hahaha....again trying sound profound where actually you are seriously out of depth....
whatever the composition....the writing is on the walls, there will be a pay cut.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Gerald Ee is wrong to build up expectations so early. Time bomb!
- Thread starter Confuseous
- Start date
whatever the composition....the writing is on the walls, there will be a pay cut.
i think all of u here kena smoked!!! the most important issue is to review the immigration policy to stop all the india foreign trash from coming in!!!! 60k now wanting and waiting to come!!! what pay cut!!! all of u idiot kena smoked still think u very clever!!! omfg!!!
Pension for Ministers: How much of $11b?
Posted on May 20th, 2011 under Articles, Others 0
Sponsor's link ( Want this spot?)
We refer to the Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office’s letter “PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/...ry_668430.html and the articles “Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay” (ST, May 14) and .”Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14). http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/E...ow-theyre-paid
According to the Budgethttp://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2011/revenue_expenditure/attachment/6%20Assets%20&%20Liab%20EE2010.pdf, the Government’s liabilities as at 31 March, 2010, for the Pension Fund is $10.6 billion.
Since this is the provision for the pensions payable to eligible civil servants and political appointees, how much of this sum is attributable to political appointees?
How many political appointees are currently receiving pensions?
To illustrate the sums involved, for example, if a 27 year-old new political appointee becomes a Minister eventually, and steps down at age 50, since the latest available Public Service Division (PSD) figures for 2009, was that an entry-grade Minister received an annual salary of $1.57 million, the annual pension may be say around $157,000 (“Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay”, ST, May 14).
If the retiring Minister lives to 90 years old (life expectancy for a female at around the 20 per cent survival probability), the total lifetime payout is $6.28 million ($157,000 times 40 years), or a present value liability to taxpayers of about $3.6 million, using the current 3 per cent discounting formula applied in computing pension liabilities.
As this example is for just one entry-grade Minister, how much would the figure be for a Cabinet Minister?
Also, since the Invest Fund of $469 million, is the provision for the pensions of the Home Affairs (Ministry) Uniformed Services (HUS)http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.a...NZyJ19YOPOM=
, does it mean that the total pensions liability is about $11 billion ($10.6 billion plus $469 million).
For example, in the Health Sciences Authority’s (HSA) financial statements for 2007/8, “In the prior year, a provision of $240,734 was made for 3 eligible officers who exercised the option to return to the pension scheme as offered by the government”. (see attached PDF file)
Since the pensions scheme was terminated many years ago, why are ‘eligible’ officers allowed the option to return to the pension scheme?
Does this mean, for example, that a civil servant who is promoted to the Administrative Service, or becomes a political appointee, may be given this option?
When a pensionable civil servant resigns to stand as a candidate in the elections, does it mean that he or she will lose all service pensionable benefits, or does it mean that they may be transferred or credited in some way, if they become political appointees?
What is the criteria to qualify as an ‘eligible’ officer?
Does this option to return to the pensions scheme mean that past service may also be credited for the purpose of the pension benefits, i.e. like a back-dating of benefits?
If this is the case, is any adjustment made for the employer’s CPF contribution to the ‘eligible’ officer’s CPF account over the years?
By the way, the liability under the Government Securities Fund is $331 billion.
.
Leong Sze Hian and Alex Lew
P.S. We are grateful and indebted to Joey Foo for doing all the research and alerting us to this issue
Posted on May 20th, 2011 under Articles, Others 0
Sponsor's link ( Want this spot?)
We refer to the Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office’s letter “PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/...ry_668430.html and the articles “Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay” (ST, May 14) and .”Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14). http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/E...ow-theyre-paid
According to the Budgethttp://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2011/revenue_expenditure/attachment/6%20Assets%20&%20Liab%20EE2010.pdf, the Government’s liabilities as at 31 March, 2010, for the Pension Fund is $10.6 billion.
Since this is the provision for the pensions payable to eligible civil servants and political appointees, how much of this sum is attributable to political appointees?
How many political appointees are currently receiving pensions?
To illustrate the sums involved, for example, if a 27 year-old new political appointee becomes a Minister eventually, and steps down at age 50, since the latest available Public Service Division (PSD) figures for 2009, was that an entry-grade Minister received an annual salary of $1.57 million, the annual pension may be say around $157,000 (“Pension about a tenth of minister’s pay”, ST, May 14).
If the retiring Minister lives to 90 years old (life expectancy for a female at around the 20 per cent survival probability), the total lifetime payout is $6.28 million ($157,000 times 40 years), or a present value liability to taxpayers of about $3.6 million, using the current 3 per cent discounting formula applied in computing pension liabilities.
As this example is for just one entry-grade Minister, how much would the figure be for a Cabinet Minister?
Also, since the Invest Fund of $469 million, is the provision for the pensions of the Home Affairs (Ministry) Uniformed Services (HUS)http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.a...NZyJ19YOPOM=
, does it mean that the total pensions liability is about $11 billion ($10.6 billion plus $469 million).
For example, in the Health Sciences Authority’s (HSA) financial statements for 2007/8, “In the prior year, a provision of $240,734 was made for 3 eligible officers who exercised the option to return to the pension scheme as offered by the government”. (see attached PDF file)
Since the pensions scheme was terminated many years ago, why are ‘eligible’ officers allowed the option to return to the pension scheme?
Does this mean, for example, that a civil servant who is promoted to the Administrative Service, or becomes a political appointee, may be given this option?
When a pensionable civil servant resigns to stand as a candidate in the elections, does it mean that he or she will lose all service pensionable benefits, or does it mean that they may be transferred or credited in some way, if they become political appointees?
What is the criteria to qualify as an ‘eligible’ officer?
Does this option to return to the pensions scheme mean that past service may also be credited for the purpose of the pension benefits, i.e. like a back-dating of benefits?
If this is the case, is any adjustment made for the employer’s CPF contribution to the ‘eligible’ officer’s CPF account over the years?
By the way, the liability under the Government Securities Fund is $331 billion.
.
Leong Sze Hian and Alex Lew
P.S. We are grateful and indebted to Joey Foo for doing all the research and alerting us to this issue
Pension for ministers – more disclosure, please
Posted by theonlinecitizen on May 14, 2011131 Comments
60Share
Leong Sze Hian /
The Prime Minister’s Office and the Minister in charge of the Civil Service have both sought to clarify and explain the issue of ministerial pension. (See links below.)
Whilst the clarification on Ministerial pensions is welcome, I would like to suggest that more details be given. Otherwise, Singaporeans may still be in the dark about how much exactly ministers receive in their pensions.
For example, the Today report says, “When a cabinet minister retires, the maximum annual pension that he is entitled to would be about 10 per cent of his annual salary while he was in service.” So, what are the annual salaries of cabinet ministers?
Otherwise, it may be akin to saying its 10 per cent of $X, but what is X?
Another question is whether this applies to other ministers as well, who are not cabinet ministers.
The Today report also says, “Ministers have to serve a minimum of eight years to qualify for a pension.” How many and who are the ministers that qualify according to this criteria?
Why is it that a minister qualifies after eight years, whereas a civil servant like Administrative Officers are only eligible after 15 years?
Why is it that Members of Parliament (MPs) elected after January 1995 are not eligible, whereas ministers appointed after 1995 are still eligible?
We are told that the “pensionable component has been frozen since 1994” but what was the amount frozen?
The Prime Minister’s Office’s statement says that “over time the pensionable component has shrunk as a proportion of total monthly salary.” What is the pensionable amount as a percentage of the annual salary?
The PMO explains that “[the] Parliamentary Pensions Act also provides for an office-holder to receive a pension at the age of 55, should he qualify for one, while he continues to hold office.” The obvious question which Singaporeans may have is: how many ministers are now receiving a pension?
The PMO’s statement says ‘[this] provision is being reviewed.” I agree that it should be reviewed as I do not see why a current minister in office who is already earning more that $2 million a year should be given a pension at the same time.
How long is this review expected to take?
After all, this is not the first time that this issue has been raised over the years.
In the spirit of PAP transformation, as espoused by ministers George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua (my former MP as I live in Aljunied GRC) in their respective press conferences after the elections, actually, it may be much simpler to just disclose to Singaporeans the amounts of pensions that each eligible minister is getting, instead of a long statement of clarification, which may leave citizens with arguably even more doubts and questions.
Given that “the points are already on… public record”, as the PMO says, and if good governance requires corporate officers of listed companies to disclose their remuneration, shouldn’t ministers do the same?
References:
“PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)
“Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14)
Visit Sze Hian’s website for a free e-book and more.
Posted by theonlinecitizen on May 14, 2011131 Comments
60Share
Leong Sze Hian /
The Prime Minister’s Office and the Minister in charge of the Civil Service have both sought to clarify and explain the issue of ministerial pension. (See links below.)
Whilst the clarification on Ministerial pensions is welcome, I would like to suggest that more details be given. Otherwise, Singaporeans may still be in the dark about how much exactly ministers receive in their pensions.
For example, the Today report says, “When a cabinet minister retires, the maximum annual pension that he is entitled to would be about 10 per cent of his annual salary while he was in service.” So, what are the annual salaries of cabinet ministers?
Otherwise, it may be akin to saying its 10 per cent of $X, but what is X?
Another question is whether this applies to other ministers as well, who are not cabinet ministers.
The Today report also says, “Ministers have to serve a minimum of eight years to qualify for a pension.” How many and who are the ministers that qualify according to this criteria?
Why is it that a minister qualifies after eight years, whereas a civil servant like Administrative Officers are only eligible after 15 years?
Why is it that Members of Parliament (MPs) elected after January 1995 are not eligible, whereas ministers appointed after 1995 are still eligible?
We are told that the “pensionable component has been frozen since 1994” but what was the amount frozen?
The Prime Minister’s Office’s statement says that “over time the pensionable component has shrunk as a proportion of total monthly salary.” What is the pensionable amount as a percentage of the annual salary?
The PMO explains that “[the] Parliamentary Pensions Act also provides for an office-holder to receive a pension at the age of 55, should he qualify for one, while he continues to hold office.” The obvious question which Singaporeans may have is: how many ministers are now receiving a pension?
The PMO’s statement says ‘[this] provision is being reviewed.” I agree that it should be reviewed as I do not see why a current minister in office who is already earning more that $2 million a year should be given a pension at the same time.
How long is this review expected to take?
After all, this is not the first time that this issue has been raised over the years.
In the spirit of PAP transformation, as espoused by ministers George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua (my former MP as I live in Aljunied GRC) in their respective press conferences after the elections, actually, it may be much simpler to just disclose to Singaporeans the amounts of pensions that each eligible minister is getting, instead of a long statement of clarification, which may leave citizens with arguably even more doubts and questions.
Given that “the points are already on… public record”, as the PMO says, and if good governance requires corporate officers of listed companies to disclose their remuneration, shouldn’t ministers do the same?
References:
“PMO on pensions for political office and MPs” (ST, May 14)
“Ministers’ pensions: How they’re paid” (Today, May 14)
Visit Sze Hian’s website for a free e-book and more.
Similar threads
