There’s a dichotomy when it comes to what we expect of our public servants. We expect them to be:
Competent
I mean, no one wants stupid public servants. On an operation level, we’d like our public servants to serve us with an acceptable level of efficiency and get the job done. On a strategic level, we’d like the bigwigs to be smarter than most of us and make decisions that will help us all. So our economy will stay healthy, our children will have a bright future, we’ll all find great paying jobs that we love, we can stay out without fear of being mugged and our reservist stints don’t include real war.An average Joe
Our public servants should be one of us. They shouldn’t be sitting on an ivory tower, aloof and cold. They shouldn’t be seen driving expensive sports cars. Most of all, they should be making a decent living at best - no over the top salaries that’ll alienate them from the struggles the rest of us face on a day to day. God forbid those that make it to the top of the public sector be paid a salary similar to those at the top of the private sector.
I’ll be honest here. If I have the chops to make it to the top of the public sector, I’ll probably want to buy a sports car. A Tesla Roadster. Wouldn’t you? If a public servant ought to emphatise with the common man, isn’t he allowed to fulfill the common dreams?
I think it is a false dichotomy you are talking about here.
The post seems to imply the average joe isn't competent.
What is an average joe by the way? Average in what? Ability? Expectations? Life experiences? Family background?
By the way, what are the common dreams? Do everyone of us want the same thing?
If I were to be presumptuous, I would say what we want are competent if not exceptional leaders who are 'average', or rather just like us, where 'average' is a shorthand of saying their aspirations are aligned with ours. We succeed when they succeed. They succeed when we succeed. Not one at the expense of another. Not one because of the other.
I don't think we would begrudge our leaders what they deserve. I know I don't - for the deserving ones.
Hi Ian, thanks for your feedback. The post was written hurriedly, so it's highly possible that my thoughts aren't as worked out as I'd like.
No offense to the average Joe, but I believe we want our public leaders to be a lot better than average. It's not uncommon for Singaporeans to question the credentials of new leaders.
"They succeed when we succeed". Who is "we"? The bottom 20%, or the top 2%? It would not be a stretch to think of those in the top public sector jobs have succeeded in their careers and should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of their success. Or are we saying that everyone in Singapore should have a 5-room flat before public servants move into their own?
Well said.
Basic principle is that people are should be able to spend their money any way they want, regardless of profession.
If people have the money and they want to spend it on an expensive holiday, why shouldn't they? The terms of employment for civil servants do not preclude expensive holidays. :-P
I agree with KTM that people should be able to spend their money any way they want. The problem in a recent incident is that the person appears to be bragging about the trip. In times like this, the person should have been more sensitive and cautious and not talk about it in so public a manner and seem to be bragging about the spending of large sum of money.
Spending yes, bragging no (at least it appears to be).
After that public lynching of that most senior of civil servants over his minor indiscretion, isn't being at the helm a highly visible sports car somewhat dangerous?
Should it be dangerous?