SINGAPORE: Life after retirement should be a time of enjoyment and personal fulfillment. 

To many people, the completion of a successful career at 62, give or take a few years, means one is free to pursue other passions including volunteering for a worthy cause, spending time with family or taking a long holiday.

But the harsh reality is that in our old age, many of us will experience ill health or even disability. A survey by the National Council of Social Service in 2015 showed that more than 13 per cent of those aged 50 and above reported some form of disability.

Even for the best of us who keep fit and follow a strict diet, the odds don’t look good. One in two healthy Singaporeans at 65 will find themselves with a long-term disability, according to the Ministry of Health.

So the ElderShield Review Committee’s release of its interim recommendations last week to enhance ElderShield, an insurance plan that provides for enrolled Singaporeans who are not able to perform three of six stipulated daily activities, should be a sight for sore Singapore eyes.

The Committee announced bold reforms including making ElderShield compulsory for future cohorts and lowering the age of enrolment to 30 from the current 40, among others.

Yet, online, the announcement drew little substantial responses from netizens. A few netizens chanted “return my CPF”.

News of a likely premium increase sparked off complaints from those enrolled in the scheme that the Government was finding some a way to “eat up the hard-earned money of Singaporeans”.

A heartening development this week was seeing voices in the news come out to discuss what could be improved.

However, the response among younger netizens in their twenties and thirties who may see ElderShield made compulsory for them was surprising muted for the most part.

A few made the comment that it is unbelievable 30-somethings like us will be enrolled in a scheme called ElderShield. “So now 30 means elderly?” asked one reader. Maybe one day we’ll need BabyShield, quipped another.

Yet there was scant discussion about the substance of the review among this group.

AVERSION TO DISCUSSING OLD AGE AND DISABILITY

It seems some of us suffer from an aversion to discussing the harsh realities of an ageing population and the challenges that added longevity, coupled with a greater incidence of heart problems, diabetes and dementia might bring.

Might it be that a hectic career, coupled with a fixation on day-to-day, bread-and-butter issues, like how to pay the bills and whether to get a car, have blinded us to the longer-term issues of ageing and disability we may all face?

Perhaps most of us are busy raising kids and creating babies – and there’s cognitive dissonance with planning for a period of life much to do with the end of your own. Being in the pink of health and the prime of our lives may also be lulling us into complacency.

Besides, for young people coming out to the work force and taking on odd jobs and ad hoc projects in the gig economy, the idea of having enough in your CPF to pay for ElderShield premiums looks like a sick joke, some say.

Yet it is far too easy to shout about costs and “return my CPF” than to engage in a deeper discussion about ageing, disability and isolation.

The simplistic fixation on the ElderShield premiums one might have to pay can be reductive.

It is also worrying that some youths have the misconception that the ElderShield review will place the burden of caring for the aged on the young, even though ElderShield as a concept is about risk-pooling and doing your part to save for your own disability.

It seems ironic for a population so well-versed in planning for the schools our unborn children will attend and the milk they will drink, that we don’t do some planning of our own for our old age and try to have a better understanding of relevant healthcare schemes.

Might it be that living in a country with one of the most technologically advanced and modern healthcare systems in the world has given us a false sense of invincibility?

Do we make the mistaken assumption that any healthcare issue can be medically treated? And anything that can be treated can be fixed?

Even for those of us aware, perhaps we want to delay thinking about the challenges advancing age brings because it’s difficult to confront a future of helplessness, where we lose our ability to function independently and cannot go about life without help from a caregiver.

WE NEED AN HONEST CONVERSATION

We need an honest conversation with ourselves about the care we need for the time when we meet with permanent disability in old age.

The Government can facilitate this but we must own this discussion.

Where some express concerns about broadening the social safety net and the Government taking on the responsibility of pooling resources, we need to play a more constructive, active part in this debate.

This starts with thinking about the model of care we want for ourselves – whether enrolling in an institution, enlisting home nursing services or living in some community-based enabled living village – before considering how to fund these including which parts and how much should be publicly or privately funded.

We also cannot shy away from considering what living while disabled will mean to each of us, but how many of us understand what this translates into? 

How many of us have thought about whether our corridors are big enough for wheelchairs to move through comfortably or where in the shower to install handlebars?

And why not, for those of us still single and unlikely to have a life partner to take care of us in our golden years? It might be unpleasant to discuss, but who then will help us get to the toilet?

Back to ElderShield, most of us will probably monetise our homes to aid in providing for our retirement and disability in old age, yet even then the current payout of S$400 a month in 30 or 40 years doesn’t sound enough to provide for the caregiving assistance we will need.

So we must take a hard-nosed look at what the future brings for our aged selves and educate ourselves so that we can have a meaningful conversation about the options, costs and trade-offs.

CELEBRATED ANOMALY?

In a world where changes to healthcare financing are not only furiously poured over but strongly debated, including the introduction and abolishment of the Affordable Healthcare Act in the US, or the debates over the state of Britain’s National Health Services, perhaps the fact that the ElderShield interim recommendations were announced without much fanfare among younger Singaporeans is an anomaly to be celebrated.

Cynics say people don’t think their feedback matters, others say it shows high levels of trust on the contrary.

Perhaps it doesn’t help that the scheme is called ElderShield, suggesting to us that the issue is about very old age, whereas disability can arise from an accident or an illness at 50.

Maybe the scheme needs a catchier name and better marketing.

Regardless, Singaporeans must focus our energies on how to improve it.

Lin Suling is executive editor of the Commentary section at Channel NewsAsia Digital News.

SINGAPORE: One question Mr Ong Chee Chiau gets asked a lot is why Terminal 5 will be so big – Changi Airport’s largest terminal by far – as opposed to building three smaller ones gradually.

The latter “seems like a logical thing to do”, said Mr Ong, who is part of the T5 planning team and a senior vice president with Changi Airport Group (CAG).

But that would mean three sets of ticket counters, directing passengers to the correct terminals, and being able to have staff switch terminals quickly or have aircraft change positions as and when needed.

“So from the efficiency of the terminal itself (and) of how we’ll use the airfield, it made sense for us to go to … a mega terminal,” Mr Ong told Channel NewsAsia’s two-part special Looking Ahead, which examines how Singapore’s mega infrastructure projects are positioning the nation for the future.

Yet at the same time, the challenge is to make T5 still feel cozy and like home, without saddling passengers with a half-hour walk to their departure gate. (Watch the episode here)

Just how big will T5 be? 

It is being built on one of Singapore’s largest construction sites, if not the largest: At 1,000 hectares, the size of Tampines new town or 2.5 Marina Bays. (The rest of the airport occupies 1,350 ha of land.) 

This development site will also include the new third runway and other buildings.

When T5 is completed by 2030, it will increase Changi’s annual capacity by 50 million passengers initially and up to 70 million if needed – which would mean 150 million passengers a year, compared with the current capacity of 82 million.

And that is a hoped-for game changer for Singapore’s competitiveness as an air hub. 

“That’s why we’re excited about T5,” said CAG chief executive officer Lee Seow Hiang, who thinks it will even change “the whole of Singapore”.

WATCH: What T5 will bring (2:35)

INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES

Beyond the aviation industry – which directly contributes to 3 per cent of the economy and employs 77,000 people – air travel is vital to areas like tourism, hospitality and retail. The finance and business sectors also depend on Singapore’s air connectivity.

This is the reason the authorities are investing in T5.

Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said: “That our airport is so well connected … allows Singaporeans to travel all over the world; it allows business leaders (and) professionals to come to Singapore, (also) using Singapore as a base to go out into the region.

Therefore that connectivity brings new business opportunities.

Though the cost of T5 is expected to run into tens of billions – comparable to planned airport expansions in London and Hong Kong – Centre for Aviation chief analyst Brendan Sobie called it a “slam-dunk” investment owing to Asia’s economic and travel growth.

By the mid-2020s, China is set to become the world’s biggest aviation market and India the third largest. By 2035, the number of people flying to, from and within China and India will be 1.3 billion and 442 million respectively.

Closer to home, Indonesia will break into the top 10 and come up to 242 million passengers. Mr Sobie sees a unique selling point for Changi here, for example.

“There are a lot of opportunities to carry Indonesians, not only to Singapore, which is the main destination for Indonesians, but everywhere across the world,” he said.

“(Changi) has connectivity to places like secondary cities in Indonesia, which are maybe not linked to the hubs in the Middle East.”

Related: Why Singapore needs Tuas mega port, to keep ruling the seas

WORKING AT CAPACITY

T5 will also enable carriers, especially Singapore Airlines, which will be an important part of the Republic’s aviation future, to add links and routes to enhance the nation’s connectivity.

As it is, SIA CEO Goh Choon Phong notes the constraint on SIA, which currently operates services to over 60 destinations. 

“Right now … during the peak hours, we’re already having difficulty adding more flights,” shared Mr Goh, who is in no doubt about the need for T5.

We’ve ordered some 50 billion dollars’ worth of aircraft coming in, and … in order to expand, the airport has to have the capacity.

Changi is the world’s sixth-busiest airport, handling about 1,000 aircraft movements a day on its two runways and a record 62.2 million passengers last year.

During the daily peak period, it manages about 68 aircraft per hour, said senior air traffic control manager Pauline Yip.

The current two runways will soon reach full capacity, making the need for a third one – which is being built at a cost of just over S$1 billion – “more urgent” than T5, said Changi East Planning project director Leong How Yin.

The new 4km-long airstrip – which is on the same reclaimed land in Changi East that will house T5 – will be ready by the early 2020s, and will need 40km of taxiways to connect it to the existing terminals.

In terms of travel figures, Changi would have been at capacity this year if Terminal 4 had not opened last October, noted Mr Sobie.

While Changi may not necessarily grow as fast as previously because the market is more mature now, he described its annual growth of 6 per cent in the last two years as “very healthy”.

“That kind of growth rate will continue,” he predicted. “Some years might be a little less, some years might be a little more, but on average, maybe in the middle single digits.”

T5 will then be opening at a time when more capacity will again be needed, he said,

Changi’s reputation … (as) one of the best airports in the world would have been at stake if they hadn’t made this investment.

Changi has been awarded the top honour at the Skytrax World Airport Awards for five years in a row now.

As traveller numbers go up, however, so too will the competition to attract them – one that Mr Lee described as “intense”. But the planned scale of T5 gives him confidence.

He said: “We have, over the last 30 years – both CAG and all the companies in this ecosystem – built up deep competence and deep competitive strengths. And the opportunity is at our doorstep.”

WHAT T5 WILL FEATURE

When it is completed, all eyes will be on T5 and how it upholds Changi’s reputation.

But it is not just travellers who are fond of the airport; it has a place in the hearts of many Singaporeans as a place to dine, a hangout for families and a space to unwind.

So what does T5 have in store for everyone?

One of Changi’s themes that CAG intends to “play up even more” is the homecoming experience, not only for Singaporeans but also for visitors – “that this could be (their) home and we’d like to make (them) welcome”, said Mr Ong.

Another part of the Changi experience involves going green, and T5 will take a step further in renewable energy – not only using solar panels in the usual sense, but integrating photovoltaic cells into the building facade, for example.

Mr Ong also hopes to push the envelope of rainwater harvesting. “We’re going to allow all the rainwater to drain into a canal, and we’ll capture the water from there, treat it, and push it back into our systems,” he said. 

“We can all look forward to a very sustainable T5.”

To make travelling easier, the T5 team will tap technology such as automated check-in kiosks and bag drops, as well as explore new systems to bring luggage “more efficiently and securely” to the aircraft.

The automation will also be aimed at increasing manpower productivity and aiding the ageing workforce.

“It’ll definitely be beyond just the cleaning robots that you see today in T4. It may take the form of exoskeletons … (or) transforming entire processes that people may be used,” Mr Ong said, adding that lessons from T4 will be learnt.

MAKING BIG LOOK SMALL

T5 is also being planned with the airlines in mind. CAG executive vice president (Airport Development) Yam Kum Weng said: “We’ve designed … a single large terminal that will allow airline groups in T5 to consolidate their operations under one roof.

“This will mean that airlines would enjoy economies of scale and, hopefully, also save some cost, as cost is an important consideration in today’s competitive environment.”

Given T5’s size, however, CAG is conscious of the need to prevent long waiting times, long queues and long walks.

“In T4, our biggest problem was: How do you make small look big?” said Mr Ong. 

In T5, we’re going to have the exact opposite problem: How do you make big look small and cosy?

He suggested that T5 will have compartmentalised spaces and new types of sky trains to minimise walking distances.

“With that, we hope to be able to make a mega terminal feel like the same cosy terminals that you’re used to in Changi,” he said.

His colleague Mr Leong said tunnels, including for baggage, will also be built to link T5 to the existing terminals. And he promised passengers a seamless experience: “They can connect between the terminals exactly as if they’re in one Changi.”

Mr Ong added: “We’ll be working very hard towards not only trying to replicate the experience that you have today in Changi Airport but, in some cases, make it even better.”

Watch this episode of Looking Ahead here. Catch the second episode, about Jurong Lake District and the integrated waste management facility, on Feb 14 (8pm SG/HK).

SINGAPORE: A van caught fire just before the Outram exit on the Central Expressway (CTE) on Friday (Feb 9) evening.

The Singapore Civil Defence Force said it was alerted to the incident along CTE towards AYE near the Outram Road slip road at about 5.20pm.

The fire has since been put out and no one was taken to the hospital, authorities said. 

A video sent by a Channel NewsAsia reader showed flames engulfing a vehicle, while other footage uploaded to social media showed SCDF officers on the scene. 

An electronic signboard at the CTE tunnel entrance near Merchant Road also warned of a fire. 

The Land Transport Authority sent out a series of tweets from 5.30pm warning of an accident in the CTE tunnel towards the Ayer Rajah Expressway before the Outram Road exit. 

It advised motorists to avoid lanes 2 and 3. 

SINGAPORE: People’s Action Party Whip Chan Chun Sing on Friday (Feb 9) reminded party Members of Parliament not to write to the courts on behalf of their constituents. 

In an internal memo sent to the media, Mr Chan said the separation of powers between the Executive (the Government), Legislature (Parliament) and Judiciary (the Courts) is a fundamental principle of Singapore’s political system that is enshrined in the constitution. 

“The PAP Government has always upheld this separation rigorously, and will continue to do so. PAP MPs must not do anything that may give rise to any misperception that they can influence or interfere in the judicial process,” he said.

Mr Chan, who is also a Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, issued the memo after a PAP MP, Sengkang West SMC’s Lam Pin Min, wrote a letter to the courts on behalf of one of his constituents Tang Ling Lee.

A High Court judge subsequently said in his decision grounds that it was “somewhat troubling” for an appellant to try and downplay culpability through an MP’s letter.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers told Channel NewsAsia on Wednesday that it received 400 letters by MPs written on behalf of their constituents in 2017. 

Mr Chan said that over the years, PAP MPs have, as a norm, refrained from writing to the courts on behalf of their constituents. 

When approached by constituents over matters that come before the courts, PAP MPs may write to the Ministry of Law on procedural issues and AGC on prosecutorial issues. “This has been the general practice, and will remain so,” he said. 

Mr Chan also said the courts are in the best position to evaluate, holistically and impartially, the evidence presented and the merits of a case. 

“The courts have clear and strict procedures to uphold the independence and integrity of the judicial process. The separation of powers has never been in question even when the courts have received a letter from an MP, directly or indirectly,” he said.