Lee Kuan Yew

From Third World to First: The Singapore Story, 1965–2000

    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    After several years in government I realised that the more talented people I had as ministers, administrators and professionals, the more effective my policies were, and the better the results
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    People want a good, honest, clean government that produced results. That was what the PAP provided. It is now less difficult to recruit talent from the private sector
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    than adequately compensated by the honour of high office and the power they wielded, and that public service should entail sacrifice of income. I believed this high-minded approach was unrealistic and the surest way to make ministers serve only briefly, whereas continuity in office and the experience thus gained have been a great advantage and strength in the Singapore government
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    the remuneration of ministers and political appointees in Britain, the United States and most countries in the West had not kept pace with their economic growth. They had assumed that people who went into politics were gentlemen with private means. Indeed, in pre-war Britain people without private incomes were seldom found in Parliament. While this is no longer the case in Britain or the United States, most successful people are too busy and doing too well to want to be in government.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    governments who have to be elected into office, as a rule, underpay ministers in their official salaries
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    The need for popular support makes
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    went further to compare the salaries of Philippines President Marcos at 100,000 pesos yearly, or just over S$1,000 a month, and the president of Indonesia, governing 150 million people at a monthly salary of 1.2 million rupiahs or S$2,500. However, they were all wealthier than I was. An Indonesian leader retained his official residence on retirement. A Malaysian prime minister was given a house or land to build his private residence. My official residence belonged to the government. I had no perks, no cars with chauffeurs thrown in, or ministerial quarters with gardeners, cooks and other servants in attendance. My practice was to have all benefits expressed in a lump sum and let the prime minister and ministers themselves decide what they wanted to spend it on.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    Our successors have become ministers as one of many career options, and not the most attractive one. If we underpay men of quality as ministers, we cannot expect them to stay long in office earning a fraction of what they could outside. With high economic growth and higher earnings in the private sector, ministers’ salaries have to match their counterparts’ in the private sector. Underpaid ministers and public officials have ruined many governments in Asia. Adequate remuneration is vital for high standards of probity in political leaders and high officials.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    On the other hand Singapore has shown that a system of clean, no-money elections helps preserve an honest government. But Singapore will remain clean and honest only if honest, able men are willing to fight elections and assume office. They must be paid a wage commensurate with what men of their ability and integrity are earning for managing a big corporation or successful legal or other professional practice. They have to manage a Singapore economy that yielded an annual growth rate of 8–9 per cent in the last two decades, giving its citizens a per capita GDP that the World Bank rated in 1995 as the ninth highest in the world.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    Singapore has avoided the use of money to win elections. As leader of the opposition, I had persuaded Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock in 1959 to make voting compulsory and prohibit the practice of using cars to take voters to the polls. After winning power, we cleaned up triad (secret society) influence from politics. Our most formidable opponents, the communists, did not use money to win voters. Our own election expenses were small, well below the amount allowed by law. There was no need for the party to replenish its coffers after elections, and between elections there were no gifts for voters. We got them to vote for us again and again by providing jobs, building schools, hospitals, community centres
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    The bane of most countries in Asia has been the high cost of elections. Having spent a lot to get elected, winners must recover their costs and also accumulate funds for the next election. The system is self-perpetuating. To be elected to Taiwan’s legislative yuan in the 1990s, some KMT candidates spent as much as US$10–20 million. Once elected, they had to recoup and prepare for the next round by using their influence with government ministers and officials to get contracts awarded, or to convert land use from agricultural to industrial or urban development. In Thailand a former government minister described it as “commercial democracy, the purchased mandate”. In
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    A precondition for an honest government is that candidates must not need large sums of money to get elected, or it must trigger off the cycle of corruption
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    Singapore was ranked as the least corrupt country in Asia with a score of 9.18, ahead of Hong Kong, Japan and Taiwan. Transparency International (based in Berlin) placed Singapore in seventh place worldwide in 1998 for absence of corruption.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    It is easy to start off with high moral standards, strong convictions and determination to beat down corruption. But it is difficult to live up to these good intentions unless the leaders are strong and determined enough to deal with all transgressors, and without exceptions. CPIB officers must be supported without fear or favour to enforce the rules.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    10,000, and the courts were empowered to confiscate the benefits derived from corruption.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    In 1963 we made it compulsory for witnesses summoned by the CPIB to present themselves to give information. In 1989 we increased the maximum fine for corruption from S$10,000 to S$100,000. Giving false or misleading information to the CPIB became an offence subject to imprisonment and a fine of up to
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    The most effective change we made in 1960 was to allow the courts to treat proof that an accused was living beyond his means or had property his income could not explain as corroborating evidence that the accused had accepted or obtained a bribe. With a keen nose to the ground and the power to investigate every officer and every minister, the director of the CPIB, working from the Prime Minister’s Office, developed a justly formidable reputation for sniffing out those betraying the public trust.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    corroborated was changed to allow the judge to accept the evidence of an accomplice.
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    The existing law that the evidence of an accomplice was unworthy of credit unless
    Ron Molinahas quoted6 years ago
    In 1960 we changed the outdated 1937 anti-corruption law and widened the definition of gratuity to include anything of value. The amendments gave wide powers to investigators, including arrest and search and investigation of bank accounts and bank books of suspected persons and their wives, children or agents. It became unnecessary to prove that the person who accepted a bribe was in a position to carry out the required favour. The comptroller of income tax was obliged to give information concerning anyone investigated
fb2epub
Drag & drop your files (not more than 5 at once)