bureaucrats
Showing posts with label bureaucrats. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

Who Says We’re Not Creating Jobs?

 

The main and longest feature in Singapore’s portion of cyberspace is focused on one single issue – namely the issue that foreigners, specifically those from India have been unfairly allowed into to Singapore to rob our local population blind. The grouses on the net comes can be summed up as “This government cares about everyone except the local Singaporean.” If you explore enough websites in Singapore, you will inevitably run into someone with some horror story about this or that company discriminating against nice hard-working Singaporeans in favour of nasty, cheating foreigners from what Donald Trump would call “Shitholes.” The question that people inevitably ask is why is the Singapore government creating an economy that in turn creates jobs from people from everywhere else, except Singapore. The pressure has reached a stage where there is an equal amount of gibberish being sprouted about the importance of building a “Singapore-Core” in the economy.

I’ve described this as gibberish because, well, if you look at Singapore’s political system, you can’t accuse the government of not creating jobs for Singaporeans. The structure of our governmental system would indicate that Singapore has created a number of high paying and highly secure jobs, which can only be filled by Singaporeans.

However, given that I work in corporate restructuring and insolvency, the question that I would ask is whether these jobs are actually producing any value for the Singapore Inc as a whole and whether these jobs could be, well for want of a better term – better utilized. Let’s remember the basics – Singapore is a tiny island, or a small red dot. 

Let’s start at the top. We have a Head of State, who functions pretty much like a combination between the English Monarch and the House of Lords in as much as the President is primarily ceremonial but does have the reserve power to say no to the government, should the government choose to tap on the reserves. Our President was paid in excess of S$4,000,000 a year until 2011, when the public felt that there was no reason for a ceremonial figurehead to earn more than the “Chief Executive” or the “Prime Minister.” The salary of the President was slashed by three quarters, which is still a fairly respectable million plus a year and the question remains, what do we get for a million dollars?

Well, the president does wave on National Day and once in a while they do host a dinner or so for a visiting dignitary. Former President SR Nathan, did spend a good deal of time trying to organize charity events. However, that’s pretty much it. Can anyone think of a President who used their time in office to create nation wide projects? Mr. Nathan was criticized in some quarters for being a laky of the government. However, in fairness, he did initiate the President’s Star Charity, which raised money for charitable organizations.  As a prominent member of our local Indian business community (one of the few local Indians to have made it to a regional role in a multinational) said, “At least we knew we had a president.”

Then there is the management committee or the cabinet. Where we have a grand total of some 30 over appointment holders. To set this into context, we have a similar amount of people in the cabinet as some of our larger Asian neighbours, or should I say countries that are faced with issues like poverty and social unrest. By way of a quick comparison, Singapore (population of 5 million and few problems) than Japan (population of 120 plus million and nasty neighbours with nukes) and slightly less than India (population over a billion and an equal amount of problems). The links of the respective cabinets can be found at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Japan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Council_of_Ministers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Singapore

Furthermore, if you look at the Singapore cabinet list, you’ll notice a few interesting facts. We have two senior ministers. The post of senior minister was used to give Lee Kuan Yew a consultancy gig. The post was later abolished in 2011. So, why do we need to revive the post and give it to our two former deputy prime ministers? If memory serves me correctly, the senior minister was the second highest paid person after the Prime Minister.

Then there is the fact that our Ministries have one minister, a second minister (ministry of finance has two), and a minister of state (several grades) and senior parliamentary secretary. Let’s not forget Singapore is a small island with limited resources, so it’s not unfair question to ask why our ministries need so many appointment holders.

One might argue that there are a number of names that appear more than once. Josephine Teo is both Minister of Manpower and Second Minister at the Home Affairs Ministry. Mr. K Shanmugam is most famously in the “non-conflict” position of both Minister of Home Affairs and Law. The valid question here is, are they getting more than one salary per ministry or if they are only getting one salary, how do they divide their time between ministries (At a million dollars a year, exclusivity is a fair demand).

Let’s not forget that Singapore’s ministers are the world’s best paid. The lowest paid one gets a million a year. A cabinet of 30 plus ministers is 30 million a year.

Then if you go down the food chain, you’ll come to the interesting fact that Singapore has five mayors, each one earning around $600,000 per person per year. Mayors in the Singapore context run Community Development Councils (CDCs), which is a collection of several constituencies. Mayors are supposed to run social programs on the ground.

I stress the point that Singapore is a tiny place. We are like the “City-States” in Ancient Greece and our geographical size (or lack of) means that the most appropriate comparisons are not with countries but with cities, and even then, we’re still pretty small. Our Prime Minister’s job is not like his global counterparts, it’s more like the mayor of other big cities. Think of London, for example, as a separate from the rest of the UK. Sadiq Khan would then be called “Prime Minister” instead of Mayor.

Yet, the City of Singapore has five mayors and the question that should be asked is “Why?” What value do our mayors bring to the table. Are they doing something beyond the scope of ordinary members of parliament?

Covid-19 has screwed up the global economy. Companies round the world are downsizing to save costs.  Given that Singapore’s leadership likes to compare itself with the best of enterprises, isn’t it time we started looking at slimming down unnecessary layers of bureaucracy? Unless that is of course, this would ruin the chances of certain Singaporeans to stay in high paying and highly secured jobs.   


Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Who Wants Transparency when You Can Have Magic? – Edward, Duke of Windsor – Netflix – The Crown


Thanks to Covid-19, I’ve been discovering a host of programs that I might otherwise not have watched. One of them is “The Crown,” which tells the story of England’s current Queen Elizabeth II. The Queen is currently the longest serving Head of State and the longest ever reigning British Monarch.

One of the most poignant moments in the series was the story of her coronation, which was the first one ever to be televised. It showed her Uncle (who did not attend), explaining the beauty of the coronation and his classic line was “Who wants transparency when you can have magic?”

This line of the series underlines the key reason why the British Monarchy has endured for so long. Despite having no political power, the monarchy has survived and, in some cases, thrived because it has been a symbol or a fantasy for the average man. She and her family are perhaps the British nation’s PR spokespeople, responsible for selling a certain image to the world. Royal Weddings are an example of this, when the world’s cameras are tuned onto the United Kingdom (the converse being Royal divorces)

The key to the Queen’s success is that she’s stayed out of politics and never gives any hint of her personal opinions on the matters of the day. She is, however, by many reports sharp and knows what’s going on and whenever she has to do something, she does it. As was portrayed on Netflix, she did dress down Winston Churchill for having a stroke and keeping it from her. The classic line being “My job is not to govern but to ensure there’s governance.”

By staying out of anything remotely political, the Queen stays out of anything grubby and as they say, ensures the magic that keeps the monarchy going. As a constitutional monarch, the last thing the Queen needs is to be transparent about the nitty gritty of the institution that she represents.

However, while constitutional monarchs may exist on the concept of magic, the same should never be true for elected politicians and civil servants, who are in the grubby business of running the country.

Unfortunately, there have been cases of elected politicians and bureaucrats who have forgotten that they are in the business of running things and that actually requires transparency. The most famous example is the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who has famously refused to release his tax returns (something which all his predecessors have done) and appointed relatives the politically influential positions (something which real Princes have avoided doing).

This is, unfortunately, not limited to the USA. In Singapore, we’ve had the example of the Ho Ching, the Chief Executive of Temasek Holdings, an investment firm that invest on behalf of the Singapore government. One of the largest issues in Singapore is the fact that nobody knows what Madam Ho’s salary is.

If you look at it from a legal perspective, there’s no need for Madam Ho to reveal what she earns. Temasek Holdings is a private company and as such has no obligation to publish any accounts or any details about the salaries paid to its directors. Her salary, as they say, should be no one’s business except hers and her employer, which in this case is the Ministry of Finance.

However, when you look at what Temasek Holdings is, you have to ask why there’s so much secrecy about its financial performance and the salaries of the top directors. Temasek Holdings, as is known to everyone is mandated by the Ministry of Finance to invest and grow the nation’s wealth. My pension money (CPF) funds are utilized by Temasek Holdings and while I may not have a direct share of Temasek Holdings, they are using my money to do what they do. So, the point is – surely their business is also my business and what Ho Ching as CEO is paid is my business.

The consistent argument for keeping all of this secret is that it’s part of national security. However, this argument does not wash. Madam Ho’s husband is the Prime Minister and his salary is public knowledge. Are we to say that the CEO of Temasek Holdings has a higher national security priority than the Prime Minister?

When it comes to Constitutional Monarchs, magic can override transparency. However, when it comes to the case of the people involved in running the country and with their hands on the public purse, the answer is no – we cannot accept that they live in the world of magic. Transparency is required in their case. Let us never forget that politicians and civil servants are employed by the tax payer and what they get up to is our business.

© BeautifullyIncoherent
Maira Gall