TOTD: The High Speed Rail

Thought of the Day - The High Speed Rail

Some people ask me what do I think of Tun Mahathir cancelling the High Speed Rail project

Well first of all, we must understand that with such high price tag, it is bound to lose money for a long time to come if it was to be built, especially when it needs to compete with the current air flights between KL and Singapore.


Secondly, although most of the rail and stations were situated in Malaysia, Singapore will benefit most from its construction. This is basically why PAP Government is willing to foot half of the cost of constructing the HSR.

PAP will benefit from the shot up in land prices around Jurong area and it will make it easier for Singapore to attract Talents from Malaysia to come and work in Singapore.

However, it is obvious that PAP Government is facing grave cash flow problem despite of its boast of having huge reserves. Huge mega projects like HSR, Tuas Mega port, T5 @ Changi Airport, New Thomson MRT line etc... are creating an obvious pressure on the government finances, so much so that PAP is planning to raise taxes as well as borrowing to fund all these.

Why would all these multi billion dollars projects come all at once, at the expense of Singaporeans in terms of higher taxes?

Thus in my view, Tun Mahathir had made a timely wise decision to call off the HSR. Of course he did it for the consideration of his country's financial position but indirectly, he will also help Singapore to pause and think whether such mega project is really necessary for the time being.

Going for an expensive HSR which is destined to lose money will only serve the ego of PAP but will bleed us in the long run.

A medium speed rail may be more practical, cost effective and sustainable in the long run.

As for penalty, I would say that in consideration of Malaysia being our closest neighbor and it is struggling with the financial situation in the aftermath of GE14, its current financial and overall stability will also be our Core interests as well. Apart from being a gesture to rebuild our relationship with the new administration, it is also in our interest to see a stable and smooth transition of Powers in Malaysia. We will not be spared if Malaysia face a financial crisis.

Thus, in the spirit of maintaining the legality of contract and rule of law, I would suggest Singapore to impose only a token of fees for the breaking of contractual obligations by the new Malaysian administration.

Goh Meng Seng

TOTD: SMRT: The Instant Failure of Privatization

Thought of the Day - SMRT: The Instant Failure of Privatization

In Economics study, there is always a debate over the pros and cons of "Privatization" of companies providing public goods like public transport.

Companies providing public goods are natural monopolies because they need economies of scale. But the downside is, it tends to be inefficient if it is under government administration. However, this may not be always true.

Natural monopolies are preferred to be under government control because this will prevent them from "exercising their monopolistic power" to "overcharged" and gain abnormal profits through maximization of profits pricing strategy.

Even when natural monopolies are turned into private companies, they will be heavily regulated due to the enormous monopoly power over pricing. This is in the interests of the public.

However, there are other issues when you try to achieve "efficiency" via privatization a monopoly like SMRT. When it becomes a private company, it will shift its priorities from providing reliable public service to making good returns to its private shareholders to sustain its stock market value.

SMRT's privatization exercise in 2000 is a typical example of how such shift of priorities will harm public interests.

After its privatization and public listing on SGX in 2000, SMRT appointed Saw, a lady from DFS and with only skill set in retail to become its CEO. The motive is simple. They wanted to MAXIMIZE profits from the vast potentials of the properties it owns under its MRT stations.

But Saw went beyond extending the retail space in MRT stations. As a person without any Engineering skillsets but with vested interests in getting hefty bonuses by increasing profitability and cutting costs, she started to cut the "Cost Centers" of SMRT operations. Obviously, the Maintenance Division is considered as a huge cost center that doesn't generate sales nor revenue but costly to SMRT!

Just like any ignorant money smelling face, she thought she could cut down expenses in Maintenance by replacing "expensive" but experienced engineers and technicians with "Foreign Talents" who have only some paper qualifications (oh, never mind if these paper certificates are fake or not) but extremely cheap at a fraction of the experienced staffs. All thanks to PAP government opening the Floodgate to "Foreign Talents" so that SMRT could capitalize on this fully!

She thought she could just ignore the need of upgrading or replacement of critical assets of the rail system so to boost the profits of SMRT further!

Well, in the short run, SMRT did "extremely well" in giving out good dividends to shareholders. Dividends jumped more than 5 folds after 2002 in some years.

However, it is just obvious and common sense that such management of a company which is heavily depended on good engineering to keep the CORE business running smoothly cannot be sustainable. Eventually, the rail system broke down. This is also partly due to the "overloading" problem due to the extensive influx of foreigners which inflated our population up to 5 million and beyond!

The MRT system was designed and built for a capacity of 3 million. It is supposed to have 8 cabins (like the Hong Kong MTR) in order to cope with a 5-8 million population.

While it is possible to mitigate the problem of overloading by building extensive by-routing rail network like the NW line, Circle lines and Downtown lines, but the stress on the main line NS and EW lines are still extremely heavy. Furthermore, the increase of the number of lines and stations would also mean the need to expand the maintenance division extensively!

How could SMRT keep the growth of expenditure on its maintenance division comparatively low while the number of lines and stations keep increasing in such a speed? You need time to train and get new engineers and technicians to familiarize with the job scope!

The proportion of money spent in maintenance as compared to Hong Kong MTR is extremely low. Do they really want us to believe that SMRT engineers are magicians or superman and women who could do wonders?

The entire system ended up in the current sorry state just because PAP screws it up with its Money-face-cronyism management strategy. They just anyhow send in someone who know nuts about running an effective and efficient rail system to become CEO just because she might be great in squeezing every penny out of SMRT!

And the most ridiculous thing is that they made the SAME mistake of sending in a replacement from the army who also knows nuts about running a rail system and hope that he could clean up the mess the previous idiot has done!!!???

What is worse than putting people who are totally clueless about the job scope to run an important rail company? And both just took in their own KAKIs from the same UNRELATED industry who similarly, CLUELESS and lack of the relevant skill set and in-depth technical knowledge of rail system to run the departments!

Instead of headhunting people with REAL Experience in running a rail system, we ended up with these mulit-million dollar parasites who are clueless of running a rail system!

This is how Privatization of such an important public goods provider cum monopoly ended up so wrong. I guess this will enter into World Wide Economic and Management Text Books!

On the side note, PAP has always treated GLCs as their "dumping ground" for their "scholars" who have expired their usefulness in SAF or civil service. Maybe it is time for us to rethink whether the extensive Scholar system we have right now, especially the SAF scholarship system, is still useful or relevant. We cannot just dump them anyhow into GLCs which they lack the skillsets and experience to work in!

Goh Meng Seng

TOTD: Technology KISS - Bus Fare System

Thought of the Day - Technology KISS

Recently there is an article and comments which try to mock or belittle Mr Tan Kin Lian in bringing up an idea of improving the cash payment system for bus company.

It is quite typical of Singaporeans, really. They don't really understand the problem and how system could be improved before they tried to belittle others.

Mr Tan had put up a suggestion that all cash payment for bus ride should be fixed at a price (let's say $2 or $3) and that will keep it simple.

I understand where Mr Tan is coming from but not many of his detractors. First thing you got to ask yourself, have you tried to take a bus by paying cash before? If so, do you always get your bus fare right all the time without the need to ask the driver? Most of you will not know how much and some of you would think the fare is the same as the EZ-Link card fare!

This is the problem Mr Tan tries to address. Application of Technology may not be always good. The principle I used to assess whether an application of Technology is excellent, good or bad or flawed is to look at KISS. What is KISS?

KISS is Keep It Simple and Stupid. Technology is supposed to make life better by making the process Simple and Idiot Proof. It would and should probably increase productivity, effectiveness and efficiency. If it doesn't, then the system is flawed. (I have used this to assess the Self-Check-in System implemented in Changi Airport as well. I will touch on this again in my future post)

For example, the EZ-Link card is a good system, though not the Excellent system. Why? Because it does not address the issue of people forgetting to tap while exiting the bus. It does not expand to other usage like replacing the cash card system and for retail purpose. This is only passable with a Grade C as compared to Hong Kong's Octopus Card, in my view.

As for the Cash payment system for the buses here, it is utterly complex and it is neither efficient nor productive. If a commuter does not know his fare, he will ask the driver. This will take a couple of minutes normally. And for this system, the bus company has to employ additional supervisors to do spot checks on buses just because of the relatively fewer commuters who use cash payment!

Hong Kong system is something worth looking at. Although Hong Kong's system does not differentiate fare based on whether you use Octopus Card or cash, or that it will give discount when you change bus or train (this is part of the strength of Singapore's system), but it is simple, neat and clean. The bus fare is based on a stepping down system. When you take the bus from the terminal, it will charge you a flat fare of let's say $7.80. At the next section (maybe a few bus stops away), the fare may drop to $6, etc.

The beauty of this system is that it is KISS. When you board the bus, if you use Octopus Card, you only tap once when you board and bus fare deducted. You don't need to worry on whether you would forget to tap when you alight the bus. If you use cash for payment, there will be LED display panel to show how much you should pay. The bus driver will just make sure you pay the right fare. No tickets needed or given! End of transaction.

Is there any technology applied here? Yes. The Octopus Card system as well as the auto-fare calculation display panel. And you don't need bus company to send people going around to check whether you have paid the fare or not!

Singapore could adopt the part of cash payment system. If you are paying cash, then be prepared to pay more or just equal if you are taking full ride to the terminal end. The fare will be calculated based on maximum distance trip. For example, if you take a bus from the start terminal, you will pay the full fare from Start to End Terminal in cash, regardless of where you will be alighting along the way. The LED display panel will show that fare. Even if you take the bus at mid-point, the fare calculated will be from mid-point to End Terminal, regardless of where you want to alight.

For this system, there will not be a need of issuing tickets nor sending bus conductors to do spot checks (save cost to the bus companies). The commuters will have fare clearly stated to them when they board the bus, don't need to waste time of asking the bus drivers and having the drivers to start figuring out the actual fare.

You do not need to be Techie to use such system like searching through internet or phone apps, just like EZ-Link card. It is basically Simple and Stupid Idiot Proof system.

It improves productivity, effectiveness and efficiency. Quite easy to implement as well.

The main problem with Singaporeans is that they do not observe and learn much things about other systems in other places when they travel. Most Singaporeans would think our system is the best around the world without knowing how fast the other cities had progressed.

The worse part is that they started to attack others who would just comment on the inadequacy of our own system without much thinking on whether there are better ways of improving it

On the sideline:

I have known Kin Lian Tan for quite some time now and I know he is always trying to comment on how things in Singapore can be improved. In fact, his consistency in doing so just demonstrates he genuinely care for Singapore.

Try asking Tony Tan to take the public transport, or even board the bus and see whether he knows how to use that EZ-Link card! Or simply ask the standard questions to all President-wannbe, how much is the bus fare in cash for our system! See how many of them could really answer without googling for it!

Thus, I find it extremely disappointing in some Singaporeans who are so myopic and vindictive, blinded by their own prejudice, emotions and misplaced "loyalty" to see the BIGGER context of things. Other than Tan Kin Lian and maybe Tan Jee Say Tan, had any other President candidates contributed their ideas, time and effort in trying to improve Singapore?

Goh Meng Seng

After Note:

Just for illustration. The current cash payment system is horrendous. For short trips, you will pay almost DOUBLE of the card payment. For my system, it may be more or lesser depends on where you board and alight the bus.

But for long distance travel, you will definitely pay lesser than the current system by paying cash.

TOTD: EZ-Link and Cash Card Redundancy

Thought of the Day

I was driving a friend's car the other day and found the car braked suddenly while I was cruising, my foot wasn't pressing on any pedal. It nearly gave me a heart attack and a RED LED indicator popped up CTBA... and I got worried when the "Temperature indicator" jumped from the usual 34 degree to 37.

I asked my friend why was this so, was the car having some problem. I got a smacking that I am just too OLD generation and didn't know "NEW (CAR) Technology" at all. I was using "old driving method" to drive a NEW HIGH Tech car!

Cruising is a method I learned from my late father to save petrol and this works especially well for manual gear car.

But I learn from Google (yes, please check Google before asking "High Tech" question, else, will get another suaning... :D ) that the "High Tech Car" nowadays will put brake on if it detected no contact of either the brake or accelerator pedal! Or that when the car was travelling at low speed and there is potential accident, it will apply brake on its own! This is to prevent drivers who are too tired from getting accident when they fall asleep with their feet off the pedal!

Wah, I say... but seriously, that's too "intrusive" for my "Old Method - Petrol saving driving"! And that temperature indicator is not about the car temperature but the surrounding temperature! Well, I told my friend I didn't know the street temperature can get as high as 37 and why do we need to know the "outside temperature" when we should be more concerned about the overheating of the car itself?

My friend scolded me, don't use "Old Method" to deal with "New Technology"!

Actually, this makes me thinking for the day. My friend has a point. When New Technology is evolving, we should be mindful to use new methods of operation to deal with it.

One fine example was the bloody redundancy of "Cash Card" and "Ez-link" card. Why would we need TWO cards when we actually could combine them into one-for-all usage Cashless card?

Cash card can be used for purchases but very few people use it because it was cumbersome. It came up with two types, one with Sim the other "Flash" card.. But some carpark can only use one of them! Such redundancy is caused by the "Old Method Mindset" using "New Technology"!

On the other hand, we have a handy EZ-Link card which we could just Tap away but it could not be used for purchases at 7 Eleven or supermarket! And it can only be topped up at the MRT/Bus stations or ATM machines.

Same for Cash Card. When you go to petrol station, they can't just top up the cash card for you but required you to top up at the ATM machine!

What the Heck! What's wrong with these people at LTA and those in charge of "Cashless cards"?

In Hong Kong, one Octopus Card, can do it all! Carparks, Supermarkets, 7 Eleven, Bakery Shops, Bus, MTR... and you can top it up at any 7 eleven shops or OK shops!

Apparently, these High End Natural Aristocrat Scholars sitting up there are only concerned about their "turf" instead of consumers' convenience and services! In fact, both cards evolved because of transportation needs, be it ERP gantries or public transport. LTA should have combined them all in the first place by setting the protocol and standards!

This is the "Old Methods" using "New Technology" stupidity we are seeing in Singapore... and we still want to pride ourselves as "First World High Tech Cashless City"?

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduced the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang and its former employee in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduce the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduce the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

Ineffective MRT Sound Barriers

In land scarce cities like Singapore and Hong Kong, it is inevitable that we will have to build our rail system in extremely close proximity to our housing estates or flats.

It is important that we take a serious view of the noise pollution of the subway/MRT that will cause health problem in the long term.

In 2011 GE, while my team was contesting in Tampines, we have raised the issue of health hazard due to the close proximity of the MRT rail built next to the various HDB flats, especially those in Tampines.

After the GE, SMRT started their so call "noise barrier" experiment but is it effective? Is it the right kinds of Sound barriers needed to reduce the noise from the track sufficiently?

I present my photo essay here on the inadequacy of MRT's "noise barriers"

I have put up an example of how Hong Kong MTR design their Sound barrier as compared to Singapore SMRT.

This photo shows the MTR system in Hong Kong. Arrow A points to the Covered Sound Barrier which it has built when the track is built close to the flat.

Arrow B is the strain station which is build underneath the housing estate, noise completely blocked from above.

This is the most effective Sound barrier.

This is the Sound Barrier built by Singapore SMRT. Observe how close the track is built next to the HDB flat. But the sound barrier is really pathetic.

First, unlike the HK sound barrier, it did not cover the whole track from top to bottom. Secondly, it is not even high enough to be effective! This is because sound will bouce off from the train and it will bounce off towards the flat.

At the very least, the Sound Barrier has to be as high as the train itself! It is a sloppy ineffective design.

 

Look at the whole straetch of rail sitting next to the flats but no Sound Barriers built.

It is a common sight that MRT tracks cut through HDB estates with BOTH sides populated with HDB flats.

We do not know how many such Sound Barriers have been built as they have promised.MRT has just quietly stop mentioning about their ineffective Sound Barrier experiment altogether!

It is surprisng that even those who live in private condominiums suffered the same fate but yet, they didn't make noise or demand for proper Sound Barriers to be built!

The issue of building effective Sound Barriers to MRT tracks as well as Expressway is NOT new. I have raised it several times in this blog since 2004.

Goh Meng Seng

PAP's Elitist Entitlement Mindset and FAILED Meritocracy

Prime Minister Lee has recently lamented about "Singaporeans' entitlement mindset" but I would say that he should take a good look at himself in the mirror as well as his backyard of Elitist cronies.

Through over 50 years of autocratic rule, his party has created a whole system of pseudo Meritocratic Cronism which lacks the very fundamental principle of ACCOUNTABILITY that TRUE Meritocracy is built upon.

Those so call "High Flyer Scholars" along with the various cronies in the whole system has taken the strong foundation which our forefathers have built up, for granted. These people milk and feed upon the wealth of the system with no accountability nor shame with FULL ELITIST ENTITLEMENT mindset. They abuse the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to the max by setting dubious standards which put up pseudo accountability system which most of the time rewards themselves with undeserving salaries and increments. Worse of all, when they indulge in doing whatever they can to meet these KPIs so that they could gain their perks and rewards, instead of doing good to Singaporeans as a whole, they have instead brought more undesirable results to the Nation as a whole.

It started right from the Top Political Leadership. When GDP growth is the single most important KPI used to judge whether the Ministers should get hefty bonuses and salary increment, we end up with the Growth At All Cost strategy which resulted worse quality of life for Singaporeans.

The same applies to many other sectors under PAP Government control. Look at SMRT. The trouble started when Saw just have that singular pursue to increase profit so that she could increase her bonuses and salaries throughout the years of her "glorious years". She went to such an extent that SMRT maintenance has been grossly compromised.

We thought that with her departure, we would get better people to run the system but we were proven wrong by PAP. They sent an Elitist PAPER GENERAL who has ZERO Corporate experience in running a train service to run the show! This elite continue to enjoy increment in his salaries while the train services continue to suffer numerous small and major breakdowns throughout the years! Yet, by using some OUT OF REALITY TOUCH KPI, he tried to justify how the train system and services have "improved"!

He has totally disregard the reality that Singaporeans have experienced on the ground and SMRT just avoid the label "breakdowns" whenever they can by putting up a false front of "delays" to mask away the reality! This is how they tried to GAME the system of KPI!

Similar thing happened to other GLCs like NOL. Another PAPER General was sent there and he continued to enjoy millions of dollars paid every year, with increments, while the company continues to bleed profusely! How? By showing that he is able to "cut cost"! But that doesn't help as the company continues to suffer great losses over the years and eventually, Temasek Holdings is going to sell it off!

It is a total shame that we are going to sell off our Nation's Flagship and key assets. NOL has special iconic value for a nation like Singapore which pride itself to be one of the busiest port in the world! But these Elites have no shame. Why? It is because they only have this Elitist Entitlement Mindset and they could just explain their GROSS incompetency away by hiding behind that KPI system.

PAP must understand that KPI should be a means to an end, to serve the people and Nation, not just a silly ploy for people to get hefty bonuses and salary increments. One may excel in ALL KPIs set but in the end, due to the methodology used in achieving these KPIs, they may create more harm than good to the Nation as a whole!

Most importantly, PAP must understand that no matter how elite you are in paper qualifications, if you do not have the necessary skill sets and knowledge of the business, you will fail! This especially true for top civil servants, government scholars and Army Paper Generals! If PAP continues to abuse the system of GLCs to feed their elitist cronies instead of assigning such important positions to people with real talents and expertise in the various fields, Singapore will be doomed with the fake Meritocracy buried under the dubious KPI system.

Goh Meng Seng

MRT Mess - Failure of Leadership Appointment

The massive breakdown of MRT North South and East West lines has infuriated lots of Singaporeans. While PAP government, LTA and SMRT boast about how much improvement the train system since the new CEO has been appointed, numerous breakdowns big and small have been occurring over the years almost as a monthly or even weekly basis. This is despite of numerous increase of fare and pumping in of taxpayers' money into the train system.

What went wrong with the whole MRT system? We used to pride ourselves to have one of the world's most reliable subway system but now, we are suffering from a highly unreliable train system which is constantly breaking down or suffering from delays.

There are a few dimensions of this problem and one of it is of course the over population which inevitably over burden the system which was initially designed to serve only a population of 3 million. PAP's over ambitious and aggressive population policy has worn down the system faster than it was designed for.

Unfortunately, while the train system was facing such unprecedented over-strain, PAP government has appointed someone who may be good in retail business and well connected to the top powerful elites but has absolutely ZERO experience in running a train system. This woman, Saw Phaik Hwa, was the most disastrous CEO PAP Government has ever appointed and the fundamental root problems of the whole MRT system was nurtured and cultured during her era.

The only thing PAP and Saw had in their minds was to squeeze and milk maximum profits from the whole train system. While Saw was good in turning and transform space in many MRT stations into retail rental space which helps MRT to gain enormous profits out from rentals, but she had at the same time cut down maintenance budget for the train system in relative terms to further squeeze more profits. In fact, her whole management focus was on retail and maximizing profits. This could be seen from the various people she employed whom are her former colleagues or associates in retail business. In doing so, it is inevitable that maintenance standards has dropped drastically with more experienced staffs being replaced by cheaper foreign labour.

Imagine that while we are facing an over strained train system, lesser resources were channeled to maintenance services. This further aggravated the situation and it is only a matter of time the whole system will break down.

In short, MRT under Saw, with PAP blessing and approval, has gone overdrive to milk the whole MRT system in the expense of proper maintenance needs. This single minded pursue of profit maximization compromised safety and reliability of the whole train system.  

Thus, when MRT has its first major breakdown, all blames are pointed to Saw. Thus, Saw resigned and the rest is history.

When we thought that with the departure of Saw, PAP government would have learned their lesson and take public transport reliability as their top priority. In view of the challenging time SMRT was facing back in 2012, PAP government should have looked for somebody who really has the relevant experience in running a subway system to look into the teething technical maintenance problems but it failed in doing so.

Instead, PAP government put a formal Army Lieutenant General Desmond Quek who also has absolutely Zero experience in running a train system to be SMRT CEO. 

While the new CEO is good at boasting about how much improvement the train system is after he took over as CEO and increasing his own salary disproportionately to the growth of SMRT earnings, but by the hard true records shown on the list above, we are still facing INCREASING disruptions and annoying breakdowns of the train system! This is a fact and the problem may become worse when more MRT train services and lines are added into the whole system.

What Desmond Quek is seen to be good so far, is to constantly ask for more fare increment and injection of funds by the Government (LTA) while he continues to increase his million dollar salary.


Thus we can see the fundamental problem of MRT system very clearly. While there are external factors like explosion of population which causes the train system to wear out faster than it is designed for, the real fundamental problem is GREED in profit maximization and the totally unprofessional appointment and management of the top leadership by their own kakis.

SMRT is an important public entity to ensure our economic efficiency can be maintained with efficient and reliable mass public transport system. It should not become an entity for PAP government to "reward" their own people or for purely self serving profiteering agenda. Neither should it be a dumping ground for retired general with absolutely zero experiences in running such important public train transport system.

SMRT is not just any other company which you could just manage with your mouth or shifting resources here and there. It needs people who really understand the whole technical aspects of the train system and its operations to manage it effectively. No matter how smart you are or what a scholar you are or how good you are in maximizing profits, you will need to get the fundamentals right Reliability of the whole train system will affect the whole country's economic efficiency. This should not be taken too lightly

Up till now, from Saw to Quek,the results speak louder than anything else: they have BOTH FAILED in running SMRT effectively, FAILED to maintain its technical reliability despite of the fact that they were increasing their own salaries over their tenure.

No matter how much tax payers money PAP is willing to throw into this system, as long as they do not have the right person who knows the whole train system inside out, they are not going to get any reliable results out of such massive injection of funds.

Desmond Quek should be replaced immediately by someone who really have the wealth of professional experiences in running such a subway system so that the right talent and focus could be used to solve the current problems. Else, Singaporeans will have to continue to expect regular train break downs and disruptions as part and parcel of their lives.

Goh Meng Seng

PAP's "Affordable Demon"

It is really getting absurd everyday with PAP and its cronies to chant the Devilish Word "Affordable".

For every thing PAP wants to increase prices in order to feed its army of cronies of million dollar salary, they do not need to JUSTIFY the need to increase the prices but just chant, "It is affordable to Singaporeans!" Does it mean that as long as you can afford, it is perfectly alright for PAP to squeeze every bits from you by raising prices?


Whether it is HDB flats (MBT famous rant about affordability) or electricity tariffs or basic needs like public transport fares, the only thing they need to do is to shout it all out loud, "Don't be stingy! You can afford the price increase! It is AFFORDABLE to you!".

Whenever you have salary increase (true or false or just some imagination), they will shout it out loud," Hey you have 4% increase in salary! We just increase 2.8%!", never mind about how many percentage increase in their own CEO or top management remuneration and the profit increase they enjoy despite of POOR SERVICE Quality (historical high MRT breakdown) and now, drastic decrease in cost due to drop in oil prices. What they want to do is to MAKE SURE whatever you have earned, MUST be SQUEEZED out from you eventually!

Never mind if this claim of 4% increase in salary is SKEWED as this include the OBSCENE increase in salaries like those Top management in these public transport companies! The overall salary increase may be 4% but what about the salary increase of those who take public transport? Do they enjoy as much as 4% increase in their salaries?

Never mind about such things as they are not interested in justifying their GREED but only throw the "Affordable Demon" at everybody.

That is the sad state of affairs in Singapore. PTC is all filled up with PAP and its cronies, worse, the representatives from the transport companies. What checks and balances are there, except the Affordable Demon guarding the interests of these greedy fat pigs?

My dear fellow Singaporeans, if you do not want to be suck dry of every drops of your blood, you will have to do something about it when you go to the polls in next GE. Think before you vote. And be warned. The 10% GST is coming and they will release their Affordable Demon at you again.

Goh Meng Seng

PAP's Core Value --- Greed

Greed has no boundary. Oil prices dropped by 40% since June this year but look what Singaporeans get:

1) Pathetic "token" decrease of pump prices by the cartel and neither CASE nor PAP government say anything or do anything about it.

2) Well, as if that is not enough, electricity tariff controlled by government didn't decrease accordingly as well, giving crap reason that our power station run on gas, not oil. But the last time we heard when oil price increased and gas price was stagnant, they increase the electricity tariff anyway, giving crap reason that the gas price is pegged and hedged to oil prices! Win liao lor!

3) As if all these are not enough to squeeze every bits from Singaporeans, now they want to increase public transport fares! Last time they increase fares citing increasing fuel cost due to high oil prices but now, when oil prices plunge, they give other excuses to increase fare despite having very healthy and high profits...

Guess it is not difficult for anyone to conclude that Greed is PAP's core value from all these happenings.

Goh Meng Seng

Half Way Bell Check on SG Political Parties - PAP Part I

This is approximately the MID Term point of the present parliamentary term if you believe the next General Election will be held in 2015.

Before I start to write this article, there are three interesting Political News and happening in Singapore:

1) One of the most promising political star in SDP, Dr Vincent Wijeysingha has call it a quit over LGBT issues.

2) PAP has announced its latest promotion of ministers. Chan Chun Sing has been promoted while Tan Chuan Jin has unexpectedly missed out of this promotion exercise.

3) WP has announced the new co-option of three members into its CEC. One of them was a candidate in GE 2011 while the other two are relatively new "elites". One of them is a lawyer while the other is an Associate Professor lecturing in NUS.

4) For NSP, after half a year of neglect of their website (yes, no updates, not even on CEC information), they have started to act. However, some curious things I have observed. The Secretary General Hazel is missing in action for all NSP recent activities, so is her husband Tony Tan. Even for important press statement, it was issued by Nicole Seah, the second aassistant secretary, not Hazel. On the other hand, Apparently, the newly co-opted CEC member cum Head of Media Team is missing from the CEC list as well.

These are the four main political parties (sorry for the exclusion of the others, including SPP, DPP and others) that I am going to examine at this Half Way Point.

Post-LKY ERA


The context of present situations is Post-LKY ERA. What will happen or how things will develop with the final phase of POST-LKY ERA in the making? It is clear by the day that the days that Singapore will live without the physical presence of LKY will come soon. Transitions into such era or even into change of ruling power have been discussed openly and intensely recently. The fundamental questions are:

1) Will PAP break with the passing of LKY?
2) Will PAP lose power after LKY pass on?
3) How will the political landscape change with the passing of LKY?

LKY has stepped down right after GE2011 along with Goh Chok Tong. There are common whispers that he did it in order to use his last influence to clear out the main internal challenge posed by the "GCT Camp" to his son's rule. This is just like old kungfu show that the old master uses his last political breathe to save his disciple from the great opponent, killing both the master and the opponent altogether.

The recent promotion exercise is also seen as a bid to look for someone "acceptable" by the Lee camp to take over as Prime Minister once the present PM Lee steps down. Apparently, Chan Chun Sing and Heng Swee Kiat are the front runners while some people think that Lawrence Wong may be the third contender.

Many people say that Heng Swee Kiat is "intelligent" guy and he should be the PM. But I beg to differ. LKY wasn't the smartest (as compared to Dr Goh Keng Swee) among his peers back in the 1960s, neither was he the most charismatic (as compared to Lim Ching Song) but he became the PM. Leadership cannot be built upon intelligence alone. Dr Goh Keng Swee might be the smartest guy among his peers but he lacked the charisma, especially public speaking skills, to be Prime Minister. Intelligence alone is only a necessary but insufficient condition for Prime Minister-ship. As for Chan Chun Sing, I cannot imagine us, Singapore, to have a Kee Chiu General to be our Prime Minister.

In fact, I think Tan Chuan Jin, who has been left out of promotion this time round, has the few critical criteria to become the next Prime Minister. He is a "thinking" minister who can make amends to his positions from time to time to suit changes in various situations. Although it is unfortunate that he has to face a couple of crisis in these couple of years which he may not have handled exceptionally well, but from my observations, he can make necessary reflections and adjustments quite responsively instead of sticking to stagnant stance like former MND Mah BT who kept insisting on his HDB pricing strategy and policy even though many people have shown him that his HDB policy is really screwed.

But nevertheless, whoever tries to become the next Prime Minister under PAP will definitely find himself in the worst position in history. PAP is after all, a "sunset party" and what it has relied heavily upon, the total monopoly of power and assurance of winning elections on every seats have diminished. It will find itself more and more difficult to recruit talented people to join them because they can no longer fulfill their promise easily as there will no longer be a "sure win" elections even under GRC system.

In view of that, it would naturally be a regression down hill development for PAP into mediocrity as it can only attract second or even third rate candidates in subsequent GE. 

PAP: Epoch Change? 

Apart from such development, on numerous occasions, PAP leaders have reiterated that they have changed and will make efforts to revamp their various policies. Most important of all, they are saying they will listen, starting with "National Conversation".

The government controlled (yes, it is a direct physical control via Press Act, giving government management ownership and huge voting rights) SPH and Main Stream Media (MSM) have hailed PM Lee's recent policy announcements made in his National Day Rally as "Epoch" changes made but is that really so?

Well, to continue to work towards 6.9 million population is anything but Epoch change. Having just a tiny tweak to their multi-million dollar ministerial salaries to yet, multi-million dollar ministerial salaries isn't really big change at all.


All these are more like Public Relations exercise rather than any serious game changer kind of policy shifts. Look, calling their tweaks in healthcare policy as "Universal Healthcare Insurance" scheme is just a bad attempt to hoodwink Singaporeans. Giving more HDB grants doesn't change the fact that their pricing mechanism is the key primary problem of spiral prices that have made asset inflation out of tune with normal inflation and salary increments for the middle-lower class. 


The bare truth is, Singaporeans continue to face the fundamental problems caused by PAP's reckless population planning which causes runaway asset inflation, runaway healthcare cost coupled with inadequate hospital beds, break down in public transport system especially for MRT and not to mention the constant flooding due to over-urbanization and Marina Barrage which was created to cope with higher water demand.

Most importantly, apart from the horrendous 6.9m population policy, their tweaks at Housing policy, healthcare and transport policies aren't exactly anything revolutionary at all.

This is especially true for HDB housing policy. Minister Khaw BW has tried his very best to deliver his promise of delivering 13,000 flats or so for this year but what he did not realize that housing problem is a long term stablizing problem. First and foremost, we need a total revamp of the wrong concept of taking HDB flats as an "investment". HDB is a home, not an investment. Secondly, we must make sure that HDB price inflation should not be higher than income increment trend. This will need a total revamp of the pricing mechanism. Third most important point is that HDB land pricing should not be used as a forever input into our Reserves. There is absolutely no reasons to pursue an indefinite growth in Reserves.

Has PAP turned the tide?

How successful is PAP in turning adverse public opinion against it? Some people opined that although PAP didn't really make great changes in these key areas but it has managed to convince and woo middle ground skeptics. I am not so sure that the middle ground could be so easily woo over.

This is especially so when PAP's crisis management skills are rather bad. This is especially so when the HAZE broke out, they couldn't even get their logistics right to deliver the masks on time as promised. Not to say about the weather warning mechanism is totally out of date and serve no purpose in safeguarding citizens' lives. Not for the HAZE warning system, neither for heavy rain and flood warning system.


If PAP cannot get both immediate crisis management, governance and future forward looking policy direction right, I am afraid that it has started to roll down the slippery slope of mediocrity. Pure lack of competency and Vision for the future will be PAP's undoing for the next GE. PAP used to provide basic fundamental competency at daily management and administration of the various systems in Singapore. At least, train doesn't break down that often, flooding doesn't occur that often as well, neither do we have constant crunch on hospital beds as well as public buses and train. I am afraid that all these basic competency has been replaced by complacency.

PAP has never been good at crisis management. I remember during the crisis of Silk Air 185 crash incident back in 1997, the then Transport Minister Mah BT was so stressed up that he actually blew his top on reporters. Now that we have all sorts of small and big crisis from time to time, ministers just acted in a reactive manner. They are just treating problems in isolation instead of taking a more holistic approach. In Chinese, we call that "脚痛医脚，头痛医头“, literally mean when the leg pain, just treat the leg, headache, just treat the head. It seems that their ability of "Helicopter View" has crashed landed.

I suspect PAP has got its priorities all wrong right from the top. Growth at all cost is still the master guiding principle. The push for 6.9m population plan is one glaring example of such "strategic thinking".

To make matter worse for PAP, its GOLDEN MANTRA "Whiter than White" has been put in serious doubt by various incidents. Integrity and Morality are something MORE than legality. What seems to be "legal" may not mean it is done with Morality and Integrity intact. 

Apart from the many big and small scandals on TOP civil servants taking bribes, the AIM saga makes PAP looks even worse, putting doubts aimed directly at its core value of "Whiter than White". Well, some may even put Michael Palmer saga as part of this deterioration and erosion of Core Value of PAP but we should not forget what happens to WP's YSL saga as well.

The most important implication of these scandals is directed at the Core Management Principle of PAP : High Pay = Eliminate Corruptions. Well, some may view that as "legalized corruptions" but it doesn't matter now. It would also mean that alternative system or methods should be explored to upkeep a clean system.

It simply means that we can no longer depend on an authoritarian system which pays its political appointees and civil servants high pay to ensure clean governance. The CORE Values of Democracy, Separation of POWERS should be established to enhance checks and balances on the various organs of governance to enhance clean management.

Apart from that, the concept of "conflict of interests" should be instilled and boundaries of good practices should be established. Due to the authoritarian nature of PAP's rule, the concept of "conflict of interests" has never been institutionalized as part of our Rule of Law, if any. With the empowerment of Internet Era, I think increasing demands on transparency, accountability and good governance will naturally raise expectation on what constitutes "Rule of Law" and "good management practices". But it seems that both PAP and WP failed to realize or understand such a shift on popular expectations.

On the other hand, PAP seems to be confused by its own promise of "light touch" approach to public opinions expressed on the internet by throwing spanners, threats of law suits, criminal persecution etc etc on bloggers, cartoonists and activists at large. It would be seen in a very bad contrasting light whereby PAP is lax towards its own morality and integrity while exercising draconian precision attacks on little errors made by citizens. In Chinese, this amount to "宽己严人", i.e. strict towards others while lax towards its own kind.

Conclusion

If PAP is determined to regain some ground it has lost, it should seriously reflect upon itself on all these grounds:

1) Readjustment to their Philosophy and Ideology of Governance, thus really revamp their various policies towards the new philosophical or ideological directions.

2) Improve their competency at governance, including crisis management.

3) There is a serious need to rethink on the issues of Integrity, Morality, Transparency, Accountability and Good Practices. It would mean to institutionalize Separation of Powers and strengthen the Rule of Law by putting more emphasis on issues of Conflict of Interests.

4) Whether PAP likes it or not, the internet or the New Media has become the important Fourth Institution of emerging Democracy in Singapore and it will replace PAP's controlled MSM totally if PAP still have any fantasy about using MSM as its propaganda tool or mouth piece. If PAP chose to revert to its old dictatorial ways of dealing with dissenting voices, it would end up losing more seats and power even more rapidly than it could imagine. It will have to relearn Public Relationship and Media management instead of relying on obedient, compliant media, editors and reporters to save them from public embarrassment. 

Last but not least, I give PAP an E as a ruling party which failed to evolve and adapt to the new reality on the ground as well as the internet.

Goh Meng Seng

  

Budget 2013 Point 1 - Car Loan Policy & COE Prices

I was pretty puzzled by the new measures made by PAP government with regards to the car loan policy. I couldn't really figure out exactly what they are trying to achieve.

COE prices have increased recently due to a curb on the number of COE issued. This is basically due to the corrective measures LTA has made due to the excessive number of COE issued prior to 2012. On the other hand, the demand on COE has increased due to an expanding population.

There must be an understanding that just like population, we cannot be expanding on the number of vehicles on the road forever. The primary concept of COE is to control the total number of vehicles on the road rather on the control of the prices. Is COE the best tool to control the number of vehicles on the road? It is supposedly to be so but there are other possibilities as well.

Nevertheless, if you want to control the number of COE issued, you will not be able to control the prices. That's basic economics. However, is COE bidding system efficient? I have been talking about pay-as-you-bid system vs the present system even since 1993. I shall not repeat on this again because apparently PAP won't listen and only interested in the revenue generated by this piece of paper.

I suspect PAP's recent measures on the restriction on the loans are aimed at curbing the demand of cars by the population. But look at the overall impact you will realize that this will further create a great divide between the rich and the middle-lower class.

Some may consider vehicles as "luxurious" goods and only those with money should buy it. I do not think so. Transportation needs via own vehicle is not merely "luxurious" goods like "jewelery" but may be basic needs for many people like salesman. This is especially so when our public transport system is really far from being efficient in such a small city state.

Sometimes you may wonder whether the allocation model for car ownership really makes sense when the rich could own not only one or two cars but a whole fleet of 5 to 10 within a small household while those middle lower class salesman who need their own transport vehicles are deprived of it.

Second hand car market is the only possible means for these people to fulfill their transportation needs. However, the recent measures put up by PAP government applies across the board! Why? If the aim is to reduce COE prices by curbing demand on new vehicles, why would the loan measures apply to the second hand market as well? Second hand car market is the "poor middle class people" market and most likely many people with various needs will not be able to meet the stringent loan restrictions.

Such measures are totally irrational and will further widen the wealth divide between the rich and the middle-lower class. You will see more and more rich families owning more cars which they don't really need (eg. kept in the garage most of the time) while those with real needs are deprived of it.

Curbing demand on the second hand car market really serve no purpose on the two parameters: Total number of Cars and prices of COE.... unless the PAP government is thinking of crashing the second hand car market so that more people will scrap their old car instead of selling off at second hand car market. It is only then they could increase the supply of COEs to the market and reduce prices...but wait, who will benefit? The rich!

We will end up with a totally skewed market situation where all resources will be allocated to the rich while the middle-lower class who may have even MORE VALID need of car ownership will be deprived. Such scarce resource allocation situation will only further inefficiency as well as social tension and instability due to wealth and income inequality; not only in terms of monetary terms but totally lopsided resource allocation that resulted in wastage.

PAP government is not doing anything good by applying such measures across the board. Second hand car market is the indirect means of "fair" resource allocation to the middle class who can't compete with the rich on COE bidding. I would suggest that loan requirement should be set at a max of 80% instead of 50% for second hand car market. At the very least, this will give the middle class a chance to meet their needs instead of squeezing them out of car ownership totally.

There are other issues about the COE and car ownership allocation but I would not want to comment on these for the moment. Let out MPs in parliament a chance to come up with their views, right? :)

Goh Meng Seng