Watched this thread for sometime. The best post and most accurate that I feel is the one below by Seee3. Also agree with the labelling of the characters. The only disagreement is the last category where it may not be blatant corruption but perks and reward systems that I would classify as immorally excessive that comes with the position and not reflected or revealed publicly. Not all of them dip into this. A minority actually refrain from it . So 1% is a bit low.
Some other comments ;
1. The recent incident involving the 2 is politically insignificant. The actions so far revealed does not indicate any structural issues or a breach of core operating principles. They reflect character flaws that is closer to inappropriate or immoral behaviour. In the corporate world, they would probably be told to zip up their pants. There is also no national security implications.
2. My guess is that the SCDF contract would still have gone thru. You cannot just walk away from a GLC contract or relationship without the big boys getting involved. At this stage it appears to be a case of overzealous relationship management by the lady that has resulted in civil servants seeking gifts, trips and entertainment.
3. There has been some change in handling such matters as such cases never see day light but handled internally. Eric Tan, CPIB head, Tan Tee How, Perm Sec MHA and Teo Chee Hean are all new to the post. There is a heavier burden on Teo Chee Hean as head of civil service and concurrently Minister in MHA to show greater resolve and justify the renumeration model after the recent salary review debacle.
4. There is also some dynamics involved which I did not realise earlier but might have helped steer the recent events into the public domain. Both Eric Tan, CPIB and Tan Tee How PS pretty much rose thru the ranks and did not have privileges of the scholat gravy train. They are highly competent though the former tends to be cocky but confident and the moral compass is true. They know each other very well before they even joined the civil service. I guess they decided to raise the bar together the new MHA minister who frankly comes from wealthy background and does not need a penny from his salary. Teo Chee Hean is also rare among the ministers as his sons have taken OMS while children of other ministers despite being eligibile have no desire to serve in public service.
5. If this is the new trend, it can only be good. It will flush out undesirable conduct which in the past was not blatant corruption and therefore difficult to slot within the criminal paradigm.
6. Hopefully it will lead to more transparency but I suspect not to the extent that is generally acceptable or required of a public service. I would certainly not hold my breath.
Don't think they will opening talk about the root causes. However, just for chit chat, I feel no. 2 is the main culprit and would like to change "Attracting" to "Selecting.."There is no question on the intelligence of those selected. "Character" is the main concern. imo I would roughly breakdown their catch into the following categories by characters :1. Sincerely serving (1%) e.g. HCH2. Serving intelligently and cleanly (5%) e.g. PO, HSK3. Mercenary + porlumpar + Kiasi (60%)4. Mercenary + porlumpar + +kiasi + yeow kiu (33%)4. Really Corrupt (1%)So personal corruption is not the real problem. It is the 90% that sway with the wind, doing things that they know is not right but because (1) it's the boss's idea, (2) do not wish to rock the boat (3) the problem will be passed to others... that is corrupting the system.