May 2007

It’s 666 With A Dot, Money-Honey!

The Straits Times headline on Mar 7, 2007 quoted our Minister Mentor saying: “Govt. gives citizen every reason to elect it.” One viable reason is, of course, the lack of credible opposition (not that we wonder why that is so). One does wonder why the good Lord has awarded our government then, with 66.6% of electoral votes in the last General Election. MM: “Do I win 99%? No, I win by 61 or 65 or 67%.”  Transparently, the exact number is 66.6%. May the satanic beast rest in peace for confusing the high-&-mighty about numbers.

     Wonder why I am not making any comment about the MM’s call for Singaporeans to agree on increasing ministers’ pay? That’s because I’ve chosen to write a song about it instead. Someday, someway… hopefully you’ll hear it. A siow friend, however, did react to the call by describing the rationale given for the raise as “infantile”, adding, -- “So much coverage in the press about the issue, talk about an entitlement mentality!”. That’s why I call him siow, maybe I can even throw in bo-tua-bo-suay (no respect for seniors) but he might react with a YouTube video! Not that I’d worry for our government on this cos this ain’t Thailand, y’know. There’s nothing (within Singapore) that our government can’t control. Nothing. “Thailand’s proposed new Constitution limits PM to two terms; hard for one party to dominate political landscape” – a report in ST on Apr 19. Think we will ever have that kind of Constitutional law in Singapore? Dream on, buster!

     MM’s final take on the subject of civil-service pay-hike made top headline-news in the ST on Apr 5: “Put ministers’ pay in perspective”, he said. “We are quarrelling about whether we should pay them $46 million or $36 million, or better still, $26 million. So you save $20 million and jeopardize an economy of $210 billion?” he added. C’mon people, not infantile lah. That same day in the ST, writer Catherine Lim argued: “The rationale goes against the very spirit of the social contract that it is suppose to protect… The ultimate reward for the leaders, whether or not they consciously seek it, is a revered place in the nation’s history, in the hearts, and minds of future generations. Hence, material reward is only secondary… What’s the use of teaching our young such values as caring and selflessness and sacrifice if each carries a price tag?”

     Ai-yah, how silly of the idealistic Cat to forget about pragmatism in Uniquely Singapore. Besides, without money, how can the government wield invincible power? Oh dear, I couldn’t withhold comment even after writing a song, I must be bovered. Better move on before I become temperamentally bankrupt or otherwise.

     Btw, after a very long procrastination, I’ve finally gotten myself on myspace.com. My URL is myspace.com/xhosux (yes, just like my own website address). So, why was I inspired to get on myspace? Answer – The Straits Times. Go to my profile on myspace and find out why that is so. There, you’ll also be treated to three of my new songs.

     So finally, it was decided and announced on Apr 10 in the ST that “Ministers and civil servants get a pay rise of up to 33%” when the initial proposal was for the rise to be double. How restraint! The ‘concession’ sure looks figuratively proportionate to 66.6% --halved! Very much in keeping with God’s will and the electoral margin, then. I might have sounded displeased with the pay-rise but now, I’m totally satisfied with the increment, especially the significance of the percentage! However, the next day (Apr 10), top headline in the ST was “Govt. defends ministers’ pay formula”, which means that most Singaporeans aren’t buying the raise (even as they’re paying for it!). Govt.’s rationale?  “Even after revision, leaders’ annual salary is nowhere near what the top earner in private sector got last year.” But please don’t argue that govt. is in public office, not private sector hor, cos they’ll have 1,000 justifications for a competitive relative scale. Enough entitlement press-space already!

     It was disclosed in that Apr 10 report that the Minister Mentor, the Prime Minister and Senior Minister’s annual salary will now stand at $3 million EACH. Five times the salary of the American President. Not a kiasu amount at all – read my lips again when I say that. It takes an opposition party leader Chiam See Tong to say: “It can be said that our ministers receive the highest salaries in the world. This can be entered into the Guinness Book Of Records as a world record. This is another first that Singapore can boast of” (Apr 10, ST). In other words, uniquely again. How fabulous! David Gan and Stephanie Sun… do chime in on the fabulousness, please! (Reminder that Gan and Sun are not even, strictly speaking, govt. pawn stars; just to split-hair on a point!)

     As if to add verbal diarrhea to the bloated concept, the Environment & Water Resources Minister Dr. Yacob Ibrahim was quoted saying in Today paper on Apr 16: “It’s not about the money…” Yeah it’s not, but take it just the same, ya? Such simple logic could slip through a doctorate-holder’s gap. What more can wash through our acquiesced masses on these shores? No need to wonder, we know all too well how muted-ness speaks for itself, if not dispenses a consensus vibe in speakers-cornered Singapore..

     After PM Lee announced that he will self-freeze his own salary for the next five years, Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan, the Minister for Community Development, Youth & Sports was asked if he’d follow suit. His reply: "I will follow the Prime Minister's advice in that we do not believe in ostentatious generosity. Generosity should be a private matter, and something which all of us should do out of our own discretion. So I don't think any minister is going to engage in this public ostentatious display of generosity." (Channel News Asia, Apr 14.) Of course, the PM’s sacrifice is NOT implicated as an act of ostentatious generosity.

     Here’s my sincere two-cent worth on the issue. Assuming there’s absolute truth in the government’s rationale that state-ministers might be swayed to give up public office for private-sector salaries…. Can we not say with absolute certainty that even if we don’t pay Minister Mentor, he WILL remain in office? (Or that his party will never let him leave?) We want to talk realism, right? So, where’s the danger in losing him then? I sincerely think that a number of the Ministers deserve private-sector’s CEO-rank pay, but EVERY minister? Shouldn’t teachers get better increments instead? Alas, I’m being too Singaporean-ly earnest about the issue (though Singaporeans will never dare express in public what I’ve just said), my readers may get bored. Let’s move on. Again. (Ever wondered why I can’t?)

     On Apr 12, ST’s top headline was – “PM Lee: Key task is to build best team for Singapore’s future.” The report added that he does not intend to be at the helm at age 70; search for potential successors has to start now.” Building the best team is well and good. But can you imagine if there’s a new successor when (current) PM Lee reaches 70? There’ll be a new PM, along with our current PM Lee as a respected ex, plus a Senior Minister and the great Minister Mentor… My, we’ll have to pay at least four uber heads-of-state Guiness Record -salaries (not to forget the President)! I mean MM Lee will be like 103 years old then! Lest you jump to certain conclusions, let me pin you with an MM-type question – are you insisting he must be laid to rest by then? Are you, huh? How dare you!

     To end the hot discussion on State ministers’ pay-hike… I’d go with my siow friend’s belief: $3 million a year each? Too little, it should be $5 million. After all, we voted them in to rule us, didn’t we? -- X’ Ho