1/20/2006
no pay for the presidency
the stringent criteria for the presidency has limited the pool of candidates to a very few very rich and well established individuals. it is no longer a position for the not so affordable people. people who are qualified to run for presidency literally do not need the money. they are well established, well accomplished, and well advanced in age.
the presidency is the highest position in the state and its value cannot be measured by a salary. let's not insult the presidency by giving it a money value. also they don't really need the money.
make the presidency an honour position. it is an honour to serve as the president of the nation. people seeking presidency shall not be seeking money. the thought is degrading.
in this light, i would suggest that the president be paid an honorarium and not a salary. and the honorarium can be in the region to $200k or $300k per annum. more than enough. too much for such dignitaries who have achieved a lot in life. let them serve with honour than with money in their mind. let them be above money and need not have to pray how much they should get for bonus at the end of the year.
remove the money factor from the minds of the people and let it not be an issue of ridicule.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
How can no pay? Then in that case you will not find any Singaporeans for the position. If that was the case then they will not have to disqualify applicants, they will probably have to force people to do the job.
i volunteer.
if not of the strict qualifications, there will be a long queue for it even at $200k.
the concept as it is now is going to receive a lot of attacks. take a peep at soc.cul.spore in my links and hear what they said.
once you equate a position with a pay, it becomes a paid job. and the value of the job or person is in question when it is being underpaid. everyone wants to boast that he is important or his job is important. and this is measured by his pay.
an honorarium is not a pay but some token sum paid in honour of the person or position. so no one can be offended or quibble if the honorarium is too little.
the second thing that i like to bitch about is the right of the people, in a democracy, to elect whoever they want as the president. even in a worst case, if the people choose to elect a mafia chief as the president, it is still the people's wish. the wish of the people.
it is fair to have a little qualification like criminals or a person with immoral character etc to be barred from becoming a president.
other than these, any normal decent citizen shall be qualified to stand as a presidential candidate and it is for the people to choose or reject him. this is a point that i fully disagree with the present criteria.
if the people want catherine lim or khoo swee chiou or gurmit singh as the president, who is a greater authority to say no? the 3 wise men? who is the ultimate authority on such an issue? it must be the people. a democracy is a rule of the people and not a few individuals.
the president may at times be called upon to make a decision. he will always have the comfort of a presidential council or the pm or the parliament to fall back on. he does not operate in a vacuum. if george bush can run the usa, there must be thousands of singaporeans who can fit into the seat of the president of singapore.
Post a Comment