Refute this question PAP?

In Political governance on 25/01/2012 at 6:07 am

The MPs of the Worthless Party didn’t pose a very simple question in parly to the ex-SAF generals. Instead, it was raised by a  poster on the TRE website, see below. 

(I hope that the WP MPs were not and won’t be distracted by whom Yaw may or not have got pregnant.  I was wondering why I didn’t read abt Yaw asking questions or making points during the recent parly debate on salaries. Was it MSM censorship? Or because he wasn’t a brainy WP MP? Looks like it was because he was going to be a dragon baby father.). As to Mrs Chiam raising this point, pigs would fly first.

The WP MPs should be going for the jagular (like Lawrence Wong tried to do to WP: he failed because the timing waz wrong. Everyone winds down for CNY, even the minorities, not juz the Chinese and Perankan) 

The question I’m referring to appeared as a comment in this on TRE. I don’t think the PAP dares even trying to answer it. (I’ve added my comments: non italics and in square brackets]


January 21, 2012 at 8:16 pm Fairy(Quote)

If BG Tan Chin Juan is now making $1.1 million after 40% discount, do you think BG Tan will have made $1.8 million per annum if he had joined the private sector after SAF instead of PAP? [I would amplify by adding Kee Chiu, Heng , at the $1.8m mark, and Lawrence Wong at the $770,000 mark. Only one Lee Hsian Yang moved from the SAF to SingTel and serious money, and SingTel is not strictly in the private sector.] 

I ask this because the whole premise of the salary recommendation is that these people are making a 40% sacrifice, which with the exception of a few proven private sector cross-overs such as NEH [Ng Eng Hen], [VivianB] and Shanmugam, the rest are from the public sector with no proven private sector capabilities. Off course now they say they are paid high salaries based on “future performance capabilities”. I will be sent to IMH (institute of mental health) if I were to tell my boss to pay me high salary now based on my future performance capabilities!

Turning their arguments around, it means that the private [sector] will surely grab these super capable ministers and pay them full private sector wage the moment they are no longer a minister. After GE2011, there were three “super capable” ministers available, but I don’t see any private sector corporation making a song & dance to celebrate their good fortune to be able to snare one or more of them. [More on this see]

  1. 1) if as PM Lee put it, pay is one of the key issues deterring private-sector talent from becoming ministers, then why are they reducing ministerial pay?

    2) wouldn’t it exacerbate the situation further, making it much more harder to attract private-sector talent?

    funny that the MSM keep talking about point no. 2 but silent on point no. 1, it’s as if both points have no relationship to each other

  2. TCJ and CCS make more than 1.1 million and their MP salaries. They still recieve SAF pension schemes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: