News

Mr Cheng Shoong Tat’s call for the Early Childhood Development Agency to ignore appeals for a study on the impact of its policies on private operators lacks clarity and is perplexing ( , Oct 31). His comparison between childcare services and public housing or healthcare is overly simplistic. Each sector has its own peculiarities, and how government policies shape each industry can be varied. As managing director of a company which runs three pre-schools, I had expressed concerns and suggested that a study be carried out on the effects of the new measures on private operators. Carrying out a comprehensive study by engaging private operators in conversations or in focus groups could be illuminating and constructive for the regulator as it refines its policies for the whole industry. The dual impact of fee reductions and escalating staff costs have had devastating effects on private operators’ long-term sustainability. As a result, many small non-POP (Partner Operator Scheme) operators who delivered good-quality services that served Singaporean heartlanders well, have ceased operations because they were priced out of the market. Scores of aspiring early childhood professionals could not realise their dreams to set up their own centres. To be clear, many private operators are committed to providing high-quality and affordable childcare services. Like all Singaporeans, the non-POP operators and their staff teams also have a right to earn an honest livelihood, even as we strive to nurture our young and build a society based on justice and equality.