Our seniors need more help, not less

As government agencies gear up to cope with the impact of our ageing society, and amid a slew of constructive proposals on the table, the Finance Ministry is scrabbling in the opposite direction – it wants to trim the old-age subsidy to reduce national spending. 

The ministry’s aggravating short-sightedness has produced a proposal to cease paying subsidies to senior citizens whose monthly income exceeds Bt9,000, thus saving Bt10 million each month. 

The consensus among the general public, clearly wiser than the mandarins holding the purse strings, has been that this is a foolhardy idea. It should be obvious to all – as the elderly population rises to unprecedented levels due to the shrinking birth rate – that the government ought to be budgeting more for seniors, not less.

The most galling aspect of the ministry’s notion is the unjust way one segment of the elderly is being “culled” from the rest, ostensibly because they’re still earning enough to support themselves. No matter how you view the income strata among seniors, these are still citizens whose work has in some way brought benefit to the country, and yet they are now to be regarded as a burden on society. 

At the very least the government should be asking these seniors – not telling them – to voluntarily waive their subsidies if they think they can manage on their own, and then find some other token of thanks or reward to give them for helping it save money.

Like other countries struggling with the fallout from an economic debacle caused by reckless, unregulated bankers, Thailand needs austerity measures. Surely every citizen can think of ways the government can save money without making life worse for the elderly.

If the Finance Ministry is determined to pursue this demeaning policy, however, we first want to see an exacting study on the people who are to be cut from the subsidy roster and the means by which they would cope without that aid. Monthly income of Bt9,000 can in no way be interpreted as representing financial security, and certainly not in advanced age and during periods of ill health.

We also need to know where the money saved on the old-age subsidy cuts would be spent instead. Perhaps it could be used to enhance healthcare for the elderly in general, or for children. But if it ended up being committed to some inessential need, such as helping the military buy a submarine, the public response is sure to be negative.

The current budget for monthly payments to citizens age 60 and up is Bt70 billion per year. Those in their 60s get Bt600 each month, in their 70s Bt700, in their 80s Bt800, and those age 90 and over get Bt1,000. By 2024 the government expects to be paying out Bt90 billion annually, and the figure will keep rising in tandem with the number of elderly, forecast to comprise more than 21 per cent of the population in 2025.

Bt70 billion is a sizeable sum, of course, but given the recipients, it should be seen as a relatively modest share of the 2016 state budget of Bt2.7 trillion. And yet we now see the Finance Ministry scrimping to save Bt10 billion by denying the elderly their due reward. It is not hard to identify alternative ways to save.

The Asian Development Bank noted in a 2012 report that Thailand and other countries mismanage their government-run pension schemes, undercutting the ability to support ageing populations. “If not properly managed, the burden will fall into younger generation,” it warned. It suggested finding alternative means to increase revenue and reduce unnecessary expenditure. 

Thailand is already mulling a “sugar tax” on beverages, so clearly there are some good ideas being mooted to boost revenue. We need more clever ideas like that to block this terrible one from the Finance Ministry to cheat seniors out of their due rewards, a concept that would only cheat generations to come.