the following is the executive summary of SDP’s policy paper entitled ‘Ethical Salaries for a Public Centered Government’:
–
Singapore’s cabinet ministers are, by far, the highest paid in the world. The prime minister is paid more than six times the president of the United States. In defending the current salary structure, the Government puts forth two main arguments: One, the high pay is needed to keep ministers from becoming corrupt and, two, it will help to attract and retain capable people in positions of national leadership.
International comparisons show that current salaries of ministers in Singapore are excessively high and that the amounts should be considerably reduced through a revised formula. Ministers should be motivated by a strong sense of public service rather than being driven by monetary reward. Importantly, ministerial salaries should not be compared to those of the highest paid CEOs but rather to the lowest 20 percent of Singaporean wage earners.
The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) is of the view that while it is necessary to provide cabinet ministers with adequate and reasonable remuneration, the current salaries which amount to millions of dollars per annum are, indeed, excessive.
Furthermore, the actual pay of the ministers are not publicly revealed. The SDP proposes that ministerial salaries be reduced based on a revised formula. Such a formula needs to have built into it features of transparency and accountability overseen by an independent commission which can withstand both domestic and international scrutiny. Singapore’s ministerial wage formula should be based on international best practices and reflect the strong sense of ethics and public service.
We present five key recommendations that will correct the excesses of the present ministerial salary system and bring it into line with international principles of fair remuneration for government leaders.
The five recommendations are:
- Establish an independent salary commission to review ministerial salaries on an annual basis.
- Discontinue variable bonuses such as those tied to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth and individual performances of ministers.
- Peg ministerial pay to the wages of the lowest 20 percent of Singaporean workers.
- Provide allowances for ministers in their performance of state duties.
- Establish an independent anti-corruption board that has the power to investigate ministers for corruption.
Reducing ministerial salaries using this revised formula will help achieve three major objectives. One, it will address the call by Singaporeans for fair and ethical salaries for our elected public officials; two, it will ensure that ministers do not lose focus in raising the standard of living of all Singaporeans, and not just those at the top of the economic chain; and three, it will attract national leaders who are dedicated to serving the country and the people and not individuals who focus on advancing their own financial interests.
–
SDP’s Policy Paper on Ministerial Salaries HERE.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
If more citizens aware of this proposal, which is difficult considering the circumcistances, there could be salary changes to something like this proposal.
Imagine, if all citizens like this idea, then, they will have to give in.
SDP should consider publishing the table in the newspaper as an ad.
In a practical world of reality, there are only two kinds of bosses (leaders). Either they are “slave drivers” or “slave owners”
Slave drivers slave you on hard performance pressure but at least they share rewards by giving you bigger pay packet than last year if you perform.
Slave owners is self-centred thinking they really own slaves. They pay themselves as much as their dirty hands can dig deep enough in the corporate jar of cookies and pays their performing slaves as little as possible just to retain them in “membership” participation.
BUT IN WHICH CASE, DID EITHER SLAVE DRIVERS OR SLAVE OWNERS DON’T WANT MORE PAY FOR THEMSELVES EVEN WHEN THEY ARE NON-PERFORMING?
The nature of truth is pay NEVER motivates performance. It only motivates demand for even more pay regardless of slave drivers or slave owners.
Ironically, pay motivates performance if slaves, slave drivers and slave owners are underpaid (they have to survive) and their performance can be transparently and rigidly measured like quantifiable piece rate in unit of output or costs savings without sacrificing quality and quantity.
In executive or leadership roles, performance is airy-fairy tale rubbish open to all kinds of cynical manipulations of short-term performance measure and screwing long-term consequences.
@Oxygen
I agree with you this is a mean world. Men once given an opportunity to take control of power will not likely to do good for the good of all.
Laws and regulations are only look-good presentation which provide opportunities for legalised corruptions and cronyism.
Democracy and capitalism is now in a tailspin doing more bad than good though by far these at least are preferable over dictatorship or authoritarianism.
Everyday, we will hear successes of those in control of power but such successes are up to them to present in the manner they like.
Expect more cans of worms to crawl out everywhere. They will say they make so many percents per year but auditors will say it is okay because they can also treat losses as capital gains or long-term investments which need not be immediately updated in a practice called creative accounting.
Look at how REITs are being managed – management fees and sale/transfer of assets are being done for the benefit of the bigger brother the REIT managers are serving as happened in Keppel Land’s sale to its K-REIT. Who bear the over-pricing in such sale? Company laws allow big bosses to hide behind the scene calling the shots without bearing legal responsibilities for conflicts of interests.
GIC and Temasek are losing more monies in many foreign investments but legally it will say their auditors are the ones who decided the accounts presentation. The real world is auditors must know what their big paymasters quietly wish them to do without asking too many direct questions. So who are we to ask GIC or auditors to do right because both of them are not legally responsible to answer for such proxy wrong doings which they can blame on the laws themselves.
Do we the citizens expect them to change and show us with real accounts our monies or at least CPFs are safe.
Amidst all the concern about salary, lets not forget that ministers and senior civil servants can be paid huge performance bonuses whose quantum remain secret under the present system. What i suspect is that Gerard Ee will propose a pay cut and this will be implemented BUT the secret performance bonus rises to compensate since there is no transparency. We need changes to the pay STRUCTURE not just base salary ( although thats too high as well)
@kf
i can understand your view. where i am coming from is simply that for the same job, an mnc pays more than an sme. the reason is because the standards to be met are different. so you are quite right in saying that there is no value add to the portfolio but to meet the standards of an mnc requires someone of higher calibre and therefore a higher pay is justified.
@oxygen
hi, i am not sure the point you are trying to be make about china. china has terrible pollution, corruption and an awful human rights record. it’s workers are so poorly paid. surely, you are not suggesting that we pay our leaders the same wage and enjoy a developing country quality of life?
as for canada and australia, they have natural resources we do not have. they have tourist attractions, lots of land and natural produce, that’s why they do well. if you have lived in these countries (i have for a while), you will know that their public services are not comparable to ours. sure we can pay our ministers the same as australian ministers but please review the quality of their ministers, transport and communications infrastructure, public housing, education system, crime rate and the amount australians pay in tax. i am not so sure you will find the australian or canadian public service standards acceptable especially for the amount of tax you pay.
you have used selected individuals to suggest that there is no link between performance and pay. if you can cite some relevant studies/ research instead of individuals which show this is the case, i will be happy to learn something new. but to my knowledge, it is an inescapable fact, especially in pragmatic singapore, that the more qualified individuals are paid more. many students make the pragmatic decision to study life sciences and accountancy over something more exciting like drama or arts even though it bores them to death for no other reason than these careers will pay them well. it is certainly not out of interest. in most countries, accountants rank very low on a lady’s list of ideal professions because they are so boring. but in singapore, the ladies rank accountants very high for a date.
i do not share your hope that men of chen show mao’s calibre will step forward without a high pay. the reality is that only one such chen show mao has stepped forward after decades and he did so after accomplishing most of his personal goals around the age of 50. well better late than never i suppose. but in a pragmatic culture where high wages seems to be a focal point in most peoples’ lives, rare indeed is it to find, especially among the young, someone who will step into the political arena.
@ Raja,
You had made some good and critical points. We do need some KPIs but what are the KPIs and how should be refined.
While the report on the surface is good, it seems to be missing some points(whether accidentally or not is another issue).
1) The report has recommended the structure for MPs allowances. However what is strange is that it does not make comparisons of MPs’ allowances with other countries, unlike the level of PM and Ministers. There could be many reasons why comparisons of MPs across different countries are missing from the report and out of the blue, we have a recommendation on how our MP needs to be paid.
Let’s take Australia (which was highlighted in the report) for example. The basic pay of an Aussie MP is AUD $ 140,910 annually or (SGD $ 185,803 yearly). This basic pay does not include other kind of allowances eg transportation, retirement, electorate, resettlement etc. An electorate allowance of AUD$32,000 is payable per year. An Australian MP is also provided a car for transportation while on parliamentarian business. There are also many other form of entitlements. Under certain circumstances, the MP could request for a car to be provided for him at all times. Therefore the total sum an Australian MP receive at the end of the day will be more than SGD$185,803. Should he leave office, the MP is also eligible for remuneration. On top of that, there is the Gold Pass scheme which ex MPs enjoyed. Such pay is comparable, if not better than what our MPs have currently.
2) On the same day the SDP report came out, the salary of Australian MPs, Ministers and PM has been raised. Aus PM’s BASIC salary is now at SGD$ 619742 and not as SGD$510,495 as reflected in the report. The Australian government has also recommended measures which are not in line with SDP recommendations to provide allowances for ministers in place of higer fixed salary. The Aussies had found that allowances are subjected to abuses, and abuses although detected, is too late as public money has been wasted as legal efforts to detect, recover or take actions against the offender will use up national resources which are better used for other purposes. Therefore allowances will be scrapped and in their places, a much more higher salary will be enforced.
While I’m not questioning the aim of the report which is commendable, what is disturbing is the methodology of the report that tends to hide certain information when it is not favourable to certain party. The leading writer for the report should know that a good research paper need to be as objective as possible and any misrepresentation or hiding/playing of data would render the report questionable and unethical from the academic point of view, which is a pity as it has the potential to change the way how things should be done.
@ raja
Your views in response, I am afraid suggest to me your apparent shallowness of awareness and experience. You might think otherwise.
China in 1990s – if you visit there is different from current. Give you one example – Wangfujing, Beijing prime shopping district, was like North Bridge Road in the early 1970s. Now is our Orchard Road comparable? I been to Shaoguan 5 years ago – its shopping district was like Wangfujing in the 1990s. Shaoguan today is probably a rural village in Malaysia compared to Kuala Lumpur – THAT WAS THE PACE OF TRANSFORMATION PROGRESS IN CHINA IN LESS THAN ONE GENERATION which saw hundreds of millions lifted out of poverty and backwardness. Their generational rotation of leadership have not seen anyone getting paid a fraction of our Ministers.
YOU DON’T NEED HUGE PAY PACKET TO ATTRACT REAL QUALITY IN POLITICAL LEADERSHIP TO TRANSFORM NATIONS. And China is NOT the only one.
As for Australia, you been there for a while. WELL I LIVE THERE AND IN AND OUT FOR DECADES – that is the comparison for your matching. You spoke of their “lousy” public service – I have a lot more personal/career encounter with them at the highest levels in different fields from law to corporate business to community matters, to education to immigration. Singapore has no match of class performance and standards compared to them – transparency, rigour of thoughts argument, accountability of institutions etc.
BY THE WAY, YOU KNOW THE QUALITY OF GOVERNANCE BY THE RIGOUR OF CORPORATE LAW APPLICATION IN THEIR BUSINESS WORLD. Australia don’t have ENRON nor the derivative sub-prime lending scams and so is Canada.
As for pay and performance, I gave the example of GE, Apple etc. I leave you to do your research for the rest. The fact I could pick up the “oddity” of chart performance of GE shares to prove my point of argument since Jack Welch left showed my keen awareness of what the real world is. Who else knows GE underpeformed?
Everyone else, perhaps, thought GE is such a wonder miracle when their shareholders now must be very angry. I am glad I am not one of them.
I also illustrate the logic that pay motivate pay, not performance. Performance is a employer centred and employer-driven demand, not an inducement or intrinsic motivation variable.
Money, by its nature, is an EXTRINSIC reward – if you cannot even figure this out – it suggest your shallow thinking. The simple truth is if I am motivated like a businessman should be – I will strive very hard even if I failed or if I am successful – the MOTIVATION IS WITHIN ME. Money is extrinsic. If I am lucky and do well, then I get lots of money. If I failed and makes barely survival, do I then climbed up the tallest building along Shenton Way and walk the thin air in disgust of money motivation failure to achieve??
Or do you in similar circumstamces?
Motivation for performance must come from within me – that is why Angela Merkel says if politician wants money, they are in the WRONG PROFESSION. That is why President Lee Myunk Bak donated US$26 million to education and another US$10 million to other charity. How much was he paid or being paid now? Park Chung Hee who transformed South Korea from a poor agrarian economy to an industrial powerhouse was a former military general. He lives frugally.
How can a frugal man be motivated by money if he does NOT want it or it does not matter to him if he has a lot or a little?
If you can motivate a monk or a nun with SEX, then the “honey” pot of money or sex trap proves the monk or nun is a complete dud of his professional calling. Am I wrong of deep thoughts or you are shallow instead?
@oxygen
i think otherwise. gdnite.
@ Ray
Take a read at this. Australian Ministerial pay and MPs pay is determined by an INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION TRIBUNAL. Its PM will get a pay rise along with MPs, but the Gold Pass is cancelled in exchange.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/australian-pm-paid-more-obama-reports-015640329.html
And the electoral allowance of A$32K is NOT income to the parliamentarians. If you ever walked into one of these in the suburbs, you will notice at the door sign reads – the electoral office of the member for Parramatta -that is to say, they rent their own premises, staff support, legal services in performing their meet-the-people service.
Here in Singapore, PAP MPs use premises of the People’s Association, no costs to them of establishment, furnishing and use of office resources.
In Australia, it is you pay your own from that allowance. And a lot of MPs has no cars at all but reimburse for fair expenses in using their own.
@ Raja
If you read this thread tommorrow. Here is the quote from Angela Merkel on pay and politicians. It is NOT my fiction of imagination, even if you don’t think so of what I wrote in this thread.
To be serious, if we were only interested in earning big money then a politician would have to go and work in industry.
Angela Merkel – Money – Earnings – Politicians – Jobs
I don’t believe you are simply born with the ambition of becoming chancellor. But if you want to make a difference, if you enjoy putting ideas into practice, then the post of chancellor has to be the one presenting the biggest opportunity of all.
Angela Merkel – Change – Politicians – Ambition – Ideas – Enjoyment – Opportunity
http://www.woopidoo.com/business_quotes/politician-quotes.htm
POLITICS AND MONEY IS SUCH A DEBASED COUPLE, only a perfect match for corruption or corrupt conduct – illegal or legalised.
This is reality.
Good night to you too.
Citizen’s minwage $1400 /mth
MP’s minwage $14000/mth
Minster’s minwage $1400/h
See the big gap?
The whole world see!
Worth the laughter…
@Minwage,
Well said..”The whole world see! Worth the laughter”
But the pap doesnt see what the whole world see. And that’s the tragedy. The pap is alienating itself from Singaporeans with its self serving, self indulging, self gratifying view and policies.
Legalised corruption is corruption despite how the pap packages its policies
this ministerial salary mess is the result of woody GCTs doings in trying to show lky that he’s better and in buying the hearts and loyalty of his ministers.
had he gone head on with lky for belittling him as wooden he would long have become a charcoal. so never mind being called woody, he used his term in office to make himself well-liked and to get the support of his own group of cronies to prove lky wrong.
while most of us are fully aware of the mediocre standards of people like wks, mbt, lss, lhk, yct etc woody gct have been heard often praising them to the sky. he doesnt deserve the esm post at all.
now he has left all the shit for lhl to clear, and lhl also needs to play his ball game carefully. else he and father would not be able to win back the hearts and loyalty of these greedy pigs already spoiled by gct.
so, its really hard time for lhl and gerard now.
hope papies will learn this lesson forever. lets wait and see the result of the review and see who stays and who quits. we will soon know who are the mercenary ministers and mps and who are really passionate to lead, prosper and die with true blue singaporeans.
@Sal
Good factual analysis of what has happened and caused the current mess of rich and poor divide, elitism, legalised corruption and cronyism. LHL indeed is in a fix how to get out of such a mess.
Raja,
It is not just about the size of the portfolio the individual takes on. the problem with the mnc-sme comparison is we still have a lot of underperformers CARRIED over from their 2006 5-year probation period into the 2011-2016 term. They kept harping on portfolio size with near-total disregard on performance and accountability.
No one said ministers have to be paid pittance. However, they are fast to over-reward themselves, slow to fire. There is no mnc, or even sme I know who would pay astronomical scales, and yet provide such long probations. Even if they stepped down, or were asked to do so, they retire with mind-blowing packages. We give pension to someone who has served at least 8 years, even if the person blunders, or underperforms in the terms, do we ? WOW!
Such underperfomers work and thrive in a large organization with deep recruitment, compensation, appraisal and retention issues.
Whether TPL is made out to perform is immaterial. She is just a little more glaring but that doesn’t mean she is the only less superior option we picked.
The fact is we didn’t pick better candidates, who understood the ground, are competent, more mature and willing to place the locals first.
If minister and MP jobs are not dream jobs, it’s hard to find what are.
High Pay = High Performance?
Do your maths of reward-performance contigency formula again. What is the missing link and black hole fallacy in that linkage?
Well it is ABILITY.
Add -ve ability = High Pay + NEGATIVE PERFORMANCE.
Is this not intuitively true?
If you pay “oxygen” to trade proprietary foreign exchange for any investment bank, I am supremely confident that “oxygen” will bankupt his employer A LOT FASTER than Nick Leeson busted Ing Barings.
In reality, Leeson was highly motivated to keep his pay and his performance bonus (which he should NOY have been paid considering the financial fraud and deadly “performance well hidden) but his true performance was???
Why?
Just look at the Pavlov’s dog salivating classical conditioning model of behaviour illustrated by this Nobel prize winner as a good explanation model of failure of pay motivating performance.
http://psychology.about.com/od/classicalconditioning/a/pavlovs-dogs.htm
Pavlov’s dog salivate at the presence of the assistant even when he brought no food (food is incentive to the dog just like pay to managers). Food is a NEUTRAL stimulus. After the first dose of reward contingency of pay, the dog became conditioned to the (food expectancy) pay represented by the mere presence of the assistant.
PAY IS THEREFORE THE NEUTRAL STIMULUS. Beyond a certain point of quantity and evolution passage of time, the manager BECOMES CONDITION TO MOTIVATED TO LOOKING FOR MORE PAY instead of looking for performance to earn that pay. Pavlov’s dog look for food by salivating even if there is no food brought in by the assistant.
So after the first pay check, the manager salivate for MORE PAY AND BIGGER PAY PACKET, NOT BETTER PERFORMANCE. He or she completely forgot about performance just like Pavlov’s dog classical conditioning.
Overpaid managers and politicians salivate for more pay but not salivating for more performance – LEAST OF ALL WHEN HE OR SHE GOT NO ABILITY AND UNDERPERFORMED. He looks for a bigger paycheck, a bigger bank statement at the end of every pay cycle ???
Intuitively, that observation is true confession of reality. How much can you eat, dress, drink, womanise or spent on toy boys – lesser still for public figures when news of such exotic behaviour will spread on internet like wild fires – forget the sad face of the wild flower or toy of abandoned spouse?
LHL has not delivered any of the GE promises and you expect minister pay review to churn out surprises. He has 5 more years to play his game, why would he do anything?
Gerald E is nothing but a soldier, the scholars at PMO will tell him what to deliver in his speech.
We should not dream or expect any changes since we are used to their style and story telling. Massive import of FTs will still continue. Hdb prices will escalate further.
PERFORMANCE HAVE NEVER BEEN DEPENDENT ON PAY. It is dependent SOLELY on competence or ability. Pay is just an extrinsic seduction of demand for more pay.
In the political world,if you are a true “performer”, you would NOT ne terrified of cutting edge public cross-examination by the tiger journalism in the media. If you are an Australian, Canadian or American PM or President and refused to answer a tough probing question from an incisive journalism, that is POLITICAL SUICIDE of failure admission.
When politicians have to muzzle, terrorise or even merely hauling the inquisitive media lecuring them on what to ask, how to ask, what to write, WHAT NOT TO ASK, WHAT NOT TO PUBLISH UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES OF IMPLIED THREAT TO HARM THEIR WELL-BEING IF FAILED TO COMPLY OR TOE UNSPOKEN BOUNDARY MARKERS, where is the performance of politicians?
And why this almost pyschopathic obsession of spread of online media and deviant thoughts of controlling information dissemination when they themselves are so busily engaged in brainwashing poisoning of public mind to distort rational thinking?
Such pyschotic behaviour is evidence of CONCEALMENT of true NON-PERFORMANCE. If I perform on the job, I would welcome as much public scrutiny as I can get of media attention. My success glows and that gives me the licence to demand more pay for performance, don’t I?
That is why such underperforming politicians will always be afraid of public scrutiny of their deceptive behaviour and incompetencies.
And still demanding of skyrocketing pay to perpetuate this rorting of society and escalating the mess all that non-performance germinates and escalates over time?
Which rational citizenry approve of demand for superlative pay for non-performance?
@oxygen
I fully agree with you that human greed is the cause of our many problems.
Obama has clearly exposed the human greed by his strong criticisms of banking CEOs paying themselves obscene salaries at the expense of shareholders with all kinds of tricks in the book like benchmarking, talent, meritocracy, which are castles in the air and not anything based on proven standards or measurable performance. The same trick is being used here in our little red dot to bolster ministers and political members with millions of salaries and bonuses plus life-long windfalls without any proven linkage as you mentioned.
Guy Kawasaki has clearly illustrated the point that the greatest successes like Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Apple etc are all brought about by untested people who have no track records to go by and that serial entrepreneurs invariably failed by trying to prove their first success was no flukes.
So if Lee Hsien Loong is to get out of the mess over the overtaxing and overcharging of all the government services and society rich-poor divide and cynicisms, the solution is unlikely to be conventional. However he does not appear to be willing to give up his dad’s strong autocratic rule trying to justify it with window dressing called basics and fundamentals. He has just put failed ministers back on board including wks, lbh, lby as if messing up all the housing and prison security is not enough of a mess.
So people have to wait long long like what most netizens are saying and not raise their hope too high or expect change as promised.
@ Robert Teh
Your post raised some interesting thoughts
“….our little red dot to bolster ministers and political members with millions of salaries and bonuses plus life-long windfalls without any proven linkage as you mentioned.,,,”
Why am I reminded of huge pay “without PROVEN linkage when perhaps there is NO LINKAGE at all – proven of irrelevance or unproven of relevance? Can you plant an “experienced” head on a young shoulder of no relevant experience, paying him or her a godly fortune expecting miracle performance?
Maybe, he or she can’t even engage intelligently orally with citizenry. If the mind thinking is proven empty and the policy-making intellect ( not just academic intellect who often failed in real life miserably too) of detailed analytical thoughts on the feet is suspect given that prior observaton, how can he or she performed at a far higher level of rigorous achievement demands? So in these deprived circumstances, can PAY MAGICALLY MOTIVATE PERFORMANCE of this virgin Turk of no ability of policy formulation or even ocmmunication skills of selling that policy construct?
And your comment on wall street greed invite this informed sharing. Here is the true flavour of extremism of wall street greed damaging American economy and society.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/big-profits-zero-taxes-for-large-us-companies-2011-11-03
I am for pro-business and capitalism but greed is way overdone in this age and that swept the economic and political landscape that will destroy humanity. Who are you going to sell your next invention when the poor cannot afford to pay?
As for serial entrepreneur, just look at the dot.com bust of 2000, how many inventions of wonder is a commercial success relative to failure numbers?
I think businessmen, entrepreneurs and politician are born, not incubated in the artificial laboratory of fake grooming of suspect talent of no real ability or competence. You therefore don’t pay excessively to experiment with sure to fail politicians or serial entrepreneurs. My betting ratio of success could be even better in the casinos.
THE PERFORMANCE AND SUSTAINED PERFORMANCE HAS TO COME FIRST BEFORE THE SEDUCTION OF PAY TO KEEP HIM OR HER THERE.
Otherwise it is corrupt failures waiting. Pavlov’s dogs proved the fallacy of extrinsic inducement.
Don’t you agree?
oxygen, the problem is also compounded once we have policy makers who are chasing after $1 more than the millions they get :-)
@ Robert Teh
If you look at China, I can’t help but noticed that their top policy-making politbureau members are very poorly paid (relative to the world and Singapore in particular) BUT THEY ARE “VERY OLD” AND EXPERIENCED.
Their “young” talent in waiting to get into the top policy-making political organs are already at 60 plus, battle tested of experience in very tough assignments elsewhere.
THE OLD DON’T HAVE THIS MAD HURRIED CRAZE FOR BIG PAY but have a hurried craze to advance their country’s development before the “mobile call” of due date from their designated graveyards. The old either made their money or forget about it in their late years of any monetary ambition. The top policy-making members are NOT noted for financial corruption, notwithstanding pervasive corruption nation-wide at lower levels.
THE CHINESE SEEMS TO GET GOOD, SOLID EXPERIENCED MEN AT THEIR POLITICAL APEX, FREE OF CORRUPTION OR UNDUE AMBITION FOR INSANE AMOUNT OF MONEY.Deng Xiao Ping slept in a disused pig-sty before his political rehabilitation.
And it works very well for China’s phenomenal economic development. I am just awe of this aspect of Chinese political institution.
I have been pondering this thoughts for some times already of its possible relevance for your own nation-building.
How come we got so many “YOUNG” parachutists air-dropped into GRC’s condom protection?
Condoms are good to protect against aids infection but it also obstructs babies making we need for this country’s future development resources.
@ kf
” oxygen, the problem is also compounded once we have policy makers who are chasing after $1 more than the millions they get :-)..”
I have compelling fear (you or anybody can prove me otherwise) that it is truly the UNDERPERFORMERS looking for a BIGGER PAY CHECK before their term or management position in corporate world is nailed “time’s up”
In that case, if eventuate, the policy-making outcome must be, dressing up APPEARANCE of performance, leaving the rotten skeletons in the cupboard for the next incumbent or the host feeding their crazy drive for desperate money.
THIS IS THE WORST DREADED OUTCOME POSSIBLE FOR THE NATION’S SUFFERINGS.
@ Oxygen – Misrepresentation of Data
You have missed the point. I am not disputing the point that we need to review how politicians are paid. Australia’s and other countries politicians remuneration has been lower than Singapore and like what you have pointed out, they have independent body to monitor such salary.
Since you are an expert in Australian politics, can you confirm and provide evidence that their system has prevented corruption? Just a few days ago one politican was taken to task for hiring a prostitute using public money. That is the reason why the Aussie Government has decided to increase the pay and decided to remove most if not all such allowances as it provided the avenue for corrupt behaviours (which is the opposite of what the SDP is recommending in the report ie less pay and more allowances).
What I am challenging here is the method use by the writer to put up report. There has been selective amnesia or cherry picking of data. If the writer is a layman like you and me, I can overlook that. But being an expert in policy matter, why does the writer decide to suppress some information that clearly shows MPs in some countries are paid more than ours.
What the report’s writer has done is no different from the MIW – cherry picking of information and data. In the academic world, massaging and misuing data is a serious crime and you get a big F for that.
Last point, if you have allowances, you will need someone to administer, monitor, vetted and of course and independent body to check all these stuff. These resources will have to be paid from public fund ie you and my tax money. The Aussie government knows such system is a waste of time and there are often loopholes which politicians will try to find. It is better to remove such allowances and have higher pay in returns (which again is the opposite of what the report has recommended).
How much you try to spin it, the fact is the report has not been truthful totally. Why only PM and Ministers salaries are compared across different countries but not the MPs. The answer is obvious. Because the data does not support the writer’s agenda and biasness.
Ethically, there is not much difference between the writer and MIW when it comes to presenting data. While I support the aim to review politicians remuneration, I do not support using unethical method to do it. I leave it for the readers to decide.
Group chosen to review their salary are known to ministers whose pay is being reviewed. Look at the conflict there.
@kf
yes i take your points. i do think our views are quite aligned. i agree that the pay needs adjustment and there are certainly underperformers, hence the review. if i was not clear then hopefully its clear now.
@ Ray
With all due respect to your intellect, I can only agree that your argument failed on your misrepresentation of data, perhaps ignorantly so.
For a start, I have never declared that I am an “expert” of Australian politics but certainly more informed in this case than you by some distance of mileage. Look at the extent of naivety of what you wrote below.
“Just a few days ago one politican was taken to task for hiring a prostitute using public money. That is the reason why the Aussie Government has decided to increase the pay and decided to remove most if not all such allowances as it provided the avenue for corrupt behaviours (which is the opposite of what the SDP is recommending in the report ie less pay and more allowances).”
Fabulous misrepresentation even if not intentionally blasphemy. look at how many lies you have told here BY JEEPING DETAILS OUT.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/i-couldnt-see-properly-macdonalds-twobot-night-with-tiffanie-20111202-1oajx.html
This is sex trap involving a property developer – NOTHING TO DO WITH MINISTERIAL OR MP ALLOWANCE. No money changed hands in that alleged “sex-nonomics” exchange investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption. You misrepresented data.
And your comment that…”That is the reason why the Aussie Government has decided to increase the pay and decided to remove most if not all such allowances…” is a SECOND BIG LIE AND DATA MISREPRESENTATION. Where is my proof of that?
You are incredibly naive to believe that an investigation only at this stage, inconclusive as yet, as become the inducement spur of decision to change Ministerial pay or MP allowance. You mean Australian government or any government makes policy decision on the run by mere rumour, investigation and in sudh sudden hurry? You don’t understand how Government works, RAY. So you lie without blinking an eyelid. And where is that misrepresentation of this data? The Ministerial pay and MPs allownce is FOR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT involving the Prime Minister, her colleagues and Opposition as well. The insidious reference you made of possible corruption read in Aussie papers (minus the details and truth) involves only STATE GOVERNMENT – in this case, state of New South Wales! So you hid the details and told plenty of lies here. SO VERY DISAPPOINTING FOR ME TO READ. The media discussion of Ministerial pay has NOTHING to do with State politics involving Ian NacDonald personal life experiences.
And one more truth I will boot in into this discussion thread. And for the record, I believe that Federal MPs are not allow to hold another job as elected member. Look at Maxine McKew, an accomplished journalist with at least a 7-digit pay took on former Aussie PM and won the Federal seat of Bennelong. How much sacrifice she made just as a MP?
If you want the weblink of truth, google mckew + John Howard + Bennelong + horror show.
For a meagre allowance of $32,000 besides her pay of course of around maybe A$150,000, she swept John Howard, the second longest surviving PM in Australia into the dustbin of history. McKew, is not motivated by pay but national political role in changing history.
@oxygen
i read your responses. i feel you are cherry picking when you make your comparisons. eg. you completely ignore the fact that china leaders behave like the mafia. they have a horrific human rights record, pollute the environment and the people have no rights or freedom of speech. i’m shocked you consider this admirable leadership.
@oxygen
you do the same cherry picking with australia. how much tax do australians pay? what is their crime rate? i’ve been to see their public housing, have you? it is nothing compared to the quality of hdb flats and estates with parks and amenities. have you tried their transport system? it is not bad but nowhere near the standard of our public transport. the australians pay more tax for inferior public services.
raja, ok :-)
oxygen, I get the impression that the performance dressing up has already started, whether we reach a dead end or not lah. You need to look elsewhere to find that person to convince you otherwise :-)
@ raja
” i read your responses. i feel you are cherry picking when you make your comparisons. eg. you completely ignore the fact that china leaders behave like the mafia..”
No, my friend. I am talking about DEVELOPMENT TRANSFORMATION that they brought to China. Of course, I am fully aware and fully acknowledge that their mad chase for wealth destroyed environment and I also protest vehmently against their political dictatorship – but all these true observations of yours and I fully agree, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PAY AND PERFORMANCE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS THREAD.
If this discussion is on autocratic leadership, its debased flaws and disgusting impacts on society, I will be lampooning China louder than you and every other bloggers here combined.
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/chinese-plane-takes-off-from-airport–without-authorisation-20111201-1o8ne.html
This is enough to make me explode, RAJA, You have no ideas of how heated I have of exchange with Chinese nationals on some personal matters and their political issues when I was there.
BUT LIKE I SAID, THESE HAS NO RELEVANCE TO THE SUBJECT OF PAY AND PERFORMANCE DUBIOUS LINKAGE.
@oxygen
yes it does. you can’t just take one aspect of their leadership and ignore other aspects when it comes to evaluating their performance as leaders and whether they are worth their pay.
i wldn’t pay them a cent to live under their leadership no matter how many new shopping and business districts they build.
@ raja
” you do the same cherry picking with australia. how much tax do australians pay? what is their crime rate? i’ve been to see their public housing, have you? it is nothing compared to the quality of hdb flats and estates with parks and amenities. have you tried their transport system? it is not bad but nowhere near the standard of our public transport. the australians pay more tax for inferior public services.”
Again, you write with your particular cherry pick slant. I said it is pay and performance linkage in this thread. Australian transport is NOT as cheap as Singapore. Yes, certainly. But there is QUALITY GOVERNANCE ON A MUCH BIGGER BROADER SCALE of its corporate sector, law and order, electoral transparency etc. THAT IS WHY AUSTRALIA DON’T GET CAUGHT OUT WITH BANKING SUB-PRIME DERIAVATIVES, WITH ENRON TYPE COLLAPSES JUST LIKE CANADA IN THE GFC.
The strength of their institutions is seen in how the Minister lost 3 consecutive lawsuit against Mohamed Haneef charged with alleged terrorism flimsy up evidence. Dr. Haneef was ex-parte in all proceedings (meaning he absent in giving his evidence). The judges in the Magistrates, Federal Court and the High Court of Australia threw the monkey out. And if that failed, a litigant could sue a judge for judicial bias in the NSW Judicial Commission. This is how rigorous their judicial system is. There are plenty of cases where small men wins big against corporate and political Australia. How many jurisdictions are like that in the world? Open up your eyes. It is this kind of rigour of check and balances tha sustain Australia’s governance which saved them from the excess of Enron type failures. You don’t know Australia, Raja.
If I recall, you talk of Australia have natural resources as compared to Singapore. It is NOT A PLUS but a curse in real life as can be seen now. The resources boom drives up the A$ which is killing manufacturing, retailing, tourism and education export sector. Mining is big export earner but a much smaller proportion of national output than agriculture, education, tourism, retailing combined. So maybe 10% of them are having boom times, the other 90% are sufering misery. Just google about Perth property prices, it has fallen in the last 24 months.
You don’t know about Australia, Raja. I survive in their wilderness outback even “working” with aborigines and big cities for a very long time.
@oxygen
we just have to disagree on australia, the discussion will take too long. i am not impressed by their leaders, system or public services and do not think it is better than spore in most aspects. and the tax is hefty. but no doubt you have your views.
# raja
“i wldn’t pay them a cent to live under their leadership no matter how many new shopping and business districts they build…”
The economic well-being and transformation change is NOT about shopping or business districts they build in Australia. It is utter nonsense to suggest otherwise.
It is about the rigorous of governance that allows them TO PROSPER AND SURVIVE A CRISIS without the hypocrisy of taking out a lot of saving to artificially pump up the place to give it APPEARANCE OF RESILENCE. Australia, Canada, South Korea have done that in the GFC and it will again if there is a meltdown in 2012. They don’t have the kind of teaser loan for housing like America, or the derivatives speculation in dubious assets in their banks. Their Reserve Bank makes decision on monetary policy independent of who is governing in Canberra.
As I said, you don’t know Australia. Neither do you understand the fallacy of pay-performance linkage when ABILITY or otherwise is the missing link in that fallacious equation, and the realities of Pavlov dog’s classical conditioning.
THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD POLITICIANS WHO CAN DELIVER PERFORMANCE WITHOUT OVERWHELMINGLY ABSORDED BY LOOKING AT THEIR PAY CHECKS DAY AND NIGHT AND JUMPING AROUND ON THE PUBLIC PLATFORM LIKE A CRAZY MONEY-MAD MONKEY OR COMPARING WITH WHO ELSE EARNS WHAT.
As merkel said correctly, you want to make transformation change for your society, go into politics. If you want money, go into business. Those in the top Chinese policy-making bureau did not go into business, did they? And if they do, will they succeed in a competitive market place?
@oxygen
my comment was in ref to china.
@ Raja
Even if you now said your comment was in ref to China when you posed the question to me of transport costs in Australia, your posting seems to be dancing around of cherry pick of your convenience.
But leave that aside, the politics in China of human rights stinks as much as their environmental degradation, but as as I said, how does that explain the pay linkage to transformation change I noted of Wangfujin in 1990s to the shopping districts in so backward Shaoguan today?
THE WHOLE COUNTRY HAS CHANGE – LANDSCAPE, INDUSTRY, COMMERCE AND BUYING UP GLOBAL NATURAL RESOURCES BUSINESS.
Can China do that 20 years ago – buying global business from Europe, America, Australia and Africa? They have become very wealthy in AGGREGATE NATIONAL TERMS all achieved without paying their politicians heavenly high salaries.
And I said, it is the same for South Korea.
Likewise, Australia and Canada escaped the nightmares of the GFC woes. Canada is living next door to USA and it is the biggest market for US exporters in trade terms, even bigger than EU.
How Canada escaped the crisis like Australia? Do you homework and find out, Raja. And why is Germany performing under Merkel who thinks too that politician should not be money seeking but transformation change seeking of historical dimension of their motivational drives.
THE EVIDENCE BEFORE MY EYES IS THAT THOSE COUNTRIES WITHOUT MONEY CRAZED POLITICIANS COMPLETELY OUTPERFORMED THOSE WHO ARE CRAZY ABOUT MONEY.
Readers of TOC can read and judge for themselves.
If the ministers think that they deserve these super high salaries, than Singaporeans deserve ‘First World Quality Of Life’ better than any other countries in this world. Than I will say that it is justified. If not it is BULLSHIT.
@ Oxygen,
What a nonsense are you talking about? If the Chinese leadership are as good as you have said, would they have killed thousands of young Chinese men and women in Tiananmen Square !! Are you then supporting killing of innocents people on the street?
You are the one who are cherry picking with information. Have you stayed in China? If not you should just shut your mouth. There are corruptions at every level and the leaders’ children are fat and bloody rich sucking the poor people.
@ Raja and Ray,
You should ignore Oxygen. He is sputtering rubbish as he has lost any intellectual capacity to engage you both.
@ remember tiananmen
Yes, you run out of valid argument and attack the messenger. Who says there is no political repression in China in this thread? We are all talking about pay and peformance here.
And have I stayed in China? You obviously in a different orbit! Or is this serious discussion beyond your intellects and substance offends your little sensitivity, admit it.
Have you just heard of a country called China? Where are you? If you have not heard of that country until this thread, just shut up since you can’t engage in a constructive debate or conversation. That is the best I can advise you.
@Robert Teh
that’s just what I felt. thanks for affirmation, anyway.
i’m inclined to believe that lhl could have felt that now is the most appropriate time for him to act on the review of ministerial pay in tandem with the outcry and support of the people to do so. when he first took over the pmship he probably had to show that he is as good as woody gct, if not better. thus, he has to allow what woody goh had created to continue.
to pm lhl, hope you would listen to the ground and boldly act now without fear of your greedy ministers and mps. also do not fear woody goh if he could do you in. if you do the right thing you have the support of the people. you don’t need the support of woody goh. get rid of his old popular policies benefiting only the ministers and mps. should any of them leave because of their substantial pay cut i am confident that many better quality and passionate singaporeans would come forward to lead.
trust the assessment of the ground that your current ministers are not that great and not indispensable. most of them are mere puppets, and like frogs in the well like woody goh himself.
if you continue to suspect and believe that oppo mps are only in parliament to cause trouble, then the people will believe that when pap becomes the oppo one day you would no doubt lead your mps to cause the government of the day nothing but trouble. that would only reflect badly on yourself and the pap.
@Sal
LHL has the support of people if he distanced himself from woody’s mistakes which cause so much unhappiness to the people.
He ought to reverse all the excessive pays and obscene bonuses and life-long windfalls which are totally absurd and unjustifiable taking people for a ride.
This is the right moment, I agree with you and the golden opportunity for him to back away from Goh’s mistakes made to please the bigger man behind.
@Robert Teh
yes.
hope he will also rid off all woody’s cronies and parasites.
cannot comprehend why recently he brought back some of woody’s cronies. that’s a Big BIg BIG mistake.
@ Oxygen = re: china
i know where you’re coming from. never mind what others’ opinion are. you could have been misunderstood in some points that you have made.
i believe most ethnic chinese singaporeans still have our relatives there. while we don’t expect our filthy rich relatives or the chinese
government to help us or our country, no doubt the rise of china economically has made the chinese ethnic race proud and a race to be reckoned
with globally.
of course we all also know that lots of acts of ill and selfish behavior of chinese businessmen and travelers have also gave the chinese ethnic
race a very bad name. but there are also a lot of bad behavior and bad deeds which were actually committed by the viets and honkies. since we are
all yellow skin, some narrow-minded whites even simply hate us.
nevertheless, china’s economic growth within such a short time is definitely no easy feat with a population size that’s more than 200 times ours
with the majority living in sub-poverty standards then. then again if anyone who wants to split hair he could say the chinese poor now is getting
poorer.
what’s most important is how their own people feel about their government. some opined that the chinese authorities are like mafias and massacred
students in tiananmen square. even if this was true, and we find such atrocity unacceptable many chinese people today told me that they now find
deng xiaoping a hero and that what he did was right for china, else china would have been totally divided today and controlled by foreign powers.
even the hongkongers who have been so close to them before the chinese takeover days condemned deng xiaoping with street demos. but today they’re
all so proud of being part of china, craving to have a pie of china’s successful harvest. deng was also a very wise leader who knows the right
time to act. had he attempted to promote his capitalistic ideals before mao’s demise he would fail and would face death. any leader who has even all
the good intention but acted at the wrong time rendering more suffering for the people is still a bad leader.
That said, i was also told by some chinese friends that
there was no truth about the tiananmen square massacre as reported by western journalists.
then a couple of days ago i stumbled upon the ‘Maoist Rebel News’ website
the author reported that a series of secret cables released by WikiLeaks shows communications between the US Embassy in Beijing and Washington
said that there was no bloodshed at tiananmen square 22 years ago.
again as outsiders we don’t know which is true. but what i do know is that the result of deng’s economic reform policies has brought china to
what it is today that even big powers and bullies like america and japan would have to pay attention to what they say and do. and deng and his
old guards, like lky and his old guards in the old days in singapore, must be credited for their selfless passion in transforming china. since
the top leaders had never believed in writing their own fat checks till they went to their graves they are certainly great respectable leaders to
be remembered eternally. the corruption we see in china are mostly committed by lower ranking ministers and officials and they are not created by
deng and his old guards but by virtue of the fact that china is so huge that not even the mighty and powerful first emperor of china could
control. i do believe that the top chinese leaders do not belong to the corrupt genre, otherwise china would not be what it is today
economically. the strict laws that they have enacted (even death penalties for corruption of a certain degree) also go to show that the top
leaders are serious in ridding corruption.
some taxi drivers i chatted with told me that lots of foreigners congratulated us for having such a good government who subsidized our housing and
givig us so much handouts like the ERS and more…
see how good woody’s propaganda is? we know we have all been sucked dry by his creative accounting and tikam tikam tricks – giving us 1 cent but take
away a dollar. but outsiders know nothing about this, like what we don’t really know everything about china. hope the chinese leaders won’t learn from
woody all his filthy tricks (i heard there are already some singapore government policies learned from our leaders being practised now
in china causing hardship to the chinese people).
what i know and witness in singapore is that woody has been finding ways in building his own ego and his own little empire, by way of legalising
corruption in big time during his whole term in office all for his own selfish agenda and his cronies.
so, if the current chinese leaders don’t deserve respect, then our current ‘a-team’ leaders are not better.
since we all live in an interconnected world if china were still in the old, the global economy today would have been far worse.
the u.s. would have gone bellyup much earlier and faster with the domino effect on all other countries, of course including singapore.
so, if not because of deng and his old guards we’ll all be in deeper shit now.
i’ll pray for china’s new leaders and pray for their continued transformation and success. their people will become more civilized in time to come
even if it’s going to take another generation or two (provided natural catastrophes won’t bring this world to an end yet).
likewise, let’s pray for our singapore leaders, be they from the oppo or pap, that they’ll lead by their pure hearts, by examples and not by greed and secret selfish agenda.
let them prove their worth to us by their willingness in taking a huge pay cut (but of course not paying them peanuts), and in distancing themselves far far away from woody’s
selfish policies.
@ sal
If you read carefully what I wrote on China – the obvious undeniable factual truths I fully concured with all views here that China is a dictatorship and its environment destroyed. These facts I have NEVER disputed in this thread but this thread is about pay-performance linkage and performance for politician can only be measured by the TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE in economic betterment for their society ( albeit at enormous political costs of oppression and shameful disregard for environmentl damage in China. I DON’T CARE OR GIVE TWO HOOTS ABOUT RACE AND ETHNICITY.
Let us keep focus, not distracted by Chinese screwed up politics and environment. Our DICTATORSHIP politics are even more screwed up then them and we looks precariously falling into extinction economically. So many Singaporeans stuck in 10 years of not even nominal increase in pay and overflood of migration adding to pressures but no future.
And China did spectacularly well. I saw that transformational change. Wangfuging in 1990 almost literally “transported” and “transplanted” to Shaoguan is like transplanting our Orchard Road gleaming shopping and business district in 20 years time to Muar (as compared to Kuala Lumpur) in Malaysia – guantum leap of transformation change in analogy.
I have not seen this kind of transformation change in 20 years even in advanced arguably resources rich and economically well-established Australia. This is no mean feat of national governance that is unlikely to be repeated elsewhere. That marvel, in my mind, extrapolate to bigger achievements on NATIONAL ECONOMIC FRONT for China – stronger currency, massive urbanisation, highways, industrial exports to the world and more POTENTLY, Chinese walks the globe with a seemingly unlimited size wallet buying natural resources projects. In my mind, the Chinese is buying an Australia or Canada on the global economic stage.
And how did the Chinese did that – top policy-making body comprising of old men and women with VERY LITTLE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO LINE UP THEIR POCKETS but passionate patriotism to advance their national development before divine call them to their graveyard on the mobile phone!
The key message in my postings here is that pay DOES NOT MOTIVATE PERFORMANCE among politicians – it is EXPERIENCE, ABILITY AND PATRIOTISM – that drive China’s phenomenal transformation and success and I want this country to emulate that success formulae.
You enter politics for PATRIOTISM, not for money, dynastic politcs, cronyism in the guise of (corrupt) meritocracy or to preserve political hegemony or longevity. Singapore DOES NOT belong to any political pary. You cannot transplant or grow experience, wisdom, ability, patriotism onto the young heads totally absorbed and crazy obsession for money alongside with those in the same mindset.
We put pay to attract “occupational” politicians who is there for the money when PAY DONT MOTIVATE PERFORMANCE AS PAVLOV’S DOG HAVE PROVEN. Pay only motivate demands for more pay and FORGET ABOUT PERFORMANCE. This is practical reality.
OUR FUNDAMENTALS ARE DEEPLY FLAWED AND DANGEROUSLY CORRODING OF OUR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIIAL.
Question is – do you want to see change or keep trying on failed formulae which we already know GUARANTEES FAILURE AGAIN?
@ Sal,
Ask yourself this simple question – would any rational businessman generating multi-million dollars of income a year after tax, give his son (old enough to be a politician perhaps) that amount of money? I am assuming that his son have never tasted the sweetness of that kind of money on his own but have a high drive for ever expanding supply of money from his parent.
I would think not. The money is most likely to disappear very quickly into the hands of ladies of the night in Geylang or the croupiers of RWS or both.
The Pavlov dog syndrome almost guarantee this outcome. Demand for money feeds on demand for even more money. In that son’s mind – the vocabularly is restricted to one word – money. Where are you going to find the enterprise to take over the business or build his own future?
People in China taught me this wisdom – sweetness first, bitterness will come later. The reverse holds true, of course.
You put young heads within access to big money, untested of proven enterprise and performance, you guarantee self-destruction.
Using phenomenal pay inducement by instaling him/her on the imperial throne and financial baits to seduce performance unrelated to proven ability, intrinsic motivational drive, capacity and ability to thrive through hardship and crisis are a poison destroying him and the business enterprise that will be passed on to his care and husbandry.
People who failed in politics can be successful in busines and the converse holds true.
There is no such a thing as “annointment” equal success both in the corporate and political world, but more likely monumental failure. If you look around on our national landscape, we see that happening – MONUMENTAL FAILURE AND ONE BIG MESS beyond my comprehension and nightmarish anguish.
This is my country. I want change.
@ oxygen
i see your point and am agreeable that human knows no bounds as far as money is concerned. we always want more. you’re absolutely right that money alone can never motivate a person to give his best. thus, tying money to performance is a sure failure.
for singapore, if we don’t pull up our socks together we’ll soon be far far behind china and even india. however to do that singaporeans must be motivated by real selfless patriotic leaders who could lead by examples and personal sacrifices.
current policies and the greedy leaders’ self rewards are only demoralizing the people.
the pappy ministers and their cronies can and will NEVER learn to be good entrepreneurs unless they started off by being entrepreneurs risking their own hard earned savings, and not taxpayers’ money.
I also want change, and more speedily than what it’s happening now. in fact, haven’t seen any to date. waiting to see the ministerial salary review.
@ sal
“I also want change, and more speedily than what it’s happening now. in fact, haven’t seen any to date. waiting to see the ministerial salary review…”
Glad to hear we are on the same page. These are hard times and terrifying future ahead for a lot of our fellow citizens.
If there is no empathy of shared sacrifice and shouldering of responsibility by the political elites and a change in direction of how this country is governed, I would want to see a very drastic change in our political landscape post the 2016 election.
The warnings of rich poor divide has seen support even among Harvard dons that poverty will destroy capitalism. In our case, it will destroy this country.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/global-business-chiefs-fear-poverty-could-destroy-capitalism-20111202-1obey.html
The Occupy Wall Street is right of their cause. We must look after our own kind who have fallen behind after the failed policies in the last decade.
RESPONSIBILITY COMES WITH POWER, NOT MONEY AND CORRUPT SELF-ENRICHMENT.
Money politics, cronyism and nepotism destroyed Malaysia in the Asian currency crisis of 1997. We must turned our back from this proven failure pathways and turn now.
MONEY AND POLITICS IS THE WORST MARRIAGE MADE IN HELL FOR HUMANITY.