MP Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap’s speech on Ministerial Salary Review

Speaker Sir,

I wish to express my concern that this government is still pushing the notion that Singapore needs to pay the highest political salaries in the developed world to ensure an honest government and attract talented individual to serve the people.

Are we sending the right message to the next generation that our top leadership may not function at the desired level if the ministerial salaries are not benchmarked against the highest income earners in Singapore?

Do we really believe our top leaders will be less capable, less honest, and less committed if their political pay is not benchmarked against those top 1,000 private sector earners?

We have been warned that the consequence of not paying top dollar to secure the services of future leaders is an incompetent and corrupt government. Can this house seriously believe we can build an honest government and prevent corruption simply by paying millions of dollars to our ministers?

If a minister has a character flaw lurking inside him, can a million dollar salary be the cure? How many members in this house will have second thoughts about serving the people if your salary is not benchmarked against top earners in Singapore?

The DPM has said yesterday that there is no right answer to this complex issue of determining public office salaries. He has also said it is all a judgment call.

But the message we sent in this judgment call is important for the next generation. We certainly do not want to encourage and inspire the wrong people to enter politics.

This brings me to my views on our human capital and the values we want to inculcate in our country.

Yes, we are a small country with a small citizen population and we operate in an open economy. While our talent pool is naturally limited, the people’s will to succeed is definitely not. This nation was started with less than 2 million people. Our forefathers had walked hand-in-hand with first generation leaders to build this nation and they did well.

Now that we have added over a million more citizens, is our will to succeed a lot less now than when we first started? Have we left our values so far behind that we are beginning to believe that the best incentive to attract people to step forward to serve the country is money?

In my experience as a counsellor, people who are passionate about serving the community do not quantify their sacrifice in dollars and cents. Likewise, people of the right calibre will not be deterred from stepping forward to lead the country even if they have to take a pay cut in the process.

It is a given that the ethos of political service encompasses a fair amount of sacrifice. To think that we can quantify that sacrifice by a 40 per cent discount to the median income of the top 1,000 earners in the revised salary benchmark for ministers may be bordering on insult to the many selfless people who are serving the community at meagre wages.

Can we put a value on passion, ethic, and sacrifice? Is the 40 per cent discount in the revised pay formula a sacrifice on the part of the ministers? Is there even a sacrifice to begin with when some of these potential talents do not even feature in the list of top 1,000 earners in Singapore before they went into politics?

What kind of values do we wish to inculcate in the next generation?

This is precisely why the Workers’ Party is advocating a different approach to determining the benchmark for political salaries rather than starting the benchmark at the medium income of the top 1,000 earners. The rationale is simple. Not everything is about money.

During the debate on the President’s Address last October, there was a call to build an inclusive society. The proposal by the Workers Party takes into consideration this notion. We call for a ‘whole of government, people-up’ approach in pegging the salaries of Ministers and MPs to the salaries of senior executives in the civil service.
The civil service salary is competitively pegged to general market conditions. Any market adjustment made to this benchmark, positive or negative, will be reflected in the political salary. This approach, I believe, has the hallmark of an inclusive society as compared to the proposal to peg ministerial salary to the top 1,000 earners.
By aligning the political salary structure to the civil service, the empathy gap between our political leaders and the general population will narrow over time. As elected leaders, we should lead by example in the effort to build an inclusive society.
As this time, I want to address the points brought up by some members of this house yesterday.
MP Mr Inderjit Singh has highlighted that unlike political leaders in UK, our elected members here are not given additional perks on top of our salary. We cannot compare apple to orange. Looking at the geographical size of United Kingdom, we can probably understand why political leaders there are given such perks like housing, a chauffeured driven car, meals and even laundry allowance. We do not need to travel long distance and spend time away from our family to attend parliament sittings but our UK counterparts do.
The Workers Party has studied and deliberated on the issue of perks and other forms of allowances which are not implemented here. This is why we propose to peg the salary of an entry minister at 5 times the salary of an MP. This multiple is more than what is being practised in some of the countries we surveyed which ranges from 1.2 to 4.6 times.
I share the same view with Member Ms Dennis Phua about perception; that a glass can be seen as either half empty or half full. I too believe there is no right answer to the formula put up by the review committee.
However, we need to remind ourselves that we are servants of the people. We need to remind ourselves to be humble, compassionate and sincere. The ‘whole of government, people-up’ approach to benchmarking political salary as proposed by the Workers’ Party is a step to building that emotional bond with the people we serve. It is a step to creating an inclusive society. It is also a step to inculcating good values for our future generation.
Sir, while we want to attract people of the right calibre to serve, we must also ensure we attract people of the right values to lead this nation.

While we cannot leave the recruitment and development of leaders to chance, we certainly cannot entrench the belief that paying high salaries is the primary way to get competent people to enter politics.

For many of us, our journey to this august chamber began with a dream to build a better Singapore for all. This journey is certainly not going to end just because we are not benchmarked against the highest wage earners in Singapore.

Mr Speaker Sir, Malay

Saya bersependapat dengan rakan saya Encik Show Mao bahawa langkah pengurangkan jumlah gaji para menteri serta pemimpin-pemimpin politik dialu-alukan namun formula yang di sarankan oleh Jawatankuasa Semakan Gaji Menteri kurang tepat atau memuaskan.
Saranan yang diketengahkan oleh jawatankuasa ini iaitu menggunakan pendapatan median 1,000 warga Singapura berpendapatan tertinggi, dengan diskaun 40 peratus, masih bersifat “Top Down” atau pendekatan dari atas ke bawah. Kami berpendapat, pendekatan ini kurang melambangkan sifat inklusif dan prihatin yang ingin diketengahkan oleh pihak pemerintah. Kami percaya pendekatan sebegini boleh melahirkan jurang perbezaan emosi diantara para pemimpin politik dan masyarakat umum Singapura.
Kami akui bahawa adalah penting bagi Singapura diterajui oleh pemimpin politik yang mempunyai kelayakkan serta kemahiran yang baik dan sesuai. Namun, faktor gaji tidak seharusnya dijadikan sebagai faktor induk untuk menarik individu-individu yang berkebolehan. Penglibatan dalam perkhidmatan politik harus lahir dari keikhlasan hati untuk menyumbang dan berbakti kepada masyarakat. Justeru, kami percaya formula atau ukur kayu yang digunakan bagi gaji menteri harus berunsurkan faktor kemasyarakatan serta bersifat inklusif. Kami cadangkan agar pendekatan “whole-of government” atau pendekatan dari bawah ke atas digunakan.

Prinsip serta objektif perkhidmatan politik adalah seiras dengan prinsip dan objektif perkhidmatan awam. Diatas persamaan ini, kami menyarankan agar gaji menteri didasarkan kepada elaun Ahli parlimen, dimana elaun Ahli parlimen pula harus berdasarkan kepada gaji pegawai eksekutif kanan dalam perkhidmatan awam. Di Singapura, gaji perkhidmatan awam berpandukan kepada kondisi pasaran am pekerjaan atau ‘general market condition’. Melalui saranan ini, gaji menteri serta gaji pemimpin-pemimpin politik akan melalui bersama keadaan pasang-surut yang berlaku kepada lebih ramai masyarakat Singapura, bukan setakat terikat kepada golongan 1,000 warga Singapura berpendapatan tertinggi. Ini sesuai dengan seperti pepatah ‘ berat sama dipikul, ringan sama dijinjing’.

Sebelum mengakhiri ucapan ini, saya ingin mengingatkan terutama sekali diri saya sendiri serta pemimpin-pemimpin di dalam dewan ini bahawa posisi kepimpinan yang kita pegang ini adalah satu amanah yang diberikan oleh rakyat. Dalam menjalankan amanah ini haruslah berlandaskan jiwa kemasyarakatan, ikhlas serta rendah diri. Ambillah ikhtibar dari pemimpin-pemimpin unggul dunia serta selamilah dan jiwailah prinsip-prinsip peganggan pemimpin-pemimpin ini. Antara contoh-contoh pemimpin yang unggul,(1) Encik Sun Yat Sen, seorang yang mengorbankan kerjaya beliau sebagai seorang doktor demi untuk menumpukan usaha dalam merubah nasib rakyat Cina. Beliau juga tidak kisah atau hirau untuk melepaskan jawatan sebagai pemimpin demi untuk kebaikan rakyat. (2) Encik Mahatma Gandhi, seorang yang banyak berkorban jiwa raga untuk rakyat India. Kelebihan beliau tidak perlu saya sebutkan. (3) Encik Omar Al-Khattab, seorang pemimpin unggul di semenanjung tanah arab yang amat terkenal akan kerendahan hati beliau serta sifat mendahulukan rakyat. Beliau adalah seorang pemimpin yang memilih untuk tidak mempunyai singgahsana atau istana. Beliau lebih selesa menjalani kondisi kehidupan sama seperti rakyat biasa kerana sifat kesepaduan beliau yang tinggi serta demi menjiwai kehidupan rakyat. Beliau juga pernah menolak saranan agar anak beliau mengambil alih kepimpinan setelah ketiadaan beliau dengan keras atas alasan cukup lah hanya seorang sahaja ahli dari keluarganya menjadi pemimpin.

Contoh yang boleh diambil daripada pemimpin-pemimpin yang sedemikian ialah prinsip yang dipegang dan sifat kepimpinan yang ditunjukkan, sehinggakan pemimpin-pemimpin seperti ini berjaya membuat perubahan yang besar serta mendatangkan manfaat yang teramat kepada rakyat yang dipimpin.

Speaker sir, Dengan ini saya menolak akan usulan yang diketengahkan oleh Jawatankuasa Semakan Gaji Menteri kerana saya berpandangan formula yang disarankan didalam usulan ini, masih ada kekurangan dari aspek untuk menyemarakkan sifat-sifat inklusif dan keprihatinan dalam masyarakat Singapura.
Thank you Sir.