PDA

View Full Version : Pay cut for the ministers!!!



phantom_opera
04-01-12, 11:41
Wow i am impressed

28% pay cut for PM, 31% cut for entry-level ministers proposed


The committee to review ministers' salaries has recommended a pay cut of 31 per cent for a minister at entry grade, and a cut of 28 per cent for the Prime Minister. -- ST PHOTO: DESMOND LIM
By Lydia Lim, Deputy Political Editor
The committee to review ministers' salaries has recommended a pay cut of 31 per cent for a minister at entry grade, and a cut of 28 per cent for the Prime Minister.

The government intends to accept the committee's recommendations, the Prime Minister said in a letter to the committee released on Wednesday.

That means the salary of a minister at entry level will be cut to $1.1 million. This is down from the current actual salary which stood at $1.58 million in 2010. The Prime Minister's salary will also be adjusted to $2.2 million, down from the 2010 salary of $3.07 million. The President's annual salary will be cut by 51 per cent to $1.54 million.

The committee has also recommended that ministers' pensions be done away with.

The basis of the pay cuts is a recommendation to change the formula used to peg ministers' salaries to top private sector pay.

The current formula for the starting salary of a minister is based on the median income of the top eight earners in six professions, including banking and law, with a one-third discount.

The committee, chaired by National Kidney Foundation chairman Gerard Ee, has recommended the formula be changed to the median income of the top 1,000 Singaporean income earners, with a 40 per cent discount.

It also recommended a new national bonus to replace the GDP bonus that ministers currently receive. The proposed national bonus is to be decided based on four measures: GDP growth, unemployment rate, real growth in median incomes and real growth in the incomes of the bottom 20 per cent of wage earners.

bargain hunter
04-01-12, 11:50
score points lor. wait until pple kao bei then cut. like that lor.

Allthepies
04-01-12, 11:51
all green eyes monsters happy liao :D

land118
04-01-12, 12:31
CNA report seemed to suggest more, does that mean taxpayers has overpaid them for the longest time?:

we heard of back pay; how about back pay cut?

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1174694/1/.html

PM may see 36% pay cut, entry-level ministers 37%

By Hoe Yeen Nie | Posted: 04 January 2012 1208 hrs

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/components/display_image.php?id=477549 Photos 2 of 2
Political Pay Review committee presenting their report and recommendations Related News http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/shim.gif•Govt intends to accept recommended wage cuts : PM Lee (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1174696/1/.html)http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/shim.gif Video http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/shim.gifhttp://www.channelnewsasia.com/imagegallery/store/phpKkmSEQ.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:V205('120104_MinPay1A.flv');)

SINGAPORE: The Review Committee, appointed by the Prime Minister to look at Ministerial salaries, has recommended cuts of between 36 and 53 per cent.

This was disclosed by Committee Chairman, Gerard Ee, on Wednesday at a news conference (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/video/) .

The committee also recommended for the pension scheme to be removed entirely for new office holders.

This will be applicable to those who are appointed on or after 21 May 2011.

Those appointed before that, will also be affected.

The Committee was appointed after the general election in May last year, and had submitted its report to the Prime Minister on December 30.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had announced the review at the swearing-in ceremony of the new cabinet in May last year.

Among the recommendations made are the Prime Minister's annual salary to be cut by 36 per cent, to S$2.2 million.

The President's annual salary is reduced by 51 per cent, to S$1.54 million.

The Speaker of Parliament will see the biggest percentage cut of 53 per cent, to S$550,000.

The lowest percentage change of a 20 per cent cut is for the Mayor and Senior Parliamentary Secretary positions.

Mayors will now get S$660,000 while Senior Parliamentary Secretaries will get S$572,000.

Previously, salaries were pegged to the median income of the top 48 earners in Singapore, with a one-third discount.

Now, they will be pegged to the median income of the top 1,000 earners who are Singapore citizens.

A 40 per cent discount will then be applied.

Based on 2010 figures, the proposed salary for entry-level ministers works out to S$1.1 million.

The committee also recommended changes to bonus payments, pensions and benefits under the new pay structure.

The committee has recommended that the GDP bonus be removed, and replaced by a National Bonus.

The National Bonus comprises four elements - including the unemployment rate, real median income growth, GDP growth and the real income growth of the bottom 20 per cent of wage earners.

Chairman Gerard Ee said the salary must be a "clean wage" with no hidden perks.

He said: "Our recommendations, while it is a severe cut, should be able to attract not all, but some of the talents to come forward.

"But preserving the message that you're coming forward to serve in a political capacity, and there is some sacrifice to be made.

"The 1,000, basically is, first take note that it's based on Singaporeans only, and eliminate the PRs and everybody.

"So we say if the talent pool from which we want to tap, if we were to hunt for them, we believe if they were to be functioning outside of politics, that's where we're going to locate them."

A member of the committee, Fang Ai Lian, said: "This new system is a lot more transparent and a lot more Singapore centric and that's why we were very careful when we picked our benchmark, it is about Singaporeans.

"When we talk about performance indicators, it is about Singaporeans. This is something that the public can look forward to when measuring the performance of your ministers.

"So when you look at benchmark, indicators pertaining to National Bonus, it is about the well-being of Singaporeans."

View the news conference here (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/video/)

The new salary will be backdated to 21 May last year, when the new government took office.

MPs will debate the report (http://reviewcommittee2011.sg/2012/01/04/press-release/#more-110) when Parliament sits for a second session 16 January.

Parliament's first sitting for this year will be on 9 January. It's expected to focus on several questions tabled on the recent flooding and the spate of MRT disruptions.

- CNA/ck

ay123
04-01-12, 12:45
why no cut in MP allowance? $15000 is almost a director pay. MP so good???

land118
04-01-12, 13:08
Minister of Lonkang (canal) & Minister of MRT, flood and breakdown, got minus points for KPIs and more payout? :D

hopeful
04-01-12, 13:16
.....Now, they will be pegged to the median income of the top 1,000 earners who are Singapore citizens.


They seems to use the word "income" and "salary" interchangeably.
Not sure which term they actually mean.

anyway, when is the URA going to finish up the showflat guidelines. been months already.

Regulators
04-01-12, 13:18
Ministers pay still higher than obama leh

Regulators
04-01-12, 13:23
Mps like tin pei ling no track record to justify her $15k salary leh. There are so many ppl smarter and more capable than her at her age but getting only less than half of her pay, so how to justify her pay?
why no cut in MP allowance? $15000 is almost a director pay. MP so good???

PN
04-01-12, 13:26
The committee has also recommended that ministers' pensions be done away with.


Good. No more pensions.

phantom_opera
04-01-12, 14:29
MP pay is roughly top 10% percentile of taxpayers ... $167k per year

mygeemeel
04-01-12, 14:48
Mps like tin pei ling no track record to justify her $15k salary leh. There are so many ppl smarter and more capable than her at her age but getting only less than half of her pay, so how to justify her pay?

Like what i have been reading... she has the package: SYT.... Smart Youthful Talented.:sleep:

amk
04-01-12, 14:54
Mps like tin pei ling no track record to justify her $15k salary leh.
u really really really have an issue with her, do you ? :D

move on lah... there are plenty of ppl around being paid obscene amount of money for doing nothing. she at least got visit old folks in marine parade ;)

Lovelle
04-01-12, 15:00
Ministers pay still higher than obama leh

agree lor

how abt their many properties rental income...

Regulators
04-01-12, 15:02
Many student volunteers also visit old folks what, so what is the big deal? Even nurses who change diapers for old folks at the old folks home don't get paid $15k monthly :doh:. So you are going to tell me she she does a lot more than that? Please lah....
u really really really have an issue with her, do you ? :D

move on lah... there are plenty of ppl around being paid obscene amount of money for doing nothing. she at least got visit old folks in marine parade ;)

amk
04-01-12, 15:21
Many student volunteers also visit old folks what, so what is the big deal? Even nurses who change diapers for old folks at the old folks home don't get paid $15k monthly :doh:. So you are going to tell me she she does a lot more than that? Please lah....

hey my point is to move on lah.. if u want to argue this way, there are plenty of ppl who get paid 30k for doing nothing some more, so how ?

I just find it amusing, every time this topic pops up, you always complained about tin tin ;) this girl does or does not do anything, has no significance on this country.

Regulators
04-01-12, 15:24
Why I complain about her is obvious, who is paying her salary and where her salary come from. Ppl earn millions in pte sector none of my business, but she is a public servant so it is everybody's business
hey my point is to move on lah.. if u want to argue this way, there are plenty of ppl who get paid 30k for doing nothing some more, so how ?

I just find it amusing, every time this topic pops up, you always complained about tin tin ;) this girl does or does not do anything, has no significance on this country.

Regulators
04-01-12, 15:32
Maybe your taxes too insignificant for you to bother about what mps get paid, but it is definitely an issue to me coz of what I pay in income tax yearly.
hey my point is to move on lah.. if u want to argue this way, there are plenty of ppl who get paid 30k for doing nothing some more, so how ?

I just find it amusing, every time this topic pops up, you always complained about tin tin ;) this girl does or does not do anything, has no significance on this country.

Lovelle
04-01-12, 15:35
their bonus is no longer link to GDP. Property growth link to GDP...get the idea ??

Snail
04-01-12, 16:27
Only question is....... how long have they been this overpaid, and can we claim it back!

Laguna
04-01-12, 16:28
majority of them still have their big fat pension intact
Is pension pegged to the last drawn salary?

Who is the happiest? the ex President must be...pension intact

DC33_2008
04-01-12, 16:29
President and Speaker of the House must be the most upset people. :o

Regulators
04-01-12, 17:23
You think the prata man is that noble to return his millions in all his years of service? :doh:
Only question is....... how long have they been this overpaid, and can we claim it back!

Worsty
04-01-12, 17:27
It will be interesting to see if ministerial performance will slip as a result of ministerial pay cut.

If it doesn't, it will prove that the earlier rationale for deciding ministerial salaries is wrong. If it does, it will prove that the earlier rationale for choosing ministers is wrong.

ysyap
04-01-12, 17:55
When top ten wages of the world's political leader's belong to Singapore, it is indeed worrisome. 37% probably will do that little bit more justice. Maybe now still have 8 out of 10 top political leader's wage still belonging to Singapore? :rolleyes:

ysyap
04-01-12, 17:56
It will be interesting to see if ministerial performance will slip as a result of ministerial pay cut.

If it doesn't, it will prove that the earlier rationale for deciding ministerial salaries is wrong. If it does, it will prove that the earlier rationale for choosing ministers is wrong.Lol! Whatever it is, it is wrong? :D

ysyap
04-01-12, 18:00
Only question is....... how long have they been this overpaid, and can we claim it back!Their pay will only be backdated to 21 May 2011 so can only claim back till then. Anything before that is history! :rolleyes:

Worsty
04-01-12, 18:09
When top ten wages of the world's political leader's belong to Singapore, it is indeed worrisome. 37% probably will do that little bit more justice. Maybe now still have 8 out of 10 top political leader's wage still belonging to Singapore? :rolleyes:

http://www.cabinet.gov.sg/content/cabinet/appointments.html <-- 15 on this page. All earning more than Donald Tsang (next highest outside of Singapore)

Then we have speaker of parliament who also earns more than him. Our Mayors? 660k which is more than Obama's USD400k. Our perm secs? All also more than Donald Tsang and Obama etc.

We still have the top 20-30 civil appointment holders easily. The recommended pay doesn't factor in bonuses as well whereas the other political leaders/civil service appointment holders do.

phantom_opera
04-01-12, 18:13
Directorships per minister will increase ... salary maintained :-)

Worsty
04-01-12, 18:23
Directorships per minister will increase ... salary maintained :-)
Ministers cannot be directors. Only MPs can. MPs is part time job. Being a Minister is a full time job.

Allthepies
04-01-12, 18:30
Singaporeans time to move on, it actually take great courage and determination to cut your own pay!

And I really don't understand why every time tok about pay, OBAMA has to come into the picture??:confused:

Is he that great a leader? Or just becos he is American some kowtow to them?
Remember under his great leadership, he just lead US and the world to a man made recession just recently. And under his amazing leadership, unemployment is at an ultra low of 10% :banghead: :banghead:

And the amount of "fringe" benefits he is getting....

mcmlxxvi
04-01-12, 18:32
Now we know how much they been overpaid all these while...

ysyap
04-01-12, 19:12
Now we know how much they been overpaid all these while...Or how much most of us have been underpaid... Lol! :rolleyes:

ysyap
04-01-12, 19:16
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his ministers will see their pay slashed by about 36 percent as the government responds to public discontent over their high salaries, but Lee will remain the world's best-paid leader.

Singapore pays government members and civil servants generously to attract top talent to the public sector. High salaries have also helped its politicians stay honest in a region where corruption is rife.

Lee earns more than S$3 million a year but will have that reduced to S$2.2 million, a review committee he appointed last year said in recommendations made public on Wednesday.

Lee told local media the government would accept the recommendations.

Despite the pay cut, Lee's salary will still be three times that of Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang, the world's next highest-paid political leader who earns about $550,000 a year.

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard will get about A$480,000 a year under proposals unveiled recently, while U.S. President Barack Obama earns about $400,000.

The annual salaries of Singapore ministers will start from S$1.1 million, a cut of 37 percent.

"Salaries must be competitive so that people of the right calibre are not deterred from stepping forward to lead the country," the committee said.

The committee to review ministerial pay was set up after parliamentary elections that saw the tiny opposition make historic gains against Lee's People's Action Party, which has ruled Singapore since independence in 1965.

The salary cuts will be backdated to May 21.

CORRUPTION, INEQUALITY

Many Singaporeans have complained about growing income inequality and rising prices for housing, transport and other basics on the island, the main Asian centre for private banking.

The quality of service in the famously efficient city-state has also declined in recent years, as seen by multiple breakdowns in the subway system last month.

Mobile data services provided by government-owned Singapore Telecommunications were disrupted on Tuesday evening and not restored until early on Wednesday.

Singapore scores well in surveys on corruption -- the last scandal involving a minister dates from 1986.

Transparency International ranks the city-state at number 5 globally for clean government out of 183 countries and territories surveyed. Neighbouring Malaysia and Indonesia rank number 60 and 100, respectively.

Some Singaporeans, however, said they would prefer if politicians' pay were linked to average salaries or that of poorer people rather than to the top 1,000 income earners as proposed by the committee.

"A good measure of a country's socio-political advancement is how a government helps the lowest rung of the society," Dawei Yan wrote on the Online Citizen, a socio-political website.

"I still believe the pay structure should be pegged to the lowest 1,000 wage earners in Singapore."

The opposition said linking leaders' salaries to what they could earn in the private sector meant they only focused on the rich.

The Singapore Democratic Party has proposed that ministers earn a multiple of pay levels for the lowest 20 percent of wage earners.

According to data from the Ministry of Manpower, the income of Singaporeans in the bottom fifth was flat or negative in the 10 years to June 2010.

amk
04-01-12, 19:19
Maybe your taxes too insignificant for you to bother about what mps get paid, but it is definitely an issue to me coz of what I pay in income tax yearly.
what made you think my income tax is less significant that yours ? ;)

come on lah. whatever tin tin gets, is less than some super scale civil servants I assure you. why do you always get a grudge on her whenever the topic of pay is brought up ? If I had a choice, I wouldn't want my tax to go to half of the MPs in the parliament, and 40% of the civil servants, and 100% of the mega defense weapons purchase.

this is not an ideal society. you live with what's available. the current pay cut, removal of pension, no GDP bonus, etc, is a right direction. let's move on over her ok ?

Eastboy
04-01-12, 19:22
$15k is peanuts to many people actually....I better not say anything more or else I will be humtummed.....:scared-4:

Allthepies
04-01-12, 19:40
come on lah. whatever tin tin gets, is less than some super scale civil servants I assure you. why do you always get a grudge on her whenever the topic of pay is brought up ? If I had a choice, I wouldn't want my tax to go to half of the MPs in the parliament, and 40% of the civil servants, and 100% of the mega defense weapons purchase ?

Her pay is slightly less than Ah Bian official pay :D :D

mcmlxxvi
04-01-12, 19:45
Or how much most of us have been underpaid... Lol! :rolleyes:

Different la... I for sure wont wanna wear white from head to toe lor...

teddybear
04-01-12, 19:53
Looks decent proposal, except are there details and transparency on "new national bonus to replace the GDP bonus"? Also what about the perks and allowances? Better be transparent once and for all then to show to be transparent on just the pay but we still don't know how much total they get ultimately from bonuses, allowances, perks etc! :beats-me-man:

They should also do a review on MP's allowances as well. 1 week work just 1 evening get paid $15k per month? Remember, the bottom of top 10% earners (work for 1 full month) only earn $10k pm! :doh:


Wow i am impressed

28% pay cut for PM, 31% cut for entry-level ministers proposed


The committee to review ministers' salaries has recommended a pay cut of 31 per cent for a minister at entry grade, and a cut of 28 per cent for the Prime Minister. -- ST PHOTO: DESMOND LIM
By Lydia Lim, Deputy Political Editor
The committee to review ministers' salaries has recommended a pay cut of 31 per cent for a minister at entry grade, and a cut of 28 per cent for the Prime Minister.

The government intends to accept the committee's recommendations, the Prime Minister said in a letter to the committee released on Wednesday.

That means the salary of a minister at entry level will be cut to $1.1 million. This is down from the current actual salary which stood at $1.58 million in 2010. The Prime Minister's salary will also be adjusted to $2.2 million, down from the 2010 salary of $3.07 million. The President's annual salary will be cut by 51 per cent to $1.54 million.

The committee has also recommended that ministers' pensions be done away with.

The basis of the pay cuts is a recommendation to change the formula used to peg ministers' salaries to top private sector pay.

The current formula for the starting salary of a minister is based on the median income of the top eight earners in six professions, including banking and law, with a one-third discount.

The committee, chaired by National Kidney Foundation chairman Gerard Ee, has recommended the formula be changed to the median income of the top 1,000 Singaporean income earners, with a 40 per cent discount.

It also recommended a new national bonus to replace the GDP bonus that ministers currently receive. The proposed national bonus is to be decided based on four measures: GDP growth, unemployment rate, real growth in median incomes and real growth in the incomes of the bottom 20 per cent of wage earners.

howgozit
04-01-12, 19:57
Singaporeans time to move on, it actually take great courage and determination to cut your own pay!

And I really don't understand why every time tok about pay, OBAMA has to come into the picture??:confused:

Is he that great a leader? Or just becos he is American some kowtow to them?
Remember under his great leadership, he just lead US and the world to a man made recession just recently. And under his amazing leadership, unemployment is at an ultra low of 10% :banghead: :banghead:

And the amount of "fringe" benefits he is getting....

Agree...

Truth of the matter is that Obama (or for that matter any American president) is grossly underpaid.

Allthepies
04-01-12, 20:36
Agree...

Truth of the matter is that Obama (or for that matter any American president) is grossly underpaid.

Ah Bian also grossly under paid, 20k per mth only :D :D

Antz621
04-01-12, 21:29
why no cut in MP allowance? $15000 is almost a director pay. MP so good???
My MP has not made a single contribution in parliament for the last 5 years; and he probably wont make any in the next 5 years.

He only come shake hands with us during GE; other than that my life has no diff whether or not he is my MP.

He got the best seat in parliament; last row most corner seat where video or cameras can hardly spot him at all. Even if he does, probably he will be in "deep thoughts" trying to think of a better way to make residents' lives like mine easier.

For all these, he only got a 3% pay cut. Fair or not?

YES VERY FAIR

Regulators
04-01-12, 22:20
Then you guys vote him in for what?
My MP has not made a single contribution in parliament for the last 5 years; and he probably wont make any in the next 5 years.

He only come shake hands with us during GE; other than that my life has no diff whether or not he is my MP.

He got the best seat in parliament; last row most corner seat where video or cameras can hardly spot him at all. Even if he does, probably he will be in "deep thoughts" trying to think of a better way to make residents' lives like mine easier.

For all these, he only got a 3% pay cut. Fair or not?

YES VERY FAIR

Regulators
04-01-12, 22:27
no personal vendetta against tin tin, just don't see her and many others taking the seat in parliament as worthy of being top ppl to run the country. It is really a terrible insult to singaporean's intelligence to even put her and some others there, but she happens to be the worse of the lot, sorry to say that.
what made you think my income tax is less significant that yours ? ;)

come on lah. whatever tin tin gets, is less than some super scale civil servants I assure you. why do you always get a grudge on her whenever the topic of pay is brought up ? If I had a choice, I wouldn't want my tax to go to half of the MPs in the parliament, and 40% of the civil servants, and 100% of the mega defense weapons purchase.

this is not an ideal society. you live with what's available. the current pay cut, removal of pension, no GDP bonus, etc, is a right direction. let's move on over her ok ?

land118
04-01-12, 23:25
Should we be thankful to the residents of Aljunied, those who vote opposition in? Without them, this exercise would not have come about..., President & Minister would continue to be overpaid for next 5 years...

Regulators
04-01-12, 23:51
low and company have done a good job so far, I hope their company expand in parliament
Should we be thankful to the residents of Aljunied, those who vote opposition in? Without them, this exercise would not have come about..., President & Minister would continue to be overpaid for next 5 years...

focus
05-01-12, 01:29
Should we be thankful to the residents of Aljunied, those who vote opposition in? Without them, this exercise would not have come about..., President & Minister would continue to be overpaid for next 5 years...

Aljunied is the tipping point..
We have to give thanks to Hougang and Potong Pasir residents for their support to the opposition too..

They are strategic voters ..

ysyap
05-01-12, 05:45
$15k is peanuts to many people actually....I better not say anything more or else I will be humtummed.....:scared-4:many in comparison to what? $15k income already occupy probably the top 5% of salary earners in the land so not so many after all if compared with the number of people in the country! :spliff:

Antz621
05-01-12, 05:53
Then you guys vote him in for what?

I did not. But my parents did. Because they are comfort zone creatures. So are the numerous aunties and uncles of West Coast GRC. And opposition who came is of such terrific calibre that my MP see no need to hold a single rally at all and yet they still bagged 66% of the votes in May. Sark or not?

YES VERY SARK

teddybear
05-01-12, 05:54
Ai Yo Yo, don't forgot their $15k pm is just for working for 1 evening a week or 2 days a month & tax free some more!


many in comparison to what? $15k income already occupy probably the top 5% of salary earners in the land so not so many after all if compared with the number of people in the country! :spliff:

ysyap
05-01-12, 05:56
Watershed GE indeed! Ruling party lost a GRC for the first time. 3 ministers kana the boot. Two senior ministers stepped down. Potong Pasir SMC changed hands after 20+ years. many more and now minister's pay kana cut backdated to May 2011. Dr Tony T don't know what hit him either... :(

DaytonaSS
05-01-12, 07:58
The pay so good y fellow bros here never go apply? u all also can make $15k a month doing nothing ma(if really is do nothing)..... Just put in your resume, i m sure u all will get it also. All top achiever here. Or issit $15k is too low pay for those unshiok brothers so they never apply?

Laguna
05-01-12, 08:29
Being MP, and in the book,
it will become a good stepping stone to top jobs in GLC

proud owner
05-01-12, 09:37
The pay so good y fellow bros here never go apply? u all also can make $15k a month doing nothing ma(if really is do nothing)..... Just put in your resume, i m sure u all will get it also. All top achiever here. Or issit $15k is too low pay for those unshiok brothers so they never apply?



can apply for MP job meh ?

i thought they were all 'approached'..meaning ... ka ki nang recommend ka ki nang ...

amk
05-01-12, 10:59
let's be rational.
Obama will still want to be US president even the pay is 0. and no benefits after. nothing.
why ? because of the achievement and power, that's intangible.
Same goes to Hu JinTao. Dun need any money. The fact that I have to lead 1 billion ppl to struggle through all these crisis is the biggest reward one can get.
SG ? do we have the same magnitude of importance that can inspire ppl to go to public to serve ? and better still hope they are capable and not just pure ideologist ?
Having a passion and care for the ppl alone is not sufficient. Far from it. Remember, all the real communist volunteers started as the most passionate and devoting ppl you can find.

So what the PAP old guards did was simply a pragmatic approach: for such small island no way we can have enough leaders. So let's just pay them. Even if they dun serve purely out of passion, they can sever for money.

I buy Gerald Ee's "1000 top earners" idea. The leaders of the country should be from the top 1000 high achievers.

proud owner
05-01-12, 11:02
let's be rational.
Obama will still want to be US president even the pay is 0. and no benefits after. nothing.
why ? because of the achievement and power, that's intangible.
Same goes to Hu JinTao. Dun need any money. The fact that I have to lead 1 billion ppl to struggle through all these crisis is the biggest reward one can get.
SG ? do we have the same magnitude of importance that can inspire ppl to go to public to serve ? and better still hope they are capable and not just pure ideologist ?
Having a passion and care for the ppl alone is not sufficient. Far from it. Remember, all the real communist volunteers started as the most passionate and devoting ppl you can find.

So what the PAP old guards did was simply a pragmatic approach: for such small island no way we can have enough leaders. So let's just pay them. Even if they dun serve purely out of passion, they can sever for money.

I buy Gerald Ee's "1000 top earners" idea. The leaders of the country should be from the top 1000 high achievers.


will Peter Lim be one of the 1000 ?

if the 1000 are really really good ..
then the whole process is LPPL ... the may end up getting more

Regulators
05-01-12, 11:38
Top 1000 earners my ass....many of them if thrown into the private sector how many would even make it to the top 1000 earners in singapore? How many have even helmed a multi million dollar private organization (meaning ceo) to be considered among the top 1000 in singapore. Being an ex BG in army is no big deal also, so many BGs walking around in mindef :doh:
let's be rational.
Obama will still want to be US president even the pay is 0. and no benefits after. nothing.
why ? because of the achievement and power, that's intangible.
Same goes to Hu JinTao. Dun need any money. The fact that I have to lead 1 billion ppl to struggle through all these crisis is the biggest reward one can get.
SG ? do we have the same magnitude of importance that can inspire ppl to go to public to serve ? and better still hope they are capable and not just pure ideologist ?
Having a passion and care for the ppl alone is not sufficient. Far from it. Remember, all the real communist volunteers started as the most passionate and devoting ppl you can find.

So what the PAP old guards did was simply a pragmatic approach: for such small island no way we can have enough leaders. So let's just pay them. Even if they dun serve purely out of passion, they can sever for money.

I buy Gerald Ee's "1000 top earners" idea. The leaders of the country should be from the top 1000 high achievers.

Regulators
05-01-12, 11:52
Look at lawrence wong (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Wong). Was the former private secretary to pm, moving around in government departments and never headed a private organization and became minister of education at 39 years of age. How do you think he got up so fast? Is he even among the top 1% in the private sector to start off?

amk
05-01-12, 12:08
so u simple disagree with the method, not the methodology ?
let say remove from the 1000 all the gov/civil servants, just the top 1000 from what you called "pure private" or reasonably "private" enough high achievers, are you happy ?

Regulators
05-01-12, 12:25
They select their own ppl (mainly with experience in govt or quasi organizations) to helm ministries pegging their salaries to top 1000 earners you think is ok? If guys like chan chun sing stuck on in mindef for the next ten years, will he even get the same as what he is getting now as a minister? It is not how they peg the salaries that is the issue, it is how they even select the new slate of top men that is a concern. Think logically, if lawrence had not been shuffling around in those govt orgs, where would a guy like him stand in the private sector? Top 1% of earners in singapore? I really doubt so.think you get my point.
so u simple disagree with the method, not the methodology ?
let say remove from the 1000 all the gov/civil servants, just the top 1000 from what you called "pure private" or reasonably "private" enough high achievers, are you happy ?

amk
05-01-12, 12:31
It is not how they peg the salaries that is the issue, it is how they even select the new slate of top men that is a concern.

So you have no issues pegging the salaries this way. <-- I'm glad to see that. ;)

You have issues in who they eventually choose. <--- this part, no comment. How the hell did that jobless Saw get the MRT CEO job ? Probably the same way how some useless MPs got chosen

Regulators
05-01-12, 12:36
If they are not of top 1000 pte sector salary earner calibre, they should not be paid like one so the method is flawed
So you have no issues pegging the salaries this way. <-- I'm glad to see that. ;)

You have issues in who they eventually choose. <--- this part, no comment. How the hell did that jobless Saw get the MRT CEO job ? Probably the same way how some useless MPs got chosen

amk
05-01-12, 12:41
If they are not of top 1000 pte sector salary earner calibre, they should not be paid like one so the method is flawed

Did you realize your logic is flawed ? At first you said you have no issues pegging the salary to the high income earners, then right after you say they should not be paid this much ?? :cool:

The salary system itself is not flawed. What is flawed is how PAP chose people.

Let say MRT hired the wrong CEO SAW. Is it because MRT pay too high ? (also 1mil) :tsk-tsk: No. The mistake is the hire, not the package.

So what PAP needs to wake up and correct now is, find the real good people. The pay package now is not the main issue.

Regulators
05-01-12, 12:48
If they want to peg to top 1000 private sector salary earners, then the slate of candidates have to be able to earn that in the private sector, otherwise they should not peg it to top 1000 if they intend to keep the same ppl. They can use the method only if the candidates are deserving of it, otherwise for the ppl they have now, the method is flawed, get it now?
Did you realize your logic is flawed ? At first you said you have no issues pegging the salary to the high income earners, then right after you say they should not be paid this much ?? :cool:

The salary system itself is not flawed. What is flawed is how PAP chose people.

Let say MRT hired the wrong CEO SAW. Is it because MRT pay too high ? (also 1mil) :tsk-tsk: No. The mistake is the hire, not the package.

So what PAP needs to wake up and correct now is, find the real good people. The pay package now is not the main issue.

Laguna
05-01-12, 13:08
BTW, why we need so many MP?

amk
05-01-12, 13:09
then your logic is even worse.

you basically say, ok, now (you think) PAP only got lousy ppl, therefore they do not deserve this pay, they should just get pay $100. So you are happy they just got paid $100 ? And your complaint will disappear once that happens, since they are now "adequately" paid ? <-- this just means you are just buey song they get a very high pay. I cannot accept lousy ppl running a country, even if they got paid 0. You logic basically says it's acceptable as long as they are paid 0. This of course sounds absurd, but your are just simply complaining for complaining sake.

A job description + package exists before an candidate is found. We need to find good people now. This is the issue. Not the pay.

MRT hiring Saw is a mistake. The pay of MRT is not a mistake.

I see this discussion is going nowhere again, just like the GE days. So I rest my case, you can have your last word.

amk
05-01-12, 13:11
BTW, why we need so many MP?

IMO we just need maybe half.
also we can reduce civil servants head count by 40% too.
.. and reduce defense budget by 50% at the very least :cool:

I like HK "big economy, small government" motto

land118
05-01-12, 13:16
BTW, why we need so many MP? Think to make data look good? Now hv 87 MPs (87 + 3NCMPs)..if I am not wrong. Lose 1 single seat ward = 1/87 = 1.2% only. Never did PAP expect to lose GRC. Wonder if 90 MPs is too many in a small country like Singapore? 50 enough?

Maybe should have a committe to review on number of MPs, GRC and Single wards, electoral boundaries, etc.

teddybear
05-01-12, 13:30
The MPs are just overpaid! Either we reduce the number of MPs by 3/4 or reduce their allowance by 3/4! Imagine working 2 days a month getting paid $15k pm that is tax free? If you pro-rate to 22 working days pm and 12 months per year, that is equivalent to getting paid a after tax income of $2m! :doh:


IMO we just need maybe half.
also we can reduce civil servants head count by 40% too.
.. and reduce defense budget by 50% at the very least :cool:

I like HK "big economy, small government" motto

wesing
05-01-12, 13:41
BTW, why we need so many MP?

I also do not understand the rationale of putting NMPs in parliament. Get paid to speak up but no voting power. Simply waste of resources.

land118
05-01-12, 13:42
check this out Minister Grace Fu on her FB; money not enough?

http://www.facebook.com/gracefu.hy
Grace Fu (http://www.facebook.com/gracefu.hy)


When I made the decision to join politics in 2006, pay was not a key factor. Loss of privacy, public scrutiny on myself and my family and loss of personal time were. The disruption to my career was also an important consideration. I had some ground to believe that my family would not suffer a drastic change in the standard of living even though I experienced a drop in my income. So it is with this recent pay cut. If the balance is tilted further in the future, it will make it harder for any one considering political office.

amk
05-01-12, 13:44
what was grace fu doing before becoming an MP ?

Regulators
05-01-12, 13:45
not everyone in the cabinet is lousy, some really are if you ask me. I never said it is ok to keep lousy ppl and pay them peanuts, but these lousy ppl are here to stay whether i like it or not. So if these lousy ppl are here to stay, it is definitely wrong to peg their salaries to the top 1000 best ppl in our country. The argument used to be these ppl would get paid more if they were working outside, but would chan chun sing or lawrence wong be earning what they get now outside of government at their current ages?
then your logic is even worse.

you basically say, ok, now (you think) PAP only got lousy ppl, therefore they do not deserve this pay, they should just get pay $100. So you are happy they just got paid $100 ? And your complaint will disappear once that happens, since they are now "adequately" paid ? <-- this just means you are just buey song they get a very high pay. I cannot accept lousy ppl running a country, even if they got paid 0. You logic basically says it's acceptable as long as they are paid 0. This of course sounds absurd, but your are just simply complaining for complaining sake.

A job description + package exists before an candidate is found. We need to find good people now. This is the issue. Not the pay.

MRT hiring Saw is a mistake. The pay of MRT is not a mistake.

I see this discussion is going nowhere again, just like the GE days. So I rest my case, you can have your last word.

land118
05-01-12, 13:48
Wonder if there is much difference between Pay of CEO of PSA subsidiary vs Senior Minister of State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_of_State) for Information, Communications and the Arts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Information,_Communications_and_the_Arts), and the Environment and Water Resources (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_the_Environment_and_Water_Resources) in Singapore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore)?

according to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Fu

Business career
Ms Fu began her career with the Overseas Union Bank (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Overseas_Union_Bank&action=edit&redlink=1) as an auditor. Between 1991 and 1995, she worked in corporate planning, financial control and business development positions in several entities of the Haw Par Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haw_Par_Group&action=edit&redlink=1).
In October 1995, Ms Fu joined PSA Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Corporation) as an Assistant Director (Finance). She took on additional responsibilities as Vice-President (Marketing) and assumed the position of Financial Controller of PSA Corporation in October 1998. She was promoted to the position of Executive Vice-President (Finance) in January 1999. In April 2003, Ms Fu was appointed the Chief Executive Officer, Singapore Terminals. Before she left the PSA Group, Ms Fu was holding the appointment of Chief Executive Officer, PSA South East Asia and Japan, where she was responsible for the business performance of PSA’s flagship terminals in Singapore, Thailand, Brunei and Japan."

teddybear
05-01-12, 13:49
PSA CEO? Just make sure PSA pay no more than $500k to its CEO and now joining as Minister become very worth while! :p
The same is true for all govt controlled entities, GLCs, etc. :beats-me-man:


what was grace fu doing before becoming an MP ?

ay123
05-01-12, 16:52
check this out Minister Grace Fu on her FB; money not enough?

http://www.facebook.com/gracefu.hy
Grace Fu (http://www.facebook.com/gracefu.hy)


When I made the decision to join politics in 2006, pay was not a key factor. Loss of privacy, public scrutiny on myself and my family and loss of personal time were. The disruption to my career was also an important consideration. I had some ground to believe that my family would not suffer a drastic change in the standard of living even though I experienced a drop in my income. So it is with this recent pay cut. If the balance is tilted further in the future, it will make it harder for any one considering political office.

she is speaking out most ministers' view. just that those minister only dare to crush their ball and continue smiling :D

mcmlxxvi
05-01-12, 16:58
she is speaking out most ministers' view. just that those minister only dare to crush their ball and continue smiling :D

Simply tok cok. Nobody point gun at their cb head to force them to join Public Service right?? Say until machiam veddy the cham lose this lose that.... Pui

mcmlxxvi
05-01-12, 17:00
I also do not understand the rationale of putting NMPs in parliament. Get paid to speak up but no voting power. Simply waste of resources.

I didnt know they paid so little.... No wonder Eunice Olsen still need to go around show face host shows etc....

sh
05-01-12, 18:48
BG Yeo damn happy now... got out at the right time:D

land118
05-01-12, 19:18
I didnt know they paid so little.... No wonder Eunice Olsen still need to go around show face host shows etc....
As per review committee report, current NMP annual salary is $30,100, proposed revised to be reduced to $28,900 p.a....

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/ministerial-pay-should-be-cut-by-37---panel.html;_ylt=AkkatVF9NJXy8AYmBSmKf.gBV8d_;_ylu=X3oDMTFmbmU1cGhuBG1pdANJQiBNb2R1bGUEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhSW5maW5pdGVCcm93c2VMaXN0;_ylg=X3oDMTMyNDJ0YjFmBGludGwDc2cEbGFuZwNlbi1zZwRwc3RhaWQDYjFkOGU5NGQtYWYzZC0zYzhjLTlhMmUtYTdkYTU2ZjY0MTQzBHBzdGNhdANzaW5nYXBvcmUEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdlBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

mcmlxxvi
05-01-12, 19:47
As per review committee report, current NMP annual salary is $30,100, proposed revised to be reduced to $28,900 p.a....

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/ministerial-pay-should-be-cut-by-37---panel.html;_ylt=AkkatVF9NJXy8AYmBSmKf.gBV8d_;_ylu=X3oDMTFmbmU1cGhuBG1pdANJQiBNb2R1bGUEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhSW5maW5pdGVCcm93c2VMaXN0;_ylg=X3oDMTMyNDJ0YjFmBGludGwDc2cEbGFuZwNlbi1zZwRwc3RhaWQDYjFkOGU5NGQtYWYzZC0zYzhjLTlhMmUtYTdkYTU2ZjY0MTQzBHBzdGNhdANzaW5nYXBvcmUEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdlBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

Ya. Thats REaLLY peanuts (not being sarcastic).

Regulators
05-01-12, 22:56
She can speak whatever view is on her mind, but it doesnt sheild the fact that she and her kakis are still grossly overpaid despite the pay cut. Put our MPs on the world stage with other leaders to compare and it is like we are giving an ant a piece of cheese the size of a mountain for the work it does. World leaders like Obama, Putin and Hu Jun Tao have to tackle issues not just at the domestic level but also on a global scale with all eyes watching them, but our ministers and their contributions to the world are unheard of in the rest of the world (maybe with the exception of our MM LKY). Our ministers can't even handle simple flooding issues along a stretch of road, simple security matters like installing grilles in prison toilet windows and simple transportation matters like ensuring trains don't break down regularly, but yet our entry level ministers are still paid more than other world leaders who have 100 times more responsibility towards hundreds of millions of people, not just a population of 5 million. :doh: :doh:



she is speaking out most ministers' view. just that those minister only dare to crush their ball and continue smiling :D

amk
05-01-12, 23:08
The argument of comparing with Obama just doesn't hold. I said before, Obama will run even if it pays 0. We simply dun have this magnitude of importance to inspire ppl to serve.
You say it so loud this and that, ask you to serve, will you do it ?
We have no choice. Using high pay is just a pragmatic approach to solve our own problem.
You may not agree, but you have no alternative. Serve by heart ? How many ppl can u find ? And are they capable ? I'd rather pay top dollars to a top lawyer to run ministry of law, or an economist to run our economy, even though they may do it for the money. I repeat, what other choice do u have ? Tell u frankly i dun trust LTK a bit to run the country!

amk
05-01-12, 23:14
It's not about how come ppl run US so big role got paid so little, and who and who run Singapore so small pay so much.
You can invite Obama to run SG, he will not take it at any pay. It's simply not interesting.
This is kind of job nobody wants. And yet 4 million ppl's lives depend on it.
The issue is never about the pay. Ppl complain about pay too high for ministers are just plain jealous and buey song.
The issue is pap found the wrong ppl. Pap should lean from experience and buck up.

Regulators
05-01-12, 23:25
Your argument also goes against the grain of logic. Are you saying all countries should pay millions to people taking up minial public roles (which not many want to do) so as to entice people to do it, and pay peanuts to world leaders with heavy responsibilities and be possibly subjected to global damnation for each wrong move? Please lah... Look at george bush now, everywhere he goes he gets mocked at by people for making terrible policy decisions that affected millions of lives. Look at Bill Clinton, everywhere he goes people will remember him for monica lewinsky. Look at Wong Kan Seng, Raymond Lim or Mah Bow Tan, they can go to any part of the world and trust me, not a soul would recognise them anywhere coz they are simply nobody in other parts of the world. They get paid millions and get to keep their embarrassing "secrets" on our tiny island.


The argument of comparing with Obama just doesn't hold. I said before, Obama will run even if it pays 0. We simply dun have this magnitude of importance to inspire ppl to serve.
You say it so loud this and that, ask you to serve, will you do it ?
We have no choice. Using high pay is just a pragmatic approach to solve our own problem.
You may not agree, but you have no alternative. Serve by heart ? How many ppl can u find ? And are they capable ? I'd rather pay top dollars to a top lawyer to run ministry of law, or an economist to run our economy, even though they may do it for the money. I repeat, what other choice do u have ? Tell u frankly i dun trust LTK a bit to run the country!

fclim
05-01-12, 23:37
The pay so good y fellow bros here never go apply? u all also can make $15k a month doing nothing ma(if really is do nothing)..... Just put in your resume, i m sure u all will get it also. All top achiever here. Or issit $15k is too low pay for those unshiok brothers so they never apply?

Cannot apply leh. Must get invited to tea first. Me? Lim kopi one. So, not qualified.

richwang
06-01-12, 02:41
The new benchmark is so much "better" than the old one. The ministers' pay will soon reach the 10M range - roughly match the real income of the political leaders in other countries.

They managed to kick out the "non-performers" like engineers. The new benchmark is catch-all for ultra rich:

Jet Li and Gong Li fall into the top 500 earners - the definition of median means you just need to import 500 ultra rich to be Singapore citizens, much easier than importing 1M to boost the GDP.

Jim Roger will soon receive invitation to become Singapore citizen;

Top CEOs in Singapore will soon be forced to increase their salary to the range of 10M. SMRT CEO will take the lead. CapiLand, StarHub, SingTel, DBS, SIA will then forced to follow;

VIP in Casino will be invited to be Singapore citizens - only winners are considered with the right qualification.


Back to the impact to property market:
GCB price will shoot up to 50M, other property prices will drop due to less immigrations and more HDB/condo supply .

So hurry up to pool our money to buy GCB, otherwise most of the forumers will find themselves much poorer 4 years later.

Thanks,
Richard

gn108
06-01-12, 11:54
Whether it's PAP chose or candidates chose to join PAP - the fact is higher minister's packages hasn't yielded the desired depth and breath of candidates. Mostly, it's those 'scholars' from Army or CS. Not many from Pte sector.

Next, emotive sentiment has also shifted.
Under, LKY - some people 'hoped' for some change
Under, GCT - more people 'asked' for change
Under BGLee - many people 'demand' for change
Regardless of pay, if continue to talk-down to the populace and yet not deliver on bread&butter issues, then it'll be -
Under next PM - "majority people will get change"


The salary system itself is not flawed. What is flawed is how PAP chose people.

So what PAP needs to wake up and correct now is, find the real good people. The pay package now is not the main issue.[/quote]

gn108
06-01-12, 11:59
The no 1 champ is Nathan...gained the full length of pay increases and exit just in time.
Next champ might be Tamugi as Speaker - just coz that was highest percentage cut.


BG Yeo damn happy now... got out at the right time:D

proud owner
06-01-12, 12:17
Mdm Ho definitely earns more than her PM husband ..

no one will check on her earnings ...

yet shes probably one of the 1000 thats being used to benchmark the cabinet's pay ..


Lily Neo is so rich ,,, she owns 4 GCB IN A ROW ..sold a corner unit ..still owns 3 in a row ... total land owned 65,000 sqft

she will be in the top 1000 too

so using these top 1000 earners to benchmark ..is LPPL

Regulators
06-01-12, 12:30
They should benchmark to the pay of g7 leaders and get only a fraction of what the g7 leaders are getting.

gn108
06-01-12, 13:16
Considering, I'm quite pleased overall...
Top 1000 - better than previous kelong scheme.
40% disct - better than 33%
More importantly is the National Bonus - bonus takes into account general welfare of the people and not just GDP.
And most importantly, removal of archaic pension scheme.

As for benchmarking to US etc - I can see how that is completely off for SG. In the US, pension for life - next they earn alot through book and seminar/talks circuit for a long time. Here - only LKY worth his salt.



Mdm Ho definitely earns more than her PM husband ..

no one will check on her earnings ...

yet shes probably one of the 1000 thats being used to benchmark the cabinet's pay ..


Lily Neo is so rich ,,, she owns 4 GCB IN A ROW ..sold a corner unit ..still owns 3 in a row ... total land owned 65,000 sqft

she will be in the top 1000 too

so using these top 1000 earners to benchmark ..is LPPL

yaozong7
06-01-12, 16:43
I have FB Chen Show Mao, my comments on the ministerial pay. Hope he rebuts the PAP in parliament!

1) Too strong a linkage between AVC and real GDP growth. I believe a better measure would be to remove AVC, and use “real GDP growth per capita” as a gauge. Using “per capita” would also address ground concerns on an overly liberal immigration policy.

2) To ensure ministers adopt a long-term outlook, 50% or more of the National Bonus should be retained and paid only at the end of a minister’s term of office, provided the National Bonus KPIs over the term of office are reached. This prevents situations in which ministers attain current year KPIs, mainly due to a low base in a bad prior year, when the cumulative effect of the 2 years could well be zero.

amk
06-01-12, 16:44
Your argument also goes against the grain of logic. Are you saying all countries should pay millions to people taking up minial public roles.

many countries cannot afford to do it, either by monetary terms, or by "ethical" terms.
SG PAP old guards chose the pragmatic way. You dun like it. What better alternative do you have ?

Please stop saying who and who earn big bucks and enjoy life blah blah. The pay system is not a mistake. The choice of people is.

land118
06-01-12, 20:29
Minister Grace Fu, if your $1m Dollar salary plus don't how many months of bonus is not enuff, den what about this NUS Engineering graduate?

http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=46012#1

land118
06-01-12, 20:39
Check this out..:D

http://mrbrwn.co/zGSpWs

Regulators
06-01-12, 22:48
So it is alright to splurge millions on ministers pay without considering their job roles just becoz we can afford it? 3 things must match, the qualification of the candidate, the job scope and the pay. I never believe in rewarding ppl excessively for doing minimal work just because they have good qualifications, the pay must go with the job scope and not the title.
many countries cannot afford to do it, either by monetary terms, or by "ethical" terms.
SG PAP old guards chose the pragmatic way. You dun like it. What better alternative do you have ?

Please stop saying who and who earn big bucks and enjoy life blah blah. The pay system is not a mistake. The choice of people is.

Laguna
07-01-12, 09:42
Minister Grace Fu, if your $1m Dollar salary plus don't how many months of bonus is not enuff, den what about this NUS Engineering graduate?

http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=46012#1

I think to be fair, this is an exception case.
Just wonder, why he has 4 children at that age...
There definitely something wrong with him.

Regulators
07-01-12, 17:24
don't mean to add salt to his wound, but i think this guy is the most unresourceful graduate i have come across. With his qualifications, he can easily give tuition or help those struggling with maths at tertiary level and still eke out a decent living. I have a friend that earns $10k a month without moving his butt out of his house, all the students flock to his house.


I think to be fair, this is an exception case.
Just wonder, why he has 4 children at that age...
There definitely something wrong with him.

Regulators
07-01-12, 17:30
the other thing is he should just leave out my alma mater if he wants to wallow in self pity and announce to the world his plight. Really disgrace to NUS. :doh: :doh:


I think to be fair, this is an exception case.
Just wonder, why he has 4 children at that age...
There definitely something wrong with him.

amk
07-01-12, 19:02
So it is alright to splurge millions on ministers pay without considering their job roles just becoz we can afford it? 3 things must match, the qualification of the candidate, the job scope and the pay. I never believe in rewarding ppl excessively for doing minimal work just because they have good qualifications, the pay must go with the job scope and not the title.

You are totally mixing up real issue with your emotions.
Answer me this : SMRT hiring Saw is a mistake, is the pay of SMRT a mistake ??
The pay for minister is not a mistake. The choice of ppl to be minister, accoing to you and the oppositions, is. Even this does not change the fact the pay system is not at fault.
Just face it: you are simply unhappy some (useless according to you) people are getting millions. So what ? LHL thinks they are capable. And 60% of people agree with him. So you can, at best , say those useless people are lucky to get a good job. The pay system itself is never the problem. Our pragmatic approach in getting ppl to run the country is not a wrong way.
Look this salary review is a review of "salary for minister", not a review for " how much lui tuck yew , tin tin should get". The latter is the job of ruling party, as in finding the right people. You think the ppl they found is crap, fine noted, but PAP is the ruling party unfortunatey, they think they are talents. I personally do not think ltk is worth even a cent, but the review also pays him 15k. :rolleyes:

amk
07-01-12, 19:15
And "I never believe in rewarding ..." :rolleyes:

first of all, we are debating the way we choose to use high pay to attract ppl to run the country. What does this hs anything to do with what you think these ppl are capable or not ? It's the methodology we are talking about here.

2nd , please, dun assume you conclusively determine who and who is useless. You have your opinion, I have mine. This debate is never about who should get how much. It's about what position should get how much.

amk
07-01-12, 19:22
Of course, using money to motivate ppl to run for public service is controversial. What I'd like to see is what alternative you can come up with. Instead of " wah how can this useless joker get paid this much". That is simply whining, and adds no value.

phantom_opera
07-01-12, 21:28
It is tough for a small country without natural resources to achieve first world living standard and continue to maintain the status.

LKY even said it is possible for SG-MY to merge again next time ... the future of Singapore is definitely fragile and uncertain

Is this "pay the top talents to form government model" suitable for Singapore? May be yes for now as long as the Lee family is genuine about leading the Singaporeans ...

Allthepies
07-01-12, 22:35
It is always interesting to hear people say that other people are doing an easier job... I see this every day..

An assistant engineer keep complaining the engineer's job is much easier than his.... An engineer keep complaining the senior engineer role is so simple... A senior engineer think the manager is shaking his leg every day.... A manger thinks the senior manager is redundant... The senior enginer think the operational manager is not worth his pay.. The operational manager think the general manager knows only how to play golf... And so on and so forth :doh:

Do you think taking care of the futures and lives of 4 millions singaporeans is such an easy job? Do you think we shouldn't pay the maximum to get the very very best person for this job? Some more we can easily afford it, we really want to be penny wise pound foolish?

Regulators
07-01-12, 23:25
I have already suggested pegging the pay of singapore ministers to a fraction of what g7 leaders are getting. in fact that is what the committee should be doing, instead of the top 1000 earner crap. Public service pay has to use pubic service pay of other similar countries throughout the world as a yardstick, not what top businessmen are earning in the private sector. it is an absolutely warped ideology to pay millions to somebody just becoz of title and ignoring job role. The transport network in london and japan is many times more complex than singapore with populations way surpassing singapore's, but do you see the minister of transport of these countries being paid even a third of what lui tuck yew is getting? Again why should balakrishnan be worth the millions when he can't even handle the flood problem in orchard, a tiny stretch of road? Are you going to tell me these ppl should still get paid millions just becoz they have good education backgrounds and qualifications blar blar blar? Look at their job scope and pay them accordingly to their work, using other developed countries as a yardstick. Don't give me the crap that ministers in g7 countries are underpaid coz they have a history hundreds or thousands of years ahead of our tiny speck of island and if they were underpaid, it would have been an issue long ago and not for you out anybody to say they are underpaid.
Of course, using money to motivate ppl to run for public service is controversial. What I'd like to see is what alternative you can come up with. Instead of " wah how can this useless joker get paid this much". That is simply whining, and adds no value.

phantom_opera
08-01-12, 09:39
I disagree that the best remuneration model is to peg to G7's top civil servants salary. Each country is different, we need to find what is best for Singapore.

IMHO, the main issue is not the salary, the main issue is whether the performance of a minister can justify the pay ... today it is the PM who judges the performance of a minister

amk
08-01-12, 10:22
To regulators: ur argument is going in circles. Lui tuck yew got paid millions not because he has super qualifications and such. He got million dollar pay because that's the pay for a minister, such an important role we think a million dollar pay is warranted. It's the same argument the pay for SMRT CEO is also millions. The question you and the oppositions should be asking is " is he the righty person ?". And for this one I'd leave this to open discussion.

The only relevant part of your post is the idea of pegging, or really using, the G7 pay system. This is fundamentally flawed. The very fact that those are G7 , the importance so far reaching to the whole world, is able to inspire many people to serve, and leave his name in the history. SG does not have that. Whether SG prosper or collapse, no one give a sh*t. But WE MUST. That's why we take the controversial approach, because we couldn't find a better solution, and we are being pragmatic. We cannot afford to fail ourselves.

With your G7 pegging model, are you confident you can have enough talents to run the country ? Passion and having a heart alone is NOT enough. The PAP old guards were pretty ruthless in many ways, but you can't denied overall SG was better under them. BN was a very nice caring party at that time :cool:

Regulators
08-01-12, 12:20
You are back to the same warped ideology that just because g7 work is more significant and holds more prestige than the job of a singapore minister, thus the latter should get paid millions and the former pittens :doh: . You are just assuming that nobody would take up the job of a singapore minister for let's say $400k-$500k a year, but that is what PAP says and does not represent the truth. Let me tell you why they find it hard to reduce to that level, it is because the entire civil service remuneration package of pegging to private sector has been flawed from the start and reducing the pay of ministers by more than half now would mean adjusting the pay of thousands of civil servants downwards possibly resulting in loss of votes in the next election. Again you are using the pay of the smrt chief as a yardstick, that is not even comparing with a public servant. Since smrt is private, the ceo bears the brunt of the recent breakdowns and fired from the job (not ' resigned'), but does that happen to our ministers? how many' honest mistakes' are our ministers allowed to make before they get fired?
To regulators: ur argument is going in circles. Lui tuck yew got paid millions not because he has super qualifications and such. He got million dollar pay because that's the pay for a minister, such an important role we think a million dollar pay is warranted. It's the same argument the pay for SMRT CEO is also millions. The question you and the oppositions should be asking is " is he the righty person ?". And for this one I'd leave this to open discussion.

The only relevant part of your post is the idea of pegging, or really using, the G7 pay system. This is fundamentally flawed. The very fact that those are G7 , the importance so far reaching to the whole world, is able to inspire many people to serve, and leave his name in the history. SG does not have that. Whether SG prosper or collapse, no one give a sh*t. But WE MUST. That's why we take the controversial approach, because we couldn't find a better solution, and we are being pragmatic. We cannot afford to fail ourselves.

With your G7 pegging model, are you confident you can have enough talents to run the country ? Passion and having a heart alone is NOT enough. The PAP old guards were pretty ruthless in many ways, but you can't denied overall SG was better under them. BN was a very nice caring party at that time :cool:

Regulators
08-01-12, 12:52
The reason why our country could become first world in such a short time is also owing to its geographical and strategic positioning on the map, not just leaders. If singapore swapped places with iceland, do you think pap can transform the country into what it is today? Trade in singapore was already going on even before lky entered into politics and we were already an important port of call during the time of raffles. We had everything in place for a boom that malaysia never saw. Our country may be different in history and geography to other countries, but throughout history, public servants have been called to serve the country, not enticed to serve the country with money. If you tell me this is the best solution that they can come up with (getting good ppl into public service using pay), I can only say that they have lost their bearings.
I disagree that the best remuneration model is to peg to G7's top civil servants salary. Each country is different, we need to find what is best for Synagogue.

IMHO, the main issue is not the salary, the main issue is whether the performance of a minister can justify the pay ... today it is the PM who judges the performance of a minister

qianfugui
08-01-12, 14:17
The reason why our country could become first world in such a short time is also owing to its geographical and strategic positioning on the map, not just leaders. If singapore swapped places with iceland, do you think pap can transform the country into what it is today? Trade in singapore was already going on even before lky entered into politics and we were already an important port of call during the time of raffles. We had everything in place for a boom that malaysia never saw. Our country may be different in history and geography to other countries, but throughout history, public servants have been called to serve the country, not enticed to serve the country with money. If you tell me this is the best solution that they can come up with (getting good ppl into public service using pay), I can only say that they have lost their bearings.

Regulator,

I fully concurred with you. I fully support and stand with you on all your postings regarding this matter.

In our littlle Sinkie farm, it is what many called legalised corruption - pay top $$ to public servants so that they are less corruptible. The top $$ idea is already warped and morally wrong from the start. Pple will only serve b'cos of top $$$. No top $$$ means No talent willing to serve . That's the msg of brainwashing.

hyenergix
08-01-12, 14:41
Did Sir Stamford Raffles also ask for a million dollar salary? He could have but he didn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamford_Raffles

"He died at Highwood House in Mill Hill, north London, a day before his forty-fifth birthday, on 5 July 1826, of apoplexy (http://forums.condosingapore.com/wiki/Apoplexy). His estate amounted to around ten thousand pounds sterling, which was paid to the Company to cover his outstanding debt."

qianfugui
08-01-12, 14:42
Regulator,

I fully concurred with you. I fully support and stand with you on all your postings regarding this matter.

In our littlle Sinkie farm, it is what many called legalised corruption - pay top $$ to public servants so that they are less corruptible. The top $$ idea is already warped and morally wrong from the start. Pple will only serve b'cos of top $$$. No top $$$ means No talent willing to serve . That's the msg of brainwashing.

To add to my last msg. Does it mean that no top $$ means not a talent. Ha Ha Ha.. It is all but brainwashing for elite class to appear .. to differentiate the commoners from the MIW in our litlle sinkie farm.

howgozit
08-01-12, 15:07
Did Sir Stamford Raffles also ask for a million dollar salary? He could have but he didn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamford_Raffles

"He died at Highwood House in Mill Hill, north London, a day before his forty-fifth birthday, on 5 July 1826, of apoplexy (http://forums.condosingapore.com/wiki/Apoplexy). His estate amounted to around ten thousand pounds sterling, which was paid to the Company to cover his outstanding debt."

Huh? .... Stamford Raffles?.. haha..

Quite out of context don't you think?

His "founding" of Singapore making it a colony of the Britiah Empire milked Singapore for a hundred over years. This exploitation of Singapore by the British was only briefly interrupted by the marauding Japanese during WW2

You see.... this is getting quite out of hand. As far as PAP bashing goes, anything goes. Even the most remote connection can be used as an analogy to PAP bash.... very funny.

hyenergix
08-01-12, 15:25
Huh? .... Stamford Raffles?.. haha..

Quite out of context don't you think?

His "founding" of Singapore making it a colony of the Britiah Empire milked Singapore for a hundred over years. This exploitation of Singapore by the British was only briefly interrupted by the marauding Japanese during WW2

You see.... this is getting quite out of hand. As far as PAP bashing goes, anything goes. Even the most remote connection can be used as an analogy to PAP bash.... very funny.

It's a satire...

Raffles got himself under fire from the British East India Company and other colonial masters because he was doing something good for the colonies.

howgozit
08-01-12, 16:16
It's a satire...

Raffles got himself under fire from the British East India Company and other colonial masters because he was doing something good for the colonies.

I think he got into trouble for incurring losses during his tenure but was too ill and died before he had a chance to resolve the matter. I think it is debatable what he was doing was good for the colonies. Farquhar would argue differently.

Ok but still... what is the link to ministers' pay?

I still don't see how you tie this in?

amk
08-01-12, 17:11
Ok now at least u r onto something, that we are talking about pay itself, no more who and who dun deserve millions and such, that's good.

Now u say the "real secret" is because the civil servants are paid too high. A a result their boss got to be much higher , is that ur point more or less ? So you think civil servants shod be lowly paid ? I cannot agree even for a bit. I would say civil servants should be even paid above average, to ensure corruption free government,

Your biggest argument : "you just assume no one will serve with lower pay". Neither you nor I know this for a fact. I'm not willing to take chances. I would rather believe most people are motivated by greed, as demonstrated in almost every aspect and stage of human evolution. We cannot afford to try. Once we fail it'll be almost permanent.

hyenergix
08-01-12, 17:18
I think he got into trouble for incurring losses during his tenure but was too ill and died before he had a chance to resolve the matter. I think it is debatable what he was doing was good for the colonies. Farquhar would argue differently.

Ok but still... what is the link to ministers' pay?

I still don't see how you tie this in?

He din ask for millions. MPs and higher levels also shouldn't demand pay way beyond their contributions.

hyenergix
08-01-12, 17:20
Ok now at least u r onto something, that we are talking about pay itself, no more who and who dun deserve millions and such, that's good.

Now u say the "real secret" is because the civil servants are paid too high. A a result their boss got to be much higher , is that ur point more or less ? So you think civil servants shod be lowly paid ? I cannot agree even for a bit. I would say civil servants should be even paid above average, to ensure corruption free government,

Your biggest argument : "you just assume no one will serve with lower pay". Neither you nor I know this for a fact. I'm not willing to take chances. I would rather believe most people are motivated by greed, as demonstrated in almost every aspect and stage of human evolution. We cannot afford to try. Once we fail it'll be almost permanent.

Landlords are paid too much for not working. It's an open secret.

amk
08-01-12, 17:33
You seriously believe civil servants' pay should be cut ?

For me I think minister pay should be separated from civil servant pay. The boss of LTA could well be paid higher than Lui Tuck Yew.

Regulators
08-01-12, 18:30
Bro, confirm you kenna brainwash liao. I never expected a person of your calibre to subscribe to the paying well to avoid corruption shit. So you are saying the moral compass of ministers and public servants is determined by how much they earn? :doh: Let me tell you, if people want to be corrupt, more is never enough and even getting more, they can still be corrupt. Ask yourself are our ministers who are paid millions satisfied? Why are so many still sitting in boards as directors? Why are they still investing their own monies in properties when they have enough in the bank to live for twenty lifetimes? Why are they still running their businesses despite their multi million dollar pay?
Ok now at least u r onto something, that we are talking about pay itself, no more who and who dun deserve millions and such, that's good.

Now u say the "real secret" is because the civil servants are paid too high. A a result their boss got to be much higher , is that ur point more or less ? So you think civil servants shod be lowly paid ? I cannot agree even for a bit. I would say civil servants should be even paid above average, to ensure corruption free government,

Your biggest argument : "you just assume no one will serve with lower pay". Neither you nor I know this for a fact. I'm not willing to take chances. I would rather believe most people are motivated by greed, as demonstrated in almost every aspect and stage of human evolution. We cannot afford to try. Once we fail it'll be almost permanent.

samsara
08-01-12, 18:41
Perhaps you may wish to propose a method of objectively valuing (in monetary terms) the contributions made by an individual?

Who determines what the services of a cleaner should be? Who determines how much a bus driver should be paid?

In today's society, we leave this to the free market, driven by competition. We have an implicit faith (may be misplaced but that is for another discussion) in the ability of the free market to determine the optimal levels for remuneration, service fees, etc.


He din ask for millions. MPs and higher levels also shouldn't demand pay way beyond their contributions.

samsara
08-01-12, 18:49
Would you agree to serve in public office if your annual remuneration is below what you are able to draw in the private sector?

Nevertheless I agree with you that remuneration should never be one's first consideration when deliberating on whether to serve the country in public office.

The difficulty however lies in reconciling the remuneration amounts that one is able to earn in the private sector with what he would be subjected to in public office.

Given the talent pool that we have in Singapore, what do you think are our chances of forming a team that comprises individuals who are:

a. highly capable
b. passionate about serving the country
c. willing to forgo the high pay that he can draw in the private sector


Bro, confirm you kenna brainwash liao. I never expected a person of your calibre to subscribe to the paying well to avoid corruption shit. So you are saying the moral compass of ministers and public servants is determined by how much they earn? :doh: Let me tell you, if people want to be corrupt, more is never enough and even getting more, they can still be corrupt. Ask yourself are our ministers who are paid millions satisfied? Why are so many still sitting in boards as directors? Why are they still investing their own monies in properties when they have enough in the bank to live for twenty lifetimes? Why are they still running their businesses despite their multi million dollar pay?

Regulators
08-01-12, 19:14
Small talent pool is always the excuse the govt gives to justify their high salaries, which comes down to their selection process. from the way I see things, they select ppl from among their own ranks and those related to the family in some way to or another to ensure control. Wks is the nephew of lky and many holding high office were the ex private secretary of pm, ccs the ex bg is also said to be related to the family. You call this selecting the best ppl for the job? have they advertised to the public for ministerial positions ever? If they tendered for the job of minister at $500k per annum, I can bet you many highly qualified candidates will take up the offer, but unfortunately the selection is an internal closed door process.
Would you agree to serve in public office if your annual remuneration is below what you are able to draw in the private sector?

Nevertheless I agree with you that remuneration should never be one's first consideration when deliberating on whether to serve the country in public office.

The difficulty however lies in reconciling the remuneration amounts that one is able to earn in the private sector with what he would be subjected to in public office.

Given the talent pool that we have in Singapore, what do you think are our chances of forming a team that comprises individuals who are:

a. highly capable
b. passionate about serving the country
c. willing to forgo the high pay that he can draw in the private sector

Regulators
08-01-12, 19:35
As for your question of whether I would forsake a higher pay in the private sector to serve the country, I would gladly do it if that is my calling. if I have made millions from my business, I would even gladly do it for $10k a month.
Would you agree to serve in public office if your annual remuneration is below what you are able to draw in the private sector?

Nevertheless I agree with you that remuneration should never be one's first consideration when deliberating on whether to serve the country in public office.

The difficulty however lies in reconciling the remuneration amounts that one is able to earn in the private sector with what he would be subjected to in public office.

Given the talent pool that we have in Singapore, what do you think are our chances of forming a team that comprises individuals who are:

a. highly capable
b. passionate about serving the country
c. willing to forgo the high pay that he can draw in the private sector

samsara
08-01-12, 19:56
Perhaps they should do just that, put up an advertisement "Government of Singapore seeking suitable candidates for position of Minister of Transport".


Small talent pool is always the excuse the govt gives to justify their high salaries, which comes down to their selection process. from the way I see things, they select ppl from among their own ranks and those related to the family in some way to or another to ensure control. Wks is the nephew of lky and many holding high office were the ex private secretary of pm, ccs the ex bg is also said to be related to the family. You call this selecting the best ppl for the job? have they advertised to the public for ministerial positions ever? If they tendered for the job of minister at $500k per annum, I can bet you many highly qualified candidates will take up the offer, but unfortunately the selection is an internal closed door process.

samsara
08-01-12, 19:58
How many people have that calling? How many people out of that group have the capabilities?

I guess these are questions whose answers we will never know until we give the change a try. It is a vicious cycle that has to be broken somehow and somewhere.


As for your question of whether I would forsake a higher pay in the private sector to serve the country, I would gladly do it if that is my calling. if I have made millions from my business, I would even gladly do it for $10k a month.

amk
08-01-12, 20:40
Does it ever occur to u that u urself are brainwashed to believe such nice morally perfect mechanism exits, and more over, is achievable in SG ? :tsk-tsk:

You yourself are not willing to serve, regardless of pay. You need a "calling", clearly you don't have one. Why do you assume others have , and will serve ? More over, why do u assume the one with th calling, and willing to serve, are capable ? And we will have enough of them ?

Look all you have are assumptions and ideologies. I have grown over that. Dun dismiss everything yet. 10 yrs later ask yourself again. We have a real issue here. LKY claimed we dun even have enough ppl to run all the GLCs, let alone minister calibre. How much of this is true is your own judgment. But please do not belittle the problem. In private sector we already have issue hiring real good managers, I know this first hand.

PAP gov is not evil. They are just incredibly pragmatic. And I used to be proud to tell my foreign colleagues that we are a simple, pragmatic, no nonsense country.

phantom_opera
08-01-12, 20:58
"calling" to serve the country are ideals of the Confucius ;)

But I serious doubt it will work for Singapore ...

It does not mean PAP is perfect ... it is already showing signs of great danger ... i like the term "losing moral authority" ... the salary review exercise is one of LHL's ideas, trying to establish PAP's "moral authority" ... it is the right step .. but it is not enough

amk
08-01-12, 21:01
And btw, th biggest waste of money for me is the defense spending. Rumor has it SG is spending 50bln in the next 3 yrs. I wonder why there is not a single opposition who questions the wisdom of this much defense spending. Just by reducing this alone can bring down the GST back to 3%.

phantom_opera
08-01-12, 21:10
And btw, th biggest waste of money for me is the defense spending. Rumor has it SG is spending 50bln in the next 3 yrs. I wonder why there is not a single opposition who questions the wisdom of this much defense spending. Just by reducing this alone can bring down the GST back to 3%.

obviously WP has no one understand finance/economy .. Bhutan they understand :doh:

Regulators
08-01-12, 21:41
Yes, you are right, the pay of those brigadier generals, colonels, other high ranking officers and most of all the defense minister should be cut to reduce defense budget. Defense spending on military equipment can go ahead as planned.
And btw, th biggest waste of money for me is the defense spending. Rumor has it SG is spending 50bln in the next 3 yrs. I wonder why there is not a single opposition who questions the wisdom of this much defense spending. Just by reducing this alone can bring down the GST back to 3%.

gn108
09-01-12, 09:45
And budget for the poor under the MCYS is very low.
So when you ask more for the old uncles you get answers like "would like to pay more taxes?"

It's more about allocation of our tax dollar.
Defence $ to support our scholar system is creaming off the budget for more efficient use.



And btw, th biggest waste of money for me is the defense spending. Rumor has it SG is spending 50bln in the next 3 yrs. I wonder why there is not a single opposition who questions the wisdom of this much defense spending. Just by reducing this alone can bring down the GST back to 3%.

proud owner
09-01-12, 10:25
The reason why our country could become first world in such a short time is also owing to its geographical and strategic positioning on the map, not just leaders. If singapore swapped places with iceland, do you think pap can transform the country into what it is today? Trade in singapore was already going on even before lky entered into politics and we were already an important port of call during the time of raffles. We had everything in place for a boom that malaysia never saw. Our country may be different in history and geography to other countries, but throughout history, public servants have been called to serve the country, not enticed to serve the country with money. If you tell me this is the best solution that they can come up with (getting good ppl into public service using pay), I can only say that they have lost their bearings.



very well said ....

proud owner
09-01-12, 10:29
Regulator,

I fully concurred with you. I fully support and stand with you on all your postings regarding this matter.

In our littlle Sinkie farm, it is what many called legalised corruption - pay top $$ to public servants so that they are less corruptible. The top $$ idea is already warped and morally wrong from the start. Pple will only serve b'cos of top $$$. No top $$$ means No talent willing to serve . That's the msg of brainwashing.


exactly .. pay a hawker centre cleaner top salary ..it will be clean ..

pay loanshark top 'interest rate'. they will keep money in bank and dont lend out ..


etc


almost all crimes start/circle around MONEY ....

if all are paid top money ..singapore will be crime free ... everybody happy ... who needs a government ..

so paying top money is the solution ????

Rosy
09-01-12, 10:32
exactly .. pay a hawker centre cleaner top salary ..it will be clean ..

pay loanshark top 'interest rate'. they will keep money in bank and dont lend out ..


etc


almost all crimes start/circle around MONEY ....

if all are paid top money ..singapore will be crime free ... everybody happy ... who needs a government ..

so paying top money is the solution ????

so how to attract top talents to serve our country with a heart?

proud owner
09-01-12, 10:37
Would you agree to serve in public office if your annual remuneration is below what you are able to draw in the private sector?

Nevertheless I agree with you that remuneration should never be one's first consideration when deliberating on whether to serve the country in public office.

The difficulty however lies in reconciling the remuneration amounts that one is able to earn in the private sector with what he would be subjected to in public office.

Given the talent pool that we have in Singapore, what do you think are our chances of forming a team that comprises individuals who are:

a. highly capable
b. passionate about serving the country
c. willing to forgo the high pay that he can draw in the private sector


point c is interesting ...


assuming one earns 1 mio now in private sector ..

he then joins the govt and becomes an MP .. and is paid say $1.2 mio ( excl bonus) ... this job is a mere 200k more, but it comes with power ..

then he becomes chairman of ABC co .. $$$ extra
and chairman of XYZ co ... another $$$$$ extra

so ... total renumeration is way above $1.2 mio ... and way above what he gets if he had stayed on his old job ...

Rosy
09-01-12, 10:42
we are certainly paying the very TOP most dollar for our ministers even after the cut. is there any other viable solutions?

If national service is not compulsory, how many parents will encourage their sons to join voluntarily?

proud owner
09-01-12, 10:44
so how to attract top talents to serve our country with a heart?


LKY said ...we run this country like an enterprise ..

so evaluate and reward like one too ...

many big mncs are now going this way :


low basic ...
higher bonus ... depending on performance ..
all bonuses are apportioned to be paid out over a period of 3 yrs .. get 1/3 each yr ..
should one leaves .. the remaining unpaid portion will be forfeited ..
meanwhile ..if times are bad ..his salary will be reviewed ... bonus slashed ..

etc

Rosy
09-01-12, 10:45
LKY said ...we run this country like an enterprise ..

so evaluate and reward like one too ...

many big mncs are now going this way :


low basic ...
higher bonus ... depending on performance ..
all bonuses are apportioned to be paid out over a period of 3 yrs .. get 1/3 each yr ..
should one leaves .. the remaining unpaid portion will be forfeited ..
meanwhile ..if times are bad ..his salary will be reviewed ... bonus slashed ..

etc

so what is your say?

Rosy
09-01-12, 10:50
Singapore is indeed very unique. We gained independence since? our forefathers come to SG because of?

can we attract real local talents to serve our nation with a heart?

hopeful
09-01-12, 12:29
And btw, th biggest waste of money for me is the defense spending. Rumor has it SG is spending 50bln in the next 3 yrs. I wonder why there is not a single opposition who questions the wisdom of this much defense spending. Just by reducing this alone can bring down the GST back to 3%.

how does a rich man protect himself and his home if he lives in a poor neighbourhood? depend on the world's policeman?

Rosy
09-01-12, 12:36
Talking about defence budget. How much does Singapore need to set aside? How much is enough? How to justify the figure?

ysyap
09-01-12, 13:33
we are certainly paying the very TOP most dollar for our ministers even after the cut. is there any other viable solutions?

If national service is not compulsory, how many parents will encourage their sons to join voluntarily?Like your analogy!

howgozit
09-01-12, 16:26
Talking about defence budget. How much does Singapore need to set aside? How much is enough? How to justify the figure?

It is never enough.

Defense spending is a bottomless pit, you can spend $20billion or $100billion more every year and the average Singaporean would not feel any more secure.

Hence, feeling as secure as we do now, any amount spent on defense seems like a waste of money to most of us.

But there is a defense science to calculate the minimum taking into consideration GDP, population, geography...etc.

Ironically, during bad times defence budget can go up wrt GDP. This was the case post '97 when our neighbours were going through tumultous times and "regime" change, in addition our nation's coffers are also suffering a hit.

WRT "scholar" generals, those who have been involved with and understand the complexity of divisional level exercises will understand that you don't need a Rambo to run a war. What you need is somebody with a first class honours in mathematics to comprehend what is going on and stage a fight.

howgozit
09-01-12, 16:34
we are certainly paying the very TOP most dollar for our ministers even after the cut. is there any other viable solutions?

If national service is not compulsory, how many parents will encourage their sons to join voluntarily?

The answer is none.

The real question should be whether a defense force is even required at all in the first place

If the answer is no. Then your question becomes irrelevant as the SAF will be dissolved.

If the answer is yes. Then we will need a government that has the political will to make national service compulsory.

land118
09-01-12, 16:45
The answer is none.

The real question should be whether a defense force is even required at all in the first place

If the answer is no. Then your question becomes irrelevant as the SAF will be dissolved.

If the answer is yes. Then we will need a government that has the political will to make national service compulsory.

Taiwan who should feel more insecure than Singapore has already cut its NS to only 4months from 2013:

http://www.asianewsnet.net/home/news.php?sec=1&id=25731

Taiwan to cut conscription to 4 months in 2013

Some say move to rev up plans for professional army is election-driven
Lee Seok Hwai
The Straits Times (http://www.straitstimes.com/Home.html)
Publication Date : 31-12-2011


Taiwan's defence ministry yesterday (December 30) announced it would slash compulsory military training times for all males from one year to four months starting in 2013, at least a year earlier than expected.
Paired with a shift from conscription to the recruitment of professional soldiers, the move cements a long-planned transition to a professional army.

howgozit
09-01-12, 16:56
Hmmm... so what are you saying?

Should we cut our NS to 1 month or none at all since or security situation is supposedly better than Taiwan?

Btw, how many Singaporeans do you think are willing become a professional infantry soldier or logistics specialist(storeman)


Taiwan who should feel more insecure than Singapore has already cut its NS to only 4months from 2013:

http://www.asianewsnet.net/home/news.php?sec=1&id=25731

Taiwan to cut conscription to 4 months in 2013

Some say move to rev up plans for professional army is election-driven
Lee Seok Hwai
The Straits Times (http://www.straitstimes.com/Home.html)
Publication Date : 31-12-2011


Taiwan's defence ministry yesterday (December 30) announced it would slash compulsory military training times for all males from one year to four months starting in 2013, at least a year earlier than expected.
Paired with a shift from conscription to the recruitment of professional soldiers, the move cements a long-planned transition to a professional army.

land118
09-01-12, 18:48
Hmmm... so what are you saying?

Should we cut our NS to 1 month or none at all since or security situation is supposedly better than Taiwan?

Btw, how many Singaporeans do you think are willing become a professional infantry soldier or logistics specialist(storeman)
Up the number of professional soldiers, review NS term and look to reduce and pay NS a wage rather than an allowance. 4mths NS maybe too short to train a competent soldier but perhaps 12-15mths but pay a salary equal to rank of professional soldier.:2cents:

Ministers want to serve but at private sector wages, likewise it is only fair that full time NS get paid real wage, given that all male citizens do not have a choice but to serve.

Rosy
09-01-12, 18:55
Up the number of professional soldiers, review NS term and look to reduce and pay NS a wage rather than an allowance. 4mths NS maybe too short to train a competent soldier but perhaps 12-15mths but pay a salary equal to rank of professional soldier.:2cents:

i would rather govt spend more $$ on buying latest weaponry and technology

spend more $ to recruit full time soldiers and reduce the spending on reservist(which serve not much purpose):2cents:

Sg is such a small island. we need to go into techonological warfare

land118
09-01-12, 19:00
i would rather govt spend more $$ on buying latest weaponry and technology

spend more $ to recruit full time soldiers and reduce the spending on reservist(which serve not much purpose):2cents:

Sg is such a small island. we need to go into techonological warfare
Good suggestion but I do not know how u can reduce spending on reservists when each time Mindef call reservist back for yearly in-camp training, Mindef need to pay their private career salary which is only fair, unless u are saying reduce the number of in-camp call-ups or duration during their reservist liability period.

teddybear
09-01-12, 20:25
Depends on who you ask and on what terms lah. If gov willing to pay >$500k a year (don't even need >$1m), there will many people dying for the jobs, and willing to die on the jobs!


Hmmm... so what are you saying?

Should we cut our NS to 1 month or none at all since or security situation is supposedly better than Taiwan?

Btw, how many Singaporeans do you think are willing become a professional infantry soldier or logistics specialist(storeman)

Douk
09-01-12, 21:38
i would rather govt spend more $$ on buying latest weaponry and technology

spend more $ to recruit full time soldiers and reduce the spending on reservist(which serve not much purpose):2cents:

Sg is such a small island. we need to go into techonological warfare

Unfortunately, Singapore need every men to be trained as soldiers, not only full time soldiers.

At war time, probably 50% will go into hiding. The country needs the remaining 50% to fight the war with latest weapons. ;)

howgozit
09-01-12, 21:57
Agree, the length of NS and allowances should be reviewed.


Up the number of professional soldiers, review NS term and look to reduce and pay NS a wage rather than an allowance. 4mths NS maybe too short to train a competent soldier but perhaps 12-15mths but pay a salary equal to rank of professional soldier.:2cents:

Ministers want to serve but at private sector wages, likewise it is only fair that full time NS get paid real wage, given that all male citizens do not have a choice but to serve.

ysyap
10-01-12, 05:38
Unfortunately, Singapore need every men to be trained as soldiers, not only full time soldiers.

At war time, probably 50% will go into hiding. The country needs the remaining 50% to fight the war with latest weapons. ;)What war? Nuclear war then no need to fight liao... :scared-5:

ay123
10-01-12, 08:38
i think defence spending is neccessary. is to tell the world that singapore is not taking security lightly. which is why singapore is always ranked a safe place for investment or stay. the sad thing is i find that the more advance our technology is the more "guniang" our soldier is :doh:

hopeful
10-01-12, 09:31
i think defence spending is neccessary. is to tell the world that singapore is not taking security lightly. which is why singapore is always ranked a safe place for investment or stay. the sad thing is i find that the more advance our technology is the more "guniang" our soldier is :doh:

it is not the fault of technology.
it is our birth rate. when we have only 1 children, we treat our child preciously. when we have 10 children, then some of the children are "disposable".
imagine if we have only 1 child, and that child die during NS. 18 years of bringing up the child goes down the drain and who will look after 2 old folks? hence NS training is easier now.

now if we have 10 children, and 1 died during tough NS training, still have 9 children to look after 2 old folks.

Rosy
10-01-12, 09:55
i think defence spending is neccessary. is to tell the world that singapore is not taking security lightly. which is why singapore is always ranked a safe place for investment or stay. the sad thing is i find that the more advance our technology is the more "guniang" our soldier is :doh:

Lacking the sense of identity and pride to serve the nation

gn108
10-01-12, 11:26
Defence spending and NS is necessary.

Where it becomes hazy is how many career generals do we need at any one point? These are mainly scholars with super-grade pay.
Again, we need generals/colonels with military strategy, valour, courage - but how many do we really need?

If I knew then what I know now, I would surely have joined the Civil Svs.
I keep telling my kids to do the same now. Many more priviledges and lesser risk for those who are not willing to take risk and be a business owner.




i think defence spending is neccessary. is to tell the world that singapore is not taking security lightly. which is why singapore is always ranked a safe place for investment or stay. the sad thing is i find that the more advance our technology is the more "guniang" our soldier is :doh:

Regulators
10-01-12, 12:49
if you go to mindef, you will find many BGs and colonels walking everywhere. These super-scale officers don't slog in the field, just doing paperwork everyday, like any civil servant and office worker. Imo, the military has too many of such officers which is really not necessary. In fact, one BG is enough for the entire singapore to head the defense force, the rest of the ranks should be capped at colonel and below. Military spending should just be on what we really need for defense, and military should not be a place for scholars to milk the country's money. Year in year out having SAF scholarship really wasting people's money. I believe a good military strategist need not be a scholar, but he has to go through rigorous training abroad and gain experience in the actual field.



Defence spending and NS is necessary.

Where it becomes hazy is how many career generals do we need at any one point? These are mainly scholars with super-grade pay.
Again, we need generals/colonels with military strategy, valour, courage - but how many do we really need?

If I knew then what I know now, I would surely have joined the Civil Svs.
I keep telling my kids to do the same now. Many more priviledges and lesser risk for those who are not willing to take risk and be a business owner.

amk
10-01-12, 12:55
... In fact, one BG is enough for the entire singapore to head the defense force, the rest of the ranks should be capped at colonel and below.
huh I found myself agreeing with you ... almost ... ;)

but then :


..military should not be a place for scholars to milk the country's money...
u make it sound like they are there specifically for the purpose of "milking the money" .. haiz why you so so extreme ? ;)

Regulators
10-01-12, 13:05
the scholarship system is elitist. I have seen non-scholar officers who are much better than scholars, and i have also seen sargeants doing a better job in the field than commissioned officers. In the name of meritocracy, these scholars are given the red carpet treatment, which to me is absurd. In my field of education, you can see the number of times scholars working in the MOE have changed the school syllabus shuffling the same topics up and down different levels over the past decade, cant even make up their blooming minds which level for which topic. I think the scholar system should be scrapped entirely.



huh I found myself agreeing with you ... almost ... ;)

but then :

u make it sound like they are there specifically for the purpose of "milking the money" .. haiz why you so so extreme ? ;)

hopeful
10-01-12, 13:08
......I believe a good military strategist need not be a scholar, but he has to go through rigorous training abroad and gain experience in the actual field.

if not a scholar, how does one prove that oneself is a good military strategist? play DOTA, Starcraft?
how to get experience in actual field? leading in ACTUAL combat missions? or humanitarian missions?

gn108
10-01-12, 13:16
That;s the issue ...there is no gurantee these 'educated warriors' can even pull the trigger. I believe we need trained warriors but not be too top heavy else no one to do the heavy lifting. True in all our Ministries and CS arms and even quasi-govt entities.

In actual war - you will surface actual situational heroes and they will not be risk-aversed scholars who are Col/Generals.

In peace-time - you may need some of these 'thinkers' but again, how many is enough or are we just stuffing these scholars into general uniforms.

No quick fix but the whole system is top heavy from Govt, Civil Svs to the likes of GIC and Temasek.





the scholarship system is elitist. I have seen non-scholar officers who are much better than scholars, and i have also seen sargeants doing a better job in the field than commissioned officers. In the name of meritocracy, these scholars are given the red carpet treatment, which to me is absurd. In my field of education, you can see the number of times scholars working in the MOE have changed the school syllabus shuffling the same topics up and down different levels over the past decade, cant even make up their blooming minds which level for which topic. I think the scholar system should be scrapped entirely.

gn108
10-01-12, 13:21
It;s more like the system is there to be milked.
I'm not blaming the scholars - if I were one of them I'd go the same way.
It's the System!

u make it sound like they are there specifically for the purpose of "milking the money" .. haiz why you so so extreme ? ;)[/quote]

Regulators
10-01-12, 13:26
a scholar who graduated in biochemistry or hebrew studies does not necessarily mean he has a mind for warfare. Thomas Edison may have invented the light bulb and a genius, but that doesnt mean he will make a good military strategist. i always believe that to be a good military leader, the soldier needs to work his way up the ranks and be in the field (preferrably war experience) and having extensive overseas training. Look at those high ranking generals in the US, they were all either involved in vietnam, korean war, iraq or involved in some sort of international mission. Our singapore generals earned their rank not from these exposures, merely pushing paper day in day out in the office.


if not a scholar, how does one prove that oneself is a good military strategist? play DOTA, Starcraft?
how to get experience in actual field? leading in ACTUAL combat missions? or humanitarian missions?

hopeful
10-01-12, 13:34
...Our singapore generals earned their rank not from these exposures, merely pushing paper day in day out in the office.

don't singapore generals have a lot of experience? arrow others and avoid being arrowed in return ;).

how many office boy end up being a CEO?
how many privates end up being a general?
let the education system sort them out first.

ay123
10-01-12, 13:36
we need commander to lead not to fight. fighting is the job of soldier. a soldier that fight well in war doesnt mean he can lead a victory for the team. in corporate world a capable CEO can lead any industry and he/she need not work from ground level.

gn108
10-01-12, 13:42
You're correct but since we're talking abt the military, the following key question needs to be asked.

So what about when war strikes? Would you want a career paper-pusher/siam-king to defend your family and assets here?

Let education separate those who can multi-task/strategise etc, but really only the best warriors can be generals who will lead the Army, Navy and AirForce. Anyway, in war, too Generals is recipe for a Major disaster.

The rest shouldn't be promoted to generals too easily just to satisfy the System.



don't singapore generals have a lot of experience? arrow others and avoid being arrowed in return ;).

how many office boy end up being a CEO?
how many privates end up being a general?
let the education system sort them out first.

Douk
10-01-12, 14:00
if not a scholar, how does one prove that oneself is a good military strategist? play DOTA, Starcraft?
how to get experience in actual field? leading in ACTUAL combat missions? or humanitarian missions?

i think for the division and above level commanders, they have war game to practice military strategies.. i think, whichever game they play, the scholars continue to receive their priviledge treatment. which commander want to tiok mark by ticking off the scholars.

teddybear
10-01-12, 14:06
Not true lah, depends on industry. Some industries put an idiots there the company also can run themselves without much effect. Some industries need people who work from ground level because too chim liao, put idiot there within 3 years only also can close-shop (eg high-tech products companies). Fly-in type CEO or leaders mostly also the fly-by-night type! (eg HP) :banghead:


we need commander to lead not to fight. fighting is the job of soldier. a soldier that fight well in war doesnt mean he can lead a victory for the team. in corporate world a capable CEO can lead any industry and he/she need not work from ground level.

maisonjai
10-01-12, 14:37
Unfortunately, Singapore need every men to be trained as soldiers, not only full time soldiers.

At war time, probably 50% will go into hiding. The country needs the remaining 50% to fight the war with latest weapons. ;)
The other 50% hiding underground play iPad.
SAF latest weapon:Apple iPad
http://ph.news.yahoo.com/singapore-military-adopts-ipad-2-115010995.html
http://www.singaporeiphoneapps.com/ipad/saf-army-latest-weapon-apple-ipad/
when batt flat all mati.

what we fear is chemical warfare, no smell, no color, next day sunrise & everyone still sleeping peacefully. Except the maid cos she slping in the Bomb shelter..haha

Regulators
10-01-12, 15:30
we need generals who have the experience leading men into battle or missions involving some kind of conflict and earn their way up to be a general by being involved in the actual battlefield, not someone who becomes general by merely playing war games in the conference room and attending course after course in the classroom. The very most our generals can brag about is having a short stint doing ranger or seals training in US, but thousands of US soldiers go through that every year so what is the big deal?


we need commander to lead not to fight. fighting is the job of soldier. a soldier that fight well in war doesnt mean he can lead a victory for the team. in corporate world a capable CEO can lead any industry and he/she need not work from ground level.

hopeful
10-01-12, 16:40
we need generals who have the experience leading men into battle or missions involving some kind of conflict and earn their way up to be a general by being involved in the actual battlefield, not someone who becomes general by merely playing war games in the conference room and attending course after course in the classroom. The very most our generals can brag about is having a short stint doing ranger or seals training in US, but thousands of US soldiers go through that every year so what is the big deal?

your condition very hard to fulfill.
Singapore ever been involved in conflict before? and not those peacekeeping / humanitarian missions.

howgozit
10-01-12, 16:46
The other 50% hiding underground play iPad.
SAF latest weapon:Apple iPad
http://ph.news.yahoo.com/singapore-military-adopts-ipad-2-115010995.html
http://www.singaporeiphoneapps.com/ipad/saf-army-latest-weapon-apple-ipad/
when batt flat all mati.

what we fear is chemical warfare, no smell, no color, next day sunrise & everyone still sleeping peacefully. Except the maid cos she slping in the Bomb shelter..haha


Haha.... LOL

Chio Ka Peng... good one!

howgozit
10-01-12, 17:22
Most of us have a pre-conceived notion of what a war-mongering general would be like. Due to Hollywood, we tend to think that the generals in the US would have a mean disposition, chomps on a cigar, bark orders and look something like Jack Nicholson.

In this day and age, nothing is further from the truth. From Whitehall in London to the Pentagon in Virginia the military is run mostly by mild mannered scholar generals not unlike what we have in Singapore.

The "problem"(if you can call it that) in Singapore is what is termed as "estab strength". That is what is required in a rank and file structure of a unit. For example, in a platoon you need a PC, in a company you need an OC and CO.... so on and so forth. For each level, there is an "estab rank", for example a seargent cannot be a PC. The estab rank is tied to the appointment required at that level.

In Singapore due to a shrinking population, the size of a unit at each level has gone through many reductions through the years. Those who did NS in the early years will recall the number of men in a platoon or section was much more than what it is now. The result is the number of appointment holders seem disproportionately high compared to the size of the force.

Coupled with an enforced "retirement" at 45years old. The SAF promotes on the basis of CEP (estimated potential). This means that unlike say the US, the scaling of the promotion ladder is condensed.

The combination of these factors means that you will see an "unbalanced" amount of high ranking soldiers. Their career life-span in the SAF however is very short comparitively. Ie., when a soldier reaches his CEP rank (be it general, colonel or captain) it means he is going to retire soon.

Regulators
10-01-12, 17:45
So it brings us to the conclusion that nobody in singapore is fit to be a general, that is the point I have been trying to get across
your condition very hard to fulfill.
Singapore ever been involved in conflict before? and not those peacekeeping / humanitarian missions.

gn108
11-01-12, 08:29
So again, why do we need so many Commanders?
How many Generals are needed to lead effectively and efficiently?

Since they don't fight in the field, their motality rate should be less.
Better have more fighters to execute the orders than shift around the model soldiers on the war-games board.

The System has made an artificial demand to soak up these scholars - in turn this artificial demand has created its own supply.



we need commander to lead not to fight. fighting is the job of soldier. a soldier that fight well in war doesnt mean he can lead a victory for the team. in corporate world a capable CEO can lead any industry and he/she need not work from ground level.

hopeful
11-01-12, 09:05
.... .... In Singapore due to a shrinking population, the size of a unit at each level has gone through many reductions through the years. Those who did NS in the early years will recall the number of men in a platoon or section was much more than what it is now. The result is the number of appointment holders seem disproportionately high compared to the size of the force.
......
just curious, why not maintain the same number of soldiers in a platoon/section and reduce the number of units?
1) more units to scare the enemies into thinking that Singapore has a lot of soldiers?
2) present platoon/section more efficient than previous platoon/sections? exhorted to be "cheaper, better, faster".

stl67
11-01-12, 15:56
Most of us have a pre-conceived notion of what a war-mongering general would be like. Due to Hollywood, we tend to think that the generals in the US would have a mean disposition, chomps on a cigar, bark orders and look something like Jack Nicholson.

In this day and age, nothing is further from the truth. From Whitehall in London to the Pentagon in Virginia the military is run mostly by mild mannered scholar generals not unlike what we have in Singapore.

The "problem"(if you can call it that) in Singapore is what is termed as "estab strength". That is what is required in a rank and file structure of a unit. For example, in a platoon you need a PC, in a company you need an OC and CO.... so on and so forth. For each level, there is an "estab rank", for example a seargent cannot be a PC. The estab rank is tied to the appointment required at that level.

In Singapore due to a shrinking population, the size of a unit at each level has gone through many reductions through the years. Those who did NS in the early years will recall the number of men in a platoon or section was much more than what it is now. The result is the number of appointment holders seem disproportionately high compared to the size of the force.

Coupled with an enforced "retirement" at 45years old. The SAF promotes on the basis of CEP (estimated potential). This means that unlike say the US, the scaling of the promotion ladder is condensed.

The combination of these factors means that you will see an "unbalanced" amount of high ranking soldiers. Their career life-span in the SAF however is very short comparitively. Ie., when a soldier reaches his CEP rank (be it general, colonel or captain) it means he is going to retire soon.

Thanks for sharing. I guess some of us are expecting too much at times...

richwang
17-01-12, 03:46
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2012/01/chen-show-mao-political-service-is-a-calling-and-not-be-treated-as-discount-factor/

Mr Speaker Sir,
The Workers’ Party view the committee’s report with a sense of hope because it is a step in the right direction. We agree with the three principles that political salaries should be competitive, that political service is a calling and has its own ethos, and that wages should be transparent.
Political service is a calling and not be treated as discount factor
However, the order by which the principles are applied has produced in our view a flawed new benchmark. Because competitive salary is placed as the first principle ahead of political service, the committee has pegged ministerial salary to the median salary of the 1000 top-earning Singaporeans and then applied a discount for political service.
If the new benchmark is accepted by the Government, it would continue to send the message, to potential political office holders and the people of Singapore alike, that top pay is the benchmark by which the importance of the office is to be judged, and that the value of political office can, in the final analysis, be monetized. It cannot be,Not even at the highest income levels. Political service is a calling; it is a privilege accorded by the electorate to serve the largest number of our fellow Singaporeans. It is primarily a privilege, not primarily a burden or sacrifice. The principle of political service should come first and not be treated as a discount factor.
Whole of Government, People-up approach
Because political service is in the genre of public service, we propose a whole-of-government, people-up approach that benchmarks Ministerial salary to MP allowance, which is in turn pegged to the pay of the civil service bench-marked to general wage levels. Because political service starts with our election as parliamentary representatives of the people, MP allowance should be the starting point. The Cabinet is the constitutional extension of Parliament and the institutional expression of the legislature’s control over the executive. It is not an extension of the private sector.
This whole-of-government, people-up approach is a pragmatic reality in many well-governed, developed countries and territories around the world.
Is Singapore unique? Of course. But it is not so dissimilar to others that we cannot learn from their best practices and how they apply good principles.
For example, the committee writes, “As is international practice in Westminster Parliamentary systems, the … political appointment holders will also receive MP allowances as they have the dual roles of being MPs”.
Parliament Sovereignty is paramount
We agree that the Ministers should receive their MP allowances. But that is because, Ministers are MPs first, they are not merely also MPs. We must remember that in our system of government, Ministers are first of all MPs elected by the people as their representatives. Not selected by the Prime Minister from the private sector into the Cabinet and then also MPs. Parliament is the highest authority in our system of government, and MPs, as elected representatives of the people, should be the starting point for the determination of ministerial salary. The committee’s benchmark to the private sector clouds this fact. Worker’s Party recommends pegging ministerial salary as multiples of MP allowance. This expresses the fact that ministers are first and foremost elected as MPs to serve and represent the people.
So in what multiples should Singapore peg ministerial salary to MP allowance? We propose that an entry-grade minister’s monthly salary be 5 times the MP allowance, and 9 times for the Prime Minister.
As DPM said, there are no right or wrong answers, and this is ultimately a judgment call. We propose multiples based on the increased responsibilities and additional capabilities and experience required of the different political offices in Singapore. We also believe that this is where the principles of competitive salary and transparency can come in, to take into consideration some of the factors cited by the committee as to why the system of Singapore may be different from those in other countries. In the words of DPM, we believe the pay should be sufficient to not deter potential political office holders with desire and ability, from serving in political office without undue concern for their standards of living.
Of course we would like to see capable men and women in the Cabinet. But I do not believe that our best people for political office are only those who make the most money. Many of our former and current Ministers did not come in from the private sector or the top earning professions, that is as we would expect. Many of them were public servants who heeded the call of political service by standing for elections.
Political service is in the nature of public service. We believe that MP allowance should be set with reference to the salary of senior executives in the regular civil service. This is consistent with the general practice in most of the countries and territories we surveyed.
The starting salary of entry-grade senior civil servants in the regular civil service — a director of MX9 grade in the Management Executive Scheme of the civil service (outside of the Administrative Service) is approximately $11,000 a month.
In our proposal, MP allowance would be about $11,000 per month, Ministerial salary would range from $55,000 per month for entry-grade ministers to $99,000 per month for the Prime Minister.
We support the clean wage proposal for transparency, in which compensation is fully accounted for with no hidden items. In addition to a fixed 13-month salary that is keyed to MP allowance, we propose that the ministers and the prime minister receive variable pay of different bonuses that add up to no more than five months in any year (compared to 13.5 months recommended by the committee). Many Singaporeans may take home up to 3 or 4 months of bonuses in a very good year, compared to 13.5 months for the ministers as recommended by the committee. In fact, if the maximum bonuses recommended by the committee were awarded, the reduction in entry-grade minister pay would be 8% and not the 31% calculated by the committee.
In our whole-of-government approach, since civil service salary is aligned to general market conditions faced by Singaporean workers, MP allowance and ministerial salary will move with the income levels of many more Singaporeans than with the total employment and trade income of the top-earning 1000, including their bonuses, commissions and stock options. The Workers’ Party’s benchmark will better help our leaders empathize with the majority of Singaporeans and not just the very few.
Inclusivity vs Exclusivity
The Workers’ Party’s proposed approach aims for enhanced inclusivity and sensitivity to the progress of Singaporeans, rather than discounted exclusivity pegged to top earners. We believe the committee has taken the right step forward with the three principles. It is up to the Government now to go further to apply the principles in the right order by recognizing political service as the first principle, anchored in the primacy of parliament. Let us place ministerial pay on a sound footing in order to ground political leadership in a strong sense of service to all Singaporeans.
Thank you. And now, if I may, in Chinese.
议长先生,
我们认可委员会提出的三大原则:一、政治职位薪金应该具有竞争力;二、从政应该有奉献的精神;三、薪酬应该完全透明。
但遗憾的是,这三大原则在奉行时的先后轻重,却使整套新的方程式出现了根本误区。把部长薪金与全国收入最高的1000人挂钩,然后为了反映政治服务 的奉献精神再打个折,这个做法突显了委员会优先考虑的是高薪的原则,这只会进一步强化现有的错误观念,认定从政的价值到头来还是要以金钱来衡量。
我们当然希望有意愿从政的人不会因为薪水过低而裹足不前。但前提是,他立志从政该不是主要因为薪水高,而是因为他先把为国为民服务视为己任。这才是我们应当坚守的第一原则。
认清了从政的本质是公共服务,我们就应该采纳“整体政府”的方案,部长薪金应以议员津贴为基准,而议员津贴则与公务员薪水挂钩。毕竟,在我国的宪政体系下,内阁是国会的延伸,内阁从来不是私人企业界的延伸。
这么一种“整体政府”、由民间从下而上的方案,也在世界许多国家与地区推行。
当然, 新加坡的国情向来就是独一无二的。但再怎么特殊, 也不至于完全找不到其他体制值得我们学习的地方吧?
委员会的建议反映了一个政治盲点:我们的政治领袖可不是直接由私人企业界遴选出来担任部长,而后再兼任民选议员的。相反的,他先得当选为议员,才能受委进入内阁担任部长。因此,部长薪金不应当与私人企业界的薪金水平挂钩,而是应该以国会议员的津贴为基准。
认清这一点后,我们可以考虑第二及第三个原则了:议员津贴的多大倍数才足以确保部长薪金保有竞争力,而又透明化?工人党的建议是:部长薪金应介于议员津贴的五倍至九倍之间,以初级部长倍数最低,总理倍数最高。这个范畴比国际标准来得高,应该足以反映新加坡独特的国情。
委员会的建议所反映的另一个误区是,认定最优秀的从政人才该出自收入最高的1000人当中。我们现任与前任的部长当中,就有好多位并不是私人企业界或者高薪专业出身的。不少部长来自公共服务领域,更有些是先从议员做起,慢慢累积政治经验后再升任部
长。
整体来说,以收入水平论从政才能,反映的恰恰是我们的社会典型的精英主义的狭隘心态。
综上所述,我们建议采取“整体政府”方案,部长薪金是议员津贴的倍数,而议员津贴则等同于高级公务员的起薪, 大约每月11000元。而既然公务员的薪金也与新加坡其他员工一样取决于经济状况及市场条件,这个方案更能确保部长薪金不会与人民的薪金水平脱钩。与其由 私人企业界收入最高的1000名精英由上而下再打折,我们认为较适当的做法是从民间由下而上,由公务员薪金为起点,制定议员津贴,最后再乘以倍数制定部长 薪金。
我们支持实行透明化的裸薪制。但是委员会建议的花红数额显然过高了。报告书说部长将减薪31%,那是以平均7个月的花红来计算得出的结果。但是花红总数额最高可达13个半月,如果花红全领了,部长薪水基本上比检讨前只减少8%。
因此,工人党建议,在固定的十三个月年薪以外,部长与总理所获得的所有花红数额,应该设定顶限,总共不得超过五个月。这么一来,在景气好表现好的年度里,部长与总理,可领多至十八个月的薪水,而不是委员会所建议的26个半月。
工人党期许部长薪金制度能以更包容更贴近民生的方式来制定,而不是只局限在社会金字塔顶层的一小撮精英范畴内,而后再通过打折,努力地尝试贴近民 生。委员会所制定的三大原则是值得肯定的,接下来就有待政府如何将这三大原则的先后轻重厘清,充分体现政治领导层为国为民服务的使命感和高尚本质。
谢谢。

hyenergix
19-01-12, 06:42
P** should have just cut the Ms' pay, keep quiet and lower the cost of necessities for the lower income group. It is stirring angry sentiment again in the Parliament with all these debates, but meanwhile the cost of necessities is still increasing. The saving from cutting the Ms' pay is not going to benefit the lower income group.

ysyap
19-01-12, 07:48
More ideally, these ministers or MPs should just come together earlier and say they'll donate 40% of their salary cum bonus, etc to those in need or those whose monthly household income < $1500 or something. Like that, not only earn satisfaction from all those who complained about their high salary but also respect from everybody. Next election PAP win big big le... :cheers5: Use money to their advantage... :D

ay123
30-01-12, 09:10
WP Yaw's scandals + 6 members resigned from SPP. this is the quality of opposition :doh:

probably LKY is right to say that aljunied will have 5 years to repent. :beats-me-man:

howgozit
30-01-12, 16:36
WP Yaw's scandals + 6 members resigned from SPP. this is the quality of opposition :doh:

probably LKY is right to say that aljunied will have 5 years to repent. :beats-me-man:

I think it was a bad judgement that Lina Chiam got into politics on the SPP ticket and into such a high position. She got by on the strength of Chiam See Tong and now things are crumbling internally.