Monday, June 05, 2006

Response to Chow Kon Yeow's post "Should civil servants be awarded titles higher than the Prime Minister and Ministers?"

Since I could not leave a comment on this blog without registering first, I'll just dump my views here.

Response to Chow Kon Yeow's post "Should civil servants be awarded titles higher than the Prime Minister and Ministers?" dated 05/06/06.

My understanding of the award is that it is given as a recognition of service to the country, not a conferment of power and influence.

If that is the case, then junior servants who have served the country should be recognised. And, just because a person is a Minister does not nessecarily imply that he/she is going to serve the country more than a junior government servant.

And since this award is merely a recognition of service, ministers need not worry about their director generals having a cooler title than the minister. It is not about the Tan Sri DG upstaging the untitled Minister.

By the way, who are these ministers who complained about having highly recognised DG's?

Labels:

1 Comments:

Blogger tigerjoe said...

There are a few things about comments made by the MP for Tanjong which I find interesting:

1) The MP demonstrates an ignorance (intentional or otherwise) for the fact that medals given out by a Head of State are a token of recognition, not a token of power.

2) The MP appears to imply that civil servants should be "beneath" Members of Parliament.

What I find most amusing though, is that a socialist, or at least an MP from a socialist party, seems very hard up on the issue of social hierarchy and medals. What ever happened to "the classless society", and service without expectation of reward?

8:25 pm, June 05, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home