Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
PM Lee leads by example
It was reported in Channel News Asia that PM Lee will freeze his own pay for the next 5 years and donate away the pay increases in these 5 years. Read the full story here.
I am extremely heartened by PM Lee’s move. Maybe some people are still going to blast him for doing it as a belated PR stunt, but I think that as a leader of the country, he has done the right thing. And, I respect him for doing that. It shows that at least the leader of the country is not out of touch with reality. He has reclaimed some of the moral authority that the government has lost regarding this whole ministerial pay increase business.
In the Analects, the Confucius said this of a government leader:
å曰：“苟æ£å…¶èº«çŸ£ï¼ŒäºŽä»Žæ”¿ä¹Žä½•æœ‰ï¼Ÿä¸èƒ½æ£å…¶èº«ï¼Œå¦‚æ£äººä½•ï¼Ÿâ€
Translated, the above line says: “If one is able to correct oneself, what is so difficult about governance? If one cannot even correct oneself, how does he expect to correct others?”
Indeed, PM Lee understands the importance of leadership by example. This is the kind of leader that followers will gladly obey and stick with through thick and thin. To quote another line from the Analects:
å曰：“其身æ£ï¼Œä¸ä»¤è€Œè¡Œï¼›å…¶ä¸æ£ï¼Œè™½ä»¤ä¸ä»Žã€‚â€
Translated, it says: “If one is moral and upright, people will follow without being ordered. If one is immoral and corrupted, people will disobey despite being ordered.”
I hope that the other ministers will take their cue from the Prime Minister and do the same. If such are the characters of all our government leaders, then I’m prepared to stake my future and life with Singapore. If not, no amount of money or glory will stop me from leaving Singapore.
Afterthought:
I hope that SPH and the other MPs DO NOT do the cheer leading like they did for the GST offset package. It will leave a very disgusting aftertaste if it happens and any goodwill from Singaporeans generated as a result of the PM’s voluntary gesture would disappear in smoke.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 11/04/2007 at 8:08 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 3 years ago
nancy,
I’m not intending to forget. Check back here 4.5 years later.
about 3 years ago
boyying:
Tsk… I could change it to IrA. By the way, have you filed your taxes yet?
Since you asked,I shall humour you. “IrCTP” stands for “I remember Chia Thye Poh”. Go check wikipedia if you don’t know who Mr. Chia is.
about 3 years ago
boyying,
I embrace free speech, so I don’t think it’s the right thing to do to ban people from saying what they want. We have to be gracious enough to take the “good” with the “bad”. Notice the quotation marks because good and bad are usually specific to situation and context.
about 3 years ago
funky,
Thank you for being able to graciously disagree. I share your same concern, but I shall remain cautiously optimistic for now. Anyway, I don’t know what the future holds. I might have to revise my position based on new information in future. We never have perfect information, so let’s take things one step at a time.
about 3 years ago
Aaron said:
I’m just asking where do you think a government leader should draw his salary from if not from taxes. I fail to see the connect between that question and “robbing†people. I don’t think you should do a bait and switch in order to attack me personally.
Wah this Aaron really full of himself.
I point out what I THINK is the flaws of his argument that LHL is using tax payers money to be a “good chap”, which, in my opinion, tentamounts to robbing. I then muse that maybe he not been a tax payer, that he possibly may not understand what as a tax payer mayfeel, he takes it as a personal attack.
I mean what makes him such a big-shot that disagreement with his line of his argument is a personal attack.
Interesting….
To Fearfully Opinionated:
Frankly I don’t care if Aaron is a sychophant of the PAP and a rabit ANTI-PAP man. I was merely arguing against his line of argument in a strident fashion.
If he so feels that arguments against his line of argument equates to a personal attack. Than that is his prerogrative.
about 3 years ago
Seow Ching,
I cannot stop you from thinking whatever you want. I’m merely seeking clarification that I never got. And, since you have the perogative to think that are the flaws of my argument and muse about it, why are you being so condescending about me musing about your argument? Double standards?
Sigh. I give up. I was enjoying the discussion with you. But you seem uninterested. There’s nothing more that I can say. But just to answer your question, by your argument, anyone who receives taxpayer’s money as salary and then donate it away is a “robber”. So the entire Civil Service is populated with “robbers” by your argument.
about 3 years ago
IrCTP why are you always spoiling for a fight?
Just because you two disagree does not mean others should be dragged in. Aaron has just given a nice invitation to drop by this site in
4.5 years time. Is this enough feedback from the resident blogger? Aaron has said for the nth time that he applauds only the personal gesture of LHL. You just have to accept that sometimes we will agree to disagree. Why go all out to discredit all him and Aaron?
about 3 years ago
The government can force people to pay tax.
Then against sentiments of the Singaporean people, the government say the want a pay increase, force you to pay-up, and then use increase pay (from tax payers money, which is being objected to), and then make a song-and-dance about “donating” the increases and then present themselves as “Look How Morally upright” I am and you don’t see that as robbery?
And then get the sympathy… Boo Hoo Hoo, see how I am “sacrificing” my $600K. AND YOU STILL DON’T GET IT?
Even CEOs of companies don’t force employees to cough out their monthly pay to pay themselves.
Geeze…..
about 3 years ago
Seow Ching,
I would say that I see your point. But as I’ve tried to explain earlier, while it’s not as strong a gesture as I would have liked, it’s still a little something. Instead of being so negative, why can’t we give a little credit and encourage PM Lee to go further? I think it’s a matter of paradigm here. I think that positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement. Ultimately, what would be most helpful is that poorer people get help, and if we keep slamming our ministers all the time, where’s the incentive to do better? I for one would not perform better because someone keeps scolding me for poor performance. I will only be able to perform if I’m given small encouragements (I don’t need ego boosters). All I’m beseeching is that while we take out the stick, we should also give a couple of baby carrots.
about 3 years ago
nancy:
If you consider this a “fight”, then you may have revise your definition of that term a little.
Aaron intends to run for political office “somewhere in the future”. Take into consideration Fearfully Opinionated’s comments about Aaron’s “disenchantment” with a certain party, you will get a fair idea what Aaron will be up against if he does run for office (I reckon that once he steps into the working world, whatever political ambitions he has will whittle away).
By then, unless he has eagled-eyed legal advisers who scan through his rally speech right down to the last letter, his arguments will never hold water against the might of more seasoned political veterans out there. When that happens, “being discredited” will become an gross understatement.
Not sure what kind of stuff he is learning from his academic studies, but with my exchanges with him so far, I would have thought he would be more critical of things he picks up from the media (be it propaganda paper or not).
about 3 years ago
Back to you, Aaron:
“Instead of being so negative, why can’t we give a little credit and encourage PM Lee to go further?”“Ultimately, what would be most helpful is that poorer people get help,…”
Do you know which charity will benefit? Or did you just take things for granted by reading that little headline?
“I will only be able to perform if I’m given small encouragements (I don’t need ego boosters).”
Are you the PM’s twin or that little worm in his stomach?
about 3 years ago
IrCTP,
Thanks for your concern about my political future but as of now, things are hazy. It remains to be seen whether my idealistic nature will survive the passage of time. To each his own.
about 3 years ago
IrCTP,
I did call for greater transparency in my reply to someone further up this reply list. In anycase, since it’s a public announcement by the PM, if he wishes to look bad by not keeping his promise, there’s little I can do about it. I’ll revise my opinion accordingly when that happens.
I’m not responding to your second part. Provocation doesn’t help matters.
about 3 years ago
“What makes you so sure that I am from the brotherhood and you are not?”
I was with them once, but too much work commitments so I just decided to be one of many of their dedicated readers – that is why I recognize the ways of the shadow warrior. You must be a ronin. Another thing you screw around with all these lessers but you dont dare to go down there to the IS do you?
And we both know why dont we.
about 3 years ago
Aaron,
To me, on this particular issue, I mean THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, my feeling is that I don’t see LHL’s move as anything praiseworthly. IN MY OPINION, which you are most entitled to disagree, it is nothing by a political ploy or simply damage control.
As a politician I would not expect LHL not to be political about his motives. That’s what politician have to, and I expect them to do. What I, which you may disagree, do not equate is political gesture as being something to claim the moral high ground. Worst still one that I will not shy from using the word, which you may disagree, robbing us and then making us feel sorry for being rob.
However, as member of a government, who has by our given consent (in Singapore context, I am probably stretching this concept), they can lord over us. So as electorates, we must be on guard never to use their power to entrap us into believing that they we owe them a living.
about 3 years ago
Oops in the line
Worst still one that I will not shy from using the word, which you may disagree, robbing us and then making us feel sorry for being rob.
It should have said:
Worst still one that I will not shy from using the word, which you may disagree, robbing us and then making us feel GRATEFUL for being rob.
about 3 years ago
Seow Ching,
I guess that clears things up.
It’s tough arguing with fundamental beliefs being so different (in this case, half-glass full versus half-glass empty perspective), but thanks for having the patience to sit through it all. If you are ever back in Singapore, or if I ever drop by UK, let’s have coffee!
about 3 years ago
Aaron:
“I’m not responding to your second part. Provocation doesn’t help matters.”
You want to talk about provocation? Then, for your own sake, don’t come up with nonsense like the following:
“I for one would not perform better because someone keeps scolding me for poor performance. I will only be able to perform if I’m given small encouragements (I don’t need ego boosters). All I’m beseeching is that while we take out the stick, we should also give a couple of baby carrots.”
about 3 years ago
the naked truth:
“And we both know why dont we.”
What’s your supposed reason then? Indulge me.
about 3 years ago
I think that in Singapore, perhaps the only place that’s safe to speak is in Parliament because that’s about the only sanctury where one can speak without fear of retribution.
That is incorrect.
“In December 1996 Chee and other party members were fined by parliament for perjury, after they were accused of fabricating statistics in a parliamentary committee examining government health care subsidies.”
about 3 years ago
IrCTP:
You mean to say you dont know!
about 3 years ago
I disagree that it is a wage freeze because his salary has been increased, regardless of whether he donates or not.
Secondly, a decrease in tax payable is also a gain because one gets to keep the money which would have otherwise been given up as tax.
Thirdly, the reason why I think it is damage control is because the PM could have volunteered to donate the pay increase before the official announcement. That would have given him more credibility.
Lastly, it is good that you try to give a person the benefit of doubt, but I disagree that the PM cannot do anything about it if his cabinet wants a raise even though he doesn’t.
What is a leader for? To lead (and win followers for his convictions) and to make the final decision that he thinks is right, given the feedback. If he believes that the raise is not justified, he should have the moral courage to decide against the raise. The fact that he didn’t throws up some possibilities:
1 He actually thinks the raise is needed. If so, why does he need to donate his share?
2 He is bowing to pressure from his cabinet and afraid he might lose them. If so, is he wise to keep such a cabinet whose loyalty is only to money, not him and his vision?
3 He is not capable of making his own decisions and relies on majority vote and SM as well as MM. If so, does he deserve to be the PM of Singapore with it’s exhorbitant price tag?
about 3 years ago
For repeating a move that has been done by a previous prime minister, his intentions, however genuine, is already much discounted.
Furthermore, if he is absolutely honest and wants not to be misinterpreted, he should just take a “pay freeze” indefinitely. The fact that his political career is far from over (look at MM) makes it more like a act than ever.
about 3 years ago
The flak at LHL’s gesture can work both ways. One eg was the Late David Marshall. He was well known for his humanitarian views and the fact that during the course of his life he tried to help many people, sometimes for free, as seen in the Nonis Trial, and sometimes for just 1 dollar.
However what people do not know is that he was also a top earning lawyer; apparently just to see him required 3000 up front, in fact he was from Drew and Napier, one of the 2nd largest law firms in Singapore.
Now does the second part necessary detract from his actions in the first part?
As evinced by the logic put forth, you can also say that David Marshall did all the above for publicity sake.
about 3 years ago
Correction, to what i said above. Regarding the statement ” what people do not know”, to make it more accurate i should say what people are likely to forget is…”
about 3 years ago
the naked truth:
I’m not from some sisterhood.
about 3 years ago
Ned Stark:
“The flak at LHL’s gesture can work both ways.”
It doesn’t. Not when you announce something in Parliament which became highly controversial (even in the international sphere) and then attempt to put the wool over people’s eyes* by announcing a “wage freeze” for the next five years (by then, an announcement can be made about increasing the pay by another 100%).
* Although this publicity worked (*winks at Aaron*) .
about 3 years ago
Glad to hear that IrCTP you had us all worried for one moment.
Why dont you say something insulting about them to really prove the point that you are not one of them.
You can start slagging off their leader – that should do very nicely
Welcome on board, we shan’t expose your IP,. we only do that to those sub-humans in the brotherhood. They should be exterminated like pest. I agree completely with what Ben and Kitana did.
hahahahaha
about 3 years ago
(*winks at Aaron*) You know what is happening dont you?
(*winks at IrCTP* you are doing a great job. I just want to tell you that.
about 3 years ago
Mr Brown,
Yes, I understand. But I’m too nice a person, unfortunately.
about 3 years ago
Mr Brown:
For someone of your standing, I expected better from you when discerning a “critical” voice from a “dissenting” one. It is sad to see the masses clamouring for the lame podcasts which you have produced. It’s even sadder to see how this “cashcow” of yours is being milked dry, day by day, week by week.
Then again, I am not surprised, given how you once did to others the very things that others did to you when your column was terminated in a local paper (albeit what you did was on a smaller scale). Anyway, I have no desire to engage with the likes of you, especially here on Aaron’s blog.
about 3 years ago
private troubles taking on the public domain i see.
let’s not be antagonistic here. we tend to allow ourselves to be abrasive, obnoxious and snooty when we converse in text, so let’s be gracious here.
and regarding mr brown’s cashcows, i think siva choy was a pioneer in that with his kopi kat antics.