This is a misinterpretation of what I actually said in my e-mail message of June 17: 'With over $400 billion of reserves (as estimated in a Business Times article in August 2006), is it really that necessary to continue to be so preoccupied with concerns of fiscal soundness as to not be able to provide subsidised health insurance to our oldest, less well-off citizens?'

There are two respects in which my statement differs from that attributed to me. First, subsidised health insurance could be provided out of current budgetary surpluses. This would imply a slower rate of growth of reserves, but not tapping the current level of reserves, as the writers' statement seems to suggest.

Second, as I argued in a Straits Times article of Feb 29, there are good economic grounds for the Government to finance more of its longer-term development expenditure by 'borrowing' from its reserves, and repaying the borrowing from the increased tax revenues that result from future economic growth. This would free up some current tax revenues, which could be used for social purposes, including subsidising health insurance for the very old who are less well off.

As the CPF Board website states: 'MediShield is a catastrophic medical insurance scheme to help you meet the cost of medical treatment for serious illnesses or prolonged hospitalisation at Class B2/C wards.' In the absence of a subsidised health-insurance scheme, what becomes of poor Singaporeans with serious illnesses or prolonged hospitalisation needs once they pass the age of 85, or cannot afford the increased premiums from ages 80 to 85?

Basant Kapur