Politics of Salary Review

[red amoeba]

a small step...forced by the election results.

as usual, such a dinosaur, difficult to accept change, difficult to initiate change.

2016 will see whether the people buy this act of bandaging a sore wound.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Don't worry about me, I will surely comment. In fact, already gave away my bits to BBC Chinese yesterday but still, will write about it on TOC.

At the mean time, disappointed by what Locke has written. He should have higher standards than that. Will elaborate later.

Goh Meng Seng

P.S. If you read Chinese, here is the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/simp/world/2012/01/120104_singaporesalary.shtml

Gist of my view: The 30% reduction is within expectation but I am still puzzled why they could still get bonuses. (HK civil servants and political appointees do not get bonuses)

It is too narrow to use 1000 out of 3million people as the benchmark and to most people on the street, the income gap would be too great.

The 30% reduction may look impressive but in comparison with the US President's salary (US$400K), there is still a big gap in between.

They say the ex-Presidents of US could publish books and give talks to earn big bucks, but LKY did publish books and get invitations to give talks all over the world too.

Will such salary reduction appease Singaporeans? I believe that high ministerial salary is not the main issue which people are unhappy about. It is the matter of accountability or rather, the lack of it, which irks Singaporeans. Singaporeans would definitely have higher expectation on these highly paid ministers but when they made mistakes, eg. letting a dangerous terrorist to escape, they didn't take up the political responsibility to resign immediately and yet, gave all sorts of excuses. This is the main reason why people are unhappy.

Where is our dear leader GMS? Looking forward to his comments.

 

[kingrant]

Obviously you are really blur. You dont even know what they have been stealing from under yr nose.

See http://agcvldb4.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?actno=REVED-219

I am wonder if you are for real. MPs elected after 1995 were not entitled to pensoins (i.e. the 1997 class of MPs were not entitled to pensions). In other words, the 1991 class (including Low Thia Kiang) was the last class to be entitled to pensions and they have already hit the pension ceiling so the pension freeze does not affect them.

 

[kingrant]

As the good ole saying goes, 'Be careful what you ask for." Unfortunately, a double edged sword.

Those who escaped - WKS, MBT, RL, YCT, LBY LBH all laughing their way to the banks and Black sea, Bahamas, Riviera...

The moment i heard that they were suggesting removing the pension scheme from MPs, I smelt a rat. Pensions for MPs are institutionalised across the developed World. Its a bit of insurance to a layman who wants to partake in politics as the tenure is rather limited unlike the majority of jobs. So now only the rich and part-timers will come forward as MPs. Its a blow to the opposition and reduces the potential pool. I saw the full report and there was no clear argument except to state that CPF is the proper superannuation scheme. For the PAP MPs it is not much a porblem as they would get invited to property soft launches all the time as well a ready job due to their connection to the govt.

 

[rusty]

It should have been a referendum where the employers have a say instead of a review by a few cronies.

 

[PMPunk]

Don't worry about me, I will surely comment. In fact, already gave away my bits to BBC Chinese yesterday but still, will write about it on TOC.

At the mean time, disappointed by what Locke has written. He should have higher standards than that. Will elaborate later.

Goh Meng Seng

P.S. If you read Chinese, here is the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/simp/world/2012/01/120104_singaporesalary.shtml

Gist of my view: The 30% reduction is within expectation but I am still puzzled why they could still get bonuses. (HK civil servants and political appointees do not get bonuses)

It is too narrow to use 1000 out of 3million people as the benchmark and to most people on the street, the income gap would be too great.

The 30% reduction may look impressive but in comparison with the US President's salary (US$400K), there is still a big gap in between.

They say the ex-Presidents of US could publish books and give talks to earn big bucks, but LKY did publish books and get invitations to give talks all over the world too.

Will such salary reduction appease Singaporeans? I believe that high ministerial salary is not the main issue which people are unhappy about. It is the matter of accountability or rather, the lack of it, which irks Singaporeans. Singaporeans would definitely have higher expectation on these highly paid ministers but when they made mistakes, eg. letting a dangerous terrorist to escape, they didn't take up the political responsibility to resign immediately and yet, gave all sorts of excuses. This is the main reason why people are unhappy.

Why your stand so different from NSP's? Are you still with NSP?

 

[aurvandil]

The salary cut was a political exercise from the start.

The objective was to regain the moral high ground for the PAP.

Viewed from this light, the cut has FAILED to achieve its objectives.

So far, the public reaction seems to be that political salaries are still too high. in the eyes of many Singaporeans, the performance of the PAP has been below expectations. Iconic failures like the SMRT breakdowns and flooding before Christmas makes it hard to sell the koyok that the PAP is doing well and delivering the goods to the people.

Instead of regaining the moral high ground, the outcome of the cuts is that it reinfoces the public perception that the PAP is self serving and that this is all wayang. Although they are not doing their job well, they still continue to pay themselves ridiculously high salaries .

 

[ssrrvv11]

Gist of my view: The 30% reduction may look impressive but in comparison with the US President's salary (US$400K), there is still a big gap in between.

They say the ex-Presidents of US could publish books and give talks to earn big bucks, but LKY did publish books and get invitations to give talks all over the world too.

who else but the resident clown goh meng seng doing the 马后炮. he didn't post his 'within expectation' prediction before the actual announcement so now trying to save some face by doing the 马后炮.

gms, is tan kin lian's 5% presidential election votes also 'within your expert expectation'

what about nsp 'epic fail' in GE2011, in particular your own performance in tampines? also 'within your expert expectation'

 

[Unrepented]

1. How many big corps are there in sinkieland with big portfolios?
2. Who are they?
3. GLCs considered private sector? Operating in a monopoly=>easy profits=>higher pay
4. Who appoints CEOs and determine their package?
5. How about contractors to GLCs?

Just going in circles in a circus, if the above are include in deriving the medium income.

......... Many heads of GLC, particularly publicly listed ones have salaries at or exceeding this. I have no problem using the medium income of the top 1000 locals, to determine what these salaries should be as a start but moving on using this as the benchmark will not give incentive to improve the income inequality of the populace. Although I do not normally agree with NSP, benchmarking to the median income of the entire population will definitely help in this aspect. Also over time, it should be an inculcated culture through our education system not to hanker for unbounded wealth expectation but a good level is enough attitude. You should not even be talking about sacrifice.

 

[sleaguepunter]

who will go bbc website to read news in chinese? bbc ban in PRC right? so only oversea chineses can read it on bbc.

政治评论员吴明盛, the bbc correspondent give you this title or u give yourself?

i cannot find your comments in the english version so instead giving your comments to at least a third of the world population, you restrict it to maybe 30-50million oversea chinese who i doubt even know about the bbc chinese website.

 

[GoldenDragon]

Don't worry about me, I will surely comment. In fact, already gave away my bits to BBC Chinese yesterday but still, will write about it on TOC.

At the mean time, disappointed by what Locke has written. He should have higher standards than that. Will elaborate later.

Goh Meng Seng

P.S. If you read Chinese, here is the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/simp/world/2012/01/120104_singaporesalary.shtml

Gist of my view: The 30% reduction is within expectation but I am still puzzled why they could still get bonuses. (HK civil servants and political appointees do not get bonuses)

It is too narrow to use 1000 out of 3million people as the benchmark and to most people on the street, the income gap would be too great.

The 30% reduction may look impressive but in comparison with the US President's salary (US$400K), there is still a big gap in between.

They say the ex-Presidents of US could publish books and give talks to earn big bucks, but LKY did publish books and get invitations to give talks all over the world too.

Will such salary reduction appease Singaporeans? I believe that high ministerial salary is not the main issue which people are unhappy about. It is the matter of accountability or rather, the lack of it, which irks Singaporeans. Singaporeans would definitely have higher expectation on these highly paid ministers but when they made mistakes, eg. letting a dangerous terrorist to escape, they didn't take up the political responsibility to resign immediately and yet, gave all sorts of excuses. This is the main reason why people are unhappy.

Thank you, boss.

I opine it is not the salary per se that matters. What matters most is, are we paying the right person? Are these chaps worthy of their salaries? From events of the past, most don't even deserve 25% of their salaries and perks.

 

[ssrrvv11]

who will go bbc website to read news in chinese? bbc ban in PRC right? so only oversea chineses can read it on bbc.

政治评论员吴明盛, the bbc correspondent give you this title or u give yourself?

i cannot find your comments in the english version so instead giving your comments to at least a third of the world population, you restrict it to maybe 30-50million oversea chinese who i doubt even know about the bbc chinese website.

政治流浪汉 吴明盛 suits him better.

 

[HedgeTrader]

I opine it is not the salary per se that matters. What matters most is, are we paying the right person? Are these chaps worthy of their salaries? From events of the past, most don't even deserve 25% of their salaries and perks.

They talk cock about talent. Look at Lim Hng Kiang, Lim Swee Say and all the fuckers and jokers like them. Talent my lanjiao KNN

 

[GoldenDragon]

Talent my lanjiao KNN

Bro, all lanjiaos are talented! Last time, some more talented than others. But with some drugs available now, not-so-talented lj of the past can catch up.

 

[4Sgie]

I was surprised reading that their previous bonuses can be upped to the top of 14 months. Mind you, not 14th month but 14 months in all.

I mean, what justification was there for this figure? It is mindboggling to say the least. I was trying to cover more from the news release but couldn't.

Why and how was this piece of info was kept away from the public for so long? I mean, if the people had know of this prior to the 2011 election, they would have gotten more hell from the electorates.

 

[rusty]

and some talented lanjios may end up like this

 

[kingrant]

I took a look at the previous White Paper that they used to support all those enormous payouts and pensions and I began to really appreciate yr point.

It's like they put that up on a whiteboard and started reviewing it from head to toe. So the most convenient starting points and stopping points were those that had numbers, thus the 1/3 became 40%, the 2/3 etc became 1000 etc.

If they had started with a blank roll of brown paper, they wld have a blank slate or green field and it could have begun with even a basic fundamental question: on what basis to set the pay? and could possibly have considered hard on why not comparing with the world leaders.

Definitely they have trashed all those public feedback gathered as hogwash. The result is as you have suspected - a political compromise and a massive hoodwink of the people.

Read the White Paper in total when it is released shortly and you will likely come to a single conclusion - this a is not a review that began with a white canvas. It is a review that is highly political in nature and reverse engineered to meet the undisclosed brief.. Here are 2 points that will show;

1) Review actually did not contradict or dispute that the salaries are out of whack or not the market rates. It actually states that there should be a 40% discount to reflect the ethos of holding a Public Office. The MR4 is the benchmark used to pit against the median income of top 1000 income earners. It could have been top 500, 750 or even 5000.

2) The National Bonus component meets nearly all calls by the opposition in recent times. This only amounts to 15% to a top performer and that requires all sub-categories to fail which is unlikely. If only 2 are not met, then the total package is reduced by 7%. But more importantly it gives excellent bragging rights and cuts away any further claims by opposition that it not pegged to economic wellbeing of Singaporans.

 

[zhihau]

It's like they put that up on a whiteboard and started reviewing it from head to toe. So the most convenient starting points and stopping points were those that had numbers, thus the 1/3 became 40%, the 2/3 etc became 1000 etc.

they began with the end in mind?

 

[scroobal]

I thought it was interesting that the corruption reason was not mentioned in this review. Which in the first place is a silly excuse for a public political office of this nature.

In Singapore, the tenure lasts as long as you-know-whos favour you. as always, it remains as the elites vs the working class. then there is the dated argument that ministers have to be paid high salaries so that the would not succumb to corruption. when pay gets reduced, Singapore would raise higher on the corruption index. indirectly, this says that they are in it for the money. i concur that Singapore needs more CSMs

 

[scroobal]

I thought it was "marvellous" how they actually addressed all the complaints and still managed to say that it is market rate but they only take 60% as an act of charity to Singaporeans.

I anticipated this.This is the killer part in entirety .Ministers salary review is merely window dressing.With this one stroke PAP wants to take the wind off the opposition who goes into politics as a career option.It's gonna take a lot of youth off who otherwise may take up politics against PAP.On the other hand PAP can always reward it's MP with directorships in many of it's crony companies.Once again,money politics wins the day for PAP.