One aim of this $1 billion matching grant is to catalyse philantrophic giving and increase the funds. I would like to find out whether these funds be used to defray cost of services or to build capacities?
The natural inclination of many when they hear that there is such a big sum of money set aside is to ask that it be deployed as subsidies, to bring down the costs of current services, so as to render them more affordable to users, especially in the light of a growing elderly population.
I agree that it is very important to develop a system of elderly infrastructure, services and products that are affordable to the average household.
For this to happen, I think it is equally important to invest in capacity and capability building. Otherwise, we will be using today’s capacity, today’s infrastructure, today’s strengths and weaknesses in services and products to address tomorrow’s growing needs. It would not be sustainable.
Hence, I am of the view that the use of this $1 billion should be judiciously apportioned between grants and subsidies, and capacity and capability investments to cater to our growing elderly population.
In this regard, I would like to ask whether besides innovating assistive technologies – the example mentioned by the Finance Minister in his Budget speech - would the Silver Trust Fund also be used to develop manpower - attract, develop and retain good people in this sector?
To help the elderly age in place, home care services demand will grow. In this connection, it is not just the pricing and affordability but the quality and availability of such services that would be important, not only for the low income, but also for the broad middle spectrum of the population.
Would any of the Silver Trust Fund be applied toward such ends? How would this sector's growth be catalysed?
