A video summary of the WP's disastrous MX9 Fiasco
- Thread starter RonRon
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,634
- Points
- 0
SINGAPORE: Minister of State for Education and Defence, Lawrence Wong has argued that when political parties and their leaders change positions on issues, they have a responsibility to explain to the public as this was about being accountable and transparent.
Otherwise, he asked how could voters be sure what to make of their future elections promises and manifestos, referring to the Workers' Party's (WP) change of position on ministerial salaries, following the three-day debate in Parliament.
Mr Wong, who is Chairman of the People's Action Party's (PAP) Publicity and Publication sub-committee, made these observations in an article posted on the party's website.
He said after three days of debate on salaries for political office holders and allowances for MPs, he had learnt more than he ever expected, but also walked away with some troubling questions.
Mr Wong said that the Workers' Party had for many years championed linking political pay to the poor.
In 2006, it proposed making ministerial salaries 100 times the salary of the bottom 20 per cent; and in its GE2011 manifesto, the WP declared that ministers' pay should be "benchmarked internationally against the political office of developed countries".
Mr Wong said at election rallies, WP candidates used the "million-dollar salaries" of ministers to whip up emotion against the government. But in Parliament, the WP proposed paying ministers around S$1 million per annum.
He stressed this was what the WP had attacked so fiercely in the 2011 General Election.
Mr Wong said: "I looked forward to hearing the WP MPs explain why they had changed their stand, a change which I considered a step forward. But unfortunately they never mentioned their past positions, much less explained their policy reversal."
He said Non Constituency MP Gerald Giam even claimed that this had been the WP's position in the General Election, while party leaders Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Sylvia Lim remained silent during the three-day debate in Parliament.
Mr Wong said that the Workers' Party had alleged that the proposal to peg salaries to the top 1,000 income earners was "elitist".
The WP counter-proposed an alternative formulae, tied to the MX9 Superscale grade. But the MX9 grade represents the top 1.2 per cent of the civil service and is benchmarked to private sector salaries.
The Workers' Party multiplied the MX9 salary upwards to give the same salary level for ministers as proposed by the review committee on political pay, which Mr Wong said targets top income earners as well.
So, Mr Wong asked if the Workers' Party's alternative is just as "elitist".
He also said he had found it disturbing that the Workers' Party had based its whole proposal on a salary benchmark that it was not familiar with, and furthermore, made sweeping inaccurate statements about what this benchmark represented.
The Workers' Party MPs had claimed that its benchmark, based on the MX9 salary grade, was representative of the general wage level of Singaporeans. When queried by DPM Teo Chee Hean, they admitted that they did not know only very few senior civil servants were at this grade.
Mr Wong said: "Basic research from easily available public information would have shown that the MX9 salary does not represent the typical wage level of Singaporeans. I believe this is the basic level of care and due diligence that responsible parliamentarians ought to demonstrate."
Mr Wong said the three days of debate showed that Singapore still has quite some way to go to achieve a First World Parliament - an often used phrase by the Workers' Party during the last hustings.
Channel NewsAsia will air a special on the debates on political pay, "Parliament Debates Political Pay".
Singapore viewers can catch the special on Saturday from 10.30pm to 11.30pm. The programme will be repeated on Sunday at the following times: 6.00pm to 7.00pm, 12.00mn to 1.00am, and on Monday from 1.00pm to 2.00pm.
-CNA/ac
Otherwise, he asked how could voters be sure what to make of their future elections promises and manifestos, referring to the Workers' Party's (WP) change of position on ministerial salaries, following the three-day debate in Parliament.
Mr Wong, who is Chairman of the People's Action Party's (PAP) Publicity and Publication sub-committee, made these observations in an article posted on the party's website.
He said after three days of debate on salaries for political office holders and allowances for MPs, he had learnt more than he ever expected, but also walked away with some troubling questions.
Mr Wong said that the Workers' Party had for many years championed linking political pay to the poor.
In 2006, it proposed making ministerial salaries 100 times the salary of the bottom 20 per cent; and in its GE2011 manifesto, the WP declared that ministers' pay should be "benchmarked internationally against the political office of developed countries".
Mr Wong said at election rallies, WP candidates used the "million-dollar salaries" of ministers to whip up emotion against the government. But in Parliament, the WP proposed paying ministers around S$1 million per annum.
He stressed this was what the WP had attacked so fiercely in the 2011 General Election.
Mr Wong said: "I looked forward to hearing the WP MPs explain why they had changed their stand, a change which I considered a step forward. But unfortunately they never mentioned their past positions, much less explained their policy reversal."
He said Non Constituency MP Gerald Giam even claimed that this had been the WP's position in the General Election, while party leaders Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Sylvia Lim remained silent during the three-day debate in Parliament.
Mr Wong said that the Workers' Party had alleged that the proposal to peg salaries to the top 1,000 income earners was "elitist".
The WP counter-proposed an alternative formulae, tied to the MX9 Superscale grade. But the MX9 grade represents the top 1.2 per cent of the civil service and is benchmarked to private sector salaries.
The Workers' Party multiplied the MX9 salary upwards to give the same salary level for ministers as proposed by the review committee on political pay, which Mr Wong said targets top income earners as well.
So, Mr Wong asked if the Workers' Party's alternative is just as "elitist".
He also said he had found it disturbing that the Workers' Party had based its whole proposal on a salary benchmark that it was not familiar with, and furthermore, made sweeping inaccurate statements about what this benchmark represented.
The Workers' Party MPs had claimed that its benchmark, based on the MX9 salary grade, was representative of the general wage level of Singaporeans. When queried by DPM Teo Chee Hean, they admitted that they did not know only very few senior civil servants were at this grade.
Mr Wong said: "Basic research from easily available public information would have shown that the MX9 salary does not represent the typical wage level of Singaporeans. I believe this is the basic level of care and due diligence that responsible parliamentarians ought to demonstrate."
Mr Wong said the three days of debate showed that Singapore still has quite some way to go to achieve a First World Parliament - an often used phrase by the Workers' Party during the last hustings.
Channel NewsAsia will air a special on the debates on political pay, "Parliament Debates Political Pay".
Singapore viewers can catch the special on Saturday from 10.30pm to 11.30pm. The programme will be repeated on Sunday at the following times: 6.00pm to 7.00pm, 12.00mn to 1.00am, and on Monday from 1.00pm to 2.00pm.
-CNA/ac
Similar threads
