PAP Govt : We can’t run public transport

[makapaaa]

Coffeeshop Chit Chat - PAP Govt : We can’t run public transport

<TBODY>
</TBODY>

From: kojakbt_89_ <NOBR></NOBR> 8:35 am To: ALL <NOBR></NOBR> (1 of 1) <TBODY> </TBODY> 55054.1 [h=2]PAP Govt : We can’t run public transport efficiently[/h]August 5th, 2011 | Author: Contributions | Edit Minister Liu and PAP MP, Josephine Teo, have recently said that a govt operated public transport system based on cost recovery, as proposed by the Workers’ Party, will result in inefficiencies that “will lead to higher costs, which will be borne by commuters, as well as a stagnation of service standards”[Link]. While there are many reasons to believe that govts can run public transport system well since there so many good examples, you better believe Minister Liu when he says he can’t do it despite the PAP telling us they are an efficient govt – if he says the PAP govt can’t operate the MRT more efficiently than Saw Phaik Hwa who had no prior experience running a transport company before she joined SMRT, you have to accept it. You cannot count on a solution to our transport system that depends on the PAP govt proving itself wrong. Here is an interesting article: Why Taipei’s MRT trumps Singapore’s you should read. It compares the MRT systems of both countries. The Taipei MRT implemented safety doors for “above ground” stations years ago. It already has the “advanced”| signalling system that SMRT is implementing to allow greater frequency of trains to stations. It is run by the Taipei City Govt. Yes, it makes less profits than the SMRT but it delivers higher service quality. SMRT (+SBS Transit) which is profit oriented will hold back investments to improve service quality because it is a monopoly - passengers don’t have other cost effective option. Singaporeans are unhappy with the public transport system. The PAP govt has to find a way forward to up service quality to improve the quality of lives of Singaporeans while keeping the cost to commuters down – the income gap and stagnant wages among a large segment of the populace makes fare increase very unpopular as it is seen as an exercise to maintain the profitability of these companies. I would even go further than the Workers’ Party’s ”cost recovery” model. If you can drastically improve the quality of life of Singaporeans by accepting some operational losses that can be recovered by using the massive gains in the COE system, you can create much more “net happiness” and lower the demand for cars…an aspiration that cannot be met for most families in Singapore. While such schemes using cross-subsidies violate PAP’s ideology, the large income gap and stagnant wages breaks many of PAP’s “self-reliant pay for yourself” schemes. The PAP has to overcome its ideological constraints to begin solving problems faced by Singaporeans otherwise they will face greater uncertainty in the next elections. . Lucky Tan <TBODY> </TBODY>

<TBODY>
</TBODY>

 

[myfoot123]

Disclose the shareholders in full detail and its board of directors. From there we know whether this government is running the public transport company at huge profit and dividends paid to themselves (indirectly).:oIo:

 

[groober2011]

in other words, the government is inefficient. They cannot run the power stations so they sold it away too. What else can they sell? Why not the water utilities and the garbage disposal too? Maybe even sell the entire country to a private corporation and simply collect the proceeds....sheesh.

 

[no_faith]

Maybe even sell the entire country to a private corporation and simply collect the proceeds....sheesh.

it might happen?

if govt cant run public transport den why we need a transport minister? to collect paycheque only?

 

[red amoeba]

huh?? then they run SIA? SIA not a form of public transport?

 

[tommylwc]

Disclose the shareholders in full detail and its board of directors. From there we know whether this government is running the public transport company at huge profit and dividends paid to themselves (indirectly).:oIo:

You mean this: http://www.sbstransit.com.sg/about/bod.aspx
and this: http://www.smrt.com.sg/about_us/board.asp

If you notice, most if not all are associated with the government at some point of their careers.
That is why our pm says "But we have to allow the transport companies to break even and to make reasonable profits," he noted.

 

[johnny333]

huh?? then they run SIA? SIA not a form of public transport?

SIA is the old mans favourite mode of transport lah. You won't see him flying MAS

When you think about it, lesser mortals are paying higher tix prices to subsidise LKY & FTs to fly SIA

 

[Cestbon]

Disclose the shareholders in full detail and its board of directors. From there we know whether this government is running the public transport company at huge profit and dividends paid to themselves (indirectly).:oIo:

Agree. Many board director are PAP member.
Singapore can run public transport. We can use CPF money to fund the MRT and bus on a interest rate 2.6~3% . Indirectly will also investing CPF/public money on safe investment.
Cut the member director. Make the public transport account transparent. Publish it in internet eg. Salary of top 100 in the company, salary range of the manager,engineer,technician,driver,cleaner.............
Cost of the MRT,bus where do they manufacturer and brand.
Singapore we have many certify account professional and can check on line.
But public transport and PAP will not dare to publish the info to all people to see.
How come HK public transport are cheaper than Singapore and also more efficient. Hope next Parliament some MP will ask this question. We not asking to compare China/Japan/US just need to compare Hong Kong standard living quite same but they use less FT still can manage a cheaper cost and better than SMRT.

 

[streetsmart73]

in other words, the government is inefficient. They cannot run the power stations so they sold it away too. What else can they sell? Why not the water utilities and the garbage disposal too? Maybe even sell the entire country to a private corporation and simply collect the proceeds....sheesh.

hi there


1. thereafter, employed a ft to run the country as pm.
2. i recommend bill clinton who is cheaper than pinketon or any sheep.
3. bill does deliver!