The LTA just announced ways to revamp the transport industry. They have just released a transport masterplan, a copy of which was shown on National TV and I thought it’s a rather extravagant use of public funds.

The proposal involves many things, one being letting the grassroots take part in the discussion. Another is the possibility of giving more money to car owners when they scrap their cars. A move that is questionable and needs further study. Who in their right mind would not buy another car? It’s like the government giving you subsidies.

The problem, in my humble opinion, lies not so much on price problems. I don’t see the effectiveness in raising ERP prices or limiting the COE given out. There are other things to consider other than price problems. One of the more important factors, in my opinion, is the standard of our own PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

We have seen many fare increase over the past few years. Everytime the prices go up, we are promised a world class public transport system. But, is it truly world class? Fares have gone up, but standards have dropped. In fact, it is now easier to see a cockroach on a bus compared to a few years ago. Buses seem to be getting noisier and drivers seem to have this problem of stalling their engine.

A good public transport system is a determining factor on whether we choose to take public transport or private ones. The thing is not so much on the cost, whether it is expensive to own a car, for those who are in this equation are those who are able to afford a car anyway. The determining factor is whether the public transport is cheaper and as effective in bringing us to our desired destination.

If we have bus routes that are planned well to bring us to our desired destination in a comfortable and efficient manner, then why would we need cars? If we are able to get to places on time even on public transport, and not waste too much time, why would we need cars? If we can squeeze into the mrt during peak hours and have sufficient space to breathe so we won’t faint, why would we need cars?

Let’s not kid ourselves. Oil prices are rising (and falling sometimes), so it won’t be long before the public transport companies start to apply for fare increases. When that time comes, will they promise to be world class again? I think it is better to under-promise and over-deliver, than to over-promise and under-deliver, even though what you deliver may be the same.

Anyway, this forum letter (shown below) just shows us why public transport (including taxis) are not so appealing to us. Other than rude drivers, we have picky drivers, or drivers who cheat us by driving further to charge more. Is this efficient? No. If we truly want lesser cars, we should work and change our public transport system!

Cabby cheats take passengers for a ride
IT IS no doubt easier to get a cab nowadays during peak hours, because you can see long queues of empty taxis and zero passengers. This has led some cabbies to take desperate measures, bordering on the dishonest. As passengers are hard to come by, especially during expensive peak hours, drivers intentionally take a longer route, hoping to stretch and make more out of what may be the only fare they’ll pick up during this time.

I had suspicions a couple of times during recent rides but didn’t think much of them as I wasn’t 100 per cent sure of the shortest routes myself. However, my journey on March 21 was a familiar one from Marine Parade to home in Potong Pasir. Instead of turning into Lichi Avenue from Upper Aljunied Road, the driver drove past this well-known straight-road connection between Upper Aljunied Road and Potong Pasir and continued along Upper Aljunied Road before turning into Upper Serangoon Road and finally reaching Potong Pasir. I hadn’t paid close attention nearing the Lichi Avenue left turn and realised too late.

When I asked the driver, he said he didn’t like making many left and right turns along Lichi Avenue, and preferred the straight road. This was not true as taking Upper Aljunied Road and Upper Serangoon Road actually includes more turns and traffic lights. The cab company was Trans-

Cab. I am 100 per cent sure the driver was trying to lengthen the journey.

To substantiate my suspicions further, I must quote another driver who checked my destination before letting me in. After I got into the cab, he admitted if my journey had been a short one, he’d not have picked me up.

I hope all cab companies will remind drivers about integrity.

I would also like to remind passengers to stay alert during cab journeys and specify your preferred route - or else you may be taken for a longer ride.

Lee Li Cheng (Ms)

I read a letter on the ST Forum today about another person complaining. Yeah, Singaporean’s are first class complainers. Anyway, this person is appalled (I think this is too strong a word) that there is differential pricing for tickets to a soccer match. He does not understand why it cost $8 to buy a ticket before the match day and then it cost $10 on the actual day itself.

If we look around, we are living in a world based on economics. Every company in this world wants profit maximisation. In this instance, I think it’s all about demand and supply. The match is held in National Stadium, and it makes sense to sell the tickets at the stadium. On that day, people who have not gotten tickets yet will purchase them directly at the National Stadium. There will be a greater demand for tickets since most people can’t be too bothered to get tickets in advanced. It makes sense then to charge a higher price since consumers are willing to pay more.

Or perhaps we can think of it this way. They are trying to separate the two markets by selling at different locations. In a tongue in cheek manner, perhaps they are trying to separate the cheapos and the true fans. Anyone heard of price discrimination? To sell the same thing at different prices in different markets. That is happening all the time.

Why does SMRT and SBS provide 45cents travel to young students in JC level and below? Because they are charitable and compassionate? I doubt so. It’s about price discrimination and filling up seats that would otherwise be empty. Same goes with student prices at cinemas and preferred credit cards having discounts. It is to attract people to come when they would otherwise have not.

Look around you. There are examples of differential pricing everywhere today. Student meals at fast food chains? Do you even know that student pay $4.50 for a extra value meal at McDonalds? Safra members having $8 weekend tickets at all Golden Village cinemas? NUS students having discounts at various shops when they flash their matric cards?

He says “Do the $2 more earned per ticket sold on match day make such a difference?”, and that he doesn’t understand the rationale.

I don’t understand his rationale too. It is very obvious that the $2 matters much to him. So much so as to write a letter to the ST Forum. Does it make a difference? I think it’s a rhetoric question.

Why two prices for the same match?

I AM appalled that there is differential pricing for tickets to the Fifa World Cup soccer qualifying match between Singapore and Lebanon tonight.

Before match day, it costs $8 and you have to buy a ticket at Jalan Besar Stadium.

On match day, it costs $10 per ticket when you buy it at the National Stadium.

As much as I would like to show my support, does the Football Association of Singapore expect me to go to Jalan Besar Stadium to buy tickets earlier to enjoy the $2-discount and travel to National Stadium on match day to watch the match?

Do the $2 more earned per ticket sold on match day make such a difference?

I cannot understand the rationale.

Heng Lian Meng

The ‘Saturday’ section of The Straits Times today featured articles about A level graduates and competition into universities here in Singapore. One of such articles is about being average when you get perfect scores. Of course, it is not the statistical average, but truly, a sense of averageness you get when you see that there are many others just like you.

I remember when I was in my secondary school, I saw other people getting 7 or more distinctions, and I was green with envy. I couldn’t make it to the statistic in the school yearbook of the 25% or so who got 7 or more distinctions. Fastforward to JC, where we count everything in As, I got 4As, or called perfect scores, ignoring the fact I got the C6 for my GP. But that was average. So many others achieved 4As. In the rival school opposite mine, there were already 400 of them. Because of such averageness, we all strove to achieve better results in S papers, for better distinctions. But so what? I got a distinction and a merit for Mathematics and Physics respectively, but that was average too.

Sometimes I don’t know whether to be happy or sad at my results. Happy because its a perfect score (if you only consider the A level subjects, not the AO ones), or sad because getting such a score can’t net one a scholarship? Thus when I read the article today, I felt that I understood.

I applied for 4 different scholarships boards, SIA, DSTA, Keppel and another one. I was only offered an interview with one - DSTA. No need to say, I never did make it. In the competitive world we have today, we have to get really perfect scores, in A or AO level, and even in CCAs, CIPs, what have you.

Looking back, I think it’s all worth it. I didn’t do the special papers for scholarships but for myself. I didn’t do the CCAs because I thought of the boost it would give me, but I enjoyed my time with my friends. I didn’t do my CIP thinking that a self initiated CIP would get more looks at my portfolio. If I had done all that with that narrow mentality, I would probably be regretting now.

Now in university, I have chosen to abandon this mad race to do CCAs for the sake of doing, to do CIPs for the sake of doing CIPs. I have chosen to improve myself through my own means, through my own interests. I think, that is the most important thing that we should do for ourself. We should enjoy our lives. After all, life is not about getting scholarships. As long as you make it into university for your degree, who cares? I hope I find an employer who’s not so into such mundane stuffs.

An article in The Straits Times today captured my attention, and it is about Singapore’s most popular, home-grown talent with a resume in attempted Changi Plane crashing, Mas Selamat. Basically, the main gripe about the current inquiry panel into this matter is about the possibility of opaqueness, also known as the lack of transparency.

According to the Worker’s Party, the inquiry is made under the Prison’s Act, which means the Home Affairs Minister would be able to disclose or rather, hide the findings as he deems fit. Thus there is this problem that the public may never get the full disclosure.

Thus, the Worker’s Party wanted the inquiry to be directed at from the President, who may block sensitive information while allowing the public to know the answers we have all been waiting for. Whether they are just fliming a new season of toilet break.

Personally I think there should be transparency. In the end, we should know why he escaped and what measures are being implemented to prevent such things from happening again. I’m not too sure if things will be different if directed by the President or the Minister, but perhaps its worth a try. Anyway the minister also has to answer to the public right? I think its “cleaner” to allow a more neutral party to head this investigation. Cuts rumors to a minimum too.

THE opposition Workers’ Party on Tuesday urged the Government to keep the public fully informed of the committee of inquiry’s (COI) probe into the escape of terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari, who has been on the run since Feb 27.

It said that as the inquiry is being carried out under the Prisons Act, which means that the Home Affairs Minister retains the discretion ot release the committee’s finds as he sees fit, this raises the question ‘as to how much the public will eventually be told.’

Said the party chairman Sylvia Lim in a statement: ‘In a matter of such high public interest as the escape of a high-risk terror suspect from a government-run facility, what assurances or checks are there that the public will be given full information?’

‘Moreover, since Singaporeans have been marshalled to assist the authorities to hunt for Mas Selamat, the least the government could do is to keep us fully informed of the inquiry and its findings,’ she added, noting the huge security forces involved in the island-wide manhunt, and the various inconveniences at checkpoints and other areas which Singaporeans have to put up with to facilitiate the massive operation.

Ms Lim, who is a Non-constituency MP, said many questions have been raised about how the escape could have taken place ‘in a country which prides itself on safety and security.’

While it is not wrong for the government to convene the three-member inquiry, headed by retired judge Goh Joon Seng, under the Prisons Act, the opposition leader noted that such inquiries are not open to the public.

‘The Committee will submit its report to the Minister, and no part of the proceedings may be released to anyone except with the Minister’s written permission,’ she said.

She suggested an alternative option: a COI appointed by the President under the Inquiries Act in the interest of public welfare or public interest.

‘This regime will allow the inquiry to proceed in public as the President shall direct. If there is concern that release of certain sensitive information will jeopardise the national interest, the President may direct that certain information not be made public,’ she said.

Separately, the Criminal Investigation Department is also looking into whether criminal wrong-doing was involved in the break-out of the leader of the Singapore Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terror network from the Whitley Road Detention Centre.

Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng has said that there was a ‘physical breach’ and ’security lapse’ at the detention centre’s compound, which has since been plugged.

The panel, which will also recommend changes to prevent similar break-outs, is expected to complete the review in a month. The other two committee members are retired police commissioner Tee Tua Ba and deputy secretary for security and corporate services Dr Choong May Ling.

In launching the COI on March 2, Mr Wong said he would decide on the part of the committee’s findings that can be made public.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has said that the escape of Mas Selamat is a ‘very severe lesson in complacency.’

The search for the fugitive entered the 13th day on Tuesday. More than 1,100 calls and emails on potential leads have been received by police so far.

Besides reporting sightings or discarded belongings on the fringes of forested areas, many Singaporeans have offered tips on how to nab the escaped detainee.

The A level results is going to be released, and the same thing happens every year. Every year during this period of time, scholarship boards come together to advertise their scholarships in The Straits Times in an add-on paper called Scholars’ Choice.

It’s a day of demoralization when I realize that for one, I can’t get those scholarships because I’m a lowly stay in Singapore peasant, and two, I’m too old, already in University.

However, I can’t help but wonder, how many of us are absolutely sure of our interests and future aspirations? At the tender age of 18 going on 19, how many of us can really take the plunge and decide which university, which course, or even, which scholarship?

I guess one failure of our education system is that we did not manage to nurture a sense of interest and direction in most of our students, a thought I shared when I was contemplating which course to enter in NUS. We can’t blame the government, because such interests are hard to nurture and you have to expose students to a wide range of activities from arts to sciences and allow them to have free space to excel, without making them stressed out with trying to achieve high standards - something that’s in our CCAs today. That is why we don’t really have much direction.

Another thought I had now is, what scholarships are there for people like me, who are in university? Partial scholarships, I mean, where the scholarship board only pays for the remaining years you have in university. It is good to have partial scholarships, especially when the people there are more mature (after NS? About 4 years after their A level results?) and have a greater sense of direction. This is especially so after they have decided on their majors and their specializations within their majors. By then, they should have chosen a field they have more interest in, a field that they are comfortable with. We undergraduates would be in a much better position to know how we can serve the parent company.

Alas, not many scholarships offer partial scholarships. The two I know of is IDA, and ExxonMobile (I think. If I remember correctly from today’s newspaper).

Anyway, a scholarship isn’t very important in a local university context. I guess I will just go into my field of interest and hope that SIA will hire me. Lol.