Apr 10, 2007
AsiaOne

Below are views from some MPs during the debate on the ministerial pay hike in Parliament yesterday.

They questioned whether pegging their pay to the private sector is the best formula, pointing out that the public sector functions differently and its leaders face fewer risks.

Mr Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio GRC):
CEOs are judged on annual financial performance while ministers face elections every five years.

A top lawyer or professional is open to lawsuits if a job is poorly done, unlike a top minister or civil servant.

The salaries for the public sector should evolve on their own, with the Prime Minister determining how much each minister should be paid.

The people will decide whether they endorse that decision every five years when we go to the polls.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Marine Parade GRC):
For every successful private sector top earner, there were many others who had failed and gone bankrupt - a scenario that a public sector official would never face.

Top civil servant Ngiam Tong Dow, famously stated that as a permanent secretary, he only worried 10 per cent of the time about whether he had the money to pay his employees' wages.

But as chairman of a private company, HDB Corp, he spent 90 per cent of his time worrying about staff salaries.

Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong:
While benchmarking the Adminstrative Service with the private sector is valid, but pegging it to ministerial pay should be questioned because Ministers should answer to a higher leadership calling.

Opposition Member of Parliament Low Thia Khiang (Hougang):
The widening income gap and the embracing of more foreign talent have resulted in a greater pool of high wage-earners among foreigners and permanent residents.

This will colour the benchmarking exercise as the numbers may not reflect "the general trend of income earned by Singaporeans."

» Have your say on this and other issues in our forum pages