Below are some extracts from a speech given by K Shanmugam in 2007.
Interesting read in current circumstances.
7 Let’s not fool ourselves. The opportunities in the private sector have always
been good. Now they have become really tremendous. Many of us here
know that for a fact. Take a bright young man in his 30s. Assume that he is
among the brightest in his generation. Today he has an array of career
choices. He can stay in Singapore or go overseas. He can join any MNC or
financial institution. Or he can stay in a profession. If he remains in the
private sector, he will have his privacy, he can travel the world, live where he
likes, have a 2nd or 3rd home and choose to lead the life he wants. In his
early 40s, he could be earning $2 million and more and by the time he is in his
late 40s, a real high flier could be taking home S$5 million or more. If the
median for the top lawyers and accountants is S$4.2 million and S$3.7 million,
you can guess what those above the median will be making. And that was in
2005. And I am leaving out the real heavy hitting Investment Bankers out of
these scenarios.
Well, Ministers are at the Apex of the system. You have to compare them
with those at the Apex of the private sector. Any other comparison will be
meaningless. You want the very best - then the comparisons must be with
the very best and if Ministers are not performing - well would it not become
painfully obvious both to the PM and the public? If the PM chooses to carry
on with such a Minister - he runs his risks. As for the argument that in the
private sector the winners change every year, I think that is only partially
correct. Every formula is going to have its drawbacks. The best and most
suitable approach, in my view, would be to compare with the top performers;
as long as a Minister is performing.
Interesting read in current circumstances.
7 Let’s not fool ourselves. The opportunities in the private sector have always
been good. Now they have become really tremendous. Many of us here
know that for a fact. Take a bright young man in his 30s. Assume that he is
among the brightest in his generation. Today he has an array of career
choices. He can stay in Singapore or go overseas. He can join any MNC or
financial institution. Or he can stay in a profession. If he remains in the
private sector, he will have his privacy, he can travel the world, live where he
likes, have a 2nd or 3rd home and choose to lead the life he wants. In his
early 40s, he could be earning $2 million and more and by the time he is in his
late 40s, a real high flier could be taking home S$5 million or more. If the
median for the top lawyers and accountants is S$4.2 million and S$3.7 million,
you can guess what those above the median will be making. And that was in
2005. And I am leaving out the real heavy hitting Investment Bankers out of
these scenarios.
Well, Ministers are at the Apex of the system. You have to compare them
with those at the Apex of the private sector. Any other comparison will be
meaningless. You want the very best - then the comparisons must be with
the very best and if Ministers are not performing - well would it not become
painfully obvious both to the PM and the public? If the PM chooses to carry
on with such a Minister - he runs his risks. As for the argument that in the
private sector the winners change every year, I think that is only partially
correct. Every formula is going to have its drawbacks. The best and most
suitable approach, in my view, would be to compare with the top performers;
as long as a Minister is performing.
