Proposal to Reduce Levy for Hiring of First Migrant Domestic Workers to $60 for All Households with One Singapore Citizen
Ministry of ManpowerSpeakers
Summary
This question concerns Mr Lim Biow Chuan’s proposal to reduce the migrant domestic worker (MDW) levy to $60 for all Singapore Citizen households and lower the concessionary age eligibility from 67 to 65. Minister of State Ms Gan Siow Huang responded that the levy serves to regulate MDW numbers, with the $60 concessionary rate targeted at households with specific caregiving needs. She noted that universal reductions could lead to an unsustainable MDW population and that age criteria are calibrated to the local context and senior lifespan. Minister of State Ms Gan Siow Huang stated that policies are regularly reviewed and suggested that households with lighter needs consider part-time help under the Household Services Scheme. Finally, she invited households in financial difficulty to approach the Ministry of Manpower for specific case reviews and assistance.
Transcript
21 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Manpower whether the levy for a migrant domestic worker can be reduced to $60 for the hiring of the first migrant domestic worker for all households with at least one Singapore Citizen as a measure to reduce cost for households.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, the foreign worker levy is a pricing mechanism to regulate the number of migrant workers in Singapore so that the employment of migrant workers is commensurate with need. The levy is currently $300 per month for the first migrant domestic worker (MDW) and $450 per month for subsequent MDWs.
To support families with greater need for MDWs, a concessionary levy of $60 per month is granted to local households with caregiving needs, defined as having either: (a) a Singaporean child below 16 years old, (b) a local elderly person at least 67 years old, or (c) a local person with disabilities living in the household. For other households, the concessionary levy of $60 will not apply.
Households that require help for lighter domestic chores may consider engaging part-time housekeeping services under the Household Services Scheme which could cost less than employing and providing for the upkeep of an MDW.
Mr Speaker: Mr Lim.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, just two short supplementary questions. First, currently, the United Nations define seniors as 65 years whereas we have set ours at 67 years. So, would the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) consider reducing to 65 years for the age eligibility criterion for getting the concessionary rate for the MDW?
Secondly, my Parliamentary Question is actually trying to address the issue of reducing costs for households. So, perhaps, MOM, will want to consider whether we can reduce this for households during the period when cost of living is quite high? So, reduce the levy for those who have a senior aged 65, rather than 67.
Ms Gan Siow Huang: I thank the Member for raising the two supplementary questions. I think our policies have to be taken in our local context – looking at the lifespan of seniors in Singapore and also to calibrate all our policies according to our local needs. We will, however, continue to review our policies so that they are kept relevant and also support households that are in need.
To the question of reducing or providing concessionary levies for all households in Singapore hiring MDWs, I would like to reiterate the point that the purpose of the levy as a pricing mechanism is to regulate the number of MDWs in Singapore. Today, we already have a growing and quite a large number of MDWs. We need to have some lever to be able to regulate the overpopulation of MDWs to keep it sustainable.
If there are households that the Member is aware of who are in financial need and require domestic help, please highlight to MOM. We will look at the case.
1.01 pm
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Clarifications. Minister Desmond Lee.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]