Recollections

I remeber watching a feedback session on TV between Melissa Hiak and David Lim (former MP and ex-President Scholar, later turned NOL CEO then left and dunno go where now) in 2001.

The topic was the increase in Ministers' salaries and scholars who break bonds.

I tried to call in to ask a question but could not get through.

David Lim was the one who said "If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys as ministers"

He also added that the Ministers put potential candidates through an extremely careful and thorough process to decide if the candidate is sincere in his desire to serve Singapore and hence the question of people entering politics for the sake of money is near impossible.

In the same session in response to scholars breaking bonds he said something about how scholars must learn to have a sense of loyalty and duty to give serve the nation and that it cannot just be about the best offer on the table for them.

He also added that PSC had a very rigorous process of selecting their candidates to choose the right candidates who would return to serve Singapore, but despite that scholars are still breaking their bonds.

I wanted to call in to say the following :

"Good evening Mr Lim. I have noted your comments regarding the two topics. Although the two topics are being discussed seperately I see a link and association between the two.

Regarding the Ministers' salaries, what you are saying is that the Ministers want to be paid what they think they are worth. And that in today's world it is only realistic to expect that you must pay the right amount to get the right people for the job. That I can understand.

So the leaders of Singapore speak this. And this message filters across our nation to every person in Singapore including the young student we have applying for scholarships. These students also take the same view. They take up scholarship, get to the very top in their Ivy League universities, are then head hunted by foreign MNCs and the offer to them is way in excess of what they would get when they return to Singapore. They remember the words of Singapore's leaders. Nobody wants to feel like a monkey when they could be paid huge sums of money. Hence they decide to allow the MNCs to break their bonds for them and take the high paying jobs.

The bond breakers are smart. They are merely following the principle set by our Ministers. Seek to be paid what you think you are worth and accept nothing less regardless of any reason.

I would also like to ask Mr Lim this : The Ministers are so sure that their method of choosing the right candidates for MPs weeds out the money-grabbers totally. But then the PSC's method seems to have been proven to fail. Why not apply the Ministers' methods of choosing candidates for office to the PSC selection process for scholars? Or could it also be possible that the "fail-proof" method of the Ministers can indeed have flaws as well?"

Anyway 7 years ago I realised there was something wrong with this whole way of thinking. And to be proven right, David Lim left office subsequently to join the private sector (NOL) where he would earn much more than what he was getting as a Minister of State. I have a very good friend whose father is a grassroots leader who works closely in David Lim's old ward. It was interesting to listen to how David Lim operated in his old ward.

7 years later, we are seeing the same debate. Ministers' salaries to go up by a million a year. Philip Yeo says Singaporeans are bond breakers and not hungry. Why not give the scholarships to foreigners who are hungrier and have the right values.

Don't they realise that leadership begins with me?

OMACOR revisited

Cedric asked me a question

"Hi,Ive just seen your comment about omacor on Angry doc's blog. You say that it costs 8 times the price for the same dose at a common health food store. Could you give me more info on that ? I mean : what is the cost of omacor, and what cheaper product are you refering to ?thanks!ceric"

I would like to direct Cedric to my post regarding OMACOR here

Cedric might want to read the comments section in that post for more info as well.

Basically OMACOR is just EPA/DHA in a 36%/24% fish oil capsule. That's your omega 3 fatty acids. Most common 1000mg fish oil capsule contain EPA/DHA in 18%/12% concentration.

The price of a common 1000mg of fish oil sold in Watsons is abotu $0.10-$0.15 per capsule.

Most of our propietary (non generic) lipid lowering drugs are about $1-$2 a pop. You can work out the maths.

SMA withdraws guidelines on fees

Angry doc has blogged about this.

Dr Huang has blogged about this.

And so SMA has withdrawn its guidelines on fees for clinics because the guidelines go against competition laws.

For the uninitiated, the guideline on fees was published by SMA at the request of MOH several years ago in response to complaints from the public that they were overcharged.

MOH tasked SMA to come up with a guideline on fees so that the public can be aware of what the upper limits of charges should be. Do note that I wrote upper limits.

As for doctors who were charging way below the guidelines, no action was taken against them. (There are quite a number of people out there who keep saying that doctors are a cartel and we set our own fees and decide how much to charge and how much we earn. But in most cartels that I know, there is no such thing as a cartel member undercutting the rest and getting away with it)

I also wonder how many people out there actually are aware that such a guideline exists? Do people know that public display of the guidelines at all clinics used to be a requirement under the Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act and Regulations? How many patients bothered to look at it?

In all of the cases where I actually used the guidelines on display, it involved explaining to patients that my $10 consultation fee was far below the recommended $20-$30 by SMA. To which they would exclaim "Wah you doctors want to rob people ar? $20-$30 just to talk to you?!!!"

I blogged about this before in 2006 to show that consultation fees for GPs had been dropping since 1998, especially if you count inflation. And this was if GPs had been following the guidelines on fees from SMA in 1998 and then following the increases in the next revision in 2006! (Hey even the Admin service had their last revision of salaries in 2000! So that's a 6 year interval whereas for SMA's guidelines on fees we waited 8 years to revise it!!!!)

I dare say that the majority of GP clinics were not charging according to the guidelines on fees. And despite the revision in 2006, few clinics actually increased their consultation fees after the revision was released.

For those who are interested you can read my analysis on the guidelines on fees here.

It might also serve as a free online old copy of the 2006 guideline on fees for you to refer to lest you think your doctor may be overcharging you.

Singapore is leaking talent

DDU asked "I thought Singapore imports workers from third world countries to do the menial jobs "

Don't know if DDU has read this

Singapore is leaking talent: SM Goh

TEHRAN: As he sat speaking to reporters about his meetings with Iranian leaders, Singapore Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong's thoughts were still focused on home.

Singapore, he said, is leaking talent. Not just ordinary talent, but its best and finest.

The concern bubbled over when he was asked if Singaporeans could ever be as proud as the Iranians.

"If we can last 1,000 years, I think we will be just as proud as the Iranians, probably even more," he said.

But the question bothering him was whether Singapore could continue to do as well over the next 50 years as it had done in the past.

"The issue which we are most concerned with is the loss of our own people at the very top," said Mr Goh. "These are bright young people, children of very well educated Singaporeans."

Some may study overseas, and the best ones were harvested straight away by companies there. And this often starts a spiral that ends up with Singapore losing these talents.

"They do not want to come back to Singapore. They want the experience of working in foreign universities, banks and companies," said the Senior Minister.

And often, two or three years down the road, these talented Singaporeans marry overseas and settle down there.

Even if they were to think of moving back to Singapore later, some find houses here too expensive. Others are put off by Singapore's shortage of space. Still others prefer the lifestyle in America, Europe or Australia.

"They don't come back; we lose them," he said. "This is a very big problem for us because if we lose the top 0.5 per cent from the next generation, Singapore will have a much lower 'peak'. The world is now competing on human resources and talent."

That was why Singapore, too, has had to turn to talented people from other countries, get them to work here and eventually turn them into Singaporeans. That was the only way to ensure that Singapore's population "peak" would remain at a high level, said Mr Goh.

The battle for talent has not just been between various countries. Closer to home, the Government stands to lose civil servants to the private sector.

Mr Goh said that it had been mentioned in Parliament that salaries in the civil service will be reviewed. Ministers' salaries are now pegged to those of civil servants.

"I personally support such a review because I know from my chairmanship of the Monetary Authority of Singapore that there has been a high turnover of staff over the past one or two years," said Mr Goh.

And since the finance industry as a whole expected wages to go up significantly this year, the MAS has a lot of catching up to do, he said.

In fact, the Public Service Division had touched on a similar point earlier.

It had said that 42 per cent of accountants who left Government jobs over the past year had cited better pay and prospects in the private sector.

About 46 per cent of legal service officers who resigned over the same period also expected higher salaries outside.

In Tehran, Mr Goh said: "I understand the need for civil service as a whole to revise the pay for civil servants. Of course that means that ministers' pay will also be revised, but by how much, I do not know. No decision has yet been taken." - TODAY