"Meritocracy" the PAP way.

[Confuseous]

This meritocracy question has been asked over the years on the brow-raising senior appointments of various government-linked people in the private sectors (just think of the number of inexperienced ex-civil servants and ex-military, navy and airforce personnel who were hired by some prominent GLCs and TLCs and the number of MPs without business experience being invited to sit on the boards of listed companies).

The recent appointment of Desmond Kuek as the new CEO of the beleaguered SMRT is yet another interesting example. Desmond’s experience in a nutshell before becoming the head of a public-listed transport company can be summed up as ex-civil servant and ex-army man. He was Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources and Chief of Army prior to that. Did he have any business or corporate experience in running a public-listed transport company? The answer is No.

In many other developed countries, there would have been a proper recruitment process to headhunt candidates with the relevant experience and merits before the CEO is appointed to a public-listed company. Was this done by SMRT which is 54% owned by Temasek Holdings? Is Desmond the best man for this difficult job to take care of the nation’s transport issues and to ensure financial returns to the company’s shareholders? On what merit was he appointed? And by whom? And today’s Straits Times reported that Desmond may be appointing more of his own kind by tapping some senior Singapore Armed Forces officers to join SMRT. How qualified are they?

The meteoric rise and rise of the unpopular Chan Chun Sing is one that continues to baffle many Singaporeans. It is highly doubtful that he would have gotten into Parliament on his own if he had stood in a single member constituency. Truth is he got in because he was in the unchallenged Tanjong Pagar GRC helmed by Lee Kuan Yew. Within 16 months, he shot into prominence and made the transition from being Chief of Army to Acting Minister for Social and Family Development and Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Defence.

Since then, he has often been in the limelight and many Singaporeans have cringed at his shockingly poor English and his inane sayings. Who can forget his head-scratching carrot cake metaphor?

- http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/meritocracy-pap-style-do-they-walk-the-talk/

 

[blissquek]

I disagree...the selection process will ensure unswerving obedience to the Papacy.

 

[ray_of_hope]

The meteoric rise and rise of the unpopular Chan Chun Sing is one that continues to baffle many Singaporeans.

- http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/meritocracy-pap-style-do-they-walk-the-talk/

Is he unpopular? Really? TOC says "many Singaporeans"? Seems like TOC is assuming the same mantle of that "Dan" who claimed to speak for an entire estate in a dispute with a neighbour. People only speak for themselves. They don't speak for anyone else.

By the way, which minister is popular? Maybe TOC can do an article to rank ministers in terms of their popularity in TOC's eyes.

 

[watchman8]

Is he unpopular? Really? TOC says "many Singaporeans"? Seems like TOC is assuming the same mantle of that "Dan" who claimed to speak for an entire estate in a dispute with a neighbour. People only speak for themselves. They don't speak for anyone else.

By the way, which minister is popular? Maybe TOC can do an article to rank ministers in terms of their popularity in TOC's eyes.

I think Tharman should rank rather high. He very seldom get himself involved in nasty politicking.

CCS started as a joke but he is well taken care of becos his is given "sure-win" ministry, the MSF.

 

[ray_of_hope]

I think Tharman should rank rather high. He very seldom get himself involved in nasty politicking.

CCS started as a joke but he is well taken care of becos his is given "sure-win" ministry, the MSF.

I have nothing against Tharman, nor do I have anything against CCS. However, I think Tharman dropped the ball not too long ago when he said people could buy an HDB flat with a salary of $1k a month. That was the point when his popularity started to decline. On the other hand, has CCS made any glaring mistakes? In fact, as against his predecessor, it seems that he has been much tougher in imposing social controls on those who can enter the casinos. That is not a bad thing. It is a good thing.

Frankly, I cannot see any of the current crop of ministers being less unpopular than CCS. If Raymond Lim was still in Cabinet he would probably stand out as the least unpopular minister.

From the batch that came in at GE 2011 CCS's rise has't been that meteoric. If one compares that with the aftermath of previous elections, the pace is similar to others. So, the apparent "baffle[ment]" at CCS's "meteoric rise" appear to largely exists in the minds of the folks of TOC.

 

[PrinceCharming]

and many Singaporeans have cringed at his shockingly poor English and his inane sayings. Who can forget his head-scratching carrot cake metaphor?

Cannot be leh...Chan Chun Sing is President Scorer in 1988, you know. He got study in Came-bridge. Moreover he got degree in econs. Very powderful OK.....

 

[jw5]

LOL. Meritocracy.
For years they have been practising the art of who is on your side, who is "with you", who agrees with you.
This has of course been acquired and inherited by many.

 

[laksaboy]

If anyone thinks Singapore practises meritocracy, I have a simple rebuttal: Wong Kan Seng.

 

[syed putra]

Ze trouble wiz zis meritocrazy ziztem is zat zey all sink zose wiz ze best test resultz are ze best for ze top jobs.
In ze vest, zose wiz good rezults ends up in research outfits. Over here, they become bureaucrats.

 

[ILovePAP]

Pap recruitment policy is still the most viable. Do you want a Yaw Shin Leong to be Ceo of a Glc?

 

[halsey02]

Pap recruitment policy is still the most viable. Do you want a Yaw Shin Leong to be Ceo of a Glc?

Yes! at least the cock up & screw up or screw who...WE CAN SACK HIM on the spot!, rather than all those shadowy meritocracy. So, Palmer is qualified to be a CEO of a GLC too?? both uses what's between the legs to think.

Who doesn't know PAP recruitment policy..unless we have just dropped in from Mars..then, what to do?

 

[Narong Wongwan]

PAP uses imperial examination system to recruit 'talents'.
This system is proven for thousands of years in china......and suited to us as we are a absolute monarchy.

 

[mojito]

If anyone thinks Singapore practises meritocracy, I have a simple rebuttal: Wong Kan Seng.

And if anyone thinks Singapore practices cronyism, i too have a rebuttal: the lovable MG Chan Chun Sing!

 

[whoami]

If anyone thinks Singapore practises meritocracy, I have a simple rebuttal: Wong Kan Seng.

Read my siggy...

 

[winnipegjets]

Pap recruitment policy is still the most viable. Do you want a Yaw Shin Leong to be Ceo of a Glc?

Why not? At least, he has private sector experience.

 

[winnipegjets]

I resent that each scholar would have milked taxpayers $68 million over their lifetime. Just because they did well in exams, they are entitle to so much of our money.

 

[PrinceCharming]

I resent that each scholar would have milked taxpayers $68 million over their lifetime. Just because they did well in exams, they are entitle to so much of our money.

In feudal China, this was what happened.

Sinkieland is but a feudal state presided over by the Emperor who loves new clothes.

 

[escher]

I disagree...the selection process will ensure unswerving obedience to the Papacy.

Vote all those PAP maggots out in 2016
Cleanse Singapore of the filth and poison brought in by smear of shit on sole of shoe Lee Kuan Yew

 

[ILovePAP]

I see so many complains but no constructive ideas. PAP meritocracy system is still the best of all.

 

[Charlie99]

I resent that each scholar would have milked taxpayers $68 million over their lifetime. Just because they did well in exams, they are entitle to so much of our money.

You may be partially correct.

Not to discriminate against those who pay more or pay less income taxes.
But generally, or most of the time, those who pay a significant portion (say for example, several years ago, we in Ontario had a marginal income tax rate of 53.5%) of income taxes, are the minority (may be only less than 5% of the entire group of tax filers)