Loke Hoe Yeong
In this increasingly vociferous season of the 2011 General Elections, to begin officially with Nomination Day, I’m going to ask you to follow through a controversial exercise. Let’s forget about democracy for a moment.
The PAP claims that we are above ideological partisanship. With our strong one-party state geared towards pragmatism, gone is the petty politicking of partisan interests that have been the bane of great countries. We’ve got roofs over our heads, Lee Kuan Yew once told an audience in Mandarin, what’s the use of democracy if it can’t eradicate homelessness? The historical narrative of the ‘Singapore miracle’ can be awe-inspiring – a people renounced labour militancy and fractious politics, and rallied together, seeing itself throughout the perilous developmental years to economic nirvana.
It ties in with the PAP’s other argument relating to our systemic vulnerability: that there is insufficient talent in this small country to support a multiparty system, so they should all be concentrated in one party. Nations who rally together stay together, we are instructed.
So why is there now so much bottled-up discontent among all sectors of society, rich, poor, or middle-class?
*
One fundamental point on the issue of ministerial salaries has been missed. Since the implementation of the benchmarking of ministerial salaries against the very top of the private sector’s, the social contract between the leadership of Singapore and its people has been drastically altered.
This is not just some woolly, abstract theory. It can be thought of as a real, legal contract. Parliamentary candidates present their candidature to the electorate, they get elected on those terms and promises made, which are then set in stone by the swearing of the oath of allegiance when becoming ministers. With the benchmarking of ministerial salaries, citizens would be akin to shareholders, investing their not-too-paltry tax dollars in high quality hires.
Except that there are gaping differences between the ministers and their private sector counterparts. The corporate financier has many demanding performance targets, and stands to possibly lose the job if they are not met. The corporate world, after all, is not known to be the most forgiving.
We have all so clearly witnessed how the major blunders of the PAP government have escaped accountability. The escape of Mas Selemat, the tripling of the YOG budget, and the Orchard Road floods (after decades of boasting that First World Singapore will never flood again) have been responded with further ministerial pay increase, just passed last month in parliament. Little wonder, since the performance peg for the variable component of their salaries is simply to GDP growth figures.
At the same time, these leaders enjoy the kind of immunity from criticism as would be accorded to elder figures in a Confucianist culture (in their own reckoning), whereby the authority and integrity of leaders cannot be questioned. Can a corporate financier, having committed a major boo-boo while being paid a million dollar salary, resort to such a defence of his performance?
We have a leadership that is formed and rewarded as in a corporate setting, but without the accompanying consequences and responsibilities.
With many seeing stagnated wages and soaring costs of living, it should come as no surprise that more and more Singaporeans are incensed at this travesty.
As NCMP Sylvia Lim has pointed out in a now widely-circulated video, the well-remunerated ministers will find problems convincing Singaporeans to make vital sacrifices during crunch-time. If that doesn’t work, they could perhaps follow SM Goh Chok Tong’s curious attempt at reining in national solidarity, by sternly reprimanding Singaporeans for complaining about the floods (even when constructive voices were actually questioning infrastructure preparedness).
But if this doesn’t work either, what then is the next option, when a real crisis hits?
I think the Minister Mentor’s justification for the astronomical ministerial salaries will go down in history as his greatest misjudgment regarding the governance of Singapore.
*
Perhaps I may never fully understand the plight of those of my forebears who, being in the most vulnerable position during the turbulent 1950s/60s, do not compromise on upholding the one-party system. I always try my best to sympathize with their lifetime of experiences.
But isn’t it a tragic oversight to keep harping on the spectre of the turbulent 1950s/60s, when the socio-political travesty of ministerial salaries is unfolding before our very eyes? Indeed it is always possible that Singapore can lapse back into the vulnerable position of our early years. By constantly using these oft-rehashed scare tactics though, the PAP leaders have cornered us into a very blunt and unexacting type of political debate, one that is absolutely futile in pinpointing the real issues at stake.
The appeal for us to marshal all our forces into one ‘team’ is misguided, as if the considerations involved in running a country are as straightforward as in a football match. The brightest among us may not agree with the ruling party’s various stances for moral or solid economic reasons. Those who dissent are no less able to lead the country. As we have seen in the past few days, some of them are now making the stand for an alternative vision for our country.
This is not about blindly mimicking ‘western-style democracy’. We all agree that every country is different. So let’s not fall into the trap of shunning democracy, simply because it has been dressed up by the ruling party as a sort of imported, exotic animal to be handled with utmost caution.
We all have a vested interest in building the best possible way of running Singapore, and we want to work hard at that.
My fellow Singaporeans, we can do so much better than what we are seeing now.
The Online Citizen
20 Maxwell Road #09-17
Maxwell House
Singapore 069113
Be part of the community! Join our Facebook Page!
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.
No related posts.
May 4, 2011 at 6:35 am
I can’t agree more with what the writer has stated. These are precisely the key issues which the ruling party fail to admit until recent days when they realized this time luck may not be on their side. National Wages Council just called for wage increase but denied has anything to do with GE; HDB may move the margin from $8k to $10k… Etc. But they still refuse to address the high ministerial pay issue! My domestic helper who is renewing her contract with me asked for more than a hundred bugs above her $330 salary because “other maids are getting that”. Yet for the last 5 years my own wage has hardly changed. What has the ruling party been doing? Where do the common SINGAPOREAN stand in this country?
May 4, 2011 at 10:35 am
Whenever I walk around these few days, especially near-by the banks like POSB, OCBC, UOB, I can see many Singaporeans are queueing up to receive G&S package. From this incident, I ask myself why is that so ? Why are they so desperate to use the money ? I do a survey and realised that every bank that I went, at least got 20 people queueing. I also walked near to the crowd and heard an anuty talked to an uncle in hokkien yesterday, allow me to use singlish to translate hor. She said, “not bad hor, government give us money leh, so nice. The government knows we need the money so much!” Then the uncle replied, “Ya loh, money not enough mah, before every election always like that one, my son told me to vote for opposition, aiya, what is the point, they always win want nah! No use want, if we choose oppositions so what can they do, end of the day, back to normal. Don’t waste your time, no use want.” The aunty seemed agreed with him and continued said, “Ya loh, you got read the newspaper bo, our government felt sorry already mah, he has changed liao.” The uncle also told the aunty “xiang ho shi mai chak, mian chak, bo ai chak!” (can’t be bothered)
When I heard it, my heart sinks down. This is the attitude that most Singaporeans have the mindset for politics awareness.
My dear fellow citizens,
Please focus and time is running short, if you have elderly to cast the vote, remind them to be fearless and every vote counts.
Tell your friends,colleagues, neighbours, relatives, aunties & uncles, nephews & nieces, all the love ones, we need the vote preciously. Vote for a change!!! P L E A S E !!!
May 4, 2011 at 1:05 pm
I am concerned that in the last 20 years of the PAP rule a number of anti-citizen developments have arisen in our Society. This has mostly occurred in our social-legal-police institutions because it is in such arena that societal conflicts are played out.
1)An alarming phenomenon in Singapore is the too close association between elites or elite firms with State Institutions. It has come to my notice that some Law firms close to the Government are able to commandeer State Institutions to hound their clients’ enemies so as to ensure victory in the Courts. This is because with the hounding the other side gets acquainted with the corrupt power of State support and softens its resolve to get justice. The State Institutions that partake in this oppression of the citizenry are the social organizations like AG, MCYS, MUIS and famously the ISD. The ISD in particular seems of late years to have left off focusing on Enemies of the State but now go after enemies of their elite friends. ISD faceless police are ubiquitous even in divorce cases. It is no wonder that they can’t even keep Mas Selamat in his place because of their varied errands for their friends.
2) Many elite professionals in the private sector also hold significant decision making positions in the public sector. These people have a leg in a Law firm and the other leg in Social/Police State Institutions. It seems that the legal/social/police entities indulge most often in such symbiotic relationships for mutual benefits and competitative advantage. Thus you have a Shari’ah lawyer who also sat in the Council of MUIS. He will thus be able to use his Statutory position to aid his fee earning efforts. Again there are cases of lawyers who are also members of Parliament. An MP is supposed to serve the citizenry at large, not a client against his opponent whenever a fee is paid to him by one side. Conflict of interest is no longer of interest in Singapore. Dopplegangers are everywhere. The examples I mentioned are just the tip of the iceberg.
3)Fifty years have seen shameful oppression against opposition personalities, a number of whom have been broken badly by thuggish legal manoeuvres by the Ruling Party and have left politics in Singapore, exiling themselves beyond the reach of the Singapore menace.. The end result is that the ratio of Ruling Party to opposition is about 80: 2. Which shows the efficacy of the mafia in the House.
4)Aside from many other adverse consequences to the citizenry, I tend to think that the singlemost adverse result is the inordinate salaries now received by Ministers because there is no countervailing voices in Parliament because the voices have been killed by the purposeful premeditated repressive acts of the Ruling Party on the oppositions during a 40 to 50 year duration. Can you make a case about this to the appropriate International Tribunal, for crime against Humanity?
5) I feel crowded in, in Singapore these days by massive numbers of foreigners working or staying as citizens. This also is a consequence of a non existent or weak opposition voice in Parliament, the very result of the extra-ordinary witch hunt against opposition individuals carried out decade after decade by the PAP. Our country has been sold off from under our feet without our consent. Because consent making was killed. Can this be formulated as an abuse of Human Rights?
There is an urgency to end this state of the Regime. We happen to live in an era where crime against Humanity has been brought to book in many instances. I know that such crimes are usually the deadly ones like wholesale violent taking over of state resources, rape and genocide. For these latter, the present day response is Egypt and Tunisia with Libya coming up for reckoning.
I leave it to you, the experts among our citizens, to give our predicament in Singapore a name and legal habitation and bring up the matter for adjudication on the International stage. The assault on the Singapore citizen is already recognized by the International community especially the United Nations. It is now necessary to take it to the next step.
May 4, 2011 at 9:54 pm
I am concerned that in the last 20 years of the PAP rule a number of anti-citizen developments have arisen in our Society. This has mostly occurred in our social-legal-police institutions because it is in such arena that societal conflicts are played out.
1)An alarming phenomenon in Singapore is the too close association between elites or elite firms with State Institutions. It has come to my notice that some Law firms close to the Government are able to commandeer State Institutions to hound their clients’ enemies so as to ensure victory in the Courts. This is because with the hounding the other side gets acquainted with the corrupt power of State support and softens its resolve to get justice. The State Institutions that partake in this oppression are the social/police/law organizations like AG, MCYS, MUIS, ICA and famously the ISD. The ISD in particular seems of late years to have left off focusing on Enemies of the State but now go after enemies of their elite friends. ISD faceless police are ubiquitous even in divorce cases. It is no wonder that they can’t even keep Mas Selamat in his place because of their varied errands for their friends.
2) Many elite professionals in the private sector also hold significant decision making positions in the public sector. These people have a leg in a Law firm and the other leg in Social/Police State Institutions. It seems that the legal/social/police entities indulge most often in such symbiotic relationships for mutual benefits and competitative advantage. Thus you have a Shari’ah lawyer who also sat in the Council of MUIS. He will thus be able to use his Statutory position to aid his fee earning efforts. Again there are cases of lawyers who are also members of Parliament. An MP is supposed to serve the citizenry at large, not a client against his opponent whenever a fee is paid to him by one side. Conflict of interest is no longer of interest in Singapore. Dopplegangers are everywhere. The examples I mentioned are just the tip of the iceberg.
3)Fifty years have seen shameful oppression against opposition personalities, a number of whom have been broken badly by thuggish legal manoeuvres by the Ruling Party and have left politics in Singapore, exiling themselves beyond the reach of the Singapore menace.. The end result is that the ratio of Ruling Party to opposition is about 80: 2. Which shows the efficacy of the mafia in the House.
4)Aside from many other adverse consequences to the citizenry, I tend to think that the singlemost adverse result is the inordinate salaries now received by Ministers because there is no countervailing voices in Parliament because the voices have been killed by the purposeful premeditated repressive acts of the Ruling Party on the oppositions during a 40 to 50 year duration. Can you make a case about this to the appropriate International Tribunal, for crime against Humanity?
5) I feel crowded in these days by massive numbers of foreigners working or staying as citizens. This also is a consequence of a non existent or weak opposition voice in Parliament, the very result of the extra-ordinary witch hunt against opposition individuals carried out decade after decade by the PAP. Our country has been sold off from under our feet without our consent. Because consent making was killed. Can this be formulated as an abuse of Human Rights?
There is an urgency to end this state of the Regime. We happen to live in an era where crime against Humanity has been brought to book in many instances. I know that such crimes are usually the deadly ones like wholesale violent taking over of state resources, rape and genocide. For these latter, the present day response is Egypt and Tunisia with Libya coming up for reckoning.
I leave it to you, the experts among our citizens, to give our predicament in Singapore a name and legal habitation and bring up the matter for adjudication on the International stage. T
First order of business is to get the Ministerial salaries scaled down several orders of magnitude to levels like any other country, even the most advanced..Otherwise we would have to account to future generations of Singaporeans as to how we have been fooled so badly: to believe that the Singapore Cabinet is so special that they have to be paid several fold more than their counterparts in other countries.Because they wont be offered lucrative speaking appointments or book royalties, said the PM. Should we compensate them for their mediocrity on the World stage? The other oft repeated argument by the Ruling Party’s spokesperson for paying them over the moon is that it would prevent them from corruption. I think this must be the real reason, an innate greedy predisposition. .
May 4, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Millie, you forgot to mention that on top of the salary adjustments we need to give our domestic helpers , our dear government is also taxing us in the form of levies. $260 per month is more than half of the salary the maid is getting a month. While the whole nation is coping with inflation, struggling with daily challenges, our million dollar ministers are dining in fine restaurants, playing golfs. Do they care, I think not. I think their mentality is ” milk the cow till dry” After all, each will be $15 million richer every 5 years. I wonder who PM is keeping quiet about the Ministers’ pay. He knows very well that one of the grouses is the sinfully high pay (unjustified just look at the tons of mistakes made by many of them over the past 5 years). Why he is still keeping quiet about this hot topic. If this is not resolved, PAP is going to lose not just Aljunied, probably Bishn T P and Kallyng Moulmein as the ground is not sweet at all. SO BE IT… A CHANGE IS OVERDUE. I don’t want my children to work so hard, have no life just to pay for the ministers.
May 5, 2011 at 12:27 am
This is a very good analysis. You should be standing for election on the opposition side
May 5, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Once a Minister takes a salary that is so large that it looks like a heist in comparison with similar jobs in government across the Globe, he breaks the compact with the citizenry. His job becomes a commercial contract and should be gauged in a strictly commercial manner. There are standard methodologies for valuing jobs and the job of being Ministers is no exception. I suggest that if a substantial opposition gets elected in Parliament, it moves the motion to revalue the jobs done by the various Ministers. The parameters involved in such a valuation exercise includes estimating that portion of the GNP attributable to the Minister whose job is under appraisal. It also includes estimating a discount rate which consists of a risk free rate and a risk premium. Intuitively without doing the calculations now, you can see that the portion of attributable GNP is very different from the GNP itself. It has been touted by the PAP that they created the whole GNP, which is not correct because patently commercial, industrial and financial enterprises are the engines which brought the process of creating the GNP to completion. For instance the ministers do not operate, the finance houses, factories and every enterprise in the country. The share of the GNP created by each Minister is a sliver of the country’s GNP.
This sliver of GNP is then operated on by the discount rate to arrive at a figure of value of the job of each Minister..The risk premium ( which as mentioned above is a component of the discount rate) would be entirely absent in Ministerial jobs so that what remains is the risk free rate which name itself reveals the nature of Ministerial jobs- essentially risk free! You should find that the resulting figure of value of the job should bear comparison with figures of actual remunerations of the Parliamentarians in the first world countries, as Singapore prides itself to be first world. You will then see the utter absurdity of claiming that a Ministerial salary in Singapore is to be 6 to 10 times more than its comparable in the first world.Governments. Thus the present salaries of our Ministers would be found to be grossly wrong in fact. Whether they are also wrong in Law has to be investigated, given the fact that these Ministers in this one party Government of Singapore in effect drew up their own salaries scales and paid themselves from that self- serving blueprint..They are judges in their own cause. The next question is whether they should be asked to return the excess payment to the State, as many bankers and CEOs were asked to do so when it was found that they did not deserve such remunerations or such remunerations were extracted by false representations..
As citizens we should break up the nonsense of Million dollar salaries to Ministers on spurious claims of uniqueness. Not only do we support a big lie but we also engender a colossal greed in these supposedly exceptionally noble people. One of the most ludicrous deeds instigated by such salaries is the pump priming of the economy by overwhelming the country with foreign labour. We will be sitting ducks for the next get rich quick scheme.