SDP candidate Michelle Lee has called for ministerial salaries to be pegged to median income levels so as to incentivise them to help ordinary workers earn more
By Nigel Tan
Chief Editor
Speaking at election rallies held all over Singapore on Labour Day, opposition candidates called for the salaries of cabinet ministers to be pegged to those of ordinary workers instead of the salaries of the highest earners in the private sector and GDP growth.
Singapore has the second-highest Gini co-efficient in the developed world. The Gini co-efficient is a measure of income equality, with a score of 0 indicating absolute equality while a score of 100 indicates absolute inequality.
According to a 2009 report by the United Nations, Singapore had a Gini co-efficient of 42.5, exceeded only by Hong Kong’s 43.4.
Other countries surveyed included Malaysia (37.9), China (41.5), India (36.8), Australia (35.2), South Korea (31.6) and Japan (24.9).
Meanwhile, Singapore’s cabinet ministers are the most highly-paid in the world, with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s annual salary of $3.1 million dwarfing that of United States President Barack Obama (US$400,000). Under the current system, the salaries of ministers are pegged to the money they might earn at the top of the private sector.
In 2007, Singapore’s ministers gave themselves a 60% pay increment, with Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean using the justification: “If we don’t do that, in the long term, the government system will slowly crumble and collapse. We don’t want pay to be the reason for people to join us. But we also don’t want pay to be the reason for them not to join us.”
In a series of rallies ahead of the May 7 general election, opposition candidates called for the ruling PAP to address the problem of the widening income gap, and said that pegging their salaries to those of ordinary workers would incentivise them to do more for low and middle-income earners.
Steve Chia (NSP, Pioneer) said that the fact that ministers’ salaries are pegged to GDP growth means that they have a vested interest in achieving higher GDP growth figures at all costs. He pointed out that this led the PAP to adopt ultra-liberal immigration policies, allowing in a flood of foreign workers which ultimately leads to depressed wages for Singaporeans. He pointed out that income disparity has never been higher, with the lowest-earning 10% of Singaporeans seeing their income levels drop by 2.7% from 1998 to 2008, while the incomes of the top-earning 10% rose by 54%.
Michelle Lee (SDP, Holland-Bukit Timah) suggested that ministerial pay should instead be pegged to 30 times of the median national income – which would amount to almost $1 million annually. She said that this would ensure that ministers have a vested interest in seeing average income levels rise. She also added that it was unfair for ministers to peg their salaries to the top earners in the private sector, saying that in the private sector, businessmen have to take risks and sometimes make mistakes – resulting in even CEOs getting fired.
Low Thia Khiang (WP, Aljunied) said that the PAP’s argument that it needed to pay high salaries to attract top talent was flawed, pointing out the shortage of candidates willing to leave the private sector to join the PAP despite the attractive remuneration for key office holders. Only eight of the 24 new PAP candidates hail from the private sector, with even Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong conceding that the PAP was finding it hard to recruit corporate high-flyers to join its cause.
Mr Low pointed out that while this was the case, the WP did not have problems attracting candidates from the private sector, even though it did not offer high salaries.
“So what happened to the high quality people from the private sector that the high salaries were supposed to attract? If high quality people from the private sector are turning to the Workers’ Party and other Opposition parties, it is a sign that good government does not necessarily require high salary,” he said.
The current ministerial pay structure was created by former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in 1994. Defending the need to pay his ministers much more than their counterparts in other countries, Mr Lee painted an apocalyptic picture of what would happen to Singapore if ministers were not paid highly enough.
“Your apartment will be worth a fraction of what it is, your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk and our women will become maids in other people’s countries,” said Mr Lee.
He later added that Singaporeans who failed to see the need for their ministers to be awarded obscene salaries needed a reality check.
“I say you have no sense of proportion; you don’t know what life is about,” he said in 2007.
“The cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government,” Lee said. “You get that alternative, and you’ll never put Singapore together again.”
Presenting himself as an example, he said: “A top lawyer, which I could easily have become, today earns $4 million. And he doesn’t have to carry this responsibility. All he’s got to do is advise his client. Win or lose, that’s the client’s loss or gain.”
—
The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club.
Pingback: Weighing in on Singapore Elections 2011 — motochan
Nani sounds like she’s quoting from some primary school social studies textbook LOL.
Incredible that SM Goh now says that people don’t really care about minister’s salaries. And he said that Capitaland CEO is getting paid $10 million. But if you want to be a politician, compare apples with apples please. Benchmark your pay with politician’s pay, not private sector pay. And are you so sure that your ministers can all become CEOs in the private sector? If so, why is Yeo Cheow Tong now earning only $20k/month at Lippo Group? And what was Wong Kan Seng’s job before becoming a minister? He was just a lowly HR manager at HP.
just ignore nani. why bother with him?
nani is from pap thats period. no point arguing with those from papies. they always glorify themself. but nani if you think that obama cannot replace wks its definitely u are wrong and u did not know that osama bin laden was created by your buddy bush just to enforce The New World Order propaganda. 9/11 was been plan 10-15 years ago . so what the shit you know about obama. as what i understand is that wks is in the same league as tpl.money money money
Breaking news: Hougang residents are suing the Hougang Town Council (run by WP) over its refusal to disclose its accounts! Minister Lim Hwee Hua has asked WP to come clean on the accounts and wants to know, if they can’t even run a small town council like Hougang, how can they run a big town council like Aljunied?
The video is here for all to see http://youtu.be/c_TnPAl1rsU
I always knew there was something fishy about LTK leaving Hougang. If there was no hidden scandal, why else would he want to leave his stronghold and take the risk of contesting in Aljunied? LTK needs to make his true intentions known and come clean on the scandal of Hougang Town Council’s accounts.
The PAP is right. If you get these incompetent fools in, they will just sink the ship! Do you want to turn Aljunied into a slum just for the sake of having an opposition voice? You can still have that voice from NCMPs!
Nani, the PAP Town Councils are much more badly managed. Do not just zoom down on WP’s one mistake and then make a huge deal out of it. Take a look at the wider picture before creating your extremely one-sided judgements. I’m not sure if you have heard about it but are you aware that in 2008 , the Holland-Bukit Timah Town council lost millions of their Council funds, which is the money of their residents, to toxic overseas investsments? What have you got to say about that? The way I see it, opposition Town Councils are much better managed than the PAP ones. The opposition Town Councils truly engage their residents. Low Thia Khiang and Chiam See Tong talks TO their residents during meet-the-people sessions, unlike the PAP MPs who talks AT their residents. If you read the Temasek Review, you can find numerous sad stories about how PAP MPs merely brush aside their residents’ concerns. That is why I do not see any problems with Mr Low or Mr Chiam running a GRC. And please do not blame them for turning Hougang and Potong Pasir into slums, the real fault lies with the PAP-run HDB who have for many decades denied upgrading for these two constituencies. It is the PAP’s fault that Hougang and Potong Pasir are decaying. My heart in fact pours out with respect for Mr Low and Mr Chiam because despite all the risks associated with being an opposition politician, they kept going and never stopped, they did not succumb to pressure and quit. They truly represented the voice of Singaporeans.
We have no issue with paying the right salary to the right calibre of people, but sadly, there has been poor accountability & transparency. CEO’s are paid top dollars but when they bungle, they have to take the consequence and resign………so we cannot take one without the other.
Ministers’ salaries should be aligned with the interest of the majority of Singaporean and not just the top income earners. Need to peg their salaries to that of ordinary Singaporeans.
I suggest as follows :
20% pegged against the current benchmark
30% pegged against the median salary of Singaporeans (excl PRs)
50% pegged against the salary of bottom 10th percentile of Singaporeans (excl PRs)
You can’t have a system where politicians are motivated by money. This is politics, not the private sector. If they are so interested in making money they can go do other jobs. Being a politician is about making sacrifices for one’s ideals. If US President Obama can do his job for $400,000 per year, why does LHL need to be paid 7-8 times as much? It makes no sense. Obama has a 100x tougher job than LHL.
Do we really want our ministers to have such low incomes and get leaders that are not up to standard or do we rather pay more tax to ‘hire’ capable leaders? At the end of the day, if the govt is able to do their job well, why are we so bothered about how much they earn?
Why do we need fund raising drive and charity show on TV every now and then? Just ask the MP to donate a certain portion of their pay for this cause yearly will do. They’ll get tax break and praises too.
Going by PAP’s reasoning concerning high salaries for ministers, here is an option. Replace WKS and hire President Obama. We will still have change to spare. it will take less than 5 seconds for President Obama to figure out and take over a GRC and WKS portfolio. That is what i call foreign talent.
Leaders should rightfully be paid well but not ridiculously obscene.
Do you honestly think that Obama can do a better job than DPM Wong? What experience did Obama have before he became President? He was a one-term Senator and community organiser. DPM Wong held numerous government positions including Minister of Home Affairs. As an example, just consider how long it took for Obama to finally find Osama Bin Laden? They have been hunting him for over 10 years. As for DPM Wong, he took only 1 year to find Mas Selamat thanks to his connections and links with the Malaysian authorities. If Obama was in charge, Mas Selamat would be on the loose for another 9 years!
Please lah nani, Osama was hiding in the vast mountains of Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan. Do you think it is easy to find someone who is hiding in the mountains? Please use common sense to argue. What that is pathetic about the MS episode is that MS climbed out of the toilet window and it took almost four hours before an islandwide waring notice is issued. And if Obama screws up, he apologises, and if he creates a big screw up, he will no doubt be forced by the Republicans to resign. Wong Cant Sing merely uttered a “i apologise” speech in parliament and then pushed the blame to the police officers working under him. Mr Wong is not even man enough to accept full responsiblity for his mistakes.
Nani,
I confer you the best balls-licker of the year. Well done. How much did they pay you?
i’m sure nani was not paid. She is just doing it out of her free will due to her brain being so brainwashed by PAP propaganda
Pingback: Daily SG: 2 May 2011 « The Singapore Daily
Remember what David Marshall said? What in the world are you going to do with all that money? When he was PM he earned $8,000 per month and it was already alot. Seriously, why does Pinky need to get paid $300,000 per month? What is he going to do with that money? And remember, Ho Ching gets paid more! Is there really no limit to that family’s greed?
Do you want a PM like David Marshall or do you want a PM like Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Chok Tong, Lee Hsien Loong? David Marshall was a complete failure during his time in charge and he had to resign because he failed to make any inroads in his negotiations with the British. His successor Lim Yew Hock was even worse, and there were riots during his time. So if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. If you pay $8,000 you get someone like Marshall running your country. Singapore is so small and we can’t afford to fail, so we need to ensure that we have the very top talent running the country.
honestly, i would prefer david marshall. he is a man who is more open to criticisms. if he had been in charge, singapore would have been much more democratic
Nani sounds like she’s quoting from some primary school social studies textbook. LOL.
We have known all along that the PAP’s interests are not aligned with those of Singaporeans. Thankfully we have a choice on May 7. We can teach them a lesson and hurt them where it counts. Not their wallets. But the ballot box.
The fucking shameless mercenary PAP dogs are really a bunch of blood suckers. Isn’t it clear that their motives are completely placed in the wrong areas? They are incentivised to grow the GDP relentlessly so they can get paid more. In the meantime, Singaporeans suffer, and they just make up excuses and throw us a couple of hundred dollars every now and then. I’m tired of this fucking useless shit. After this election, the PAP is going to raise minister’s salaries yet again to $6 million for LHL and $5 million for LKY and GCT. They will say, see, no private sector talents joined us in 2011 GE, meaning that our pay is too low.
What a bunch of shameless dogs.