Top 10 best paid politicians in the world

As you might imagine, the release of Barack Obama's tax return by the White House last month caused quite a stir. Everyone knew the U.S. President earned the base Commander in Chief salary last year, but perhaps few were keen to Obama's potency as an author: according to his filings, the most powerful man in the world earned a total income of $5,505,409 in 2009, thanks in large part to proceeds from Obama's two best-selling books, The Audacity of Hope and Dreams from My Father.
Yet, this time of year, it's that base salary everyone is concerned with. As Canadians, tax season is the slot on the calendar when it's most appropriate to gripe over how much Prime Minister Stephen Harper earns. Where do the incomes of Harper and Obama rank on the world scale, you ask? Perks, stipends and expenses aside, Here is the 10 highest-paid politicians in the world, based on their taxpayer-funded salaries.*All figures in USD.

10. Gordon Brown, Prime Minister, UnitedKingdom

Annual salary: $300,400

Brown, the Scottish-born leader of the U.K's Labour party, has always boasted that he's a man of the people. And it's that political motivation that now has the British P.M. in a fight to raise his nation's minimum wage from $8.97 to $11.75. Brown's salary, while nearly nine times more than the average English worker's income, is actually quite modest when compared to other world leaders. But, perhaps Brown has his sights set on future earnings: Tony Blair, the man Brown succeeded as P.M. in 2007, now makes as much as $600,000 per speaking engagement at events around the world.

9. Angela Merkel, Chancellor, Germany

Annual salary: $303,800

The only female leader to crack the top 10, Merkel has led the German government since 2005. With nicknames such as "The Iron Frau" and a nagging comparison to former tough-talking British P.M. Margaret Thatcher, it's no surprise that Merkel has handled the recent Greek financial collapse with similar resolve. When Greece asked Germany — where the average worker's income is just less than $30,000 per year — for an $11.2 billion bailout earlier this month, Merkel only agreed under the premise that Athens present a sustainable, deficit-cutting plan before any German funds would be released. The Chancellor's plan, according to her finance minister, Wolfgang Schaeuble, "won't cost any [German] taxpayers' money at the end of the day" and should be in place by this weekend.

8. Jacob Zuma, President, South Africa

Annual salary: $305,800

Sixty-eight year old Zuma has already caused turmoil among his nation's taxpayers during his brief presidency. Since his election win last year, Zuma has implemented an eight per cent salary increase for all public office bearers — even backdating his own raise to his May election date. Zuma is notorious in South Africa — a country where the World Bank estimates more than half the population lives below the poverty line — for a 2005 rape charge, as well as lengthy, public legal battles against charges of corruption and racketeering. Still, the President is the highest-earning politician in all of Africa.

7. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister, Canada

Annual salary: $309,800

Canadians are world class when it comes to grieving about taxes. And who could blame us? Last year, according to the Fraser Institute, the average Canadian family lost 42 per cent of their household income to taxes. Because of this, the ire of the Canuck taxpayer always falls on figures with public salaries, and no such official earns more in Canada than Harper. Wherever you stand on the P.M.'s annual salary — is it too much, or too little? — the Conservative leader earns a wide margin more than the average Canadian. As of the last census, full-time Canadian workers made an average of only $41,401 each year.

6. Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister, Australia

Annual salary: $315,800

Rudd and the rest of the federal government have been recent beneficiaries of a three per cent raise — an increase that bumps the Aussie P.M.'s salary up by almost $10,000 every year until 2011. A Senate leader actually called for Rudd's salary to be tripled to $1 million, but the everyman Prime Minister sheepishly declined. In fact, Rudd's three per cent raise was a long time coming. After he took office in 2007, the newly-minted Aussie leader froze his own salary and then deferred a similar increase the next year. The P.M. remains committed, he maintains, to improving the quality of life for all people in Australia, where the average annual household income totals just over $60,000.

5. Nicolas Sarkozy, President, France

Annual salary: $319,800

Unlike in other governments where top-ranking officials earn similar salaries, France awards its top-brass with incomes that far exceed other public figures. Sarkozy, who has been France's president since 2007, and his Prime Minister, François Fillon, both earn 50 per cent more than the next highest-compensated member of the French government. Yet the French president's salary — which still towers over the average national household income of $58,000 per year — wasn't always so high. As recently as 2007, the first year of his presidency, Sarkozy earned a paltry-by-comparison annual income of $135,200.

4.Brian Cowen, Taoiseach, Ireland

Annual salary: $342,400

Ireland's Taoiseach, the country's head of government, is the highest-paid politician in all of Europe. And while Brian Cowen has only held office since 2008, his salary has already become a lightning rod in Irish politics. During his first year as Taoiseach, Cowen denounced business leaders taking huge pay increases during the outset of the country's financial meltdown. It was then, of course, that Cowen became eligible for a $50,600 per year raise of his own — a pay hike he took in stride. The Taoiseach's opposition fumed over the fact that Cowen earns more than seven times what the average Irish family does per year.

3. Barack Obama, President, United States

Annual salary: $400,000

The salary of Barack Obama, despite making him the third-highest earning public figure on the planet, seems positively miniscule when you consider the bloated Wall Street bonuses the President has had to police during the early months of his presidency. Yet $400,000 is a lot, especially when compared to the average U.S. household income — just over $50,000 when last measured in 2007. Obama, as did other presidents, does earn outside income while in office (his millions made from best-selling books were mentioned in this feature's intro) but his most lucrative years may be to come. Like Tony Blair, the ex-British P.M., many former U.S. presidents earn much more than their in-office salaries after their terms finish. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, for example, each make as much as $150,000 for speaking engagements around the world.

2. Donald Tsang, Chief Executive, Hon Kong

Annual salary: $515,300

To Tsang's credit, the well-compensated chief executive has been a loyal employee of the civil service. Hong Kong's head of government has maintained a public job since 1967, working his way up through posts in the finance and trade sectors. And while Hong Kong's civil servants are traditionally well paid — a strategy that aims to attract "capable and enthusiastic candidates" to public work, as Tsang himself once pointed out — never has Tsang earned more than with his current post, held since 2005. The 65-year-old's salary is more than 21 times what the median household earns per year in Hong Kong, where an average family takes home just $24,000 annually.

1. Lee Hsien Loong, Prime Minister, Singapore

Annual salary: $2.75 million

The highest-paid politician by a staggering margin, Lee Hsien Loong has often defended his extravagant salary. In a recent U.S. trip, Loong highlighted how American politicians, because of their low annual salaries, may have other interests — future pursuits, perhaps — that could distract them from their public service. "Our attitude is: you must pay for the quality of the person you want," he said of his high earnings. "You want the best person and you want him to be properly motivated." Still, rhetoric aside, there are many who justly suggest Loong's annual income is far too high for governing Singapore, a tiny nation of less than five million people. The P.M.'s salary of $2.75 million per year is more than 80 times that of the average Singaporean family.Source : http://www.msn.com

Optic Fibre roll out 50 % completeBy Frank Kanyesigye

Government has announced that works on the rollout have reached 50 percent (File Photo)
KIGALI - The Government has disclosed that approximately 50 percent of the works to roll out the fibre optic cable across the country is now complete.
This was revealed yesterday by Dr. Ignace Gatare, the Minister in President’s Office in charge of Information Communication Technology (ICT), in an exclusive interview with The New Times.
“The total distance for the optic cable is 2,300 kilometres across the country and the distance covered so far is 1,380 kilometres in laying the ducts, while fibre blowing has been done on over 730 kilometres,” he said.
He added that two major regional links of Kigali-Gatuna and Kigali-Rusumo are already covered and two more regional routes; Kigali-Kanyaru and Kigali- Rubavu will be completed by the end of this month.
Gatare said that all the civil works and rolling out the fibre will be ready by the end of December and the entire network will be fully operational by April 2011.
“We are targeting to connect 317 institutions in all 30 districts, 97 in Kigali and 220 outside Kigali, and all the nine Rwandan borders will be connected. But as we are working on connecting more institutions, the number will certainly increase,” he explained.
The infrastructure will boost access to various broadband services including fast tracking government initiatives like e-Governance, e-Banking, e-Learning, e-Health, and other applications.
He underscored that once the cable is connected to the undersea fibre optic, Rwandans will access affordable high speed internet which should eventually foster the development of online business such as e-Tourism.
The network cable is expected to enhance the ICT industry by facilitating IT-based foreign direct investments in areas such as business outsourcing which can leverage on the already existing fibre optic broadband infrastructure.
Ends

Differences between Electronic Transactions Act 1998 and Electronic Transactions Act 2010

With the enactment of the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) 1998, Singapore became the first in the world to implement the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, and is widely acknowledged as a world leader in laws relating to electronic commerce and ICT. Besides provisions for creating a commercial code for e-commerce transactions, the 1998 ETA also contained clauses on the government use of electronic applications, the limitation of liability of Network Service Providers, as well as set out a framework for Public Key Infrastructure (PKI).
The United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts (UN Convention), adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 23rd November 2005, drew upon the rules contained in the UNCITRAL Model Law and is intended to supersede it. One of the main drivers for the UN Convention was that the current Internet environment is vastly different from the predominantly EDI environment in 1998, when the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce was issued. Following the adoption of the UN Convention, IDA together with the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) conducted a review of the 1998 ETA, culminating in the 2010 ETA.
The 2010 ETA, in aligning with the UN Convention, largely retains the legal scheme for dealing with electronic transactions contained in the 1998 ETA. There are a number of details that are changed, in order to provide greater flexibility and to keep up with technology changes.
The main differences between the 1998 ETA and the 2010 ETA are summarized below:
1. Application and Consent: Clause 5 of the 2010 ETA clarifies that parties still have autonomy on deciding to exclude or agree to the use of electronic transactions, or to agree to additional requirements as to the form or authentication of a contract or transaction. The agreement or consent to the use of electronic transactions was also clarified to be inferred from the conduct of the parties unless otherwise agreed or provided by law.
2. Electronic Originals: Clause 9 of the 2010 ETA provides that a requirement in law to provide or retain certain documents, records or information in its original form can be fulfilled by retaining them in the form of electronic records, subject to certain safeguards. A public agency may impose additional requirements for the electronic originals under its jurisdiction. The Minister may exclude certain laws from this provision.
3. Time and Place of Dispatch and Receipt: Clause 13 of the 2010 ETA modifies the current rules in Clause 15 of the 1998 ETA on when and where an electronic communication is deemed to have been dispatched or received. The new rules are a better fit for internet communications, where communications can move from one email server to another, as opposed to the rules in the 1998 ETA which were created in the time of closed systems.
4. Invitation To Make Offers: Clause 14 of the 2010 ETA clarifies that an electronic communication proposing to conclude contracts and is addressed to the world at large (e.g. website advertising prices of goods) is considered an invitation to make offers, not offers capable of immediate acceptance, unless it clearly indicates the intention of the party making the proposal to be bound in case of acceptance.
5. Automated Message Systems: Clause 15 and 16 of the 2010 ETA facilitates the use of automated message systems. Clause 15 clarifies that contracts formed through the use of such systems (e.g. when a seller instructs a computer to accept an order for a product so long as there is enough stock) are valid and enforceable, even though no natural persons had reviewed the action of the systems or the result. Clause 16 allows for errors made in an electronic communication to be able to be withdrawn by the error-maker if the error was made by a natural person and an automated message system, and the system does not allow the person to correct the error.
6. Technology Neutrality: Part IV of the 2010 ETA has been amended to be technologically neutral. Technology-specific provisions based on the public-key infrastructure (PKI) have been shifted into the Third Schedule of the ETA, opening the possibility of the 2010 ETA being applicable to other security procedures like biometrics.
7. E-Government: Part V of the 2010 ETA clarifies that public agencies are empowered to accept in electronic form the filing of documents, provision of information, creation or retention of documents and originals, and the issuance of permits and payments, without having to amend their present legislations.

For more information on changes made between the 1998 ETA and the 2010 ETA,

Moving a data center? Avoid these four career-limiting mistakes

By Irwin Teodoro, Network World
August 30, 2010 10:26 AM ET

This vendor-written tech primer has been edited by Network World to eliminate product promotion, but readers should note it will likely favor the submitter's approach.

Moving a data center is a major undertaking for most organizations. And a successful move is a nice resume builder for any IT professional. A successful move will showcase skills in large-scale project planning, project management, technology integration and interpersonal communications. The process provides a chance for exposure across the company, as virtually every department is touched by the IT organization (and affected by a data center move) in some way.
However, data center moves can be fraught with career-limiting failures. No IT professional wants to be on the receiving end of memos and discussions describing lost orders, missed deadlines or customer dissatisfaction that occurred because some mission-critical business process was disrupted by a data center move that didn't run smoothly.
In most relocation projects, there are four critical mistakes to avoid: ignoring the data, combining the move with additional projects, failure to plan appropriately and not creating an inventory of equipment, applications and processes. Taking time up front to think through each of these will significantly improve your chances for success -- and the personal recognition that follows.
* Ignoring the data. While IT professionals give plenty of thought to the infrastructure involved in data center relocation, moving the data itself can be just as taxing -- sometimes even more so. It is easy to lose sight of the data, as many firms have adopted the model that business group leaders own their data. Marketing owns the prospect data base, operations owns inventory data and so on. Yet the reality is that the data and its underlying infrastructure must be considered as part of an interconnected holistic system -- not elements that can be taken apart and easily reassembled at will.
The smart IT professional will reach out to business owners before the move to identify information that may be affected and reach agreement on such items as data access, compatibility with new systems, application migration and others. Cleansing data prior to the move may be worthwhile, but definitely not during the move.
* Combining the move with additional projects. With all the planning that goes into moving a data center, many professionals attempt to combine other projects -- often guided by the CFO's visions of cost savings -- into the relocation.
This is probably the biggest mistake a firm can make. One of our clients recently attempted to combine multiple projects into a garden-variety data center move, and wound up making the project so complex that the timelines slipped out past all available slack in the plan. The firm was subject to significant financial penalties by failing to vacate the old facility on time.
Moving a data center is a major project in and of itself. It is not the time to take on virtualization of the computing environment, or incorporation of a new tiered storage philosophy. Move your data center first. If your operations or finance teams insist on trying to combine projects, work with your vendor or reseller on a quote for sequential projects -- the fees should not be significantly more. Finally, calculate potential costs associated with the increased complexity of combined projects. Paying an extra month's rent or failure-to-vacate penalties may wipe out any projected savings from the combined projects.
*Incomplete planning. Some IT professionals don't take the time or effort to prepare a comprehensive plan or complete documentation of their existing data center environments. They either go from memory about which applications run on which servers, or make incorrect assumptions on equipment that may or may not be in use. Relying on memory practically guarantees that a key server or application won't get moved correctly.
Smart project managers take a comprehensive approach to planning; not only working a baseline "best case" plan to accomplish the project goals, but putting significant upfront time into risk management planning. Most failures are due to a lack of foresight -- nobody thought the disaster that just hit your datacenter move could happen. Therefore, you didn't plan for it.
Spend the time and meet with business owners across the organization and your IT team. Identify some of the worst-case scenarios that could occur in your data center move. When you think you've identified them all, brainstorm some more. Assess the likelihood of each scenario and the potential business impact and make contingency plans. Disasters may not happen, but you'll be in a far better place if they do.
* Forgetting to create a complete inventory. It should go without saying that any IT professional worth his salt will have developed strong project plans, with plenty of slack time. However, don't forget to develop a comprehensive inventory of every server, application, networking connection, storage array and everything else in your data center before you start to move. Work with business leaders across the enterprise to make sure you include everything. And be certain to have a well-documented list of everything in the current data center before planning for a new one.
Being lax or unprepared in moving data could have devastating results. While company expectations are high for improved performance from a new infrastructure environment, data quality may suffer if it is quickly moved as an afterthought. At best, critical data may be temporarily unavailable. At worst, records could be permanently lost. For companies that increasingly rely on data, the ramifications range from abandoned shopping carts and immediate loss of sales to long-term damage to customer relationships and company reputations.
Develop plans to relocate data with as much care as you put into hardware and building projects. And make sure you work with data owners across the enterprise. By following these recommendations, you'll wish you could move more often.
Teodoro is director of systems integration for Laurus Technologies (www.laurustech.com), a leading Midwest IT consulting and systems integration firm. Teodoro can be reached at iteodoro@laurustech.com.