$387 million can't buy you the true spirit of Singapore

There was a time not too long ago when Singaporeans cheer their team with all their hearts. You didn't have to force school children to cheer and support our sportsmen. Our sporting heros came from our schools and kampungs. You knew them or knew someone who knew them. There was enthusiastic support for our sportsmen and great pride among Singaporeans when they won. ...no amount of money can manufacture that.

Transportation Woes In Singapore...

There were reports about the crowds at Jurong East last year[Link][Link]. But little has been done. In fact things have been getting worse not just at Jurong East Station but, I believe, throughout the public transport system. Many netizens are just fedup with the situation. The denial from the govt is causing frustration. Many have taken to filming or taking pictures of the situation as evidence of their unpleasant experience.

The situation is getting from bad to worst. We are now seeing the trains packed during off-peak period and during peak hours there're hardly any space to accomodate more commuters. On most days I would give a miss to at least 2 trains before I managed to board a reasonably populated train.

Would LTA consider letting SMRT and SBS run parallel bus services? I don't think so.

Singapore's 45th National Day

"There is something down the road that we can strive for

We are told no dream's too bold that we can't try for

There's a spirit in the air, it's a feeling we all share

We're going to build a better life, for you and me

We can achieve, we can achieve......"

- Count On Me Singapore

During my NS days, I had to sing "national songs" every Saturday with my buddies before we get to leave camp for the weekend. The feller heading the unit was a very patriotic Singaporean and he sang with the loudest voice. The rest of us were reluctant conscripted choir boys. However, if you keep singing these songs every Saturday for more than a year, they tend to grow on you and the lyrics you can't be bothered with you start to remember. The song "Count On Me, Singapore", tells us to have bold dreams as a nation so that we can build better lives for everyone. If we try hard enough, "we can achieve". As a nation we need a bold dream, because it is bold there will be risks and setbacks but will to try hard to overcome it to build a better life for everyone. That was the "can do" spirit we aspire to have more than 2 decades ago. The events in recent years have reminded me this song I sang as an NS man more than 2 decades ago....I'll tell you why....

A few weeks ago, many Singaporeans suffered losses and great inconvenience due to flash floods in Singapore. The response from the leadership was that Singapore "cannot be floodless" and that every other road has to be converted to a canal if we want a floodless Singapore. That was a very disappointing response to a very serious problem. The leadership has given up even before trying. How do they know that an innovative idea won't be discovered if they invested in a study into the recent floods? Even if we cannot stop all floods, the goal of having a floodless Singapore is a worthy one because as we work towards this bold vision, we will always seek out solutions that will reduce the frequency of flooding. Flooding is just one example of lack of commitment and boldness on the part of the govt tackling problems we faced.

If we keep our current model of economic development, we will continue on this trajectory of rising income gap and declining quality of life for many Singaporeans that we have seen in the past decade. Going forward, the govt has set itself a low hanging goal of increasing the median income by an average of 2.5% per year for the coming decade. This is a meaningless goal because it is not clear if it translate to any rise in the quality of life - housing cost has risen 5% in each of the previous 2 quarters and that alone negates any improvement to affordability of housing for median income families for the next four years based on the 2.5% income increase the govt aims for. When asked about the income gap measured by the GINI Index, our PM trivialized the problem by saying that the GINI index not a good measure of inequality and that the govt has already done "a lot"[Link]. Singapore has the largest income gap among developed nations yet there is a lack of determination in govt to enhance social equity. There has been many ideas suggested including having minimum wages which is implemented in all developed countries except Singapore or restructuring our economy to move away from industries dependent on low wages and so on. However, the govt will not make any bold moves and will continue pursue GDP growth by importing cheap labor. The unequal distribution of wealth has resulted in a large segment of the populace, roughly 30% of households, experiencing decline in living standards in the past decade as Singapore produces the highest number millionaires per capita as wealth distribution has become extremely unequal[link]. This govt has no bold vision to bring about a more equal society and will only make small changes only if it does not compromise its other interests....that is all we can expect if nothing changes.

In healthcare, instead of aiming for universality and affordability, govt policy has shifted the burden of rising costs to Singaporeans through means testing. Hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans remain uninsured as cost rises. Capacity has shifted to the private sector as a result of govt aspiration to be a medical hub for the rich in the region to increase profits from the healthcare sector. Govt hospitals are now overcrowded [Link]and the cost of medical care is spiraling up much faster than the median wage. As the cost increase, the Singapore shifts the burden to the sick and their family to keep its expenditure low - the Singapore govt's expenditure as a % of total cost is the lowest among develop countries and ordinary Singaporeans shoulder the highest % of the healthcare costs among developed countries. After Obama pushed through his major healthcare reform billin the US, Singapore became the only developed country without universal healthcare[Link]. We need a bold vision to deliver the high quality care to everyone regardless of income group with less differentiation so that the healthcare does not further exacerbate the inequality that already exist in our society due to the income gap. Overcrowded public hospitals and under-utilised expensive private hospitals for millionaires is not the way to go....but we will certainly have more of that if nothing changes.

As I travel around Singapore, was it a fare increase???

Many people aren't sure if they are actually paying more. I have found a way to check and compare the old fares and new:

http://gothere.sg/maps#q:amk%20to%20bedok

I did a few sample checks and found that if you made no transfers, you always pay more under the new structure. If you have 1 transfer, you sometimes pay less. But the increase can be as big as 10-15% for certain trips - this is huge because previous increases were 1-2% and commuters took issue with those hikes. For those who have to pay more, this fare hike is probably the biggest one in their lifetime!

Did commuters asked for the fare structure to be changed? No. This was a move introduced by LTA and the public transport operators.. Under the new structure, they eliminated the penalty for transferring to another bus but increase the fare for single bus trips for various distances. This makes it hard to figure out if you'll end up paying more or less from this new structure. However, if you have a direct bus and do no transfer, you will almost certainly end up paying more. Many people I asked who have one transfer still end up paying more. So you need multiple transfers to benefit from the new fare structure. The publicity posters and booklets only show positive examples of people saving money.

"The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has said that under the new system, one in three commuters would see a fare increase" - CNA[Link]

I'll tell you why this new structure simply makes no sense. Firstly, it makes people pay more for the same distance if they do not need multiple transfers. What it does is reduce the penalty for multiple transfers which shouldn't have been there in the first place - this incentivise people to make transfers to cut down on distance. However, it is NOT DISTANCE BUT TIME that is more important. Very often the distance gains you make transferring from one bus to another is easily lost due to waiting time. It is rare to gain any time by transferring twice when you have a direct bus - yet it is only in these multiple transfer trips that the new fare is cheaper . The new structure penalises those with direct buses by raising the fares for such trips....and may incentivise people to make time wasting multiple transfers to save money. If they genuinely wanted to encourage people to save time, they should have simply eliminated the transfer penalty and keep the other parts of the fare structure the same. It is time not distance that is important to the commuter and they have started off with the wrong basis for the new fare structure.....and the more cynical people asking if this is simply a scheme to raise the revenue and profits of the public transport companies.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Some say bus fares up 40% after new calculation [Link]

Monday was the first work-day after the public transport operators started calculating bus fares based on distance travelled on 3 July.

Those travelling to Malaysia by bus were in for a surprise. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has said that under the new system, one in three commuters would see a fare increase.

For those affected, LTA estimates the average weekly fare rise to be about 30 cents per commuter. However some commuters have called the Channel NewsAsia hotline, saying the fare for the journey from Kranji MRT Station to Johor is up by 40 percent - from $1 to $1.40.

This has affected many who are working or studying in Singapore, as they are also not allowed to cross the Causeway on foot.

Meanwhile, private bus operators said they have not seen an increase in customers because "many commuters may not have realised that bus fares are higher now".

- CNA/ir