Daily Lessons from Life 18 January 2012 - Wrap Up on Ministerial Salaries Review Parliamentary Debates

No specific headline to comment on but a general wrap up on the hotly debated Ministerial Salaries Review

Lessons for me are:

1. the incumbent continued to hold on to its central theme of: you need to pay high enough salaries to attract capable and committed Singaporeans to serve the public;

2. that the incumbent was eager to adopt the Ministerial Review Committee's proposal of a NEW Pay Scheme with a lower pay (fixed + variable), but NOT, in my opinion, a 'pay cut' as some argued it shows that it too understand the the OLD Pay Scheme was not, despite 17 years of pointing out its MERITS and desirability in order for Singapore to NOT fall into a banana 3rd world state, is NOT acceptable by the voters!;

3. flaws or holes were detected in the many defences put up by the incumbent:

e.g. pegging to the PRIVATE sector's pay and claims of sacrifices of loss of personal time with family - well, many CEOs or senior executives of the private sector TOO work very long hours, flying here and there, and have VERY LITTLE TIME with the family too! So, where is the 'sacrifice'?

Also it is important to focus on the +ve instead of the perceived -ve. That one is making a BIGGER impact serving as Ministers instead of just a highly paid CEO or executives of a private enterprise. Yes?

In addition, managing priorities will be a KEY skill of a minister. So, he or she SHOULD be able to juggle between family time and public time well. IF NOT, he or she needs to improve in this area. Just like the busy executives who achieved monetary successes but suffered a broken marriage and family who DID NOT or COULD NOT manage his or her priorities.

Besides, when the children are grown up, they would want to have their own lives and families. So, the family time will be quality time instead of quantity! Yes?

e.g. claiming that high enough pay is important to attract capable and committed Singaporeans to step up to serve as ministers as they too need to provide for their families, put their children to good universities and live a good quality of life.

We have a missed opportunity to set the standard for: what is 'good quality of life'? Can S$500k/year tax free be able to afford the ministers and their families this? As to putting their kids to good university, it is not about money but about abilities and Singapore DOES has a fairly good scholarship system where even the PM's children have access to!

In political office, COMMITMENT must be No. 1 consideration followed by CAPABILITY.

e.g. while the PM cited a few current ministers who did suffered a drop in income, we need to look at EVERYONE of them IF we really want to say for sure that ALL the ministers take lower total pay home when they join the government from the private sector.

e.g. about having a clean wage and that ministers should not be made to suffer as they DO NOT have as much avenues to generate income after they left office. Unlike in the USA where the ex-President can go on a speaking circuit and command US$250k an appearance!

The fact is: MANY retired (or gracefully asked to exit) ministers are assigned to Advisers or Board of Directors or whatever high power job. This is a fact. Of course, if the government wants to clear ALL doubts that Singapore ministers DO NOT have much opportunities to make MONEY, it can show HOW little these ex-ministers are paid for their jobs after retiring from office. e.g. ESM Goh, Ex-MM Lee, ex-DPM Wong, ex-FM Yeo, etc...

e.g. it is a THANKLESS job and mistakes may be mades since the ministers are human being afterall

Well. Nobody is perfect. As long as there is no lack of trying and be as transparent as one can be, the public will know who is really trying to create a greater good for the majority of Singaporeans though the results may not be a satisfactory as one planned for.

4. for whatever it is worth, the democracy process has kicked in. The parliamentary debate has been conducted and Singaporeans get to read and learn as much as they care to read and learn. Most agreed that this is the step in the right direction. I believe the ULTIMATE test will be: will this be another emotive and hot topic comes GE 2016?

If it is, then perhaps the government has ONCE again failed to CONVINCE Singaporeans that 'high enough pay is critical to attract high calibre and 'committed' people to serve in the government'. Or simply that Singaporeans are NOT intelligent or educated enough to know WHAT is good for themselves!!


Holes are still there for some to see. Will the government tries to influence the mindset of the next generation of political aspirants that 'sense of public duty is No. 1 while fixed pay of S$500k/year tax free is the national standard for a 'good quality of life, putting children to good universities, and providing for the family!'