘hongbaos’ in the form of financial assistance.
However, she will not be receiving growth dividends, which is based on family income and the value of their homes. Top-ups will be given to Medisave accounts, and Public Assistance payouts will be increased, but these mainly service needy families and not homeless folks like her.
An additional $200 million will be pumped into ComCare, and another $10 million will go into grassroots, self-help groups, and voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). However, it is unclear which organisations will benefit from this funding, and how much of it will be steered towards the homeless elderly.
For Madam Chan and those like her, the god of prosperity seems to have passed them by.
Despite the various measures mentioned in Budget 2008, the homeless elderly seemed to have been left behind. While 10 welfare homes exist in Singapore to provide care for about 1,700 destitute people, many are still left wandering the streets. With no caring relatives, no friends, and no way to be contacted, the only hope for Madam Chan is to fall into the attention of some social worker, if they ever find her at all.
While no official figures have been made public about the number of homeless in Singapore, sightings of the destitute sleeping on void decks and on benches are common. They can be spotted sleeping on laid-out cardboard boxes, with their bags as pillows and newspapers as blankets. They carry their belongings with them in plastic bags. Many of them are old, lonely, and abandoned.
While Budget 2008 has not addressed the need of these individuals, it seemed that their families and society in general are not helping much either, content with leaving the problem to welfare organisations, which sometimes lack sufficient funding themselves. In a society where ‘filial piety’ is touted as one of its foremost values, we should not be seeing feeble elderly sleeping out alone and unprotected.
While the budget speech has promised benefits for all, it is doubtful that much of the wealth generated from the additional education, entrepreneurial, and research assistance will trickle down to the bottom of the barrel. The new measures effectively cover the lower-class to the rich, but what about the desperately poor?
The economic benefits coming our way, unfortunately, may remain firmly in our pockets. While many of the middle class and rich will benefit from the new measures, nudging them to “give back to the poor” may not be easy, as present economic realities may make this difficult.
On one hand, the middle class, many of whom are degree holders in middle-management jobs, have inflation to worry about.
On the other hand, the rich, many of whom are living comfortably off their hard-earned money, may find it difficult to give up too much for a philanthropic cause.
Amidst all the buzz and excitement of the ‘New Singapore’; the casino with its opulent splendour, the shuffle of chips at the poker table, and the Singapore Flyer soaring above the skyline, we must never forget to develop into a more compassionate society.
The voice of those like Madam Chan must never be forgotten.
Seeing her at the McDonalds restaurant along the air-conditioned ‘street’, I went up to the old lady and bought tissue, paying extra for it. Her face widened in a wrinkled grin and she thanked me profusely. We then sat down at the table to have a chat.
She revealed that she was left to fend for herself by her only son, who bums around from job to job and stays at their relatives’ place. Her husband abandoned her early in the marriage. Her feeble legs only allow her to work twice a week. She earns less than $10 a day, adding up to barely $20 a week.
Our time together was cut short because she had to go back to selling tissue. With no contact number, it was difficult to meet her again. I left her my number, hoping that somehow we could keep in touch again.
She never called.
Lonely and abandoned, Madam Chan is a forgotten ghost treading the land of rapid modernisation. She is homeless, wandering from place to place, unsure of where she will stay for the night. If she is lucky, kind hawkers will treat her to a free meal. But more often than not, she pays for food with the meagre sum she earns.
Living on such a subsistence level, she has fallen out of the scope of the budget speech, which was delivered by Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam on 15th February 2008. In it, he mentioned how a budget surplus meant that needy Singaporeans stand to gain by receiving ‘hongbaos’ in the form of financial assistance.
However, she will not be receiving growth dividends, which is based on family income and the value of their homes. Top-ups will be given to Medisave accounts, and Public Assistance payouts will be increased, but these mainly service needy families and not homeless folks like her.
An additional $200 million will be pumped into ComCare, and another $10 million will go into grassroots, self-help groups, and voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). However, it is unclear which organisations will benefit from this funding, and how much of it will be steered towards the homeless elderly.
For Madam Chan and those like her, the god of prosperity seems to have passed them by.
Despite the various measures mentioned in Budget 2008, the homeless elderly seemed to have been left behind. While 10 welfare homes exist in Singapore to provide care for about 1,700 destitute people, many are still left wandering the streets. With no caring relatives, no friends, and no way to be contacted, the only hope for Madam Chan is to fall into the attention of some social worker, if they ever find her at all.
While no official figures have been made public about the number of homeless in Singapore, sightings of the destitute sleeping on void decks and on benches are common. They can be spotted sleeping on laid-out cardboard boxes, with their bags as pillows and newspapers as blankets. They carry their belongings with them in plastic bags. Many of them are old, lonely, and abandoned.
While Budget 2008 has not addressed the need of these individuals, it seemed that their families and society in general are not helping much either, content with leaving the problem to welfare organisations, which sometimes lack sufficient funding themselves. In a society where ‘filial piety’ is touted as one of its foremost values, we should not be seeing feeble elderly sleeping out alone and unprotected.
While the budget speech has promised benefits for all, it is doubtful that much of the wealth generated from the additional education, entrepreneurial, and research assistance will trickle down to the bottom of the barrel. The new measures effectively cover the lower-class to the rich, but what about the desperately poor?
The economic benefits coming our way, unfortunately, may remain firmly in our pockets. While many of the middle class and rich will benefit from the new measures, nudging them to “give back to the poor” may not be easy, as present economic realities may make this difficult.
On one hand, the middle class, many of whom are degree holders in middle-management jobs, have inflation to worry about.
On the other hand, the rich, many of whom are living comfortably off their hard-earned money, may find it difficult to give up too much for a philanthropic cause.
Amidst all the buzz and excitement of the ‘New Singapore’; the casino with its opulent splendour, the shuffle of chips at the poker table, and the Singapore Flyer soaring above the skyline, we must never forget to develop into a more compassionate society.
The voice of those like Madam Chan must never be forgotten.
Seeing her at the McDonalds restaurant along the air-conditioned ‘street’, I went up to the old lady and bought tissue, paying extra for it. Her face widened in a wrinkled grin and she thanked me profusely. We then sat down at the table to have a chat.
She revealed that she was left to fend for herself by her only son, who bums around from job to job and stays at their relatives’ place. Her husband abandoned her early in the marriage. Her feeble legs only allow her to work twice a week. She earns less than $10 a day, adding up to barely $20 a week.
Our time together was cut short because she had to go back to selling tissue. With no contact number, it was difficult to meet her again. I left her my number, hoping that somehow we could keep in touch again.
She never called.
