SINGAPORE: A baggage handling incident at Changi Airport Terminal 2 has sparked an outpouring of public empathy, after a video showing a SATS employee tossing luggage onto a conveyor belt circulated online.

The incident, which took place on April 23, came to light after Instagram user Eric Yoong shared footage of the baggage handler throwing suitcases and boxes onto a baggage belt. In his post, Mr Yoong questioned the worker’s actions, writing, “I don’t think that’s the correct way for a baggage officer to handle those unclaimed luggage by throwing it back to the luggage belt instead of placing it back nicely or leaving it at the side.”

SATS later confirmed to the press that it had investigated the matter. The ground handling company told Mothership, “The behaviour seen in the video does not reflect our service standards or the care with which we expect baggage to be handled. We are sorry that this occurred.”

The company added that the employee involved has since been counselled and reminded of the importance of proper baggage handling, even under operational pressure.

However, rather than criticising the worker, many Singaporeans responding online expressed understanding and sympathy for the physical demands of the job.

Several commenters pointed to the weight of the luggage and the strain involved. One wrote, “Imagine lifting 20 kg and [needing] to swing across to the belt,” while another said, “See how heavy those luggage and the poor elderly man has to pick up so many? Try, and you get a back injury…” A similar sentiment was echoed by another user who commented, “Sorry…the luggage bags are mostly heavy plus one staff handle. Do you think you can carry properly if you work like him?”

Others suggested that the tossing motion may have been a practical way to reduce physical strain. “They do this to avoid injury, using momentum and swing. Otherwise, it’s backbreaking for a man of his age,” one commenter said, adding that luggage is generally designed to withstand rough handling.

Some also questioned the need to publicise the incident in the first place. “Why need to film this? Don’t break people’s rice bowl la,” one user wrote, while another added, “Ask him to work there, see if he still can complain.”

Several commenters felt the handling seen in the video was not excessive. “Looks normal, leh? If your bag cannot handle this, please go fly a private jet and load your own bags,” one said. Another remarked, “What’s wrong?! He was next to the conveyor belt when he lifted & tossed the luggage on it. He wasn’t throwing like really hard…Slight knock and the suitcases cannot take it?!”

Others highlighted the realities of manual labour and high workloads. “TBH, what’s wrong with the tossing? It’s not like they’re being particularly rough. It’s manual labour; they carry thousands of pieces of luggage every day, it’s no easy job. Do you expect them to put every single piece of luggage down gently?” one commenter wrote. Another added, “Try placing a 32kg bag on a moving belt… Don’t talk big.”

Some responses also reflected frustration at what they saw as excessive complaining. “Like I say, we are becoming a nation of complainers. This complain, that complain,” one user wrote, while another commented, “Everything wants to complain…they never really throw it harshly…please lah…you know how heavy a bag can be sometimes…can give you a slipped disc.”

The incident has since sparked broader discussion about the physical demands faced by airport ground staff, as well as public expectations around service standards and working conditions.

This article (Singaporeans empathise with local baggage handler who was caught throwing suitcases at Changi Airport) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: Thailand is moving to revive a long-standing plan to create a logistics link between the Indian and Pacific oceans, given the recent disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz that highlight the vulnerability of key global shipping routes.

The government said it is pushing forward with its “Land Bridge” project across the country’s narrow southern peninsula, an idea that had previously stalled amid political turbulence, incomplete public hearings and environmental and health impact assessments, as well as resistance from some local communities.

Renewed interest in the project comes as concerns grow over chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the nearby Malacca Strait, both critical arteries for global trade.

Reuters reports that Transport Minister Phiphat Ratchakitprakarn said over the weekend that a proposal is expected to be submitted to the cabinet between June and July. The government would then begin seeking investors for the project, estimated to cost around 1 trillion baht (US$30.97 billion), potentially starting in the third quarter.

The Land Bridge concept, which has been discussed for decades, involves the construction of two deep-sea ports, one in Ranong on the Andaman Sea and another in Chumphon on the Gulf of Thailand. These would be linked by about 90 kilometres of road and rail infrastructure, along with energy systems such as pipelines.

If realised, the route would offer an alternative to the Malacca Strait, a 900-kilometre channel bordered by Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore. It is the shortest maritime route between East Asia, the Middle East and Europe, with more than 100,000 ships, mostly commercial vessels, passing through it last year.

Thailand has begun reaching out to potential investors, including Singapore. Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul discussed the plan on Monday during a meeting with Singapore’s Defence Minister Chan Chun Sing.

Government spokesperson Rachada Dhanadirek claimed that Mr Chan viewed the project as an economic opportunity for both Thailand and foreign investors, and expressed interest in the proposal if it progresses.

The renewed focus on alternative trade routes comes amid broader regional debate. Indonesia’s finance minister recently sparked discussion by suggesting that countries could consider imposing tolls on ships using the Malacca Strait, before later clarifying that such a move would not be feasible.

Within Thailand, the Land Bridge is generally seen as a more viable option than the long-proposed Kra Canal, which would involve cutting a shipping passage across the peninsula. That idea has historically faced opposition due to environmental, financial and security concerns.

This article (Thailand wants SG to invest in $31 billion ‘Land Bridge’ proposal as Hormuz deadlock persists) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A Singapore nurse has sparked an online debate after calling out what she described as “entitled old people” over the use of reserved seats on the MRT.

In a post on Reddit, the nurse recounted boarding a train at Botanic Gardens after a long and exhausting shift. She described her job as “physically and mentally taxing,” adding that she had not had the chance to “eat, drink, sit, pee, sh*t, etc., for >8 hours.”

Hoping to rest during the journey, she took an empty reserved seat, noting that she had a heart condition. However, an older commuter soon approached her, tapped her shoulder, and repeatedly insisted that the seat was meant “for seniors only.”

The Redditor shared that the woman came “SWOOPING IN, tapping my shoulder and repeatedly saying ‘this seat is for seniors only’,” adding that the woman continued pointing at the priority seat sticker even after sitting down herself.

The nurse expressed frustration that the commuter appeared to ignore the broader intent of the reserved seating scheme. Describing herself as being in her early 20s and looking even younger, she suggested that her condition may not have been taken seriously because it is not visible.

“This is just a rant because I’m tired and pissed off with old, rude people acting all high and mighty,” she added, inviting others with similar experiences to share.

The post drew a wide range of responses, with some commenters offering tongue-in-cheek advice on how to handle similar encounters in future.

Some felt she should stand her ground more firmly. “Your problem is you got up. Just tell her u got heart condition point to sign and sleep. If she keep nagging, just ignore,” one comment read.

Another commenter said, “Ah you see. Your problem is you didnt wayan for hong xing da jiang. You said you got heart problem. Just take out your meds and act like you ate and drink water. Make sure you look like you suffering.”

Others reflected on what they saw as a wider cultural issue. “That’s the part of this first-world life we’ve honed into. No more ‘caring’ attitude with kind gesture or communication. Yes, the older generation can be quite ‘cruel’… Welcome to the first world ugliness,” one wrote.

Several users shared similar encounters. One Redditor recounted, “I WAS JUST COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY. There was this aunty she legit swooped across the crowd… She came to me used her bag to hit my leg then smiled… BRO SHE HIT MY LEG HARDER WITH HER BAG THEN GIGGLE and directed my eyes to the poster.”

Another commenter pointed to the issue of invisible conditions. “A lot of older generation like that one, they don’t see people with invisible disabilities…Most of them entitled, thinking the reserved seats are for them and them only,” they wrote, adding that “a seemingly healthy and young person may need the seat more than the old person.”

Practical advice also featured prominently in the discussion. “Just stay seated next time… and just go to bed the moment you get the seat.” one netizen suggested.

Others criticised the broader system rather than individuals. “As much as I want to side with you.. don’t hate the player, hate the game. The ‘reserve seat’ culture had cultivated this behaviour,” a commenter wrote, adding, “This kind you should just tell her you not feeling well. Now you flip the sympathy game back to her.”

Another netizen offered practical advice, saying, “Don’t wear uniform in public transport. Always change before leaving work. So if someone mess with you, and it goes viral, you won’t immediately lose your job.”

Some responses were more blunt. “Life sucks, next time, don’t give the seat to anyone,” one commenter said.

This article (Nurse with heart problem rebukes ‘entitled old people’ for hogging reserved MRT seats) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: Ex-Minister Ng Eng Hen has posted a photo on social media showing himself on board an MRT train, sparking questions as to whether the veteran politician is trying to back Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Gan Kim Yong after the latter’s electricity saving tips caused controversy earlier this month.

Showing off his Passion Card, the former minister wrote on Facebook, “Took MRT to Maxwell Food Centre and had the laksa mee on Sunday. With this new long range capability, I can now target hawker food faraway!”

Comparisons to Mr Gan were immediate. He had said in Parliament earlier this month that Singaporeans should take public transport instead of driving and use fans instead of air-conditioning units to do their part in conserving energy.

Netizens on social media, online forums, and messaging groups were quick to ask whether the DPM and his fellow ministers would lead by example and take buses and trains, and turn off the air-con in Parliament, to do their part.

Others described the remarks as “tone-deaf” and “out of touch,” with some suggesting they reflected a disconnect between policymakers and ordinary citizens.

As the remarks continued stirring a sense of unease online, Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh was spotted travelling by train, winning widespread praise and comparisons to the DPM. DPM Gan was hot on Mr Singh’s heels and was spotted hours later on Friday (April 10) taking the Punggol LRT with an entourage following him.

However, just days after the LRT ride, DPM Gan has gone back to the comfort of car rides.

In a Facebook post on April 12, Mr Gan revealed he was on his way to Changi Airport for an official visit to the United States, where he is expected to meet government and business leaders, including in Austin, Texas. The post, which featured a photograph of him seated in a car, quickly drew attention online.

Critics asked whether the LRT ride had been a staged gesture and a one-off act rather than a genuine attempt to practice what he preaches.

The comments on Mr Ng’s post, meanwhile, include ones questioning whether he is “doing his part” and backing the DPM.

One commenter tagged the DPM himself and quipped, “Nowadays the trend is, taking mrt or public transport need to post online.”

Another netizen commented, “WP MP took MRT, DPM took MRT, SMOS took MRT. Now ex-Defence Minister also take MRT. We are suddenly so obsessed with MRT.”

Crediting Pritam Singh for starting a trend, a commenter said, “Now even ex minister joining the fab show started by PS.”

This article (Ex-Minister joins MRT bandwagon after DPM’s electricity saving tips cause unease) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: After 15 years as a fixture in Serangoon, Japanese department store Isetan has closed its outlet at NEX mall for good, with staff bidding an emotional farewell to customers as shutters came down on Sunday (26 Apr).

The closure marks the end of an era for the store, which had been an anchor tenant since NEX first opened in 2010. On its final day, employees gathered to thank shoppers who had supported the outlet over the years, before lowering the shutters for the last time.

Store manager Gladys Kan addressed the crowd in a farewell speech, expressing gratitude for the support and kindness shown by customers over the past 15 years. She wished them well and encouraged them to patronise Isetan’s last remaining outlet at Shaw House along Scotts Road. Staff then bowed and waved goodbye as the store closed its doors.

In a Facebook post published on Monday (27 Apr), Isetan Singapore confirmed the closure, attributing it to the expiry of its lease. The company thanked its stakeholders and customers, while inviting the public to “continue creating new memories” at its final remaining branch.

Isetan’s presence in Singapore dates back to 1972, when it became the country’s first Japanese department store. At its peak, the retailer operated seven outlets across the island, including a prominent location at Wisma Atria.

In recent years, however, it has steadily scaled down its footprint. Its Westgate branch in Jurong East closed in 2020, followed by its Parkway Parade outlet in January 2022. The NEX closure comes just over five months after its Tampines Mall store shut on 9 November 2025, ending a 30-year run there.

News of the impending closure had been announced by NEX in December last year, with the mall hinting at “new and exciting offerings” set to replace the long-standing tenant.

In the lead-up to its final day, Isetan NEX drew large crowds with moving-out sales offering discounts of up to 70 per cent on a wide range of items. Shoppers flocked to the store in its final weeks, eager to pick up bargains and revisit a familiar retail space one last time.

The closure has also sparked an outpouring of nostalgia online, with many sharing personal memories of the store.

One Redditor posted, “Goodbye Nex isetan. We will miss you. I remembered when I had just moved to serangoon maybe 11 years ago, You were here for the first time. You sold everything, and encompassing 3 levels you might have been the biggest shop in this mall. Goodbye.”

“Sadly the end of the era of department stores. Have so many childhood memories of following my mom around,” a commenter agreed.

One netizen who was there on the final day observed, “The end indeed. I was at Isetan around 7pm and some of the aunties were like ‘可以收工了’ （we can pack up now) jokingly cos it was still so crowded and the others just laughed along. But I can sense that it was bittersweet for them.”

While acknowledging e-commerce has taken over most people’s shopping patterns today, some netizens said the closure of brick and mortar stores still hits hard. One commenter said, “I know there are better deals online but I really like shopping in department stores. It’s really sad to see for me the eventual closures of these stores.”

Another netizen said, “Goodbye Isetan Nex, thank you for all the good memories.”

This article (“The end of an era” – Singaporeans lament closure of Isetan megastore at Nex) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A photo of five schoolboys sharing a single seat on an MRT train has sparked mixed reactions online, with some amused by the boys’ creativity and others less impressed by their behaviour.

The image, which has been circulating on social media, shows five international school students in their physical education uniforms, all carrying backpacks, stacked on top of one another on a single seat. An Indian boy is seated on the actual seat, with a boy of African descent sitting on his lap, while three European-looking boys balance on top of them in a precarious pile.

Seated next to them is a Chinese woman, whose expression appears visibly disapproving. According to the individual who shared the photo, her reaction was hard to miss.

“This scene somehow brightened and giggled up my MRT ride,” the OP said on Reddit.

Another Redditor who was on the same train and got another shot of the boys added in a comment, “I have to add on that the lady kept glancing at me as if to show her disapproval of their actions. She kept remarking ‘cant you see that this is a seat for one person.’”

The unusual sight quickly drew attention online, with netizens divided between those who found the moment lighthearted and nostalgic and those who viewed it as inappropriate behaviour in a public space.

Some commenters expressed amusement, with one writing, “No seats on MRT? be the change you want to see in the world..” Another joked, “Later got new sign that says not allowed to 5man sit on each other like that.”

Others took a more sentimental view, reflecting on the carefree nature of youth. “Those were the days that we all missed and it will never come back again,” one comment read.

At the same time, there were voices urging tolerance, with one netizen simply saying, “Let them have fun.”

The photo continues to circulate online, drawing both laughter and criticism as viewers weigh in on whether the boys’ antics were harmless fun or a step too far for public transport etiquette.

This article (Photo of five schoolboys sharing single MRT seat raises eyebrows) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: Netizens have expressed shock at the cost of a plate of food after a Singaporean shared online that he bought a large, sumptuous plate of Seafood Hor Fun for only $4.

Facebook user Balaaji Naidu Bg said he had the meal at the small, unassuming coffee shop at Block 843 Woodlands Street 83. The corner coffeeshop is not very well known aside from the residents of the flats surrounding it and visitors to the Evangelical Free Church nearby, but loyal patrons consider it a hidden gem, with delicious food at reasonable prices.

Sharing a photo of the hearty meal, Mr Balaaji wrote, “$4….I was shocked.” He added in a comment that he could not believe the price and even asked the stallholder for the price twice, unsure if he had misheard him.

Quite a few commenters responded that they could not believe the price either and said they are used to paying around $7 for a similar meal elsewhere. One said, “$4? No way. Here in our place, Newton food court, $7 seafood.”

Another one who is familiar with the stall said the operators have deliberately kept prices fair. The netizen, Facebook user Magensilva Kanapathy, wrote, “This seafood stall has been operating for 30 years. Their food is good and they have kept the prices reasonable.”

Hawker prices have been steadily rising over the years, thanks to inflation and rising operating costs. Hawker meals across Singapore could soon become even more expensive, as stallholders grapple with mounting cost pressures driven by higher ingredient prices, energy costs and fuel-related surcharges.

Some vendors have already raised prices by between 50 cents and S$1, while others say increases may be inevitable if current conditions persist. The squeeze has been intensified by global factors, including the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, which has pushed operating expenses higher and cut into already thin profit margins.

This article (‘$4… I was shocked’: Seafood hor fun at Woodlands coffeeshop draws attention online) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A bubble tea chain has decided against lodging a police report after surveillance cameras allegedly caught a little girl absconding with their loyalty stamp.

The company, TeaPulse, has said that it is now forced to overhaul a key part of its customer loyalty system due to the theft.

TeaPulse said the incident occurred at its i12 Katong branch, where a girl believed to be around nine years old reportedly reached over the counter and took the company’s loyalty stamp.

The stamp is used to mark customer loyalty cards, which can later be redeemed for free drinks or special items.

According to the company, the girl’s mother was on a phone call at the time but was looking in her daughter’s direction when the incident happened. TeaPulse initially appealed to the public for help, asking the mother or anyone who might recognise the pair to come forward and return the stamp. It also said it will be going to the police.

The company added that misuse of the stamp could undermine customer trust and the value of its rewards system.

In its posts, TeaPulse acknowledged that the situation might appear to be a case of childish mischief, but said longer footage suggested the act was deliberate. It also claimed both the child and her mother acted somewhat suspicious.

The company also sought public opinion, questioning whether its response might be seen as overly harsh. Some commenters said the company’s view of the incident was fair but others called for more compassion and urged the company to refrain from publicly shaming a minor.

In an update, TeaPulse said it would not pursue further action against the girl or her mother, effectively closing the matter.

“Stealing is wrong,” the company said, adding that even at the age of nine, such behaviour should already be understood as unacceptable.

Despite deciding to move on, TeaPulse now faces operational challenges. The company said it will have to work with its supplier to modify the design and colour of its loyalty stamp to distinguish it from the one that was allegedly taken.

As the changes will need to be implemented across all its outlets, the process is expected to be inconvenient.

TeaPulse said it understood that some members of the public may feel protective towards the child due to her age, but stressed that the incident could not simply be dismissed.

This article (Bubble tea chain decides against police report after girl allegedly takes loyalty stamp) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: The perennial hot-button topic of Singapore’s high ministerial salaries returned to the fore this week, after Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that the Government must work harder to keep Singapore exceptional.

Speaking at the annual Administrative Service dinner on April 21 at the Marina Bay Sands Expo and Convention Centre, SM Lee told senior civil servants that the risk of Singapore’s “virtuous cycle” of effective governance and sound policymaking weakening has grown. This, he said, could make it more challenging to deliver continued prosperity and progress for the country.

He stressed that maintaining Singapore’s exceptional standing would require sustained effort from both political leaders and the public service. “We need to work much harder to keep it going,” he asserted.

Addressing top administrative officers, SM Lee emphasised that civil servants must go beyond simply carrying out decisions. He urged them to take ownership of the policymaking process by forming clear views, offering considered advice, and standing by their recommendations. Effective governance, he said, depends on a close partnership between ministers and officials, built on shared conviction and mutual trust.

His remarks come against the backdrop of a shifting global landscape. SM Lee noted that Singapore’s success over the past six decades was supported by a relatively stable, rules-based international order, with strong economic cooperation and expanding global markets, particularly with China’s rise. However, he cautioned that such conditions are unlikely to persist.

“I do not believe the next 60 years will be anything like the last 60,” he said, pointing to increasing geopolitical tensions and reduced collaboration between major powers. These changes, he added, could result in slower economic growth and reduced global prosperity, posing greater risks for small nations like Singapore.

SM Lee highlighted the importance of maintaining a high-quality public service, alongside capable political leadership, to navigate these challenges. While civil servants are expected to remain apolitical, he clarified that this does not mean being indifferent to policy outcomes. Instead, they should be deeply committed to ensuring the best possible decisions are made for the country.

He also cautioned against complacency, noting that even countries once regarded as models of good governance have seen public trust erode, with voters turning to populist leaders. Singapore, he said, must avoid such a trajectory by continuing to deliver competent governance and maintaining public confidence.

At the same time, SM Lee stressed the role of politics in enabling good policy. Sound ideas alone are insufficient if they lack public support. Governments must be able to persuade citizens, and voters must be willing to back leaders who pursue difficult but necessary policies.

Describing administrative officers as “generalists”, he said they must balance deep knowledge of their respective domains with a broader understanding of national priorities and trade-offs. While they should be well-versed in the rationale behind existing policies, he stressed that these should not be treated as unchangeable. Instead, policies must be regularly reviewed, updated, and, when necessary, reimagined.

Looking ahead, SM Lee called for Singapore to harness not just the capabilities of its leaders and civil service, but also the ideas and energy of its people. Strengthening social cohesion and trust among citizens, in leadership, and in national institutions will be critical in facing future challenges, he indicated.

Only by remaining united and adaptable, he said, can Singapore continue to make sound decisions and preserve its stability, security, and success in the years to come.

While the former PM’s speech was directed at officials, Singaporeans responding to his remarks have reignited the debate on ministerial salaries, asking what some of the world’s highest aid ministers are doing as Singapore navigates the tenuous geopolitical climate.

One netizen quipped on social media, “Big salary must work hard, that is normal,” while another commented, “Salary so high = work for it.”

Another commenter said, “Well, the nation pays you an above-market salary, and with a high salary comes great responsibility. Nothing is free. so of course you need to work harder during difficult times to prove your worth.”

Some felt the high ministerial pay packages have made some ministers “out of touch” with the concerns of ordinary Singaporeans, leading them to “talk down” to citizens. One commenter said, “Our government is polarised to talk down to citizens. And not wanting to listen to feedback from Singaporeans on jobs, [and] high cost of living. But when it comes to their salary, they can try to give all the reasons why they should be paid [more].”

Another commenter pointed out, “Small country of 6m and highest remunerations in the world!”

Ministerial pay has grown significantly since Singapore gained independence in 1965. In 1965, Singapore’s founding Prime Minister, the late Lee Kuan Yew, who was then known as the Chief Minister, reportedly earned a monthly fixed salary of $3,500. This means that he was paid $42,000 annually.

In 1973, the Prime Minister’s salary was bumped up to a monthly sum of $9,500 while other ministers started to earn $7,000, nearly double the $4,500 they used to earn, following a ministerial salary review.

$9,500 and $7,000 in 1973 roughly translate to $27,742 and $20,441, respectively, in 2016 when adjusted for inflation.

Justifying the salary increase in 1973, the elder Mr Lee said: “Too great a disparity between Ministerial rewards and what Ministers, with business experience and professional qualifications, could earn outside will make it increasingly difficult to assemble a successor government.”

Then, 20 years later, in 1994, the first framework for ministerial salaries came into play. The policy, which saw ministers being paid two-thirds of what the top four earners from six professions in the private sector earn, caused ministerial salaries to balloon. Mr Lee Kuan Yew explained then:

“Sir, my generation of political leaders has become dinosaurs, an extinct breed of men who went into politics because of the passion of their convictions.

“The problem now is a simple one: How to select younger leaders when the conditions that had motivated the Old Guards to sacrifice promising prospects of a good life for a political cause are no longer obtainable in a completely different social climate?

“This change in climate is inevitable with economic progress and a change in social values.Let me explain very simply, Mr Speaker, that MPs are real men and women, just like you and me, with real families who have real aspirations in life. So when we talk of all these high-falutin, noble, lofty causes, remember at the end of the day, very few people become priests.”

In 1996, two years after the White Paper on “Competitive Salaries for Competent and Honest Government” was released, Lee added: “People accept the principle of pegging Ministers’ salaries to the top men in the private sector, but to many people the top salaries are too large.”

Ten years after the ministerial salary framework was released, Lee Hsien Loong took over the reins of the nation from his father’s successor, now-Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. In 2007, Lee Hsien Loong’s annual salary climbed to a whopping $3,090,000 under this framework.

And then, the unthinkable happened. In 2011, the ruling party lost a Group Representation Constituency (GRC) to the opposition and public support for the People’s Action Party (PAP) slipped.

In 2012, for possibly the first time ever, Singapore’s ministers took a pay cut. An independent committee reviewed the ministerial salary scheme and recommended the following salary cuts:

• President’s annual salary to be slashed by 51 per cent to $1.54 million;

• Prime Minister’s annual salary to be cut by 36 per cent to $2.2 million, along with the removal of pension;

• Full minister’s (MR4 level) annual salary to be reduced by 37 per cent to $1.1 million, along with the removal of pension;

• Prime Minister’s salary to be pegged to double the MR4 salary;

• MP’s annual allowance to be cut by 3 per cent to $192,500; and

• The entry MR4 minister’s salary to be benchmarked to the median income of the top 1,000 earners who are Singapore citizens, with a 40 per cent discount.

The Government accepted the committee’s proposal. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s annual salary was slashed to $2.2 million, where it has remained for the last six years.

In 2017, a committee formed by PM Lee to review ministerial salaries recommended that political salaries be adjusted to reflect “annual benchmark movements,” given a 9 per cent rise in benchmark salaries.

Ministerial salaries have not gone up since then

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said then that ministerial pay will remain the same and will be reviewed again in five years: “… since the scheme remains valid and the economy is still in transition, we will not change anything now and will maintain the current salary structure and level. We will review the matter again after five years or when it becomes necessary.”

This year, the Government convened an independent committee to review the salary framework and recommend appropriate salaries and refinements.

Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister-in-charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing said in February that the norm annual salary for an entry-level minister has remained at S$1.1 million, from 2012 to now.

Ministerial pay is structured with fixed components — comprising monthly salary and a 13th-month non-pensionable annual allowance — accounting for 65 per cent of total annual pay. The remaining 35 per cent is variable and linked to both national economic performance and individual performance.

The national bonus component is tied to four indicators: real median income growth, income growth at the 20th percentile, the unemployment rate and real gross domestic product growth. No bonus is paid if targets are not met, while meeting targets results in up to three months’ bonus, rising to as much as six months if targets are significantly exceeded.

Political officeholders also receive an annual variable component in line with civil servants, which ranged from zero to one-and-a-half months between 2018 and 2024. In addition, individual performance bonuses, determined by the prime minister, can range from zero to six months each year.

It is unclear when the ongoing salary review will conclude.

This article (Debate on high ministerial salaries resurfaces as SM Lee says Govt must work harder to keep Singapore exceptional) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A long-forgotten investment from the 1990s is resurfacing for hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans, after veteran journalist Bertha Henson brought renewed attention to it on social media this week.

Citizens aged 50 and above are being notified by the CPF Board about shares they acquired more than three decades ago under a national push to build a “share-owning society”. The initiative, introduced during Goh Chok Tong’s premiership, aimed to give ordinary Singaporeans a tangible stake in the country’s economic growth.

In 1993, over 600,000 Singaporeans became shareholders in Singapore Telecom (SingTel) when the company launched its public listing. Using funds from their CPF Ordinary Accounts, they purchased shares at a discounted price of $1.90. A second tranche followed in 1996 at $2.50, also below market rates.

For many, the process required little effort beyond consenting to the use of CPF savings. The shares were held in a CPF-managed account, and dividends generated over the years were credited back into CPF rather than paid out in cash.

While the initial outlay averaged about $2,000 per person, long-term returns have been significant. Dividends alone have accumulated to around $5,000 over time, though these gains remained locked within the CPF system.

Some investors, particularly those more financially active, had earlier opted to sell their holdings through SingPost or brokers. However, any proceeds from such sales were similarly channelled back into CPF accounts.

At age 55, shareholders previously faced restrictions: they could only transfer shares to their personal Central Depository (CDP) accounts if they had met the Full Retirement Sum. Otherwise, the holdings remained under CPF management.

That framework has now changed.

Since April 8, shareholders have been given direct control of their SingTel shares, regardless of whether they meet retirement sum requirements. They may now sell their holdings through brokers, SingPost, or online platforms, with proceeds credited directly to their personal bank accounts.

Those who choose not to act will see their shares automatically transferred to their CDP accounts from Nov 21. For individuals without an existing CDP account, one will be created on their behalf. After the transfer, the shares will no longer be tied to CPF.

Based on current market estimates, a typical shareholder holding about 1,360 shares could realise roughly $6,800 if they sell, assuming a share price of around $5. For many seniors, this represents a substantial and unexpected financial boost.

Despite the potential for widespread selling, the overall impact on SingTel is expected to be minimal. The shares held under this scheme account for less than 5 per cent of the company’s total share base.

The Government has indicated that the move reflects the success of its original objective. Share ownership among Singaporeans is now widespread, and participation in the stock market is no longer seen as niche.

Even so, the programme’s legacy is mixed. While it succeeded in bringing a large number of citizens into the market, many remained passive investors, holding onto their initial shares without further diversification or engagement.

This article (Singaporeans above 50 could see S$6,000 payout from long-held SingTel shares) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A parent has made a complaint against a primary school teacher for belittling him and his job in front of his child, after the teacher allegedly said that the father is “just a Grab driver”.

A screenshot of the complaint email the father sent to the school principal is circulating online. Alleging that the teacher’s conduct was “inappropriate,” the father claimed, “The teacher made insulting remarks about me, referring to me as “just a Grab driver,” in a manner clearly intended to belittle my profession.”

While clarifying that he is not a full-time Grab driver and owns multiple businesses, he pointed out, “Regardless, all honest work deserves respect, and such comments are unacceptable.”

He added, “More importantly, to degrade my son and his father in a classroom setting is completely inappropriate and has caused embarrassment and distress to my child. My son looks up to me, and such remarks are harmful to his confidence and emotional well-being.”

The father asked the school to investigate the matter, take action against the teacher and update him on the outcome. He added, “If this matter is not addressed satisfactorily, I will have no choice but to escalate it further.”

The boy’s mother shed light on what happened in a comment on social media. She claimed that the class pupils were to get into two lines depending on whether they would be happy or unhappy when people spoke badly of them.

Sharing that her “cheeky son” joined the ‘happy’ line, the mother claimed the teacher asked him why he would be happy. To this, the boy apparently said, “So I can sue them and make money.”

The mother alleged that the teacher replied, “Your daddy got money meh? Don’t think I don’t know your daddy is sleeping now. He’s just a Grab driver! Where can [you] afford lawyers to sue? Grab drivers are broke!”

The mother also claimed that the teacher used the word “wasted” as she spoke to the pupil.

Reactions online were mixed. Some felt the child may have misinterpreted what the teacher said, while others censured the teacher for being elitist.

One commenter said, “I don’t really know, or care who is right or wrong in this particular case. But from purely anecdotal evidence, I have observed that the most messed-up people from my friend group went on to become teachers.

“With that in mind, I take the words of my child rather seriously when it comes to wrongdoings in the classroom. In fact, I have managed to elicit some apologies from my child’s teacher regarding an exchange that had happened in school. In fact, I wasn’t acting accusatorily and was just asking for clarification.”

The commenter added, “Teaching is a noble profession, but we are all humans after all.”

Some also said such incidents are not uncommon. A nurse said that one of her colleagues, a doctor, asked her why her father ” chose to drive a taxi when there are so many other careers available out there.” The doctor apparently added that “it’s like the lowest job”.

The nurse said she was “surprised and disgusted” by the comment but chose to laugh it off as she did not want to continue the conversation.

She added, “Also, who says taxi driver and PHV driver cannot be successful?! Success is one’s own definition anyway.”

Others urged the parents to escalate the matter to the Ministry of Education, while some wondered why the teacher had such a mindset in the first place.

One netizen quipped, “Bruh this teacher 100% used to be a bully.”

This article (‘Just a Grab driver’: Parent files complaint over teacher’s alleged remark) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: A social media post praising former Cabinet minister Lim Hng Kiang has drawn mixed reactions online, with some netizens pushing back against what they saw as an overly flattering portrayal of his public service.

The post, published by Facebook user Alvin Huang, offered an extensive account of Mr Lim’s career, framing him as a steady and understated figure in government whose contributions were often overlooked. It recounted his tenure as Health Minister during the 2003 SARS outbreak, noting that he faced intense public criticism at the time over the government’s response, including accusations that measures such as quarantine orders and school closures were implemented too slowly.

Mr Huang wrote that Mr Lim became “the easiest target” for public frustration during the crisis and was subsequently moved out of the Health Ministry to the Prime Minister’s Office. However, the post argued that Mr Lim’s role during SARS was later vindicated, citing then-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s valedictory letter, which said Mr Lim had made “sound decisions” under pressure and noted that Singapore’s response was praised by the World Health Organisation after the outbreak.

The post went on to highlight Mr Lim’s subsequent 14-year stint as Minister for Trade and Industry, describing it as the longest tenure in that portfolio and crediting him with developing key industry clusters, advancing trade agreements and steering Singapore’s economy through the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. It characterised his work as largely unnoticed by the public, suggesting that this was by design.

Mr Huang also detailed Mr Lim’s background, including his education at Raffles Institution and the University of Cambridge, his scholarships, and his early career in the Singapore Armed Forces and civil service. The post further outlined policy initiatives from his time as National Development Minister, as well as personal details such as the death of his wife in 2014 and the family’s request for donations to charitable causes in lieu of wreaths.

Concluding, Mr Huang described Mr Lim as a minister who “just wanted the work to be done,” contrasting him with others who seek recognition.

The lengthy tribute, however, prompted a range of responses in the comments section, with some users questioning the tone and intent of the post.

One commenter pointed out that Mr Lim had been “fully paid in millions dollars,” adding that he served while “highly paid” and would continue to receive a pension and medical benefits after retirement. The commenter contrasted this with the struggles of ordinary Singaporeans, writing that some “died as broke or work till death.”

Another user suggested that current Members of Parliament are more active on the ground, while a separate comment directly questioned Mr Huang’s motives, asking: “Alvin, are you paid to write a biography like this?”

At the same time, several commenters shared positive personal experiences and expressed appreciation for Mr Lim’s work.

One user recounted approaching Mr Lim for help during a difficult period when both parents were seriously ill, writing that Mr Lim assisted by writing in to help secure a nursing home placement and subsidies. The commenter said they remained “always grateful” for his support.

Another described Mr Lim as “very down to earth” during his time as an MP in Telok Blangah, noting that he would attend events without fanfare and drove himself like any other resident.

Others pointed to specific policies they benefited from, including the introduction of a queue system for HDB applicants, which one commenter said helped them secure a flat after multiple unsuccessful attempts in the ballot.

This article (‘He was paid millions’: Post glazing ex-PAP Minister draws flak) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.