Basket.

PM, ministers to get pay rise of between 14% and 33%


Full ministerial statement on the issue

In a startling and completely unexpected development, the Government of the Republic of Singapore has decided to award itself enormous pay rises at the expense of the people. Certainly can't say I saw that one coming.

But more seriously - the issue of how justifiable these pay rises really are. Let us have a look at the cold, hard facts and figures, laid out so beautifully in an easily accessible news report in an act of magnanimous transparency.


- President S R Nathan will now get S$3.2 million a year, up from S$2.5 million currently.

- Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will get S$3.1 million a year, up from S$2.5 million currently.

- Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew will get S$3.04 million a year, up from S$2.7 million at the moment.

- Deputy Prime Ministers will get S$2.4 million a year, up from the current S$2.06 million.

- Ministers and Senior Permanent Secretaries will get S$1.6 million a year, up from S$1.2 million previously.

- Members of Parliament will now get S$13,200 per month as allowance, up from S$11,900.


Let us leave everything else aside for the moment and agree that that is a lot of money.

What is mentioned but not emphasised in the press, however, is this is not going to be the only increase. There will be another next year.

As the press is, for obvious reasons, not going to emphasise this point, allow me to.

THERE IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER PAY RISE FOR OUR AUGUST LEADERS NEXT YEAR - EQUAL TO OR EXCEEDING IN MAGNITUDE, THIS ONE.

Ah, the Straits Times. Putting the "state" in "state media". To give out some details, this year's increase is expected to push salaries to 77% of THE BENCHMARK, while next year's is expected to push them to 88%. This little factlet took up four lines in a single column on page seven of today's Home section, the headline of which was, masterfully, "More of ministers' pay to be linked to performance".

But enough about the subtleties of state journalism. Let us move on to the main point and examine these increases, what they mean, and whether they are deserved.

The government has demonsrated an impeccable sense of timing, for one. GST is to go up 2% from July - against strong public opposition. Even as the GST hike debate raged, a small, insignificant motion was rejected by Parliament, almost unnoticed amidst the controversy. This was a motion to raise the stipend given to Singaporeans on public assistance from S$290a month to around S$400. The old crutch mentality excuse was trotted out in order to reject this very humane call to aid one of the tiniest, neediest portions of society - even though one needs to be unable to qork in order to qualify for public assistance. If the monthly providence had been raised by S$110, the government would have had to bear an extra S$3.96 million a year in costs. Quite a princely sum, until you find out...

... that the total adjustments in Civil Service salaries will mean an increase in S$214 million in costs per year for the government.

And that the pay rises for political appointment holders will cost the government an extra S$10.5 million a year.

So... what are we supposed to think here? Personally, I can draw only one conclusion: fuck the poor, let's keep getting richer! If you happen to reason out something wildly dissimilar, I would greatly enjoy hearing your reasoning.

This, of course, is in addition to the government's Tharmanomical dismissal of a proposal to exempt GST on essential items (dealt with in an earlier post) and another possible impending hike in transport fees. So, the message? Seems clear as day to me.

I have no doubt that ministers and political appointment holders have incredibly hectic schedules. They are running a whole country. But this kind of pay rise, this kind of salary is patently ridiculous. S$3.1 million a year is S$101,680 a month, which is just over S$3,000 a day - which is not so far away from what an NSF recruit earns in a year. Also, median household monthly income is around S$2,700 a month. This amount is also about five times what American President George W. Bush earns. Really puts things into perspective, doesn't it?

However, PM, SM, even MM salary rises are at least slightly justifiable. They are a hectic jobs full of pressure and never-ending headaches, perhaps. What is utterly unjustifiable is the increase in the President's salary and the increase in MPs' allowances.

Let us first examine the office of the Elected President in Singapore. No joke, that is what it is called, even though the last presidential election to take place was the first, way back in 1993 (prior to that, the president was selected by Parliament). Then, the PAP had to coax a visibly reluctant Lim Kim San to run against former PAP protege and DPM Ong Teng Cheong, who incidentally later broke rather publicly with the ruling party. After Mr Ong declined to stand again in 1999, the PAP placed another handpicked candidate on the rostrum - senior civil servant Sellapan Ramanathan (better known as S R Nathan). Nathan's most high-profile previous role was Ambassador to the United States from 1990 to 1996. He also served a term as head of Singapore's external intelligence agency, the Security and Intelligence Department, often overshadowed by its rather more infamous domestic counterpart, the Internal Security Department. It was then claimed that no suitable candidate had stepped up to oppose Mr Nathan, and he was duly "elected" President of Singapore on 18 August, 1999. He was "elected" in a similar way to a second term on 17 August, 2005.

What, exactly, is the role of the Elected President of the Republic of Singapore? Ostensibly, he is a safeguard against a rogue government. Contitutionally and in reality, he is a ceremonial figurehead. The government has never made any bones about Singapore being a parliamentary democracy - a country run by Parliament, as opposed, for instance, to the United States of America, where the elected President and his cabinet make the decisions, albeit aided and approved by Congress and the Senate. Our Elected President, in contrast, takes little or no part in the actual governing of the country - although he technically has the power to veto laws by not signing them. He is not even the nominal commander-in-chief of the armed forces (the actual and ceremonial roles belong, of course, to the Chief of Defence Force).

So what exactly is he doing to earn S$3.2 million a year? Meeting the occasional foreign dignitary, presenting the occasional award, appearing at Istana open houses, being the guest-of-honour at this or that event. To paraphrase Churchill, never has a country paid so much to so few to do so little. Unless he has some super secret role I don't know about, but I seriously doubt this - as Mr Nathan is eighty-three years of age and this will certainly impose certain limitations on the tasks he can carry out.

What, for the matter, are our MPs doing to earn an S$13,200 allowance per month? And "allowance" is the key word here - because allowances are not subject to CPF deductions. Therefore an allowance of S$13,200 = take-home pay of S$13,200 = serious load of money every month for sleeping in background of boring speech by minister for x.

What is more, MPs do not have to be present at every single Parliament sitting. I believe they only need to make about 75%. In addition, the vast majority of them have day jobs, usually very well-paying ones in the private sector. So what is this? The way I see it, it's by far the highest-paying part-time job in the damn country.

Some people have commented that being an MP is not an easy job - but I must question how difficult it really is if so many of our MPs can hang on to their day jobs as company directors and the like. If it was truly so hectic, wouldn't they have to devote their entire energies to being a responsible Member of Parliament? And think about it - if you have ever been to a Meet-the-People session, how sure are you that your MP is actually devoted to your concerns and not simple half-heartedly listening to you bitch while day-dreaming about the next day in the boardroom?

To wrap it up, since the PAP loves accusing those who criticise it of not having good solutions to problems, allow me to present a few. Pay hikes - if you really must, can't it wait? It's not like your previous salary was a pittance. Couple more years maybe, let Singaporeans get over the GST hike? Better still - benchmark your pay not to top private sector earners, but more reasonably to other leaders of First World countries. Because the argument that we need top dollar to get top talent is not holding water - other First World nations are not paying their leaders so much and... they still have leaders?! Pretty capable ones too. Why?

For MPs - make it a full-time job, and make them draw a salary. Only then can we be sure that they are putting their full time and effort into helping to run the country, instead of having to entertain the disturbing possibility that your MP is more interested in company stock performance than the concerns of his/her loyal constituents.

Not that all that is going to happen. There is only one important rule of governance: Governments should serve their people. Not the other way around.

It seems that our government has completely abandoned that one shining rule of good governance in favour of rhetorical fluff that, very disturbingly, they are themselves beginning to believe.