Singapore men aged 65 could expect to live another 17 years on average, compared to 16 more years in 2003. -- PHOTO: THE NEW PAPER

A boy born in 2006 can expect to live an average of 78 years, compared to 76.6 years for a boy born in 2003.

A girl born that year can expect to live an average of 82.8 years, up from 81.6 years for one born in 2003.

The longer life expectancies are borne out in the latest figures released on Tuesday by the Singapore Department of Statistics (DOS).

Lifespans for older people have also gone up.

In 2006, Singapore men aged 65 could expect to live another 17 years on average, compared to 16 more years in 2003, while Singapore women in the same age group in 2006 could live 21 years more, against 20 years in 2003.

DOS said Singapore's life expectancy compares well with selected developed countries.

It is lower than in Sweden, Australia, Hong Kong and Japan but higher than South Korea's and United Kingdom's.

The latest life expectancy figures are derived from a new series of "complete life tables" compiled by DOS.

"The derived life expectancy figures give an indication of the average longevity of the population, but do not necessarily reflect the longevity of an individual," said the department in a statement.

The DOS statistics come as studies by an independent actuarial consultant show that at least 72 per cent of CPF members who would potentially come under a national annuity scheme and who turned 65 years old in 2006 can expect to be alive at age 80.

Australian company Trowbridge Deloitte, which was appointed by the CPF Board to study life expectancies, also found that at least 55 per cent among this group will live to 85 and beyond.

Separate surveys it conducted also indicate that there is 'no robust local data' to conclude that the rich live longer than the poor - and thus stand to gain more from the compulsory annuity scheme, now called the CPF Life Scheme.

Making public these findings on Tuesday was Professor Lim Pin, who chairs a committee tasked to address the skepticism among Singaporeans of the need for the scheme.

Such calculations, Prof Lim said, support government data that Singaporeans are indeed living longer - and hence need to have money in their latter years.

Some had doubted that they would live beyond 85 years when the Government announced plans for mandatory annuities last year.

They had also felt that the poor will end up subsidising the rich, who may live longer because they can afford better health care.

Elaborating on the methodology that Trowbridge Deloitte employed in its calculations yesterday, Prof Lim said they were based on figures derived from the DOS and local mortality trends.

As to whether the rich were living longer than the poor, he said that there is currently little data available that examines mortality based on income level here.

But Prof Lim added that 'the scheme is not cast in iron,'

'We'll be periodically reviewing this scheme, so if new data arises, we will incorporate them when they are meaningful and useful,' he said.

The committee, in its report, also noted that improving healthcare standards and better nutrition will lead to future annuity participants having even longer lifespans, as already been seen in other developed countries.