SBS Transit, SMRT submit applications for fare adjustment
-
3Boys:
Giam has got it wrong. Very high sounding ideals, but very little practical suggestion as how to get there. It's easy to say, 'NTC will benefit, we expect no less', but can they deliver in reality?? Show me, I say.
If the policymakers don't adopt an alternative solution... e.g. NTC... how to show?
Below is Giam's response to Lui's rebuttal on their proposal for NTC...
http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20110719-289947.html
\"As a result of such profit-oriented behaviour, the two PTOs’ high returns have been enjoyed by their shareholders. For example, SMRT has paid out close to 80 per cent of its net income in recent years. These generous dividends could instead have been used to provide better services or reduced fares. However, it is not possible for publicly-listed firms to do this, as their obligations are to their shareholders.
...
...
...
To achieve these outcomes, the government should set stringent key performance indicators (KPIs) for the NTC. These KPIs could include:
Affordability of fares to ordinary Singaporeans
Containment of costs;
On-time bus and train performance;
Customer satisfaction ratings (through independent surveys);
Percentage of public transport ridership;
Productivity improvements and innovation.
...
To incentivise their performance, the bonuses and pay increases of NTC executives should be pegged to the achievement of such KPIs...\"
I may not agree wholeheartedly to what Giam or his party is advocating... but it's still good to have someone keeping our ministers on their toes. -
ksi:
They did liberalise COE for a while, and guess what happened?
Another case in point...COE system was supposed to be demolised after ERP came...has it been the case? Another contribution to \"obscene\" excesses. I don't think we are quipping about having huge surpluses in the budget but at whose expense? :scratchhead: And if COE is high, public transport is a highly essential necessity.
We should get even more draconian about car ownership and usage, in my opinion, like many European cities. But yes, public transport needs to improve commensurately. -
Daddy
Define 'affordability of fares' - $1 per day? $2 per day? Free??
Affordability of fares to ordinary Singaporeans
Containment of costs;
On-time bus and train performance;
Customer satisfaction ratings (through independent surveys);
Percentage of public transport ridership;
Productivity improvements and innovation.
Define 'ordinary Singaporeans' - Household Income < $1000 per month? <$4000? Never been on overseas holiday in last 24 months?
Define 'containment of costs' - Contain costs at all costs?? Acceptable to contain costs to the detriment of service standards? If so, by how much?
All very nice, now please, some meat on the bone show us please. -
3Boys:
I agree... we have subsidised healthcare, education, housing... but it still kinda sucks...
And why do you believe a nationalised company can run better than a private one. What is your satisfaction level with the stat boards and ministries? You very happy with healthcare, education?
Then again... could it have been worst?
The downside about nationalised... productivity/efficiency may drop if profitability is not a KPI?
The upside... no more fat bonuses for CEOs/shareholders? -
3Boys:
I still have not developed a position on this issue but I have been mulling this exact question that you just posed. If privatizing is so great... then why not privatize healthcare, and education?
And why do you believe a nationalised company can run better than a private one. What is your satisfaction level with the stat boards and ministries? You very happy with healthcare, education?
Growing up, our family stayed away from polyclinics. Family elders told me that polyclinic queues were long, doctors were rude and nurses were rough. In the past 5 years, I've steered my family towards polyclinics and govt hospitals because the waiting time is shorter than the 2.5 hour experience at Raffles Medical... the doctors (at the polyclinics) were more civilized and the receptionists more professional (than those at Raffles Medical).
From my personal experience, I think govt healthcare is better than private, for a fraction of the cost. http://petunialee.blogspot.com/2010/05/hospital-visit.html
As for education, we do have a highly performant system since so many of our students make it to honour rolls in distinguished universities worldwide... and ITE has campuses to rival that of many European universities. Of course, the testing arm of our education is long (horrendously difficult) whilst the teaching arm of our education is woefully short (doesn't teach enough) because schools have developed a reliance on tuition. But well... I am not sure that happened because it's a public service, not private.
An interesting article appeared in the Straits Times about grades inflation in the USA, especially in private schools. The author argues that the profit motive incentivises teachers and Profs to be lenient, thus bringing down standards.
I don't see too clearly into this issue as yet (so am still on the fence) BUT I am wary of the classic trite arguments FOR introducing the profit motive into public services such as transport, healthcare and education. There are other important outcomes that may not be well-served by the profit motive (e.g., well maintained buses, frequent buses). In general, I am wary of these American fads and fashions, supported by intelligent American arguments. Americans are good at giving the positive side of the picture. The drive to privatize started in the USA. We've copied them without critical thought. Privatizing healthcare in USA lead to the growth American healthcare insurance giants... and a host of problems. Old folks take the bus to Canada to get the medicine they need for chronic conditions. Private educational institutions are prone to grade inflation... and they cocoon their paying students so much that Bill Gates has this to say...
Bill Gates recently gave a speech at a High School about
eleven (11) things they did not and will not learn in school.
He talks about how feel-good, politically correct teachings
created a generation of kids with no concept of reality and
how this concept set them up for failure in the real world.
Rule 1 : Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2 : The world doesn't care about your self-esteem.
The world will expect you to accomplish something
BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3 : You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school.
You won't be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4 : If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss
Rule 5 : Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity.
Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping:
They called it opportunity.
Rule 6 : If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault,
so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.
Rule 7 : Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring
as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills,
cleaning your clothes and listening to you
talk about how cool you thought you were:
So before you save the rain forest
from the parasites of your parent's generation,
try delousing the closet in your own room..
Rule 8 : Your school may have done away with winners and losers,
but life HAS NOT. In some schools, they have abolished failing grades
and they'll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer.
*This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9 : Life is not divided into semesters.
You don't get summers off and very few employers
are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF.
*Do that on your own time.
Rule 10 : Television is NOT real life.
In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
Rule 11 : Be nice to nerds.
Chances are you'll end up working for one..
The Happiest People in the world are not those who have no problems, but those who learn to live with things that are less than perfect !!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
3Boys:
U ask me? Ask Giam lah... :razz:
Define 'affordability of fares' - $1 per day? $2 per day? Free??Daddy
Affordability of fares to ordinary Singaporeans
Containment of costs;
On-time bus and train performance;
Customer satisfaction ratings (through independent surveys);
Percentage of public transport ridership;
Productivity improvements and innovation.
Define 'ordinary Singaporeans' - Household Income < $1000 per month? <$4000? Never been on overseas holiday in last 24 months?
Define 'containment of costs' - Contain costs at all costs?? Acceptable to contain costs to the detriment of service standards? If so, by how much?
All very nice, now please, some meat on the bone show us please.
U majiam bulldozer sia... no point nitpicking at this early stage... even our Budget needs time to sort out all the details before it is given to the citizens... -
3Boys:
Liberalise? As far as I remember, it was only an interim solution prior to building the ERP gantries which took time to build. It was supposed to be history after ERP went live...look at it today, what happened, it continued to be touted as a way to control traffic, you think so with the ERP gantries multiplied a few times too? Did anyone remember COE as an interim only? I thank God everyday that I am blessed and not having to worry about broken promises. Not everyone is so blessed. At least we agree that public transport should at least be the reasonable common solution for everyone.
They did liberalise COE for a while, and guess what happened?ksi:
Another case in point...COE system was supposed to be demolised after ERP came...has it been the case? Another contribution to \"obscene\" excesses. I don't think we are quipping about having huge surpluses in the budget but at whose expense? :scratchhead: And if COE is high, public transport is a highly essential necessity.
We should get even more draconian about car ownership and usage, in my opinion, like many European cities. But yes, public transport needs to improve commensurately. -
3Boys:
If cost of transport become unattractive to move around in Singapore, it might end up cheaper to take a budget flight or those groupon tours and move around in a cheap neighbouring country. So going holidays overseas does not necessarily mean costing more if the rising cost living in Singapore continues at this rate. Besides, with financial institutions being so aggressive in their products, people may well be leveraging on overdrafts to enjoy certain luxuries and that is creating a wrong impression on actual spending power too.
Define 'ordinary Singaporeans' - Household Income < $1000 per month? <$4000? Never been on overseas holiday in last 24 months? -
Daddy
I posing to Giam lah!
U ask me? Ask Giam lah... :razz:
U majiam bulldozer sia... no point nitpicking at this early stage... even our Budget needs time to sort out all the details before it is given to the citizens...
Ok, I stop bulldozing. -
How to show the meat ? when the proposed stall not even set up ?
when our late president OTC asked about the BIG meat in our reserves at the existing stall(s), the stall operators could not even tell him. maybe in another 40 years ( out of the 56 ), my son will know the answer.
http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php/perspective/special-feature/4900-are-we-rich-or-are-we-bankrupt-part-3
so many arguments, trying to justify this angle, that angle. Kong buay liao de.
Public Transport - to raise again the fares ? Justifiable or not ? I vote ney.....oh, sorry, we are not allowed to vote on this, it is up to PTC.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics