I did not copy my idea from anybody. It came from my own writing. It is nice to know that some other important people share the same idea.

I think it is fairer and workable idea. For Defence minister it will be based on a few pointers such as low fatalities in peacetime, training to cost ratio and budget controls. Of course i not hoping for WARTIME performance.

As for MHA, Low Crimes, No more blunders and Custom Effectiveness in preventing smuggling of illegal stuffs, capturing FT “chickens” sending them back to mainland china and recapture of MSK. If not WKS better don get any bonus.

For health minister, lesser waiting time to see a doctor in hospital, patient happiness index, treatment to cost ratio, more well trained doctors, staffs and beds.

FG

For the PM, MAYBE the happiness index will come in. Though i’d prefer that he based his salary on the performance of his ministers whose in turn depends on quantifiable KPIs in their respective areas.

However, the fact that this has been suggested by an opposition member before will almost mean it will never be considered. It is a kiss of death…

diplomacy works only with culture and education. Of the latter apparently today’s leaders hold a goodly amount of or at least lay claim to that.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Planet_Index

People derive happiness from either materially or immaterially, a poem can satisfy the mind and give one happiness. However, happiness can also be derived from other forms. Drugs also can bring one happiness albeit temporarily, and as such would our ministers be coerced into catering to our preferences? It would be bad for us if our ministers were to cultivate our hedonistic tendencies. Like before pegging it to the private sector, leaders would be driven to make more money, would our ministers strive towards giving us the most happiness? When we arrive at a moment in time, where one must make the most difficult decision, and that decision entails creating a lot of unhappiness, would the ministers be able to do so and accept the salary cuts?

Happiness is more of an arbitrary quality than a quantity. Can we really put a scale to happiness? Happiness being so subjective furthermore can we accurately gauge everyone’s happiness and say that if it reaches past this level then the minister has proven his worth? This is important as if we cannot get an accurate reading and have to settle for a very close estimate, it would not be fair to the ministers or the citizens. In addition to that, can we be certain that the result will not be biased towards or against?

It is a misconception there is some form of linear relationship between happiness and money. A poor family can also achieve happiness just as easily as a rich family. Some people are much more easily satisfied and thus happy. So going along this line of reasoning, would it be possible to have a country with happy and contented but poor people? As such would the ministers be justified in paying themselves more? Like in Bhutan of which this Gross National Happiness came from.

Likewise, if you are going to peg the ministerial pay to a “happiness index” and couple it with the national mean wage multiplied by a factor of 10 -20, why is it not possible to link the ministerial salary to the “happiness index”. Which is to say, if the overall populace is satisfied, then the minister gets paid a fixed salary (that is not allowed to move freely upwards) and then gets rewarded by the “happiness index” (i.e. nothing but thanks from the citizens). This is also known as job satisfaction.

Public service is not always about bringing in the greatest amount of wealth or happiness to a country, there are brilliant people in the private sector to bring in the wealth. It also helps if there is a good judicial system and a free market economy with suitable monitoring agencies. Public service is about emancipating those who do not have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others. In addition, there should be fair equality of opportunity.

What and how do we deem fair compensation for those in the public sector I do not profess to know, and until we find a suitable format it will always be a subject for many more discussions.

Consider the final sentence of Mr Tan’s article: “The performance of a government is best measured by the happiness index. If the majority of the people are happy, they are more likely to re-elect the existing government.”

Based on this logic, the PAP government deserve to be re-elected for the past forty odd years because they make the people happy. Is this true? Or simply the fact that they have no choice at all.

You said …. but I think it can still become a victim of the “money politics” problem you raised. There are always short-term ways to raise happiness, such as establishing lavish welfare schemes or drastically lowering taxes, but the drawback may come only decades later.”

This is the line of reasoning used by the PAP leadership to discredit any suggestion to consider any form of welfare or reduction of tax (e.g. GST or petrol tax). The argument goes, “if we spend money recklessly, we will be bankrupt one day”.

Leaders must be prepared to make decisions appropriate to the times. The current high inflation needs measures to ameloriate the impact on many people. There is a case for petrol tax to be reduced, GST to be reduced and for a bigger cash payout under something like a new “Progress Package”.

I am not suggesting that we continue the welfare, reduced tax or cash payout until the nation becomes bankrupt. I am sure that our leaders will know the right time to discontinue these measures.

I agree with the approach of our leaders to avoid subsiding the price of essential commodities, such as rice, electricity. petrol, and to give a cash payout to help people to meet the higher cost.

I also like to acknowledge that they have done a good job in looking for many sources of supply around the world, and to have a cooperative like NTUC Fairprice to help to prevent profiteering by retailers.

Actually there is a “happiness index” already in place. It’s called the election process held every 4 years. Maybe we Singaporeans should also blame ourselves when we approve incompetent ministers during these election processes.