Tag Archive | "ministerial salary"

Transport fares to fall in S’pore proves ministerial salary reduction also possible

Transport fares to fall in S’pore proves ministerial salary reduction also possible

Tags:


Finally, it is happening.

sbs-bus

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who believe in logic and how variables move in tandem, have called the government to reduce ministerial salaries in the wake of transport fares falling in Singapore.

This after transport fares will fall by 4.2 percent from Dec. 30.

One Singaporean, Jiang Dao Li, said: “As you can see, never say never. The day has finally come where transport fares in Singapore have fallen in response to external factors.”

“Therefore, ministerial salary reductions must also happen as it is possible. Let’s strike when the iron is hot.”

Other locals said allowing ministerial salaries to fall will result in overall cheaper prices throughout Singapore.

Pian Yee, another local, said: “We should recognise a miracle the moment we see one.”

“Professions like doctors and engineers have been taking ministerial salary as a benchmark to remunerate their staff.”

“If one more thing is cheaper, more things will also be cheaper and then everything will not be so unnecessarily expensive.”

 

 

 

 

 

 





2 Education Ministers sharing 1 salary will prove commitment to serving S’pore

2 Education Ministers sharing 1 salary will prove commitment to serving S’pore

Tags:


Enriching lives, not themselves.

ong-ye-kung-ng-chee-meng-share-salary

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who believe in the pledge that Singapore is based on justice and equality, have come out to voice their concern that two full Education Ministers must share one salary between them.

This after they noticed that the education portfolio had all along been overseen by just one minister previously.

One Singaporean, Seng Lui, said: “To have two education ministers draw two salaries, sends a signal that there can be three or four Defence Ministers in the future or even seven or eight Prime Ministers at one time.”

“Each minister will draw one salary each and this will cause the system to be bloated.”

Other locals said allowing two ministers in one portfolio to share one full ministerial salary will aid in helping to cut costs.

Zhuan Qian, another local, said: “If two full ministers can share one salary, this will show the extent of their commitment in serving Singapore.”

“Moreover, if the full ministers want to earn more money, they can fall back on SkillsFuture and upgrade their technical capabilities and find other jobs available in the economy.”

“This will aid in economic growth amid gloomy outlook while facing headwinds and all that stupid economic jargon.”

 

 

 

 

 

 





Ministerial salaries will be unaffordable if lowered

Ministerial salaries will be unaffordable if lowered

Tags:


It will still be unaffordable if cut by 50 percent.

khaw-boon-wan-akimbo

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who know how to use a non-sequitur as a form of rhetorical device, have come out to say that ministerial salaries will be unaffordable if lowered.

This after The Straits Times reported that bus fares will be affordable if raised because this is the kind of thing that is characteristic of Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan.

One Singaporean, Fu Bu Qi, said in response: “Ministerial salaries will unaffordable if lowered.”

“This is because it is already unaffordable, regardless.”

“They can lower, lower and lower, also no use.”

However, other locals said raising bus fares to make them affordable might actually work in real life under some circumstances.

Jin Wu Lui, another local, said: “If I was a Cabinet Minister, you can raise the price of everything and it will all still be affordable.”

“And Cabinet Ministers will not need to pay for public transport because they all drive. This is the true meaning of a car-lite Singapore.”

 

 

 

 

 

 





Output-based pricing will make ministerial salaries fairer, S’poreans tell Transport Minister

Output-based pricing will make ministerial salaries fairer, S’poreans tell Transport Minister

Tags: , , ,


Singaporeans respond to Khaw who said distance-based ERP system is fairer.

erp-gantry-pricing-khaw

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who believe in harnessing technology since it is available and that people should be paid according to talent, have come up with a response to Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan.

This after Khaw said the upcoming distance-based pricing will make ERP system fairer as it will allow the implementation of charges according to distance travelled.

One Singaporean, Hua Tua Qia, said he fully supports this idea as technology should be harnessed to make things more efficient and fair: “Singapore also needs to start paying ministers according to work done and compensating them according to problems solved, or at least pegging their salaries according to their IQs.”

“At the very least, ministers should be paid according to how many lives in Singapore they have made better.”

“Going by this logic, Tharman will get about S$3 million a year, Lee Hsien Loong maybe about $10,000 and Khaw Boon Wan owes all Singaporeans money.”

Letting motorists pay with Majulahs will show Majulahs are valuable.

Posted by We Are Kanina on Tuesday, March 15, 2016

 

 

 

 

 











PAP must ownself check ownself, increase ministerial salaries only when timing is right

PAP must ownself check ownself, increase ministerial salaries only when timing is right

Tags: , ,


PAP vows to improve the lives of PAP after this GE2015.

marine-parade-pap-group-hug

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who found themselves doused in white, have come out to congratulate the PAP for pretending to remain humble after their landslide victory during the General Election 2015.

As a result, Singaporeans felt this amount of effort put in by them must be rewarded accordingly.

One Singaporean, Zhuan Da Qian, said: “It was a hard fought victory for the PAP. Winning by so much and having to act like they are not happy like bird and gloating more openly than they already are. There is no other way to reward themselves than with more money.”

Other Singaporeans said PAP paying themselves more money is not troubling as this is what 70 percent of the people who voted for them would have wanted.

Jiak Ka Leow, another local, said: “Go ahead. Just take whatever you want. Nothing and nobody can stop you. Now that they have the people’s mandate, just do whatever you want since you have been issued a blank cheque to run wild with.”

“If you feel held back by common decency, no worries. The 70 percent of Singaporeans who gave you their vote are telling you, ‘It’s okay. It’s your entitlement’.”

“Feel free to add another $600,000 more a year. It is peanuts anyway.”

“Go ahead, $50,000 is a derisory sum.”

 

 

 

 

 











PAP must be humble after landslide victory, increase ministerial salaries only when timing is right

PAP must be humble after landslide victory, increase ministerial salaries only when timing is right

Tags: , ,


PAP vows to improve the lives of PAP after this GE2015.

marine-parade-pap-group-hug

Singaporeans from all walks of life, who found themselves doused in white, have come out to congratulate the PAP for pretending to remain humble after their landslide victory during the General Election 2015.

As a result, Singaporeans felt this amount of effort put in by them must be rewarded accordingly.

One Singaporean, Zhuan Da Qian, said: “It was a hard fought victory for the PAP. Winning by so much and having to act like they are not happy like bird and gloating more openly than they already are. There is no other way to reward themselves than with more money.”

Other Singaporeans said PAP paying themselves more money is not troubling as this is what 70 percent of the people who voted for them would have wanted.

Jiak Ka Leow, another local, said: “Go ahead. Just take whatever you want. Nothing and nobody can stop you. Now that they have the people’s mandate, just do whatever you want since you have been issued a blank cheque to run wild with.”

“If you feel held back by common decency, no worries. The 70 percent of Singaporeans who gave you their vote are telling you, ‘It’s okay. It’s your entitlement’.”

“Feel free to add another $600,000 more a year. It is peanuts anyway.”

“Go ahead, $50,000 is a derisory sum.”

 

 

 

 

 











PAP ministers turn to crowdsource fundraising campaign to supplement lowly ministerial salary

PAP ministers turn to crowdsource fundraising campaign to supplement lowly ministerial salary

Tags: ,


They expressed concerns about Singapore’s high cost of living catching up with their pay.

teo-chee-hean-salary

Saying how public service wages for ministers in parliament have been kept to a low of a few million dollars a year for the last few years, several PAP ministers are contemplating turning to crowdsource fundraising campaign to supplement their income.

Speaking to reporters about the ethos of sacrifice in public service on March 10, 2015, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said ministerial contributions are the only thing that can be measured in dollars and cents: “Salary for ministers must be competitive, but it has not risen from $1.1 million a year since 2014. It should be about $1.2 million now.”

“As such, PAP ministers need to turn to other means to supplement our income.”

“Furthermore, the high cost of living in Singapore is increasingly eroding the quality of life of ministers.”

“We urge Singaporeans from all walks of life to donate to our campaign so that we can serve you better.”

At press time, Minister of State Josephine Teo is still wondering if being a minister is its own reward.

 

Ministerial contributions can be measured in dollars and cents:

5 reasons Josephine Teo’s service to S’pore must be measured in dollars and cents

Tan Cheng Bock makes dubious claim about ministerial pension

Tan Cheng Bock makes dubious claim about ministerial pension

Tags: , , , , ,


Did he inevitably put his foot in his mouth?

Uh oh. Seems like we have another case of major foot-in-mouth moment for the PAP.

Ex-presidential candidate and former PAP all-white Tan Cheng Bock made a sensational but dubious claim in a Facebook post on Jan. 12.

The runner-up president essentially said that “all office holders (in parliament) were required to switch from pension to CPF in 1998″ and ” in 2008… the Pension component was re-introduced”.

But this, if snooping Facebook users are correct, is misleading, if not utterly and stupendously wrong.

Here is what the popularly regarded Super Moderate wrote on his Facebook:

“Annual Reporting of Ministerial Salaries. When I was in parliament (1980-2006) I was under the impression that Ministers did not get any Pension because all office holders were required to switch from pension to CPF in 1998. Imagine my surprise when I read in the newspaper (5 Jan 2012,ST) that in 2008, two years after l left parliament, the Pension component was re- introduced and this resulted in a further increase in salaries for Ministers. This Pension component, which caused a lot of anger, is now removed. I am glad that this is being done. However, such a trend of changing policies mid stream is not good. Singaporeans want more transparency. To be transparent, an annual report of ministerial salaries must be published.”

This post was later shared by TheOnlineCitizen’s FB page on Jan. 16 .

However, in a Facebook post reply on Jan. 16, YPAP wrote:

“Tan Cheng Bock is mistaken. There was never any requirement in 1998 for office holders to switch to CPF. The white paper on salaries was introduced In 1994 and it clearly stated the basis for ministerial and civil service salaries. The paper explicitly mentioned having pensions for office-holders. This policy has been maintained till now, with Gerard Ee’s committee recommending to do away with pensions. So there is no “midstream” change in policy as construed by TCB”.

So here’s the major beef:

1. What gave Cheng Bock The-Man-Who-Sought-And-Received-Free-Sunday-Parking-For-Mankind the idea that “all office holders were required to switch from pension to CPF in 1998″? Which Act was he referring to? Or more specifically, what is he smoking?

2. Since Cheng Bock The Kindhearted Doctor served from 1980 to 2006 – a total of 26 years – he is eligible for pension and should be receiving his pension now. So why is he under the impression that “all office holders were required to switch from pension to CPF in 1998″?

3. The Straits Times article on Jan. 5 that Cheng Bock cited is: “Ministerial salary (MR4) benchmark and actual salaries for past year“.

The footnote under the graph reads: “The percentages represent actual salaries as a percentage of benchmark. The Practice of taking into account the value of pension as part of a minister’s total pay when comparisons are made with the private sector benchmarks began only in 2008.”

Therefore, nowhere does it state what Cheng Bock said: “in 2008… the Pension component was re-introduced”.

4) Should Cheng Bock not clarify now if he was right in claiming that the pension component was re-introduced in 2008?

5) So, if he is eligible for pension and is receiving it, how can he not know? Too much ukulele?

6) Hey! Where the hell did that original Facebook post with Cheng Bock’s claim go to?

This matter was originally raised by Fabrications About The PAP. (Click on photo below for their penetrative questioning.)

Hard times ahead for our poor ministers?

Hard times ahead for our poor ministers?

Tags: ,


Lifestyle changes are manageable for our country’s leaders, says one reader

Dear New Nation editor,

Today, I heard there was news that a lot of people are very happy.

Apparently, people are rejoicing because they heard ministers’ salaries are getting cut.

It is usually very quiet here around Sixth Avenue at noon on Wednesdays, but I noticed my housekeepers’ iPhones buzzing with Facebook updates with the news, even though none of my friends staying around me or at Orchard area dropped me a message.

I think it’s because I woke up too early. Read the full story

Should ministerial salaries set ministers up for life?

Should ministerial salaries set ministers up for life?

Tags: , ,


This Sunday, Dec. 4, come join the fray! A debate so lively it might knock your socks off. And then some.

By Belmont Lay

Debate. Come have some.

How much should public office holders in parliament make?

Does minimum wage apply to them? Or should maximum wage be the norm?

Does being in public service entail lower wages as it is different from slaving for the private sector? How much is too much? Should current wages be factored into future pensions?

Are public office holders benefiting disproportionately from Singapore’s economic growth?

Having a go at the ultra-piping-lava-hot button issue of ministerial salaries in a debate that would test the incisive wisdom of four of the brightest sparks our sunny island has to offer are:

1. Mrs Jeannette Chong Aruldoss, from the National Solidarity Party

2. Dr James Gomez, from the Singapore Democratic Party

3. Mr Ong Wee Min, from the National Solidarity Party

4. Mr Tan Jee Say, Candidate, 2011 Presidential Elections

And what’s a debate without audience participation?

If you’ve ever pondered about these questions and they have kept you up all night, you and your views are wanted.

If these questions are what you and your friends fight over on weekends after having one too many, you should show up too.

If your head is filled with half-baked statistics about Singaporean wages and you spend most waking hours drawing spurious correlations between them and our economy, then I guess you should stay home.

No kidding, you should come down too. They’ll make room. I think.

The National Solidarity Party Colloquium on Ministerial Salaries will be held on Sunday, 4 December, 2011 @ 1:30pm @ Parc Sovereign Hotel, 175 Albert Street Singapore 189970.