Connect with us

Current Affairs

Price of formula milk in Singapore has gone up by nearly 40%

Published

on

It was recently reported that a man had been arrested for suspected involvement in a series of milk powder theft cases islandwide. It was also understood that he had intentions to resell the stolen milk powder. As would seem to be the observation of that man, is milk powder such an expensive commodity that selling it on the black market would be lucrative?
A one-stop pregnancy and parenting portal in Singapore, Babyment, collected data earlier this month about the price hike of formula milk in Singapore, and noticed the increase in price when compared with data collected in December 2012.
The portal, which advocates and promotes breastfeeding, also observed that the price of formula milk sold in Singapore was much higher than similar brands sold in Malaysia and China, with two products selling at a price that is more than double that of similar brands in Malaysia.
To protect and promote breastfeeding in Singapore, the Ministry of Health (MOH) established the Sale of Infant Foods Ethics Committee, Singapore (SIFECS) in 1979. This committee formulated and implemented the Code of Ethics on the Sale of Infant Foods in Singapore, noting that the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends exclusive breastfeeding (that is the infant only receives breast milk without any additional food or drink, not even water) for the first six months of life.
Under the Code of Ethics, companies that sell or market formula milk are subjected to fairly stringent terms and conditions to ensure that mothers are not persuaded to rely on these products to provide nutrients for their infants.

  1. Price of formula milk in December 2012 and March 2017*

Tables below show the price per 100 grams of baby milk powder by stage:

On average, the price of baby milk powder sold in Singapore has increased by 26.8%. The smallest increase is seen in Enfa products by Mead Johnson (21.3% for stage 1, 20.7% for stage 2 and 22.3% for stage 3) while Nestlé’s Nan H.A. products show the greatest increase (39.3% for stage 1, 37.1% for stage 2 and 34.7% for stage 3).
Manufacturers claim they have made improvements to the formula milk sold in Singapore in the last 4 years. These include the Similac and Enfa series of products by Abbott and Mead Johnson respectively.

  1. Price comparison with China and Malaysia *

Tables below show the cost per 100 grams of baby milk powder in Singapore, China and Malaysia by stage.

According to the data collected, baby milk powder sold in Singapore is more expensive than those sold in Malaysia, with two brands (Similac stage 3 and Friso stage 3) selling at a price that is 2.2 times of similar ones in Malaysia.
Baby milk powder in Singapore is in general more expensive than similar brands in China except for the Nestlé Nan H.A. series.
Products sold in different countries may differ in terms of nutrition level due to different food regulatory requirement by the country’s governing authority.
*All data is computed based on selling price of a can of formula milk that has a net weight of milk powder of 800g to 900g.
Data collection and verification
All data on baby milk powder sold in Singapore was collected through personal visits to NTUC Fairprice and Cold Storage supermarkets. In general, there is no price difference for all baby milk powder in Singapore among major supermarkets like Fairprice, Cold Storage, Sheng Siong and Giant.
The majority of data on prices of formula milk in December 2012 (except stage 1 formula) can be verified through another independent database owned by Babyment. Through this database, Babyment shares with its visitors the latest promotions in baby milk powder.
Wyeth (S26), Nestlé (Nan H.A.), Abbott (Similac), Dumex (Mamil), Mead Johnson (Enfa) and Friso have official stores in e-commerce platform www.jd.com in China and the original selling price of products sold in those official stores was used in the comparison.
Wyeth, Dumex and Nestle Nan have official stores in e-commerce platform www.lazada.com.my and the original selling price of products sold in those official stores was used for these brands. For other brands sold in Malaysia, the average prices from two supermarkets Tesco and Jaya Grocer were used.
Exchange rate used in computation: SGD : RMB = 1 : 4.94 and SGD : RM = 1 : 3.17. The company in its calculation followed the rate quoted on 20 March 2017 at google.com.sg
Notes and explanation on the data
Not all formula milk products sold in Singapore are included in Babyment‘s data collection. In 2012, stage 1 formula sold by Mead Johnson was called Enfalac, stage 2 Enfapro, and stage 3 Enfagro.
China and Malaysia have been chosen for comparison due to similar products sold in those two countries. Names of the products may be slightly different. For example, in Malaysia, the stage 1 formula by Mead Johnson company is called Enfalac, instead of Enfamil.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

on

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending