Post GE 2011 Discussion
-
DesertWind:
A condo (entry Level) per Year Down the Drain ....
Hi mummy3streams,
You make perfect sense!
Still, being an accountant, I get a kick out of plucking numbers.
So I want to give a number and then wait for the \"Toto\" to open and see if I strike (ke..he..he..).
So the current ministerial pay is now SGD1.5 to SGD3m with the President at SGD4m. My very initial gut feel is that it should be a 50% cut and with the recent knowledge of the civil service pay, all the more I think this new (& final) guestimates seems about right (to me at least!).
Hence my new and final guestimate for the revised range for ministers should be between SGD750K to SGD1.5m with President at SGD2m. Again I mean the basic gross annual pay (maybe with or without bonuses I dunnoo).
Compare to the HK Mr Tung, US President and the ANZ/NZ PM and with the current USD/SGD exchange rate of about SGD1.23 per USD, won't loose face already lah! :imanangel:
:laugh: :laugh: -
cimman:
Could not agree with you more.frankly, I really don't care how much the ministers are paid so long as they do a good job. The higher the pay, the higher the standards held to which they are accountable.
With the recent issues on high property prices, high inflation, transport problems, overspending on YOG, it serves to highlight the fact that the ministers are not performing to expectations.
There should be KPIs for ministers and it shouldn't be just the GDP figure. They should form a committee to look into implementing KPIs for ministers. The KPIs should be reviewed annually, and not only during election years when voters voice their discontent through their votes. At least the govt took note of the discontent and retired the unpopular ministers.
:celebrate: -
Spring cleaning time for PM Lee 大扫除
-
Q1. How much does a Bank Teller earns now? How much cash does she handles one day? How come with this bank teller (whom I assume is earning only about SGD1K per month) counting "endless" money everyday, is expected to be TOP HONEST with no discrepancies at all in her balancing. And we cannot expect a TOP MINISTER to be honest in their handling of the country’s money?
Q2. How much does a maid earns now? SGD400 and people are screaming already. So many of us expect the maid to be HONEST with NO STEALING of either cash, money or handphone. How come with a TOP MINISTER, we must PAY for him to be HONEST?
Q3. The analogy of a beautiful wife to prevent straying is somehow not quite right to me. A better analogy would be to prevent a man from straying, perhaps it is to give him TWO beautiful wifes instead?
Hah…hah…hah… have a good day folks! Login off now! -
Funx3:
Nevermind, he can take 20 years to pay for one!A condo (entry Level) per Year Down the Drain ....
:laugh: :laugh: -
Whilst political appointees’ pay shd definitely be reviewed n is being reviewed, let’s not get carried away to d extreme.
D justifications consistently given from 1994 were dat:
1.\t Civil service were losing good ppl to private sector. Higher pay in private sector was a major reason.
2.\tPAP finds it hard to recruit good potential office holders coz $ not enuf to attract n retain.
3.\tAct as deterrence to corruption.
D salaries of civil service (top tier) n political appointees r linked. So by protocol, if PM wants to raise his n d Ministers’ pay, d President’s pay has to be raised first. That was wat happened towards d end of d last parliament sitting just before GE 2011. It was not debated, just announced n it was so. Wonder how many ppl missed d announcement hidden in one of d MSM pages.
1.\tI believe to maintain some standards, D political appointees MUST be accorded a decent renumeration package to reflect their office n responsibilities. But it shd not be pegged to d median of d top six or eight earners in SG, d amount has to be tempered by d intangible benefits of public service. If political appointees aspire to be in office only for monetary gain n fame, then their hearts r in d wrong place n they should be rejected at d ballot box.
2.\tD President’s pay shd be de-link with Ministers’ pay n be paid an amount commensurate with his office n responsibilities. Work-wise, he is definitely many notches below d Cabinet n his pay shd reflect dat, not purely by protocol.
3.\tLikewise, civil service pay shd be de-link from political appointees’ pay. Dis shd only affect d top tier in civil service. It’s a job like any other. They also hv families to look after. A good man with many years of experience in d civil service could be paid more than a political appointee who may come n go after every election, why not? You want to retain these ppl to keep d bureaucracy running smoothing n effectively no matter who d political appointee is. -
DesertWind:
Oh Must Experience Common Ppl Pain, than Can Really Speak for the Ppl, right?
Nevermind, he can take 20 years to pay for one!Funx3:
A condo (entry Level) per Year Down the Drain ....
:laugh: :laugh:
:evil: :evil: -
Way2GO:
I agree with you!Whilst political appointees’ pay shd definitely be reviewed n is being reviewed, let’s not get carried away to d extreme.
D justifications consistently given from 1994 were dat:
1.\t Civil service were losing good ppl to private sector. Higher pay in private sector was a major reason.
2.\tPAP finds it hard to recruit good potential office holders coz $ not enuf to attract n retain.
3.\tAct as deterrence to corruption.
D salaries of civil service (top tier) n political appointees r linked. So by protocol, if PM wants to raise his n d Ministers’ pay, d President’s pay has to be raised first. That was wat happened towards d end of d last parliament sitting just before GE 2011. It was not debated, just announced n it was so. Wonder how many ppl missed d announcement hidden in one of d MSM pages.
1.\tI believe to maintain some standards, D political appointees MUST be accorded a decent renumeration package to reflect their office n responsibilities. But it shd not be pegged to d median of d top six or eight earners in SG, d amount has to be tempered by d intangible benefits of public service. If political appointees aspire to be in office only for monetary gain n fame, then their hearts r in d wrong place n they should be rejected at d ballot box.
2.\tD President’s pay shd be de-link with Ministers’ pay n be paid an amount commensurate with his office n responsibilities. Work-wise, he is definitely many notches below d Cabinet n his pay shd reflect dat, not purely by protocol.
3.\tLikewise, civil service pay shd be de-link from political appointees’ pay. Dis shd only affect d top tier in civil service. It’s a job like any other. They also hv families to look after. A good man with many years of experience in d civil service could be paid more than a political appointee who may come n go after every election, why not? You want to retain these ppl to keep d bureaucracy running smoothing n effectively no matter who d political appointee is.
Took the words right out of my mouth. -
MummyThreeStreams:
I Agree.
I agree with you!Way2GO:
Whilst political appointees’ pay shd definitely be reviewed n is being reviewed, let’s not get carried away to d extreme.
D justifications consistently given from 1994 were dat:
1.\t Civil service were losing good ppl to private sector. Higher pay in private sector was a major reason.
2.\tPAP finds it hard to recruit good potential office holders coz $ not enuf to attract n retain.
3.\tAct as deterrence to corruption.
D salaries of civil service (top tier) n political appointees r linked. So by protocol, if PM wants to raise his n d Ministers’ pay, d President’s pay has to be raised first. That was wat happened towards d end of d last parliament sitting just before GE 2011. It was not debated, just announced n it was so. Wonder how many ppl missed d announcement hidden in one of d MSM pages.
1.\tI believe to maintain some standards, D political appointees MUST be accorded a decent renumeration package to reflect their office n responsibilities. But it shd not be pegged to d median of d top six or eight earners in SG, d amount has to be tempered by d intangible benefits of public service. If political appointees aspire to be in office only for monetary gain n fame, then their hearts r in d wrong place n they should be rejected at d ballot box.
2.\tD President’s pay shd be de-link with Ministers’ pay n be paid an amount commensurate with his office n responsibilities. Work-wise, he is definitely many notches below d Cabinet n his pay shd reflect dat, not purely by protocol.
3.\tLikewise, civil service pay shd be de-link from political appointees’ pay. Dis shd only affect d top tier in civil service. It’s a job like any other. They also hv families to look after. A good man with many years of experience in d civil service could be paid more than a political appointee who may come n go after every election, why not? You want to retain these ppl to keep d bureaucracy running smoothing n effectively no matter who d political appointee is.
Took the words right out of my mouth.
Very Logical and Sound Argument ....
But Maybe Rather Bitter to Swallow, from their End .... -
Very pleased that PM Lee is tackling the issue of ministerial pay which is a sacred cow. Also rather pleased with the appointment of our new DPM who is such a broad-minded politician. Glad to see WP winning Aljunied GRC though i personally wish that GY had stood at another area.
Holding political office is not a profession but a calling. Its for top talents who are willing to serve the people and nation and satisfaction is derived not from top pay but from respect and recognition from the people whose lives have been touched by these politicians. Top remuneration is never enough to draw top talents into the poilitical fold. In fact top talents come with top responsibilities and such talents if drawn because of top pay are actually unsuitable for political office. Its the challenging task ahead and the ability to make a difference to the lives of citizens and the nation that will entice top talents to come forward to serve and not because of pay. This point has been proven in the absence of private sector top talents from the ruling party in the recent watershed election. Instead, it was the presence of a top coporate lawyer and several others from the alternative parties that had caught the imagination of the public.
Judging from the recent statements of the political office bearers, i am hopeful of good things to come for the benefits of the people and nation. Particulary pleased with the cordial greetings from elected members of both sides of political divide as seen from the recent sworn-in and investiture. Hope this relationship can be taken up further by seeing each side as not only political opponents but also colleagues in parliament working together to enact effective policies for the long-term interest of our nation.
Hope that my offsprings can recognise the significant contributions of politicians in a parliament not devoid of charm and feelings for each other.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login