Lee Boon Yang as Keppel Chair: how much are we spending to keep ex-PAP leaders on GLCs and stat boards?

Lee Boon Yang as Keppel Chair: how much are we spending to keep ex-PAP leaders on GLCs and stat boards?

It was reported recently that Dr Lee Boon Yang who had retired from cabinet will take over Lim Chee Onn as Chairman of Keppel Corp. Mr Lim, 64, himself a former Cabinet minister, will however stay on for an unspecified period as a senior adviser. (read article here)

Keppel Corp is a public-listed company with commercial interests in property, infrastructure, offshore and marine engineering as well as financial investments.

With due respect to Dr Lee, he is not exactly the best person to helm Keppel Corp based on his CV here. Dr Lee is a dentist by training. After joining the government, he held various portfolios in the Ministries of Defence, Labor, Finance and lastly Information, Communication and Arts.

Can Keppel Corp please explain its decision to appoint Dr Lee as its Chairman? What will be his annual salary and bonuses if any?

If Keppel Corp is a purely private outfit in the first place, it is unlikely to recruit Dr Lee and in any event if it did, only its shareholders have the right to question its decision.

However, Keppel Corp is partly owned by Temasek Holdings which owns 21% of it as of February 2008 (source: Kepcorp).

Technically speaking, Temasek Holdings is owned entirely by the people of Singapore though it functions as a commercial entity independent of the government.

Are taxpayers’ monies being used to pay Dr Lee’s salary? Why does Dr Lee need to work? Unlike the current civil service scheme, he is entitled to pension for the rest of his life!

It is a standard practice for the ruling PAP to give its retired ministers a “plum” job after they left public office either in a Government-linked Company or statutory board.

Ex-Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan was appointed the Chairman of Singapore Press Holdings upon his retirement. His predecessor was Mr Lim Kim San, the previous Minister for National Development.

From my observations, this arrangement is born out of political necessity to serve four purposes:

1. Keep current ministers on their toes all the time so that they will not dare to defy the party’s wishes.

2. Retain the allegiance and loyalty of the ex-ministers so that they will not go against the present cabinet.

3. Keep the PAP’s henchmen in control of strategically important companies like SPH in order to retain their political dominance.

4. Impose a mouth gag on these insiders with knowledge of sensitive information to prevent them from divulging any state secrets which may embarrass the government.

History is full of ex-government leaders creating trouble for the incumbents after they left office. We need only look across the causeway to see how Mahathir’s vitriol against his successor led eventually to his downfall.

The PAP is indeed smart to continue to keep ex-ministers on its payroll so as to keep them in check. Even if they had wanted to express opposition to the government’s policies, there are no avenues for them to do so because SPH will never grant them an interview.

Have you ever wondered why Singapore never have an instance of ex-PAP leaders coming out into open to disagree with the present ones in its history?

When PAP co-founder Rajaratnam passed away two years ago, few Singaporeans, especially the younger generation can hardly remember him.

When is the last time we heard about Goh Keng Swee, Toh Chin Chye, Ong Pang Boon or other PAP old guards in the papers?

The only time we will read about them is when they or their closed ones passed away like in the case of Toh Chin Chye who lost her only daughter recently.

In contrast to the shabby treatment given to the first generation of leaders, MM Lee Kuan Yew is given extensive coverage by the media once every few days to the effect that Singaporeans young and old are constantly reminded of his omnipresence.

The PAP practice of lavishing generous rewards on its ex-leaders only goes to maintain political stability to serve its own partisan interest while it is a drain on our state resources.

Ex-ministers should be allowed to retire gracefully to spend more time with their families. Let us not trouble them again by making them “serve” the nation.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27959.1