Ministerial Salary Review

[concern2]

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:


Thanks for sharing, Strparent!

\"It's time to bite the bullet, not one but three...\" but, yah, still top earners..

[Chenonceau]

You expect them to be bottom earners?

[corneyAmber]

Chenonceau:

You expect them to be bottom earners?

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

[Funz]

Chenonceau:

You expect them to be bottom earners?

Gosh, lack of sleep is making me misread earners as cleaners.

[3Boys]

Edureach:

Good that our PM has taken this step to reconnect with the people. Also like the fact that our President had accepted the commitee's recommendations in such a quick manner.


Personally, all politicians holding office are statesmen. Financial and personal sacrifices are to be expected. In return, they are accorded with respect and the esteem the offices hold which financial rewards in itself cannot satisfy. Without their leadership and sacrifices, our nation cannot prosper and move together regardless of one's social standing as one people. Nation building must be seen to start from the very top. Previous PAP leaders were seen to be frugal and had great support from the people. This is a major step taken by this current leadership to correct a policy error and is one i am happy about.

Occupations like social services, uniform groups, government medical staff and education service also require some form of sacrifices. If all these professionals would to demand higher pay, they should take the risk to venture into private sector. Thus comparing the very top pay the top ceos draw in the glcs/top public listed cos is not instructive at all. Major sacrifices must be seen from our leaders which is why it is not just a career but a calling! A highly competent professional with great achievements in his career may not necessarily make the cut for political office in this instance if he is too concern about remuneration. Careers as President, PM and his ministers are all extraordinary jobs meant for extraordinary people. There is glory in this area and no amount of material benefits can equate with it.

All in all, i am happy with the progress made so far by this current administration.

I fundamentally disagree with this.

The implication is that paying low wages somehow ensures that only the right candidates come forth to serve.

I think across the world, if you look at all political systems, the evidence for this is scant.

The only reason I support the reduction in wages for our leaders is that is provides them with the moral authority needed to lead, not because I think that we are going to get any better government or governance. Quite the contrary, I think.

[Chenonceau]

Funz:

Chenonceau:

You expect them to be bottom earners?

Gosh, lack of sleep is making me misread earners as cleaners.

Whoa! That means... ok... I can't say it. But it is still better than this...
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2011/10/seen-on-facebook-not-quite-sure-what-kind-of-cleaning-service-this-is.html

[HVR]

3Boys:

Edureach:

Good that our PM has taken this step to reconnect with the people. Also like the fact that our President had accepted the commitee's recommendations in such a quick manner.


Personally, all politicians holding office are statesmen. Financial and personal sacrifices are to be expected. In return, they are accorded with respect and the esteem the offices hold which financial rewards in itself cannot satisfy. Without their leadership and sacrifices, our nation cannot prosper and move together regardless of one's social standing as one people. Nation building must be seen to start from the very top. Previous PAP leaders were seen to be frugal and had great support from the people. This is a major step taken by this current leadership to correct a policy error and is one i am happy about.

Occupations like social services, uniform groups, government medical staff and education service also require some form of sacrifices. If all these professionals would to demand higher pay, they should take the risk to venture into private sector. Thus comparing the very top pay the top ceos draw in the glcs/top public listed cos is not instructive at all. Major sacrifices must be seen from our leaders which is why it is not just a career but a calling! A highly competent professional with great achievements in his career may not necessarily make the cut for political office in this instance if he is too concern about remuneration. Careers as President, PM and his ministers are all extraordinary jobs meant for extraordinary people. There is glory in this area and no amount of material benefits can equate with it.

All in all, i am happy with the progress made so far by this current administration.

I fundamentally disagree with this.

The implication is that paying low wages somehow ensures that only the right candidates come forth to serve.

I think across the world, if you look at all political systems, the evidence for this is scant.

The only reason I support the reduction in wages for our leaders is that is provides them with the moral authority needed to lead, not because I think that we are going to get any better government or governance. Quite the contrary, I think.

I share your view but sadly there are some people who think ministers' pay should be very much lower still. How low can we go? 10K per month? Who honestly think George Yeo and Raymond Lim are now earning less than they used to do previously? Even their current pay is 50% lower I am sure they would think the trade off -more privacy, less public scrutiny, etc - is worthwhile.

My point is we cannot attract the right person to serve just by saying 'come on, you are the one, it's a noble call and pay should not really matter'. It just wont work.

[3Boys]

HVR:

I share your view but sadly there are some people who think ministers' pay should be very much lower still. How low can we go? 10K per month? Who honestly think George Yeo and Raymond Lim are now earning less than they used to do previously? Even their current pay is 50% lower I am sure they would think the trade off -more privacy, less public scrutiny, etc - is worthwhile.

My point is we cannot attract the right person to serve just by saying 'come on, you are the one, it's a noble call and pay should not really matter'. It just wont work.

Therein lies the politics of envy and hypocrisy. It is the unfortunate reality, but this reduction in pay will draw the bulk of the sting of criticism, and hopefully put the government back on the front foot and back to governing, instead of fighting a rearguard action. Quite masterful politicking from the PM, if I may say so. But it comes from the heart, I believe, he was already giving away a chunk of his salary to charity anyway.

[verykiasu2010]

Uniquely Singapore !

[corneyAmber]

3Boys:

Edureach:

Good that our PM has taken this step to reconnect with the people. Also like the fact that our President had accepted the commitee's recommendations in such a quick manner.


Personally, all politicians holding office are statesmen. Financial and personal sacrifices are to be expected. In return, they are accorded with respect and the esteem the offices hold which financial rewards in itself cannot satisfy. Without their leadership and sacrifices, our nation cannot prosper and move together regardless of one's social standing as one people. Nation building must be seen to start from the very top. Previous PAP leaders were seen to be frugal and had great support from the people. This is a major step taken by this current leadership to correct a policy error and is one i am happy about.

Occupations like social services, uniform groups, government medical staff and education service also require some form of sacrifices. If all these professionals would to demand higher pay, they should take the risk to venture into private sector. Thus comparing the very top pay the top ceos draw in the glcs/top public listed cos is not instructive at all. Major sacrifices must be seen from our leaders which is why it is not just a career but a calling! A highly competent professional with great achievements in his career may not necessarily make the cut for political office in this instance if he is too concern about remuneration. Careers as President, PM and his ministers are all extraordinary jobs meant for extraordinary people. There is glory in this area and no amount of material benefits can equate with it.

All in all, i am happy with the progress made so far by this current administration.

I fundamentally disagree with this.

The implication is that paying low wages somehow ensures that only the right candidates come forth to serve.

I think across the world, if you look at all political systems, the evidence for this is scant.

The only reason I support the reduction in wages for our leaders is that is provides them with the moral authority needed to lead, not because I think that we are going to get any better government or governance. Quite the contrary, I think.

I believe the above argument premised on the fact that all other selection criteria for the government leaders remained the same and assumed acceptable and the only one that needed twigging was the high wages.

Incidentally after the review for reduction, the wages are not considered low by global standards, I would say more equitable, so this statement is not exactly accurate as well:

The implication is that paying low wages somehow ensures that only the right candidates come forth to serve. (should be \"lower\"?)

And \"right\" means different things to different people.
I read \"right\" for you means better in capability and you are not wrong if wages is the only criteria to attract such capable people. The common saying is 'pay peanuts get monkeys'.
\"right \" for most ppl now means \"right mindset\" to serve and that assumes the person selected should already be capable(filtered by the leadership criteria) and only lacking in mindset as it may be clouded by the high wages previously. Assuming well paid people will perform at their best is also a wrong assumption. We have already seen a few cases where performance is not at the best too.

So my take is if we find very capable people and they reject the role because the wages have been revised downwards, then better not have them on board because running a country is not a money-making job, it requires some special spirit. If we find a less capable one but with the special spirit booster to drive him/her to do things in the best interest of the country, we are still better off. And we are talking about equitable wages, not low wages here. Of course there are still netizens who are quipping about the wages not low enough, I will ignore this group for now.