Are you happy with this cut??

January 4, 2012, 1.37 pm (Singapore time)

Ministers' salary framework to be reviewed every 5 years

By ANGELA TAN

The Committee to Review Ministerial Salaries is recommending that the Prime Minister appoints a committee every five years to review the salary framework.

The team, helmed by National Kidney Foundation's chairman, Gerald Ee, has recommended cutting the salaries of the President, Prime Minister, Speaker of Parliament, Deputy Speaker of Parliament, and political appointment holders; as well as the allowance of Members of Parliament (MP).

The Committee also recommends removing the pension scheme for all political appointment holders.

The new salaries arising from this review will take effect from 21 May 2011, the date when the new Government took office.

January 4, 2012, 1.25 pm (Singapore time)

UPDATE: PM annual salary to be cut by 36%, remove pension scheme

By ANGELA TAN

The Committee to Review Ministerial Salaries has recommended that the President's annual salary should be cut by 51 per cent to $1.54 million.

It has also recommended that the Prime Minister's annual salary should be cut by 36% to $2.20 million.

'The Prime Minister's annual salary should be pegged to two times the MR4 annual salary, ie $2,200,000, or a drop in salary of 36%,' the committee said in a report released on Wednesday.

'As there is no one to decide on the annual performance bonus for the PM, the PM's bonus will be based only on the National Bonus. Where the targets for the indicators are met, his National Bonus will be 6 months,' it added.

A Minister at the MR4 grade (ie. entry-level grade) should be paid an annual salary of $1.10 million, a cut of 37%. A Minister at the lower end of this grade will start at an annual salary of $935,000.

The Committee has also recommended removing the pension scheme for all political appointment holders, and adopt only the Central Provident Fund system which is the basic retirement scheme for Singaporeans. The CPF payments will be subject to the usual contributions cap.

With this recommendation, political appointment holders appointed on or after 21 May 2011 will not receive any pension. For office holders who were appointed before 21 May 2011, they will have their pension frozen, ie they will only be eligible for pension accrued up to 20 May 2011. The frozen pension will be paid when they step down or retire from office

The Committee also made recommendations on a new benchmark. A new salary framework and National Bonus linked to the socio-economic progress of average and lower income Singaporeans is also proposed.

'The new salaries are based on our recommendation to benchmark the MR4 Minister's salary to the median income of the top 1,000 earners who are Singapore citizens and with a 40% discount to signify the ethos and sacrifice that comes with political service,' the committee said.

It said the benchmark is based on a larger pool that does not specify occupations and covers only Singapore Citizens, the pool of talent that political leaders will be drawn from.

Based on the IRAS Year of Assessment 2011 income data, the new benchmark figure is $1.10 million.

January 4, 2012, 1.11 pm (Singapore time)

Review committee suggests 51% pay cut for President, entry level minister cut by 37%

By ANGELA TAN

The Committee to Review Ministerial Salaries has recommended that the President's annual salary should be cut by 51 per cent to $1.54 million.

It has also recommended that the Prime Minister's annual salary should be cut by 36% to $2.20 million.

A Minister at the MR4 grade (ie. entry-level grade) should be paid an annual salary of $1.10 million, a cut of 37%. A Minister at the lower end of this grade will start at an annual salary of $935,000.

Wah... I think i am in the wrong sector!
Why didn't i study enough and get to know the "correct" people when i was younger???

Maybe cos i am a "LEE" i can somehow pass off and suddenly appear and say i am a long lost relative that needs to be in Singapore Politics

I am worried...pay peanuts mite get monkey

Vote for "Ms Lee" in the next Presidential Elections!!!

Duval_S wrote:

I am worried...pay peanuts mite get monkey

haha..bro, confirm get monkeys...

no pay cut already monkey....haha !!

Duval_S wrote:

I am worried...pay peanuts mite get monkey

Geez for SGD1.1 Mil and SGD2.2 Mil, sure ain't normal peanuts.

Since we are getting monkeys, can I nominate myself for it?
I will take half of the amt and the gov can use the rest to help needy Singaporeans!LOL

guys seriously there are improvement required, but I think the goverment has done well since 1965 until know.
if you see the countries around you that has had their independence even earlier than singapore they are still way way behind singapore is so many ways. These countries has far more resources that Singapore can ever hope for, but they are behind singapore. If this is not due to the vision and the governance of the goverment I don't know what is.

I do agree there are improvement that can be done (some are obvious) and that goverment needs to be on their toe all the time and not be complacent, but we we have to balanced on our view to see both the good and the bad. So far I can see is there are more goods than bad. we need to work on reducing the bad and reminding the goverment as such but let's not also forget what they have achieved so far.

创国难,守国更难!

hi..just my point of view..i think they need to be paid this amount to work hard and stay clean for the country to move ahead.
cause it does not make sense and discouraging to annouce low salary but collecting millions from behind. Giving poor quality and low funds for public projects.

Deleted..

I was hoping for 50% cut as fair.

After cut, the salary still exceptionally high, furthermore still got bonus!!!!! Anyway they already pocketed the 2011 bonus before the cut salary amount, so no real loss.

Would this be used as an excuse to cut our pay as well?

I think these ppl deserve their salary. They are highly paid for their freedom. They can't come to GR and talk cock about golf, someone could be monitoring their IP add. They can't just ball match with anyone when they feel like hitting some balls. They can't visit JB massage after golf game and obviously they can't play the 19th hole.

of course not at the join and method that you and I do bro, I'm sure if they want to they can get their 19th hole and at the level that mortal salary man probably does not even know existed..

Duval_S wrote:

I am worried...pay peanuts mite get monkey

peanuts don't come cheap, peanuts cost $600K..

Yo guys, at least the cut was made!
Despite it was dame late bt at last we live to see the first step!
Monkeys or nt, we sincerely hope nt!

Just for comparison:
Salaries for top US officials:
President 400k
Vice President 227k
Speaker of the House 223k
Chief Supreme Justice 217k
Cabinet members 196k
Senators 174k
Representatives 174k

Singapore ministers are all top students .... And top generals


Must pay more la

I wouldn't really want to put US as a bench mark if I were you.
dying economy, high unemployment, budget deficit, mounting debt and disfunctional cabinet that keep bickering among each other about their own agenda ?
I think there are better countries out there.

I know for a fact most foreign bank top tier 1 and 2 executives are at the 900-1.5M range. A minister salary of 1.5 to 2x that is reasonable given the comparison to enterprise top 1-2 executive salary.

For me the key is minister can earn a lot of money, sure why not, but they need to perform. So the key word is performance index of the minister and how they are being measured.

The peeved is always minister screwed up and other than I apologize and I will look into it, nothing much happened and the issue either died down or get replace with new issue. In corporate world, people earning that much will get fired, got no bonus or demoted if they screwed up. Never happen with the goverment. I think this is what people want to see and this is the crux of the problem, not the salary it self.

For example given the housing blunder (old mnister = we have enough housing, new minister = we need more house whithin the span of 1 months), the budget blow up in youth olympic and the latest saga on MRT. There should be a publicly clear accountability and action taken by the PM on their minister performance. which in this case warrrent some questioning.

But overall, if we think of this country like a goverment, do they deserve the 1-2 million dollar pay. I think it's ok to pay that much if they perform as they did in the past and they can proved it to the public. And for those minister that screwed up, I think theys hould just be replaced, no point of carrying excess bagage , it wil weight down the performance of the whole cabinet and the image of the goverment as a whole.

but then again, that's just my personal view.

Don, the CEOs of the worlds top corporation can screw up the company and still get tens of millions in severance package/golden parachute/stock options. So in a sense, no accountability in corporate world's top echelon as well

true.. but those are days gone by now I think and only applicable for banking sector during the good days before 2011. maybe I'm wrong, but common corporation will fire you dishonorably and will give you nothing other than notice period unless specified otherwise on your employment contract.

The thing is with top CEO they have a get away clause on their employment contract. Of course this only happen during the good time, I doubt there is any new appointment with this clause nowadays but then again, who am I to say, I'm not yet a CEO hahaha..

or it could also be I'm working at the wrong firm...

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

Hey, at least they are not corrupt!

nientsu wrote:

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

well said, nientsu!