(posted to Feedback Unit in reply to Ms Cheo on 30.3.2006)
The subject matter is "Measures to tackle Singapore's Traffic
Problems".
I am not a minister or MP and I do not think it is my duty to come
up with solutions to the country's problems when I am giving my
feedbacks on problems or issues.
It would be enough for me just to elaborate the problems for the
ministers and MPs to exercise their duty to come up with
solutions.
Sadly, our system of government is so arrogant that very often the
vocal citizens who give suggestions were always told off by the
ministers and MPs with demands for alternative solutions.
Therefore I find it very discomforting that our minsiters and MPs
who were paid the world's highest salaries and bonuses should have
behaved in this manner.
Fair enough that COE or ERP or a mix of such measures might be
better solutions as compared with the vehicle excise duty (175% of
OMV).
Fair enough that the rich should be made to pay for vehile
ownership or road uage to lessen the costs of living for the poor.
Problem is the rich are not touched as many of them are owning more
than one vehicle while while many of the poor and not-so-rich still
need to drive for works or making a living but are subjected to
burdensome double and triple taxing on vehicle ownership or road
usage even after the COE or ERP were introduced supposedly to
replace excise vehicle duty.
What I am questioning here is that if our ministers are to announce
in parliament that COE and ERP, should be introduced as fairer way
to price road usage or vehicle ownership, they should have the
integrity and honour to stop collecting the old vehicle excise duty
as soon as COE and ERP were introduced.
He should be honourable in not overcharging the motorists or any
citixens in any way in running the country.
If the ministers cannot let the COE and ERP replace the vehicle
excise duty, he should have come back to parliament to explain why
he is keeping to the old vehicle excise duty while charging the new
COE and ERP and breaking his promise.
The 170% excise duty had become quite a big burden on citizens who
drives cars amounting to billions. When COE and ERP were added to
these excise, not only were citizens hard hit but the businesses
too were made to bear unnecessary financial burdens causing heavy
losses.
it will be uncaring and immoral for the ministers to day one thing
and do another and not keeping to his words of honour.
When people give such feedbacks about unreasonable over-taxing of
fees and charges, the ministers should look into deeper problems
and not ignore them with dares and arrogance. They could have
conducted more studies instead and investigate whether there were
double taxing or triple taxing and find some alternative or diverse
and creative new solutions.
If Singapore is to make further progress, our leaders must change
their mindset - do not over-tax the people by using artful
argumentations but be more caring so that their actions will not
become too harsh.
The country has been governed in the smae manner somewhat with
one-track-minded artful argument penalising many people
unnecessarily with such uncaring arrogant attitude.
It reminded me of an incident back in 1990s when A Straits Times
reporter rang me once to ask for my personal view about
government's intention to allow shopping centres to stop cordoing
their car park lots to save the $60 per month per lot car park
surcharge introduced to discourage vehicle usage. It so happened
that after a while the motorists have stopped visiting shopping
centres while the car park surcharge has become quite a financial
burdon on shopping centre managemnet.
I told the ST reporter that he should ask the minister why he
failed to keep his promise that once the COE was introduced there
would be no more car park surcharges as such COE was said to have
been introduced to replace all forms of taxes relating to vehicle
ownership and road usage. This is a case of our ministers' failing
to keep to his promise until more problems were caused and
businesses were badly hit.
The lady reporter has subsequently contacted other shopping centres
for comments and views and it was confirmed that they were
similarly unhappy over such high-burden car park surcharge
resulting to withdrawal of the car park surcharge one to two weeks
later.
Ministers' actions in taxing people could adversely affect business
vibrancy. In the old days of 1990s, many actions eg. COEs and ERPs
have hit the business vibrancy. Today the same ministers' actions
and taxes have affected businesses as before. Which ministers care
enought to examine his actions so that he would be more caring not
to affect the economy.
There should be a fundamental reexamination of use of artful and
fallacious assumptions in running the country.
If the ministers can solve the same problems without affecting the
business vibrancy or over-taxing on the motorists, or driven up the
cost of living or doing business don't you think they would be
doing a better job. However which ministers are that caring?
The ministers should be mindful of people survival and cost of
living and should stop killing all the geese that lay the golden
eggs.
From such an objective governing viewpoint, I feel that our current
measures have fallen short of the desired objectives and
results.
The ministers should govern the country with a larger perspective
of how such revenue generation might lead to driving up our overall
costs of living and doing business.
It is certainly not right to double tax the motorists to no end -
excise duty, COE, ERP, road tax, petrol tax, etc etc. In any event,
did COE and ERP effectively improve traffic situations?