By Leong Sze Hian
I refer to the report “LTA announces changes to Vehicle Quota System” (Channel News Asia, Mar 11).
The report states that the number of COEs is likely to be reduced, which means car prices may go up.
Will higher COE prices mean more revenue for the LTA?
The report also states that the annual allowable growth rate of vehicles halved from 3% to 1.5% last year. This begs the question: Why did we take so many years to finally decide to half the allowable growth rate?
Transport Minister Raymond Lim explained to Parliament on Thursday how the LTA persistently over-projected the amount of cars to be scrapped each year.
He said that the reason was that LTA persistently over-projected every year.
In his own words:
“Let’s say last year we over-projected for the current year, if we over-project it again, we add to the problem”.
So, it would seem from the remarks in Parliament that the LTA allowed the vehicle population to grow at double the sustainable rate, because it persistently “over-projected” the number of vehicles to be scrapped year after year.
Has the LTA performed to expectations in managing sustainable vehicle growth?
Probably not.
Minister Lim also said: “This direct replacement system is similar to that implemented before 1999. But back then, as quota numbers were released annually, there were complaints from industry players that the time-lag was too great”.
Why are we going back to the original system we used before 1999? Since, according to Minister Lim, “there were complaints from industry players that the time-lag was too great”, why didn’t LTA simply change it its policies earlier?
What has been the outcome of all this “self justification”? Why is it assumed that what didn’t work in the past would once again become the best way to make it work in the future?
Well, perhaps a lot of money?
Let’s look at the Budget.
Which ministry has the highest estimated Operating Revenue (other than the Ministry of Finance at $35.9 billion) for FY2010 of $2.7 billion? Answer: The Ministry of Transport.
For revenue from Excise Duties, the highest contributor is Motor Vehicles at $425 million, a whopping increase of 17.5 per cent over FY2009.
For Licenses and Permits, the highest contributor is Transport and Communication at $1.2 billion, a whopping increase of 34.1 per cent.
What Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) do we use to evaluate our transport ministry?
Maybe there is something wrong with the KPIs?
Did persistently over-projection resulting in much higher vehicle population growth lead to higher revenue?
Would reducing supply of COEs now also lead to higher revenue?
Would returning to the original system before 1999 lead again to higher revenue?
As an analogy, if a company pays its CEO more money when the traffic that he is supposed to regulate becomes more congested, when customer satisfaction declines because they keep having to pay more for a deteriorating service, and alternative public transport options are also declining in service standards and public transport fares keep rising, what is the incentive for the CEO to improve his performance?
Perhaps we need to align the KPIs with the desired outcomes.
How about penalizing the LTA when traffic congestion increases by transferring some of its revenue to subsidize or improve public transport, give more incentives for “green” vehicles if vehicle pollution increases, demand more subsidies if public transport service standards decline, and demand more transport infrastructure spending if traffic benchmarks deteriorate, etc ?
Normally, most countries have to spend money to solve a problem, but in Singapore, too often, the solution makes more money instead, and the problem never seems to go away! Uniquely Singapore!
________________________________________________
Related posts:
- More than just money needed to help poor
- Cutting cheap labour not the solution, says Manpower Minister
- Subsidies cannot solve problems: MM Lee
- Raising foreign worker levy will not solve problems, say critics
- TOC Editorial: Our money, our right to know
The whole thing is planned and executed with only one thing in mind, $$$. When NTUC needs new taxi, COE will suddenly drop to $50. PM allowed the population of car to explode with low COE, saying everyone wants to drive, so ERP will control the way we drive and regulate traffic and congestion. So every tom dick and harry, whether got money or no money, went to buy car, most top 10 years payment plan. After the car population exploded, they raised parking charges, COEs and ERPs. Now 1 hour in CBD is almost $5 to $6, peak hours ERP is almost $10.
Can I ask? After you buy a car, even if ERP or parking charges are high, would you park your car at home and take public transport? I reckon their smart move to push for car owners and trap them after with all these hikes?
Now, jams everywhere despite high ERPs… so they lower the COE but COE prices went to new heights.
Anyway, Singaporeans are always being manipulated for commercial gains.
After the car population exploded, they raised parking charges, COEs and ERPs. Now 1 hour in CBD is almost $5 to $6, peak hours ERP is almost $10.
They just rob you outright! We just have to kick them out of govt this GE. . . no choice, its either they die or we die scenerio now!
how much are they making from ERPs and COE? anyone any idea?
they just entrapped you and then tell you they going to solve these problems using hikes. the impact on ERP will certainly spill over and add on to cost of living where basic neccessities are being transported, surely these additional costs are being passed on to consumers?
One suggestion to M.O.M. …
Employers to bid COE for each and every foreign worker.
Transport ministers of the gahman have lost their credilibility over the ERP and COE schemes. These schemes are implemented with $$$$ in mind – period.
objective – many times when coe dropped to $50, ntuc taxis were launched, coincidental yeah…
park and ride – the cost of parking is also high! you park and ride, you also pay a lot. you dont park and drive straight, you also pay high.
what crab you talking about?
Can someone be kind enough to calculate for us, at least roughly, how much the people of singapore have paid for the COE + ERP since their inception todate?
How much of a difference does having COE+ERP have compared to not using it?
Is there daily traffic congestion still?
Why spend so much hard-earned money ? Have these solved the congestion problem ?
What i am sure is there has been a lot of money collected. I suppose these were well spent on the People? Who knows where/what these money went to or spent on?
maybe we should not ask or demand for this kind of answer. Just accept?
all public servants should take public transport
Former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, took the train to work and the current mayor, Boris Johnson, supports cycling. Maybe the idea of public servants taking public transport to work is not too far fetched!
cannot afford car, COE, ERP parking,
then just sell the car and take public transport lah.
that is what most singaporeans do anyway.
while you complain about how expensive is ur luxury item is,
there are many singaporeans who can barely afford public transport.
i find the Parliament too crowded with too many cooks spoiling the broth. Can I then institute a congestion tax, since the “market” determines it? Or even better, let the market decide how much these people int he parliament should be paid, no?
wow. objective’s posts are deleted.
now i look like a schizophrenic. :O
//ApApA
That’s the WP idea of controlling using dependency ratio, employers will end up paying higher wages for FT.
//if u want to experience bad traffic conditions, take a holiday in Manila, Kuala Lumpur or Bangkok.
don’t need.
just take the mrt during peak hours.
Very tiring experience.
You pay one dollar, sign for a $60,000 loan and then drive off in a new car.
Same day Govt collects $40,000 from your finance ompany and goes laughing to the Bank.
You spend the next 7 years or more, paying for this loan you take out to pay the Government duties and taxes for the car.
Where else in the world can this kind of extortionately, enslaving contracts exist?
Only in Uniquely /Your Singapore.
did the road planner in the past planned the roads to cater for the heavy traffic we experience everyday despite the COE and ERP ?
Is this a rant or proper policy analysis?
Is this yet another opportunity for TOC to make snide remarks, or to push the discussion in a positive direction through rational arguments?
The question of timing will always be ‘wrong’ for those who wishes to rant only and not argue the case on points of merit. I challenge you to do better.
And the same goes for the snide remarks about ‘making money’. Is that all you got? Sarcasm?
COE is meant to control the vehicle population, not ERP. ERP is to control the flow of traffic on a certain road provided there are other roads less used. If all the roads are jammed up, what use is the ERP? Just look at the roads today. It is jammed up everywhere. The COE then becomes a tool to generate revenue and nothing else. Proof otherwise please.
On hindsight, they could have done better. I feel that more than housing, transport is the root of most unhappiness among residents.
1) If transport is well connected, timely, comfortable, cheap, etc people will not mind staying in Woodlands or Pasir Ris. Notice that excess Sengkang flats were sold out soon after KPE was in operation.
2) I think most who take public transport would agree that the current system has a lot of room for improvement. However, from media report, it seems that our government rate itself ok in this area. Does it mean that we have to fine tune the KPI for ComfortDelgro, SMRT, etc to more correctly reflect what commuters feel? Should we look at overcrowding, waiting time, traveling time and availability of seats as a criteria for judging the performance of public transport? Hurt their pocket (in terms of millions of dollars) if they perform badly. Transport companies has no reason making tons of money and lavishing huge bonus to their CEO if they do not meet the public transport objective. To solve a problem, you must first recognize that there is a problem. Somehow or other, I feel that privatization of public services, without adequate monitoring and control led to the current situation. To make all places easily accessible, it is inevitable that some bus routes will lose money. It is very difficult due to conflict of interest for listed companies to swallow such loses willingly. The transport ministry has a huge role to play to ensure that public interest, not just shareholders interest is being taken care. Currently the score for Ministry vs Transport company is 0-1.
3) Provide good alternative. Before sorting out the MRT and bus problem, let taxi be a cheap alternative. Making taxi expensive without a good MRT and bus network will just force people to buy car. If car also gets too expensive and roads too congested, then the residents are really forced to a tight corner. No choice, stay near workplace will be the mentality.
4) I remember LKY and PM Lee had some differences regarding the number of COE. We are a small country who do not manufacture cars. Because we are small, it is easier for us to build a good public transport system and encourage people to use them. Just because some car retailers make some noise does not mean we should pander to their needs.
5) If you want to increase productivity, just make the roads, buses and MRT less congested. A lot of people now spend too much time and energy commuting. No seat in MRT or bus, stand for 45 minutes before going to office. Commuters who constantly change between MRT and bus gets tired. When I was still schooling, we do not have MRT but bus connectivity was so much better. I prefer to sleep in a bus for 1 hour rather then change 3 bus/MRT in 45 minutes.
Have we improved as a nation? How is it compared to LKY or GCT time? Roads are more congested, price of a taxi trip has increased a lot more than rate of inflation, public transport is now so crowded that more people cannot get seats, etc.
For housing, government building more 2-3 rm for citizens. 3 rm that had been phased out since donkey years ago. You tell foreigners about the good local food in coffee shops but they tell you that this cannot be from Singapore because the entire place is run by PRC. What foreign worker quota? Is there a helpline we can call to report all those establishment that come up with schemes that work around the quota? Pay people for reporting and I am very sure there will be volunteers. (I salute Old Chang Kee and Mac for their policy of employing old folks). Now we even build a world class casino for foreigners. Locals not welcomed and will be taxed.
For PAP, all is not lost. But they will lose seats if they do not buck up because everybody travel. Solve the transport woes as a first step.
Apologize if you find my ranting too long.
The congestion issue must be multi-spoke in resolution, by controlling the number of cars via pricing/COEs, all it does is to add to the cost and not solving the problem. It will further skrew society to the Haves and the Have-Nots.
ERP is priced currently not at pain point thus despite pricing ERPs the roads are still jammed.
No differentiation between vehicles which moves the economy e.g. delivery, public transport, logistics providers etc. adding costs to the overall business environment.
In my simple mind this is how I see we can to change the situation:
1. Nationalise public transport providers:
The reason why trains are packed and buses are never on time is due to the profit element in a listed co’s mandate. In reality it is not wrong to have a listed co to make money, it is in the mandate. However, in a place like Singapore where there is no real competition in the first place, privatisation is silly.
By placing a CEO to be a guardian of the public route planning working with the buses, trains, LRT routes instead of dreaming of ways to make more money.
2. National level of route planning and crowd control
Single platform of planning which works out the net revenue neutral buses and trains routes. I.e. after costs and expenses, zero should be the end game in terms of profit and not dividends.
Crowdedness of trains which can be controlled by increased frequency which was initially dropped in the pure pursuit of profits.
Bus routes need to replicate 40-60% of train routes in order to ensure distribution of loads.
4. Allow private service providers to come into the picture to supplement the system
Not many people can disagree that the MRT is a good mode of transport but the question is no the train system itself but the connectivity problem. i.e. getting to the train stations from where you stay.
If we were to rationalise the national planning of transport routes then logically some routes will be discarded. Which can be covered by private bus providers as although the charges will be higher on a trip basis, the speed and connectivity providing access to the train backbone of public transport will definitely be cheaper than purchase of a vehicle.
5. Increase prices of COEs and ERPs for private transport vehicles
Increasing prices for COEs and ERPs will cause the buyers of cars to consider their usage and plan better to car pool and interact with their neighbours.
Just to give you a sense of how silly it is, along the stretch of housing I stay at, we have 6 cars going out in the morning to the same CBD which brings 6 people as everyone drives i.e. 1 pax per car.
6. ERP rebates for businesses and taxis
Due to the large increase in ERPs, businesses will need to be able to defray the costs of businesses. ERP expenses for delivery, logistics, taxis will be tax deductible in order to ensure the cost of doing business is not as badly impacted.
In the case of the taxis, some may argue that it is a premium form of transport but that is only partly true, in reality it is the only choice for people if they are late or in a rush. If the public transport platform is better. Then taxis would be a last resort choice of transport.
Ultimately we cannot look at trying to trash private vehicle ownership without ensuring the complementary infrastructure is in place. The key must be to make buying a car more costly, inconvenient mode of transportation by making the obvious substitutes like buses and trains alot more attractive.
Just my simple thoughts. Happy to discuss with wiser people here.
Public transport took me more than an hour from cck to bukit timah.
here it goes
10mins wait for feeder bus vs 1min warm up engine if driving
15mins travelling to MRT station
5-10mins for walking to train station and wait for train
10-15mins to reach jurong east interchange
5mins wait for train AGAIN
5mins to reach clementi
10mins wait for bus
20-30mins to reach SIM.
Approx. 80mins to 100mins
Driving at most from approx 35-40mins during PEAK hour.
Garhman ppl sure take public transport before convincing other citizen to follows. Well i doubt they will.