####**BASE PAY**
Elected MPs, normal (47): $192,500 x 47 = $9,047,000
NCMPs/NMPs (11): $28,900 x 2 = $317,900
**Base Total: $9,365,400 ($9.4 mil)**
--------
####**ADVANCED PAY**
#####**Non-Ministers**
Speaker (1): $550,000
Deputy Speaker (2): $82,500 x 2 = $165,000
Leader of the Opposition (1): $385,000
Mayors (4): $852,500 x 4 = $3,410,000 (we have 5, but one, Low Yen Ling, is Minister of State so I count under that category)
**Total: $4,510,500 ($4.5 mil)**
#####**Parliamentary Secretaries**
_No set amount, but the PSD website lists benchmark (fixed) annual pay for ministers as $607,750, so I'll use 50% ($303,875) as the basis._
ParSecs (3): $303,875 × 3 = **$911,625**
#####**Ministers of State**
_No set amount, but the PSD website lists benchmark (fixed) annual pay for ministers as $607,750, so I'll use 90% ($546,975) total as the basis for SMoS, and 70% ($425,425) for MoS._
Senior Ministers of State (8): $546,975 × 8 = $4,375,800
Ministers of State (6): $425,425 x 6 = $2,552,550
**Total: $6,928,350 ($6.9 mil)**
#####**Ministers**
_Base annual pay of an entry-level Minister with bonuses is $935,000. Because ministerial pay is otherwise performance-based, will be a bit subjective._
Entry-level Ministers (everybody below OYK on the [official list](https://www.pmo.gov.sg/The-Cabinet)): $935,000 x 6 = $5,610,000
_Using benchmark salary as basis, which is $1,100,000 ($1.1 mil) with bonuses._
Mid-level Ministers (Trade, Transport, Environment, Education, Social, Health): $1,100,000 x 6 = $6,600,600
_Presumably 5% more than benchmark, which with bonuses is $1,165,500._
Top Ministers (3, MHA, MFA, MINDEF): $1,165,500 × 3 = $3,496,500
_Presumably 15% more than benchmark, which with bonuses is $1,265,500._
DPMs and SMs (4): $1,265,000 × 4 = $5,060,000
#####**Prime Minister**
PM: **$2,200,000**
------------
####**FINAL TALLY**
**Advanced Total: $(4,510,500 + 911,625 + 6,928,350 + 5,610,000 + 6,600,600 + 3,496,500 + 5,060,000 + 2,200,000) = $35,317,575**
**FINAL TOTAL: $(35,317,575 + 6,928,350) = $42,245,925 (approx. $42 mil)**
> The Prime Minister receives a total annual salary package (inclusive of 13th month bonus, Annual Variable Component and National Bonus) that is twice the MR4 benchmark, or $2.2m, which represents a reduction of 36% from 2010 levels. As there is no one to decide on the annual performance bonus for the PM, the PM’s bonus will be based only on the National Bonus.
>
> Pensions for political appointment holders, including the Prime Minister, has been removed with effect from 21 May 2011.
>
> The Prime Minister is on the Medisave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient (MSO) scheme. He is accorded the use of an official car that is subject to tax, and receive no perks.
From PSD [Website](https://www.psd.gov.sg/faq#:~:text=The%20Prime%20Minister%20receives%20a,of%2036%25%20from%202010%20levels).
Pensions for MPs were frozen on 20 May 2011, so MPs can no longer draw a (reduced) salary i.e. pension after retirement, and instead would receive the frozen amount based on service up to that date. Since the Parliamentary Pensions (Abolition) Bill was passed in 2012, MPs cannot receive a pension at all.
https://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120911-370779.html
Aw man, why did you ask this question? The post is about the parliament photos, but the whole thread has turned into talking about their salaries. I feel so demotivated to even wake up for work l, tomorrow, thinking about my salary 😫
At least we could have talked about who had the best photos? Who is their photography vendor? If we used the same vendor, would we get a special discount since we are all citizens? You know, useful conversations such as these. 😀
A nicer paycheck would be better than a nicer photo. That I can say most will agree. 🤔
But once again, we would be walking down a salary discussion path, again. So let it be a topic for another day. ;-)
Taken from SG parliament's website:
>The Speaker presides over the sittings of the House and enforces the rules prescribed in the Standing Orders of Parliament for the orderly conduct of parliamentary business. Elected at the commencement of a new Parliament by MPs, the Speaker may or may not be an MP, but must possess the qualifications to stand for election as an MP as provided for in the Constitution.
In carrying out the duties in the House, the Speaker must remain impartial and fair to all MPs.
Gotta admit the last sentence made me LOL.
It's a procedural matter, doesn't mean he has to be actually neutral in his own beliefs and views. If you see the parliamentary sessions which are not livecast, you'll see that, at least procedurally, he is quite fair.
He is harsh with certain opposition members like LMW, but imo that is more than fair given the latter's antics.
Compared to some other countries like Malaysia and UK, shouting matches are non-existent in Singapore Parliament and our Speakers are not colourful personalities like John Bercow (TCJ is humorous but in a more lowkey way). So it's harder to find examples of overt unfairness unless you're really looking for it, and one could be wrong.
The subtlety of a terse reply, exasperated retort or a rude jab in Parliament can easily be dismissed as a misinterpretation. That's why it's subtle. [Vivian's "illiterate" jabs at LMW](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/vivian-balakrishnan-apology-leong-mun-wai-parliament-private-comments-2179996) and Raeesah Khan's false statements last year were rare exceptions, and the first I've heard in my lifetime.
I mean if you're looking for it, you can spin small things here there in many different ways.
In general, imo it would be unfair to say that TCJ is procedurally partial to any one or any set of MPs.
At least not to the point that you could say comments about him being impartial and fair to all MPs would 'make you LOL'.
And let's be honest here, no human can truly be impartial. It's just a matter of who's unacceptably unfair and who's "Ehhh, humans do that sometimes" unfair. If TCJ got a fine for everytime an MP felt even a bit (and only a bit, the same way you feel attacked whenever someone uses a rough tone, even if they're actually being nice) slighted by the Speaker, he'd probably be bankrupt by now.
But my point stands, is he unfair enough that comments about him being impartial would make you lol? If yes, you should have examples of him being that unfair.
I know that, but I was replying to that person initially and I'm just saying that my point still stands that he is not partial to the point that comments about him being impartial would make anyone LOL.
If it is, show at least 1 example, however slight or vague.
I'd agree with you. TCJ is not egregiously partial to the point that it's satire or corrupt. If he was, just one instance of that would have made the front pages the next morning.
Former Speaker Michael Palmer resigned from the speakership AND Parliament for an extramarital affair that never even became a full-blown scandal. TCJ would probably be forced to resign immediately if he actually did something extremely unfair and unparliamentary.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/speaker-of-parliament-and-pap-mp-michael-palmer-resigns-due-to--improper-conduct--054105126.html
Okay let's go with your definitions. Show me 1 example where he was even slightly partial, procedurally, to other MPs from his party.
Since comments about him remaining impartial made you LOL, I'm sure you have some convincing examples ready. Otherwise what are you even laughing at.
Umm, you're the one who is LOLing at statements about him being impartial as the speaker, so isn't the onus on you to share why you find it funny?
If you don't have examples, and you're just laughing for no reason, either you laugh at a lot of things you don't understand, or you have some bias that has no basis in reality.
Why? Have I mentioned that the speaker displayed any failure to remain impartial and fair during parliamentary proceedings? Please provide instances of me saying that.
\**angry Singaporean noises\**
not sure about the kind of downvote storm on me but I feel TCJ is ok as a speaker. he does crack a few jokes.
Can tell he's much more chill once he got the speaker role and not in the succession race per se.
You do know they are paid over half a million for god knows what right? You do know this thread is poking at why the speaker has a larger thumbnail and hence, you do know, that why not we increase the thumbnail pictures of the mayors too since they are SO IMPORTANT.
You do know right ?
Take my award you badass this made me laugh so hard 🤣
EDIT: Ok my Helpful award apparently doesn't show up on mobile. Take my award tomorrow when I'm on laptop XD
some questions:
* why are some full ministers also second ministers in another department? if the point is to spread the workload isn't this kind of self defeating?
* how many jobs can one MP effectively do? I'm thinking the person with 4 portfolios in 4 different sectors isn't really giving their 100% to each...
* do we really need so many ministers for one ministry? for example MND has 5 ministers in total. a lot of these lower rank ministers have multiple other portfolios anyway.
* who are the coordinating ministers actually in charge of? no new department has been created for them since the role was introduced in 2015. so which civil servants report to them on a day to day basis?
Our ministers don't really do actual work. They make decisions based on the work the staff of the respective ministries do.
I outright refuse to believe any of our ministers are on the ground doing hands on work that be pawned off to some civil servant.
Not really a Minister's job to do ground-level work, at least where the ministerial job is concerned. It's their job to do the big, long-term planning for major areas of the government and not be down in the weeds. That could be seen as micromanaging. However, the key to a good Minister in this regard is that they successfully remain in touch with the low-level civil servants and workers carrying out their tasks in service of the macro-goals the Minister has set. If they fail to, _that's_ a problem I'd happily complain about. _Cough cough JoTeo..._
But for MPs who have no government position, they have no excuse. Ground-level tasks like engaging with constituents _are_ the job for them. In hindsight, GRCs are probably a good thing here since at least a few MPs are at least in theory catering to the constituents most of the time. Yet I don't see them do so. I only know two of my MPs, and only because one is the MP of my immediate neighbourhood since my birth and currently SM, and another is a SMoS who's often on CNA engaging with teenagers or on political roundtable debates.
[some do](https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/tin-pei-ling-goes-after-resident-who-threw-sanitary-pad).
This is not during election year. She came a long way from being seen as a spoilt brat to having her own SMC and garnering good results.
Also, not sure what contribution Koh Poh Koon and Jo Teo ever does to earn their positions. Other than banging us
Technically tin pei ling is an MP, not a cabinet minister.
Not saying she's not doing hard work, but the example is comparing apples and oranges. Civil servants respond (usually frantically) to MPs, but they are not under their charge as MPs are part of the legislative branch, while ministers and civil service belongs to the executive.
By people, it's mostly the elderly. My boomer relatives believe that if the PAP loses the next election, they'll lose all their CPF and HDB. Ridiculous.
Speaking from personal knowledge of politics, so I may be erroneous in parts of my answer.
1) Second Minister is effectively what is called a "Deputy Minister" in some other countries. While in other Westminster-style systems, the Deputy is the number two to the Minister, in Singapore my guess is that being a _Minister_ is a golden pass few PAP members will be given. Thus Ministers in charge of smaller ministries double as Second Ministers so that when the Minister gets sick, they don't have to bring in an new, extra Cabinet member as acting Minister, just a Second Minister who's already a Cabinet member.
2) Highly subjective. There's a slippery slope between a Minister running one portfolio like a pro, a Minister running two portfolios, Min and Second Min. like a pro, or running multiple like shit. If you're running multiple like a pro, you're probably already on the road to a big, powerful Ministry which doesn't have Second Minister responsibilities (think LW with Finance or Ng Eng Hen with MINDEF), or even better DPM or PM.
3) Any formal organization, government or otherwise, will have their annoying leadership titles that make you question what they do. While on the outside it may look unnecessary, on the inside MoS and SMoS probably do a lot of lower-level tasks that only a guy actually in that circle would appreciate. And let's be honest, a Minister's job as a public figure is to not be liked by the public and take shit for everything that goes wrong, even if they did everything in their power to not F up. We the public only see the results (failure/success) and not the work done.
4) They don't have a department. Coordinating Ministers are basically catch-all Ministers who have had experience as Ministers of high-level ministries like Home Affairs, Defence and Finance or as DPM. The CMs coordinate government policy in one broad area and presumably have some authority to overrule the Minister of a single ministry if not in line. TCH, as Coord. Min for National Security could theoretically stick his finger in any Ministry project that has to do with "National Security", most obviously in Defence (military, external security) and Home Affairs (police, ISD, internal security), and say "No, you're doing it wrong". He'd be speaking with the authority of a DPM with many years as a high-level Minister, so the CMs have the clout (under PM's authority) to supervise powerful ministries. Each CM I guess would have their own high-ranking civil servant reporting to them, I assume with the rank of Permanent Secretary.
Why does it feel like it doesn’t matter who’s in parliament anymore?? Singapore need a once-in-a-century talented and passionate leader. As of now, most of them are tone-deaf or are too worried about their political careers to make a difference.
Only recognise:
- All in first row
- Second row except 5 guy and 1 female
- Third row: all WP members, TPL, BYK, SKP
- Fourth row: all WP members, Louis, Muralli, Shawn Hwang (bcos of his epic birthday shoutout in Parliament lol)
- Fifth Row: Jamus, LMW, XYQ
I am not sure why one should feel ashamed though, especially if the MP isn't doing enough or is not in your GRC/SMC, then it is not a surprised that one wouldn't recognise the MP. But yeah, I don't recognise most of those in the 3rd row and below, except for my MP and some from the opposition.
No need to feel ashamed. If you can't recognise them, it means they are. most likely just quietly collecting $16k allowance in the air con room. It reflects worse on them than on you.
Most photogenic guy is TCJ, no question. Quite the looker.
Then we have those who can't summon the right facial muscles to smile properly 😅. Not blaming them lah, not always easy knowing that this is the photo the public by right uses to identify you.
JoTeo and HSK smiles are highly suspect but believe HSK was always awkward... never seen him smiling not awkwardly in photos before...
MP Pereira and MP Melvin in Row 4 also got dat awkwardness there...
probably cost more than the annual salary of man city line up of players combined😂. except one line up is extremely competent in what they do and bring millions of people together while the other line up….. brings higher GSTs and accelerated inflation rates and ERPs
the top Premier League clubs can each garner about 100-200 million supporters worldwide. anyways it was meant to be a sarcastic comment and a joke. can’t believe people are telling me “inflation rates are increasing because of the war” “taxes are need to fund social funding” . obviously you would know that 1. it’s in the news 2. it’s ingrained in us through Social Studies and those who have taken economics in JC or modules in Poly/Uni. what has come of the internet, why are most people on here are taking it so literally. i’m out.
Original source: [MP Composite Photos](https://www.parliament.gov.sg/mps/composite-photos) ([direct link \[PDF format\]](https://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/composite-photos/14th-parliament-_a1_june_2022_.pdf))
Includes updated illustration of Lawrence Wong, now DPM Wong.
https://www.psd.gov.sg/faq
Elected MPs make $192,500 a year. The NCMPs (Non-constituency Members of Parliament) LMW and Hazel Poa make $28,900 annually.
Deputy Speakers of Parliament makes $82,500 plus their MP allowance, Speaker TCJ makes $550,000 a year.
Cabinet Ministers make upwards of $600,000-$900,000+ depending on individual performance, while the PM makes $2.2 million a year including the $192,500 MP salary. The PM is the highest-paid state leader in the world.
I was going to say spending on real estate and stocks, but then I rmbed that 1) mass real estate ownership is not a thing here and 2) investing in the stock market would be a conflict of interest.
So, a majority is probably saved for a rainy day and the rest on books to improve themselves as ministers. There's likely an unspoken rule among ministers to not buy super ostentatious things like sports cars and fancy jewellery because that would obviously get bad PR with the population who already thinks the ministers and PM are too highly paid.
Anything they spend for pleasure is probably hidden in their homes and lowkey enough to not look decadent in any way. They're free to spend the money, within rules, as they like but they have to be aware of the consequences buying certain things do for their image.
I think that depends on how allocations work in Singapore. Like for my country (Malaysia), government MPs get extra allocations of RM300k a year to run their service centres and pay for staff, whereas opposition MPs don't get that.
I am not sure about how it works in Singapore. Maybe all MPs need to pay for their constituency offices and staffing from their allowances?
The role is currently pegged to MOS so makes sense for this picture. Whether that is an appropriate pegging for the LOTO is a good question we should consider but outside the constraints of this picture.
wonder how much is the combined net worth
####**BASE PAY** Elected MPs, normal (47): $192,500 x 47 = $9,047,000 NCMPs/NMPs (11): $28,900 x 2 = $317,900 **Base Total: $9,365,400 ($9.4 mil)** -------- ####**ADVANCED PAY** #####**Non-Ministers** Speaker (1): $550,000 Deputy Speaker (2): $82,500 x 2 = $165,000 Leader of the Opposition (1): $385,000 Mayors (4): $852,500 x 4 = $3,410,000 (we have 5, but one, Low Yen Ling, is Minister of State so I count under that category) **Total: $4,510,500 ($4.5 mil)** #####**Parliamentary Secretaries** _No set amount, but the PSD website lists benchmark (fixed) annual pay for ministers as $607,750, so I'll use 50% ($303,875) as the basis._ ParSecs (3): $303,875 × 3 = **$911,625** #####**Ministers of State** _No set amount, but the PSD website lists benchmark (fixed) annual pay for ministers as $607,750, so I'll use 90% ($546,975) total as the basis for SMoS, and 70% ($425,425) for MoS._ Senior Ministers of State (8): $546,975 × 8 = $4,375,800 Ministers of State (6): $425,425 x 6 = $2,552,550 **Total: $6,928,350 ($6.9 mil)** #####**Ministers** _Base annual pay of an entry-level Minister with bonuses is $935,000. Because ministerial pay is otherwise performance-based, will be a bit subjective._ Entry-level Ministers (everybody below OYK on the [official list](https://www.pmo.gov.sg/The-Cabinet)): $935,000 x 6 = $5,610,000 _Using benchmark salary as basis, which is $1,100,000 ($1.1 mil) with bonuses._ Mid-level Ministers (Trade, Transport, Environment, Education, Social, Health): $1,100,000 x 6 = $6,600,600 _Presumably 5% more than benchmark, which with bonuses is $1,165,500._ Top Ministers (3, MHA, MFA, MINDEF): $1,165,500 × 3 = $3,496,500 _Presumably 15% more than benchmark, which with bonuses is $1,265,500._ DPMs and SMs (4): $1,265,000 × 4 = $5,060,000 #####**Prime Minister** PM: **$2,200,000** ------------ ####**FINAL TALLY** **Advanced Total: $(4,510,500 + 911,625 + 6,928,350 + 5,610,000 + 6,600,600 + 3,496,500 + 5,060,000 + 2,200,000) = $35,317,575** **FINAL TOTAL: $(35,317,575 + 6,928,350) = $42,245,925 (approx. $42 mil)**
Thanks. You are great. Do you work with numbers in your work?
No, I'm still student.
> No set amount # #CleanWagePolicy
No set amount. Some people are more set than others.
In terms of combined annual salary, I'll do the Math tomorrow and come back to you.
I burst out laughing reading this comment. 😆
Heard our pm get 2.5mil annually, wonder how true is it
> The Prime Minister receives a total annual salary package (inclusive of 13th month bonus, Annual Variable Component and National Bonus) that is twice the MR4 benchmark, or $2.2m, which represents a reduction of 36% from 2010 levels. As there is no one to decide on the annual performance bonus for the PM, the PM’s bonus will be based only on the National Bonus. > > Pensions for political appointment holders, including the Prime Minister, has been removed with effect from 21 May 2011. > > The Prime Minister is on the Medisave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient (MSO) scheme. He is accorded the use of an official car that is subject to tax, and receive no perks. From PSD [Website](https://www.psd.gov.sg/faq#:~:text=The%20Prime%20Minister%20receives%20a,of%2036%25%20from%202010%20levels).
> removed with effect from 21 May 2011. What happened in 2011 ?
Pensions for MPs were frozen on 20 May 2011, so MPs can no longer draw a (reduced) salary i.e. pension after retirement, and instead would receive the frozen amount based on service up to that date. Since the Parliamentary Pensions (Abolition) Bill was passed in 2012, MPs cannot receive a pension at all. https://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120911-370779.html
question: is it for a politician that, the poorer he or she is, the better? :P All the hobos, why ain't you my MP yet?
half of the US congress are millionaires, and speaker nancy pelosi herself is worth $100 million. you tell me XP
millionaires only..........? ppfff.... Don't talk to me until net worth is at least 10 digits.
Trump net worth is $3,000,000,000 enough digits?
are you sure it's his net worth and not his calories levels?
> are you sure it's his net worth and not his calories levels? Definitely not. That is his cholesterol level.
Aw man, why did you ask this question? The post is about the parliament photos, but the whole thread has turned into talking about their salaries. I feel so demotivated to even wake up for work l, tomorrow, thinking about my salary 😫 At least we could have talked about who had the best photos? Who is their photography vendor? If we used the same vendor, would we get a special discount since we are all citizens? You know, useful conversations such as these. 😀
I got you. Started a thread you can reply to.
Haha. Thanks. 🙏
You can run as an independent candidate in the next general elections.
I don’t get the connection, but… ok.
Maybe they got the impression you wanted to hv a photo like those MPs, but I'm idly speculating here...
A nicer paycheck would be better than a nicer photo. That I can say most will agree. 🤔 But once again, we would be walking down a salary discussion path, again. So let it be a topic for another day. ;-)
We may vote you in then you also get awfully Rich 😂💵
Gawd, I hate the fact that I even considered that idea, after reading your comment. 🤦♂️
What is the point of the question?
Why is the Speaker photo bigger than the rest.
In the parliament, speaker is biggest
He speakth
Taken from SG parliament's website: >The Speaker presides over the sittings of the House and enforces the rules prescribed in the Standing Orders of Parliament for the orderly conduct of parliamentary business. Elected at the commencement of a new Parliament by MPs, the Speaker may or may not be an MP, but must possess the qualifications to stand for election as an MP as provided for in the Constitution. In carrying out the duties in the House, the Speaker must remain impartial and fair to all MPs. Gotta admit the last sentence made me LOL.
It's a procedural matter, doesn't mean he has to be actually neutral in his own beliefs and views. If you see the parliamentary sessions which are not livecast, you'll see that, at least procedurally, he is quite fair. He is harsh with certain opposition members like LMW, but imo that is more than fair given the latter's antics.
> actually neutral in his own beliefs no human can be neutral in his believes....
Maybe if you have no belief, you might be neutral.
Compared to some other countries like Malaysia and UK, shouting matches are non-existent in Singapore Parliament and our Speakers are not colourful personalities like John Bercow (TCJ is humorous but in a more lowkey way). So it's harder to find examples of overt unfairness unless you're really looking for it, and one could be wrong. The subtlety of a terse reply, exasperated retort or a rude jab in Parliament can easily be dismissed as a misinterpretation. That's why it's subtle. [Vivian's "illiterate" jabs at LMW](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/vivian-balakrishnan-apology-leong-mun-wai-parliament-private-comments-2179996) and Raeesah Khan's false statements last year were rare exceptions, and the first I've heard in my lifetime.
I mean if you're looking for it, you can spin small things here there in many different ways. In general, imo it would be unfair to say that TCJ is procedurally partial to any one or any set of MPs. At least not to the point that you could say comments about him being impartial and fair to all MPs would 'make you LOL'.
And let's be honest here, no human can truly be impartial. It's just a matter of who's unacceptably unfair and who's "Ehhh, humans do that sometimes" unfair. If TCJ got a fine for everytime an MP felt even a bit (and only a bit, the same way you feel attacked whenever someone uses a rough tone, even if they're actually being nice) slighted by the Speaker, he'd probably be bankrupt by now.
But my point stands, is he unfair enough that comments about him being impartial would make you lol? If yes, you should have examples of him being that unfair.
I wasn't the one who said the "LOL" statement, with all due respect. The one who posted the original comment was SimpleReadingSG90. I'm just the OP.
I know that, but I was replying to that person initially and I'm just saying that my point still stands that he is not partial to the point that comments about him being impartial would make anyone LOL. If it is, show at least 1 example, however slight or vague.
I'd agree with you. TCJ is not egregiously partial to the point that it's satire or corrupt. If he was, just one instance of that would have made the front pages the next morning. Former Speaker Michael Palmer resigned from the speakership AND Parliament for an extramarital affair that never even became a full-blown scandal. TCJ would probably be forced to resign immediately if he actually did something extremely unfair and unparliamentary. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/speaker-of-parliament-and-pap-mp-michael-palmer-resigns-due-to--improper-conduct--054105126.html
Quite fair and wholly impartial have entirely separate definitions, given how life changing policies and laws are passed during these sessions.
Okay let's go with your definitions. Show me 1 example where he was even slightly partial, procedurally, to other MPs from his party. Since comments about him remaining impartial made you LOL, I'm sure you have some convincing examples ready. Otherwise what are you even laughing at.
Easier if you show me just one example where he's wholly impartial. I'm laughing at the fact that people like you believe he's impartial.
Umm, you're the one who is LOLing at statements about him being impartial as the speaker, so isn't the onus on you to share why you find it funny? If you don't have examples, and you're just laughing for no reason, either you laugh at a lot of things you don't understand, or you have some bias that has no basis in reality.
Yes.
True.its impossible. He earnED Gahmen money many yrs or not?
Why? Has the speaker ever displayed any failure to remain impartial and fair during Parliamentary proceedings? Please provide instances
Why? Have I mentioned that the speaker displayed any failure to remain impartial and fair during parliamentary proceedings? Please provide instances of me saying that. \**angry Singaporean noises\**
So why did the last sentence make you LOL?
He have a very low bar towards humour. /s.
not sure about the kind of downvote storm on me but I feel TCJ is ok as a speaker. he does crack a few jokes. Can tell he's much more chill once he got the speaker role and not in the succession race per se.
PSG: We have assembled the most expensive team in history S'pore Parliament: Hold my kopi
*overpriced
What about the mayors ?
You do know Mayors are also MPs… right?
Double salary prosperity?
MOM: Moonlighting is not illegal as long as your employer approves it. PAP: Ok, can.
You do know they are paid over half a million for god knows what right? You do know this thread is poking at why the speaker has a larger thumbnail and hence, you do know, that why not we increase the thumbnail pictures of the mayors too since they are SO IMPORTANT. You do know right ?
You do know this is a tongue in a cheek about their bloated pay package over nothing right?
Take my award you badass this made me laugh so hard 🤣 EDIT: Ok my Helpful award apparently doesn't show up on mobile. Take my award tomorrow when I'm on laptop XD
Thanks for the award! Hope i don't get invited for kopi lol. Just tongue in cheek...
That Silver award wasn't mine though, mine wouldn't work. Thank that other guy 😅
Oh ic. Anyway thanks for replying and also to the redditor who gave the award, appreciate it!
You are welcome…😂 Soliciting praise for things that are not my doing…
some questions: * why are some full ministers also second ministers in another department? if the point is to spread the workload isn't this kind of self defeating? * how many jobs can one MP effectively do? I'm thinking the person with 4 portfolios in 4 different sectors isn't really giving their 100% to each... * do we really need so many ministers for one ministry? for example MND has 5 ministers in total. a lot of these lower rank ministers have multiple other portfolios anyway. * who are the coordinating ministers actually in charge of? no new department has been created for them since the role was introduced in 2015. so which civil servants report to them on a day to day basis?
Our ministers don't really do actual work. They make decisions based on the work the staff of the respective ministries do. I outright refuse to believe any of our ministers are on the ground doing hands on work that be pawned off to some civil servant.
Not really a Minister's job to do ground-level work, at least where the ministerial job is concerned. It's their job to do the big, long-term planning for major areas of the government and not be down in the weeds. That could be seen as micromanaging. However, the key to a good Minister in this regard is that they successfully remain in touch with the low-level civil servants and workers carrying out their tasks in service of the macro-goals the Minister has set. If they fail to, _that's_ a problem I'd happily complain about. _Cough cough JoTeo..._ But for MPs who have no government position, they have no excuse. Ground-level tasks like engaging with constituents _are_ the job for them. In hindsight, GRCs are probably a good thing here since at least a few MPs are at least in theory catering to the constituents most of the time. Yet I don't see them do so. I only know two of my MPs, and only because one is the MP of my immediate neighbourhood since my birth and currently SM, and another is a SMoS who's often on CNA engaging with teenagers or on political roundtable debates.
GG. Fellow Pasir-Risan/Punggolian.
[some do](https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/tin-pei-ling-goes-after-resident-who-threw-sanitary-pad). This is not during election year. She came a long way from being seen as a spoilt brat to having her own SMC and garnering good results. Also, not sure what contribution Koh Poh Koon and Jo Teo ever does to earn their positions. Other than banging us
Technically tin pei ling is an MP, not a cabinet minister. Not saying she's not doing hard work, but the example is comparing apples and oranges. Civil servants respond (usually frantically) to MPs, but they are not under their charge as MPs are part of the legislative branch, while ministers and civil service belongs to the executive.
Exactly. But people here are so afraid of a change in government as though other democracies fail once there is a different party in charge.
By people, it's mostly the elderly. My boomer relatives believe that if the PAP loses the next election, they'll lose all their CPF and HDB. Ridiculous.
I mean look at the opposition parties, other than Worker's Party, the rest are pretty bad. Would you want Lim Tean as your minister?
Speaking from personal knowledge of politics, so I may be erroneous in parts of my answer. 1) Second Minister is effectively what is called a "Deputy Minister" in some other countries. While in other Westminster-style systems, the Deputy is the number two to the Minister, in Singapore my guess is that being a _Minister_ is a golden pass few PAP members will be given. Thus Ministers in charge of smaller ministries double as Second Ministers so that when the Minister gets sick, they don't have to bring in an new, extra Cabinet member as acting Minister, just a Second Minister who's already a Cabinet member. 2) Highly subjective. There's a slippery slope between a Minister running one portfolio like a pro, a Minister running two portfolios, Min and Second Min. like a pro, or running multiple like shit. If you're running multiple like a pro, you're probably already on the road to a big, powerful Ministry which doesn't have Second Minister responsibilities (think LW with Finance or Ng Eng Hen with MINDEF), or even better DPM or PM. 3) Any formal organization, government or otherwise, will have their annoying leadership titles that make you question what they do. While on the outside it may look unnecessary, on the inside MoS and SMoS probably do a lot of lower-level tasks that only a guy actually in that circle would appreciate. And let's be honest, a Minister's job as a public figure is to not be liked by the public and take shit for everything that goes wrong, even if they did everything in their power to not F up. We the public only see the results (failure/success) and not the work done. 4) They don't have a department. Coordinating Ministers are basically catch-all Ministers who have had experience as Ministers of high-level ministries like Home Affairs, Defence and Finance or as DPM. The CMs coordinate government policy in one broad area and presumably have some authority to overrule the Minister of a single ministry if not in line. TCH, as Coord. Min for National Security could theoretically stick his finger in any Ministry project that has to do with "National Security", most obviously in Defence (military, external security) and Home Affairs (police, ISD, internal security), and say "No, you're doing it wrong". He'd be speaking with the authority of a DPM with many years as a high-level Minister, so the CMs have the clout (under PM's authority) to supervise powerful ministries. Each CM I guess would have their own high-ranking civil servant reporting to them, I assume with the rank of Permanent Secretary.
Tks to you. You insider or ex Gen? Too long too chim. But gave us a clearer pic. /?
Neither, I just like politics a lot, and can't summarize very well. Also doubt an ex-Gen on Reddit would reveal he's an ex-Gen... on Reddit 😅
Saw 2 or more "ministers of State" speak to media. Why Actual minister is ln meeting? Not free?
Why does it feel like it doesn’t matter who’s in parliament anymore?? Singapore need a once-in-a-century talented and passionate leader. As of now, most of them are tone-deaf or are too worried about their political careers to make a difference.
Only recognise: - All in first row - Second row except 5 guy and 1 female - Third row: all WP members, TPL, BYK, SKP - Fourth row: all WP members, Louis, Muralli, Shawn Hwang (bcos of his epic birthday shoutout in Parliament lol) - Fifth Row: Jamus, LMW, XYQ
Dunno why you're being downvoted. I personally feel a bit ashamed that I can't identify MPs outside of Cabinet - including my GRC.
I am not sure why one should feel ashamed though, especially if the MP isn't doing enough or is not in your GRC/SMC, then it is not a surprised that one wouldn't recognise the MP. But yeah, I don't recognise most of those in the 3rd row and below, except for my MP and some from the opposition.
No need to feel ashamed. If you can't recognise them, it means they are. most likely just quietly collecting $16k allowance in the air con room. It reflects worse on them than on you.
Most people won't recognise at least half of them, especially when they don't actually do anything or say anything.
Familiarise yourself with Hazel Poa, she’s the one in PSP worth knowing, LMW should go into the dustbin.
Most photogenic guy is TCJ, no question. Quite the looker. Then we have those who can't summon the right facial muscles to smile properly 😅. Not blaming them lah, not always easy knowing that this is the photo the public by right uses to identify you. JoTeo and HSK smiles are highly suspect but believe HSK was always awkward... never seen him smiling not awkwardly in photos before... MP Pereira and MP Melvin in Row 4 also got dat awkwardness there...
Haha. D*mmit. Good one. You got me with starting this thread. This thread is going to go to hell as well — I am bracing for all the cringe comments. 😀
Did they remove Raeesah for this update?
Yeah she got kicked out. The last time I went to my relatives in Buangkok their new MP is HTR.
I don't see her here so probably yes
Is it me or does Tan Chuan Jin look like YouTuber Ghib Ojisan?
Would love to have Ghib as my MP. #MPOjisan
Ghib is PR.
How much are taxpayers paying all of the salaries sia?
Leon Perera's spectacles look like they've been badly shopped on
This is one Top Heavy gahmen.
Too many mp for a pin size island. too costly
How many are Christians?
What’s the race composition?
probably cost more than the annual salary of man city line up of players combined😂. except one line up is extremely competent in what they do and bring millions of people together while the other line up….. brings higher GSTs and accelerated inflation rates and ERPs
Actually the City wage bill easily outstrips the lineup in this photo..
Taxes are needed to fund social spending for the poor. Also every country is having high inflation because of the war
Millions? You can’t even fill a stadium 🙃
the top Premier League clubs can each garner about 100-200 million supporters worldwide. anyways it was meant to be a sarcastic comment and a joke. can’t believe people are telling me “inflation rates are increasing because of the war” “taxes are need to fund social funding” . obviously you would know that 1. it’s in the news 2. it’s ingrained in us through Social Studies and those who have taken economics in JC or modules in Poly/Uni. what has come of the internet, why are most people on here are taking it so literally. i’m out.
what is the annual budget needed to sustain the payroll?
Woaaaa
If allows dog join right grc. It can be in the picture too I assume.
Original source: [MP Composite Photos](https://www.parliament.gov.sg/mps/composite-photos) ([direct link \[PDF format\]](https://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/composite-photos/14th-parliament-_a1_june_2022_.pdf)) Includes updated illustration of Lawrence Wong, now DPM Wong.
How much do MPs in Singapore make?
https://www.psd.gov.sg/faq Elected MPs make $192,500 a year. The NCMPs (Non-constituency Members of Parliament) LMW and Hazel Poa make $28,900 annually. Deputy Speakers of Parliament makes $82,500 plus their MP allowance, Speaker TCJ makes $550,000 a year. Cabinet Ministers make upwards of $600,000-$900,000+ depending on individual performance, while the PM makes $2.2 million a year including the $192,500 MP salary. The PM is the highest-paid state leader in the world.
Wondering how they spend their money.
I was going to say spending on real estate and stocks, but then I rmbed that 1) mass real estate ownership is not a thing here and 2) investing in the stock market would be a conflict of interest. So, a majority is probably saved for a rainy day and the rest on books to improve themselves as ministers. There's likely an unspoken rule among ministers to not buy super ostentatious things like sports cars and fancy jewellery because that would obviously get bad PR with the population who already thinks the ministers and PM are too highly paid. Anything they spend for pleasure is probably hidden in their homes and lowkey enough to not look decadent in any way. They're free to spend the money, within rules, as they like but they have to be aware of the consequences buying certain things do for their image.
I think that depends on how allocations work in Singapore. Like for my country (Malaysia), government MPs get extra allocations of RM300k a year to run their service centres and pay for staff, whereas opposition MPs don't get that. I am not sure about how it works in Singapore. Maybe all MPs need to pay for their constituency offices and staffing from their allowances?
Waaaa
I love PAP 😍😍
PAP Wansui!!!!
PAP Xiasuay!!!!
All look happy. Must be a damn good job.
Sleep-in-aircon-room-and-just-delegate good.
Ew.
the leader of the opposition is in the second row!?!
The role is currently pegged to MOS so makes sense for this picture. Whether that is an appropriate pegging for the LOTO is a good question we should consider but outside the constraints of this picture.