Peg ministers' salaries to those of Hong Kong's ministers
-
The pay of cabinet ministers has always been a topic of debate. Currently, the salary of cabinet ministers is pegged to that of several top professionals in Singapore. Some object to it on the grounds that the work of ministers is different from that of a lawyer or a banker. Whilst that is true to some extent, we have to compensate our ministers who are drawn from these disciplines which pay top dollars to their best workers. For the continued prosperity of Singapore, we cannot expect any less than the best of these professionals.
Pegging ministers' salaries to local top professionals will reflect the performance of the economy and local salaries. Perhaps in addition to that, we can also peg their salaries to those of cabinet ministers in Hong Kong, our closest competitor in the region. After all, Singaporeans have to remain wage competitive and that applies across the spectrum.
Ministers do not have to worry about a salary cut. In 2002, Tung Chee Hwa earned an annual salary of US$625,641 compared to Goh Chok Tong who earned US$600,000. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/06/24/Hongkong.cabinet/index.html Given that the pay is fairly comparable, ministers do not have to fear a drop in income. On the other hand, pegging their salaries to those of our closest competitor will ensure that our ministers do not price Singapore out of the market. -
this will never ever happen at all
its for the battle against corruption, blah blah, lame government excuses for their high pay -
according to your logic... if you pay them any less, they become horribly corrupted immediately and like someone said in another post... how can we trust such horribly corrupt people?Originally posted by allentyb:
this will never ever happen at all
its for the battle against corruption, blah blah, lame government excuses for their high pay -
I agree with OM, we should pay annual salary of: PM SGD 100 million, our MM 100 million, our SM 75 million and other Ministers 50 million. In that way, they will give better performance and we won't have any corruption. Then we will have the highest paid politicians in this planet.
-
you mean the universe?Originally posted by maurizio13:I agree with OM, we should pay annual salary of: PM SGD 100 million, our MM 100 million, our SM 75 million and other Ministers 50 million. In that way, they will give better performance and we won't have any corruption. Then we will have the highest paid politicians in this planet.
-
Are there other legislative council members there making that kind of indecent salary? Or is the Chief Executive the only person making those kind of salary?
Would Long Hair finally cave into conformity? Perhaps his prospective Legco salary of more than US$6,000 a month - considerably more than he has earned in previous employment as a decorator, a waiter and a bartender - would prove a temptation too large to resist. Such a boost in income would allow him to move out of his 300-square-foot apartment in a public housing estate into more fashionable quarters. In the past, Long Hair's antics had twice landed him in jail. Now, incredibly, he had landed in the halls of power. Surely, for the sake of a little street theater, he would not blow his big opportunity to become a part of the mainstream of Hong Kong's political life.
The average pay for the ministers (per year) in the Prime Minister's Office is:
Total Expenditure on Manpower for Political Appointments:
$18,381,652
Total Head Count of Political Appointments:
7
The average pay for a minister in the Prime Minister's Office is:
$18,381,652 / 7 = $2,625,950
The average salary of SGD 2,625,950 per minister in the Prime Minister's Office far exceeds the salary of USD 625,641 paid to the only high paying Chief Executive of Hong Kong.
Dr. OM, I wonder if you could answer my query about the meaning of P.Q.R.S.T.U.? I wonder if you are a quack or a wannabe.
-
Conditions in Hong Kong are not identical to those in Singapore. Your proposal will fall flat. When your proposal does not even take into consideration something as primry andcritical as this, there's no necessity to even consider the rest of your argument.
Goes into the waste paper basket liao.
Mushroom Yes!
Oxford No!!
-
Why peg to anyone's salary at all?
Why not simply show the 'formula' that PM Lee consistently insists as a 'non-discussion' topic and explain how ministers justify their wages?
The exhorbitant nature of the wages will look the part as soon as people realise that absolutely no justification nor performance indicators have been used as leverage.
Instead, generalisation in the form of internal self-praise such as "oh, he did a great job" can somehow manage to translate to a 6-figure sum.
It seems our ministers have already started the perverted trend of making EXHORBITANT SALARIES the norm for senior civil servants. Corruption aside, isn't the mindset now warped into assuming that high office comes with SUPERSCALE salary? Are they serving the nation or serving themselves?
Is it therefore any wonder why the civil service is unable to attract the best talents for a lower pay package?
Isn't AndrewYap's earlier comment that the assumption of civil servants BECOMING corrupt, given a lower pay instead of their current salaries, be in fact very REAL?
Why is our PM so afraid of revealing the formula he claims is used to calculate their wages? Surely it must be referenced to some baseline? -
top business professionals dont necessarily make good ministers.
btw, how do they appraised the performance of the ministers? -
Before comparing or benchmarking, parliament should have discussed the following:-
(1) Will benchmarking against private sector's boss/business owner CEOs' salaries with iron rice-bowl public sector's wage earner be apple-to-apple comparison at all?
(2) How to evaluate talents and performances of ministers/officers and terminate services of any one found non-performing or failing to meet expectation without being affected by cronism or protectionalism.
(3) In the event of losses in investments by private sector bosses/business owner CEOs, these bosses/CEOs will suffer losses or even get the sack, how do our ministers account for failure in economic restructuring as announced over last three recessions.
(4) How to offset the generous life-long annuities over 25-30 years' retirements in the actual benchmarked talent-retaining and anti-corruption market-driven salaries to be paid to ministers/officers.
(5) In the voting of their own salaries, will the PAP MPs or at least the executive MPs abstain from voting?
If our ministers cannot answer to the above-stated criteria for benchmarking, then they are just deceiving the public and taxpayers and are not up to the quality or standard to deserve such million-dollar salaries. -
Like, GST increase to help the poor by lowering the corporate tax rate!Originally posted by robertteh:If our ministers cannot answer to the above-stated criteria for benchmarking, then they are just deceiving the public and taxpayers and are not up to the quality or standard to deserve such million-dollar salaries. -
Originally posted by BillyBong:
6 figure sum? Please! Our PM, MM and SM are paid in excess of $2.5 million a year.
Why peg to anyone's salary at all?
Why not simply show the 'formula' that PM Lee consistently insists as a 'non-discussion' topic and explain how ministers justify their wages?
The exhorbitant nature of the wages will look the part as soon as people realise that absolutely no justification nor performance indicators have been used as leverage.
Instead, generalisation in the form of internal self-praise such as "oh, he did a great job" can somehow manage to translate to a 6-figure sum.
It seems our ministers have already started the perverted trend of making EXHORBITANT SALARIES the norm for senior civil servants. Corruption aside, isn't the mindset now warped into assuming that high office comes with SUPERSCALE salary? Are they serving the nation or serving themselves?
Is it therefore any wonder why the civil service is unable to attract the best talents for a lower pay package?
Isn't AndrewYap's earlier comment that the [b]assumption of civil servants BECOMING corrupt, given a lower pay instead of their current salaries, be in fact very REAL?
Why is our PM so afraid of revealing the formula he claims is used to calculate their wages? Surely it must be referenced to some baseline? [/b] -
The importance of the Singapore Cabinet Ministers seem to be over-inflated, when compare their Job Functions to that of the Cabinet Secretaries of Hong Kong.
Hong Kong is merely a Special Administrative Region - a state within a state - and do not manage its External Defense nor Foregin Affairs - the Secretaries can be compared closer to the Town Councils but on a super scale.
Hong Hong as a Special Administrative Region is bigger in population (6,940,432) and has a bigger area (land and sea area of 1,092 sq Km) than all of Singapore put together (692.7 sq Km); making the Hong Kong Cabinet to be more efficient than our Singapore Cabinet - in terms of the annual productive output to the numbers employed in the Cabinet, Civil Service, and local admiistrators.
The Hong Kong Cabinet has one Chief Executive and 14 Cabinet Secretaries managing the entire Hong Kong - and without any further expenses to have District Mayors; and with a Legislative Council consisting of 60 seats.
Comparatively, the Singapore Cabinet has one Prime Minister has 16 Cabinet Ministers, 1 MM and 1 SM, and with FIVE Mayors running enlarged Constituencies, with a Parliament of 84 seats (of which 82 are held by the Ruling Party).
The Hong Kong Administration manages an economy with a labor force of 3.63 million; a GDP of US$253.1 Billion; and Reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold valued at US$132 Billion.
The Singapore Administration manages an economy with a labor force of 2.4 million; a GDP of US$138.6 Billion; and a Reserves of Foregin Exchange and Gold valued at US$134.6 Billion.
Comparing the wages paid to those in the Singapore and Hong Cabinet - we see the following figures :
Singapore Prime Minister's BASIC Salary: US$1,100,000 per year
Hong Kong Chief Executive: US$416,615 per year
Singapore Minister's BASIC Salary: US$655,530 - US$819,124
Hong Kong Cabinet Secretaries: US$278,538 - US$315,077
Comparing the Hong Kong Chief Executive's salary with Senior Minister GCT is not realistic; and if Singapore Ministers are drawn from the business community - it is hardly the norm of local companies to pay such high salaries that the Ministers are paid.
In any case, the Hong Kong cabinet are similarly filled by talents from the cream of their Community - and not necessarily Scholars only - Dollar for Dollar, Hong Kong seems to be getting a bigge bang for every dollar paid to their Administrators
If the salary of the Singapore Government has to be pegged to Hong Kong, it will be a deep cut to filter out the humbug that Singaporeans have been fed with to justify the high wages - that its purpose is to stop corruption.
In actual fact, the very reason of stopping corruption is merely to legitimize the raiding of the Reserves that has been painstakingly built-up over the last 45 years, and it is heart breaking that this nest egg should fall into someone else's hands.
They may as well "make hay, while the sun continue to shine". -
It goes to show our PAP gov is corrupted in a indirect manner.......Originally posted by allentyb:
this will never ever happen at all
its for the battle against corruption, blah blah, lame government excuses for their high pay -
6 figure PER MONTH.Originally posted by maurizio13:6 figure sum? Please! Our PM, MM and SM are paid in excess of $2.5 million a year.
how's that?
more than what you earned a year? -
they appraise themselves?Originally posted by dragg:top business professionals dont necessarily make good ministers.
btw, how do they appraised the performance of the ministers?
how in the world will someone say himself is lousy performance if he is appraising himself? -
stop dreaming. it is easy to give out but difficult to take back. be glad that they even suggest to freeze their pay during this civil servant pay increase.
-
Next, we still got professionals in Singapore who have not got a raise for close to 10 years. Yet, we see the ministers in Singapore getting a raise every time inflation hits and we still see GST going higher and higher.
-
"I would never give a rumour respectability by commenting."
David Kimche
ex-Mossad spy
Likewise, don't grace a rubbish topic with your comments too. -
Minsiters justify their high pay as they peg their salaries to those in private sector. Therefore, as is with the practice in the private sector, poor performance should see a Minsiter fired or demoted or pay-cut. So far, I don't remember any Minsiters being fired or demoted or pay-cut, do you? They must be doing an excellent job... Let's pay them even more.......!
-
Far from it. Government officials are under alot more pressure to perform. The competition for their jobs is intense with a new batch of bright young graduates from top Ivy League and Oxbridge Universities every year. If they fail to perform, they are out. The expectations of a top government official is as high, if not higher than any CEO in the private sector.Originally posted by robertteh:(1) Will benchmarking against private sector's boss/business owner CEOs' salaries with iron rice-bowl public sector's wage earner be apple-to-apple comparison at all?How to evaluate talents and performances of ministers/officers and terminate services of any one found non-performing or failing to meet expectation without being affected by cronism or protectionalism.[/b]
Performance evaluation is open and transparent. Key performance indicators are agreed upon at the beginning of each work year and they have to be objective and measurable. Promotions depend on these assessments, which are open to review. Prove your allegations of 'protectionism and cronyism'. Singapore has been regularly voted the cleanest government in Asia by PERC, a Hong Kong-based institution.Originally posted by robertteh:
No, I do not agree with 'failure of restructuring'. On the contrary, the economy is being transformed very successfully to embrace high-value industries n aerospace, biomedical sciences, water technology and precision engineering. It is precisely the success of economic restructuring that causes low-skilled Singaporeans to face structural unemployment.
[b In the event of losses in investments by private sector bosses/business owner CEOs, these bosses/CEOs will suffer losses or even get the sack, how do our ministers account for failure in economic restructuring as announced over last three recessions.[/b]
Singapore's economy is plugged into the world market. With our main export market in the US and our economy being export driven, a recession in the US or global economy will hit us. Having a recession does not mean a failure of the government. In fact, we can expect a recession pretty soon in view of the weakening US property market. It is how we handle a recession that demonstrates the strength of government.How to offset the generous life-long annuities over 25-30 years' retirements in the actual benchmarked talent-retaining and anti-corruption market-driven salaries to be paid to ministers/officers.[/b]
Minister pensions are related to the years of service and their performance and salary scales whilst in office, similar to that in Hong Kong and other goverbments. Top commercial firms also provide generous retirement benefits and golden handshakes for their top employees. If we want the best, we have to compete for the talent.Originally posted by robertteh:
MPs and ministers are elected by Singaporeans. And I say that if Singaporeans do not agree with the pay of ministers, let them campaign in the Opposition Party camps during election and take away a GRC from the ruling party, provided they can persuade Singaporeans to their view.
In the voting of their own salaries, will the PAP MPs or at least the executive MPs abstain from voting?[/b]
I believe the majority of Singaporeans agree that we should pay good wages to attract the best talents into the government. However, I do agree that the wages we pay must not drive Singapore uncompetitive and therefore it will be good to peg it to the salary of Hong Kong cabinet ministers as well. Ministers in Hong Kong also receive generous allowances and some have government housing thrown in as well. These perks should also be considered in the assessment. -
So when OM asked that the salary of our ministers be peg to our Hong Kong counterparts, he is in fact asking that our ministers take a pay cut???Originally posted by Atobe:The importance of the Singapore Cabinet Ministers seem to be over-inflated, when compare their Job Functions to that of the Cabinet Secretaries of Hong Kong.
Hong Kong is merely a Special Administrative Region - a state within a state - and do not manage its External Defense nor Foregin Affairs - the Secretaries can be compared closer to the Town Councils but on a super scale.
Hong Hong as a Special Administrative Region is bigger in population (6,940,432) and has a bigger area (land and sea area of 1,092 sq Km) than all of Singapore put together (692.7 sq Km); making the Hong Kong Cabinet to be more efficient than our Singapore Cabinet - in terms of the annual productive output to the numbers employed in the Cabinet, Civil Service, and local admiistrators.
The Hong Kong Cabinet has one Chief Executive and 14 Cabinet Secretaries managing the entire Hong Kong - and without any further expenses to have District Mayors; and with a Legislative Council consisting of 60 seats.
Comparatively, the Singapore Cabinet has one Prime Minister has 16 Cabinet Ministers, 1 MM and 1 SM, and with FIVE Mayors running enlarged Constituencies, with a Parliament of 84 seats (of which 82 are held by the Ruling Party).
The Hong Kong Administration manages an economy with a labor force of 3.63 million; a GDP of US$253.1 Billion; and Reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold valued at US$132 Billion.
The Singapore Administration manages an economy with a labor force of 2.4 million; a GDP of US$138.6 Billion; and a Reserves of Foregin Exchange and Gold valued at US$134.6 Billion.
Comparing the wages paid to those in the Singapore and Hong Cabinet - we see the following figures :
Singapore Prime Minister's BASIC Salary: US$1,100,000 per year
Hong Kong Chief Executive: US$416,615 per year
Singapore Minister's BASIC Salary: US$655,530 - US$819,124
Hong Kong Cabinet Secretaries: US$278,538 - US$315,077
Comparing the Hong Kong Chief Executive's salary with Senior Minister GCT is not realistic; and if Singapore Ministers are drawn from the business community - it is hardly the norm of local companies to pay such high salaries that the Ministers are paid.
In any case, the Hong Kong cabinet are similarly filled by talents from the cream of their Community - and not necessarily Scholars only - Dollar for Dollar, Hong Kong seems to be getting a bigge bang for every dollar paid to their Administrators
If the salary of the Singapore Government has to be pegged to Hong Kong, it will be a deep cut to filter out the humbug that Singaporeans have been fed with to justify the high wages - that its purpose is to stop corruption.
In actual fact, the very reason of stopping corruption is merely to legitimize the raiding of the Reserves that has been painstakingly built-up over the last 45 years, and it is heart breaking that this nest egg should fall into someone else's hands.
They may as well "make hay, while the sun continue to shine". -
If our ministers truly deserve their pay then I would like to see those when they have stepped down or 'retired' from their posts commanding the same or even higher pay in the private sector. How is it that some of these ex-ministers and ex-ministers of state are jobless and have to start their own companies. Nobody wants to employ them at their old pay?
And did you hear of one who was sacked as CEO of an MNC? -
duh.. i thought they are the highest paid politicians on the planet?Originally posted by maurizio13:Then we will have the highest paid politicians in this planet. -
To see things from another angle;
Most of our cabinet minister will be happy to exchange seats with their Hong Kong counter parts even if it means a large pay cut; if i have China to back me, things are so much simpler, we don't get push around by countries around us.
Hong Kong minister might not even want to take up similar jobs in Singapore with double or triple the pay; have to less land, less people meaning less tax revenue, but still need to manage defence budget, surrounded by "friendly" countries.
When things are good, everyone thinks that he can do a better job and who ever earning more is just too much. But if bad times were to really come, what ever we do then might not be much help any more as we have only so little land to fight with.