During a parliamentary session on 16 October 2024, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament (MP) for Hougang SMC, Dennis Tan Lip Fong, raised concerns about the cost of hearing aids for seniors.

Citing studies that link uncorrected hearing loss to dementia, Tan asked the Minister for Health whether seniors could be allowed to use their MediSave savings to purchase hearing aids.

In response, Minister of State for Health Rahayu Mahzam explained that the government already provides financial support through the Senior Mobility and Enabling Fund (SMF).

This fund offers means-tested subsidies of up to 90% for eligible seniors, reducing the cost of hearing aids significantly. She also highlighted that the SMF is part of broader support measures that help seniors manage their healthcare costs.

For seniors with severe hearing loss who require more complex devices such as bone conduction or cochlear implants, Rahayu said that further subsidies are available.

In these cases, seniors can tap into both MediSave and MediShield l Life, which are designed to help cover the high costs of such procedures. The Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) is also available to provide additional support for those who face financial difficulties.

Rahayu addressed the possibility of extending MediSave usage to cover hearing aids, stating, “While many Singaporeans wish to use more of their MediSave, we need to ensure that they retain sufficient balances for major health episodes in advanced age.”

She reiterated that MediSave is reserved for more severe and costly health conditions to ensure that individuals can cover unexpected, significant medical expenses later in life.

Tan followed up with a supplementary question, pointing out that the current monthly income eligibility threshold of S$2,000 per person in a household under the SMF excludes many seniors from receiving aid.

He argued that many seniors who are no longer working struggle to afford hearing aids, which can be a significant financial burden. Tan urged the Ministry to reconsider allowing seniors to use part of their MediSave savings for this purpose, particularly given the link between hearing loss and dementia.

Rahayu acknowledged the concerns but noted that since 2019, over 16,000 seniors have applied for and benefited from the SMF, with 99% receiving subsidies.

She emphasised that those who do not meet the SMF eligibility requirements can seek further assistance through the AIC. This ensures that seniors who are in genuine need can still access necessary support even if they do not qualify for the SMF.

Rahayu also explained the Ministry’s approach to managing MediSave usage. “It is a balancing exercise,” she said, stressing that the government must ensure MediSave funds are preserved for future healthcare needs, particularly for more severe medical conditions and costly treatments.

While the Ministry is open to reviewing its policies, Rahayu reiterated that the existing subsidies and support mechanisms provide significant help to seniors. She encouraged those who are facing financial difficulties to reach out to the AIC for further assistance.

The income threshold for SMF eligibility was increased from S$2,000 to S$2,600 from 1 October 2024.

In a speech delivered on 16 October 2024 in Parliament, Associate Professor Jamus Lim, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Sengkang GRC, expressed his admiration for Team Singapore athletes at the 2024 Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games.

During the motion titled Olympic and Paralympic Achievements, Lim particularly acknowledged medallists Jeralyn Tan, Maximilian Maeder, and Yip Pin Xiu for their outstanding performances and achievements.

Assoc Prof Lim began by extending his appreciation to all national athletes, stating that their dedication and sacrifices, whether they secured a medal or not, exemplified their passion and commitment to the nation.

He noted the extraordinary efforts of Jeralyn Tan, who secured a medal in boccia at the Paralympics, Maximilian Maeder, who became Singapore’s youngest Olympic medallist in kitefoiling, and Yip Pin Xiu, who continued her dominance in the pool by winning two gold medals in backstroke events.

Despite these commendations, Assoc Prof Lim raised questions about the disparity in the monetary rewards offered to Olympians and Paralympians in Singapore.

He noted that, under the current system, cash rewards are given under separate programmes: the Major Games Award (MGA) for Olympians, managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC), and the Athletes’ Achievement Awards (AAA) for Paralympians, overseen by the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC).

Assoc Prof Lim highlighted that these rewards are funded by the Tote Board, a government agency, leading him to question why the government has not taken steps to ensure parity between the two.

He recalled previous Parliamentary questions posed by both the Workers’ Party and the People’s Action Party, alluding to bipartisan concerns over the unequal treatment of able-bodied athletes and athletes with disabilities.

Assoc Prof Lim argued that, while the SNOC and SNPC are technically non-governmental organisations (NGOs), their close ties to the government through sponsorship and council membership—some of which involve current and former ministers—suggest that the government can exercise influence over the award structures.

Addressing the economic arguments for unequal rewards, Assoc Prof Lim pointed out that athletes generally compete for the love of their sport rather than financial gain, yet still require financial support to continue competing at the highest levels.

He argued that monetary rewards, though secondary to passion, play a crucial role in allowing athletes to sustain their careers, especially during periods where success may be uncertain.

Assoc Prof Lim also refuted arguments that Paralympians should receive smaller rewards because their competitions are less popular or have fewer participants.

He equated this reasoning to arguing that athletes in less popular sports like sepak takraw or silat should receive smaller rewards compared to footballers. In his view, such distinctions undermine the value of diverse sporting disciplines and achievements.

Expanding on this argument, Assoc Prof Lim cited the example of the U.S. women’s soccer team, which, despite drawing larger audiences and generating more revenue than their male counterparts, fought a lengthy legal battle for equal pay.

Similarly, he pointed to the case of athletes in the billion-dollar NCAA leagues in the U.S., who receive limited compensation despite the vast revenues their performances generate.

He concluded his economic analysis by stating that the market dynamics of supply and demand do not justify the current disparity in rewards for Olympians and Paralympians.

Rather, the issue should be viewed through a moral lens. According to Assoc Prof Lim, Paralympians deserve equal recognition for competing at the highest levels, regardless of their classification or the number of competitors in their categories.

In his closing remarks, Assoc Prof Lim urged the government to take an active role in ensuring equal monetary rewards for both groups of athletes, following the lead of countries like Canada, the United States, and France, which have already implemented similar policies.

He argued that such a move would align with Singapore’s broader values of equality, compassion, and non-discrimination.

Assoc Prof Lim’s call to action was framed within the context of broader societal goals, with the Workers’ Party having long advocated for equal opportunities for all Singaporeans.

He concluded by stating that recognising the achievements of all athletes equally, through financial rewards, would be a significant step towards fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.