~by: Leong Sze Hian~
I refer to the article “Donations to CDCs up 5% to S$10.9m” (Today, Feb 28).
The joint press release by the Community Development Councils (CDCs) states that “A total of $10.9 million was attracted in community and corporate donations in 2011, up from $10.4 million in 2010. In particular, the proportion of donations from corporate companies had increased, forming one-third of the overall donations received in 2011 as compared to one-quarter in 2010”.
Compete with VWOs for donations?
Whilst it is a noble intention and objective to “To encourage the more able to help the less able in the community”, I think we should consider the implications of the CDCs asking for more donations which may be in competition with the private and volunteer sectors, like the Voluntary Welfare Organisations (VWOs).
In a sense, for example, every donation dollar given to the CDCs from a company's charity budget, may mean a dollar less for VWOs.
What are Budget surpluses for?
When GST was raised in 2007, the primary reason given was to help the poor. With a Budget surplus of $2.3 billion last year, and a net Budget surplus of $8.2 billion over the last six years, why do the CDCs have to embark on its almost never-ending quest for more donations? The $10.9 million it raised is a pittance, relative to our Budget surpluses mentioned above.
Less job placements?
As to “In 2011, the CDCs had successfully placed 10,775 job seekers into employment, a 26% decrease from 2010. With the improved economic conditions, it has been easier for those who have the necessary skills and right mindset to secure employment or better jobs on their own”, what does this mean? – That the decrease in the job placement success rate was due to improved economic conditions which made it easier for job seekers to find jobs on their own?
But, “On training and employment, the CDCs said they provided employment and training assistance to about 27,300 residents – a 13 percent increase from 2010”. So, if economic conditions had improved such that job seekers could find jobs on their own, then why did the numbers given job assistance increase by 13 per cent? – Kind of self-contradictory, don't you think?
It's kind of like saying in the same breath that the economy was good, but then more people sought and were helped?
Actually, the CDCs could simply have given us the statistics as to how many of those who sought job assistance were placed by the CDCs, and how many found jobs on their own, instead of just citing the reason of easier to find jobs on their own as the cause of the CDCs' decline in the placement rate?
More applications?
With regard to “In 2011, the CDCs received some 69,600 applications for assistance under the national schemes, a 14% increase over 60,900 applications in 2010. The increase is attributed to more applications under the ComCare GROW and Self-Reliance pillars”, since the economic conditions had improved, why are more applying for assistance?
One of the reasons given was that “The Self-Reliance applications increased by 14%, from 33,526 in 2010 to 38,316 in 2011. Between June and December 2011, the Self-Reliance applications increased by 25%, compared to the same period in 2010. This is likely due to the increased awareness of assistance rendered by CDCs through various outreach efforts and publicity”.
The ComCare Self-Reliance consists of the following two programmes:-
Work Support Programme
This programme supports families who require assistance to tide over a difficult period. This scheme is targeted at families whose members are prepared to do their best to help themselves.
ComCare Transitions
ComCare Transitions assists those who are temporarily unable to work due to old age, illness, disability or extenuating circumstances and have little or no family support.
More awareness?
I find it rather strange that often, whenever more people apply for help, one of the reasons given is invariably that it was due to increased awareness.
So, is it logical to say that after some six years of having the ComCare programme, “ families who require assistance to tide over a difficult period” and “those who are temporarily unable to work due to old age, illness, disability or extenuating circumstances and have little or no family support”, are still not aware – such that applications jumped again due to more awareness?
Could it simply be that more applied because more people are in financial stress?
Are the 69,600 new applications for the year that do not include existing needy families that were already getting assistance?
If so, how many needy families are there in total?
How many helped by how much?
What is perhaps conspicuously missing in the subject press release, is how many of the increased 69,600 assistance applications were successful, and how much was disbursed to them?
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Ah, the fudging of statistics, logic, words has been honed into a fine art to create a smoke screen to lull us into believing that they are working very hard at taking care of the citizens. We need sharp, analytical and altruistic people like Mr Leong to help us see beyond the smoke screen.
All these charity business in Singapore is started by one man popularly known as Mr Charity. who has since passed away. He started a booming industry where those clever enough can get money for themselves in big handfulls while dosing out peanuts to the poor and needy. Some like Durai, the Buddhist monk, priests and other less well knowncommunity leaders become very rich, having gold taps fitted in their toilets, stables of horses and mansions overseas like the Sultan of Brunei only that he rules over all his subjects, while our Charity Chiefs rule over the desperate and the poor of society..
Increase or decrease in number of people helped can be attributed to many reasons, such as increase or decrease in outreach, staffing, waiting times, etc. It is not entirely because of economic conditions.
CDCs should set a target on how many people they want to help and push themselves to achieve this target. Every year, increase this target by say 10%. This will be more meaningful.
in europe..there is no such thinggie as a donation campaign whether it the queen astrid club or the primeister hat balls….
the last campaign i know off was sir someusician song
DO THEY KNOW it xmas time? that campaign sell cd @ market rates and the profits goes to the homeless poor..princess diana openned the campaign not the CHAMPAGN….
Donation drive is good. It shd continue. Serves as a constant reminder to people to have a heart for fellow beings.
Giving donation emancipates the spirit and bring abiout immense feedom for some givers.
Donation softens people's hearts. The reciever too rejocies over shower of love upon him.
The taxpayers (governement) dont have to bear the full cost of subsidy. The money saved can go to more productive areas to generate growth.
In fact our needy school children are so well looked after that they dont have to pay for uniforms, books, fees, shoes, etc. They even get food & transport vouchers made available from thempels, churches and other NGOs.
Elsewhere, I dont think poor school children have such benefits.
We have become a Nation of beggars. There are so many charities that one becomes afraid to step out on Saturdays when the beggars with tin cans come out in full force.These beggars are sadly school children who are coaxed to waste their time on something which in previous times were fully the province and responsibility of the Government. But today this Government eschews giving out welfare money. Yet it has a full barrel of reasons why the officeholders must get paid in the millions and yet money is not enough. The most farcical is the Prsident's Charity show. This gentleman presides over a show to get money from the long suffering public to give to the poor while he himself is so surprised why and how such largess has come his way and he secretly snears at the naivety of the citizenry.
The cost of charity is to be reckoned with in money mad Singapore.
Let us go back to the old cookbook formular where the Government takes care of the sick , old and poor and not the glamourous and foreign.
What u are asking , Mr Leong is what they don't u to know
Increase GST to help the poor….
Most lame excuse I ever heard…
The Government should not scrounge on the taxpayer. It should finance the poor.
There are too many charitable organizations. These impose a cost on the taxpayer because they have to be staffed and paid too.
The Govt should Open up the old social welfare department and assist the poor directly..
The CDCs are just glorified social welfare departments but with a difference. It is an NKF in the making. .
To the author Leong Sze Hian and TOC,
You have failed to address my queries on your article linking extra budget to the FSC and the money given out to the needy, the article that you have put up on 28 Feb 2012.
Please answer these questions:
a) Does the FSC only provide financial services to the community?
b) What other non-financial services are provided by the FSC?
c) If the FSC provide more non-financial services like counselling, managing juveniles, helping families with problems, do these services incur costs?
d) If these non financial services incur cost, will it be logical then that if we were to expand such non-financial services to the community, we need to have bigger budget?
e) Can Leong Sze Hian or TOC prove that FSC's job is only to disburse money as he try to claim in his article?
f) In your article, you have quoted a report from the Straits Times. Why did you fail to mention and quote that the extra money is for 10 new FSCs and more social workers, which was clearly reflected in the Straits Times report?
You, Leong Sze Hian, has remained silent on the questions. Why are you providing half truth facts and deceptive methods in your article?
The govt has millions in surpluses nearly every year, but in accordance to the wishes of the Great Leader, will give only token help to the needy.
They will make the TCS artistes do monkey tricks, or force the overpaid President to lend his name to fundraisers.
The only money they are willing to spend is on those aching heart advertisements on TV that try to spur people to donate.
Who's championing free-speech and moderating and censoring rights to reply on their article.
Where's the contradiction? Go find it in your mirror!!
Charity is likely to be a strategic plank for the Govt to spread wealth more evenly and help reduce the income gap.
The Govt plays an important role inredistribution of wealth and ensuring that the lower income groups live with dignity and get a chance to move up in life. And to do that, it needs to collect funds before it can think about expending funds. The Govt can only forcibly tax and levy residents and corporations to a certain extent beyond which it would simply price itself out as a competitive and attractive place to live, work and play.
The wider the income gap, the more likely the Govt will promote the not for profit sector. The Govt has a vast array of tools to help steer the not for profit sector in fulfilling its strategic objectives.
It isn't a bad thing. The Govt has funds and does make money from investments and generate surpluses, but it cannot possibly be used to help every worthy cause.
@son of s
Agree with you fully. This PAP govt. is very good at exploiting the poor people of Singapore. The army of "beggars" out begging for money is a burden on society and non-productive. Very little actually go to needy recipients, after deducting all the costs. The govt. should just cutl the heavy indirect tax burden on the poor, create decent paying jobs for its citizens rather collecting so much taxes and then sucking them into the black hole called reserves.
Talking about non-productive activities, the PA immediately comes to mind. It's the most non-productive spending that anyone could think of, and should immediately be eliminated. PA activities are mainly aimed at politicking and garnering support for the ruling party. The huge budget of the PA could immediately be channeled towards much more productive endeavours.
The government just wants to keep the money in their own pockets. always say they want to keep the money for a rainy day but the rainy day comes, the people suffered more as they will tell the people to tighten belts and cut budgets so that they don't lose too much money.
Can the government tell us why are they keeping so much money and not reinvesting in singaporeans but on to others? is this government elected for singapore or for other countries?
@Libran
Yes the PA uses massive state funds to support the PAP.. So is the Town Council format of providing municipal services to HDB estates. Yes we have a large umbrella of state organizations coopted to politicking for the PAP. I suspect that the CDC is also a propaganda apparatus for the PAP.
All these organizations if dismantled will free the money to fund the poor and disabled.Bring back the Social Welfare Department to look after the needs of the needy without the need to PAP the service.
@son of s
Agree with you fully. Every public organ has been subverted by them into furthering their selfish objectives, therby hijacking the national agenda of nation building that must be the top priority of all true blue Singaporeans. After 50 years of supposedly "nation building", we are slowly waking up to the horror of losing our identity, degrading to third world living standards (beneath the facade of a first world society), true blue Singaporeans still struggling daily to make ends meet, paying off 30-year mortgages for leasehold public housing, non-existent social safety net, high indirect taxation (where did all the money go?),and having to compete with third-world workers that suppress our real wages. We are also waking up to the ransom we have to pay for ministers and their cronies in GLCs, stat boards, govt. agencies, top bureaucrats and civil servants ( Ask these people to step out into the private sector and see whether they could command that kind of salaries they are getting now from taxpayers).
VOLUNTARY donation29 February 2012
Donation drive is good. It shd continue. Serves as a constant reminder to people to have a heart for fellow beings.
Elsewhere, I dont think poor school children have such benefits.
…………………………..
are you sayin africa and india hav stupid pupils?
who run the IT industries? and who was the former head of UN
can singapoor hav the talent to be the head of UN and run the IT industries without india injuns?
For every $1 donated or budgeted to CDC, how much went into administrative costs such as salaries, 4-5 months bonuses, staff welfare, rentals, renovations, imputed rents etc? What is the proportion of the money actually going to the poor & needy??
From personal experience, 1 of the main reason why they claim that less job placements becoz of good economy blah blah, is actually becoz CDC is unable to help many jobseekers get a job.
Most of the time the CDC staff don’t bother to contact the jobseeker. The 2 or 3 jobs that the CDC staff recommend to the jobseeker at their 1st meeting is usually from SMEs trying their luck to find desperate people. These jobs are very low pay and lousy work conditions, that even many foreigners themselves will think 2X or 3X.
Only after 3 months the CDC staff will contact you, but only becoz he/she want to close case. Whether you actually got job or not, they don’t really care. If you got job, they will self-praise and say they help find you job.
If you got no job, they ask you whether you want to remain on their list i.e. no contact again for another 3 months. If you no longer want to be on their list, CDC will again self-praise and say that you are able to find job on your own.
This kind of job who don’t want? Even primary school kid can do.
Is it enough? Community Chest got $55m last year but spread it out across 300,000 people = ~$$180 each a year. Not much. The key is to distribution. Getting the right stuff/assistance to the right people who need it.
As to where the budget goes, LSH knows a lot of that goes to workfare (300,000 people on it). $3b under the grow and share package in 2011 with $1.55b going to the growth dividend payout. $3.63b going to GST voucher payout over the next few years alone.
The cost of Government, the cost of Charity, the cost of living in Singapore is kept high because we have got to support the whole world's workers in order to keep this bunch of office holders happy with their salaries. If you trace the reason why we had ti import such shiploads of people, why our judicial system is dangerous to our health, why we lose our homes, our jobs, our Human Rights,scurrying at the thought of the ISD, it all comes down to keeping this bunch of people in power.
Statistics can be skewed like sataysticks, deliciously prepared for unsuspecting diners who eventually suffer food poisoning in a deadly state of shock.
There is a pattern. Municipal; services as provided by Government is expensive with the office holders paid highest in the world, millions per annum. So Charity must also be expensive with the administrators paid handsomely compared with the amount of charity they dispense. The poor in Singapore has no free lunch. Only those in charge of them gets the free lunches, dinners, glory and power on top of it all.
Many singaporeans families who were casted into great difficiuties are due to the policies of the PAP regime.
No one should doubt this fact.
But so far no much helps are being given by the PAP.
While PAP does not ties any string to foreigners coming into the country to work & enjoy what we sinagporeans have, PAP listed many conditions when singaporeans come for helps.
And singaporeans are told that we should be happy with our lots & what the PAP has done & citizens are reminded all the times about how other countries are far worse than us.
PAP want singaporeans to prepare to sacrifice more in the coming years.
Should singaporeans just sit & wait for more miseries.
PAP says we need more new foreigners.
I said we need a new government, one who place interests of singaporeans first.
So many donation but no one knows how much is done to help poor people or their infrastructure. And to know NKF has so much fund to last so many years. Isnt it strange, these charity organisations are constantly asking for money? Is asking money already part of their job?
I think all charities should publish how much donation received, how much has been used to help poor people etc and operations. Need to be very transparent but currently I dont see that!!!
Relentless donation drives… its crazy. just go to queen street, cancer society send an army of people standing at the temple asking for donation. THERE DONT WANT YOU MONEY, INSTEAD THEY ARE ASKING FOR YOU TO USE YOUR GIRO SO THAT THEY CAN DEDUCT FROM YOUR BANK EVERY MONTH!!!