$0.9B SMRT scandal?

[Unrepented]

Which company calculatse toll charges of users, that is just sufficient for maintenance, and not include cost recovery for the building of the infrastructure?

you can actually find the contract details on the web... sorry can't remember where it is..

if I remember correctly:

1) under the old contract (ie NS, EW line)...
- infrastructures belong to LTA under the care of SMRT
- rolling stocks (ie trains) belong to SMRT
- SMRT is to maintain everything to certain operational standard

2) under the newer contract (ie circle line... NE?)
- infrastructures and rolling stocks belong to LTA
- LTA is to ensure proper maintenance
- SMRT is to pay LTA a certain sum of money specified in the contract for the purpose of maintenance

 

[mojito]

Had the PAP govt not subsidised SMRT, the consumer would have to pay for the upgrading of the tracks thru increasing fares sir.

The government could increase corporate taxes, levies and income tax for the highest earners. It doesn't always have to come from commuters.

Be creative.

 

[deepblue0911]

Please allow me to help Kinana on this. Because SMRTee is a listed company, therefore any profits belongs solely to the shareholders of the company. Tell me which listed company in sgx perform social services to such an extend as you require?

I shouldn't say upgrade tracks. Tracks are infrastructure and should be borne by LTA.

Subway system is an important part of our transportation network and its effectiveness and efficiency affects lives of Singaporeans to a large extent. Parts of the profits generated by SMRT should go back to improve services.

If I'm not mistaken, this is the case with the New York subway system, where the profits generated are shared with the City and there is (at least was) a guarantee on a fixed (low) fare so that commuters can benefit.

Nobody will argue against SMRT making profits. But as an important national transportation means, it has a far more important role than a profit-generating company answerable only to shareholders.

 

[ckmpd]

Nobody will argue against SMRT making profits. But as an important national transportation means, it has a far more important role than a profit-generating company answerable only to shareholders.

Yes, certain strategic businesses shd not be corporatised. Maybe it's timely for the SG govt to consider re-nationalising MRT, power generation, water supply.

 

[deepblue0911]

Yes, certain strategic businesses shd not be corporatised. Maybe it's timely for the SG govt to consider re-nationalising MRT, power generation, water supply.

I'm sure there're pros and cons to privatisation and nationalisation. What I'm hoping is for the govt (not PAP) to consider carefully what's in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans. I accept that there may be short-term discomfort. But we also need to see immediate efforts to relieve acute problems. Surely that's not too much to ask.

 

[deepblue0911]

I agree with what you said. The pap must be objective and truly work for the well being of all Singaporeans. The pap must go beyond working for themselves and their own people. MRT was built with tax payers money but given to SMRT free to run on profit basis. The main beneficiaries are TH and SMRT shareholders at the expense of MRT travelling singaporeans. Profits and dividends are given to SMRT management and shareholders. Singapore tax payers paid fort he infrastructure and SG mrt commuters paid high tickets prices and bear with congestion, mrt breakdowns, etc.

The pap has been negligent in running the mrt by appointing their own unqualified people to run and messed up our mrt

I saw a lot criticisms against the former CEO for screwing up SMRT. I'm curious in who sanctioned her appointment in the first place? Clearly when they brought her in from DFS, her experience in retail must have been a priced asset. In all fairness, the retail at MRT stations has become really good. But what's the use of great retail experience when the trains won't work?

If there's someone who deserved equal if not more criticisms, it should be the people who brought her in. Quite clearly an error of judgement in the appointment.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Had the PAP govt not subsidised SMRT, the consumer would have to pay for the upgrading of the tracks thru increasing fares sir.

The fact that SMRT is effectively a monopoly means that commuters (commuters and not consumers, you retarded gay dog!) have been overpaying all these years. What the SMRT fiasco has shown is that the PAPpies and their form of cronyism politics and elitism has led to a disaster where ever public services are accorded to the masses.

 

[scroobal]

2 outstanding points bro. Clearly you can see the issue thru the haze that this countries leadership has created. You go to a hospital for its medical care and expertise. One does not visit a hospital because it it has nice rooms and a shop that sells good chocolates.

In all fairness, the retail at MRT stations has become really good. But what's the use of great retail experience when the trains won't work?

If there's someone who deserved equal if not more criticisms, it should be the people who brought her in. Quite clearly an error of judgement in the appointment.

 

[virus]

A week has passed and there are still no details on the co-sharing arrangement of the costs. SMRT Corp is a listed company that pays dividends to its shareholders. Though owned by Temasek in the main, its construct is that of a private entity. It is also a private company that has been proud to publicise its profit making prowess and the dividends it has delivered to shareholders until the recent spate of incidents over the last few months.

When it was listed, the financial arrangements placed the responsibility of infrastructure on LTA and the operating assets on SMRT Corp. In 2010, there was change in arrangements and the details are not clear.

The Govt has a duty to reveal in detail the co-sharing of costs arrangement on the $0.9B that is scheduled to be spent over 8 years. More importantly it has to explain the mechanics and rationale for this construct and the benefits it provides to taxpayers. It needs to make it clear that SMRT is not enjoying subsidies or grants from the State while its shareholders are getting dividends.

The big picture is the continous conflict of interest when the PM's wife is the Head of Temasek and holds the majority share in SMRT Corp. Is the cost-sharing arrangement making her look good. Is the State propping up the share value of SMRT Corp.

Thus far the listing of SMRT Corp ostensibly to gain from the well known values of privatisation does not make sense if the State is actually carrying this baby for all intents and purposes.

It is also odd that it was SMRT Corp that released the co-funding arrangement and not the Govt. Was it to avoid the elephant in the room which is the conitnuing political damage incurred by the husband from the claws that do not hold to passengers engaged in skaywalking with the grocery bags in both hands.

Lastly, time for Parliament to have good hard look at Temasek and its present management. SIA under the old regime became the worlds most profitable airline with a pint sized civil servant helming it. It did not come back to seek help from the state coffers after the initial seed funding. Its main operational costs is also engineering related and it is also in the transport sector. How did it pay for "renewal and replacement". Its operatings assets ie planes and equipment need to be serviced and replaced. Where did the funds come from? Was cost co-sharing in play or needed? Did the passengers engage in skywalking.

no worries about how long it will take.. just worry how much it will cost. and they will slap you with any of the following excuses

a/ it has been a long time since they last adjusted to meet increasing cost, even though they r one of the main contributor of increased cost of living.

b/ to improve the quality of transport whatever it meant, may be it mean disruption will be shorter but more.

c/ the shareholders must not suffer.

 

[scroobal]

Latest update:

Its appears that SMRT thru the influential parent body is pressuring LTA to commit. Thats is why LTA or the Govt were not present at the press conference. This is what happens when the boss of the govt and boss of a private entity share the same bedroom.

Whether true or not is not issue. The fact that it is conflict of interest is sufficent enough to cause concern. Lui only recently became a confirmed Minister. In his mind and as a politician, he would know which side of his bread is buttered. No matter how saintly he thinks he is, the fact that his boss shares the same bedroom with someone whose company has made commitment via a press conference in a nilateral manner is a concern. He might have agreed in principal, but having a unilateral press conference shows the tail is wagging the dog.

GCT legacy will not only be considered as the seat warmer but he also allowed the wife to be placed in position that does no good to the country. He himself used the word "awkward" to describe her appointment. Both he and Dhanabalan will have the carry this can until the day they die.

Core principles should never be compromised. Avoiding conflict of interest is a primary and core principle of control and there are very few. So it not that hard to abide and trust these core values. Was it worth it. Will the country collapse if she was not appointed. If this lady has any ounce of self respect, she should leave the GLCs, and start her own business and let the world judge her business acumen.

 

[deepblue0911]

2 outstanding points bro. Clearly you can see the issue thru the haze that this countries leadership has created. You go to a hospital for its medical care and expertise. One does not visit a hospital because it it has nice rooms and a shop that sells good chocolates.

TY Scroobal Sir.

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

The best is still to fully liberalise the system Let SMRT charge consumers what they want and stop all subsidies from the govt

Yes, i fully agreed with you for once, but i m afraid your beloved PAP will not allow that to happen.

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

You really are intelligent. Keep up the good work. More points for you.

Wow! You have found yourself a suck cock buddy!

Now you can say goodbye to your seat less bicycle liao!

 

[kukubird58]

hahaha....for someone who protrays himself as insightful.....the remarks cumming from him is shockingly shallow.....
keep harping on something like it was some secret that we all don't know......and always barking the wrong trees.....
whether the CEO of temasick and the pm sleeps in the same bedroom is a moot point.....
for any CEO worth his/her salt, i would expect the CEO to safeguard the company's interest at all time.
what smrt is doing is exacty that....posturing to safeguard the company's interest as far as possible...
obviously the prataman does not know such thing as posturing in the commercial world......lol.

 

[Conqueror]

Will Not Allow It To Happen ?

Yes, i fully agreed with you for once, but i m afraid your beloved PAP will not allow that to happen.

Hahahaha ! You seems to know the devil well enough. What will the rest of you think ?

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

Re: Will Not Allow It To Happen ?

Hahahaha ! You seems to know the devil well enough. What will the rest of you think ?

You know what? Maybe Ah Leong has been sucking his cock some many times in this thread alone that his brain went blank and start to sprout nonsenses.

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

Re: Will Not Allow It To Happen ?

Hahahaha ! You seems to know the devil well enough. What will the rest of you think ?

You know what? Maybe Ah Leong has been sucking his cock some many times in this thread alone that his brain went blank and start to sprout nonsenses.

 

[Zombie]

whether the CEO of temasick and the pm sleeps in the same bedroom is a moot point.....
for any CEO worth his/her salt, i would expect the CEO to safeguard the company's interest at all time.
what smrt is doing is exacty that....posturing to safeguard the company's interest as far as possible...

it's pm (and thus his team) facing the question of coi, not ceo of th nor smrt

 

[kukubird58]

it's pm (and thus his team) facing the question of coi, not ceo of th nor smrt

hahaha...not sure what you mean but the prataman was talking about press conference on cost sharing called by smrt....not the coi.

 

[Zombie]

but the prataman was talking about press conference on cost sharing called by smrt....

how is it called "cost-sharing".......if it is with a company so that this company can make a higher profit, while the govt is making a loss?

cost-transfer would be the correct term..