Response to the Silent Minority

I recently came across a post that responded to my introductory post on this blog.

I just thought I'd share it with all of you.


Dear Silent Majority,

Great effort in trying to present what might be an unpopular view on cyberspace. 

I personally have no qualms with the high pay, but it must commensurate with the talent possessed. 
Likewise I am also not against the PAP, but it doesn't mean that I don't question the system. In fact, I am of the view that we SHOULD question the system, but only with the intent to make it more robust, not to tear it down.

Your argument puts forth a few assumptions, that
1. All our Ministers are of necessary calibre. 
2. By stating that the system allows US to attract the cream of the crop you have suggested that the everyday Singaporean got to vote these Ministers in (that is still up for debate), unless of course you're speaking in a different capacity? 
3. That GDP is the one and only indicator of a government's performance. (http://www.google.com.sg/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=limitations+of+gdp)

I'm sure we have brilliant, hardworking Ministers in our government. The public is questioning though, if that applies to all our Ministers for which we are paying top dollar for. The "noise" says no, our lean and efficient yacht is bloated, and we need to toss some of them to keep moving at the pace that we want. 

If even PM Lee, with his intimate knowledge of his ship, admits that they are having trouble finding competent people to do the job with their current selection process, who are we to say otherwise? ;) (http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/micacsd/speech/S-20110407-2.print.html?AuthKey)


There are some questions we need to ask then -

Is our current system up for questioning? Is there space to question the system and do we have enough transparency and information for us to make critical assessment?

Is there room for improvement with the current selection process if it's not yielding the expected results? How is it that we were able to find such a capable team in 1960s with a population of 1.6mil but in today's Singapore with 5mil we're short? (http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/themes/people/hist/popn.html)

Are all our Ministers up to the task of running their ministries to justify their pay? If not, how can they be held accountable to the public (their paymasters) and what recourse does the public have? 

Can we improve the system by which our MPs and Ministers are employed? Do all potentials get a fair chance at being hired? This is an important question we need to ask because by depriving these potentials a fair chance, we are actually depriving ourselves of a fair chance at getting real leadership.

Come Together

You are right, there is a lot of noise out there, but shouting a different tune doesn't solve the issue. What's necessary is to take a measured approach to filter through this noise and listen for the real issues. We need to tackle what's really pressing and crucial for improving the current system. 
To do that we need to be working TOGETHER. There's no "Opposition camp" or "PAP supporter", we are all SINGAPOREANS buying into ONE government. We, as Singaporeans, should be sitting down as a family, with diverse views no less, to decide what's right and what's best for the household so everyone benefits and no one gets left behind.

Regards,
The Silent Minority

Thank you for your response my friend. This is exactly what we need. Like yourself, I am certainly not against the PAP. I feel that they have done a great job thus far. Is the system perfect? Certainly not. I don't think any government can claim to be perfect. As such, the implication is that there is room for improvement and there are aspects to be critiqued. I completely agree with you that we should critique it with the intention of making it more robust rather than tearing it down. Which is why when I see online platforms presenting contrary views to the incumbents, simply for the sake of it(everything the government does is bad, and so on and so forth), I get filled with such disdain.

If I may clarify my position from the 3 questions you posed earlier on,

1. All our Ministers are of necessary calibre. 
Yes, I am working on the assumption that they are of necessary calibre. In my opinion, it would be foolhardy for any government to appoint a cabinet minister for a particular role if he/she is not the best person available for the job.

2. By stating that the system allows US to attract the cream of the crop you have suggested that the everyday Singaporean got to vote these Ministers in (that is still up for debate), unless of course you're speaking in a different capacity? 
I don't mean to say that the everyday Singaporean gets to vote these Ministers in. What I mean to say is that this particular system of remuneration makes it easier for a potential ministerial candidate to decide whether or not to sacrifice the income he would receive from the private sector as he would not be making too big a sacrifice. Take for instance an example where he would have to take a 50% cut in income. It would be unlikely that he would choose to become a minister should that be the case. I'm certainly not suggesting that everyday Singaporeans get to vote these Ministers in and that is certainly another debate altogether.
3. That GDP is the one and only indicator of a government's performance.
 This is a fair point. I don't feel that GDP is the only indicator of the government's performance. I don't believe that the system is perfect and hence, it is certainly up for questioning. There are other benchmarks upon which their performance should be appraised. This could affect a variable portion of their income for instance. But certainly, my belief is that in order to attract people of calibre, we need to be able to offer them something similar to what they would be getting in the private sector.



Is our current system up for questioning? Is there space to question the system and do we have enough transparency and information for us to make critical assessment?
As mentioned above the current system is definitely up for questioning. It is certainly not a perfect system and as mentioned, we need to move from a GDP oriented remuneration structure, to a more holistic results based system.  

Is there room for improvement with the current selection process if it's not yielding the expected results? How is it that we were able to find such a capable team in 1960s with a population of 1.6mil but in today's Singapore with 5mil we're short? (http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/themes/people/hist/popn.html)
 My post wasn't really about the current selection process but since you mentioned it, I'll touch on it just a little. My view is that in the 1960s we did have an extremely capable team. Singapore was a young nation having been through occupation and being part of the Federated Malayan States. We had an exceptional leadership and this in my opinion was a culmination of a number of factors. Despite the lower population numbers of 1.6mil people, Singaporeans we far more politically attuned then than now(though things have improved over the past few years). We had also come to a point where we were complacent and this also contributed to the masses being apathetic. Without going into too much detail yet, these are just a few of the factors that occur to me off the top of my head.


Are all our Ministers up to the task of running their ministries to justify their pay? If not, how can they be held accountable to the public (their paymasters) and what recourse does the public have? 

I'm afraid I'm not in a position to appraise the performance of all our Ministers. I will however  vouch for the ones who I feel are doing an exceptional job. Amongst the cabinet ministers that we have today(well, not really because Parliament has dissolved) the two that I feel have), the ones that I feel have done an exceptional job are the Minister of Foreign Affairs George Yeo and Minister of Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam. Every Minister has their KPIs within their ministries and if the electorate are unhappy with any of the ministers they are free to not vote for him in the elections. Of course then this becomes a slightly more complicated matter. The opposition has to provide credible candidates such that the electorate can actually choose somebody credible to vote in.



Can we improve the system by which our MPs and Ministers are employed? Do all potentials get a fair chance at being hired? This is an important question we need to ask because by depriving these potentials a fair chance, we are actually depriving ourselves of a fair chance at getting real leadership.


The current system by which our MPs and Ministers are employed is by no means perfect. You have made references to how come PAP candidates are given a free pass into Parliament by riding on the coat-tails of their anchor candidate. I feel that the system can be further refined. Whether or not all potentials get a fair chance at being hired is not a question that I can answer. What I will do is paint a scenario. If the opposition has a candidate that has the potential to be a Cabinet Minister. For the sake of the argument, let's assume that he is the best person for the job. We also have to assume that he is voted in, whether through a GRC or an SMC. Will he be considered for the job? I don't have the answers for you but it's definitely something worth exploring.




Finally, I wholeheartedly agree with your final 2 paragraphs and you echo my sentiments exactly. Let me just state for the record, I am not a supporter of the PAP or any other party in particular. I don't believe that the system is perfect. On the contrary, I believe every system can be refined and further refined and then further adapted as a result of the inevitable change that will occur. I can't profess to know everything about politics. As a matter of fact, I have to admit that I have much to learn. Thank you so much for the response. I hope you keep reading and keep spreading the word about this site. I look forward to having more discussions with you and the rest of the readers.


"You are right, there is a lot of noise out there, but shouting a different tune doesn't solve the issue. What's necessary is to take a measured approach to filter through this noise and listen for the real issues. We need to tackle what's really pressing and crucial for improving the current system. 

To do that we need to be working TOGETHER. There's no "Opposition camp" or "PAP supporter", we are all SINGAPOREANS buying into ONE government. We, as Singaporeans, should be sitting down as a family, with diverse views no less, to decide what's right and what's best for the household so everyone benefits and no one gets left behind."