Singapore
File photo of the Istana. (Photo: Elizabeth Neo)
05 Jul 2023 01:25PM (Updated: 05 Jul 2023 03:26PM)
SINGAPORE: A total of 413 companies in Singapore with more than S$500 million (US$370 million) in shareholders’ equity have filed CEO or managing director information with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA).
About 40 per cent of these CEOs or managing directors, or about 165, are Singapore citizens, said Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Lawrence Wong on Tuesday (Jul 4).
https://www.sammyboy.com/javascript:;
Mr Wong was writing in response to a parliamentary question by Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NMP) Leong Mun Wai (Progress Singapore Party), who asked how many such companies have Singaporean chief executives.
Potential presidential candidates looking to qualify under the private sector service requirement must have served for at least three years as chief executive of these companies.
Those in the public sector must have held office – for at least three years – as a minister, chief justice, Speaker of the House, attorney-general or permanent secretary among others. Chief executives of key statutory boards or government-owned companies like Temasek also qualify.
It was revealed in parliament in May that there are around 50 public service positions that may fulfil the public sector service requirement to run in Singapore's next presidential election.
Potential candidates must also satisfy the committee that they are people “of integrity, good character and reputation”.
A Presidential Elections Committee - made up of members such as chairpersons of the Public Service Commission and Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority - determines whether candidates are eligible to run.
Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam and businessman George Goh, founder of Harvey Norman Ossia, have both announced their intention to run for the presidency.
Replying to a separate question on Tuesday, Minister-in-charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing also explained why it is inappropriate to compare or impose the same requirements for the private and public sectors.
Member of Parliament (MP) Jamus Lim (Workers’ Party – Sengkang) had asked Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong about the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates, which includes a condition for profitability throughout the entire period of the candidate’s service as chief executive.
He asked why an equivalent criterion to measure successful leadership is not included for public sector candidates.
Responding on behalf of Mr Lee, Mr Chan said the criteria was amended in 2017 after considering the Constitutional Commission’s 2016 report, which made recommendations on specific aspects of the Elected Presidency.
“For candidates relying on the public sector service requirement track, the Commission had considered whether performance criteria should be included as an additional factor for consideration and did not recommend doing so,” he said. “The Government accepted the Commission’s recommendation.”
Mr Chan said that while the Commission proposed a performance criterion for private sector candidates, it was of the view that there were "no measurable standards" against which the performance of public sector candidates may be assessed.
“This is unlike the private sector service requirement, where there are financial performance indicators, such as profitability, that can serve as an objective assessment on how the applicants have performed in the companies with them at the helm,” he said.
He also said that while the Commission acknowledged that the performance of public sector organisations can, to a limited extent, be measured, these performance indicators were likely to be representative of only a part of the organisation’s work.
“These indicators may not reflect the success of the policies implemented by these public sector organisations, which sometimes take a significant amount of time to bear fruit,” he said.
Lastly, Mr Chan noted that the Commission’s view was that the list of qualifying public sector offices was "tightly drawn". This would have provided candidates who had served in these offices with the experience of leading “substantial organisations with sizeable workforces”, dealing with “complex matters having a wide-reaching public dimension” and grappling with “the contrary pulls and pressures of government decision-making".
He said: “In summary, while the private and public sector service requirement tracks are both aimed at identifying candidates with the necessary skills and experience for the office of the President, the nature of the work in the private and public sector are different.
“It would be inappropriate to compare or impose the same requirements for both tracks.”
165 firms with over S$500 million in shareholders’ equity headed by Singaporean CEO, managing director
Potential presidential candidates looking to qualify under the private sector service requirement must have served for at least three years as chief executive of these companies.
File photo of the Istana. (Photo: Elizabeth Neo)
05 Jul 2023 01:25PM (Updated: 05 Jul 2023 03:26PM)
SINGAPORE: A total of 413 companies in Singapore with more than S$500 million (US$370 million) in shareholders’ equity have filed CEO or managing director information with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA).
About 40 per cent of these CEOs or managing directors, or about 165, are Singapore citizens, said Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Lawrence Wong on Tuesday (Jul 4).
https://www.sammyboy.com/javascript:;
Mr Wong was writing in response to a parliamentary question by Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NMP) Leong Mun Wai (Progress Singapore Party), who asked how many such companies have Singaporean chief executives.
Potential presidential candidates looking to qualify under the private sector service requirement must have served for at least three years as chief executive of these companies.
Those in the public sector must have held office – for at least three years – as a minister, chief justice, Speaker of the House, attorney-general or permanent secretary among others. Chief executives of key statutory boards or government-owned companies like Temasek also qualify.
It was revealed in parliament in May that there are around 50 public service positions that may fulfil the public sector service requirement to run in Singapore's next presidential election.
Potential candidates must also satisfy the committee that they are people “of integrity, good character and reputation”.
A Presidential Elections Committee - made up of members such as chairpersons of the Public Service Commission and Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority - determines whether candidates are eligible to run.
Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam and businessman George Goh, founder of Harvey Norman Ossia, have both announced their intention to run for the presidency.
Replying to a separate question on Tuesday, Minister-in-charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing also explained why it is inappropriate to compare or impose the same requirements for the private and public sectors.
Member of Parliament (MP) Jamus Lim (Workers’ Party – Sengkang) had asked Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong about the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates, which includes a condition for profitability throughout the entire period of the candidate’s service as chief executive.
He asked why an equivalent criterion to measure successful leadership is not included for public sector candidates.
Responding on behalf of Mr Lee, Mr Chan said the criteria was amended in 2017 after considering the Constitutional Commission’s 2016 report, which made recommendations on specific aspects of the Elected Presidency.
“For candidates relying on the public sector service requirement track, the Commission had considered whether performance criteria should be included as an additional factor for consideration and did not recommend doing so,” he said. “The Government accepted the Commission’s recommendation.”
Mr Chan said that while the Commission proposed a performance criterion for private sector candidates, it was of the view that there were "no measurable standards" against which the performance of public sector candidates may be assessed.
“This is unlike the private sector service requirement, where there are financial performance indicators, such as profitability, that can serve as an objective assessment on how the applicants have performed in the companies with them at the helm,” he said.
He also said that while the Commission acknowledged that the performance of public sector organisations can, to a limited extent, be measured, these performance indicators were likely to be representative of only a part of the organisation’s work.
“These indicators may not reflect the success of the policies implemented by these public sector organisations, which sometimes take a significant amount of time to bear fruit,” he said.
Lastly, Mr Chan noted that the Commission’s view was that the list of qualifying public sector offices was "tightly drawn". This would have provided candidates who had served in these offices with the experience of leading “substantial organisations with sizeable workforces”, dealing with “complex matters having a wide-reaching public dimension” and grappling with “the contrary pulls and pressures of government decision-making".
He said: “In summary, while the private and public sector service requirement tracks are both aimed at identifying candidates with the necessary skills and experience for the office of the President, the nature of the work in the private and public sector are different.
“It would be inappropriate to compare or impose the same requirements for both tracks.”
