Current Affairs
Whose future is “shining”, really?
Ministers to get a 3rd pay hike. What about the elderly?
Andrew Loh
Ministers scheduled to be given a third pay hike this year
If you ask me, the future is really shining for us… We will survive; this is a red dot, which we can make redder and brighter. (MM Lee, 2006)
We are into a period of good economic growth and social development… If there are no wars or oil crises, this golden period can stretch out over many years… (Singapore in a golden period, says MM Lee, 2007),
Mdm Soh (not her real name) is more than 70 years old and has been working as an office cleaner for more than a year. Her daily routine starts at 7am and ends at 5pm, which means she puts in 10 hours of work, including a one hour lunch break. She works five and a half days per week – 55 hours in all.
She is paid $650 per month.
$2.95 per hour.
In January 2008, the Minister for Health, in advocating for the implementation of means testing starting at the median income, cited the figure of $2,170 for full-time employed residents. Mdm Soh clearly is not in this income bracket, even though she works full time.
Mdm Soh says that she started work when she was 10 years old, doing various jobs over the years. Although she finds life tough with the current rate of record inflation, she declines help from her children. “They also have their families,” she says. “I’ll just make do with what I have. I don’t go out except for work and maybe once in a while I buy a little 4D”, she says in Teochew, referring to the lottery. She quickly adds that she spends “at the most just one dollar’s worth” on the lottery.
The elites – a third pay hike
At the other end of the spectrum, top Government ministers had their salaries increased twice in 2007, the second one in December of that year. According to a Straits Times report:
Under the revised salary package announced by the Public Service Division (PSD) on Thursday, ministers at the starting grade will take home $1.94 million next year – an increase of 21 per cent over this year’s $1.6 million.
Also in the same report:
With the pay revision, the annual salary for President SR Nathan will go up from $3.1 million this year to $3.87 million in 2008, the Prime Minister’s from $3.09 million to $3.76 million, ministers and senior permanent secretaries, from $1.593 million to $1.94 million, entry superscale grade Admin officers, from $384,000 to $398,000 and MPs, from $216,300 to $225,000.
The Prime Minister’s salary was increased by $670,000 per year. That is about $55,833 per month. The PM’s salary is currently $3.76m per year ($313,333 per month).
According to the Reuters news report, “Singapore’s economic boom widens income gap” (9 November, 2007):
“The proportion of Singapore residents earning less than S$1,000 (US$690) a month rose to 18 percent last year, from 16 percent in 2002, central bank data released late last month show… and Singapore’s Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, has worsened from 42.5 in 1998 to 47.2 in 2006, and is now in league with the Philippines (46.1) and Guatemala (48.3), and worse than China (44.7), data from Singapore’s Household Survey and the World Bank show”.
The Government is expected to announce a third salary increase for civil servants, including ministers, later this year, as part of a three-step effort to close the gap in the benchmark for ministers’ salaries. This was explained by Minister in Charge of the Civil Service, Teo Chee Hean, on the 9th of April, 2007:
Salaries at the MR4 Grade are currently at 55% of the benchmark. Given the large gap, it is not realistic to close the gap fully in one go. Instead, we will close half of the current gap, that is, from 55% of the benchmark, to 77% of the benchmark by the end of this year.
This will be effected in two steps – one step now, and another step at the end of this year. Next year, we aim to close half of the remaining gap, bringing salaries to 88% of the benchmark by end-2008.
(Sprinter)
What is the Government doing about the income gap for ordinary Singaporeans, especially the poor? It prefers to take a “targeted approach”, giving periodic handouts and assistance and schemes like the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS). The Government has dismissed suggestions for the institution of a minimum wage and has also regularly warned that “subsidies will not solve Singapore’s problems”. (Lee Kuan Yew)
Give our elderly a sense of peace and security
Yet, with the anticipated third increase in ministers’ salaries, which is already the highest in the world, Singaporeans are beginning to wonder if only the top few are reaping the rewards of the hard work which everyone had put in during the boom times.
As was asked in an earlier article on TOC, “Why have Singaporeans, with one of the highest savings rates in the world, become so dependent on government handouts to even just get by?” With regards to the latest handout as reported by Channel NewsAsia, Over 780,000 households to receive $134m of utility rebates, one wonders why such a huge number of Singaporean households need such handouts to pay their utilities.
Have Singaporeans, consistently ranked one of the hardest-working and overworked, suddenly become beggars with hands extended towards the Government all the time, even as they continue to strive and compete with foreigners?
Perhaps it is time to seriously consider a more institutionalised approach to closing the income gap, such as having a minimum wage policy, and give Singaporeans, especially the working elderly such as Mdm Soh, a sense of security and peace in their twilight years. This is more pertinent now as the Government is also encouraging Singaporeans to work for as long as one can. Minister Lim Boon Heng even urged Singaporeans not to think of retiring (Channel NewsAsia).
To have someone like Mdm Soh work for $2.95 an hour is, in all honesty, quite shameful for a country which regularly trumpets its economic achievements. But more importantly, it says something about how we value those who have given practically their entire lives helping Singapore become this “world-class” city which the Government now boasts about.
While chatting with Mdm Soh, she was very anxious not to be seen talking to me too long. “I have to get back to work, or else my boss will be looking for me”, she would periodically say. I could not help but wonder: Are our elderly so frightened of not being able to find jobs that they would accept any jobs offered to them, even if they do not pay them fairly?
As former NTUC Income CEO Tan Kin Lian said here:
I believe that local workers deserve to have an adequate salary for a hard day’s work. This salary has to be commensurate with the cost of living. It should be adequate for a worker to feed a family, at least in a frugal way. The worker should not be expected to work for 12 hours a day, and still not earn enough for the family.
Indeed, our elderly who put in full-time work should not be struggling to keep up, or made to work for less than what would be minimum wage, all in the name of “globalisation” or “competition”.
Otherwise, ministers should be prepared for a severe backlash if and when they increase their own salaries later this year – the third time in two years – by millions of dollars again.
It seems that this “golden era” which MM Lee declared we are in is only for a select group – and we also wonder whose future it is that is “really shining”.
Read also:
Uniquely Singapore – F1 or F9: Income statistics?
Elderly toilet cleaners a sad reflection of society here.
————–
Below is a recent letter which my colleague Leong Sze Hian sent to the Straits Times. It was published in the ST on June 25:
Retraining low-wage workers: Let’s be realistic
I REFER to the article, ‘Contract workers: Caught in the pay squeeze’ (June 8).
The Building Custodian Job Re-design Programme, an initiative supported by the Workforce Development Agency and National Trades Union Congress, seeks to enhance the skills of cleaners to value-add in work such as changing light bulbs, clearing blockages and ‘custodial checking’, such as sighting and reporting defects, pests and killer litter.
This job of building custodians or multi-skilled cleaners comes with a $1,000 starting wage, compared to a cleaner’s $700 to $800.
As I understand most cleaners are elderly with low education, how realistic is it to expect them to undergo re-training to expand job duties and responsibilities?
How many companies have sent cleaners on this re-training programme?
How many of the 37,000 contract cleaners have so far been sent for re-training?
As most cleaners are employed by contractors which have to bid for contracts at the lowest competitive price, how likely is it that one paying the lowest wage of $700 will pay the $1,775 course fee and allow time off for the 112-hour course?
With regard to the advisory to all companies and contractors on responsible outsourcing practices issued by the Ministry of Manpower in March, I have come across an elderly road sweeper, an 84-year-old Singaporean man who works 55 hours a week for $650 a month, and an elderly woman who works 24 hours a week as a housekeeper at a community club for just $300 plus a month – no wage increment, bonus and so on.
Government agencies, statutory boards, government-linked companies and so on should take note of the very low wages of workers on their premises, and try to influence their outsourced contractors to pay decent wages.
For example, they could follow the example of the PAP town councils, which have recommended a $1,000 starting wage for full-time workers and $500 for part-time workers, in new cleaning contracts since April.
Although no minimum wage is imposed, cleaning companies are required under the new contracts to send their workers to the National Skills Recognition System Clean Residential Estates course.
—————
Current Affairs
Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech
Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.
by Alexandar Chia
This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.
Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.
Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.
Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.
As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.
Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.
Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.
If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?
In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.
Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.
And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.
This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.
These are how I suggest it is to be done –
- The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
- Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
- A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
- A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
- Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
- All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.
Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.
Current Affairs
Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun
A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.
SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.
The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.
The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.
Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.
The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.
The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.
If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.
In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.
They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.
The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.
The investigation is ongoing.
Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.
Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.
The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.
Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.
However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.
The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.
-
Singapore3 days ago
Minister K Shanmugam transfers Astrid Hill GCB to UBS Trustees for S$88 Million following Ridout Road controversy
-
Singapore1 week ago
Singapore woman’s suicide amidst legal battle raises concerns over legal system
-
Parliament5 days ago
Minister Shanmugam rejects request for detailed information on visa-free visitor offences: Cites bilateral considerations
-
Diplomacy1 week ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Opinion2 weeks ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Parliament6 days ago
PAP MPs attack WP Gerald Giam in Parliament over NTUC independence from ruling party
-
Politics1 week ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Politics4 days ago
11 former or current PAP MPs & Ministers underscore heavy presence in NTUC leadership