The nagging question of Ho Ching’s salary as CEO of Temasek Holdings does not appear to be one that is about to disappear into the sunset. Indeed, it appears to be one that is raised periodically by opposition politicians, media outlets and the like. According to reports, it would seem that this is an issue that raises the heckles of her husband who is also our Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong (PM Lee).

Attempting to address the issue in Parliament, Second Finance Minister Lawrence Wong has said that “the government has an ‘arms-length’ relationship with Temasek and GIC and that the government refrains from interfering with their Boards’ decisions, such as the appointment of Ho Ching as CEO of Temasek.”

He further added that “salaries at Temasek and GIC are decided respectively by independent boards.” In isolation, that may well be an acceptable answer but then, this isn’t a straightforward issue of a private company deciding the salaries of its employees. Rather, Temasek is a unique company that straddles between private and public.

While ostensibly a private company, it also manages state assets which are clearly of public interest. Not to mention the fact that its CEO is the wife of our current Prime Minister! This would mean that apart from Temasek’s affairs being arguably of public interest, there is also a potential argument for a case of conflict of interest!

Where are the checks and balances when state assets are managed by the wife of the man who holds the highest political office in the land? Lest we forget, Madam Ho is not a public servant which means that we may never know why or how decisions are made. What is there in place to prevent state assets being potentially used to keep her husband in power?  In the first place, Madam Ho should never have been made CEO of Temasek.  Not only was she made CEO but she has been a long standing one whose salary appears to be opaque. While I am not suggesting that any actual wrongdoing has taken place, the fact that this factual matrix exists means that it will always be a subject of contention, controversy and suspicion.

Added to the apparent murkiness is the seeming detraction whenever that question is indeed raised. No one ever answers directly. Why is it such a secret? Perhaps Madam Ho does not feel that she is compelled to disclose her personal income because she is not a public servant. However, even if she is not technically on the payroll of the state, she is still the wife of the most powerful man in Singapore who is at the helm of Singapore’s most powerful private/public company. With that in mind, isn’t she obligated to be more transparent and open?

The more her salary isn’t disclosed, the more there will be speculation that something untoward is happening even if that isn’t the case. In this case, I would think that her dual role as the de facto first lady and as the CEO of the powerful private / public hybrid company that is Temasek should trump her desire for privacy if that is the reason why she is not divulging her earnings.

Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Minister Ong: More than 2,000 people have been quarantined to contain KTV cluster

At a media briefing yesterday (16 Jul), Health Minister Ong Ye Kung…

The five Cs of political leadership in Singapore

Leadership renewal is taking shape, with significant changes to the Central Executive…

金管局发禁令 高盛前主管终身不得染指我国金融活动

随着美国司法部起诉高盛集团(Goldman Sachs)前银行家雷斯纳(Tim Leissner),我国金融管理局也跟进,将雷斯纳的10年禁令延长为终身禁令。 去年三月,金管局向涉嫌一马公司丑闻的雷斯纳,发出10年禁令,禁止他直接或间接参与管理本地资本市场服务公司,或从事任何受我国证券与期货法令监管的活动。 金管局在今天的文告中指出,自雷斯纳在上月被美国司法部提控后,该局获悉更多他参与一马公司弊案的证据。 雷斯纳已承认与一马弊案有关的洗钱罪名,为此金管局决定对他施以终身禁令,并禁止他成为受证券与期货法令管制的公司的董事或大股东。 在上月,高盛(Goldman Sachs)公司承认,属下二职员涉及一马公司案,高盛在向美国证券交易委会提呈的报告,指雷斯纳和黄宗华(Roger Ng Chong Hwa)“绕过公司内部审计机制,同时蓄意欺骗监管者及内部委员会。” 高盛在2012至2013年期间,通过3笔债券发行为1MDB筹资近65亿美元,并在交易中取得近6亿美元的佣金,远远超过银行助发债预期可获得的1至2%正常收费。…

研究指政府应考量国人对移民比率的接受度

李光耀公共政策学院新加坡政策研究所和种族和谐资源中心(OnePeople.sg),從去年8月至今年1月进行一项民调,探讨可能影响本地社会凝聚力的隐忧。 根据李光耀公共政策学院官网,发布有关研究报告的简介,指出近期发生的一些社会事件,都与五大关键议题有关:族群、宗教、移民、阶级和性少数权益(LGBT)。 “仅在今年,“美丽求求你”讽刺视频风波、立法禁止外国传教士发表煽动性言论、再到上周末出现摩根大通高管辱骂本地保安,引起社会反弹,”以及有要求废除刑事法典377A的呼声,都一再占据着本地媒体的版位。 故此,该研究旨在探讨本地居民如何受到上述五大隐忧影响,以及国家干预与公共论述的缓解机制。 研究认为国人都意识到管理社会隐忧的重要,尽管过去族群和宗教议题都由政府管理,惟相当大部分人口亦认为移民课题、LGBT和阶级需要政府的参与与公共讨论。 研究建议政府在制定移民政策时应考量国人对移民比率的接受度,特别是有六成受访者坦言,不喜欢和新移民做邻居,住家附近的新移民人口在1-20巴仙之间,对他们来说才是比较理想的。 近七成认为移民仍不够融入本土社会 此外,有将近67.5巴仙受访者,某种程度上赞同或非常赞同,新移民对于融入本土社会仍做得不够好;不过93巴仙受访者赞同孩子与不同背景的人一起玩耍。 而来自不同学历、不同年龄背景的受访者中,有近半认为在移民课题上认为政府应干预和管制移民涌入,这可能显示本地人的排外心理和对就业的不安全感在提升。 报告也提到近期发生的摩根大通高管辱骂保安事件,而坊间一些声音不外乎要求对这位外籍高官采取行动、调查他的学历背景、开除他/驱逐出境。 报告也分析居民在看待此事上把身份和阶级关联在一起,甚至将之关联到此前新加坡和印度政府签署的《综合性经济合作协议(CECA)》,使之成为当局必须处理的不利因素。此外,包括保安协会、工会和一些议员也站出来呼吁立法保障低薪劳工的权益。