Basket.

Truly, the Ivory Tower.

That link above would be the latest attempt by our ruling party to utilise the so-called "New Media". As with its predecessor (the laughable P65.sg), all it manages to achieve is to showcase the pathetic naivete of some of our possible leaders-to-be.

Ministerial pay rises have been in the news lately. If you somehow contrive to have no knowledge of the issue, it has recently been stated by our Prime Minister that minister pay, currently S$1.2 million a year, is "only" 55% of what it should be - S$2.2 million. It is safe to assume that in the near future, ministerial salaries will be moved either closer to this level or right to this level all at once.

I would just like everyone to sit back and consider for just a moment how much money is S$1.2 million.

For starters, it is more than 38 times per capita GDP, which is S$30,900 a year (2006 estimate, source CIA World Factbook).

S$1.2 million a year translates to S$100,000 a month. In comparison, an NSF private earns S$450 (combat) or S$350 (non-combat), an NSF corporal gets $S520 (combat) or S$420 (non-combat), an NSF 3rd Sergeant S$600-S$700 and an NSF 2nd Lieutenant S$800-S$1000 a month. A cleaner would be fortunate to get a thousand dollars a month. Apparently, NSF allowances cannot be raised to something even approaching reasonable, but ministerial pay, high to begin with, can be massively added to.

Welfare payments in Singapore for the elderly, ill or disabled are in the region of S$200-S$400 a month.

Our minsters earn more than 3 times in one month what the average Singaporean earns in an entire year.

Are things in perspective yet?

I do not deny that extremely high-ranking civil servants such as government ministers must be paid a salary befitting their status, but S$1.2 million a year is excessive and S$2.2 million is completely absurd. Who the hell needs that much money? What the fuck do they do with it all?

More disturbingly, the implication is that our leaders are induced to carry on serving the nation by the lure of base coin. In that case we shouldn't call it "public service", should we? We are told over and over that we must love and serve our nation - are our leaders setting a very good example for us here by effectively saying that cold, hard cash is their main motivation? We can boast about having extremely low rates of corruption, all we want - but it's all perspective, isn't it? Because it can be argued that our leaders are being bribed not to be corrupt.

What is more, in the recent debate over the GST hike, the government explained that it needed the extra money to help the less fortunate. So, apparently, there is no money to help the less fortunate, but there is money for ministerial pay rises? Imagine how much more money we would have to help the poor if our ministers would show solidarity with the lower-income grouping and take a significant paycut; which, in any case, would in all probability barely affect their lifestyles.

Governments are meant to serve the people. That is and should always be a golden rule of good governance. It should not ever be the other way around - but our government seems to be losing sight of the fact.