A blogger in Singapore facing a libel lawsuit has become the center of what some are calling a David-versus-Goliath battle that has exposed a desire among citizens for greater public debate over retirement security. I am heartened by the solidarity, support and unity that Singaporeans have shown during this period,” Mr. Ngerng said in a separate statement. “I will continue to advocate for transparency and accountability on the use of our CPF retirement monies.” Mr. Ngerng—the first blogger in Singapore to be hit with a libel suit from a government leader—said he may have to seek further donations to pay damages, as the High Court only handles claims above S$250,000. The case has grabbed local headlines and stirred heated debate over the CPF system, which many lower- and middle-income Singaporeans say lacks transparency and fails to meet their retirement needs. Officials have said they would review the pension scheme and consider certain changes but defended the overall system as sound. Mr. Lee’s decision to take Mr. Ngerng to court also riled some Singaporeans, who took to social media to say the prime minister could have acted with more magnanimity against an ordinary citizen, or even spurned legal recourse altogether. “There’s a sense that this is a David-versus-Goliath situation,” said Sudhir Vadaketh, an author who writes on Singaporean political and social issues. “Many people perceive the prime minister as being a bully for pursuing his case to such an extent,” instead of accepting Mr. Ngerng’s apology and offer of damages, he added. In some ways, Mr. Ngerng’s case has also exposed widening income disparities among Singaporeans, political observers say. The CPF, set up in 1955, runs a retirement-savings scheme that takes mandatory contributions from citizens and permanent residents, as well as their employers. In recent decades, the system was liberalized to allow CPF members to use some of these savings to buy homes and make financial investments. Such changes, compounded by slowing wage growth and rising living costs in the past decade, have hurt many people’s ability to save for retirement, analysts say. In a 2013 survey, insurance firm Manulife found that nearly 70% of Singaporeans expected to work beyond the retirement age of 62 years due to expected shortfalls in their retirement savings.
Posted on: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 04:08:55 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015