Ministerial pay: Calibration matters, but also regular reviews
Singapore’s system has many admirers but while the principles are clear, the pay proposal will be tough to sell politically.
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
Many systems value the human contribution to good governance through either administrative rules, or relying on people wealthy enough to serve. Singapore’s deliberate, balanced and open approach is a unique governance competency we should not take for granted, says the writer.
ST PHOTO: SHINTARO TAY
Aaron Maniam
I recently returned to Singapore after three years teaching at the Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford. Many students there are serving political leaders and officials from across the world, several with many years’ experience. Singapore’s approach to paying political and public service leaders came up often.
It was striking how positively many students viewed Singapore’s approach. Most noted, with some regret, that their own countries had failed to find a balance between paying enough that capable people are willing to do the job, but not so much that public office becomes indistinguishable from any other career. For many, Singapore’s answer was carefully considered, with a transparent formula behind it and robust parliamentary debate around it.
