20,000 people affected by 'processing issue' with means-testing system managed by MOH
The majority of those affected received higher-than-intended subsidies and grants, MOH said in a media release on Monday (Jul 21). The rest received subsidies and grants that were lower than intended.
Corrections to subsidy and grant levels are currently being made, following the discovery of the issue, the ministry added.
HOMES typically uses income information from the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) to means-test individuals with business income, said MOH.
However, in January 2025, the system could not appropriately account for the business incomes of selected individuals following changes in the data processing timelines.
This led to "inaccurate means-testing" for individuals with business incomes and members of their households between Jan 1 and Jan 27.
Around 19,000 people who are under schemes administered by MOH were affected, the Health Ministry said.
Another 1,000 people were also affected despite being under other schemes managed by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA), Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), Ministry of Education (MOE), and Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA).
This is because "HOMES also provides means-testing results for selected subsidy schemes across the government", MOH added.
Those affected by the issue represent less than 3 per cent of all individuals means-tested during the Jan 1 to Jan 27 period, the ministry said.
Affected schemes and what to expect
AFFECTED MOH SCHEMES
CareShield Life and MediShield Life premium subsidies and Additional Premium Support (APS)
Affected individuals will receive the correct premium subsidies at their next policy renewal. APS recipients will continue to have their premiums covered based on their approved validity period. All affected individuals will be notified via letter. No action is required on their part.
Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS)
Affected CHAS cardholders will receive letters detailing any required actions, if any.
Subsidies for long-term care services
Affected individuals will receive the corrected subsidies from the next billing cycle or payout date.
Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund, Equipment Rental Scheme, Home Caregiving Grant and ElderFund
Affected individuals will be informed of their adjusted subsidy or payout.
Subsidies for day surgeries, inpatient services, specialist outpatient clinics, polyclinic drugs/vaccines and community hospital services
From July 2025, public healthcare institutions will notify individuals who received lower-than-intended subsidies and adjust their bills accordingly. Reimbursements will be issued where applicable. No action is required from individuals.
AFFECTED NON-MOH SCHEMES
ECDA: Preschool subsidies and early intervention schemes
ECDA will inform affected parents, preschools and early intervention centres of the adjusted subsidies from Jul 22. The corrected subsidies will take effect from August 2025 onwards.
IMDA: DigitalAccess@Home Scheme (DAH)
The affected households will be informed from Jul 22. Households who were under-subsidised will receive the correct subsidies and be automatically reimbursed. Those with higher subsidies will continue to receive them for the remaining validity period of the household's current DAH award. Their eligibility will be reviewed when they apply for a new DAH award.
MOE: Higher education bursaries and Kindergarten Care (KCare) additional subsidies
The Institutes of Higher Learning will inform affected students. No action is required from the students. Affected children attending MOE KCare will have their corrected subsidies applied from August 2025 and will be notified accordingly.
SG Enable will work with service providers to inform the affected individuals receiving the subsidies from Jul 22. The corrected subsidies will apply from August 2025 onwards.
MOH said it has completed the reassessment of the affected people and "will adjust their means-test and subsidy tiers back to the intended levels" from Jul 21 onwards.
"For those who received an over-subsidy, they will not have to return the excess subsidy and/or grant amounts that have already been paid," the ministry said.
"For the minority of individuals who received lower than intended subsidies and/or) grants, agencies will make good the difference."
MOH said that the agencies will reach out to inform affected individuals progressively, and there is no action required on their part.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
5 hours ago
- CNA
KKR in talks to buy ST Telemedia Global Data Centres, Bloomberg News reports
KKR is in talks to buy ST Telemedia Global Data Centres in a deal that could value the Asian digital infrastructure provider at more than $5 billion, Bloomberg News reported on Saturday, citing people familiar with the matter. Reuters could not immediately verify the report.
CNA
7 hours ago
- CNA
Can botox really improve your self-esteem? Depends on how you already feel about yourself, say experts
These days, for every flaw we perceive about our bodies, there seems to be a treatment, procedure or regimen designed to "fix" each one. Social media is rife with content promising aesthetic perfection. We fixate on beauty standards led by influencers, going down the rabbit hole of tutorials and tell-alls on how to achieve sculpted jawlines or glass-like skin. Counsellor Bethany Chuah from psychological consultancy firm Mind What Matters said that studies have shown a clear link between social media materials such as these and an increase in cosmetic procedures. Filtered images create the illusion that constant self-enhancement is normal or even necessary, and this can be psychologically risky. The sea change is clear: Cosmetic procedures used to be something we kept hush-hush, but they are appearing more in public discourse and conversations. Recently, American personality Kylie Jenner made a comment on a fan's TikTok video that quickly went viral, sharing the details of her breast augmentation surgery, down to the name of the surgeon and implant size. Men are not exempt from similar pursuits. One of the newer trends to surface on online communities is "looksmaxxing", where young men seek to enhance their "sexual market value" through facial massages and cosmetic surgeries. It has spawned a peculiar vocabulary used by those who subscribe to these ideas when discussing about their features. For instance, "mewing" refers to a tongue exercise that purportedly sharpens jaw shapes, "IPDs" refers to interpupillary distance or the gap between the eyes, and "canthal tilt" is used to describe the angle of the eyes. In Singapore, the Ministry of Health said that the number of licensed providers offering aesthetic services rose by an average of about 40 a year between 2020 and 2023. More young Singaporeans are opting for "injectables" such as botox and collagen shots. Mental health experts told CNA TODAY that body dissatisfaction is normal to a certain extent. For instance, adolescents aim to look "cool" or be consistent with a certain image of themselves. Mr Benjamin Low, senior clinical psychologist at specialist clinic Psych Connect, said that women, in particular, experience "normative discontent". This means they are often encouraged to be discontented with their looks and seek to appear better. However, "better" is defined according to prevailing ideals in society. The insecurity we may feel about our faces or bodies is nothing new, but we now have the means to do something about it. We can smooth out every wrinkle, regrow every hairline. With all these new avenues for "improvement", imperfection now seems intolerable. Fake is no longer taboo; unreal is the new norm. Yet, given how easy it is to step into a clinic and book a consultation – or even an appointment for a procedure right away – how can we tell if we are doing it for the right reasons? Are we acting out of an unhealthy insecurity about our faces or bodies? Can a desire to undertake such procedures ever come from a neutral, grounded place? BODY POSITIVITY OR INSECURITY? Firstly, it is important to note that there are differences in facial and body enhancements. Invasive surgeries involve using an instrument to make skin incisions, often leaving scars. Some examples are nose reshaping, body contouring or facial surgery. On the other hand, non-invasive procedures leave the skin intact and are usually performed via syringes or lasers. These cheaper, more convenient options usually don't require general anaesthesia and require less time for the patient to recover. Facial injections such as botox and dermal fillers fall under this category. Both invasive and non-invasive procedures are getting increasingly popular. However, when is a person's desire for such an intervention borne out of a simple want for self-enhancement, and when does it reflect darker psychological causes? Counsellor and psychotherapist Ana Jeremiah, who runs private practice The Journey Within, said that it is important to hold space for both sides of the spectrum. "When it is about self-enhancement, the decision usually stems from a place of clarity and self-agency," she said. In this case, these people likely already feel generally fine with themselves but want to align their outer appearance with how they feel inside. They are not driven by fear, pressure to conform or a need to be accepted and they can reflect honestly about their intent behind seeking a procedure. Ms Jeremiah added: "They might be happy with who they are and where they are in life, and choose to undergo a procedure as a form of self-expression or even a personal reward, rather than out of shame or the hope that changing their appearance will solve deeper emotional pain." One of her clients made the decision to undergo such a procedure from a self-aware position, and it ended up supporting her self-confidence. Ms Jeremiah attributes this to her client not making the mistake of letting her decision-making be driven by insecurity. On the flip side, choices that stem from unhealthy reasons may not achieve the desired outcome. "(Those) rooted in insecurity often carry urgency, shame or the belief that changing their appearance will finally make them feel 'enough', loved or accepted," Ms Jeremiah said. Mr Low highlighted this factor for those who feel that most or all of their self-worth is based on their appearance. Such individuals may feel great discomfort in situations where their appearance may be noticed, for instance, in mirrors or among people. "Grounds for suspecting an unhealthy cause are increased if the perceived flaw is not commonly seen as a flaw in the person's culture or if the flaw is barely noticeable objectively," he added. OBSESSIVE CHECKING Mr Low also stressed that if a person keeps looking at and negatively evaluating the state of the perceived flaw, their motivation for "fixing" it is likely to be psychologically unhealthy. Such individuals may also often try to conceal the flaw, he said. For example, avoiding physical interaction with people, or wearing jackets to conceal perceived fat despite hot weather. This masking or avoidance behaviour can occur despite their desire to socialise with friends, for instance, or to dress lighter in humid climates. Another red flag indicating unhealthy mindsets or attitudes is when people go for repeated procedures. Mr Low pointed out that in such cases, the risk is that procedures borne out of unhealthy psychological causes will never be enough. To self-identify a facial feature or body part as unsatisfactory or unseemly and then addressing it with external procedures might offer temporary relief, but "dissatisfaction with the same (feature or) part may resurface", he warned. "They may also feel that the procedure did not fix it to their full satisfaction despite a technical success." Alternatively, these people might simply shift their fixation to a different feature or part. "A physical fix does not fix a psychological cause," he added. Another sign of trouble is if people seeking cosmetic enhancements believe that the procedures will magically fix unrelated areas of their life – suddenly finding love, for instance, or gaining social acceptance, Ms Chuah of Mind What Matters said. Mr Jasper Loy, clinical director of Youthline, a youth service that provides free counselling, said that such individuals might not acknowledge the risks, pain, recovery time or potential for less-than-perfect results. Strong resistance to any psychological evaluation or counselling before surgery is a potential indication that they are unwilling to address the underlying issues driving their desire for surgery and other procedures, he added. "Cosmetic procedures can become a slippery slope. Each change briefly soothes insecurity, but doesn't address the root cause (of this need)," Ms Chuah emphasised. "Long-term body confidence often requires deeper work." If someone is considering a procedure, Ms Jeremiah offered some important questions that they should ask themselves: "Am I doing this to honour and express who I already am, or to finally feel 'enough' in the eyes of others?" This question helps clarify their motivation "If no one ever noticed or complimented the change, would I still want to do this?" This question gently invites one to reflect on whether the desire is truly for themselves or if it is rooted in external validation CONFIDENCE COMES FROM WITHIN Overall, Ms Chuah said genuine body confidence cannot come from a scalpel or syringe, but rather "from within". Building self-worth takes reflection, compassion and support from people who see your value beyond your appearance, she explained. "It is not a quick fix, but the results are longer-lasting than any procedure." Mr Loy from Youthline agreed that journeying towards self-acceptance requires patience. The ideal body is a myth, he said, and chasing it can lead to dissatisfaction and insecurity. Instead, we are better off learning to love ourselves as we are, recognising our inherent worth and celebrating our unique qualities, he advised. Worried that your friend, family member or loved one is considering an aesthetic procedure for the "wrong" reasons? The key is to lead with empathy, not judgment, the counsellors said. Instead of telling them what to do or what not to do, try to focus instead on helping them make an informed, self-aware decision, Ms Chuah proposed. Mr Low said that concern can start with care but then escalate into worry, persuasion and coercion. Avoid criticising them, he advised. Such criticisms may result in the distressed person feeling that they are a "problem" or are seen by others as one. Instead, Ms Chuah suggested asking open-ended questions to understand their perspectives and help them feel safe to honestly explore their motivations. Ms Jeremiah listed some prompts aimed at creating space for reflection without shame. For example, "What is leading you to consider this?' or "What do you hope it might change for you emotionally?" "Remind them that you care about them as a whole person," she added.
CNA
11 hours ago
- CNA
ASEAN nations can overcome space, disaster constraints in pursuit of nuclear energy: IAEA chief
SINGAPORE: As Southeast Asian nations grow their ambitions for nuclear energy to meet rising power needs and climate goals, obstacles such as natural disasters and geographical limitations can be addressed, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Mariano Grossi said on Friday (Jul 25). Member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) must also disseminate more information to tackle public perceptions of nuclear energy that are influenced by past nuclear disasters such as the 2011 Fukushima incident, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog said in a media interview. Mr Grossi was in Singapore on Friday as part of the S R Nathan fellowship, a high-level programme for foreign leaders and prominent individuals to visit the country. As part of his visit, Mr Grossi met President Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, and delivered a lecture hosted by the Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Institute (SNRSI) at the National University of Singapore. Mr Grossi and Minister for Sustainability and the Environment Grace Fu then signed a renewed agreement to help developing nations build nuclear expertise through fellowships, scientific visits and training courses. Speaking to local media after the day's activities concluded, at the Shangri-La Hotel, Mr Grossi reiterated his belief that Singapore is well-placed to adopt nuclear technology as the city-state faced "no insurmountable challenges". "Singapore is a very special case, because this country, it has a fine technology base in general ... it has a mature regulator, nuclear regulator. It has very good nuclear safety research capabilities," said Mr Grossi, adding that the "institutional pillars" that are typically necessary in a newcomer country were present. "I think all of this groundwork has been done here. So in my opinion, when the country, the government, decides to move into a programme, it will be relatively fast," he added. "I don't see, as I said, any obstacle. In some countries, it will be the finance - impossible - or the lack of human capacity, workforce, you don't have those problems in Singapore. This is why I was saying at the beginning of our conversation that there are many steps, many boxes that have been checked already in Singapore." That said, Mr Grossi noted that Mr Wong and Mr Tharman had stated to him during their meetings that no decision had been made regarding the deployment of nuclear energy here. At the same time, the country has been taking steps to expand its research into nuclear safety, including the establishment of SNRSI earlier this month to further studies into this area. Singapore's renewed agreement with IAEA would also enable international nuclear experts to gather in the country to conduct capacity building activities for nuclear research, which will also benefit participants from Singapore. Nuclear power presents a potential source of clean energy and the advancement of nuclear technology, especially in the area of small modular reactors (SMR), makes it a potential option as Singapore works towards decarbonisation. In 2012, the government said that a pre-feasibility study concluded that nuclear energy technologies available at the time were not suitable for deployment as the risks still outweighed the benefits for a small and dense country like Singapore. Answering another question about Singapore's geographical limitations, Mr Grossi said that the lack of space was not a negative factor. "In case there was a deployment here, even within a limited geographical space ... there would not be any problem to have precautionary measures of any type. These measures include protocols and procedures on what to do in the event of an accident, Mr Grossi said. "The idea that introducing nuclear power generates an immediate risk ... is not sustained by reality. Of course, any technology - and nuclear is not an exception - entails risks," said Mr Grossi, adding that risks should be managed and reduced to a minimum. Asked to elaborate on why he did not see space as a limitation, Mr Grossi said that the underlying assumption was a "worst-case scenario". "I would say that, if this is the criterion, other industrial activities ... will also have negative effects in a relatively constrained space like the one here. This is why there are specific plans for that. "Let me put it this way, any geographical space is limited in some way. When you have a nuclear power plant in China, for example, of course, the country is huge, but the vicinity of the plant would also ... be affected," he said. 03:05 Min ASEAN'S AMBITIONS FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY Singapore is not alone in exploring nuclear power within the region. There are currently no operational nuclear reactors in Southeast Asia, but countries like the Philippines and Indonesia have set targets to operate nuclear power plants in the early 2030s. Nevertheless, these regions are also prone to earthquakes, which are one of the many factors the IAEA takes into consideration when dispensing advice on where to situate nuclear plants. "The IAEA has services specifically oriented at that. Where are you planning to build your nuclear power plant? And here, what comes into play is the geological situation of a place, the access to water with a number of things," Mr Grossi said. An intergovernmental organisation, the IAEA works with member states to promote the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy. Singapore has been a member state since 1967. "The IAEA has expertise and people who are specialists in this concept called siting. So this is a very major element," Mr Grossi added. Asked if the IAEA considered a nation's political stability a key factor in letting it pursue nuclear technology, Mr Grossi replied that it was every country's "sovereign right" to decide whether it wanted to engage in a nuclear programme. However he noted that countries undergoing political turmoil would not usually engage in something that required much planning and institutional effort. Mr Grossi also said that it is up to the individual ASEAN nations to decide whether to explore nuclear energy alone without any collaboration with other countries. That said, bilateral partnerships are also possible. He referred to the example of the Krsko power plant in Slovenia, which supplies energy to both Slovenia and Croatia. This showed how two relatively small countries agreed to situate a nuclear plant in one country but split energy between both, he said. "You can imagine as many arrangements as the countries would like. Here, there is no pre-baked solution. It will depend if there is a will. So it is a dialogue that perhaps countries in ASEAN might wish to have." PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE INFORMED Mr Grossi also spoke of the importance for governments and the region to disseminate more information and for the public to familiarise itself with nuclear technology. "The reality is that all the ASEAN governments are approaching the agency and telling me that they want nuclear energy ... so there is a lot of interest in the area," said Mr Grossi. "It is clear that we have 60 years of nuclear experience in the world, that more than 400 reactors are operating in the world without problems." "So in my opinion, it would be good to do more, to do more information sharing, campaigns of education, dissemination of this information because it's true that the public perceptions may still be influenced by a certain inertia from past examples." The Fukushima incident, for instance, has "left quite a strong impression in some layers of society", he added, referring to the 2011 nuclear power plant meltdown in Japan's Fukushima prefecture. To address such fears, Mr Grossi said transparency was key. He added that a lot of wastewater has been treated and discharged in a controlled manner. "So, so far so good ... But we are going to continue. I said that the IAEA will be present until the very last drop of this water. "So this is, I think, a way to prove that we are there, that we are not going anywhere." On how the IAEA will strike a balance between being an authoritative power and maintaining global nuclear security when nuclear programmes were of political sensitivity, Mr Grossi said that the "best and most important element" was to work within the "family of nations" in the IAEA. "Every country that is operating normally and safely and with no proliferation concerns is a member of the IAEA ... receives the inspections, does the safety and security reviews, participates actively in the regulatory activities, countries that have transparency." Asked to rate how prepared ASEAN was to adopt nuclear energy at this point, Mr Grossi declined to give a score. "There is no such thing as an ASEAN energy output, because the countries are part of what ASEAN is but there is a huge difference between Myanmar and Singapore, or between Vietnam and Thailand.
