More transparent replies from Parliament regarding crime rate needed

MP Desmond Lee said that Singapore achieved low crime rate with a lean police force comprising 9,400 regular police officers. He added that this was low compared to other cities such as London, New York and Hong Kong. However, he did not indicate whether crime rate had increased or not.

The mid-year crime statistics released in August 2015 (16,575 cases) was 6.7% more than that of last year during the same period. In the previous year, crime in 2014 increased by 7.4% from 2013. Does the MP think that as long as we have an efficient police to crime rate, Singaporeans can tolerate crime increases?

In a Parliamentary reply in February 2014, we found out that we have about 6000 auxiliary police officers. Perhaps our police force is not so lean after all. We should have more transparent replies from Parliament.

Disruptive Technologies

Overlap bus, train routes to tackle transport woes

Mr Khaw Boon Wan, the new Transport Minister, has said that Singapore’s MRT lines are no longer new and that more can be done through maintenance and reinvestment in the infrastructure. He also cited the example of European cities, where it is common for everyone to use public transport.

FROM ALEX LEW YAN LIANG AND LOKE HOE YEONG -

OCTOBER 2

Mr Khaw Boon Wan, the new Transport Minister, has said that Singapore’s MRT lines are no longer new and that more can be done through maintenance and reinvestment in the infrastructure. He also cited the example of European cities, where it is common for everyone to use public transport.

In fact, there are many differences between other cities’ transport systems and Singapore’s.

London’s and Tokyo’s, for instance, are more intricate. If passengers are stuck at one subway stop, they can get on another line or hop onto a bus plying a route that mirrors the metro line they intended to use originally.

Those city planners recognised that multiple transport options were required to meet a city’s complex needs. Buses and trains complement each other, with some tactical overlaps in routes, often in anticipation of breakdowns or congestion in one line or another.

In Singapore, planners removed most of those overlapping routes and withdrew bus lines to make way for less-reliable LRT lines. This might have been done in the name of efficiency. Also, this strategy was predicated on the assumption that our transport infrastructure would not be prone to breaking down.

Singaporeans tend to blame the transport firms for disruptions arising from MRT breakdowns, but the bigger contributing factor in our transport woes could be pinned down to the adoption of an “either MRT/LRT or bus” strategy.

Commuters in European cities use public transport regardless of their socio-economic status. This is not explained by car ownership being more affordable than in Singapore, but by cars being seen as an inconvenient as a mode of transport there. It is hard to find a cheap parking lot in Central London, while patience is required for driving through narrow thoroughfares such as Oxford Street at peak hours.

In Singapore, cars are simply expensive, but remain a relatively convenient mode of transport for those who can afford one, with the Certificate of Entitlement scheme targeted at restricting ownership to the upper middle class and above.

Disruption to Service industry

On the 1st September 2015, Eatsa, a high tech fast food restaurant opened near San Francisco’s Embarcadero. Eatsa revolutionaries the dining experience with full automation of all processes besides cooking and eating.

With the exception of a few kitchen staff, there is not a human in sight. The restaurant has received good reviews. This marks a new era – technology has begun disrupting the low skilled service industries. Technologies have always disrupted industries. And disruptions are not always friendly.

When personal computers became affordable, many processes were made more efficient. Less workers were required. The same happened within manufacturing over the last few decades. Today, the number of workers required in an automobile factory is a fraction of the number required 30 years ago.

But why is this development unsettling for Singapore and our region? Eatsa marks a tipping point because entrepreneurs have finally commercialized this automated solution. It no longer remains in the scientific repositories of institutes. Our service industries provide a lot of low skilled jobs that were harder for machines to replace.

Unlike the jobs of welders and technicians, it was harder to replace the work of waitresses. Within the next decade, this technology will become cheaper. Owners of F&B outlets can access this technology.

Low skilled Singaporeans must brace themselves for change. Policy makers cannot shield Singaporeans from these changes. It will be worse for Singapore or any country to regulate such technologies. In fact, it makes more sense to adapt to such changes quickly.

Rough economic seas call for leaders with proven track records

Rough economic seas call for leaders with proven track records [Alex Lew] 

Singapore has 5.5 million people, a tiny if not negligible domestic market. Other economies are significantly bigger: China has 1.36 billion people; Indonesia has 253 million.

Some argue that our purchasing power is higher. But it is mathematically impossible, in dollar terms, to consume as much as China or most of the rapidly growing nations in the region.

We will never be the natural top choice of operations for top firms, no matter how rich we become. 

Some of us think the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will be Singaporeans’ hope. They believe ASEAN countries can form a common market as the European Union did. 

Unfortunately, ASEAN nations have very different characteristics and political interests.

While I believe ASEAN nations will be more cohesive with the ASEAN Economic Community 2015, Singapore will not be the Frankfurt equivalent in the EU. In fact, in the long run, it may be more palatable for each member to bypass ASEAN’s complex interests and deal with larger economies such as China and the United States individually.

This means Singapore has no alternative but to open our financial markets to the international community. We must also be the trading hub for this part of the world for as long as we are relevant.

Today, we are integrated with the world. Based on World Trade Organization data, our trade to gross domestic product ratio from 2011 to 2013 was 366.2. To put it simply, our economy will always be volatile and linked to global markets.

Notably, we were among the first to enter a recession in 2008 and among the first to enjoy great growth rates in later years.

Our interconnectedness requires us to select the smartest leaders of the lot to govern Singapore and help us survive on the rough economic seas. Many believe that the global economy will become more cyclical.

This implies that changes will happen quickly. In future, more Singaporeans will lose their jobs overnight. Industries may be wiped out by disruptive technologies. 

We need ministers with the uncompromising courage to identify and make policy changes. Singapore has no buffer against failure. If we were Malaysians, we could fail and return home from Kuala Lumpur. We would still own some land and go on with life. 

If Singapore fails, investors would exit; they are not beholden to Singaporeans. And we have no hinterland. Some argue that we should focus largely on supporting local firms, but we do not innovate as Israeli entrepreneurs do. 

Our local firms complain about the tighter quota on lower wage foreign workers, who have lower wage bills, but Singaporean employees want higher wages. These are tough questions. It is no wonder that almost 70 per cent of the electorate voted for the proven party with an economic track record.

Changi Airport needs to get its priorities right

In his commentary “Changi Airport must develop into a destination in itself” (Jan 6), Mr David Leo argues for the need to develop the airport as a “city” and retain its status as an aviation hub.

He proposes that it can be a place where people can visit for purposes other than transit. He rightly emphasises the need for it to remain competitive, with the rise of Dubai Airport as a preferred stop on the Kangaroo Route. But transforming Changi Airport into a standalone “city” should be the last of our priorities.

As a city state with many business and leisure options, Singapore is unique and different from competitors such as the United Arab Emirates.

Do travellers really prefer to stay around the airport when other city locations — Sentosa, Suntec Convention Centre, Singapore Expo, Fusionopolis, Raffles Convention Centre and Marina Bay Sands — are within a 30-minute taxi ride?

Anyway, they will have to clear immigration before they can access Project Jewel.

What should be enhanced instead is transport connectivity from the airport to downtown Singapore — for instance, a direct MRT route to the city, rather than the current inconvenient transfer at Tanah Merah station.

This leads to the next important issue: Transport planning. We must seriously consider the planning parameters in the east. Singapore’s priority has always been to ensure prudent, optimal utilisation of land and resources, which requires smarter planning of traffic infrastructure.

Airport users share the major roads leading to and from Changi Airport with residents in the east, who depend on those roads for their daily commute and may identify with the woes of traffic congestion there.

It is unwise to direct greater traffic, in the form of shoppers from the rest of Singapore, to Project Jewel in the coming years.

An airport’s real strength lies in connectivity and movement of goods and passengers. The greater freight volume we carry, the stronger our status as a transport and business hub.

We would also want more aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul activities in the east. Major airlines should come to regard Singapore as the most efficient servicing centre in Asia.

Finally, the nation should focus on tapping future travel trends in the region and exert leverage as these evolve. For instance, how can Singapore capture greater returns from the increase in low-cost, short-haul flights around Asia?

This is what would secure Singapore’s position in the context of Asia’s growing economic importance.

article also appeared on todayonline

Transport issues are multifaceted and should be addressed at macro level

Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew’s decision to leave politics has brought Singapore’s transport issues to the forefront again (“Transport Minister Lui to leave politics”; Aug 12).

MRT breakdowns, the unfortunate leitmotif during his tenure, had a direct and personal impact on Singaporeans, but the issue is multifaceted. We must address this suite of problems at a macro level.

First, Singapore is a large city, yet we are primarily dependent on one central transport system: The MRT. The bus system has been relatively peripheral since the MRT network was opened in the late 1980s.

Our transport planners prefer that buses be used predominantly as feeder services that connect Singaporeans from their homes to the nearest MRT station for their main commute to work.

The risk is clear: Since we cannot expect any mechanical system to have 100 per cent uptime, we have to expect breakdowns, unfortunately.

Second, Singapore is largely a hub-and-spoke city. This implies that we are connected to the extent that we can get from one “hub” to another, for example Tampines to Jurong.

Direct connectivity between the two hubs is limited unless one can afford private transport. Of course, policymakers have been discouraging car ownership over time through the Certificate of Entitlement scheme.

Third, most of our workplaces are concentrated in a few central areas, whereas the majority of Singaporeans live in the west, east or north. Only those living in Commonwealth, Tiong Bahru, Redhill, Alexandra and Queenstown have it easier.

This is perhaps the leading cause of Singapore’s transport woes. During peak hours, much of Singapore’s working population travel on our arterial roads and MRT lines.

No transport policy can alleviate these bottlenecks because it is not prudent to sustain excess capacity during non-peak hours. Off-peak initiatives can help solve some problems, but they are not a game changer.

We should take a lighter regulatory stance towards private buses and taxis in the short term. In the longer term, we must start building public housing in downtown areas again. We can also expand business areas gradually.

We have tried to create business areas far from the central area, such as Changi Business Park. But this is not how a city grows.

Land pricing and zoning difficulties notwithstanding, we cannot sacrifice Singapore’s future for the sake of policy coherence.

Article also appeared on Todayonline