TKL: Talk Cock King

Recently, in Fact v opinion & “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”, I praised him, almost agreeing with him. Since then he said more sensible things:

Two dirty words – tweak and calibrate

A few years ago, it was common to see the words “tweak” and “calibrate”. The ministers used them almost every day. When they see any problem, they immediately think about how to “calibrate” and “tweak” the system to solve the problem.

It seemed that the only way to solve problems in Singapore is by “tweaking” and “calibrating”. I see their statements so often that I felt nauseous when I encounter them.

I know that the ministers are just parroting their puppet master. Guess who is the puppet master who just love “tweaking” and “calibrating”?

After I while, I got tired. I declared publicly in my Facebook and blog that these two words are “dirty words.”

I guess my strong words must have reached the ivory tower and must have caused some anguish among the occupants.

Today, we hardly see these words. They must have been abolished from the vocabulary of the ivory tower.

Although these words are hardly used nowadays, the bad practice still continues. Our government policies are tweaked and calibrated to suit different groups of people.

What is wrong with this approach? It leads to complications and unfair treatment of different groups of people. Some get the benefit, some do not. Some get more, others get less – depending on how the line is drawn. Now make a guess – who draw the line? The person who hold the drawing ruler probably has some vested interest.

I prefer a different approach – to give equal treatment to everybody. Except for one difference. When it comes to taxation, the higher income should pay more tax (as they can afford it), but they should enjoy the same benefit given to everybody.

Tan Kin Lian

Fortunately, I don’t have to change my low opinion of about him because very recently he posted this after the public tpt fare rise

 

He forget he has boasted he has rental income from his properties. Juz increase the rent by 5%.

He forgot he got rental income? Dementia? Like his PE manager Meng Seng, or Lim Tean

(Btw More evidence that being anti-PAP is bad for yr mental health)

Or is he trying to pretend that he wasn’t a PAP cadre (GCT’s branch secretary, no less)? What an ingrate.

Just as bad an opportunist as TJS:

TJS: Right attitude, wrong project? and Why TJS never got invited for tea and biscuits.

At least TJS has lowered his public profile. He sold his bungalow and now posts photos of his travels round the world on FB, a retired honourable warrior tells me.

Advertisement

Despite PISA rankings, S’poreans blur on interlining

When I skimmed thru the constructive, nation-building story

The Big Read: Bus contracting model has benefited drivers, commuters — but will the good times last?

I had to pause to read an interesting unconstructive, and certainly not nation-building segment that shows how inflexible, brainy, hardworking S’poreans are mentally when compared to lazy, stupid ang mohs who vote for welfare and Brexit:

Mr David Cutts, the regional managing director of British company Go-Ahead, said that one of the challenges it had faced in the initial stages was introducing the interlining model of running buses in Singapore.

Interlining is a concept which requires bus drivers to drive multiple routes during a shift, instead of just one.

For instance, after completing Route A, a driver may not be required to do another trip for 20 minutes. Within that time span, the same driver may drive another route (Route B), before returning to the interchange to ply Route A again.

While this is a concept that is practised widely in cities like London, it led to a spate of resignations among Go-Ahead’s drivers who could not cope with juggling multiple routes two weeks into commencing operations in September 2016, forcing the company to sub-contract drivers from SBST and SMRT.

Since that episode, Mr Cutts said, bus captains are no longer forced to take up interlining. While the concept remains in place, only 40 per cent of its bus captains work interlining routes and at a rate where they are comfortable with.

Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/big-read/big-read-bus-contracting-model-has-benefited-drivers-commuters-will-good-times-last

What’s the point of us and China (remember that many of our bus drivers are FTs from China) topping PISA ranking particularly in maths (East Asians to dominate maths Nobel Prize soon?) if we and the Chinese are mental ly spastic retards, incapable of mental flexibility.

Then there’s this: S’poreans really that cock despite topping PISA exams?

So maybe this isn’t fake news?

Before over 1500 delegates, Director General of the Ministry of Education, Mr Wong Siew Hoong, projected graphs depicting Singapore’s stellar PISA results. He then juxtaposed these to OECD data on student wellbeing, and also of innovation in the economy, revealing Singapore in the lowest quartile. His conclusion was stark: “we’ve been winning the wrong race”.

https://au.educationhq.com/news/41377/the-pisa-fallacy-in-singapore-insights-from-the-nie/

(Reported in What ST doesn’t tell us about our PISA ranking)

 

Either go Grab or Gojek

Southeast Asia’s apps-for-everything will dominate in 2019. Cash is being lavished on Grab and Go-Jek, as they dabble in everything from ride-hailing to groceries. It’s a Chinese approach to luring and keeping consumers who are moving online fast.

The region from Myanmar to Indonesia is one of the world’s fastest-growing internet markets, with cheap smartphones, low connection costs and improving data speeds. On average, according to a 2018 study by Google and Singapore’s Temasek, Thai users spent almost five hours online daily – more than three times their Japanese counterparts.

[…]

Part of the reason is the transformation of Grab and Go-Jek into apps-for-everything, along the model of China’s Meituan Dianping, is to keep consumers coming back for payments, rides, massages and takeouts, among other things.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-grab-gojek-breakingviews/breakingviews-superapps-will-starve-the-rest-in-southeast-asia-idUSKCN1OW02F

LTA should grab Grab’s balls or Gojek

Seriously the A-Rabs have come up with something interesting that we should copy asap.

On Christmas eve, it was announced that Dubai is to launch a company with Careem, the regional rival to Uber, to manage the ride-hailing system for all taxis operating in Dubai, the Gulf’s S’pore.

The Dubai authorities said this would be the world’s first partnership between a government regulator and a private ride-hailing app. Dubai, like other regulatory authorities, has clashed with fast-growing ride-hailing companies challenging the dominance of traditional taxi services.

Careem said

— it would have a 49% in the joint venture, which would manage e-hailing systems and online payments for almost 11,000 taxis; and

— the venture could be expanded to include other transportation services, such as buses, as Dubai seeks to extend its regional leadership in technology innovation of government services.

If Grab refuses to play ball with LTA, LTA should try Gojek.

Real reason why Terry of TOC kanna lim kopi?

To signal to him to stop publishing fake news on the public transport system? LOL.

Let me explain.

If you skim thru TOC’s headlines as regularly as I do, you are sure to get the impression that our public tpt system is on the verge of collapse and that most S’poreans think it sucks: bad and expensive.

Well I personally find the system pretty good (and cheap) but then I use it off-peak and I’m an oldie: Public tpt users will vote for PAP?

As I don’t use it during peak rush hours (the real test of any public tpt system) and I get a concession rate, I sit down and shut up and defer to Terry’s Online Channel on how bad the system really is, even if I think it’s pretty decent. Unlike cybernuts, I know that most of the time my personal opinions are not the reality.

So it was great interest that I read an article by an ang moh FT in an online publication that has no known, or unknown connection (I double checked with Morocco Mole, Secret Squirrel’s sidekick) with the constructive, national-building media, or the PAP IB.

Here’s the most relevant extract. Do read the whole piece and make up yr mind on its accuracy vis-a-vis Terry’s Online Channel.

Singaporean’s Generally Approve of Their Public Transportation System

Public opinion is another factor worth considering. After all, these are the customers and their satisfaction is another key piece of information for judging success of each system. Singapore also fares very well by this measure. For example, a study by McKinsey & Company found that 86% of the population approves of the current public transportation situation and 84% approve of recent changes to the system. Both of these figures are significantly higher than those of most other cities, representing another indication that Singapore’s public transportation is performing well relative to other major cities.

Where Does Singapore’s Public Transportation Rank?

Based on efficiency, it appears that Singapore’s public transportation system performs relatively well compared to those of other cities. Additionally, when taking into account other key indicators such as affordability and customer satisfaction, it appears that Singapore’s is among the best in the world. Therefore, while there is always room for improvement, it seems reasonable to believe that Singapore’s public transportation system is performing relatively well.

[…]

William Hofmann

William is a Senior Research Analyst at ValueChampion Singapore, focusing on banking and SMEs. He previously was an Economic Consultant at Industrial Economics Inc.

 

Public tpt users will vote for PAP?

When the CEO of SMRT threw his disgraced predecessor onto the path of train by saying that he disagreed with the failure’s view that SMRT had a culture problem, this reminded me that S’pore

is the second most affordable city for public transport, according to a study comparing trends in public transport fares across 12 major cities.

The Nanyang Technological University (NTU) study – which was commissioned by the Public Transport Council (PTC) – compared trends in public transport fares across the cities in terms of concessionary fares, fare affordability and fare revenue per passenger kilometre.

The cities include London, Beijing, Sydney, Seoul, Paris, Hong Kong, Taipei, Toronto, New York, Tokyo and San Francisco.

Constructive, nation-building CNA*

Us oldies definitely will

Singapore’s senior citizen and student concessionary fares were also among the lowest across the 12 cities compared, according to the study.

Seniors in Singapore, London and Sydney pay concessionary fares at age 60 while other cities have lower fares for seniors only at age 65 or 70.

The study also found that Singapore collected the lowest fare revenue per passenger kilometre, when compared with Hong Kong, Sydney, Toronto, New York, San Francisco and London.

————————————

*More details

The study measured fare affordability as the proportion of disposable income spent on public transport by a household in the second quintile household income group.

This quintile was chosen because it is the group “most likely to depend on public transport regularly”, said the study.

“To allow comparability of public transport affordability across the cities, an index illustrating the costs incurred by a typical family with two working adults and two schoolgoing/school age children as a percentage of household disposable income was developed,” it said.

[…]

Based on this, Singapore came in second after San Francisco in terms of fare affordability with an index score of 4.8, compared with San Francisco’s score of 4.1.

This means that on average, a typical family that uses public transport on a daily basis in Singapore spends about 4.8 per cent of its disposable income on public transport, said the study.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/public-transport-in-singapore-second-most-affordable-out-of-12-10857020

 

The Hard and Harder Truths about Uber, Grab or Go-Gek

They got the funding to burn dollar notes, others don’t.

“Tens of others had technology just as good as Uber that never went anywhere. The difference is Uber has been heavily financed by Wall Street and they’ve raised more than $13bn. We didn’t have the same access to capital.”

He says building Uber’s app might have cost something like $30m but the rest of its huge pile of cash has gone on subsidising rides, offering discounts, effectively buying up the market.

CEO of Autocab talking to BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46151994

As Autocab had been providing various services to cab firms for 20 years and was developing apps back before Uber got off the ground, the BBC reporter asked the CEO (Safa Alkateb) the obvious question: why wasn’t this Manchester firm heading for a $120bn (£92bn) IPO and global domination and not the start-up born in San Francisco?

Safa Alkateb, who spent a career in Silicon Valley before coming home to run Autocab, had a simple answer – money.

The Harder Truth: Uber raised the white flag in S’pore and the region, the winner Grab stopped subsidising fares. Fares rose while incentives for drivers were scaled back.

The throwing of money is aimed at securing a monopoly or near monopoly position.

South-east Asian authorities gained valuable experience as they scurried to respond, suggested Toh Han Li, chief executive of the CCCS* and this year’s chair for Asean’s competition agencies group. The Grab-Uber case “can be considered as the first significant case involving co-operation among Asean competition authorities”, he said.

Nikkei Asian Review

*Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore

 

Bus driver says complain to LTA about bus sign problem

On Saturday at about 9.20am, a bus whose service number (31) was not visible unless one was standing very close to it was at the bus stand along Marine Parade Rd near the Roxy Htl. When I boarded it, I told the driver that the light panel illuminating the bus number was faulty. A true blue S’pore uncle he told me in perfect English to tell LTA. Others had also complained he said.

I asked him why he couldn’t tell LTA. He said they wouldn’t listen to him. He also explained that the bus (SBS 30006R) was operated by LTA.

Strange that the operator does not listen to its bus driver. Or could it be that true blue S’porean driver bo chap?

Why Grab can give finger to S’pore govt

(Update on 9 October 20180 at 10am: Microsoft has invested in Grab. Amt is reported to be US$200.)

S’pore mkt is irrelevant to Grab.

SoftBank will soon increase its commitment to Grab by pouring an additional $500m into the south-east Asian ride-hailing company, after the Singapore-based firm announced it is looking to raise about $1bn before the end of the year.

FT

Remember

Singapore’s competition watchdog has fined Grab and Uber a total of S$13 million over their merger, saying that the deal has led to the substantial eroding of competition in the ride-hailing market.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/grab-uber-fined-after-merger-deal-competition-watchdog-10751522

And this is a lot of bull

The fall from grace of “digital darling” Grab serves as a cautionary tale for digital disruptors, after its Uber takeover left riders and drivers up in arms over price hikes and lower incentives.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/fallen-grace-grab-could-learn-hard-way-if-it-does-not-change-its-ways-report

But what to expect from constructive, nation-building media?

SMRT Neo juz cutting and pasting ang moh practice

In Man that should be running SMRT,I wrote about the ang moh running the MRT system in the world’s greatest global city, New York. He has always worked in public transport and has always taken public transport to work be it in London, Toronto, Sydney or NY.

As mentioned in the piece, he’s no Oxbridge or Ivy League type. In an article, I read after doing the above piece, he tells of the times when as a junior manager in charge of a station in London’s MRT system, he was treated like dirt whenever he had to go HQ to meet the senior managers.

Btw, by GCT’s standard he is Goh Chok Tong’s standard, he is “very mediocre”: he earns only US$325,000 a year. He took the NY job because it was a challenge bhe couldn’t resist. The salary was close to his previous job.

Whatever, SMRT Neo is jux cutting and pasting: what our paper generals and scholars are well known for. And ministers too. Think all our restructuring plans: Economic restructuring: This time, it’s really different.

 

Public tpt: PAP ahead of the curve and flew off the rails?

Use of public transport is in decline in many wealthy cities. Blame remote working, Uber, cheap car loans and the internet. That’s what reported recently in the PAP’s bible*: https://www.economist.com/international/2018/06/23/public-transport-is-in-decline-in-many-wealthy-cities

So maybe when the PAP administration decided to cut  back SMRT maintenance all those yrs ago, they were way ahead of the curve and got biten by reality? Sometimes thinking long term is bad for everyone. It’s also mud in the eye for The PAP way is the American corporate way.

---

*PAP’s bible challenges “market-based solution”

SMRT: Driven to drink?

The constructive nation-building ST reported that an SMRT executive, a Mr Kek, was arrested for drink driving. A former Chief Engineer Officer with the SAF, Mr Alvin Kek, is SMRT Trains chief operations officer (rail). Alvin Kek was previously SMRT’s senior vice president for rail operations (North South East West Lines).

New boss coming, so afraid for job isit? But a poster on FB said his father died recently. Well if that’s an IB excuse, then sure got a lot of S’poreans can use this excuse.

Or maybe the job is so tough that it got him arrested for drink driving?

What do you think drove him to get arrested for a drink driving?

Man that should be running SMRT

As Desmond Kwek’s successor, instead of another scholar and general as reported by  ST, the PAP administration should try to recruit Andy Byford who has worked in some tough MRT systems (London, Sydney and Toronto) and has a record of success in the MRT field. So much so that New York turned to him to do something about its system.

He is a MRT man to his bones: all his jobs involve trains.

Better still he personally checks the system daily: he takes the MRT to and from work. When was the last time Desmond or any other CEO or presumptive CEO took the MRT to work?

And finally, he personally apologises for delays. A Ferrari driving FT MD of SMRT said commuters had a choice not to use her trains if they were unhappy. Even the PAPpies found this too much to stomach.

But he’s no Oxbridge or Ivy League man, so our system discounts him immediately.

He made a name for himself running transport systems in London, Sydney and Toronto. Now Briton Andy Byford is in charge of turning around New York’s ageing, failing subway system. What did he get himself into?

About 400,000 people pass through the Bloor-Yonge subway station every day in Toronto, Canada’s largest city.

And on a summer’s day in 2013, the city’s transport chief Andy Byford tried to apologise to every one of them.

Earlier in the day, water damage had caused a signal failure, delaying trains from rush hour that morning until early afternoon.

Walking up and down the platform, Byford tried to apologise in person to harried commuters while a recording of him formally apologising played on a loop on the station’s loudspeaker.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43561378

 

 

“Free restaurant food for SMRT & ComfortDelgro”

“Abalone, geoduck, sea cucumber and sharksfin isit?”

“Only in S’pore will a PAP minister sneer at serving restaurant food for the elderly poor while the PAP administration condones welfare for public tpt cos.”

The above were my tots when I read

“However, he noted that in the PTC’s discussions with commuters, the council had found that there was an “expectation on the ground” that transport fares will be increased. He added that commuters spoken to were “quite happy to bear higher fares” as they recognise the cost of improving the transport network.”

Public Transport Council chair Richard Magnus

Err so not true that the public tpt network (i.e. infrastructure) is not getting $20bn from the surplus as said by the presumptive PM and a possible one (Lawrence Wong: a PM-in-waiting) in parliament to improve the network?

Ministers wouldn’t lie in parly because lying is “dishonourable”.

So what is this “improving the transport network” by the tpt cos? Network (i.e.infrastructure is not paid for by fares because network is under the LTA.

Welfare for the tpt cos methinks. S’poreans (Surpluses belong to S’poreans even the PAP says though many S’poreans, not juz the cybernuts, may disagree) for improving the tpt network, yet we have to pay tpt cos for these improvements via fare rises.

Welfarism the PAP way. Sad. Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham (“Rob the poor, to give to the rich”) must have been reincarnated as PAP ministers.

Where is Robin Hood when we need him? Goh Meng Seng (Silence of Goh Meng Seng) and Lim Tean (Where’s yr defamation video and jobs rally Lim Tean?) are certainly no reincarnations of Robin Hood.

As is Mad Dog.

Dr Paul? But his followers sadly still prefer to listen to their top Mad Dog. Sad.

CNA report shows public tpt Hard Truths are BS

Constructive, nation-building CNA visited Taipei and reported

How Taipei Metro turned itself around – and the lessons for Singapore’s MRT system
It suffered a spate of delays, then became one of the world’s most reliable subway systems. Talking Point travelled to Taipei to find out how the system is run.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/cnainsider/taipei-metro-subway-system-lessons-singapore-smrt-breakdowns-10046044

So far (and beyond), constructive, nation-building stuff.

But buried really deep in the report, there are things that contradict Hard Truths:

— “To appease the public, the Taipei Metro gave fare discounts …”

Where got this here? I don’t count the “early bird” scheme.

— “The Taipei Metro is nationalised and is majority-owned by the Taipei City government … the metro boss is Mayor Ko Wen-je – who is also one of Taipei’s most recognisable commuters, as he takes the train to work.”

Khaw or Ho got like this meh? Let alone Chairman and CEO of SMRT?

— The Mayor “told Talking Point that ticket fares have not changed in the past 20-something years.”

PAP MP Cheng Li Hui (Was she brown-nosing when she said it was wrong to cut fares, or juz stupid?) should note the above. As should other PAPpies including ministers.

— He also said: “If profit is the only criterion … then very quickly, the public transport will break down.”

PAP MP Cheng Li Hui (Was she brown-nosing when she said it was wrong to cut fares, or juz dumb?) should note the above. As should other PAPpies including ministers

Wah lan SMRT CEO so cock isit?

Scholar and ex-SAF commander is so useless that Khaw, Temasek and SMRT thinks he needs more supervision, a lot more.

It’s not me or angry commuters or the anti-PAP mob saying this. It’s the constructive, nation-building media reporting comments by Temasek, SMRT and Khaw.

If he’s so in need of supervision, why not fire him? Or cut his salary by half? Meritocracy? What meritocracy? Meritocratic hubris/ Who defines “meritocracy”

Here’s how MediaCorp reported the story. ST’s report is along similar lines so maybe there was a dictator dictating the narrative?

Temasek-backed Pavilion Energy’s CEO Seah Moon Ming will step down to focus on his role as chairman of train operator SMRT.

CNA

That shows that Temasek thinks he needs more supervision.

And so does SMRT because

In a separate media release, SMRT said it is “pleased” that when Mr Seah took on the chairmanship in July this year, he had planned to prioritise more time in the role.

“Under the guidance of Mr Seah and our board, SMRT remains focused on delivering key initiatives such as asset renewal efforts, while it continues its multi-year effort to strengthen management, operations and maintenance teams, and build robust engineering and operational capabilities for future needs,” SMRT said.

“The board, CEO and management of SMRT welcome the opportunity to work even more closely with Mr Seah from Feb 1 2018.”

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pavilion-energy-ceo-seah-moon-ming-stepping-down-to-focus-on-9470572

As to Khaw, Desmond’s public defender

Earlier on Tuesday, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan called for more support for the SMRT chairman, after saying that the flooding of the Bishan-Braddell MRT tunnel on Oct 7 was not a failure of engineering, but a “failure of organisational management at SMRT”.

CNA

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three cheers for TOC

The latest SMRT problem and LTA’s announcement that

the two rail operators are required to inform passengers of any delay exceeding 10 minutes, via regular announcements within stations and on board trains. If the delay worsens, updated information should be announced via mainstream and social media.

reminded me that Terry’s Online Channel has been tracking and documenting delays in train service, announced and, more importantly, unannounced, by SMRT.

This is important because memories are short especially for sheep and BS artists.

Here in Wah train service so reliable meh between 2012 and 2016? I reported that I challenged a TRE reader to tell me about his experiences of SMRT delays between 2012 and April 2016. As expected, no picture, no sound.

I also asked via FB a few other very vocal complainers, but they admitted they couldn’t remember or they were not regular MRT commuters.

Which is why it is important that there is a record of the delays that is publicly accessible. But if TOC closes, then no records exist. And after a trouble-free 2019, come the next GE, the sheep will think that the trains have always run on time.

Wah train service so reliable meh between 2012 and 2016?

A usual sane TRE reader posted this in response to my comment that there was only one major cock-up between 2015 and April 2016 On the contrary cybernuts, Desmond did a great job

opposition dude:

November 23, 2017 at 10:17 pm  (Quote)

Ah Cynical, it’s always interesting to read how you like to whitewash the truth isn’t it?

No major cockups until 2015 you say? Perhaps you aren’t a regular user of the trains and have never been caught in a disruption? What about the frequent disruptions faced by commuters every other month since he took over, all that magically doesn’t count ah? Only major shit like the tunnel “ponding” and the langga at Joo Koon?

…

Well I asked him

@opposition dude, look forward to u giving me details of disruptions between 2012 and April 2016 based on yr experience …

No picture no sound so far. So can I reasonably assume he was talking cock? What do u think?

Chiat lat if SMRT involved in this

Sure a lot of problems. Hope that SMRT will be left out of the driveless bus scheme to be introduced in Punggol, Tengah and the Jurong Innovation District from 2022*.

But I forgot, with GE scheduled at latest by early 2021, SMRT will be great again by 2019 at the latest. The PAP administration will throw our money into fixing SMRT so that by the next GE, the present unhappiness will be a distant memory. Remember this was done before: On the contrary cybernuts, Desmond did a great job.

Desmond did such a great job between his appointment in 2012 and July 2015, that a major MRT cock-up weeks before the last GE did not help the Oppo.

————————————

*BBC report

Singapore plans to introduce driverless buses on its public roads by 2022.

The government says they will be piloted in three new neighbourhoods which will have less-crowded roads designed to accommodate the buses.

The buses will be used to help residents travel in their communities, and to nearby train and bus stations.

Densely-populated Singapore hopes driverless technology will help the country manage its land constraints and manpower shortages.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-42090987

 

MRT collision is no play play

Can really be jialat safety and convenience issues.

What happened has implications for the on-going introduction piecemeal introduction of the new signaling system.

The faulty train was operating on both the old and new signalling systems. The old signalling system currently operates from Pasir Ris to Pioneer, while the new system – which allows trains to arrive more frequently during peak hours – operates from Joo Koon to Tuas Link.

Given the finding, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan instructed the separation of the two sections of the East West Line operating under different signalling systems.

If this problem happened here it could happen anywhere else where a train has to operate on both systems.

Note there have been no reports on where else on the MRT system trains are operating on both systems.

And before the cybernuts KPKB, remember that new signalling system is being brought in piecemeal to avoid closing down an entire line.

Related article: This BBC (UK-centric) article explains the issues behind “signal failure” in a railway system: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41708585

Khaw blaming Dr Goh for SMRT failings?

How can Khaw say we were poor money 30 yrs ago?

Thirty years ago, Singapore’s per capita GDP was about $16,000. Last year, in 2016, it has grown more than four times to about $73,000….So when there are people who criticise the North-South and East-West Lines on why we did not do this and that, we were simply short of cash.

Khaw

In 1981, 36 yrs ago, we had so much reserves because of consistent budget surpluses that Dr Goh Keng Swee decided to set up GIC to better manage the returns on the reserves. (Btw, Goh was no fan of the MRT system. He wanted buses.)

Is he implying that Dr Goh, the then PM of the day, one Harry Lee, and the cabinet decided to prioritise overseas investment returns over the MRT system? Is he also saying that the money in the reserves stashed away then were better deployed building a Great MRT system?

Khaw must be punch drunk after taking too many head blows because in defending SMRT, he’s telling us that the then leaders prioritised surpluses i.e. reserves, over infrastructure. Until his latest comments, the official narrative was that we could have surpluses (reserves), and good infrastructure and that the founding leaders achieved both in their wisdom. Now Khaw is saying that the official narrative is BS, and that the money that went to GIC to manage should have been used to make a Great MRT system, not one that is braking down 30 yrs later.

Separately as Chris K pointed out

GDP per capita had grown more than 4 times in 30 years means the govie has 4 times as much tax revenues as 30 years ago. If “we were simply short of cash”, then the govie is not spending enough for the transportation system to keep up with the size of the economy.

Is Khaw, blaming the other Goh and PM (then DPM) for not spending $ in the 90s?

I’ll leave the last word  to a M’sian PR working here (he married local so as to get HDB flat)

30 years ago might have been short, but since then fiscal surpluses have been close to 10pc of GDP a year by IMF accounting. See this is the problem, train investments come out of the budget but land sales get squirreled away unseen. And we pretend we are poor… So easy to invest in a massive investment portfolio, so hard to invest in your own infrastructure. This fiscal dinosaur begs to be made extinct.

Related posts

SMRT: The cock that Khaw talks

Fat cats need help

P&G mgt reminds me of the PAP

SMRT: Why Desmond must go

PAP has lost “output legitimacy”

SMRT: The cock that Khaw talks

Improving rail reliability is a “multi-year war”, said Mr Khaw, who added that calling for a leadership change with each disappointment would be a “sure strategy for failure”

Hey Desmond Kuek was brought in (or “volunteered”) five years ago. So how long more will he be allowed to disappoint?

Did he, when he “volunteered” ask for “5 + x” number of years to make “SMRT great again” or was promised  “5 + x” years to make “SMRT great again”? If he asked for, or was given a specific number of years to make “SMRT great again” we must be told the number and the reason for that number.

Otherwise five years on the job, and still no results sounds like jobs for the generals.

And this is BS

Due to budgetary considerations faced by the government decades ago and the island’s land scarcity, the design of the North-South and East-West lines — Singapore’s oldest MRT lines which were opened in 1987 — is not ideal.

And overcoming the constraints would require the halting of operations for an extended period and at large costs to taxpayers, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan told the House on Tuesday (Nov 7).

For instance, the two lines, which account for about 60 per cent of the MRT ridership, have relied only on one depot in Bishan over the last 30 years because of “budget constraints” at the time of design.

…

Budgets were not the only constraint. Citing the example of train systems such as those in London and New York, Mr Khaw said he was “quite puzzled” by how the trains there could run 24 hours while allowing engineering work to be done.

While these lines were designed as far back as a century ago when land was cheap, he has also realised that the networks catered for many side-tracks, such that trains could run on alternate tracks. “That’s why they were able to continue running 24 hours, not necessarily along the same tracks. It will go to the same stations but there are bypasses … And that’s how a well-designed network ought to be,” he said. Again, Singapore does not have this “luxury”, he said.

Not having these “luxuries” means that there should have been a lot more emphasis on preventive maintenance. It’s now clear that this was lacking, hence the present rush to fix the system before the next GE.

And btw, land was (and is) expensive in HK too. And the British administrators were not exactly spendthrift in their MRT construction budget.

SMRT: Why Desmond must go

That SMRT has asked staff to own-up to lapses without being penalised before a detailed audit is carried out is very worrying. The implication is that SMRT’s senior management is worried that the falsification of records on the maintenance of a tunnel is not the work of “a few rotten apples”. As someone posted on FB:

To be at this juncture, they must have lost control over the operations of the company. Employees must be very unhappy and demoralised too!

Management must be worried that the falsification of maintenance records is systemic. If it’s systemic, senior management cannot escape responsibility even if S’pore does accountability and responsibility in its unique understanding of “meritocracy”: Why PAP doesn’t do accountability, meritocracy.

Talking about the falsification of maintenance records and the failure to detect that work was done, a few days before the amnesty:

Singapore Management University’s Toru Yoshikawa said they are indicative that it was not a priority for SMRT’s top management and board to review its system of checks and internal audits.

Well Desmond has been CEO long enough (5 years) to be responsible for systematic mgt failings. so he and other senior managers should commit hari-kiri. And btw, Hali, the president, and Ong, a contender to be PM, were directors of SMRT: More on Hali’s judgement between 2007 -2011/ Meritocracy? What meritocracy?

During his 1984 National Day Rally speech, LKY had this to say about getting things done and what should be done when things don’t work: “Everything works, whether its water, electricity, gas, telephone, telexes, it just has to work. If it doesn’t work, I want to know why, and if I am not satisfied, and I often was not, the chief goes, and I have to find another chief. Firing the chief is very simple.“

Wonder why his son forgot this Hard Truth when rereading LKY’s speeches? How PM honours “Pa”

Because LKY would fired him after the 2011 GE if LKY had the power? Instead LKY had to move on and was rumoured to have said that Teo Cheen Hean would have made a better PM than “Hsien Loong”.

 

 

 

 

 

PM, Khaw, SMRT: Apologise like Zuckerberg

Recently, Mr Zuckerberg observed Yom Kippur, the Jewish festival of atonement. He wrote on Facebook: “For the ways my work was used to divide people rather than bring us together, I ask forgiveness and I will work to do better.”

I think Khaw, Desmond and the chairman of SMRT should have followed him Where’s Khaw? (cont’d) instead of doing a pale imitation of Japanese-style apology over the “ponding” problem.

PM and the PAP should also do a Zuckerberg for creating disharmony to ensure the “right” person became president by

— going against the national aspirations of meritocracy and multiracialism by wanting a Malay as president, and

— selecting as the Malay president someone whose i/c says “Indian”.

But let’s be fair. Maybe this is why Why PAP thinks we need a Malay president?

And after the recent London terror attack, only the anti-PAP TRE cybernuts will say that the PAP administration is wrong to try to prevent terror attacks.

 

MRT: Pouring petrol on the waterborne flames of discontent

That’s what the chairman of the Public Transport Council did last week, a few days after Khaw, and the chairman and the CEO of SMRT did a pale imitation of Japanese-style apology over the “ponding” problem. 

The Public Transport Council (PTC) will consider the rising cost of maintaining new rail infrastructure as it goes into its annual fare review exercise, PTC chairman Richard Magnus said on Thursday (Oct 19).

…

Mr Magnus wrote in a blog post, titled Balancing Sustainability and Affordability, that the council “cannot turn a blind eye” to rising costs as it has to ensure the “viability of the public transport system”*.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/fare-review-adds-to-rising-costs-of-public-transport-magnus-9325772

He obviously isn’t singing from the hymn sheet as the other three because the last thing the PAP administration wants, is to remind the commuting public that once the trains run like clock-work again there’ll be fare rises**. (Funny that the trains were on time when ran by a Ferrari-owning FT retailer, who also owned a Mercedes sports, not a paper general.)

Whatever, somehow I think that even if the problems at SMRT and the other MRT lines are fixed by this time next year next year, way before the next general election (latest possible date is in early 2021), there won’t be fare increases until after the general election. (And if the problems ain’t fixed by 2021, I wouldn’t be surprised if PM declares a state of emergency, delaying GE until after the MRT problems are solved.)

Btw wonder who are the

— turkeys voting for Christmas,

— suckling pigs voting for Chinese New Year, and

— the sheep voting for Eid al-Adha,

in the focus groups that tell the PTC that “fares are affordable”. Must be the die-die must vote PAP PAPpies.

————————————————

*The report contined:

He detailed the cost of investments in public transport, such as the new Downtown Line and bus contracting subsidies.

The Government’s investments in new rail infrastructure will cost S$20 billion over the next five years, and comes on top of S$4 billion to renew, upgrade and expand rail operating assets, he wrote. Another S$4 billion will be spent on bus contracting subsidies over the same period.

“While these investments are a necessary part of the Government’s push to improve the public transport experience, they raise operating costs and impose a heavy cost burden on taxpayers,” he said.

**Chris K, no fan of the PAP, points out that by first world-standards, public transport fares are low. Funny on this pro PAP occasions, he doesn’t point out that salaries here are not Swiss standard. Btw, his FB wall is becoming the home of TRE’s cybernuts. Comments by the likes of Albert Tay and Es Nolan could have come TRE cybernuts like Oxygen and Rabble-rouser. Chris K will steal eat the lunch of TeamTRE. He doesn’t ask them for funds.

Making MRT Great Again

“Win back our trust”. Taz what Khaw, and the chairman and paper general CEO at SMRT should be doing to make Our MRT Great Again.

First world country.
First world transportation.
First world ethics.

Not the usual suspects KPKBing “PAP is always wrong”.

Someone by the name of Eugene Weeposted u/m on FB. Although he isn’t at present living overseas, he’s spot on on his take of SMRT and what needs to be done.

I think Singaporeans are an understanding bunch.

Yes, we complain like mad when the train service is delayed because in more ways than one, it affects our daily lives and jobs.

But this does not mean we are on a witch hunt to get people fired.

We have been brought up in a culture of honesty and responsibility, and we expect the same from the highest levels of management or government. I believe we are simply looking for an honest response, admission of the issue and a credible solution.

We are more than happy to move on.

But what is unacceptable is when problems remain unaddressed, and worse still, its getting more common.

In light of these, of course there is a swelling ground discontent. but what makes me really uncomfortable is the responses to the public are nothing more than PR spins… get the public to be grateful, look at the hardworking people, to empathize with the workers etc etc.

These PR stunts are not only failing to address our concerns but also basically missing the point, not to mention eroding public trust.

We are not blaming the workers; what we are saying is that the only affordable form of public transport (that the majority of Singaporeans relies on for their bread and butter) is not reliable and please fix it – that is the management’s role.

Yes, we get it. Transportation is not an easy role, and we are not saying it is. But please don’t whitewash or brush it over with some convenient statistics of how more reliable it is when it is not.

If we believe Singapore’s education is top notch; we too, have to believe that Singaporeans are not that gullible to believe in selective statistics, and ignore the day to day disruptions.

If we aim to uphold our values as a first world country that takes pride in what we do, then please don’t give third world responses.

Take issue with the problems at hand, fix it, stop pushing the blame and definately not passing the buck down the line.

We are better than this.

Please don’t take aim at the ground workers, it is not only an appalling display of poor leadership but a clear indication of a lack of moral courage to be there for your people.

And please don’t talk about increasing public transportation fares or increasing salaries till you can increase reliability.

We know it’s an uphill climb, but important sacrifices have to be made in the higher echelon and communications have to be more sincere.

Win back our trust.

First world country.
First world transportation.
First world ethics.

Why PAP doesn’t do accountability, meritocracy.

Where’s Khaw? (cont’d)

Since I wrote Where’s Khaw? on Sunday, he’s resurfaced like a submarine. From a flooded MRT tunnel isit?

And he’s not blaming the constructive nation-building media or new media or even commuters for misrepresenting the truth about the “ponding” at Bishan. Instead

In his first comments on the unprecedented flooding-induced train outage on Oct 7, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan apologised to commuters but pinned the blame squarely on operator SMRT’s maintenance regime.

But there’s more:

Chairman of SMRT Corporation and SMRT Trains Seah Moon Ming bowed and apologised to the public for the underground flooding incident along the North-South Line (NSL) on Oct 7-8 that resulted in a 20-hour disruption. 

But SMRT’s president and group chief executive officer Desmond Kuek, while expressing regret, did no apologies or bowing:

“Much progress has been made with the inculcation of a positive work culture, but there remain some deep-seated cultural issues within the company that has needed more time than anticipated to root out.”

Hello he became the President and Group Chief Executive Officer of SMRT Corporation Limited (SMRT) on 1 October 2012.

So it’s been a good five years since he took charge. He now owns the culture and all other bits of SMRT. SMRT’s history pre October 2012, is no longer an acceptable, reasonable excuse.

But in S’pore scholars don’t get sacked do they? Meritocracy? What meritocracy? Why PAP doesn’t do accountability, meritocracy.

Here life is good for scholars. Multi-millionaire salaries but not accountable for results: juz for trying hard it seems.

 

Where’s Khaw?

They seek him here, they seek him there,
Those MRT commuters seek him everywhere.
Is he in heaven?—Is he in hell?
That demmed, elusive Khaw*.

I mean until last weekend, whenever there was a breakdown in SMRT service, Batman Super Khaw would come out swinging defending SMRT.

Kerpow! The constructive, nation-building MSM for pointing out that commuters were delayed.

Thwack! Social media for posting commuters’ complaints.

Zap! Commuters don’t appreciate SMRT when it doesn’t breakdown

Crunch! Kick all the above in the balls for KPKBing.

But, he’s been silent (MIA? AWOL?) since rainwater flooded tunnels on the North-South Line and causing a disruption between Ang Mo Kio and Newton MRT stations between Saturday evening and Sunday afternoon.

He posted on FB but on other things.

Meanwhile

Vivian Balakrishnan

on Thursday

Our bus and train staff from SBS and SMRT work tirelessly to provide good service for us all. Some of them even wake as early at 3 AM to catch the company shuttle so that they can start the daily services bright and early. They work six days a week for long hours. Their jobs are difficult and challenging.

Mayor Teo Ho Pin, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, and I hosted breakfast for them as a small gesture of appreciation this morning. Remember to give them a smile the next time you see them 🙂

 Maybe there’s going to be a new transport minister? And VivianB is the chosen one?

But maybe Khaw had other things to do. He hosted the 23rd ASEAN Transport Ministers meeting on 12 October.

Or maybe, SMRT is preparing to announce something major? Like the CEO committing hari-kiri. But don’t hold yr breath. Scholars and other PAPpies do not do Japanese despite GCT telling us to follow the Japanese Learn from Japanese — set example leh elites

————————————-

*Apologies to the original

We seek him here, we seek him there,
Those Frenchies seek him everywhere.
Is he in heaven?—Is he in hell?
That demmed, elusive Pimpernel.

Sir Percy Blakeney, Baronet

MRT: insufficient attention to maintenance

Yesterday, I posted a short piece on accountability in a meritocracy  PM, this is accountabilityand alluded to SMRT as its anthesis.

Here’s more on SMRT (and MRT) from an expert. Forget all the smoke about the need for new sleepers, initially, and now, new signaling eqpt as the cause of disruptions.

The efficiency of the system led to overconfidence, said Lock Kai Sang, engineering professor at the Singapore Institute of Technology and a former member of an Independent Advisory Panel appointed by the Land Transport Authority to assess the rail system’s power supply.

“At a certain point, there wasn’t sufficient attention being paid to the maintenance,” he said. “They were too confident at one point.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-18/singapore-workers-get-a-taste-of-commuting-chaos-as-trains-fail

Let’s also not forget the population increase which should have raised the priority of the the issue of maintenance because of the pressure of an increase in commuters.

And as I’ve pointed, Hali was a non-executive director of SMRT from 2007 to 2011. The maintenance issue and labour problems originated or festered during that period.

The good news according Mr Lock is that “the government and rail operators are putting in a lot of effort to install systems that allow predictive maintenance, designed to stop problems before they occur.”

Granted but if we were a truly meritocratic and accountable society, the systems should have been in place to help prevent problems before they occur i.e. predictive maintenance should have been in-built into the system. SIA doesn’t fly its planes until they crash.

Related article: How to incentivise entitled meritocrats

More on Hali’s judgement between 2007 -2011/ Meritocracy? What meritocracy?

Further to this about Hali’s judgment as SMRT non-executive director in not being aware of MRT problems that ordinary S’poreans were aware of, there’s more about her judgement (or rather lack of it) during her spell as SMRT director and a senior NTUC leader.

She really showed bad judgement because it concerned SMRT’s labour relations.

I wrote this in 2012 about Ong Ye Kung, but it applies to Halimah too given that labour problems don’t just happen overnight. They fester over time. And she should have known about the labour tensions in SMRT given that  she was Deputy Secretary General, Director of the Legal Services Department and Director of the Women’s Development Secretariat.

Earlier this year, SMRT’s S’porean drivers made known publicly their unhappiness over pay proposals that had his endorsement as Executive Secretary of NTWU (Nation Transport Workers’ Union). As he was also a non-executive director of SMRT, if he were an investment banker, a US judge would have rebuked and censured him for his multiple, conflicting roles.

Then he resigned, effective last month, from NTUC to “join the private sector”.

In perhaps a farewell, good-riddance gesture, FT PRC workers went on strike (illegally) and we learnt:

— they lived in sub-standard accommodation (SMRT admitted this);

— unlike most SBS FT PRC drivers, most of SMRT’s PRC drivers were not union members; and

— Ministry of Manpower reprimanded SMRT for its HR practices.

All this reflects badly on Ong: NTUC’s Deputy Secretary-General,  Executive-Secretary of NTWU and SMRT non-executive director. And on the system that allowed him to rise to the top. After all his ex-boss said the following reported on Friday, which given Ong’s multiple roles in SMRT, can reasonably be interpreted as criticism of Ong:

In his first comments on the illegal strike, which saw 171 workers protesting over salary increases and living conditions, the Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) said the labour dispute “shouldn’t have happened” and “could have been avoided”. [So where was Ong: looking at his monthly CPF statements and being happy?]

NTUC is thus reaching out to SMRT’s management to persuade them “to adopt a more enlightened approach to embrace the union as a partner”, he added. [Hello, NTUC’s Deputy Secretary-General was on SMRT’s board, so what waz he doing?]

Mr Lim, who was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the Labour Movement Workplan Seminar, cited the example of SMRT’s rival SBS Transit where nine in 10 of its China bus drivers are union members. Only one in 10 of SMRT’s China bus drivers are union members, according to union sources. [So, why didn’t Ong advise SMRT to help unionise these FTs, and if he did, why didn’t NTUC push harder ehen SMRT refused?]

SBS Transit’s management “recognised the constructive role of the union”, while union leaders “played the role of looking after the interests of the drivers”, said Mr Lim.

“And as a result … they work very closely as one team, it’s a win-win outcome. In terms of how workers are being treated and respected, how management are responsive, how they work together, I think it’s a kind of model that we ought to see more and more in Singapore.” (Today)

Judgment? What judgment?

Coming back to Ong. Given he’s failed at NTUC as Zorro Lim implied above, he’s now said to be a possible PM?

And NTUC is not the only place he failed. He failed here too:

Ong was the Chief Executive of the Singapore Workforce Development Agency from 2005 to 2008. There, he spearheaded many initiatives to build up the Continuing Education and Training infrastructure for Singapore, and made training accessible to the individual worker, including contract workers and the unemployed.

Wikipedia entry

Surely he must share a lot of the blame for the low productivity of S’pore’s work force?

Meritocracy? What meritocracy?

Related: Meritocratic hubris/ Who defines “meritocracy”

Where was Hali’s judgement between 2007 and 2011?

AWOL? MIA? Looking at her monthly CPF and bank statements?

The  constructive, nation-building media repoeted that the presumptive Madam President said making a decision to unlock the nation’s reserves is not just based on numbers but involves exercising judgment gleaned from years of experience in policymaking. (Here’s what Chris K says about the lack of discretion that any president has.)

Well between 2007 and 2011, where was her judgement when she was a non-executive director of SMRT?

I mean it wasn’t only the cybernuts in TRELand who were pointing out the problems that SMRT was not owning up to such as overcrowding and a lack of maintenance. Luckily for the PAP and PM, it was only after GE and PE 2011 that the wheels came off the trains, the signal lights failed, and the power supply failed, something predicted by many S’poreans.

Where was her judgement then? Presumably that management not the users of the MRT system were correct that everything was fine?

 

Tan Kin Lian is absolutely right

This blog is anti-TKL because in 2011 he was clowning around (albeit on the advice and instigation of one Goh Meng Seng) and doing the PAP’s work in depriving Dr Tan Cheng Bock of the presidency. Though they never got the thirty pieces of silver.

Transport minister Khaw BW held a media briefing to announce the rail reliability target for 2020. The journalists asked him some questions about the current train breakdown in Singapore.

The minister chided the journalists. He said that it is not easy to fix the engineering problems. He challenged them to try to solve the problem if they are so smart.
I find the minister’s remarks to be deplorable. The journalists are required to do their job as journalists. They are not supposed to be experts in engineering.

The transport ministry, the Land Transport Authority and the train operators are supposed to employ the engineering experts. They are supposed to identify the problems and to find the solutions.

The correct benchmark is the breakdown frequency in other train systems around the world. Do these train systems break down as often as has happened in Singapore. Some of these systems are older than our train system.
If our engineers are not up to mark, the transport minister should look for other engineers to fix the problem. He should not rely on journalists to give him the solution.

It is absurb for the minister to speak in this manner.

Sad to say, this is the quality of the ministers and the top officials that are appointed by PM Lee HL to run Singapore. It seemed that paying top salaries, in the millions of dollars, does not provide the answer.

We do need a change of government.

Sad there is viable alternative in sight.

How Pay & Pay can ensure we complain less

You know the PAP administration is rattled when a PAP minister castigates the constructive, nation-building media for reporting the problems that MRT breakdowns are causing commuters. He wants the media to report how Great SMRT is.

ST’s editor responded, “If press coverage doesn’t match everyday experience, then the press loses credibility.”

He only said that because we have the internet and social media to keep honest his paper and other media. I’m old enough to remember when local media coverage at times didn’t match everyday experience.

Now to some constructive advice to the minister and his minions on how to make sure S’poreans KPKB less when the trains don’t run on time.

Behavioural economists tell us we are wired to care more about things we pay than things we get for free. This tendency is called the “endowment effect”. Paying for something represents a loss of money, so we care more and get more upset over things we pay for than over things (identical or otherwise) we can get for free*.

So when an MRT delay occurs, shut the KPKBing down by making the trip free.

It has the additional benefit of showing Khaw, LTA, SMRT and Temask how much revenue is lost when trains don’t run on time.

---

*Take “WordPress”. Because I use the free version, I don’t grumble about things that suck.

Did SMRT CEO Trains say “Disruptions are planned”?

But first what SMRT really means when it says “no choice”.

SMRT Trains’ CEO Lee Ling Wee said on Monday (Jul 10) “no choice leh”

SMRT had to test the new system throughout the day because it was being added to an already operational MRT line and would take “years” if it were only tested at times of the day which were less busy.

“If we were to restrict the performance checks to only weekends, or engineering hours (i.e. 1.30AM – 4.30AM), it would take Singapore years to implement the new signalling system on the NSEWL,” he said.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/no-choice-but-to-test-mrt-signalling-system-throughout-the-day-9019020

What I think he’s mealy-mouthing is that SMRT’s staff don’t really know how the new signaling system will operate with the existing system in peak and normal hours, so they got to put it in when traffic conditions are normal, pray hard and debug when things go wrong..

This is the giveaway me thinks:

“The system hardware and software we have are customised for the unique local environment,” he said. “While the system supplier had experience working with other operators in the world, they are unable to simply replicate the well-oiled systems of Taipei, Hong Kong and London, and import those here.”

I think he says the disruptions* are planned going because

Unlike with the Circle Line incident last year – when SMRT had to conduct extensive tests to find out what was causing intermittent signalling issues in September and November – Mr Lee said that a “planned” approach was being used this time.

“This is unlike the Circle Line incident in 2016 when we dealt with unknown unknowns,” he said. “We are adopting a planned, systematic approach …

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/no-choice-but-to-test-mrt-signalling-system-throughout-the-day-9019020

Hey Desmond, get off yr ass and stop looking at yr bank statement, because in the 1990s

The renowned American military strategist, Edward Luttwak said that the only good thing about Singapore was that “the trains run on time”. (From the standpoint of 2017, that now seems like a funny remark, given the relative regular incidence of train delays on the MRT.)

Derek da Cunha on FB recently

I mean military men are supposed to make sure that the trains run on time. Taz why in the 19th century many US generals ended up running railway companies. Even a tin-pot dictator, Mussolini, is reputed to have made Italian trains run on time.

But u seem to be different. Because u scholar and SAF general isit? Everything is “paper” only?

—————————————————–

*The NSEWL has experienced multiple disruptions over the signalling system test period, with commuters taking to social media to voice their frustration. At the end of June, train services on the North-South Line were halted for nearly two hours due to a signalling fault. Part of the East-West Line was also disrupted.

 

PAPpy Grinch strikes? Or is it Scrooge?

And “Heads or tails, we get screwed”, and “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.” were the tots that crossed my mind when I read that the Public Transport Council (PTC) may recommend standardising fares for all MRT lines and bus routes here.

In a blog post on Monday (Oct 10) PTC chairman Richard Magnus said that “it is clear that commuters prefer a simple fare structure”.

True but we prefer lower prices too. And the plan to standandise the fare structure sounds like an excuse not to pass on the benefits of lower costs to us.

Mr Magnus added that while the large negative quantum of 5.7 per cent may have commuters hoping for a corresponding drop in fares,trade-offs may be necessary to balance the various interests of commuters, the need for operators to sustain a viable public transport system, and the “financial burden” of Government expenditure on public transport infrastructure and assets.

ST

Stop the BS about “financial burden” of Government expenditure on public transport infrastructure and assets**. Hey we got budget surpluses that need recycling. And recycling doesn’t juz mean giving Temasek and GIC money to gamble invest.

So long as there are humongous budget surpluses, we can have our cake and eat it. Now if the budget is neutral, then fair enough to raise fares.

---

*“The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.”

Jam tomorrow or jam to-morrow (older spelling) is an expression for a never-fulfilled promise. It originates from Lewis Carroll’s 1871 book Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There.[1] In the book the White Queen offers Alice “jam every other day” as an inducement to work for her:
“I’m sure I’ll take you with pleasure!” the Queen said. “Two pence a week, and jam every other day.”
Alice couldn’t help laughing, as she said, “I don’t want you to hire me – and I don’t care for jam.”
“It’s very good jam,” said the Queen.
“Well, I don’t want any to-day, at any rate.”
“You couldn’t have it if you did want it,” the Queen said. “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.”
“It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day’,” Alice objected.
“No, it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know.”
“I don’t understand you,” said Alice. “It’s dreadfully confusing!”

Wikipedia

**ST reported him as saying:

He noted that $4 billion would be spent to subsidise bus services over next five years under the bus contracting model.

Other considerations include the reliability of the expanding rail line and the manpower crunch in the sector.

“Realistically, it is not sustainable to keep imposing higher standards on our operators while fares remain unchanged, or to keep increasing the level of subsidies from the Government. The experts’ view is to avoid large fluctuations in fares which may create adverse impact to industry stakeholders; and to have small and gradual fare adjustments instead,” he said.

“A fine balance is therefore necessary to ensure that our public transport system remains viable and sustainable in the long run.”

So long as there are humongous budget surpluses, we can have our cake and eat it. Now if the budget is neutral, then fair enough to raise fares.

Circle Line: BS piled on

Ownself praise ownself when it came to finding the fault that disrupted Circle Line rail services

Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said the multi-agency effort to identify the cause behind recent disruptions to the Circle Line showed what combined collaboration could do for Singapore, when unconfined along departmental or organisational lines*.

Hello it took a very long time, didn’t it? The breakdowns (and delays) started in August and the problem was only a few days ago, in November.

S’poreans opted for a defacto one party state because we were promised efficiency. Didn’t get efficiency here, did we? We got one massive balls-up and a lot of bull.

————————————–

*He went on,

“It’s not possible for one agency to have all capabilities,” said Dr Ng in response to questions on the sidelines of the Republic of Singapore Air Force’s (RSAF) Exercise Torrent 2016 on Sunday (Nov 13).

“In this particular instance, the Defence Science and Technology Agency and DSO have experts in signals. GovTech – even though it’s very young, had experts in data analytics, very bright young minds, and the Land Transport Authority and the Ministry of Transport showed great leadership in bringing all these capabilities together,” said Dr Ng.

CNA.

ST on how rotten SMRT’s culture is

Must read this ST article as it describes how rotten the SMRT culture was or is. An excerpt

Truth is, SMRT must be accountable for many of its recent missteps, including one which led to the deaths of two young employees on a track early this year.

Just days after an embarrassing bus driver strike thrust the operator into the limelight in November 2012, newly minted chief executive Desmond Kuek admitted that the company had managerial, structural, cultural and systemic issues. Fixing those “deep-seated” issues, he said, was going to be a top priority.

Four years on, it is clear some of those issues remain unresolved. To be fair, no one person can effect profound change in an organisation of some 9,000 employees. A top-down approach rarely works. Change has to come from within, and start from the bottom. Management has to walk the talk, and be ready to join the troops in the trenches.

Many years ago, Lee Han Shih, a really brave and good SPH journalist (now a media entrepreneur), told me that the reporter who wrote the above report, was one of ST’s best. This report is more evidence.

BPLRT: Is SDP or LTA telling the truth?

What the LTA says is going to happen is not the what the SDP claims is going to happen.

Below is the SDP’s claim that the Bukit Panjang Light Rail Transit (BPLRT) system is going to be scrapped and that this is a waste of money. It goes on to say

There are many train systems all over the world much older than the one in BP that are still running. Some were built in the 19th century with wooden carriages powered by steam engines when they first started.

But the trains kept running because innovative minds re-engineered and made improvements to the systems. There is a strong sense of pride in the work done in these places, something that is obviously missing under the PAP’s leadership in Singapore.

Sadly for someone (me) who wants an end to the PAP’s hegemony and for the Oppo to gain cred with the middle ground, the SDP is at the very least guilty of misrepresentation.

This is because according to a BT (or ST?) report “Bukit Panjang LRT may be scrapped: SMRT company blog” the LTA is also thinking of extending the working life of the line and upgrading it, not juz getting rid of it.

In an internal LTA SMRT blog

SMRT Trains managing director Lee Ling Wee said a joint team is reviewing the future of the system with a view to giving it a major overhaul.

“It will be more than just a makeover,” Mr Lee wrote, adding that the 17-year-old system is near “the end of its design life”.

One, to deploy self-powered autonomous guided vehicle on the existing viaduct.

Two, build a new LRT system with significant design enhancements in key infrastructures such as power supply, signalling, rolling stock, tracks and stations.

Three, to renew the existing Bombardier system with a more updated signalling system – allowing trains to be tracked more accurately, and to ply at a higher frequency.

Mr Lee said that an idea to do away with the entire LRT system was also mooted and for residents in the Bukit Panjang area to go back to riding buses.

Isn’t

to deploy self-powered autonomous guided vehicle on the existing viaduct

or

to renew the existing Bombardier system with a more updated signalling system – allowing trains to be tracked more accurately, and to ply at a higher frequency

what the SDP accusing it of not doing?

There are many train systems all over the world much older than the one in BP that are still running. Some were built in the 19th century with wooden carriages powered by steam engines when they first started.

But the trains kept running because innovative minds re-engineered and made improvements to the systems.

Wake up yr ideas SDP. Can’t find people who understand English isit? Why liddat?

Dr Chee is KPKBing that he and the SDP lack cred with the voting public because they are fixed by the Chiams, and the PAP and its media allies. He should put his own house in order before throwing stones.

With enemies like the SDP and Dr Chee, the PAP doesn’t need friends. The PAP is really lucky.

—————————–

*Singapore Democrats

The idea of scrapping the Bukit Panjang Light Rail Transit (BPLRT) system is typical of the malaise and lack of direction that has enveloped the present government.

Unable to think outside the box and come up with viable solutions to make things work, the PAP chooses instead to waste public funds by ditching the nearly $300 million system.

The SMRT, under the governance of the Land Transport Authority, gives the excuse that the BPLRT has come to the end of its 20-year design lifespan and therefore should be discarded.

This is an affront to common sense. There are many train systems all over the world much older than the one in BP that are still running. Some were built in the 19th century with wooden carriages powered by steam engines when they first started.

But the trains kept running because innovative minds re-engineered and made improvements to the systems. There is a strong sense of pride in the work done in these places, something that is obviously missing under the PAP’s leadership in Singapore.

The truth is that the BPLRT system has been plagued with problems right from the beginning and the authorities have been unable and unwillingly to fix its regular and frequent breakdowns, preferring to focus on making a profit off the system.

This is similar to the regular and frequent breakdowns of the MRT experienced nationwide. The inability resolve the sorry state of affairs of the system is not because of the design lifespan of the trains or the tracks – platform doors are even falling off in the brand new Downtown Line.

Rather, the source of the problem is the incompetence of the government to put together a team of able leaders and to marshal resources to deal with the malfunctions.

Instead of tackling the problem head on, the PAP chooses the easy way out – abandoning the entire system. Such a move means that hundreds of millions of dollars of the public funds will be flushed down the drain. While money is easy to come by for the government through the raising of fees and taxes, it is something that Singaporeans toil for.

The SDP calls on the PAP to not take the people’s hard earned money for granted and earnestly look into to fixing the problems of the BPLRT and MRT.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share76

No need for PRC FTs or senior citizens

Several Tuesdays ago, I read in ST that SBS had no issues about the retirement age being raised to 67. It has lots of oldie drivers.

I also read on the same dat that SMRT will raise its basic starting salary for all its Singaporean and Permanent Resident (PR) bus captains by 20 per cent to S$1,950 from Sep 1, it announced in a press release on Monday (Aug 28). 

SMRT said the revised salary package will see new bus captains earning a monthly gross salary of up to S$3,540. Existing bus captains will also have their basic pay increased by at least S$300 “in recognition of their service to the company”, SMRT said.

This comes on the heels of similar pay hikes by Singapore’s two other public bus operators as competition for local bus captains intensifies.SBS Transit increased its starting salary from S$1,775 to S$1,950 in June while UK-based bus operator Go-Ahead increased its starting salary from the S$1,865 it announced in February to S$1,950 in July. 

(CNA)

This reminded me that LTA is exploring the use of self-driving buses*. No for SBS or SMRT to employ oldies or PRC FTs, and no need to compete on wages. They both had to taise wages because of an ang Moh bus operator “spoiling” the market. More FT operators pls.

But technicians to service these self-driving buses sure to be FTs. Cannot blame companies or govt given situations like this? Employing locals can be problematic.

---

*But pls keep SMRT away from this project. Look at its problems with self-driving trains on the Circle Line. I mean self-driving trains work in other cities.

SMRT: Still no hati-kiri meh?

(Update at 4.30 am on 27 April: Came across a great comments on Facebook: When train services were disrupted in 2012, the Board said it hold the CEO and management responsible. A COI was subsequently called. Now trains break down ever so often plus the fact that two staff died on the job, What has the Board of SMRT got to say?

And this: Minister Khaw made a Facebook post about the 100 day achievement but has been oddly silent after the repeated breakdowns right after

But let’s be fair: maybe he realised that his previous “100 day” comment provoked Nemesis to punish him for his hubris. He didn’t want us to suffer because he talks cock.)

Let alone a deep bow of apology?

(Japanese CEO of Mitsubishi Motors recently apologising for corporate misbehaviour )

Yesterday, when the SMRT reported what went wrong when two trainees died and where thetr was a massive failure of train services, I was reminded that the PAP administration talks the talk of about following Japanese values; while not walking the talk,

GCT was keen to stress Jap values so long as they didn’t apply to the PAP administration and Khaw only when they applied to the WP.

Where was GCT’s and Khaw’s Jap style of responsibility from the head of SGH and the senior official in MoH?

And why no bowing at SMRT?

Actually this is this the kind of Jap behaviour the PAP administration prefers? CEO takes cover.

But I’ll end on a constructive, nation-building note

Here’s something from the BBC on how to admit mistakes without admitting that one has personally made a mistake. PAP ministers and others should take note.

Going back further still, in 1961 John F Kennedy faced a news conference days after the failed CIA-sponsored invasion at the Bay of Pigs in Cuba.

Despite saying he had no more to add on the debacle beyond an initial statement, a reporter asked about conflicting information surrounding a “certain foreign policy situation”.

“There’s an old saying that victory has 100 fathers and defeat is an orphan,” Kennedy said in his reply.

That neither he nor his administration had anything more to say at the time was not to conceal responsibility, he said, because “I’m the responsible officer of the government”.
All in the wording.

Admitting fault is a political minefield. As political scientist Daniel W Drezner wrote in the Washington Post last year, it brings few benefits: an admission is unlikely to change critics’ minds and could damage supporters’ confidence.

While some commentators on the BBC website praised Mr Obama’s candour, others said he should have chosen the healthcare reforms as the focus of his contrition: something he instead picked as a highlight of his presidency.

And long before the 24-hour news cycle, presidents were careful when acknowledging faults.

In a 1876 report on his presidency, marred by political and financial scandals, Ulysses S Grant said “mistakes have been made, as all can see and I admit it”, according to Safire’s Political Dictionary.

Or in other words: “Mistakes have been made. But not necessarily by me.”

Why so many MRT breakdowns

Senior lecturer at SIM University, Professor Walter Theseira, said: “… We’re doing a lot of backdated maintenance or fixing of problems after they become really apparent.”

The above was hidden in a long CNA article entitled

Singapore’s train system: What needs to be done to ensure a smoother ride?

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-s-train-system/2364656.html

SgDaily also spotted this and highlighed it on Facebook. Great minds think alike LOL.

But there is Karma. Dividends from SMRT to state have been recycled back and more. The free lunch was enjoyed by the private investors who got the benefit of dividends (i’m assuming they sold their sgares in time).

Related posts: Learning from the Arabs and this. But I was wrong about assuming that general could make trains run on time. Forgot he paper general and scholar, like the CEO of NOL.

 

Humbug higher fares= better service/ New tpt minister will be the ONE

In the constructive, nation-building media and the new media, there seems to be some astro-turfing that higher ticket prices are needed for better, more reliable public tpt.

BS: Go ask the Brits. U/m appeared in the BBC recently

There’s more happy-ish news in the Telegraph, which reports that ministers are to announce the smallest increase in fares for six years. However, the Guardian quotes campaigners pointing out that fares have risen at triple the rate of wages over the past five years.

The FT takes the same grim line, pointing out that season tickets and other regulated fares have risen by 25% in real terms since 2010 while average pay rose 8.7%.

The Daily Express grumbles: “In return travellers continue to battle with trains that are frequently delayed and hugely overcrowded. All the while rail bosses pick up huge pay packets and some petulant unions misuse their ability to cause chaos.”

Next tpt minister will be Ah Loon’s successor

The conventional wisdom in the MSM and new media is that the transport portfolio is the “poisoned cup” portfolio. Two ministers in a row have been disgraced and publicly shamed. No-one wants to do the job.

But what if in the last few yrs, the really hard work of cleaning the Augean stables* that is the public transport system has been almost done? And that very soon the trains will stop breaking down? Get more punctual? And less crowded?And the bus system gets better during peak hours (as a bus user and trains in off peak hours, I’ve not got any complaints about the buses)?

If so, time (and a few more beautifying cosmetic changes) will enable the PAP administration to declare victory (trains not breaking down, and running on time, and buses less packed at peak times) and to declare that XYZ the transport minister is the guy that should succeed Ah Loong.

But this presupposes that Ah Loong and the PAP don’t argue that “60 is the new 40” and that Ah Loong like Johnnie Walker  keeps on walking.

——–

*Augean stables – definition of Augean stables by The Free …

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Augean+stables

the stables of Augeas, a legendary king of Elis, which had been left filthy for many years: they were cleaned by Hercules, who diverted a river through them. ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend: Noun.

Augean Stable | Definition of Augean stable by Merriam …

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/augean%20stable

a condition or place marked by great accumulation of filth or corruption. ADVERTISEMENT. Examples of AUGEAN STABLE. <as a gubernatorial candidate he …

Aqua Lions?/ No worries about coup/ SMRT no got this

So the SAF was upset that the swimmers called their team “Red Lions”, the description that SAF’s parachuting team uses? And the swimmers decided to drop the name.

What the heck? Given that it’s a swimming team, “Red Merlions” is more appropriate? Or “Blue Lions” or “Water Lions or “Aqua Lions”?

What do you think? A lot better than “Sea Lions” that GCT suggested? [Last sentence added at 7.15am].

Actually, this storm in tea cup could have been engineered by the SAF’s special ops team to divert attention from the fact that three ex-SAF commanders are showing themselves to very incompetent: the tpt minister and the CEOs of SMRT and NOL.

Shouldn’t Khaw be calling fot Lui* to commit hari-kiri? Or resign? But then our leaders always talked cock about Japanese style responsibility: only for the “little people” not them. https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/learn-from-japanese-set-example-leh-elites/

But let’s look on the bright side of the incompetncy of the transport minister and the CEO’s of NOL and SMRT

Given that they  are scholars and two are ex-generals and one an ex-admiral, and given the problems that the tpt ministry and NOL and SMRT are facing, SAF generals and admirals are sure to cock-up any coup attempt**.

Seriously, the u/m report amazwd me

Transport operator SMRT said on Friday that it will accelerate the setting up of a new maintenance operations centre, which will provide swifter responses to rail incidents.

Experts stationed at the centre will be able to communicate directly with maintenance teams on the ground, and provide in-depth diagnostic advice to speed up service recovery.

The centre is expected to be ready in the coming year, SMRT said in a press briefing which was called in light of the recent spate of train disruptions.

Only one other metro has such a maintenance operations centre, SMRT added, while declining to say which one.

– See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/transport/story/smrt-beef-its-team-engineers-and-technicians-20150306#sthash.soP3EC4t.dpuf

Given that Kuek was an ex-SAF general, I’m surprised he didn’t make establishing such a centre a priority given the situation he was left by the previous Ferrari driving CEO. This FT told commuters to bugger-off if they weren’t prepared to be crammed like sardines, pointing out that they had a choice not to take the train, and anyway trains were more packed elsewhere.

If as an army general, he doesn’t know the importance of a state-of-the-art command-and-control operations centre, what does he know?

Kuek would never have made it into the German general staff: From the mid 19th century to the end of WW II, the train section, an elite section,  of the elite general staff had to ensure that the trains would run on time when war came. When the Kaiser on the eve of World War I asked his chief of general staff if he could stop the mobilisation, he was told that the train schedules wouldn’t permit it. Now if Kuek had been in charge of the train section, the trains would have delayed and WWI prevented.

—

*I suspect post GE, he’d join Raymond Lim.

**Fortunately, Indon and M’sian generals and admirals are just as incompetent as our SAF ones: think the MH 370 incident (military radar not switched on, or if it was no-one was watching); or the inability of the Indon navy to curb piracy and sand smuggling.

Curbing COE anger/ Shumething from the PAP’s bible

Since “populism” is no longer a dirty word for the PAP administration (juz look at Tharman’s budget measures that had tai-tai Kate Spate Tin and other PAP MPs upset) here are two more measures that will make ordinary S’poreans happy:

Curbing COE envy while raising $

Not only do anti-PAP cybernuts get worked up with envy of people that can afford CoEs, even usually rational people like P Ravi can go over the top in their grumbling about the unfairness of the COE system: that it favours the rich especially the really filthy rich.

Ferraris are common on the streets of Singapore – but the gap between rich and poor is growing. BBC Online

Here’s how to make S’poreans less envious of those with flash cars: Finland’s speeding fines are linked to income, with penalties calculated on daily earnings, meaning high earners get hit with bigger penalties for breaking the law. So, when businessman Reima Kuisla was caught doing 103km/h (64mph) in an area where the speed limit is 80km/h (50mph), authorities turned to his 2013 tax return, the Iltalehti newspaper reports. He earned 6.5m euros (£4.72m) that year, so was told to hand over 54,000 euros.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-31709454

The premises for the law are pretty solid

— sports cars are expensive toys;

— rich people are more likely to buy sports cars than ordinary people;

— people who drive sports cars are likely to drive over the speed limit;

— the standard fines are “peanuts” for the rich.

We could go further and calculate monetary punishment for motoring offenses, not involving death or injury, on daily earnings, hitting high earners (like ministers, or ex-MPs working as advisers to TLCs) with bigger penalties for breaking the law.

This system of fines is even more necessary to curh COE envy as S’pore is expected to see the world’s largest influx of super-rich individuals over the next 10 years, with 1,752 people joining the ranks of the so-called ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs) by 2024, according to a report by property consultancy Knight Frank

 The projected addition to Singapore’s wealth brigade is higher than that of cities such as Hong Kong, New York and London, and will see the number of people with net assets of US$30 million (S$41 million) or more here soar by 54.3 per cent to 4,979 in 2024, said the Wealth Report.

Combine this measure with the u/m and tai- tai tin and friends will quit the PAP. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Free public tpt

And it’s from the PAP’s sacred text: the Economist

Making buses and subways free … would increase passenger numbers, opening up space on the streets for essential traffic and saving time by reducing road congestion.

In New York, the idea of free buses and subways dates back to at least 1965, when Ted Kheel, a lawyer, first floated the idea—and pushed for a doubling of bridge and tunnel fares to make up for lost revenue. Kheel died in 2010, but the modern version of his plan, which would include a congestion charge for cars and trucks entering the Manhattan business district, lives on. The big push by New York’s mayor, Michael Bloomberg, for congestion-pricing was blocked by the state legislature in April 2008; in 2009 he proposed making cross-town buses free, but that idea has yet to be implemented. It’s worth a second look.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2013/06/fares

————

*Member of Parliament for West Coast GRC Mr Arthur Fong has raised concerns over whether the programmes announced during the recent Budget can be sustained.

Speaking in Parliament on Tuesday (Mar 3) during the Budget debate, Mr Fong said the Government must keep a tight hold on the reins as Singapore moves in the direction where more social spending is beginning to feature in its budgets. He said a miscalculation of such spending will be hard to address for future governments.

Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC Chia Shi-Lu has said he supports the Silver Support Scheme but is concerned over its long-term sustainability.

Speaking in Parliament on Tuesday (Mar 3) during the debate on the Budget statement, Dr Chia asked if having such a permanent scheme will mean increasing the burden for Singapore – given the ageing population and a shrinking tax base.

MP for Marine Parade GRC Tin Pei Ling said in Parliament on Tuesday (Mar 3) that with Temasek Holdings expected to contribute another S$4 billion to S$5 billion to Government coffers after being included in the Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework, she is concerned that Singaporeans would take the nation’s financial reserves for granted.

Ms Tin also says that there is a need to ensure that Singaporeans do not set unrealistic expectations of what can be drawn from the NIR and end up depleting the reserves.

“We may need to set controls to stop ourselves from making further rule changes, like in 2009 and this year, which enable us to draw more NIR each time we need more revenue to fund new needs.

“We need to explain to Singaporeans that the NIR comes from our reserves which are extraordinary and precious, and should not be taken for granted, and also that the Singapore spirit that has enabled us to build up such levels of reserves is also extraordinary and precious, and we must sustain this spirit.

“I hope that the Finance Minister can give an assurance that we can do all these, even as we increase the NIR to fund our new priorities.”

Ms Tin also questioned if using the financial reserves will result in Singaporeans losing their resilience.

“Studies have shown that countries which have abundant natural resources often do not do well over the long term, because their people do not have to work hard and apply their wits, and gradually lose their vitality and initiative,” said Ms Tin.

“Singapore may not have oil reserves, but we must take care that our financial reserves can also have the same corrupting effect on our drive and resilience.”

(Excerpts from CNA)

How bad can MRT get? Juz look at NOL

During the Spring Festival, we had more evidence of how a scholar, army general and ex-Temasek MD is failing to refloat NOL which he steered onto the rocks. He had to sell the crown jewels to try to refloat NOL No need to remind readers that SMRT is run by a scholar and a retired SAF general. NOL today, the MRT ststem tomorrow.

Contrast NOL’s financial performance withwhat’s happening at Maersk Line.

NOL

NOL has suffered three straight years of pre-tax losses in challenging industry conditions.

The buyer, Tokyo-listed Kintetsu World Express (KWE), has said it will keep APL Logistics’ headquarters in Singapore.

“In an increasingly competitive liner shipping sector, NOL believes that it is imperative to strive to have the most cost-competitive position, and the strongest financial position in order to have a better chance to thrive,” NOL said yesterday.

“Accordingly, NOL has decided to dispose of its logistics business and focus on improving its core liner shipping business.”

Mr Ng Yat Chung, NOL’s group president and chief executive, said: “The transaction will also strengthen our balance sheet and unlock value for our shareholders.”

NOL, which posted its fourth-quarter results last Friday, said operational cost efficiencies helped narrow its net losses to US$85.1 million from losses of US$137 million a year earlier.

– See more at: http://business.asiaone.com/news/nol-sells-logistics-business-16-billion#sthash.6NXQ5TVu.dpuf

Even our constructive, nation-building media was forced to show how desperate the CEO had become: he sold the crown jewels, cannabalising NOL

The move sees NOL selling the only profitable part of its business. APL Logistics posted a 5 per cent jump in fourth-quarter revenue to US$458 million and core Ebitda of US$20 million, while APL, NOL’s container shipping business, posted losses.

NOL said the purchase price represents a 15 times multiple to the APL Logistics group’s reported core Ebitda, a measure of profit, for the full year of 2014.

Since August last year, NOL has been mulling over a sale of APL Logistics and undertook a competitive bidding process.

– See more at: http://business.asiaone.com/news/nol-sells-logistics-business-16-billion#sthash.6NXQ5TVu.dpuf

Maersk Line 

Maersk Line, the world’s biggest container shipping line, continued its strong performance by boosting net profit to $2.3bn last year from $1.5bn in 2013.

Seen as a bellwether for global trade as it transports 15 per cent of all seaborne freight, Maersk Line said it expected container demand to grow 3-5 per cent this year, well below the pre-crisis levels of more than 10 per cent but in line with 4 per cent growth last year.

“We basically don’t expect a lot of change. The low oil price should give some changes in patterns,” said Mr Andersen, pointing to growth in Asia-US and Asia-Europe trade but declines in north-south routes to Africa and Latin America.

Maersk Line expects to post a higher underlying profit this year than in 2014. The conglomerate as a whole said it expected an underlying profit this year of slightly below $4bn, compared with $4.1bn in 2014.

 

Fare reduction in 2016? Dream on?

Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said last Monday that commuters could see fares fall by about 1% in 2016 because of a drop in energy prices last year.

Three amber signs that this will not happen? Or should that be three straws in the wind? Constructive nation-building CNA carried three stories on 22 January and 23 January that could indicate that even if oil prices remain at the US$50 level (or even below US$100), public transport fares will rise.

Fare review formula review : PTC

The overhaul of the bus industry would require the fare review formula to be relooked, with the Public Transport Council (PTC) having to consider, among other things, whether to apply different sets of fares for a period of at least a few months in 2016 when some bus routes would be under the new bus contracting model while others would not.

The bus contracting model – under which the Government will own all bus operating assets and collect the fares, while operators run the services – will be implemented in phases, starting from the middle of 2016.

Three packages of routes, making up about 20 per cent of routes, will be tendered out first. The remaining 80 per cent will be grouped into nine packages, which will be run by incumbents SMRT and SBS Transit on negotiated contracts under the contracting model, for about five years after their Bus Service Operating Licences expire on Aug 31 next year. After the negotiated contracts expire, more bus services will be gradually tendered out.* (CNA)

“Energy costs are not the biggest contributor to fare rises”

So said Nanyang Technological University transport economist Walter Theseira in another article

SIM University’s urban transport management expert Park Byung Joon said bus and trains operations are not making “huge money”. “We are not in the government contracting model (for buses) yet, we are still in the operating mode (where) the expenditure has to be recovered from fares,” he added.

Dr Theseira said a large part of the increase year to year is usually due to the rise in labour cost and other operating expenses, while fuel cost is not a “large explanation” for the increase in prices over time.

While energy prices have been high over the past few years, they have also been stable. “Usually, year on year, public transport becomes more efficient, so the fuel cost component will be dropping over time,” he said.

National University of Singapore transport researcher Lee Der Horng said while no one likes to see a hike, there is a price to pay if Singaporeans want to see a better public-transport system. “And I think the key thing in this whole exercise is that the authority or Government must make sure fares are affordable, especially to low-wage workers, minority groups, senior citizens and students>”

Fares not tied closely to changes in oil price.

That is a key finding of a study by Boston Consulting Group, which shared the report exclusively with Channel NewsAsia.

Boston Consulting tracked changes over the past 17 years and it found that bus and MRT fares increased at a much slower pace than oil prices.

[W]ages rose steadily between 1997 and 2014 – the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose at a slower pace for the first 10 years, before picking up pace from 2008. …fare increases have lagged behind wages and consumer prices … fare increases kept pace with CPI for about the first 10 years, before slowing down. It added that Singapore is one of few cities in the world that keeps its transport costs low.

“The state actually invests in majority of the infrastructure – so the MRT, LRT lines, the bus interchanges, they have been built by the state there is an expectation that the public transport operators should achieve efficiency and productivity improvements every year,” said Partner and Managing Director of Boston Consulting Group Singapore Dinesh Khanna.

“So even if you are expecting inflation to go up, fares should be growing at rates lower than inflation. Over the past few years, the state has also subsidised and put in place more concession fares for the senior citizens and other important interest groups.”

So are we screwed yet again?

Maybe an election in 2016 will stay the instincts of the Pay And Pay administration?

Finally MPs who can afford not to take public transport (think monthly allowance of S$15,000 each which makes them outearn president Xi: they each earn in two months whay he earns in one yr) pontificate

MP Seng Han Thong, who is deputy chair of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for transport, said the middle-income group would be most affected by the fare hike. However, as buses and trains improve connectivity, it would benefit this group.

GPC chairman Cedric Foo (Pioneer) added that those who “fall between the cracks”, such as the jobless, could apply for public-transport vouchers.

MP Lim Biow Chuan noted that a person who takes two public-transport trips a day would see increases of about S$1 a month. “It’s still bearable.”

What are you waiting for? Go buy SBS, ComfortDelgro and SMRT.

————————–

*Rest of article

RELOOKING THE FARE REVIEW FORMULA

The existing fare review formula is valid from 2013 to 2017, but PTC Chairman Richard Magnus said it could be relooked before the new model is implemented. He added that it would be a challenge to review fares for the routes under the existing and new models, as well as those in transition. “We will need to begin to rethink how fares will be then,” he said.

On whether there would be different sets of fares, he cited social equity and distribution as factors for consideration.

Nanyang Technological University transport economist Walter Theseira said that under the new model, the Government could keep fares down, “effectively throwing money into a loss-making operation”. “It changes the nature of how subsidies are provided to the system,” he said.

National University of Singapore transport researcher Lee Der Horng said there was also room for the PTC to make the formula more responsive to inflation, wage levels and energy prices, though he acknowledged that it takes time for the relevant data to be available. Under the existing formula, there is a one-year lag in the indices used for computation.

SIM University urban transport management expert Park Byung Joon saw the merits of the current approach. “The whole idea … is that we want to avoid a situation (where there is) see-sawing (of fares) every time fuel prices go up and down.”

 

“Betterest” indicator on whether there will be early GE

Will PTC mandate a price rise (even the deferred bit from last yr) given that the price of oil has fallen to near US$60 from almost US$115 a barrel in June

Public transport operators may submit their applications for fare review to the PTC for consideration by Dec 19. The decision will be announced in the first quarter of 2015, according to the press release.

To evaluate applications robustly, the PTC will take guidance from the fare review mechanism and fare adjustment formula recommended by the Fare Review Mechanism Committee and accepted by the Government in Nov 2013. (CNA)

If there is no price increase, then surely an early GE is on the horizon (First school holidays of of 2015: Saturday 14th March to Sunday 22nd March).given that a very major issue is the pay-and-pay attitude of the PAP administration when it comes to public transport and the related issue of overcrowding on public tpt which has been improving since the govt threw our money at the problem: the government is putting back all the dividends it received from these two companies and then adding 35% more. So it’s wrong to say that the SMRT and ComfortDelgro are getting free lunches. At most the government is subsidising their lunches by 35%.

Why only yesterday CNA reported

Five new Peak Period Short Services (PPSS), designed to alleviate crowding, reduce waiting times and improve the reliability of feeder services during peak hours, will begin operating in the next two months, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) said on Tuesday (Dec 16).

The five new services and their launch dates are:

Service 285P in Clementi: Dec 30, 2014

Service 265P in Ang Mo Kio: Jan 6, 2015

Service 903P in Woodlands: Jan 13, 2015

Service 811P in Yishun: Jan 20, 2015

Service 812P in Yishun: Jan 20, 2015

(Related post: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/12/08/want-to-win-big-pm-juz-do-the-right-things/

But even if there is a price rise, PM may be juz as clueless as he was in school and 2005 and hold an election. Actually he might not be that clueless because the world economy might take a turn for the worse. Lower oil ptrces might not solve the world’s economic problems because weak economic growth in Europe and China is one reason for the weak oil price.       .

Related post

.https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/coming-ge-real-problem-for-the-pap/

Big Data, the PM and the Oppo

But bear with me first on the LTA and Uber and other taxi apps.

The PAP administrationis  afraid of losingrevenue from CoEs is the reason why LTA is creating its own taxi apps and making life difficult for Uber etc?

Because of Uber and other such apps, “Millions of people may decide that they no longer need to own a car because using Uber will be cheaper than owning one.”? This was said by Travis Kalanick, chief executive of Uber, on a new round of financing which values Uber at US$40m.

For “Uber” read “Uber and rival apps”

(A reminder of what LTA has done.

[A]nnounced plans to put its own taxi app into the growing market just after it announced regulations for the existing players in the industry.

The app, Taxi-Taxi.SG, will launch in mid-December, and will show commuters the number of available taxis near them, as well as signalling to taxi drivers the locations of potential customers. No details on app charges have yet emerged.

The Singaporean market already has t… Uber, local competitor Grab Taxi, and a number of apps from the individual taxi firms and smaller companies. These apps are free, but charge customers a cut of the taxi fare.

The plan comes as Singapore announced a new regulatory framework for private sector taxi apps, which are transforming an old-fashioned industry into a fiercely competitive and lucrative marketplace.

The regulations mean that all booking services must be registered with the LTA, specify their fees upfront, provide customer support services and prevent bidding on nearby taxis.

http://www.futuregov.asia/articles/5792-singapore-land-transport-authority-takes-on-uber-with-own-app)

Somewhere in the mix of measures,  the govt commended the LTA for its use of big data analytics to monitor travelling patterns and demand from commuters.“With this insight, LTA was able to perform targeted injection of bus capacity, which saw a 60 per cent reduction in the number of bus services with persistent crowding in spite of year-on-year increase in average daily bus ridership,” LTA.

Well if the data had been publicly available (and not confined to LTA, the transport regulator), perhaps the public good would be better served.

PM talks big about the use of big data analytics in developing S’pore. But my impression is that in S’pore, unlike in the UK, the data is only available to the right people: govt, state agencies and GLCs. In the UK and the West, big data is publicly available so that anyone can access the data to make sense of it, or develop apps, or both.

But if that happens here, the PAP administration will no longer have the monopoly of the data that is needed to formulate policy. Oppo parties like the SDP, NSP can come up with detailed policies based on the data. Now that would be a problem for the PM who has said the opposition have not articulated a vision for Singapore.

The SDP says:

This is untrue. The SDP published Dare To Change: An Alternative Vision for Singapore in 1994.

Dr Chee had also recently described a new vision for Singapore in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal. Mr Lee ignores these and claims that the opposition has not articulated one.

But more than just a vision, the SDP has laid out concrete and comprehensive alternative policies in key areas such as housing, healthcare, population, the Malay community, education, Ministerial salaries, and (soon-to-be launched) the economy. The SDP’s campaign for the next GE will focus on these alternative policies.

The SDP, NSP and TJS’s gang have come up with policies: the problem is that lackof access  to basic data (something often available in the West but not here despite S’pore being a first-world state) makes their policy papers little more than motherhood statements.

Thinking about it, the PAP should treasure the Worthless Party, not rubbish or fix it. All it wants is to check the PAP administration, something where the WP talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk, and hopes that the PAP needs it as coalition partner.

If the PM can’t live with this, what does he want? A PAP dictatorship? Even LKY never went that far. He juz he made sure he won big in elections, something son has a problem doing.

 

 

Want to win big PM? Juz do the right things

Singapore’s next General Election will be a “deadly serious” fight between the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) and the opposition … every seat, GRC and SMC will be a national contest, and not just a local one … every seat will be a General Election, not a by-election. (CNA)

Ah yah, why PM like to talk big and cock? Juz do the right, fair things by S’poreans and trust S’poreans to be fair-minded. After all, daddy, for all his bullying and intellectual thuggery, made sure public housing was really, really affordable. and the heartlanders willingly gave the PAP their votes. Earlier, he made sure that the streets were kept clean, portholes mended, and clean water, electricity and sanitation provided at affordable prices.provided. And the votes followed. (and taz why I don’t begrudge him the office that many say he has in the Istana.)

An example comes to mind where PM can ensure that his administration does what’s fair and reasonable and that will benefit most S’poreans.

The price of oil has fallen from almost US$115 a barrel in June to around US$70.

This fall in oil prices makes it a no-brainer for a fair, reasonable govt, with a GE coming, and S’poreans unhappy with stagnant real wages for the PAP administration to make sure that public transport fares don’t rise in 2015*, and if oil remains near US$70, in 2016.

After all, SMRT’s Vice-President for Corporate Information and Communications Patrick Nathan said in November: “We seek a better alignment of fares and operating costs, and will be submitting our application for a fare review in the coming weeks.”

Well with oil at US$70, one of the two major component for operating costs, is dropping rapidly. The other,btw, is wages.

So is there a need for fares to rise in 2015? Bet you when fares are raised, as they are likely to, the excuse will be that fares were held down when the price of oil was above US$100. So only fair to raise them now.

Let’s see if the PAP administration is smart enough to deviate from the Hard Truth of “Always make S’poreans pay and pay”, what with a GE coming and S’poreans facing stagnant real wages. Anti-PAP born-losers should be hoping that the PAP sticks to its hardest of Hard Truths.

———–

*The Public Transport Council (PTC) on Wednesday (Nov 19) announced it has started the annual fare review exercise.

—

Public transport operators may submit their applications for fare review to the PTC for consideration by Dec 19. The decision will be announced in the first quarter of 2015, according to the press release.

To evaluate applications robustly, the PTC will take guidance from the fare review mechanism and fare adjustment formula recommended by the Fare Review Mechanism Committee and accepted by the Government in Nov 2013. (CNA)

The new fare adjustment formula is now based on core inflation (excluding property and car prices), average wage increase and an energy component.

SMRT: How long will new CFO last?/ What should really worry

Going by recent form, not very long because the previous one lasted all of 8 months and the one before that 30 months*.. The new CFO assumed the post last Saturday. He was previously SMRT’s head of its strategic finance and business structuring advisory office. He only joined SMRT in October 2013.

If SMRT had been an ordinary listco, the share price would have plunged when the previous CFO resigned because when a new CFO resigns (especiallt when the CFO is from outside the organisation) so quickly after starting work, investors worry about financial irregularities. More so given that the previous CFO lasted 30 months.

But the market took the resignation in its stride because SMRT is a TLC and TLCs  (and other GLCs) don’t do financial irregularities despite what the anti-PAP cybernuts say. Even TRE (no cybernut) didn’t bother, implying that the CEO and other ex-SAF senior mgrs wanted to bring in another ewx-SAFer.

What is worrying is that despite all the ex-SAFers, SMRT’s security is still so lousy in a region where there are Muslims willing to die for Jihad. :

 The two Germans charged for their alleged involvement in a case of vandalism of an SMRT train at Bishan Depot have been slapped with two additional charges each on Friday (Nov 28).

Andreas Von Knorre and Elton Hinz, both aged 21, are accused of entering the depot without authorisation on two other occasions – once on Nov 6 at about 2.43am and another on Nov 7 at about 2.20am.

The two men were first charged on Nov 22 at the State Courts. They each faced two charges of entering the depot without authorisation on Nov 8 between 2.48am and 3.29am, and using spray paint to paint graffiti on the left exterior cabin of an SMRT train at the depot. (CNA)

Taz right, they broke in three times in three days, implying that the first two times their entries went undetected.

In any organisation such a lapse of security is unforgivable; more so here where commuters lives can be  dangered and the economy wrecked by such break-ins (if bombs had been planted …), and where the senior managers are all military men.

LTA and DPM Teo should be puttingb some serious pressure on SMRT to improve its security before a bomb explodes on the MRT, killing S’poreans and the PAP’s much loved FTs., and wrecking the economy.

——

*SMRT has lost 3 CFOs since 2011 when SMRT trains started breaking down regularly (The CEO CEO Saw Phaik Hwa “resigned” in January 2012 after one P Ravi .) .

In September 2011, CFO Lim Cheng Cheng left and was replaced by Catherine Lee Khia Yee.
In January this year, SMRT announced that Ms Lee had resigned from the company to “pursue other career opportunities”. The same announcement said that Sam Ong, Hyflux’s Group Senior EVP and Group Deputy CEO, would take over from her on 1 March as SMRT’s new CFO. Ms Lee left SMRT after 2.5 years there. She is currently CFO at Clifford Capital.

Just  8 months later, Mr Ong has also left.

SMRT says in its statement to the stock exchange, saying that Mr Ong left to “pursue philanthropic interests and business prospects”.

What LTA, SMRT & SBS CEOs, senior mgrs must do

Commute to work using their very own system. The head of Moscow’s Metro explains why

Dmitry Pegov, head of the city’s metro, has signed an order obliging his own deputies and heads of departments to use the underground to reach the office “just like ordinary passengers”, the state-owned TASS news agency reports. “One should personally see and understand what is going on in the department that they oversee, how the work is being conducted, and what should be improved or changed,” Mr Pegov says. “I go to work on the metro, every day I get down to the station and travel for nearly 35 minutes, and even have to change lines,” he tells the agency. One of the perks of his job means Mr Pegov could travel up front with the driver, but he says he prefers to be in the carriage with the masses.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-29954523

Well for starters, SMRT will step up the security of its depots as its CEO and senior managers won’t want to get blown up. At present, it’s our problem, not theirs if a bomb explodes.

Seriously, investors should sell SBS, ComfortDelgro and SMRT shares if the mgrs have to use their transport systems to commute. Expenses will balloon.

SMRT is dysfunctional, still/ Why unaffordable CoEs should make S’poreans happy

What was SMRT thinking?

SMRT said on Monday it had decided against making a takeover bid for Addison Lee, London’s biggest minicab operator after

Britain’s Sky News reported over the weekend that SMRT was planning a £800m (S$1.6bn) for Addison*.

It shouldn’t have even tot of bidding because SMRT’s market capitalisation of S$2.3bn was only 30% more than reported bid price.. It’s finances are not in great shape either. At the end of its last financial yr, cash flow was negative and gearing stood at 65%, while it also suffered its first loss in its fare business.

It also has operational problems here.

So what were the ex-scholar and his fellow ex-SAF officers thinking?

Plenty of things to do in S’pore (including more reliable service) and it doesn’t need any distraction abroad,”

And going abroad in a political nightmare for the govt and SMRT: if it loses money, S’poreans will be screaming (rightly) that the public is subsidising their failure overseas.

The investment bank that brought a proposal to SMRT to bid should have been sent packing immediately, not entertained enough so that a staff member would leak that SMRT was planning to bid.

Happinness is taking public tpt

It’s ’cause commuting by public transport makes people happy.

No this isn’t ST propoganda for the the PAP govt, LTA, SMRT or ComfortDelgro/ SBS.

But a study in the UK where cars don’t cost a fortune, and where the public are unhappy with expensive and crowded public transport.

The University of East Anglia study surveyed 18,000 passengers and found that even when other factors that may affect wellbeing were taken out of the equation commuters who travelled to work on public transport were happier (that is, scored lower on feelings of worthlessness, unhappiness and sleeplessness) than those who drove. Key to it all is what public health experts call “active travel”. Drivers are choosing a “non-passive travel mode” requiring constant concentration. This can be boring, isolating and stressful. Active travellers, on the other hand, have time to relax. The simple walk to and from the station appears to have intrinsic value. As the UEA economist who led the study put it: “It appears to cheer people up.”

While we’re putting things simply, apparently the people who chose to take public transport were around half a stone lighter, too – the bodyweight benefits were found to be on a par with cycling. I don’t wish to do down the car, and perhaps I’m unusual in some ways – my commute is often the only hour in my day that is truly my own, which must go some way to making it special. If I had all day to read and listen to podcasts and radio programmes, perhaps I’d feel differently. But who has all day to do those things? Moreover, who wouldn’t feel better if they added half an hour or so of moderate exercise to their daily routine?

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/sep/28/why-commuting-public-transport-makes-you-happy-lauren-laverne

The LTA and our constructive, nation-building media missed a PR trick when they disn’t highlight the UK study (The Guardian is the kind of paper that only Maruah-type people and economic illiterates like Roy read) when trumpeting, The number of bus services that were crowded during peak periods has fallen substantially over the past two years, following the addition of 450 buses under the Government’s Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP).

‘Giving an update on the programme, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) said the number of bus services carrying passengers at more than 85 per cent capacity during peak hours had fallen from 96 before the implementation of the BSEP to 38 in July.

…

The S$1.1 billion BSEP was launched in 2012 to boost connectivity and bus-service levels. Under the programme, a total of 1,000 government-funded buses will be added to the public transport network by 2017. [CNA]

The media went ape reporting the joy of commuters at the extra buses.

Locals can still afford CoEs

So we learnt last week that FTs didn’t cause CoE prices to (only 13% went to foreigners, Wonder waz the PR %? As usual not given.

———————

*Addison Lee is being put up for sale by its private equity owner, Carlyle Group, which paid £300 million for a majority stake in April 2013. Carlyle has decided to start an auction process after receiving unsolicited offers for the business.

Private equity firms BC Partners, CVC Capital and Charterhouse were reportedly among those making bids.

 

 

SMRT: only now meh?

I’ve only recovered from this piece of news on SMRT: on 16th Feb it was reported that “Singapore’s two train operators will adopt a “predict and prevent” approach to their maintenance regimes from now on.

‘Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said … this new approach will see operators actively monitoring the condition of the rail system to prevent breakdowns and delays.”* Seems they were using a “find and fix” approach. Easiest way to “find” problems is sit back, drink kopi and wait for news of train delays, breakdowns?

Maybe taz why a CEO who is a scholar and ex-SAF chief is needed, not a Ferrari-driving FT retailer? Horses for courses?

Anyway now that SMRT is adopting state-of-the-art, cutting edge management techniques, time to buy stock? Stock set a new 52-week low during yesterday’s trading session when it touched 1.02. 36.7% down from a 52 weeks ago. That it yields 1.95% is a reflection that the price has collapsed.

DBS wrote this in 2012: SMRT has a dividend payout policy of at least 60% of net profit. In fact, in the past few years, it has paid over 70%, hence providing a reasonable yield.

ComfortDelGro, on the other hand, has paid only 50%of earnings as dividends. – See more at: http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/markets-investing/smrt%E2%80%99s-dividends-risky-in-2012-dbs#sthash.k1ywpunr.dpuf

(Comfort yields 3.63%)

Surely after GE (next yr after August,  is my prediction), fares will be increased? Time to buy and wait now that mgt is better?

60% dividend policy. SMRT has a dividend payout policy of at least 60% of net profit. In fact, in the past few years, it has paid over 70%, hence providing a reasonable yield.
ComfortDelGro, on the other hand, has paid only 50%of earnings as dividends. – See more at: http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/markets-investing/smrt%E2%80%99s-dividends-risky-in-2012-dbs#sthash.k1ywpunr.dpuf

60% dividend policy. SMRT has a dividend payout policy of at least 60% of net profit. In fact, in the past few years, it has paid over 70%, hence providing a reasonable yield.
ComfortDelGro, on the other hand, has paid only 50%of earnings as dividends. – See more at: http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/markets-investing/smrt%E2%80%99s-dividends-risky-in-2012-dbs#sthash.k1ywpunr.dpuf

But then think again as NOL is run by another general and scholar and NOL recently lost serious money. Here’s analysis from last yr after an earlier set of results https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/scholar-cant-repair-nol-maersk-steams-ahead/

——-

*Mr Lui was responding to questions from Members of Parliament on the reliability of train services, in the wake of several disruptions last month, including a delay on the North-South Line that affected some 19,000 peak-hour commuters.

So far, operators SMRT and SBS Transit have been using the “find and fix” approach to correct existing issues with their rail systems.

Mr Lui said he had called up SMRT’s senior management to convey his concerns after the recent spate of incidents.

He said: “They take it seriously, and as the CEO told me himself… the team was actually very disappointed themselves with the series of incidents, as well as with how the staff on the ground had handled it.”

SMRT will be reviewing its contingency plans on a station-by-station basis to better support its ground staff, rather than rely on a generic plan that covers stretches of the network.

Mr Lui said: “SMRT’s management has already committed to review its contingency plans on a station-by-station basis, and refine its command and control structure in times of disruption to better support ground staff.”

Both SMRT and SBS Transit have also switched to a “predict and prevent” strategy for their maintenance regimes.

For instance, some trains on the North-South and East-West lines are already equipped to collect real-time data and detect problems as they run.

Several MPs had asked why train disruptions continue despite efforts in recent years to improve the train services.

Mr Lui said: “Service disruptions do happen from time to time, especially as our rail network further expands and ages, and as we run more and more train trips.

“But in the case of the January incidents, SMRT could have done much better in service recovery, especially to provide timely information to affected commuters.”

Both train operators, however, have put in hard work to improve train reliability since 2011, Mr Lui added.

Government estimates showed that SMRT has increased its yearly repair and maintenance expenses by over 65 per cent from S$38.3 million in 2011 to S$64.6 million last year.

Both train operators have also hired more engineers and expanded their maintenance teams.

The Land Transport Authority is also upgrading the rail infrastructure.

The North-South, East-West lines’ third rail system will undergo a full, system-wide change-out this year, Mr Lui said, and the North-East Line’s overhead power system will also be improved with new corrosion-resistant materials to minimise cracking in its components.

In a separate statement, SMRT said it takes responsibility for the recent incidents, and will leave no stone unturned to improve the reliability of its train services. (CNA report)

SMRT: Update

.There could be a rights issue coming to shore up its finances. But to call it, it must be pretty sure of profits for dividends somewhere down the line. Massive train price increase after 2015 GE?  Don’t see PAP losing power or even losing a two-thirds majority. Or even PritamS becoming a cabinet minister in a PAP, WP coalition govt.

But remember the CEO is an ex-SAF chief, juz like in that dog with fleas, NOL :https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/scholar-cant-repair-nol-maersk-steams-ahead/

Good article on SMRT by someone whom I don’t usually think highly of: http://www.baldingsworld.com/2014/01/29/why-is-smrt-raising-fares/

This video has been making the rounds on Facebook: During a 45 train delay, SMRT begs passengers on board repeatedly for a pair of scissors

Taz why PTC raised fares. After paying Kwek and his SAF buddies, got no $ for proper tool box? LOL

Gd reports

— SBS (ComfortDelgro)  benefits more than SMRT from price hike

http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/news/chart-day-these-charts-show-how-transport-firms-will-be-impacted-fare-hike

— Sports Hub to make $ for SMRT

http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/news/singapore-sports-hub-could-turn-around-souring-smrt-profits

 

Another reason why SMRT sucks

Last Monday, I made one of my irregular trips on the MRT. I entered Eunos Stn in the late morning and one of the escaltors was closed “for maintenance”. I returned home via another route partly to avoid walking down the stairs on the return journey

Last Friday, I again took the MRT from Eunos Stn. Guess what? The escalator was still closed for “for maintenance”. When I made the return trip (wanted to eat at a great but expensive Malay food stall at Eunos Hawkers’ centre: stall always asking why I don’t eat more regularly and I explain to them I don’t use the MRT that often), several hours later, the escalator was still not working.

Err how to expect train services not to be disrupted (five already this yr according to TRE*) if cannot even repair or service escalator within five days? But to be fair, maybe engineers too busy repairing tracks etc to bother about escalator. Got to prioritise everything, according to jnr tpt minister Jos Teo.

I will have to again use the MRT from Eunos this Wednesday and then the following Monday (yah lot of travelling these few weeks: pushing my luck leh), and I’ll keep readers informed.

Meanwhile, avoid the stock. It’s going to take huge fare rises to make it a gd dividend yielding stock again because it needs to spend more, a lot more to get (and then keep) the trains running on time. With an election likely in 2015, these fare increases are unlikely https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/12/13/why-a-2015-ge-is-now-more-probable/

Meanwhile, I wish MRT users a disruption free day, though the odds are rising against this probability.

Thinking about it, SMRT may have closed one of the Eunos escalators to save money as per this story about the London MRT (tube) system.

Green Park is one of the busiest tube stations in London. It has three escalators to the station concourse from the Piccadilly line, which serves not just London commuters but international businessmen and tourists travelling to and from Heathrow. Yet routinely one is closed at peak times.

The reason? According to station staff Green Park has been set energy targets and this is the way that it is meeting them.

So, in order to meet this energy-saving goal, the London Underground is prepared to cause unnecessary delays to passengers, even though time-saving for passengers is always a crucial element in any evaluation of a transport project. It is also prepared to create potential dangers to public safety as bunching occurs while people wait for the only up escalator that is operating. And as that happens another escalator stands idle, with the big investment that has been made in it in effect written off.

What folly. Whether or not this is intended by the top brass at Transport for London is unclear. But this is what happens when stupid objectives are set and managers are either pressured into meeting them come what may or follow them without paying heed to their primary responsibility, which in the case of a tube station is to convey passengers as swiftly and as safely as possible to and from the trains. (http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2014/01/trouble-targets)

Hmm, thinking about it, the setting of stupid objectives, and why the absence of the profit-motive when providing public services (like transport) is not a gd idea, may be the subject of posts after the CNY hols. Must try to stop writing about ang moh tua kee Bernice Wong and her masculine, not sheltered, babyed & childish (so unlike local boyars) hubbie, Anton Casey.

—

*Or is it four http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/01/26/smrt-5th-smrt-breakdown-not-a-breakdown/ (Updated one hour after first publication)

A PAP MP on the need to lose dignity to get $50 vouchers

Last year, the Fare Review Mechanism Committee (FRMC), among other things, proposed that public transport operators be required to contribute to the Public Transport Fund to help needy households when fares are adjusted, as a way of “sharing” their gains with commuters, it said. This could range from 20% t to 50% of the expected increase in fare revenue, depending on profitability, Presumably it would then issue vouchers for distribution to the needy poor.

I was reminded of  the proposal when I read, The thing is, the G talks about public transport vouchers again. Now if I remember correctly, hundreds of vouchers in the past hadn’t even been taken up…Either people really don’t need them – or there wasn’t a good plan to get them to the needy. Perhaps, that should be fixed first. http://berthahenson.wordpress.com/2014/

The proposed fund in turn reminded me that one Charles Chong in the  early noughtie said the needy should be made to lose their dignity to get $50 help vouchers.

This is what I posted in 2011

I hear Charles Chong will speak in parliament tomorrow. Doubtless he will talk about helping the needy*. It’s the in- thing in the PAP to want to help the needy. (This is of progress of sorts. Only recently, Lily Neo was berated and sneered at by VivianB for asking for more help for the poor. When that happened, I tot of Oliver Twist asking for more food and being beaten for his pains.)

But I would like to ask Charles Chong, “Must a needy S’porean still lose his dignity for a $30 voucher?”.

Let me explain the background by winding the watch back some years.

In the early noughties, when S’pore was in a recession or recovering from one, one Charles Chong said, “We shouldn’t…be telling everyone that there’s this help available. It’s quite a process to go through to get the vouchers. A person with dignity won’t do it unless he’s in genuine trouble.” Charles Chong was explaining his (and some other PAP MPs’) reluctance to distribute free electricity vouchers on the ground that giving these to the needy would create a culture of dependence.

After reading this remark, I began to have serious problems with the attitude of the governing party. (Previously I had been indifferent to the PAP, even though before 1991, I was a “LKY is almost always right” and “LKY has his heart in the right place” person.)

This remark of Charles Chong also prompted a writer to MediaCorp’s freesheet to ask,”Can a Singaporean no longer lend a hand … without being accused of encouraging a crutch mentality? Aren’t we allowed to feel compassion for another? …cannot use for any other purpose except to pay your utility bill. There is no need to make people beg for that.”

I don’t recall the government or Charles Chong responding to this letter …

(https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/question-for-charles-chong/)

Will Kee Cui tell us that the PAP govt repudiate such an attitude today? Will Charles Chong say “It was an honest mistake?”.

For the record, Charles Chong is my MP. As readers will know, I’ve always voted WP all my life. But even if JJ stands for the WP, I’m likely to be on hols next GE. Charles Chong and the WP makes me want to puke**. My wish i9s that the SDP stands in Joo Chiat in place of WP, with JJ as its candidate. Yah, I typival S’porean: want cake and eat it too, all of it.

Let’s not be fooled into believing that the PM, cabinet ministers,  and PAP and WP MPs and  get out of bed in the morning to help the working poor. I would exempt Lily Neo and Halimah Yaacob and possibly Kee Chui from the last sentence.

Maybe, anti-PAP paper activists including readers of TOC and TRE should remind Charles Chong and voters that he said,“We shouldn’t…be telling everyone that there’s this help available. It’s quite a process to go through to get the vouchers. A person with dignity won’t do it unless he’s in genuine trouble.”

If this turned me against the PAP’s policies, it might turn others too. Or remind wavering anti-PAP S’poreans why they are right not to trust the PAP.

—-

*He did. speak of helping the needy. Funnily he didn’t say that they should be made to crawl on their knees to get help. But then he only won by 300 votes in GE2011, and the PAP only got 60% of the popular vote.

**In its election manifesto WP called for public tpt nationalisation, something Low reaffirmed after the Punggol East victory. Now, “The WP believes that public transport should be provided as a public good and not for profit” And if we help it be a kingmaker in the next GE. will it play us out and support the PAP, Hard Truths and all? Remember PritamS’s comments on coalition with the PAP juz after the voters of Aljunied gave WP a gd majority. He slapped us in the face, not the PAP, driver. Low only slapped Singh’s wrist.

Tpt minister looks after shareholders, the poor and the disabled?

What about other disadvantaged S’poreans?

The Public Transport Council (PTC) will release its decision on raising fare adjustments for public transport tomorrow and a reasonable person would conclude that fares will go up based on what Minister for Transport Lui Tuck Yew wrote  on a Facebook post on Monday.

“I told (PTC chairman Gerard Ee) that the government was ready with our package for the low-income workers and persons with disabilities and that we would like to announce this together on Thursday. These two concession schemes will be fully funded by the government,” wrote Mr Lui, stressing that the schemes would make transport fares much more affordable for both groups.

Isn’t he telling the PTO, pls feel free to help out the tpt companies (and their shareholders*) because the govt (us tax-payers, including said poor and disabled: remember that they too pay GST) will absorb the increases for said groups.

Mr Lui also said that the discount under the scheme for low-income workers would lower their fares to around the same levels as 10-15 years ago, depending on the journey. Meanwhile, the discount for those with disabilities will be “even more significant”.

Hey what about retirees and those who never got pay rises?

BTW, the WP’s silence on nationalisation is deafening, even though WP Low told us last yr that WP still believes in it. I have my doubts  https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/wp-changes-mind-on-nationalising-smrt-sbs/

Backgrounder: In December, transport operators SBS Transit (SBST) and SMRT applied to the PTC to raise bus and rail fares this year, with SBS – Singapore’s biggest bus operator – citing cost pressures.

—–

*Some shareholders do get a free lunch:despite claims by scholar and ex-general running SMRT that its biz model is broken:

Using back-of-the envelope calculations and figures in annual reports, since it was listed SMRT (over a decade ago) has paid S$562.79m in dividends to Temasek, and ComfortDelgro has paid the S’pore Labour Foundation (a statutory board affiliated to the NTUC) dividends of  S$150.46m*since 2003 (Comfort and Delgro merged in 2003, and SLF had a stake in Comfort). The amount that ended up with the government was S$713.25m, with SMRT contributing 79%. But ComfortDelgro is likely be the main beneficiary of the S$1.1bn bus plan**, given that, at present, SBS Transit (a listed co 75% owned by ComfortDelgro) provides most of the buses. Taz an example of how messed up things are.

The funds’ flows also show that the government is putting back all the dividends it received from these two companies and then adding 35% more. So it’s wrong to say that the SMRT and ComfortDelgro are getting free lunches. At most the government is subsidising their lunches by 35%.

The government should get credit for ploughing its share of the “loot” (as the proponents of nationalisation would put it and MPs Puthu, PAP, and PritamS, WP, might put it), but it doesn’t. Taz how messed up are.

(Incidentally, one could reasonably argue that the other shareholders — and the minority shareholders of SBS Transit, remember ComfortDelgro owns around 75% – are getting a free lunch while the government returns its share of the dividends. But let’s nt get into that today.)

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/03/02/oh-what-a-tangled-web-we-weave-mrt-comfortdelgro-and-the-government/

Small wonder that foreigners snapped up ComfortDelgro at gd discount last year though tapering caused some wobbles https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/06/17/when-raising-fares-sbs-smrt-govt-dont-have-this-problem/. Now above price bot. in.

.

When S’pore has 8m people and counting

An unofficial map of how the MRT system will look like when fully developed

http://transitmaps.tumblr.com/post/68121163229/singapore-bernie-ng

 

Waz the “right” kind of gotong royong?

Update on 22 23 October 2013: Minister explains use of Criminal Law Temporary Provision Act (http://au.sports.yahoo.com/football/news/article/-/19491410/football-match-fixing-witnesses-fear-reprisals/) on footie fixers.

I recently came across “gotong royong” the American way, or community spirit the capitalist way: in American- speak, the “sharing economy”.

Technology is revolutionising the way Americans catch a cab with a ride now just a click away through mobile phone apps like like Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, Instantcab and Flywheel.

Many of these services are part of the so-called “sharing economy” in which car owners offer to drive strangers in exchange for a “donation”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24393348

But is this the “right” gotong royong that the PAPpies say they want here?

Bet you the Hard Truths that premise the PAP’s governing methods will prevent S’pore from ever going down this route, even though this seems one of several viable solutions (several are needed)  to our public tpt and private car problems  Remember, NTUC is via the Labour Foundation, the controlling shareholder of ComfortDelgro, the owner of the biggest taxi fleet here, and Temasek’s SMRT has a big taxi fleet too. The former runs most of the buses, while the latter runs most of the trains too. And it might impact the revenue from CoEs.

Seriously, the problem here is that “gotong royong” is contrary to the PAP’s Hard Truth that it is fount of everything. Gotong royong is not compatible with a top-down approach, where there is always a “right” way of doing things.

In “gotong royong”, as in the “sharing economy”, things happen because the rabble plebs mob community, society, consumer is the driving force, not a benign meritocratic elite. The people realise that there is a problem, issue, and are free (within some, not many, constraints) to work out a solution*. They don’t bitch while waiting for the governing elite to solve the problem, feeling entitled that because said elite is well-paid, they must solve the problem, resolve the issue.

I consider the following to be gotong royong in action, but doubt the PAP ministers urging us to “gotong royong” would agree:

— TOC’s and TRE’s continued existence;

— the various fund raisings for various legal cases where the govt is the defendant;

— the public funding of the deposits of Alex Tan and friends, and the independent team at Tanjong Pagar GRC;

— Nicole Seah raising money for her team’s election expenses;

— the free food and drinks at Gilbert Goh’s Hong Lim Green functions;

— Function 8;

— CHC members who willingly pay the legal fees of church members being prosecuted for false accounting etc;

— pastor Khong’s gang funding a legal suit;

— those who lend sound eqpt and technical help at various Hong Lim Green parties

— the kay pohs trying to help FTs avoid being hung for drug trafficking**;

— those gathering to help the family of Dinesh Raman get justice and closure**;

— Maruah**;

— the volunteers who help FT manual workers;

— the LGBT community; and

— the dedicated band of enthusiasts who have been trying to draw attention to the cemetery’s [Bukit Brown’s] value. They have succeeded in having it included on the biennial watchlist of the World Monument Fund (WMF), of heritage sites around the world that are in danger.

All these examples and more show that the gotong royong spirit is alive and well. They juz don’t fit the PAP’s narrative, especially the bit that the PA’s and PAP’s grass-root activists are the only selfless, dedicated volunteers. And that in cyberspace, their activists are no match for the the injuns, outlaws and other inhabitants of cowboy towns.

—

*In the US, there is no hegemonic elite to enforce the top down approach, and stifle innovation or stifle dissent or force recantations from members of the elite turned heretical.

**How come no help Dan Tan? Because he drive 7 series, got properties and China babe? And he not violent, middle class or FT?

SMRT: Rights issue coming?

Reading the u/m, I can’t shake the feeling that a rights issue is coming: the capex and running costs seem to call for it. Given that the share price has fallen from the 1.40ish level (at the end of July), to the present level of 1.29, it  might be interesting to buy if one expects a rights issue is in the offing. A rights issue will signal that Temasek expects dividend levels to be maintained at current levels, or slightly reduced, not slashed drastically. It took the results of 1Q 2013- 2014 to bring the shares to below the 1.34 level, a level brokers had been targeting since January.

Let you know if I buy after I buy. BTW, still not bot ComfortDelgro https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/06/17/when-raising-fares-sbs-smrt-govt-dont-have-this-problem/. Share price recovered 10% while I was thinking about it (blame QE reprieve). Shares are now near the price that institutions took a placement off the S’pore Labour Foundation.

CREDIT ratings agency Standard & Poor’s (S&P) has lowered its outlook on SMRT Corp from “stable” to “negative” over concerns about its financial position, particularly its cash flow.

S&P said [on 27th September 2013] that the transport operator’s operating expenses are higher than expected. It also pointed to high capital spending over the 12 months to June, while noting the uncertainty over government financial support such as funding for the firm.

http://www.cpf.gov.sg/imsavvy/infohub_article.asp?readid=435478142-19258-9361788629

“… the lack of timely government support could delay a recovery in SMRT’s key financial metrics.”

SMRT’s “moderate” financial risk profile is weakening, S&P added.

It said it expects the group’s bottom line will be hit by increased operating expenses such as wages and repair and maintenance costs, without the offsetting factor of higher fares.

S&P added that SMRT’s capital expenditure will likely remain high at about $600 million.

It noted that the group’s capital spending will likely ease in 2015 as it implements a new rail financing framework. This, in turn, will ease its debt situation.

“Nevertheless, we base this on a positive and timely outcome for the ongoing discussions between the company and the Government.”

S&P said SMRT’s business risk profile remains “excellent”, backed by its dominance in Singapore’s rail sector.

Its passenger numbers have grown steadily over the past two years despite breakdowns in December 2011.

The agency predicts that passenger numbers will continue to rise as the economic environment improves and it retains its dominant position here.

S&P continues to believe that the likelihood of “extraordinary government support” for SMRT Corp is “extremely high”.

It said: “This is based on the company’s critical role as a provider of essential public transport service in Singapore, and its very strong link with its majority owner, the Government, through Temasek Holdings, which owns 54.2 per cent of SMRT.”

TRE to blame?

The appointment of SMRT’s security chief as its new PR chief* reminded me that In a letter dated 3 September 2013, a TRE reader sent in a complaint about some PRC FTs at a MRT station

They were eating foods such as Biscuits, Cakes, Lychees, Bananas and Apples, taken out from several boxes and plastic bags. The lychees peeled skins were littered on the concrete bench/seat. They were also shouting loudly in a distinct China’s Chinese accent. I also observed that they were loitering; not boarding any trains travelling towards Joo Koon or Woodlands MRT. They were literally having a picnic.

I did not stop them to minimise the possibility of myself getting hurt, as I have read several reports of China nationals attacking Singaporean Police officers. e.g. (source: TR Emeritus)

• Lone PRC man took on 3 trained police officers
• Another PRC charged with kicking police officer

He complained to the SMRT staff but didn’t know the outcome as he had to catch his train and TRE wrote: Editor’s note: A letter has been sent to SMRT for comments on why the foreigners were not fined on the spot.

Maybe the SMRT person too read TRE’s reports of aggressive PRC behaviour and decided he too didn’t want to get beaten up, juz like the letter writer? There was an incident also reported by TRE about a PRC PR shop assistant who beat up a SMRT officer because the officer had stopped her son for trying to avoid paying.

So maybe TRE should be more careful in highlighting PRCs aggressive behaviour towards S’poreans to avoid unnecessarily frightening S’poreans.

Wonder if SMRT ever replied to TRE?

—

*Let’s hope this ex-cop improves on this

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/smrt-another-breakdown/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/smrt-is-in-the-biz-of-transporting-people/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/smrt-svp-is-great-believer-in-shareholder-value/

“Cheaper” to build F1 track

Netizens in July were making comments about a SMRT river training for F1 following a tragic accident when a bus alleged to be speeding overturned. The driver (apparently an FT PRC) claims the brakes didn’t work. http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/07/24/smrt-bus-crash-at-dairy-farm-road-actual-video-of-crash/. Nothing further has emerged.

For us lesser mortals, when F1 comes to town, those of us who have to work, have the inconvenience of blocked roads and altered bus routes. And the shops at Suntec have to deal with falling biz. All this so that S’pore doesn’t have to build a proper F1 track. Guess we now know why only Monaco, Montreal and S’pore have street races: peanuts compared to the number on permanent circuits. The public are inconvenienced, and the public cannot be upset even in countries where the people can’t vote for the govt ruling them. BTW, in Montreal, the street race ain’t in the heart of the city, and in Monaco, people commute by helicopters and boats too (at least the rich do).

It’s not as though there is a huge savings gap. In fact it’s more expensive to stage a street race, even without taking account of the economic losses.

However, the annual running costs of a street race are greater than those of one on a permanent circuit: temporary grandstands need to be built and the roads need to be upgraded to F1’s high safety standards. The biggest single expense for the operators is staffing (c£10m), followed by rental of grandstands (c£8m) and construction of safety barriers and fencing (c£5m). 

In total, the annual operating cost of an F1 street race is in the region of £36m. Then comes the hosting fee, which is paid to the F1 rights holder. The average hosting fee came to £17m in 2011 but the sting in the tail of the contracts is that the price accelerates by as much as 10 per cent every year. Most new F1 race contracts are for ten years, so by the end of the agreement the annual fee comes to around £40m thanks to the escalator clause in the contract. That means that over the ten-year duration the bill for hosting fees totals an estimated £272m (see below) with the cost of running the races coming to £360m. That makes a total over ten years of more than £600m.

… With annual running costs that are far lower than those for a street race, the total cost of building a Grand Prix circuit and hosting an F1 race over a ten-year period comes in at around £560m. But promoters need to dig deep to fund that initial track construction… http://www.babusinesslife.com/Ideas/Features/The-cost-of-hosting-a-Formula-1-Grand-Prix.html … how much the key elements of a brand new Grand Prix circuit are likely to cost… [£164m]

So the difference is spending S$80m more over 10 yrs to “save” on the cost of building a permanent track. Of course, I ‘m assuming the cost of the circuit land is zero or nominal. But this being S’pore where giving away the land for public housing would be “raiding the reserves” (Mah Bow Tan), this is a non-starter. Anyway the usual suspects would shout “corruption” even if the govt was willing to lease land at a nominal price.

So, the end result is that the “little people” who have to commute by way of public transport, get screwed, So waz new?

(Related post: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/f1-sharing-the-1bn-in-value-add-with-the-losers/)

But let’s look on the bright side like Brian Cohen in the Life of Brian. Suffering a lingering, painful death by cruxification, Brian’s spirits were lifted by others crucified along with him, who sang “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”.

Hopefully SMRT and SBS are tapping F1 to make our tpt system more reliable and efficient. In the UK, train and bus companies have started working with the Williams Formula One team to help improve their service.

The companies are buying advice and equipment to make their vehicles more reliable, something every passenger in the land will be grateful for.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23132335

At the moment, SMRT’s only links with F1 is that the previous CEO drove a Ferrari, and is alleged to have had a Mercedes super car. Maybe when Desond Kwek and his ex-SAF mgrs want to buy super cars with their mega-bonuses, Williams could call them to see if something win-win can be arranged for them, Williams and SMRT? Free sex is no longer an option after recent corruption court cases.

SMRT might be interested in this: talking train window ads

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23167112

I mean its CEO is claiming that its business model is not sustainable i.e. he can’t raise fares to cover the costs of salaries and maintenance. Cut dividends leh? As at end February 2012, SMRT has paid SMRT paid S$562.79m in dividends to Temasek since its listing.

(Another way of raising $https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/how-smrt-can-spend-more-on-maintenance-while-contd-paying-gd-dividends/)

Finally, great video that shows guy driving round Manhattan at speeds that breaks the law. http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/sep/06/manhattan-island-24-minutes-video. Driver records 24-minute fastest lap around Manhattan

SMRT: Another breakdown!

Fortunately it’s not the trains, or the buses. It’s minor. Shares are marginally off today, so market doesn’t worry about this latest dyfunctionality

Still even think about investing in it because the continuing dysfunctionality  is not reassuring, inspite of having as CEO, a scholar and ex SAF head, who was brought in to get the trains (and buses) to run on time again. Still not running. There have been several train delays, the most publicised of which was in April when a crack on the northbound track between Somerset and Orchard stations slowed trains to a crawl. Then a speeding bus (driven by FT PRC driver training for F1) crashed overturned.There were injuries and a death. And then there was S’pore’s first strike (legal or otherwise) in decades.

All this on the watch of a scholar and general? Err what would have happened on the watch of a non-scholar, sales char bor FT? Actually, we know: overcrowded trains, poor working conditions for FT drivers, contempt for commuters.

Back to the latest failure: SMRT’s Vice President for Corporate Marketing and Communications, Ms Kalai Natarajan, has quit after only 5 months. She was among several senior management staff (mostly ex-SAF officers, but not her) brought in by the new CEO Lt Gen (NS) Desmond Kuek after he took over in Oct last year. She was hired in Feb this year, taking over from Mr Goh Chee Kong, who left last year. Mr Goh is the guy who insinuated, “Better you die, than damage SMRT property.” OK, I exaggerate, but not by much. He was ex-SAFer. (Her quitting shows the gd for the FT, where “T” stands for “Talent”, running Temasek’s public communications. I once blogged that he had turned down the SMRT post.)

During her short tenure, more than five in her communication team of about 10 people resigned.

According to ST, her departure is unusual because she is not required to serve notice. She told ST that she is leaving SMRT today (Monday). She confirmed that she will not be serving notice. Usually the notice period for senior management is three months. Seems she hasn’t another job waiting for her.

A HR expert speculated in ST report that there may be a “cultural misfit” if senior management staff “are not on the same wavelength”. Let’s watch to see if the Hongkie that was brought in to run train operations, quits.

If he does, then commuters should be worried, very worried, that experienced professionals have left, leaving only ex-SAFers, not experienced in running public transport operations or public communications.

Related posts: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/smrt-can-still-wait/ Interesting that it is still trading way above its “Sell” target price.

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/for-they-have-sown-the-wind-and-they-shall-reap-the-whirlwind/

When raising fares, SBS, SMRT & Govt don’t have this problem

SBS and SMRT are grumbling loudly that their present biz model (after delivering golden rivers of dividends for Temasek and the S’pore Labour Foundation) doesn’t work. SLF even sold 8% of SBS’s parent at a huge discount to the market price. Great move as this was done before market meltdown. (BTW, at current price, tempted to buy into ComfortDelgro. It closed last Friday at 1.755, up 3% from Thursday. The co’s fundamentals havenot changed since institutions bought SLF’s stake at 1.94. It is likely that when they bot from SLF, they would have been given assurances of the fundamentals at that price.)

And govt has been pouring our money ($1.1bn and counting) at the public the transport system. And the Wankers’ Party remains quiet* about its Manifesto call to nationalise the public transport system.

If the PAP govt weren’t concerned that it would lose votes if fares were raised without a marked improvement in service standards, fares would have gone up by now to keep the dividends flowing. Screwing the public (by making the public pay-and-pay) is the PAP way pre the 2011 GE and PE.

Anyway, SMRT, ComfortDelgro and the govt should be grateful that this doesn’t happen here when faresw are raised: Protests against bus and underground fare rises in the Brazilian city of Sao Paulo have turned violent.

Police fired rubber-coated bullets and tear gas, and detained more than 200 people. Police say they seized petrol bombs, knives and drugs.

Violence has also been reported at protests in Rio de Janeiro.

Prices for a single ticket in Sao Paulo were raised on 2 June from 3 reals ($1.40, £0.90) to 3.20 reals ($1.50, £0.96).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-22899748

For that, they have to thank people like this TRE reader

My Middle name is AhLong:

June 14, 2013 at 3:47 pm  (Quote)

We need to organise a movement similar to BERSEH of Malaysia now to demand clean election. We need to ensure a proper way to secure and account for the ballot boxes en-route to the counting station …We must demand at the counting station, after all ballot boxes are accounted for and examined, all the ballot tickets should mixed into a single bunch and count from there. In this way, the sly election department will not be able to get the data for gerrymandering in the next election.

Finally, to have a level of playing field, election department should NOT be under PMO!

If he is serious, he should be trying to organise shumething, instead of juz bitching anon. His use of the word “We” is simply a way of saying “You”.He juz wants to let out hot air, like VivianB, Auntie and her favourite Singh, the M’sian gals from S’pore Writers, and the Nairs, Gopalan and Rajan. He doesn’t want to do the hard slog, like Low, Ah Huat, Ah Lian, the NSP’s Dynamic Duo, the Ravis (M and P) and Team SDP. If you’re wondering why Siow is not on the list, he’s away in the US until year-end. And no, he is not attending the CIA’s regime change course.

—

*To be fair, Low mentions it in passing, now and then.

LTA, SMRT: Learn from NY & Dubai pls

“Sponsorship is already used on metro systems across the word in places like Madrid, Dubai and New York,” says a Tory party report, and it suggests “Sponsorship deals to rename London Underground lines and stations should be considered as a way to fund a freeze in fares, Tory politicians have said.”

A report by the Conservative Party on the London Assembly said if £136m was raised in sponsorship it could freeze fares for a year.And it claimed £204m would cap rises at inflation for the next three years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22745677

“Transport for London (TfL) said the cost of of changing maps and signs made a deal of that kind unfeasible”, and bet you that LTA and SMRT would give the same excuse.

But here’s shumething that SMRT cannot say, “Every penny of this and our other revenue goes towards keeping fares as low as possible”,. because as a listco, controlled by Temasek, it got to pay dividends.

TRE says it all about Ong Ye Kung, NTUC & SMRT

TRE posted these articles in the following order on its front page.

NTUC claims credit for unionising SMRT PRC bus drivers

In a recent hour-long phone interview with 2 journalists from Yahoo! Singapore, former SMRT bus driver…

185 SMRT PRC bus drivers had petitioned MOM in 2010

 

Ong Ye Kung as a director of SMRT should have known about the plight of the bus drivers. But as union leader of the bus driver, he did nothing. And NTUC is now claiming credit for unionisg PRC drivers? Why now only after a strike? But let’s be fair, maybe NTUC leaders are like the many readers of TRE who “hate” all things PRC. See all the negative stories TRE carries from the Western media about China which pander to these readers.

 

SMRT: Dump

Brokers had forecast cost increases in staff, repair and maintenance costs, but not the 29.1% in maintenance & repair; and the 18.2% in staffing costs (all those new recruits from SAF?*) reported this quarter.

Brokers are putting a target price of around 1.34, a big drop.

But maybe there is the usually Biz School approved front-loading of costs, expenses whenever there is a new CEO. For yield buyers like me, the next Q’s numbers are awaited.

——

*https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/smrt-noticed/

 

 

 

More FTs on way, a lot MORE!: DBS

OK, OK, I exaggerate: only 8% more of population if S’poreans don’t start breeding like rabbits.

DBS Vickers expects an upcoming white paper on Singapore’s population to raise its population target to 7 million from 6.5 million, which will benefit construction, land transport, property and healthcare companies. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/18/markets-singapore-stocksnews-population-idUSL4N0AN3GR20130118

SMRT is not on the “buy” list. It too has concerns about SMRT, like me and many others.

SMRT: Noticed?

I had planned to blog on the new appointments http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?138562-8-New-hires-to-get-SMRT-on-track-4-from-military but forgot until today. Old age.

Noticed that SMRT has created seven new posts? Looks like Kuekie wants to spend, spend, spend on expanding management.He must think SMRT like SAF, money not an issue.

Taz two reasons to avoid the stock. The only reason to buy is to capture the gains from increased fares. But I’m not sure if fares would be allowed to rise this year, let alone this side of next GE: unless there is a marked improvement in service.

And speaking about service, on Boxing Day, for the first time ever, I couldn’t board a train because it was full: I didn’t have the right to board a crowded train, it was too crowded. It was at noon at Bishan. Note, I avoid using MRT and buses during rush hrs. And on Boxing Day and 31st Dec, there were problems when I used the NE Line.

SMRT: Buying target price

OSK DMG has a target price of $1.60 (6% above current price) and a Neutral call. I’ll monitor price to see if it falls to below or near that level. And then evaluate it to see if worth buying for dividend yield. The CEO’s talk of getting rid of FT drivers’ supervisors, could if carried out herald a change of culture.

BTW broker has a  Nneutral” call on the sector, with preference for ComfortDelGro (S$1.72 BUY TP S$1.85) for its cheaper valuations and overseas growth potential.

WP changes mind on nationalising SMRT & SBS

This blog at regular intervals reminds readers that the Wankers’ Workers’ Party had been silent on public transport nationalisation, despite it being in the Wayangs’ party’s 2011 manifesto and despite Gerald Giam advocating it in ST in July 2011 (here, here); and despite the seeming failure of the govt’s public tpt policy (I mean does the pumping in of S$1.1bn show that the “for-profit” policy working?)

Finally WP and GG have broken their silence: “If PTOs are unable to do so because of their obligations to shareholders, public transport should be taken out of private hands and run by a not-for-profit corporation which focuses on providing efficient and quality public transport, instead of generating shareholder returns.”

Err this was what is written in Manifesto: “Instead of public transport being provided by profit-oriented companies, all public transport including the MRT & public buses servicing major routes should be brought under a National Transport Corporation, a public body, to ensure a smooth integration of the overall national transport network and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services and overheads incurred by multiple operators.”

Spot the difference? The Manifesto call was unconditional. Now the operative word is “IF”.

Second time WP changing its mind on a Manifesto call. The first was on the benchmarking of ministers’ salaries. Like this change, one GG was behind that one too. Maybe Eric Tan (remember him?*) was right to rubbisg GG.

If the Manifesto is juz toilet paper, pls tell us WP. And tell us which first-world opposition party treats its manifesto with such contempt?

Related post

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/why-wp-mps-are-not-first-world-parlimentarians/

—

*GG called him his Si-Fu. Si-Fu lost NCMP seat to GG. Si-Fu had been promised NCMP seat before GE 2011, if East Coast team was entitled to one.

SMRT did not brief FT drivers on labour law?

I’m glad that the four FT PRC drivers that are facing charges for instigating an illegal strike are going to get help from some civic-minded lawyers.

Following the guilty plea by one driver who it seems had no lawyer to advise him, I was dismayed.

I had heard via Secret Squirrel and Morocco Mole that the PRC FT drivers had never ever been briefed on the labour law here: particularly that there was a procedure to be followed before striking. And that SMRT has no documentary evidence that it ever briefed its FT drivers.

So when I read that one driver had pleaded guilty, I tot it was unlikely that these issues,  assuming they were true, or even probable would be raised in public by the drivers.

Now that the remaining four charged drivers have legal advice, if these allegations are probable, they would be raised, in mitigation.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. But ignorance of the law particularly when it is in a foreign language should be taken into consideration when passing sentence: especially if the employer did not brief its FT employees about the legal process involved in taking industrial action.

As to whether SMRT could have been so dysfunctional as not to brief its FT drivers on labour law, fact is that its HR department is pretty dysfunctional.  “MOM [Ministry of Manpower”] said it has reiterated to SMRT that labour and contractual grievances raised by the workers should be a priority and addressed quickly.” And after all, SMRT only introduced the following after the strike:

— “[T]old its drivers at the sessions that it has set up a 24-hour hotline for drivers to call if they have concerns or grievances”; and

— “They have also appointed liaison officers who can speak Mandarin to deal directly with the drivers, said SMRT.”

(CNA report)

Avoid the stock especially as SMRT’s focus on profit is one of the many factors why SMRT has been facing problems, according to its CEO Desmond Kuek. If the CEO talks like this, you can be pretty sure good dividend payouts are not one of his KPIs.

SMRT: Better not take the bus

(If you are short of time, juz read the last two paragraphs on why taking SMRT buses may be dangerous, otherwise read on.)

TRE reprinted this and Neutral responded as follows:

To be fair, “ex-SAF chief and scholar” was only in charge recently and so not really his problem. More like it’s “Miss colour hair” legacy.

 However, it is interesting to see how he handle this situation and if he applies a military approach, these “strikers” can jolly well go home to PRC for christmas.

I disagree.

Ever since the illegal strike began, SMRT has goofed in its handling of it:

— Came out to say initially 102 didn’t turn up: later said 171. If it got it wrong by 10%, fair enough, but it got it wrong by 67%. If it didn’t know how many drivers didn’t turn for work, it means it didn’t know how many drivers extra it would need. If a transport company can’t keep track of attendance, there is something wrong with its management info systems.

— But maybe it wasn’t the fault of the mgt info system but of the internal communications system?

— Then there was SMRT saying that striking workers were sacked; and then saying more had returned to work the next day. If they were sacked, how can return to work?

— As the law is very clear on what constitutes a strike (minister’s comments), management did not take decisive action in calling it an “illegal strike” until after the minister said so, it seems. This did the constructive, nation-building no favours, forcing it into some contortions to explain the initial non-use of the word “strike”. The media will not thank the management for the public ridicule it got.

And

— SMRT has admitted that “swifter actions could have been taken to improve dormitory conditions”. It should have admitted it could have communicated better with the PRC workers. It said on Wednesday, “the additional pay adjustment of S$25 a month for drivers from China was finalised last week and that it is in the process of communicating this to the drivers.” (CNA). Couldn’t they have told the drivers, before they saw their pay slips?

— The dormitory conditions should not have been so bad. SMRT is a TLC and GLC, not any SME.

— SMRT should have encouraged the FT PRCs to join NTUC. SBS did this. If they were part of Zorro’s gang, maybe things may not have reached this point. As Siow Kum Hong wrote on his FB page, “[A]ctually, i think people go on strike only if they feel disenfranchised and after they think they’ve exhausted other options.”

— As the strike took place when the CEO was away on overseas leave, it showed a lack of foreknowledge of worker unhappiness. Or worse: SMRT knew but CEO couldn’t be bothered to change his vacation plans.

These failings reflect badly on the ex-general, ex-SAF chief and scholar. And shouldn’t he be on the first plane back? After all, first illegal strike in Singapore since 1980 and in a TLC. The CEO was an ex-SAF chief and then senior servant: is this boh chap attitude a reflection of the ethos of public service?Thank God, there was no military or national security crisis during his stint as SAF chief.

Avoid the stock. It’s a dog that has fleas on the dog’s fleas.

And what happens if one of the FT drivers is so frustrated that he turns suicidal when driving a bus full of commuters. Or if he runs amok? Has the ex-colonel and scholar in charge of bus operations tot about the possibility that putting unhappy drivers on the road is endangering S’poreans and FTs. Imagine the damage that pictures of passengers being burnt alive will do to S’pore’s reputation as employers’ paradise?

Better give SMRT bus services a miss if you can. And if you have to take a SMRT bus, better make your will first, and check your insurance cover. Better safe than sorry?

SMRT is in the biz of transporting people

TRE republished this and improved on it by adding part of  the newspaper report that annoyed me.

Here are some great comments posted on TRE about the “unprecedented offer”

TheFortyPercent:

The SMRT’s attitude is typical of the legacy left behind by LKY. If SMRT makes a generous compensation, people will throw themselves on to the MRT rails. If we have too generous welfare benefits, people will laze around and not work. If we have good health benefits, people will fall sick, get cancer and not take care of their health. If we don’t pay our civil servants and ministers the highest salaries, they become corrupt. If we don’t have the ISA, people will become militant. If we don’t have a meritocratic law of the jungle system, every Singaporean will become lazy and indolent. If we don’t bring the thousands and thousands of foreigners, Singapore will collapse and your mothers, wives and sisters will become maids. And the list goes on….. It just shows how much confidence LKY and the PAP has in its citizens! No other country in the world in all history has its leaders, as Singapore has, condemned, spoken derisively and rubbished its own citizens. This is the wonderful legacy that LKY has bequeathed to all Singaporeans! His money of course goes to his family and the ten generations of descendants after him.

One Eye Dragon In Your Pants:

Wow, so that’s what SMRT thinks of us. Money grubbing opportunists who would do anything (even getting our limbs amputated!) to get some compensation. Yeah, in their eyes, we are all lesser mortals who deserve nothing. Have they looked at themselves in the mirror lately? If only public transportation isn’t monopolized by SMRT & SBS, I would outright boycott their services.

Truth:

It is shameful that SMRT has such bad social grace to say such words of the public , implying the young Thai girl has a motive to lose her legs to get some money. Are we in some foreign lands where people sell their body organs to get some money ? Then why the need to say such unkind words of your commuters, to the effect that they would intrude on the SMRT tracks and implying try some antics to get some donation.

Lousy public relation, presenting a inhumane image of SMRT. These words are really mean and uncalled for.

Thought those infamous word ” opportunity to make money ” sent to the taxis after the breakdown of the trains last December was bad enough, and now these words. The SMRT never learn, or with a new PR people, has still not got its acts together again.

By the way, why is the PaaPa government making the common folks pay for upgrading and repairs bill $1.1 billion for the SMRT ? The Board of directors( past since 2002 )each receiving $200,000 annually and the chairman $500,000 should contribute their fees to the repair bills if they have some conscience. They failed in their duties as directors, and yet keep this money for private enjoyment . Shame on them, especially on Mr Chew Choon Seng, now chairman of SGX, who was the chairman of the board in 2002 that appointed a wrong unsuitable person to be CEO. They got away scot free, enjoying their director fees privately, but now the taxpayers have to bear with the cost of the repair , through no fault of theirs.

Today had reported that the ang moh FT I tot had joined SMRT had still not joined, and is unlikely to do so: Smart “Talent”. When you have a PR person, unapologetically, saying that $15,000 was an “unprecedented” offer to a girl who lost her legs; and that non-payment policy is to deter people from deliberately losing their limbs or lives  to get money from SMRT, it shows the kind of culture ( “choose not to board crowded trains” and “trains can be packed more” and “opportunity to make money” and “never ever damage SMRT property even if you are suffocating in a train that has stopped, and there is no electricity and you are left in the dark”) he would have to defend about if he signed on. Maybe the previous PR boss, an ex-army colonel, should reapply for his job?

He fits the culture to a “T”, blaming the bad English of the staff for them not communicating with the public. He was the person who also said that SMRT should never ever be damaged. Wonder why did he “move on” if he fitted the culture to a “T”. Goh Chee Kong approved comments like this.

Finally, we get to the title of this post:  SMRT is repositioning itself as an engineering company. I’ve commented on why this may be a bad idea: engineering companies tend to gold plate operations.

SMRT should think of itself as a “Mass Rapid Transit” biz: moving crowds of people quickly, in reasonable comfort and efficiently at low cost. Be like AirAsia, EasyJet or Ryanair, the best low cost airlines: decent customer service at lowish prices. And handicapped and elderly people: take a taxi if you are not happy with the service. Don’t bitch too much. Ryanair tells them in no uncertain terms, not to use it. It tells them there are alternatives.

 

SMRT: $15,000 not enough

Talk of bad PR.

When I read that the Thai gal sued SMRT, I didn’t think much of her case. I tot that she should have accepted reasonable compensation and moved on.

But when I read that SMRT says that its $15,000 offer was “unprecedented”, I tot what a dumb, mean company.

I don’t know waz a fair amount would be taking into account her injuries and that it isn’t SMRT’s fault. But $15,000 is not it. Its legal costs would easily exceed $100,000.

I had been looking to buy shares in SMRT, but I’ll give it a miss for the time being. Want to see if mgt changes are working.

Anyway, hopefully the FT brought in to replace an ex-SAF officer will do something to change SMRT’s bad record in public communications. The SAF officer said once “Better you die, than damage SMRT property”.  Ya I exaggerate, but that was the message he gave when a commuter smashed a glass panel to let air into a train stuck in a tunnel.

How SMRT can spend more on maintenance while cont’d paying gd dividends

Find sponsors for MRT stations Dubai style.

The station at Changi Int’l Airport can be renamed after Changi Airport, or SIA or any airline wanting publicity. Raffles City can be renamed after Robinsons or Westin. Raffles Place can be named after a bank sponsor while Temasek can sponsor Dhoby Gaut.

While new CEO as an ex-SAF chief and senior civil servant (also a scholar) should ensure that the trains run on time (in the early 20th century in the US, retired generals were in demand to run railwa s because the army like the railways were complex organisations), he might not be gd for profits. As I explained here, SMRT is now seeing itself as an engineering co, not a transport co, but problem is that engineers tend to gold-plate their operations.

Reason WP quietly ditched its public tpt nationalisation call?

(“Trying to serve residents better, WP ditches manifesto call nationalise public tpt?”)

My WP “Morocco Mole”* (the sidekick of  “Secret Squirrel” in the carton series: bit like Yaw to Low) tells me that at July’s parly seating, GG will again keep quiet on the above issue in the debate after the ministerial statement on the major disruption in the MRT system. Tells me no other WP MP will raise the issue of public tpt nationalisation, as this is GG’s responsibility.

He asked, “Why so cock, when the Commission of Inquiry’s findings  that SMRT was skimping on maintenance can be used to support WP’s election manifesto call to nationalise public transport? Also shows WP can think better than PAP.”

I referred him to this ST report, where it was reported that MPs are lobbying LTA  for better bus services in their wards: all because the $1.1 bn subsidy.

I told him since WP has appointed Ah Huat (remember him?) to co-ordinate its efforts for more buses to serve Hougang and Aljunied, it would be most awkward for him (and WP) to beg LTA, and SMRT and SBS to improve services in WP areas if the WP is publicly proposing to destroy their staffs’ rice bowls. It would have no leg to stand on.

His response, “Tan kuku. Even if Sylvia, Glenda and Angela (remember her?) perform [expletive deleted] on the LTA, SBS and SMRT male managers, and Show Mao [expletive deleted] the female managers, think that they will improve services in WP areas? Why WP so cock?” 

He has a point. SIGH (Victor Hugo: “A traitor always pays for his betrayal in the end.”)

Related post: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/05/28/hougang-only-up-to-a-point-lucky/

—-

*Moley is a WP cadre but not on the Central Executive Council,. He is ex-Barisan. He early last week told me that the WP had tabled only one question abt public transport (abt the release of the COI report). He is right. Which makes WP’s silence on this issue more deafening. Look at the topics raised: what the public wants raised for the most.

Demonising cabbies again?

(Or “How to get more taxis on the road, increasing rentals, and still screw the consumer”)

Last Saturday, MediaCorp’s freesheet carried an article that screamed

Taxis could become harder to flag down

More may obtain a taxi licence to rent cabs for personal use instead of plying the roads

It went on: more people could possibly be getting taxi licences for the wrong reasons – as suggested by Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew in a press interview … Noting how, with the exception of those owned by ComfortDelGro, taxis are hired out mostly to cabbies who drive a single shift per day, Mr Lui said the authorities “need to be even more vigilant about this … because now driving a taxi can, with high COE prices, become a substitute for owning a car”.

Right, it’s the fault of cabbies gaming the system that we can’t get a cab. Not the fault of ComfortDelgro, the govt, or SMRT.

In mid April, there was a ST report that taxi drivers’ take-home income have gone up by as much as 30% since the increase in taxi fares at the end of last year. “ComfortDelGro, the biggest operator here with about 15,600 taxis, said average net income per cab per day has risen by 12 per cent to $210.93 … up from $188.69 in November, excludes costs drivers have to bear, such as rental and diesel.”

In the run-up to the fare increase late last year, our nation-building, constructive media were full of stories of the plight of cabbies. And when fares were increased, there were stories of drops in income as people stopped taking cabs. Poor cabbies. The media also reported extensively that the fleet owners were NOT increasing their taxi rentals. The benefits of the  increase were all going to the cabbies.

So I was surprised (in February or early March) to read in the same said media that S’pore had plenty of  taxis (about 27,000 of them) but that taxis were under-utilised because some work on one shift with one operator per taxi who “once they earn enough would call it a day”.

In April, we were told that they are doing well: to to 30% increase in take-home pay. So will there be shortages again as more of those taxis with one operator are AWOL because the operators call it a day after they earn enough? Now we are again reminded that many cabs are only operated by one person a day, and worse: that increasingly cabbies are gaming the system by using the taxi as a car, not as a cab. Juz earn enough to pay rental, then use taxi as car, for what we are not told. Transport gds? Visit clients? Or rent to senior members of Home Team or other scholars to have sex in in return for favours?

A shortage that will be solved when the fleet owners increase their charges so that the cabbies have to work longer hours again?

In other words, are we “being conditioned” for operating costs (not fares) for cabbies to go up to increase the supply of available taxis.

Then we will read stories in the media that taxi drivers are suffering, and that fares have to rise. And we shouldn’t complain if we are compassionate.

The cycle of spin goes on. Bit like the cycle of life.

Instead of inceasing rentals to increase supply, why not insist that each taxi must have mutiple operators working in shifts? Incentives, disincentives could be introduced to force cabbies into sharing? Afraid of too many cabs on the road, forcing down rentals because cabbies are leaving the industry?

.

SMRT: “Cowboys” were right

Since the trains started breaking down towards the end of last yr, bloggers and posters (not I) have been attacking SMRT for putting profits before safety, and disregarding the engineers’ advice (though without having a clue abt the said advice). Yacoob’s exemplar for the new media, the constructive, nation-building media were deafening in their silence on this national issue. I was silent because I was trying to figure out if I shld go buy some SMRT shares.

Well, based on the comments by the chairman, Koh Yong Gua, reported by ST and ST’s headline on an inside page, the inhabitants of cowboy towns were correct. (Explain that Yacoob and DPM Teo.)

“SMRT to refocus on its engineers” read the headline. This implied that SMRT had lost its focus on engineers somewhere along the line, assuming it once had such a focus.

Mr Koh said that “SMRT will be repositioned an engineering company”, begging the question “What was its earlier positioning?”. Retailer, property developer, financial engineer, or cash cow for Temasek? Since SMRT was listed in 2000, Temasek has received $694.3m in dividends (I’ve including the dividend declared recently).

The promotion of Mr Khoo Hean Siang in March 2011 to COO was meant to show the importance of engineers, he said. The previous COO who was “removed” was not a technical person. Wonder what was he? Ex-SAF officer or financial man? With the CEO a retailer, it surprises me that until 2011, the COO was not a technical man. And that board meetings did not include a very senior engineer in attendance.

Actually, I think Mr Koh still hasn’t got it. SMRT is not an engineering company. It is a company whose main business is moving large numbers of people around S’pore safely, and in reasonable comfort (most of the time). By focusing on engineers and positioning SMRT as an engineering company, he could be laying the seeds for a serious problem somewhere along the track. Investors in the West have found that companies dominated by engineers tend to goldplate processes and systems. Siemens, Rolls-Royce, Westinghouse, Boeing, Airbus and even GE, had to be run by non-engineers before shareholders benefitted.  

Commuters may say so what? So long as it is safer and doesn’t breakdown, power to the engineers. The problem is that goldplating is expensive, and eventually someone has to pay. This is likely to be the commuter (via fare increases) or his avatar or alter ego the taxpayer.

I was planning to buy into a rights issue when one is annced, as I expect. But given the positioning as an “engineering company” and its “refocus on its engineers”, I think I’ll give the stock a miss for the time being. But never ever bet against Temasek when it comes to a local company.

Related post:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/smrt-quiet-re-nationalisation/

SMRT mgt failures: What does it say abt SAF?

“The experts questioned having the bus bridging services ply a route mirroring the entire train line as this may not be the most effective way to move people. They suggested that the bus bridging services should ferry commuters to one to three stations, or to the next working station.”

Huh? Having been lucky enough not to kanna caught in one of these disruptions (my 87-yr old mum on her only second MRT outing was at a station when a disruption occured), I’m surprised to learn that this wasn’t done or that it isn’t now SOP?

Given that it is a well-known fact, I believe, that retired SAF officers are given senior jobs at SMRT (presumably because they have the experience of managing large and complex organisations), I’m surprised that foreign experts recommended the following “fairly common sense and not rocket science” command and control procedures:

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120510-0000079/Foreign-experts-give-tips-at-SMRT-inquiry

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1200227/1/.html

We need genuine Talents to help us run our public transport systems, not ex-SAF officers, M’sian PRs or PRC bus drivers that we have been getting. And no “ang moh tua kee” attitude when getting Talents please. Hongkies, Japs, Taiwanese and Koreans who speak Inglish should be considered. No PRCs because China’s MRT systems are very new.

As to our defence, are we spending money foolishly on hardware, when what we need are a few good men? The government should be worried. It’s not us “lesser” citizens are at risk. It’s the FTs and rich S’poreans who need protection. An Indonesian pirate chief after reading of SMRT’s failures despite employing retired SAF colonels, may be tempted to raid Sentosa Cove, plunder it and kidnap people.

DPM Teo & GG (or WP): gentle reminders for next week

DPM Teo has been busy in April, what with opening a temporary carpark in Hougang, praising Desmond Choo (assumed PAP candidate there), talking abt the dangers of the internet, and pushing onto us the task of integrating FTs onto us, despite many of us wanting first-world FTs, not the garbage we’ve been getting in ever increasing truck loads, I’d tot I’d remind him of shumething he said in March concerning violent, ang moh FTs.

In March,  in parliament to a question from “Kate Spade” (the real people’s princess, not that NSP, TJS groupie gal who was from RP and who is looking to move on from NSP, not her boy friend: I mean tin looks ordinary, Nicole has star quality), he told us very upset S’poreans that Home Team was conducting an internal investigation on why two violent ang moh FTS who beat up two S’poreans badly in 2010 were allowed to post “peanuts” in bail; and why the police investigation took so long? They took the opportunity to cock a snook at S’pore by moving on.

He said the investigation would be completed in April, and implied that we would told the conclusions.

As it’s now May and parly sits next week, he should be abt to tell us abt the conclusions. And if the investigation has yet to be concluded, why not?

Tot he might need reminding as he seems to be trying hard to join Tharman, Sailor Lui, $8 Khaw and PM, as a teller of jokes in bad taste.

And I hope Gerald Giam (the apprentice who overthrew his si-fu Eric Tan) remembers that the WP called for the nationalisation of the bus and MRT systems in its 2011 GE manifesto, and that he wrote this on nationalising the public tpt system in July 2011.

If neither he nor any other WP MP raises this issue in parly next week, or explains why the WP has changed its mind of nationalisation (despite the apparent failure of the government’s model and the voters’ disgust with the government on this issue), the WP should have the decency to take down the manifesto from the WP website. First, the WP changed its benchmark that the WP wanted ministerial salaries to be referenced to, and now this. Said manifesto isn’t worth the paper it is written on even before the WP comes into power.  In first-world democracies, manifesto promises are ditched after the party wins power, not before: another WP first? Other firsts https://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=449379458422514&set=at.281804541846674.87911.280285461998582.555162557&type=1&theater

WP: No longer believes in public tpt nationalisation

This week, one of the topics to be debated in parliament will be the public transport system especially the government’s plans to inject $1.1bn into the bus system.

In its 2011 General Election Manifesto the WP wrote: Instead of public transport being provided by profit-oriented companies, all public transport including the MRT & public buses servicing major routes should be brought under a National Transport Corporation, a public body, to ensure a smooth integration of the overall national transport network and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services and overheads incurred by multiple operators.

In simple English, the WP manifesto called for the nationalisation of the MRT and bus systems.

But, I’ve been reliably told, that the WP will not be calling for the nationalisation of the public transport system in the debate on public transport this week. It will keep silent on its manifesto call.

If my source (a WP member in gd standing) is correct, and I hope he is wrong, one can only wonder if the WP has forgotten its manifesto call on the nationalisation of public transport (see somewhere here) or changed its mind on public transport nationalisation? And then one can wonder why the forgetfulness or change, when the facts and public mood seem to favour nationalisation.

Granted, at the time, there was very little mainstream (to be expected) or new media (more surprising this) attention, and very little public interest (not surprising, given the lack of awareness on this call) on this issue. But things are different now.

There have been several major failures of the MRT system, resulting in chaos, and public anger.

With $1.1bn of tax-payers’ money going into the bus system (two-thirds or 67% of it, $733m, going into ComfortDelgro where the state has a shareholding that is “peanuts”*), there are many voices wondering why private shareholders should benefit from a public good?

Example: Since housing and transport are both necessities of life, and public transport is the only choice of the lower-income group, it is not unjustifiable to commit resources to keep the cost of public transport low … government spending on public transport is a form of income redistribution …

The key concern in the S$1.1-billion package to purchase and operate buses is not that it subsidises public transport per se but whether public funds could benefit a small group of shareholders, to whom bus companies are ultimately accountable.

This is what the Government will need to account to taxpayers.

Even BT, part of the nation-building, constructive media had this to say, The public transport model has come under scrutiny ever since a $1.1 billion package was announced by the government to supplement the existing privately run bus fleet with 550 buses.

How has the government responded?

The minister responsible for throwing $1.1bn at the problem can only parrot repeat what his predecessors used to say, Our current model leaves the operations of trains and buses to commercial entities as we believe the long term public interest is best served this way. The profit incentive drives the operators towards higher efficiency and productivity, which keeps costs as low as possible . . . Otherwise, if the system is inefficiently run, the public will ultimately pay for the higher operating costs, either through higher fares, or greater government subsidies.

He should be asked in parliament this week why despite the “higher efficency and productivity” (“which keeps costs as low as possible”) of the private companies, commuters keep paying more and more while getting worse and worse service, so much so that the government has to subsidise the companies to improve bus service quality.  The minister’s The profit incentive drives the operators towards higher efficiency and productivity, which keeps costs as low as possible, can and should be challenged.

So the WP has plenty of ammunition to rubbish the government’s public transport policy And remind the government and the voters that it called for nationalisation last year. But it seems it will not call for nationalisation.

Parliament is the best place to debate the issue and the WP should not let this opportunity be missed especially as it called for nationalisation in its election manifesto. If it does not raise this issue, S’poreans must hope that PAP newbie FT MP, Puthucheary (“No NS for me”) will raise the issue. He had suggested in the last session of parliament that nationalisation might be a gd option.

There should be a more selfish, self-serving reason for the WP to use this opportunity to call for nationalisation.  If  the WP doesn’t believe in its own manifesto or keeps quiet when it changes its mind on a manifesto issue, why should, we, the voters believe in the WP?

The PAP pointed out earlier this year (rightly) that the WP’s benchmark for ministers’ salaries had changed from the poor (in said manifesto) to a civil service senior grade (Gerald Giam in parliament). The WP could not rebut the PAP charge.

The voters who voted for the WP believed its call for the need of a co-driver, to keep the PAP honest and competent. If voters cannot believe in the PAP and the WP, what should the voters do? Vote SDP?

The WP might want to be reminded that in countries with first-world parliaments, the election manifesto is a very important document, not something to be chucked away after a general election. If the WP does not call for nationalisation of the public transport system in parliament this week, it should remove the link on the front page of its website to its manifesto.

—

*Using back-of-the envelope calculations and figures in annual reports, since it was listed SMRT (over a decade ago) has paid $562.79m in dividends to Temasek (which owns 74%), and ComfortDelgro has paid the S’pore Labour Foundation (a statutory board affiliated to the NTUC which has 12%) dividends of roughly $150.46m since 2003 (Comfort and Delgro merged in 2003, and SLF had a stake in Comfort). The amount that ended up with the government was $713.25m, with SMRT contributing 79%. But ComfortDelgro is the main beneficiary of the $1.1bn bus plan, given that, at present, SBS Transit (a listed co 75% owned by ComfortDelgro) provides most of the buses. ComfortDelgro is getting $733m or 67% of the $1.1bn package.

Related rant

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/wp-does-do-original-thinking-pap/

 

WP does do Original Thinking PAP

(Or “Trumpets pls for WP” or “WP way ahead of PAP and S’poreans”)

So the PAPpies are accusing WP MPs of plagarising. The implication is that WP don’t do original thinking. Well it is clear from the responses of the “victims” that the PAP are peeing on the wrong tree. Wicked, mean tot: are the two Nairs advising their fellow PAPpies to use this tactic? Seems the kind of thing lawyers love to do: go negative on obscure technicalities. It also seems similar in nature to the Nair’s recent antics; antics that backfired badly on the Nairs, and on the PM in one instance. So the PAPpies should take care.

Seriously, the WP had an original idea that was way ahead of public sentiment in its 2011 General Election Manifesto. Instead of public transport being provided by profit-oriented companies, all public transport including the MRT & public buses servicing major routes should be brought under a National Transport Corporation, a public body, to ensure a smooth integration of the overall national transport network and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services and overheads incurred by multiple operators.

In simple English, the WP Manifesto called for the nationalisation of the MRT and bus systems.

At the time, there was very little mainstream (to be expected) or new media (more surprising this) attention, and very little public interest on this issue. But things are different now.

With $1.1bn of tax-payers’ money going into the bus system (two-thirds or 67% of it, $733m, going into ComfortDelgro where the state has a shareholding that is “peanuts”*), there are many voices wondering why private shareholders should benefit from a public good? Example: Since housing and transport are both necessities of life, and public transport is the only choice of the lower-income group, it is not unjustifiable to commit resources to keep the cost of public transport low … government spending on public transport is a form of income redistribution …

The key concern in the S$1.1-billion package to purchase and operate buses is not that it subsidises public transport per se but whether public funds could benefit a small group of shareholders, to whom bus companies are ultimately accountable.

This is what the Government will need to account to taxpayers.

Even BT, part of the nation-building, constructive media had this to say yesterday, The public transport model has come under scrutiny ever since a $1.1 billion package was announced by the government to supplement the existing privately run bus fleet with 550 buses.

But the minister responsible for the splurge can only parrot his predecessors, Our current model leaves the operations of trains and buses to commercial entities as we believe the long term public interest is best served this way. The profit incentive drives the operators towards higher efficiency and productivity, which keeps costs as low as possible . . . Otherwise, if the system is inefficiently run, the public will ultimately pay for the higher operating costs, either through higher fares, or greater government subsidies.

The WP should now be asking why despite the “higher efficency and productivity” (“which keeps costs as low as possible”) of the private companies, bus commuters keep paying more and more while getting worse and worse service, so much so that the government has to subsidise the companies to improve bus service quality. It should also remind the government and the voters that it called for nationalisation last year.

I’m sure the WP will soon rebut the minister’s The profit incentive drives the operators towards higher efficiency and productivity, which keeps costs as low as possible. But why is the WP so modest about getting it “right”? 

Being modest and understated are to me, great traits, in people. I hate show-offs and boasters. But being modest is not for a political party that aspires to form the government some day. Worse, there is the danger that the PAPpies persuade voters that the WP doesn’t believe its own manifesto, so why should they (the voters) believe the WP? It pointed out earlier this year (rightly) that the WP’s benchmark for ministers’ salaries had changed from the poor (in said manifesto) to a civil service senior grade (Gerald Giam in parliament).

If this silence persists, one can only wonder if the WP has forgotten its manifesto call on the nationalisation of public transport (see somewhere here) or changed its mind on public transport nationalisation? And then one can wonder why the forgetfulness or change, when the facts and public mood seem to favour nationalisation?

—

*Using back-of-the envelope calculations and figures in annual reports, since it was listed SMRT (over a decade ago) has paid $562.79m in dividends to Temasek (which owns 74%), and ComfortDelgro has paid the S’pore Labour Foundation (a statutory board affiliated to the NTUC which has 12%) dividends of roughly $150.46m since 2003 (Comfort and Delgro merged in 2003, and SLF had a stake in Comfort). The amount that ended up with the government was $713.25m, with SMRT contributing 79%. But ComfortDelgro is the main beneficiary of the $1.1bn bus plan, given that, at present, SBS Transit (a listed co 75% owned by ComfortDelgro) provides most of the buses. ComfortDelgro is getting $733m or 67% of the $1.1bn package.

Oh what a tangled web we weave: MRT, ComfortDelgro and the Government

According to the Christian doctrine of the trinity, there is only one God but God is three persons: the Father, the Son ( Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit. But each person is God, whole and entire.

Well our public transport system is some sort of trinity: the government*, ComfortDelgro and SMRT. Except while they are legally separate entities, in practice there is a kind of blending. This makes the Christian doctrine of the trinity easy to understand by comparison.

I’ll use the flow of funds between the companies and the government to illustrate an example of S’pore’s unique trinity at work. Using back-of-the envelope calculations and figures in annual reports, since it was listed SMRT (over a decade ago) has paid S$562.79m in dividends to Temasek, and ComfortDelgro has paid the S’pore Labour Foundation (a statutory board affiliated to the NTUC) dividends of  S$150.46m*since 2003 (Comfort and Delgro merged in 2003, and SLF had a stake in Comfort). The amount that ended up with the government was S$713.25m, with SMRT contributing 79%. But ComfortDelgro is likely be the main beneficiary of the S$1.1bn bus plan**, given that, at present, SBS Transit (a listed co 75% owned by ComfortDelgro) provides most of the buses. Taz an example of how messed up things are.

The funds’ flows also show that the government is putting back all the dividends it received from these two companies and then adding 35% more. So it’s wrong to say that the SMRT and ComfortDelgro are getting free lunches. At most the government is subsidising their lunches by 35%.

The government should get credit for ploughing its share of the “loot” (as the proponents of nationalisation would put it and MPs Puthu, PAP, and PritamS, WP, might put it), but it doesn’t. Taz how messed up are.

(Incidentally, one could reasonably argue that the other shareholders — and the minority shareholders of SBS Transit, remember ComfortDelgro owns around 75% — are getting a free lunch while the government returns its share of the dividends. But let’s not get into that today.)

What a mess. Even the government implicitly accepts that the present “rojak” system of organising the public transport here is not something that it would have introduced, if it had been prescient:

— it is is now planning to publicly funding the bus fleets of Comfort Delgro and SMRT with S$1.1bn; and

— in 2009, the then transport minister, a private sector PAP “catch” (“retired’ after the 2011 general election when the WP almost won the GRC he was helming) that joined the government was trying to fix the system while not admitting that the system was broken even then. (Thank Alex Au’s write-up on this for reminding us what that minister said in 2009.)

So it is no surprise that the the WP’s call in its 2011 general election manifesto to nationalise the public transport system**** is getting a lot of support (the nationalisation, not the WP’s call) from netizens. There may be merit in a nationalised public transport system: instead of being run for shareholders who are only interested in profits, and dividends, the system is run for the benefit of commuters. One of these days, I may run through the arguments. But don’t hold your breath. I think the debate is sterile as it all depends on one’s assumptions and definitions.

Sorry, back to the “rojak” system:  in the short-term, there is a problem of overcrowded buses. And this problem needs fixing. Nationalising the system ain’t as easy as passing a law. Shareholders have to be compensated and this requires valuations to be made, and agreed upon, or adjudicated. And it ain’t as though the shareholders are FTs. As mentioned earlier:

— Temasek owns 54% of SMRT; and

— The S’pore Labour Foundation, a statutory board linked to the NTUC, holds 12% of Comfort Delgro. SLF is Delgro’s single largest shareholder.

(Incidentally these stakes especially Temasek’s controlling stake shows how absurd the system is. S’pore has public transport private monopolies that are partially owned and controlled by the government. And the government regulates the fares and the routes. And as mentioned earlier, the government’s share of the dividends are now ploughed back and added to, but not appreciated by the public.)

Meantime, who is to run the system, and fund the fleet expansion? Public has to wait while these issues are sorted out? It’s OK for those critics who don’t use public transport that often, especially those who have one car per family person. But most S’poreans are not that fortunate.

To me, the government spending on the buses is a pragmatic quick fix both for the public and itself. The commuting public (self included when forced to travel during peak periods, admittedly a rare occurrence) gets less annoyed with the government, while the government is seen as publicly responding positively on a matter of public unhappiness.

As to the concern that the system is being fixed to bring more FTs in, let’s reserve judgement on that. Too early to even speculate. To even speculate, shows the level of mistrust that some people have of this government. I’m not one of them.

So while longer term, nationalisisation may be the best way to run a public transport system, it ain’t a short-term fix. The short-term fix is what the government is doing, throw money at the problem.

Critics should focus on whether the fix is the most cost-effective means of solving an immediate problem, not focus on a possible long-term solution. They should be making a case (not juz asking) for ComfortDelgro and SMRT to make massive rights issues to fund bus fleet expansion. Or asking for detailed details on what taxpayers get in return? Or how to ensure that the other shareholders don’t get a free lunch because of the S$1.1bn package.

Plenty of things to do to keep the government on its toes.

BTW, the full quote in the title is:

Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!

——-

*I’ve simplified: there is a universe within the government — including the Land Transport Authority, the Ministry of Transport, the committee that fixes train and bus fares, the S’pore Labour Foundation, the Minister of Finance (owner of Temasek), the Singapore Civil Defence Force and the police force.

**Dodgy this calculation as I’ve used a dodgy, lazy assumption, but near enough for all but CFAers, or investment analysts, or myself when analysing an investment)

***The government has allocated S$1.1bn to the purchase of 800 new buses, 550 of which will be paid for by the government (that is, through public funds), with the remaining 250 paid for by the PTOs. The S$1.1bn is also to fund running costs over the next 10 years. More on the use of the money, and an assurance that the operators will not benefit because it is a subsidy for us commuters. [Last sentence is an update on @ March 2012 at 9.00am]

****Unless the WP has quietly ditched this too like its benchmarking of ministers’ pay to the poor. I am not being mean or nasty. In January 2012, Gerald Giam had to be reminded in a private conversation where I was present that nationalisation was in the party manifesto for the 2011 general election. GG seems to have difficulty remembering things. He had some problems in parliament during the ministers’ salaries debate.