Comments on: Questions about pensions, HDB, CPF, transport, jobs, charities, etc.

By: Keith

Keith — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:40:21 +0000

Unfortunately, our protests will not amount to any change of mind on the govt’s part. They have always been pushing through whatever they wanted to do. What we have is a govt that is obsessed with unending surpluses and runs the country like a corporation. Their favorite way of solving problem is to have the citizens pay money like this compulsory annuity and the additional gantries. That’s sad.

By: Robert Teh Kok Hua

Robert Teh Kok Hua — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:26:00 +0000

It is such a shame that despite all the high education and claims of talents our ministers simply do not have the ability to see or understand it is ethically, morally, socially and even legalistically wrong even with all the legalistic wrangling of bills through parliament to take people’s monies in the form of so-called life-long pensions while denying citizens’ right to collect their own self-contributed pensions which are their own monies while ministers are simply taking free lunches from public enjoying market salaries and expected to be paid life-long pensions all at the same time.

n the past, government pensions for civil servants were based on long-term service (more than 25 years), below-market low wages(e.g. teachers or policemen), adjustments etc. Strictly no free lunch to government pensioners.

Government ministers were discouraging civil servants to be paid pensions probably since civil servants were being paid from 1970s market-level wages and CPF contributions were large for them to use for purchase of housing etc. So pension scheme was abolished for civil servants with conversions of pensions to CPF/lump-sum so many civil servants had foregone pensions years ago. Many civil servants affected were still unhappy today with an existing lawsuit filed to be reinstated to pensions so abolished.

Nowadays, within a short time after abolishing the civil servant pension schemes the ministers by sheer political power and without any logical or sustainable basis whatsoever like offset for lower wages paid to ministers or longer than 25 good years in service or good conduct to the whole country, ministers could just revert the pension schmes for public service and give themselves all kinds of pensions and rewards without check or explanation to citizens.

Instead, government ministers being paid market or above-market world’s highest bill-collector salaries spiced with all the multi-month bonuses and double salaries for some are now rewarding themselves with all kinds of pensions which smell while having the cheek to ask citizens to defer receiving of their CPF self-paid pension to receive them in annuities which accrue large chunks of interest profits to the banks to support government ministers’ pensions at S$180,000.00 pa which is not designed to compensate any under-payment of wages or loyalty to look after citizens’ interests at all.

By: RaymondChua

RaymondChua — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 05:42:42 +0000

So ic, if the gov are so capable of making honest mistake, why is there that they won’t make honest mistake when it time to claim annuities and cpf. Imagine the gov tell you can’t take out the cpf due to some honest mistake.

Perhap, it’s time we exercise the right of citizen to exert welfare because at the end of day, we can always tell them we make honest mistake if it doesn’t work out.

Why is it that only gov can only make honest mistake and get away with it everytime, whereas the citizen cannot even allow to make an honest mistake ?

What bullshit is this long term plan like annuity, cpf etc if only to get from public and when it is about ask money to take out from gov to hlep others, the plan are just shot-term ?

By: Robert Teh Kok Hua

Robert Teh Kok Hua — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 05:15:32 +0000

In the past, government pensions for civil servants were based on long-term service (more than 25 years), below-market low wages(e.g. teachers or policemen), adjustments etc. Strictly no free lunch to government pensioners.

By: sevenleleven

sevenleleven — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 04:31:24 +0000

came out in the paper, $179,000 pa pension for a million dollar minister. that work out to be approx $15,000 pm compared to athe annuity of some $300 pm.

By: otak69

otak69 — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 03:03:21 +0000

I’m against the idea of pensions for any Office Holder.

But, even if I were to agree, could anyone clarify what a Mayor does that is so important that he needs to be included in that pensionable list?

By: Ace

Ace — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 02:11:57 +0000

Another one of their geniuses at work here, with Halimah denying that there is any pension paid then 3 days later an “honest mistake” statement comes out from some press officer to retract.

I guess the maxim of this current administration is that,”If you cannot convince the people, then confuse the hell out of them.”

With all this to and fro of data and “honest mistakes”, I seriously think we are getting closer and closer to the stage whereby nothing said is to be trusted at all.

With the focus on retaining talents by paying them sky high salaries, we should expect better.

Why dun we have a system whereby every publicly announced “honest mistake” results in them taking a pay cut of 10% on their total annual package, which will be diverted to the public assistance schemes so that people on PA can have 2 square meals and maybe plus a cup of kopi-o a day. (Note to Vivien: Still not eroding work ethics since it is only kopi)

Then we may actually have some truth to the state of affairs. If we were solely to rely only on The ST, then it will be hopeless, since the ST is increasingly focusing on being a media whose main role is to provide supermarket coupons and lining for pet droppings to the general population.

This episode is just one of the many which will continue until the people actually realise that for every NSS, every fountain built around their estates, every goodie given. They end up footing the bill for so much more…..

By: RaymondChua

RaymondChua — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:14:23 +0000

From the data Fox found, it only mean that
the gov has been deceiving us using their own statistic figure and half-truth ?

By: Fox

Fox — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:47:23 +0000

For the first question, the answer can be found at http://www.moe.gov.sg/parliamentary_replies/2006/pq20060213.htm#Scholarship,

On average, about 14% of our undergraduates and 30% of our postgraduates in NUS and NTU in 2001-2005 were on scholarships. About one-third of the undergraduate scholars were local students. One quarter of the postgraduate scholars were local students.

The largest segment of undergraduate scholarships comes from industry, which offers about 54% of the scholarships. The Government’s share is about 35%. The universities have been increasing their provision of undergraduate scholarships, with their share rising from about 8% in 2001 to 11% in 2005. The remainder comprising less than 1% has been offered by research agencies.

On the other hand, the universities themselves account for the bulk of postgraduate scholarships, although their share has declined from about 90% in 2001 to 79% in 2005. The industry and research agencies have been increasing their provision of postgraduate scholarships. The number of postgraduate scholarships offered by industry has increased from about 5% in 2001 to 12% in 2005. Similarly, those offered by research agencies have increased from about 2% in 2001 to 6% in 2005. The postgraduate scholarships offered by the Government have also been on a rising trend. Currently, the Government offers about 3% of the postgraduate scholarships.

Currently, about 25% of the scholars holding university-sponsored postgraduate scholarships are local students.

By: Fed up

Fed up — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:27:55 +0000

Good to know that Leong is keeping track of all these!!! Keep it up. We will thank you alot one day when the time comes.

Cheers