Skip to main content
Pay Me Well

In 1996, Lee Kuan Yew said that low salaries will not attract able men who are or can be successful in their professions or business. Now they will be upping the peg of ministerial pay in Singapore to the top private sector earners again. Currently ministers earn just S$1.2m (US$1.836m) per year, and the repeg will put them at S$2.2m (US$3.36m) or higher if you are more "senior". Since 1994, the salaries of Singapore ministers have been set at two-thirds the median pay of the 48 best-paid bankers, lawyers, accountants, engineers, and executives in multi-nationals and manufacturing firms.

Naturally, there is a big outcry from the general public in Singapore. Bulk of who survive on a household monthly income of between S$2,000-S$6,000. Here are some thoughts:

a) Nobody is really deriding the repeg, just the quantum I guess. To peg to the TOP private sector earners is to imply that the ministers are also the top quartile. Is that the reality?

b) Another reason is that they are clean and the salaries are needed to eliminate corruption or the need to be corrupt. Doesn't that say something inherent with the mentality of a normal person: that a person will be more likely to be corrupt if he is paid below average. Hmmm... does that mean that the majority of people in prison now may not need to be there if they were paid well enough in the first place???

c) If you are paying for being "efficient", "competitive nation building" and "corruption-free"... Singapore ranks #5 in the world, Norway ranks #2 and their ministers get about 20%-25% what their Singapore counterparts are getting. I thought Norway has a higher cost of living index than Singapore. Hmmm... maybe Singapore can outsource for cheaper and better performing ministers from Norway. Even at half the new package, Norway ministers would jump at the offer.., plus now no need to pay foreigners CPF right??!!

d) Actually I do agree that salary plays a big part in nurturing the right behaviour. Most Asian nations pay their ministers pittance (let's not single out specific countries, you-know-I-know lah), and those countries that do so have also the highest incidence of corruption. These are smart people (most anyway), these are also people being given immense power, and the likelihood for abuse is also high: if you pay them pittance, the attraction and need to find extra sources of income are very high.

e) You have to pay well if you want to eliminate the distractions of wanting to feather one's nest or to accumulate for a sufficiently nice retirement income. Hence you will find many politicians thinking and finding ways to benefit themselves instead of doing nation building stuff. I think Lee & Lee have a strong argument here. You don't want ministers spending half their time having meetings about "special projects", "specially awarded jobs", "meeting important and connected people for the wrong reasons", etc...

f) The angst among the public is when they compare with what the general public is getting, or rather what they themselves are getting. Its a bit like begrudging the MNCs CEO pay packages. US listed companies regularly pay their CEOs between US$5-50m a year all in (basic, options and bonuses) - of course, the companies have a pretty big market cap to contend with. Even smaller US companies (those with market caps of US$1-5bn will pay between US$1-10m. OK, let's bring it back to listed Singapore companies as a better yardstick, the top CEOs of the top 50 firms should be getting packages of S$1.5m to S$5m easy, no questions asked. Why is it so difficult for the public to accept that their ministers are paid like the CEOs of the top 100 companies in Singapore?? Surely the way they have been handpicked, proven themselves continuously, and before that having to accumulate top notch degrees and recognised academic excellence - all must count for something. These are the people leading the nation. I would be proud that they get what they are getting, and they deserve it too. Is it easier to run a nation than a big company? Like I have said before, Singapore is a very well run company.

g) Plus, we are not talking about 1,000 or 2,000 ministers... its just a select bunch. You pay S$600,000 a year and get dubious characters like TT Durai (the NKF scandal). So, obviously S$600,000 is way, way, not enough. Look at the new apartment launches, you have to make it affordable for the ministers as well. If ministers have problem buying, who else can buy?

h) Sure, the comparisons with US, UK and Japan ministers will be a sore point. Maybe Singapore is doing it correctly, and the rest are doing it wrong. Must remember that ministers in those countries are also known to "need to pave the way later" when they get out of office - not to say they are corrupt but they do "plan" to have other sources of income later in life.

i) The one thing which the senior government must rein in is the way retired/former ministers get on a lot of important boards, and gets paid very well. In order to maintain better integrity, maybe retired/former ministers should NOT be sitting on more than 2 boards (either private or public) because they way it is now, the retired ministers could get paid even more than the ones in service now in some cases!!! For example, ex-Foreign Affairs minister S Dhanabalan is now the Exec Chairman of DBS Group, Chairman of Temasek and Director of GIC. (like they say in Singapore... "walau-wey"). The ex minister for Defence Yeo Ning Hong is the Exec Chairman of PSA, Director of DBS Group and Director of Singapore Press. There's another very busy ex-minister Lim Chee Onn (ex-minister without Portfolio, my my... look at his portfolio now) - the Exec Chairman of Keppel Corp, Chairman of Keppel Capital, Chairman of Keppel Land, Chairman of MobileOne, Director of Temasek, Director of k1 Ventures, Director of Singapore Airlines, and Director of Natsteel (where got time , man!?). Then there is Goh Yong Hong the ex-Commissioner of Police. He is the Exec Deputy Chairman of Singapore Turf Club, Chairman of Singapore Pools (not the swimming type OK), Director of Dragon Land, and Director of Premas (a unit of Capitaland).

j) The ministers are mostly picked from the business sectors and their evolutionary process are quite different from politicians of other countries. Few are the grassroots types or cikgus/teachers/municipal leaders/etc... Hence the yardstick for apples to oranges applies here.

k) What about working for the benefit of the nation? Let sleeping dogs lie, its tough enough to remember the Singapore anthem in Malay-man, one thing at a time lah. Like I say, the way Singapore is run, its like a corporation, hence the pragmatism. Live with it, its good for the country.

Comments

DanielXX said…
There was a huge amount of debate in parliament about this salary revision issue. I think the ministers found it difficult to put forward their points because a lot of it tends to be difficult to espouse --- for example, how do you explain that low salaries tend to lead to distractions that could lead to people in power abusing their authority (like you said, special projects etc). But these are valid points ..... we have to recongise that human nature is such. Salary hikes are always difficult to put through when it is under such public scrutiny; the furore only slightly died down when our PM said he was going to donate his own increment to charity for 5 years, to attain "moral authority".

Popular posts from this blog

My Master, A National Treasure

REPOST:  Its been more than two years since I posted on my sifu. This is probably the most significant posting I had done thus far that does not involve business or politics. My circle of close friends and business colleagues have benefited significantly from his treatment.


My Master, Dr. Law Chin Han (from my iPhone)

Where shall I start? OK, just based on real life experiences of those who are close to me. The entire Tong family (Bukit Kiara Properties) absolutely swear that he is the master of masters when it comes to acupuncture (and dentistry as well). To me, you can probably find many great dentists, but to find a real Master in acupuncture, thats a whole different ballgame.


I am not big aficionado of Chinese medicine or acupuncture initially. I guess you have to go through the whole shebang to appreciate the real life changing effects from a master.


My business partner and very close friend went to him after 15 years of persistent gout problem, he will get his heavy attacks at least…

PUC - An Assessment

PUC has tried to reinvent itself following the untimely passing of its founder last year. His younger brother, who was highly successful in his own right, was running Pictureworks in a number of countries in Asia.

The Shares Price Rise & Possible Catalysts

Share price has broken its all time high comfortably. The rise has been steady and not at all volatile, accompanied by steady volume, which would indicate longer term investors and some funds already accumulating nd not selling back to the market.


Potential Catalyst #1

The just launched Presto app. Tried it and went to the briefing. Its a game changer for PUC for sure. They have already indicated that the e-wallet will be launched only in 1Q2018. Now what is Presto, why Presto. Its very much like Lazada or eBay or Alibaba. Lazada is a platform for retailers to sell, full stop. eBay is more for the personal one man operations. Alibaba is more for wholesalers and distributors.

Presto links retailers/f&b/services originators with en…

How Long Will The Bull Lasts For Malaysia

Are we in a bull run? Of course we are. Not to labour the point but I highlighted the start of the bull run back in January this year... and got a lot of naysayers but never mind:






























p/s: needless to say, this is Jing Tian ... beautiful face and a certain kind of freshness in her looks and acting career thus far



http://malaysiafinance.blogspot.my/2016/12/bank-negara-may-have-switched-on-bull.html


I would like to extend my prediction that the bull run for Bursa stocks should continue to run well till the end of the year. What we are seeing for the past 3 weeks was a general lull where volume suddenly shrunk but the general trend is still intact. My reasons for saying so:

a) the overall equity markets globally will be supported by a benign recovery complemented by a timid approach to raising rates by most central banks

b) thanks to a drastic bear run for most commodities, and to a lesser extent some oil & gas players, the undertone for "cost of materials" have been weak and has pr…