Revised pay for S'pore President and Cabinet from May 21

[MarrickG]

SINGAPORE - President S R Nathan and the Cabinet will be drawing revised salaries from May 21 onwards.

According to a statement released today by the Prime Minister's Office, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong decided that the new salaries for political appointment holders will take effect from May 21, the date when the new Cabinet was sworn in.

President S R Nathan also adopted the new salary on the same day. Although the salary for the President would in-principle commence from the new term of the President, the President informed Prime Minister Lee that he would adopt the new salary from May 21, said the statement.

The new salary scale comes after PM Lee announced the formation of a commitee to review salaries of the President, Prime Minister and political appointment holders.

The commitee will be headed by Gerard Ee, who is the Chairman of Changi General Hospital and Chairman of National Kidney Foundation. The committee members include John De Payva, President of the National Trades Union Congress, Fang Ai Lian, Chairman of the Charity Council and Chairman of the Methodist Girls School Board of Management, Stephen Lee Ching Yen, President of the Singapore National Employers Federation and Po’ad bin Shaik Abu Bakar Mattar, Member of the Council of Presidential Advisers and Member of the Public Service Commission.

George Quek, Founder and Chairman of Breadtalk Group Ltd, Vice President of Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and Chairman, Xinmin Secondary School Advisory Committee, Lucien Wong, Managing Partner of Allen & Gledhill LLP and Chairman, Maritime and Port Authority and Wong Ngit Liong, Chairman of the National University of Singapore Board of Trustees and Chairman & CEO, Venture Corporation Limited will also be onboard.

The commitee will take into account salaries of comparable jobs in the private sector and other reference points such as the general wage levels in Singapore.

 

[MarrickG]

'Substantial discount' in Ministers' pay

SINGAPORE ministers could get a paycut soon.

Calling the “substantial discount” that is in the works “a different model from the current one”, Mr Gerard Ee told The New Paper last night the revised version would better “reflect the ethos and value of public service”.

Mr Gerard Ee is now the head of a task force to review ministerial pay.

The pay of everyone in office - “from the president to Prime Minister Lee and the parliamentary secretaries” - is up for review.

 

[MarrickG]

No stress asking ministers to take pay cut

HE DEALS in dough.

And, as the founder and chairman of BreadTalk Group, Mr George Quek (left) decides on the salaries of 6,000 employees, from bakers to top management of the multinational food and beverage company.

Now, he has been tasked to help decide the pay of our ministers.

Mr Quek is one of eight independent members on the committee to review the salaries of the President, Prime Minister and political appointment holders.

Speaking to The New Paper yesterday, Mr Quek said that he would not feel stressed if he were to ask the ministers to take a pay cut.

More in The New Paper today (May 23).

 

[po2wq]

... Calling the “substantial discount” that is in the works “a different model from the current one”, Mr Gerard Ee told The New Paper last night the revised version would better “reflect the ethos and value of public service” ...

tis burger b4 he even start work, he oredi have his intended results in his mind ...

lidat, how can tis burger b objectif n do a fair job? ...

 

[BuiKia]

It was tharman who asked him to do the review. It has been decided by the MIW to have a pay cut even before it was reviewed. Review is only a formailty. They decided on the committee memebrs who will do the review, so basically everything will turn out the way they wanted it to happen.

 

[po2wq]

ah loon wanted n asked 4 sum1 2 slap his face ...

 

[lianbeng]

lianbeng demands the cut-back sum to be deposited back into our savings accounts - taxpayers' money u know?

 

[saratogas]

It is not their salary that people are tulan but their 8 month bonuses!

If there is really a cut... Prataman will surely feel the pinch as raw materials for prata has increased more than 30%!

 

[po2wq]

lianbeng demands the cut-back sum to be deposited back into our savings accounts - taxpayers' money u know?

ya, man! ...

me wanna take moni go eat mee siam wif hum ...

mee siam wif hum cud never taste any betta! ...

 

[denzuko1]

They better have more than 50% pay cut.

 

[Narong Wongwan]

It is not their salary that people are tulan but their 8 month bonuses!

If there is really a cut... Prataman will surely feel the pinch as raw materials for prata has increased more than 30%!

President will no longer have the highest pay after this cut.
His cut will be the most drastic.

 

[tanwahtiu]

well well well, next election not many interested to join politic as the salaries are watered down. Leegime want to fold up and now is the time to fark up the salaries and they have made enough to retire for the rest of their life.

 

[leongszehian]

Pension for ministers – more disclosure, please
Posted by theonlinecitizen on May 14, 2011131 Comments
60Share

Leong Sze Hian /
The Prime Minister’s Office and the Minister in charge of the Civil Service have both sought to clarify and explain the issue of ministerial pension. (See links below.)
Whilst the clarification on Ministerial pensions is welcome, I would like to suggest that more details be given. Otherwise, Singaporeans may still be in the dark about how much exactly ministers receive in their pensions.
For example, the Today report says, “When a cabinet minister retires, the maximum annual pension that he is entitled to would be about 10 per cent of his annual salary while he was in service.” So, what are the annual salaries of cabinet ministers?
Otherwise, it may be akin to saying its 10 per cent of $X, but what is X?
Another question is whether this applies to other ministers as well, who are not cabinet ministers.
The Today report also says, “Ministers have to serve a minimum of eight years to qualify for a pension.” How many and who are the ministers that qualify according to this criteria?
Why is it that a minister qualifies after eight years, whereas a civil servant like Administrative Officers are only eligible after 15 years?
Why is it that Members of Parliament (MPs) elected after January 1995 are not eligible, whereas ministers appointed after 1995 are still eligible?
We are told that the “pensionable component has been frozen since 1994” but what was the amount frozen?
The Prime Minister’s Office’s statement says that “over time the pensionable component has shrunk as a proportion of total monthly salary.” What is the pensionable amount as a percentage of the annual salary?
The PMO explains that “[the] Parliamentary Pensions Act also provides for an office-holder to receive a pension at the age of 55, should he qualify for one, while he continues to hold office.” The obvious question which Singaporeans may have is: how many ministers are now receiving a pension?
The PMO’s statement says ‘[this] provision is being reviewed.” I agree that it should be reviewed as I do not see why a current minister in office who is already earning more that $2 million a year should be given a pension at the same time.
How long is this review expected to take?
After all, this is not the first time that this issue has been raised over the years.
In the spirit of PAP transformation, as espoused by ministers George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua (my former MP as I live in Aljunied GRC) in their respective press conferences after the elections, actually, it may be much simpler to just disclose to Singaporeans the amounts of pensions that each eligible minister is getting, instead of a long statement of clarification, which may leave citizens with arguably even more doubts and questions.
Given that “the points are already on… public record”, as the PMO says, and if good governance requires corporate officers of listed companies to disclose their remuneration, shouldn’t ministers do the same?
References:
“PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)
“Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14)
Visit Sze Hian’s website for a free e-book and more.

 

[leongszehian]

Pension for Ministers: How much of $11b?

Posted on May 20th, 2011 under Articles, Others 0
Sponsor's link ( Want this spot?)


We refer to the Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office’s letter “PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/...ry_668430.html and the articles “Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay” (ST, May 14) and .”Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14). http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/E...ow-theyre-paid

According to the Budgethttp://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2011/revenue_expenditure/attachment/6%20Assets%20&%20Liab%20EE2010.pdf, the Government’s liabilities as at 31 March, 2010, for the Pension Fund is $10.6 billion.

Since this is the provision for the pensions payable to eligible civil servants and political appointees, how much of this sum is attributable to political appointees?

How many political appointees are currently receiving pensions?

To illustrate the sums involved, for example, if a 27 year-old new political appointee becomes a Minister eventually, and steps down at age 50, since the latest available Public Service Division (PSD) figures for 2009, was that an entry-grade Minister received an annual salary of $1.57 million, the annual pension may be say around $157,000 (“Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay”, ST, May 14).

If the retiring Minister lives to 90 years old (life expectancy for a female at around the 20 per cent survival probability), the total lifetime payout is $6.28 million ($157,000 times 40 years), or a present value liability to taxpayers of about $3.6 million, using the current 3 per cent discounting formula applied in computing pension liabilities.

As this example is for just one entry-grade Minister, how much would the figure be for a Cabinet Minister?

Also, since the Invest Fund of $469 million, is the provision for the pensions of the Home Affairs (Ministry) Uniformed Services (HUS)http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.a...NZyJ19YOPOM=
, does it mean that the total pensions liability is about $11 billion ($10.6 billion plus $469 million).

For example, in the Health Sciences Authority’s (HSA) financial statements for 2007/8, “In the prior year, a provision of $240,734 was made for 3 eligible officers who exercised the option to return to the pension scheme as offered by the government”. (see attached PDF file)

Since the pensions scheme was terminated many years ago, why are ‘eligible’ officers allowed the option to return to the pension scheme?

Does this mean, for example, that a civil servant who is promoted to the Administrative Service, or becomes a political appointee, may be given this option?

When a pensionable civil servant resigns to stand as a candidate in the elections, does it mean that he or she will lose all service pensionable benefits, or does it mean that they may be transferred or credited in some way, if they become political appointees?

What is the criteria to qualify as an ‘eligible’ officer?

Does this option to return to the pensions scheme mean that past service may also be credited for the purpose of the pension benefits, i.e. like a back-dating of benefits?

If this is the case, is any adjustment made for the employer’s CPF contribution to the ‘eligible’ officer’s CPF account over the years?
By the way, the liability under the Government Securities Fund is $331 billion.

.

Leong Sze Hian and Alex Lew

P.S. We are grateful and indebted to Joey Foo for doing all the research and alerting us to this issue