Yeo Ning Hong
Singapore
“The SAF always reviews and enhances its training system to maximise the contributions of NSFs to national defence during their NSF stint. We will continue to ensure that the training syllabus is relevant to the defence needs of Singapore, and NSFs' time in the SAF used meaningfully and efficiently.”
“New recruits will find military training less onerous if they take on the personal responsibility of preparing themselves well physically before enlistment. AUCTION OF #03-06 PEK CHUAN BUILDING 6.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. I believe Dr Ahmad Mattar had earlier on attributed some comments to me. I just want to clarify that I am not waiting for July to have my views on SBC made known to the Minister for Information and the Arts.”
“Sir, to encourage the new NSmen to maintain the same physical fitness that they have achieved while they were in full-time National Service, Mindef will increase the IPPT pass standards for new NSmen who ROD on or after 1st April to the same level that they attained when they were NSF.”
“Sir, I do not think Mr Chiam has any clue whatsoever about what is involved in basic military training. It is not fitness. It is the acquiring of basic military skills, to know how to fight, to know how to ensure that you do not get killed.”
“Sir, Mr Chiam would make a most popular Member of Parliament in Kuwait - if only they had a Parliament in Kuwait. That is exactly the sort of situation that had brought the Kuwaitis the disaster they had a year and a half ago, when people are only interested in having a better life and are not prepared to make the effort to ensure that th…”
The complete record
Every one of 853 lines we hold for Yeo Ning Hong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 18.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Changi Airport Passenger Terminal Building No. 2 is progressing according to schedule. Work is expected to be completed in July/August this year, and we expect it to be available for operation in October/November 1990. DETECTION OF "ICE" AMONG DRUG ABUSERS 4. Dr Ho Tat Kin asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether "ice" or methamphetamine usage has been detected among drug abusers; and, if so, whether there are sufficient deterrents to prevent drug abusers from getting on to "ice".”
“But I understand Mr Chay's point, which is we will operate the two independently. We will take into account the recommendations of the Select Committee because I believe they have got a good point, which is to find a mechanism, to find a way in which we can offset some of the additional cost that comes about as a result of the quota system. It is a valid point. But the ARF/PARF scheme is fairly complex because of its diversity in application to the different categories of vehicles. So give us a bit of time and we will untangle it a little. 4.21 pm BILLS INTRODUCED MASS RAPID TRANSIT CORPORATION (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Act (Chapter 172 of the 1988 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Communications and Information (Dr Yeo Ning Hong); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister of State for Communications and Information (Mr Mah Bow Tan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. ADJOURNMENT”
“Sir, Mr Lew Syn Pau asked whether we could give the taxi drivers yet another concession, namely, a choice between the preminums for 1.0 and 1.6 litre or greater than 2 litres, whichever is lower. Let us allow the system to operate before we jump the gun. I can understand his very special concern for the taxi drivers. I share that concern also, but we have tried to be fair. If he wants to be more definite and argue one way or the other, I am quite happy to consider his proposal, whether he wants to group taxis in the same category as luxury cars or whether he prefers it to be with the medium-sized cars which, I think, is a more reasonable and more sensible approach. Mr Goh Choon Kang asked whether individuals will be allowed to tender and whether they will be limited. I have again not gone into the details of administrative measures. Yes, we will allow individuals to tender. And, in the first instance, to ensure that there is no abuse, we will restrict the number that individuals can tender for. But once the system is satisfactory, we should be quite relaxed about the limits. I would ask him to be a little more patient and allow ROV to work out the details and announce them in due course. Mr Chng Hee Kok and Mr Chay Wai Chuen have totally opposing views. But I think the question by Mr Chng did clearly indicate that the subject is a complex one. Because at the moment there is a range of ARF and PARF paid by the different categories of vehicles. In due course when I make the announcement, I would go into all the details and from the explanation, it would be quite obvious to Members why it is indeed complicated. No, we will not ignore the Select Committee's recommendation. We will look at it carefully.”
“The idea is similar to the concept of weekend vehicles, where vehicles that do not use the roads as extensively, particularly during the weekday peak hours, can be given special rates of taxation. We are happy to consider that. Cartels? We will prevent it in the first place, rather than allow it to happen and then try to eradicate it. Motorcycles should be less than one-third, I think Mr Yatiman also made that appeal. We will operate the system, see how it works out, and if necessary, make some adjustments.”
“Many of the taxi operators are given licences to operate more taxis than they are currently operating. We have chosen to allow them to decide. But for purposes of monitoring the overall situation, we keep tab of the numbers. Should we allow individuals to own taxis? This is a very old subject, Sir. The yellow-top taxis represent a legacy from the past where individuals who own taxis eventually become proxies for others who want to manipulate the system. We have been trying over the last decade and a half, to move away from that position. We will allow bona fide companies with the expertise in operating vehicle fleets, with the expertise to do good proper maintenance of vehicles, to operate taxis. Indeed, we have done so recently by allowing a bus company to operate taxis. We will free the market. But at the same time, the Government has the duty to the public and to taxi commuters. We want to make sure that every taxi is kept in good operating condition. And the best way of ensuring it is to have the taxis operated by companies. Then they can work out their own schemes, as indeed the NTUC Comfort has done, where NTUC operates a fleet of taxis but the taxis are in the names of the taxi drivers themselves. We want to have a good fleet of well maintained taxis for the benefit of taxi commuters. Dr Vasoo suggested giving rebates to those who use roads less. Sir, that is the equivalent of a kilometre tax. I have indicated earlier on that it is not practical because any mechanic worth his salt can alter the odometer without much difficulty. It is to abuse. But I understand the idea and I appreciate his suggestion.”
“The Government determines the ARF and the road tax and all the other levies that need to be made, and leaves it open to people to buy vehicles. It has been pointed out by the Select Committee that the quota system is more effective, more predictable than the old system. Dr Lee comes back to the question of need. We discussed that the last time. Need is very subjective. Everybody needs a vehicle if it is within his means to own one. We are aware of it. But as Mr Chiam pointed out, it is not possible to have everybody owning a car or a vehicle. So who is to assess whose need is greater? Let the individuals decide. Individuals have the choice to decide whether they prefer to spend their money on a vehicle or they prefer to take a bus and spend their money in some other way. Dr Tan Cheng Bock suggested that we allow instalment payments over a period of 10 years. Sir, let us leave it to the private sector to sort it out. The private sector has already got the mechanism of spreading out the price of a car, ARF, and all the other costs through financing. Let us leave it to them. Vintage cars? Sir, I can give a copy of the failure rates of old cars to the Member for his careful study. He may or may not be keeping his car in good shape. We are not able to ascertain. But as a general principle, It is quite obvious, (I am sure he will also agree) that the older a vehicle is, the more likely it is to have defects, which may not surface today, but will cause a breakdown some day and cause a congestion. Sir, Mr Goh Chee Wee came back to say that it is not true that Government does not control the number of taxis allowable. ROV requires a taxi operator to indicate to the ROV the number of licences that it wishes to have. And we have been extremely liberal, as he himself pointed out.”
“Sir, Mr Chay suggested that we freeze the ARF and PARF and operate the two systems independently. The two systems ie, the quota system and the ARF/PARF scheme will be operated independently. But freezing the ARF means that we will not be able to reduce the ARF, which is what I believe the Select Committee has recommended. I understand the interaction. In fact, it is the interaction between the ARF and the quota system that makes the ARF problem complex and, therefore, requires additional time for us to look at it carefully. Dr Lee suggested extending PARF to 15 years. Sir, he has obviously not listened to the figures that I have quoted earlier on, to show that vehicles over 10 years do have very serious problems and therefore we should discourage rather than encourage their rapid growth. To give PARF for 15 years means that we encourage more and more old vehicles on our roads. And when a vehicle breaks down, other road users pay for it by way of increased wastage of time. All road users will have to spend another half an hour, 40 minute, 50 minutes, stuck behind that vehicle particularly if it broke down during peak hours and at a critical junction. So a cost has to be borne by people who have got nothing to do with the owner of the old vehicle. While it is obviously advantageous to the owner to keep an old vehicle, it is disadvantageous to all the others. The same argument applies also to giving a grace period for 15 years. Yes, we can be a lot more generous to existing owners, but it will be at the expense of prospective owners of vehicles. Whether we should have a fixed sum for the entitlement, and have a ballot? The Government has been operating a similar system all these years with the road tax and the ARF.”
“The bus companies have also indicated that they are looking into the possibility of running mini-buses to such estates.”
“With the reduction in ARF. Sir, the reduction of ARF is a subject that will be taken up a little later. It is not possible at this stage to decide whether the reduction will be offset or otherwise. Do we have any data on the breakdown of vehicles on the roads and whether they are caused by old cars? Sir, the answer is no. We do not have the data, because people do not report breakdowns of vehicles to the Government. When your car breaks down you do not report it. Therefore there is no way in which the Government can have that data. But, yes, it is commonsensical to believe that old vehicles, on the average, must be less road worthy than new vehicles. Let me give some figures on the failure rates of major systems among vehicles 10 years and older. Structural problems, for old vehicles - 15% of them failed. Wheel system, in other words, something wrong with the wheel, 27% of them failed. Propulsion system, 13% of them failed. Braking system, 19%. In other words, one car out of five old vehicles has got faulty braking systems. Steering system, 14%; body, 22% and other faults, 15%. They add up. It is true. It is only commonsensical that older vehicles are less fit than newer vehicles. The next question is whether we will have more shuttle services. The bus companies have already initiated and are operating shuttle services. So far, they have got five services operating. This is an area where I would encourage management committees of condominiums or private housing estates or residents associations to get in touch with the bus companies. If they can carry out surveys which indicate a need for such services to be operated , then the bus companies can look into the demand.”
“Exactly, they take up the same space. Similarly, they occupy the same road space and therefore they should pay the same price, regardless of what the value of the vehicle is. Otherwise, you will say old cars will have to pay less because an old car has less value and so on. 20% open category - is it unfair to the motorcycles and the small cars? Again, the same argument comes forth. For motorcycles, we have already made a special case for them where the premium that they are required to pay will be kept at one-third. Small cars, as Mr Chiam rightly pointed out, occupy the same road space. For the time being, let us keep it as it is and let the system work itself through. Will the additional income from the quota system offset the reduced collection as a result of fewer vehicles registered with ARF?”
“Increase the car park charges in CBD areas? We will bear that in mind, and maybe at the next exercise make an adjustment. The kilometre tax? These are some of the different suggestions that have been made and have been looked into. Mr Chiam asked whether a quota, if not fully used in one quarter, will be carried over. Yes, it will be carried over into the next quarter. Is there an inherent inequity in the six different categories because cheaper vehicles in each category will pay more percentage-wise? When we move towards a fixed dollar tender system, then obviously we are talking about dollars. We are no longer talking about percentages. If you pursue that argument then you will say that it is also unfair to charge a big car and a small car the same parking rates.”
“Increase car parking charges, yes. We will look into it. But I think we will also need to bear in mind that if we increase car park charges, we increase the temptation for those who would park their vehicles illegally. Then they will create more congestion. So there is a balance. But it is something that we can look into. We can have an increase in petrol duty. But you know the problem of abuse , the easy way of bypassing that particular measure.”
“We have looked at all possible remedies. We have looked at them in great detail. There are no more convenient, useful, practical, effective measures that we can apply. We have exploited the Area Licensing Scheme to its fullest. We have managed to protect the central business district from severe congestions in the mornings and in the evenings. But that is really the limit, because to go further, we would have to introduce a full-day ALS.”
“The taxi drivers will well taken care of by the taxi operators, in particular by NTUC Comfort. They have schemes where taxi drivers pay over a period of years to minimize cash flow fluctuations. Mr Leong also suggested that we move quickly to operating the tender system on a monthly basis. We want to do it as soon as possible. But let us give some time for people to get used to the system. I want to point out that when we move to a monthly tender system, the number of vehicles available for each tender will effectively be diminished by two-thirds. So the quotas become smaller and when the numbers are too small, particularly when we have so many different categories, the probability of fluctuation, will be higher. So let us give a bit of time for people to understand and to operate the system. Validity period of six months, I have gone into the pros and cons. We can look at it as we go along and see whether there is a real need for it to be extended or not. The proposal for better linkways along the roads to make it more convenient for pedestrian to move from place to place, I believe the Minister for National Development has already announced an extensive programme to beautify Singapore, to make covered walkways and linkways from various key points of interests, commercial centres, etc. I am sure the Ministry of National Development will be doing more and more of such programmes in due course. I thank the Member also for his suggestion that weekend vehicles should be given different plates so that they can be easily distinguished from the rest, otherwise it would be open to abuse. It is a good suggestion. Mr Chiam has asked whether we have looked at all remedies. Sir, Mr Chiam spent five months on the question of land transport. He knows the possible remedies.”
“Sir, Dr Beng and Mr Leong asked whether the certificate will be transferable. These are details which I have not touched upon this morning. We are very conscious of the possibility of cartels being formed, particularly when the scheme is new and people are not familiar with how it operates. ROV is looking at this matter and will give the details of implementation of this scheme a little later. But I want to assure the House that the scheme will be devised in a manner that will not permit a cartel to be formed, nor would we allow people to use the quota system as a means for speculation. It means it will be a little inconvenient for some people. Later on, when people are more familiar with the scheme, and as the system evolves, we will be a little more relaxed. But we start off being a little more restrictive. The important thing is to safeguard the interests of the people. Dr Beng asked whether it is possible to dismantle the quota system after the ERP is available. Let us proceed one step at a time. Let us look at the ERP and how effective the ERP will be and how early we can distribute the traffic, particularly during peak hours. The more we are able to distribute the traffic over time and space, the more we can allow the number of vehicles to increase. The quota system is not fair because it is upfront. Sir, the purchase of vehicles is also something that buyers pay upfront. I would expect that in due course finance houses will work out their own scheme where some financing will take place. I want to point out that Mr Chiam, in the last debate, did specifically say that he was very much against the idea of financing and that it should be loaded upfront to make it more difficult for people to own cars. So we have different points of views.”
“He also asked whether existing owners will force up prices for the new owners. Again, I do not believe so. The more people there are tendering in the pool, the more likely it is that we will get a more even price. If we exclude the existing owners, then it will be the new buyers wanting to tender. Numbers are smaller but the quota is also proportionately smaller. I gave as an illustration the figure of 7,000 for the first quarter, if we only require new buyers to tender. If we allow a total of 14,000 for the first quarter and those who want to scrap their vehicles will also have to tender, then it will be a much larger pool. I think having a larger pool is more likely to lead to a fairer tender system, than having a small pool and exempting the existing owners from that requirement of having to tender.”
“Money collected for use of roads is a national asset. It belongs to the people and it should be managed carefully in a manner that will benefit the largest number of Singaporeans. Sir, I apologise for not understanding completely Mr Heng's suggestion of 10 years for all vehicles with PARF eligibility. In other words, he is saying that all cars less than 10 years old, ie, eligible for PARF, would be given this very special privilege. I think it is very invidious to say that this group of people ought to be given something extra special, a 10-year grace period, whereas all the other vehicle owners will only get 10 -X years. I think it is not fair. Revenue figures to be given as soon as possible, yes, we will provide that as soon as the data is available. The Member can always ask an Oral Question whenever he thinks that the answer should be forthcoming. Yes, the quota system will add to the cost of operating a car and therefore eventually will feed back into the total economy. But as I have shown with the figures earlier on, the increases are small, in the order of cents per kilometre. The Ministry of Trade and Industry will be monitoring business cost carefully. Sir, Dr Hong Hai has also earlier on mentioned two other points which I failed to go into at some length. He asked whether by reducing the quota from 4.3% overall growth to 2 1/2-3%, we would cause a rush in the first few quotas. I do not believe so. As the numbers are made public, the public will make their own calculations. We will be providing the figures at least two quarters in advance. We start off by figures for four quarters, the figures available to Members of the House. Then we will give figures two quarters ahead of the tender so that members of the public can do their own calculations.”
“Sir, as I mentioned earlier, the bus fares are affordable at the moment. Should we air-condition all buses? I think it is a question best decided by the market, rather than for Government to impose that all buses in Singapore should be air-conditioned. The danger with subsidies is that when you are subsidizing something, you lose a sense of what the market needs and what the market is prepared to pay, and then you may end up with wastage. The Government is prepared to subsidize major infrastructure, such as MRT extensions. But when you are subsidizing direct consumption, I think the Government prefers to move more cautiously. There is this fallacious belief that Government's money is nobody's money. Government's money belongs to the people. The more we spend Government's money in one area, the less of Government's money we have left to spend on other things. So if we subsidise airconditioned buses, when people may not really want to have airconditioned buses, then it means that we have got to spend less on health, on education and the list of other things which the Government is already subsidising.”
“I think giving (10-x) years means that existing owners do not have to worry about the quota system immediately. It will give them time to adjust to the quota system, because even the owner of the oldest vehicle is unaffected by the quota system for at least two years. Whether Government could give figures of revenue collected, yes, these figures are indeed given every year when ROV reports to Parliament. Similar figures are also available, I think, in other reports from the Ministry of Finance and also the reports on customs duties. They are available to the public. Mr Lew Syn Pau suggested that we have a separate category for taxis. Sir, we considered that possibility also, except that taxis represent an extremely small group. There are only about 11,000 taxis at the moment. Even if we assume that they have got an average lifespan of six years, we are talking about a replacement level of about 2,000 per year, which means about 500 per quarter. That is a bit small. There are too few players in the market - four or five players - and the opportunities for collusion are high. I think it is fairer to all to put them together with the large category of 1.0 to 1.6 litres of cars.”
“3 million people use buses everyday. That represents a very sizable proportaion of the population. Government has already made subsidies in a number of different ways. We have built the bus interchanges, we have built bus stops, and we have kept the scheduled buses out of restraint measures such as ALS and the quota system. We have indeed been giving special preference to the buses. As for subsidy, the Government has already made a very massive subsidy for the MRT system. Government has already spent $5 billion. We intend to spend more in due course, when the need for more extensions of the MRT system becomes clearer. Mr Heng suggested that the scheme where everybody pays the lowest successful tender price, regardless of what the bids are, may lead to irresponsible tendering. Sir, let us give the system a try. It may lead to a more rational bidding where pople bid what they are willing to pay. This approach, we believe, is fairer. Because it means that at any one time all the people bidding in one particular category will pay the same price, rather than different people within the same category at the same tender paying totally different prices. But I will bear in mind the proposal of the Member and look at it in due course. Should we remove the restrictions on the quantum that companies can deduct for tax purposes by way of expenditure on "Q" cars? We can look at that. But my belief is the present allowances are adequate. It is a matter that I will ask the Finance Minister to review, if necessary. Mr Heng has also suggested a more generous scheme of giving all existing owners a 10-year grace period. We can be more generous, but, as I said earlier, when we are generous to one group, we in effect are being less than generous to the others. We have to strike a balance.”
“Sir, Dr Wang Kai Yuen has got a very good point, namely, since the taxis have got a mandatory lifespan of seven years, is it possible for the quota premium to be pro-rated to seven years. It is possible, but there are also other categories of vehicles with mandatory lifespan. So I would like some time to consider this possibility. I do not think the taxis are in any way severely disadvantaged if they were to pay a 10-year premium like everyone else. If they scrap their vehicles after five or six years, they will get the rebate. Whether there should be an administrative charge for the tender. We can look into it. It is a good suggestion to ensure that those who tender are serious. Sir, Dr Wan Soon Bee came back to mention that taxis will be affected if we reduce the ARF. That is true. But we should remember that taxis pay very small ARF. In fact, taxis do not pay any PARF at all, particularly if they scrap their vehicles early. So some adjustments of ARF for other vehicles will have an impact on the taxi drivers. We will have to look at that carefully as we make the adjustments. Dr John Chen believes that the measures under the quota system would be adequate to contain the rapid growth of old vehicles. Let us look at the actual figures and see whether it does or does not have that salutary effect. Mr Heng Chiang Meng has five questions. Whether we should have direct subsidy for buses to make bus fares affordable - I believe, Sir, at the moment, bus fares are very affordable. They start off at 15 cents for feeder services and 40 cents for trunk services and they go up to a maximum of 80 cents. I believe it is very affordable. Some 2.8 million passenger trips are made on buses every day. Assuming eash passenger takes two or more trips daily, that means that avout 1.2 - 1.”
“And maybe over the longer term, we can have a review to see whether this is indeed a reasonable ratio to use or whether we could bring it down a little further, as suggested by Encik Yatiman, to something like a fifth. But let us operate the system and see how the flexibility that is built in can cope with the changing circumstances and the different demands of the economy. Encik Yatiman Yusof also suggested heavy fines for vehicles that break down on roads, to tackle the problem at its root. Sir, this is a good suggestion. It is somenting that is worth considering. What we really want is to encourage individual vehicle owners to exercise a sense of responsibility, of maintaining their vehicles in a manner that will not break down on the expressways or on busy roads. I am sure Members must have travelled on the expressways and have seen on the othe side, three, four, kilometres of vehicles not moving at all or hardly moving at all because a vehicle in front had broken down. His other point is congestion caused by PWD. Sir, we will encourage PWD to carry out as much of its work in a manner that will minimize inconvenience to the public.”
“Sir, Dr John Chen asked why we need to impose the 10% surcharge for old vehicles. As I have explained earlier on, over the last three years we have seen a very rapid increase in the number of old vehicles, an increase of 70%, growing from 55,000 to 93,000. I think all Members will agree that this is not a healthy trend. Therefore we need to do something just to moderate that particular rapid growth. As to the quantum of the ARF or import duty or both that we would be reducing, can I ask for a little time to study this problem rather than to make any announcement at this stage. I hope to be able to make the announcement before the end of the year. Sir, Dr Wan Soon Bee has spoken up very eloquently, as he has always done in the past, on behalf of taxi drivers. Yes, the operating cost will go up. But as I have shown in the table circulated earlier, it is not a cost increase that will make taxis not affordable to Singaporeans. For taxis, we are talking of an increase of about 0.4 cents per km. Dr Wan also suggested that by reducing ARF we will in effect be increasing the quota premium. If that is so, then I take it that Dr Wan is not in favour of the Government reducing ARF in the longer term. Sir, Encik Yatiman Yusof asked whether it is possible for people wanting to buy a motorcycle with the open entitlement to pay a premium lower than one-third. He suggested a figure of one-fifth. Sir, the Ministry has explained on a number of occasions the issue of the road space that a motorcycle occupies on the road. The Government knows that owners of motorcycles are normally from the lower and middle income group. Therefore we have brought the figure down from seven-tenth to a third. We have done that for the ALS fees. It has worked well. I think we should start off with a third.”
“It will make very little impact on the land transport policy itself. But I think it will be unfair to first time owners because then existing owners will be free from the need to tender together with everyone else. I think the larger the pool of vehicles there are for people to tender, the better it is and the smoother and smaller will the fluctuations be. If I could illustrate. If existing owners do not have to tender, then we will start off with only 7,000 vehicles for tender, and not 14,000. Then in the fourth quarter, if existing owners do not tender, the number will be reduced to only 4,000; instead of 14,000 in the first quarter under our existing scheme, 11,000 in the fourth quarter. So requiring existing owners to tender will be fairer for first time vehicle owners. Mr Goh Chee Wee asked whether Government can remove the controls for the number of taxis on the roads. The Government does not control the number of taxis on the roads. The taxi operators are allowed to have any number of taxis. What they need to do is inform the Ministry. Indeed at the moment the allocation to the various taxi operators far exceeds the number of taxis on the roads. We have left it to taxi operators to decide whether they want to use up the full quota that has been allocated to them or whether, looking at the overall market circumstances, they prefer not to move too rapidly in that direction. Mr Goh also asked the question of whether the motorcycles will be edged out in the open category. We have taken cognisance of that possibility. That is why we require anybody with an open entitlement to pay only one-third of the premium instead of the full premium. This is if he wants to buy a motorcycle to provide some measure of protection to future owners of motorcycles.”
“I thank Members for their various questions. Sir, I thank the Chairman of the Select Committee for agreeing generally with the overall structure of the quota system. His first question is, should we not maintain the increase of vehicles at closer to 4.2% which is the overall long term increase? We can, Sir. But it means we pay a higher price in terms of congestion. What we are trying to do is to start off at close to the long term trend and then gradually bring it down. Because as I emphasized earlier on, even at 2 1/2-3% growth, in the long term we will still be seeing heavier and heavier congestion on our roads. If I could give simple illustration. In traffic engineering terms, what does a 3% increase of vehicles on the road mean? If the 3% more vehicles are spread evenly, traffic junctions which are experiencing traffic congestion at the moment will see an increase in waiting time for vehicles using those junctions. Motorists using those junctions will now have to spend, on the average, two more minutes per junction. So if you are going to work and you use three of such junctions, where the traffic already exceeds the capacity of the road or junction, then you have to add, on the average, six more minutes for that trip, if you make it next year with a 3% increase in vehicle population. So we have to strike a balance. If we want to allow a large increase, then we must be prepared to live with even greater congestion. Sir, I think the range of 2 1/2-3% is something that we can probably live with. To go any higher means that we will have to have more people on the roads wasting more time going to and from work. Dr Hong Hai asked whether it is possible to exempt existing owners of older vehicles from the tender system. Again we can do it that way.”
“' Sir, it was an invaluable insight and the Member of the Opposition has been candid enough to express it. His five months spent studying the problem has provided him with that insight. I want to thank him for having the courage to express those views. For the past 16 months, we have witnessed an example of public participation in shaping public policy. Everyone participated, the man-in-the-street, academics, professionals, trade organisations, political parties, and, of course, Members of this House. I want to record my grateful thanks to all of them. They have all made valuable suggestions which have guided the Government in the final formulation of the quota system. Every suggestion, every view, was considered. Many of them have been accepted and integrated into the total system that I presented earlier. Let me now express my heartfelt gratitude to fellow Members of this House, to Members of the Select Committee on Land Transportation Policy, and most of all, to Dr Hong Hai, the Chairman of the Select Committee, for their invaluable contributions. Collectively, they have all helped to ensure that life for all roadusers in Singapore will continue to be a pleasant one for many years to come. Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. [Applause].”
“I expect also to make some reduction in the import duty or the ARF/PARF or both before the end of the year. My Ministry will also study the possibility of having a new category of vehicles, the weekend vehicles, which can be taxed at a much lower rate. Sir, land transportation is a national problem. The roads, the vehicles, the congestion, are there for us to see. What we have tried over the years is to anticipate all possible problems and circumstances. In particular, for the quota system, we have tried and tried very hard to anticipate all problems. But it is not likely that we have anticipated all possible problems. We are putting in place a transparent system that every Singaporean can see. It will take some time for Singaporeans to understand fully the system. But the important thing is that the system is transparent. We will provide the data, the numbers, and Singaporeans will make the decisions themselves. The transparency of the system will ensure its fairness. We will improve the system with experience and with feedback. Therefore, I welcome suggestions from fellow MPs and from members of the public on how we can make this quota system even more convenient and fairer to all roadusers. Sir, let me conclude by quoting a few statements from Mr Chiam See Tong. He was a Member of the Select Committee which studied the land transport problem for five months. In the last debate, he said: 'There is no one single answer to the [land transport] problem. It is a very difficult problem that we are tackling ....' He went on to say: 'We cannot have every person owning a car. I think that is not possible.' Then he concluded later on by saying: 'I cannot remember any issue or problem that has been more widely discussed as this.”
“Whatever new technology is available in any country, we will study, and if it is relevant and applicable, we shall bring it back to Singapore and use it. Sir, listening to grassroots leaders and MPs, we have noted over the years a call for Government to allow a special category of vehicles, referred to as weekend vehicles, ie, vehicles that will be used only during the weekends when there is no traffic congestion and during the off-peak hours, such vehicles should be taxed at a lower rate. I welcome this proposal. Therefore, I would appreciate any suggestion from Members of the House on how we can design and administer such a system in a manner that will not contribute or aggravate the congestion during the peak hours. Summary Sir, let me try to summarise briefly the various points of the quota system. We have tried to be fair to all. So the quota system will apply to all vehicles. First time owners will tender to own a vehicle. They will pay only the lowest successful tender price. Existing owners will be given a grace period, ranging from two years to 10 years. We will have six categories of vehicles. That will give some protection to owners of motorcycles and small cars, in particular the lower and middle income owners. The seventh category, which is the open category, will allow some flexibility, to respond to economic changes in Singapore. The expected increase in cost is likely to be small, averaging a few cents per kilometre. We shall begin the quota system on 1st May 1990, with an initial net increase of 7,000 vehicles for the first quarter. And we will also put in place on 1st May 1990 a road tax surcharge on old vehicles to slow down the rapid growth. On 1st May 1990, the Government will remove completely the interim increase in registration fees.”
“But the Government does not intend to price cars beyond the reach of the population, or to use land transport policies as a means of generating revenue. That is not the intention of the Government. I will say that again. The Government does not intend to price cars beyond the reach of the population, nor does it intend to use land transport policies as a means of generating revenue. After the quota system is in place, I intend to reduce the ARF and the PARF or the import duty rates, or both. A reduction in these areas will partially offset the additional revenue generated by the quota system and will help moderate the cost of owning a vehicle in Singapore. I expect to make the announcement on such reductions before the end of the year. These reductions will be announced and implemented in such a way that future tenderers will be well informed of the change before they make their bids and therefore can do their calculations properly. The Government is also conscious that the quota system will increase business costs, although the effect would not be large. The Government will monitor this impact and, if necessary, take other measures to contain business costs. Weekend vehicles Sir, my Ministry will continue to explore all ways and means to allow the maximum number of vehicles on our roads, without severe congestion or restriction to the free movement of people and goods. We will allow the maximum number of vehicles that our existing network of roads can bear. To do otherwise is stupid, because we would not be making the best use of our limited land. We shall do our utmost, using all possible technologies, to increase the network of roads in Singapore and to increase their capacity.”
“This will be increased in steps of 10% for the next four years, so that when the scheme is in place in five years' time, the vehicle that is 10 years or older will pay 10% surcharge, and this will go up progressively to vehicles 14 years or older paying a 50% surcharge. Removal of interim increase in registration fees Sir, when the interim increase in registration fees was announced, I indicated that Government will reduce this by at least 50%. With effect from 1st May 1990, the Government will remove completely the interim increase, that is, it will remove completely the $1,000 for motorcycles and the $5,000 for all other vehicles. Reduction of ARF/PARF and/or import duty Sir, I now want to move on to another subject. This is ARF and PARF. The Select Committee recommended that the existing PARF scheme be kept, although not necessarily in its current form. The Committee also recommended that the Government reduce the ARF when the quota system is introduced. My Ministry has looked at this problem in depth. The ARF/PARF scheme is another problem that is simple in principle, but when we seek to apply it, it turns out to be extremely complex. Let me give an illustration. A reduction in ARF will obviously be beneficial to new car owners. But the reduction in ARF means that the value of vehicles presently on the road, in other words, existing owners' assets, will go down. So we want to approach this very carefully to make sure that we are fair to all again. My Ministry will further study this particular problem. After the quota system has been in place will modify the PARF scheme, in a manner that will remove some of the undesirable investment effects. The Government is determined to ensure free movement of traffic on our roads.”
“I will ask ROV to meet with the press and the trade community to go into the details. And if there are useful suggestions that the motor trade community has, we will be happy to look into their suggestions to make sure that the administrative aspect of the quota system will be as smooth as possible. Road tax surcharge Sir, over the past three years, the number of vehicles older than 10 years has grown very sharply, from 55,000 in 1986 to 93,000 in 1989. This is an increase of 70% over a three-year period. At the moment one vehicle out of six is 10 years or older. Last year, half the number of vehicles 10 years or older failed their first inspection. Obviously, Sir, this trend is undesirable and must be slowed down. Older vehicles are more prone to breakdowns. When this happens on a busy expressway or road, particularly during peak hours, they cause severe traffic congestion and a lot of wastage of time to all road users. This was pointed out by Dr Vasoo during the last debate. We know that vehicles vary enormously in their initial quality, in their maintenance, in the mileage travelled. The age of a vehicle is a very poor proxy for actual road worthiness. However, it would be invidious and impractical to require individual vehicles to be scrapped at different ages. Therefore, to discourage owners from keeping their vehicles way beyond 10 years, the Government has decided to impose a 10% road tax surcharge on old vehicles for every year exceeding 10 years, subject to a maximum of 50%. This surcharge will be phased in gradually. In the first year, beginning 1st May 1990, all vehicles 10 years or older will pay a 10% road tax surcharge.”
“I have therefore provided Members of the House with a very simple table to show the magnitude of the increase as far as cost is concerned. If we assume a hypothetical, and I stress it is hypothetical, quota premium of $1,000 for the motorcycles, then knowing that on the average a motorcycle travels a total of 120,000 km over a 10-year period, the increase works out to be only 0.8 cents per km. If you look at the column for commercial vehicles; the increase works out to be only 2 cents per km. Two cents to be shared by 30 - 40 tourists on a tour bus? Will that drive away tourists from Singapore? You will see that by restraining all, the restraint on any one individual owner has been kept small, small but effective. In other words, a little restraint, applied to all, goes a long way. (10) Tender Bids Sir, tender bids will be on the basis of a fixed dollar preimum which the tenderer is prepared to pay. This premium will be on top of all the existing fees and taxes for the different categories of vehicles. And all successful tenderers will need to pay only the lowest successful tender price, whatever sum they bid. This particular method of tendering has been used before by Government, and successfully, for the tendering out of textile and CFC quotas. Date of implementation The quota system will be implemented on 1st May 1990. We expect to call for tenders in early April. In other words, beginning 1st May 1990, all new vehicles will be registered only if they are accompanied by a valid entitlement. Sir, there are other operational and administrative details not of a policy nature. Therefore I would not go into the details today, details such as the type of forms to be used, the quantum of deposit to be paid, and so on.”
“But it is possible to make some inference on the magnitude of that number. Because if we can get some feel for that number, then it would put the quota system into some perspective from the financial point of view. Let me give some figures so that Members can also follow the deduction process. For the first three weeks after the interim increase of registration fees, the net increase in vehicles was 1,346 vehicles. If you work on the basis of 13 weeks for a quarter, then you get 5,832 vehicles. This number of 5,832 vehicles is smaller than the net increase that we would allow for the first quarter, which is 7,000 vehicles. So it means that if vehicle owners take a logical and a commonsensical approach to the quota system, then in the first instance, we would not expect the quota premium, on the average, to be higher than the interim increases in registration fees; namely, $1,000 for motorcycles and $5,000 for the other vehicles. We should remember also that many dealers were giving very hefty discounts because of their large profit margins. So that further indicates that it does not seem likely that the initial quota premium will be higher than $1,000 for motorcycles or $5,000 on the average for the other vehicles. But I want to stress that the Ministry is not in a position to know what the exact premiums will be. It will be the public that will decide on the magnitude of the premium. At $1,000 and $5,000 for motorcycles and other vehicles, what does that work out to be? Sir, some people say the increase will destroy the international competitiveness of Singapore as a transportation and tourist centre. I think we should try to examine these statements to see if there is any basis for it at all.”
“This is to enable existing owners who are scrapping their vehicles and tendering for a new one, to have enough entitlements to tender for, so that they will not squeeze out the first time buyers. If I could put it this way, 7,000 allocated because we expect 7,000 people to scrap their vehicles and buy new ones and 7,000 allocated because we expect 7,000 new buyers. So all in all, it means that for the first quarter of the quota system we will have 14,000 entitlements. This will decrease over the next three quarters to 13,000, 12,000, and 11,000 entitlements respectively. These replacements will be spread evenly among the different categories. I have circulated a table (Cols. 1279 - 1280) to illustrate the details of distribution. table - QUOTAS FOR THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES FOR THE 1ST 4 QUARTERS (Cols. 1279 - 1280) Sir, Members will see in the first column that there would be 14,000 entitlements available for tender in the first quarter, going down to 13,000, 12,000 and 11,000. Then if they look across they will see the exact numbers allocated for each of the individual vehicle category. Agter 1st May 1991, one quarter of the actual users of vehicles scrapped in the preceding twelve months in each category will be used for the replacement quota. (9) How much will the Quota Premiums be? Sir, many people have asked, when the quota system was suggested, how large will the quota premiums be? I do not know. Because with the quota system, it is the public that decides the premium and not the Government. Still they press on, they want an answer. Is it going to be very large, or is it going to be very small? Many people fear that it will be very large. Sir, I stated very categorically that I do not know what the premium would be.”
“Mr Lew Syn Pau has suggested that the bidding for the quota system should be by way of a tender. I agree. It is a good idea. This is a fair, time-proven and economically efficient method of allocating scarce resources, ie, the opportunity to use our roads, which is a scare resource, because land is scarce in Singapore. Tenders will be called quarterly. We will give the number of entitlements, in other words, the number of vehicles that we will allow to be added, two-quarters in advance. This will give individuals who want to bid for the entitlement time to know what is ahead. In other words, people will be able to make their careful calculations and make their bids accordingly. We want to move on, if we can, to a more frequent period for tendering. Instead of doing it quarterly, after the system has settled in, we will probably have tenders on a monthly basis. What that means will be that the prices for the quota will show less fluctuation. Sir, last year there was a net increase of 28,725 vehicles. To start the quota system smoothly, we will allow 7,000 more vehicles to be available for tender when the quota system is introduced. 7,000 for one-quarter works out to 28,000 for the year. It is very similar to last year's figures. After the first quarter, we will then slow down gradually to 6,000 and 5,000 and 4,000 for the next three quarters. Last year a total of 28,503 vehicles that were scrapped. As it turned out, that is coincidentally also approximately 7,000 vehicles per quarter. We expect a similar number of vehicles will be scrapped each quarter. So again to help the quota system get off as smoothly as possible, we will add 7,000 more entitlements for tendering.”
“I want to state clearly, Sir, that the Government intends to continue to develop the road network. Where possible, the Government will build more flyovers, more underpasses, more expressways, more tunnels. We will go to the limit that land and technology permit. The Government will also conduct a careful study on the possibility of using new technology to build a network of roads underground, under the city. But we have to be realistic. It would take us some years before all these new roads, this network of underground roads and expressways, these flyovers and tunnels, will be available for use. In the meantime, we must manage the growth of our vehicles. So, for the first year of the quota system, the Government will allow a net increase of 22,000 more vehicles. What does that translate into? 22,000 vehicles is approximately 4.3% of the vehicle population. That is very close to the figure of 4.2% over the last 15 years. Then next year we will slow the growth of vehicles slightly, maybe down to 2 1/2-3%. But we must remember that even with 2 1/2-3% growth, it means that congestion will get worse because we are only able to build roads at less than 1% a year. Road building takes a long time, however hard PWD tries. As an illustration, for the Central Expressway, a section of 5 km through the city will take us nearly four years to complete. We hope to introduce the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system in about four years' time. If the ERP succeeds in helping to spread the vehicles on the roads, both with respect to space, geographically speaking, and with respect to time, then we may be able to relax the growth rate of vehicles a little. We will review the situation when the ERP is ready. (8) How frequently should we have the quota system?”
“And when people tender for an entitlement in the open category, they can take that entitlement and buy any type of vehicle they like. This open category provides some flexibility, so that the economy can respond to the transportation needs. For example, if we have a building boom when there is a lot more construction activity, then it is quite obvious that the need for lorries and trucks will increase. And this open category will permit that flexibility, to be built into the quota system. To make sure that motorcyclists are not disadvantaged in the open category, any successful tenderer in the open category will need only pay one-third of the premium if he wants to use that open entitlement to buy a motorcycle. Quite obviously, for the people wanting to buy company cars and heavy goods vehicles, they will have to pay double as they do in their respective categories. (7) How large should the quota be? Here I want to give a bit of historical background. Over the past 15 years since Government systematically applied restraint measures, the overall growth of vehicles has averaged 4.2% per annum, compounded over the last 15 years. During that period we were building the PIE, the AYE, the CTE, ECP, SLE, TPE. We were building all the expressways that we now have in Singapore. We were building flyovers; we were building by-passes. We introduced computerized traffic lights, we introduced real-time traffic management. In spite of all the new roads, the expressways that were built, in spite of all the new technology and in spite of all the restraints, we are experiencing growing congestion. Already 17 major traffic junctions in Singapore experience congestion during peak hours, where the flow of traffic exceeds the ability of the road to handle.”
“I have therefore decided that owners of existing taxis need not bid for replacement taxis. In other words, if they scrap a taxi, they will be allowed to register for a new one. But to be fair, they will have to pay the prevailing quota premium for vehicles for cars in the category of the 1.0 - 1.6 litres. If taxi operators, sensing that the market demands more taxis, wish to have more taxis without scrapping old taxis, they can do so. But this time they will have to tender like everyone else in the 1.0 - 1.6 litre category. (6) How do we ensure some flexibility in the distribution between the different types of vehicles in Singapore to meet the changing needs of our economy? Some people have pointed out that the most efficient mix of vehicles should be determined by the market, and not by the Government. I agree whole-heartedly. But to get the quota system going, we want to start off on an equal footing. We would therefore set the rate of growth of all vehicles at the same percentage. And this percentage will be based on the population of each category of vehicles on the 31st December 1989. To allow for some leeway for market forces to operate, we can take 20% of all vehicles that were scrapped and put it into a special category to be referred to as an "open category". Then the remaining 80% of vehicles scrapped will be replaced and put back into their respective categories. Let me try to illustrate with a simple example to make it easier to understand. Let us suppose 1,000 motorcycles, 1,000 commercial vehicles and 2,000 cars were scrapped. Then, for replacement, we will allow 800 more motorcycles for tender, 800 more commercial vehicles for tender, and 1,600 motorcars for tender in the next cycle. The remaining 20% , or 800 vehicles, will go into an open category.”
“At the moment, heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) pay only $15 for registration fee, in contrast to light goods vehicles (LGVs) which pay $7,000 for registration fee, even though the heavy goods vehicles occupy more road space, because of their size and their lack of manoeuvrability. The Government has decided that heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) will pay double the quota premium of light goods vehicles (LGVs). This is to ensure greater fairness between the light goods vehicles and the heavy goods vehicles. (5) Taxis Sir, Ministry officials have met with representatives of NTUC Comfort and other taxi operators led by Mr Lew Syn Pau, Dr Wan Soon Bee and Dr Wang Kai Yuen. We have listened very carefully to their concerns. We have taken their very special circumstances into consideration, while at the same time maintaining fairness to the other roadusers. My Ministry will make two concessions for taxis. Firstly, many taxis have engines of 2.3 litres. But quite obviously these are not luxury cars, like private cars with large engine capacities. I have therefore decided to put taxis in the category of 1.0 - 1.6 litres, in other words, medium-sized cars, regardless of the engine capacities of taxis. This particular category of vehicles is the largest category. Therefore a few taxis in that category to allow for taxi increases over the coming years will have minimal or no impact on the premium to be paid. Secondly, unlike private cars, taxis are required by law to be scrapped before they are seven years old. Many taxis are owned by individuals. Some of them have indicated through their representatives that they are worried that if they are required to tender for the entitlement to buy a taxi to replace their scrapped taxi, they may not be successful.”
“Many MPs argued that putting all cars into one category would be inequitable. It would be unfair. Why? Because it will permit the owners of big cars to squeeze out owners of small cars. Mr Loh Meng See and Dr Ong Chit Chung suggested that we should have some form of differentiation, maybe based on the engine capacity of the cars. Mr Leong Horn Kee went further. He suggested four categories for cars. For the Ministry, for land transport management, having one single category, a large common pool, for the quota system for all vehicles, with minor adjustments for differences of road space each type of vehicle will use, is obviously the most efficient approach. However, the Government has chosen an approach that is of greater benefit to the lower and middle income owners. We have decided to have the quota system applied to six different categories of vehicles: (a) Small cars, with engine capacities less than 1 litre; (b) Medium-sized cars, with engine capacities from 1,001 cc to 1,600 cc; (c) Big cars, with engine capacities from 1,601 cc 2,000 cc; (d) Luxury cars, with engine capacities larger than 2,000 cc; (e) Commercial vehicles, including goods vehicles and private buses; and (f) Motorcycles. Having these six different categories will give some protection to owners of motorcycles and small cars. They will not have to compete with owners of big cars. Since company cars enjoy tax benefits, they will pay double the premium for private cars. This is what they presently do for road tax and other fees, eg. ALS fees. If we do not have this additional proviso, then we will create a loophole for individuals to buy cars on the cheap in the name of companies.”
“He suggested a grace period of two to five years. Mr Chay Wai Chuen suggested that we give a grace period that is given by a simple formula (10 - X) where X is the age of the vehicle. His argument goes something like this. Each of the existing vehicles on the road will be deemed to have a permit whose life will expire by the tenth year of registration. And at the end of that 10 years, that vehicle will have to be scrapped. Having looked at the various possibilities, my Ministry came to the conclusion that each of these possibilities can be used. It is valid, it is practical and can be justified. The Government decided to adopt the formula used by Mr Chay which is to give a grace period of 10 - X years. Furthermore, the Government goes one step further, namely, any vehicle that is 8 years or older will enjoy a minimum 2-year grace period. If I can give an example: say, a year old car; that year old car will have a grace period of 9 years. All existing owners of vehicles will be unaffected by the quota system for a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 10 years. If existing owners do not wish to scrap their vehicle at the end of the grace period, they still do not have to tender. But they will have to pay the prevailing quota premium to revalidate their entitlement for another 10 years. What if an existing owner wishes to scrap his vehicle within the grace period? Since the existing owner did not pay the premium, in other words, he paid zero premium, he will obviously not be entitled to any rebate. (4) Should all vehicles be grouped into one single category for the quota system or should we have sub-categories for the different types of vehicles? Again, we listened to MPs' views during the debate.”
“It is an average to smoothen out any fluctuations. Obviously, for the forst three quarters the operation of this scheme, we will have to take the prevailing quota premium as the premium for the first quarter, the average of the first two quarters'premiums, and the average of the first three quarters,' premiums respectively. Sir, the certificate of entitlement, which the buyer has tendered for, would be valid for a period of six months. In other words, within those six months, he will have to exercise his right to buy his vehicle. If the holder does not exercise that right within that six months, his deposit will be forfeited. Why six months? A shorter validity period may be inconvenient for buyers. Some of them may not have made up their minds as to the exact model, and colour vehicle, etc. A longer period will encourage speculation and hedging, which are undesirable. (3) Should existing vehicle owners also be included in the Quota System? Sir, many Members of this House have reflected the sentiments of the public. They are against the idea of granting existing owners the right in perpetuity, to replace their vehicles with new ones. Many MPs have spoken on this subject during the last debate. For example, Mr Chay Wai Chuen was of the view that the burden of adjustment should be placed on all owners, and not just on new ones. Mr Loh Meng See said that existing owners should be given notice that after a period of time, they too should be treated like all other new owners. Sir, I agree with this views. We have looked carefully at the views expressed by the different MPs, because they reflect the views of the public. Mr Peh Chin Hua suggested that we give existing owners a grace period, after which they will be treated just like new owners.”
“(2) Should the entitlement or the right to own a vehicle be given in perpetuity or should it be for a fixed period only? An entitlement in perpetuity will give owners the right to own a vehicle indefinitely. What does that mean? It means that the premium for the entitlements for the first time buyers of vehicles will rise sharply over the years. Similarly, the price of vehicles with that perpetual right or entitlement will rise, because the first time buyer will have to buy out the existing owner of that vehicle with that perpetual entitlement. That will obviously be unfair to future generations of Singaporeans, our younger brothers and sisters, and our children. At the same time, the vehicle will become an investment. That is obviously undesirable. The Government has therefore decided that the entitlement will be for a fixed period only, and we will fix that period at 10 years, beginning with the registration of the vehicle. Ten years is an appropriate time and it is in line with our existing limit for PARF benefits. If such a vehicle is scrapped or exported before the 10-year period is up, then the owner will receive a rebate on the premium that has been paid for 10 years. And this rebate will be pro-rated to the number of months left before that entitlement expires. Then if he wants to buy a new vehicle, he will, together with other first time buyers, have to bid for a new vehicle. But if the owner prefers to keep his vehicle beyond 10 years, then he will not have to bid for the new entitlement. He will have to pay the "prevailing quota premium" in order to revalidate his entitlement for another 10-year period. The "prevailing quota premium" will be the average of the premiums for that particular category of vehicles for the last four quarters.”
“Every group of vehicle owners has persuasive and compelling reasons as to why they should be treated differently, indeed, why they should be exempted from the quota system completely. Many MPs had made pleas on behalf of their constituents. I appreciate the MPs' pleas. But because all vehicles share the same road space, if we allow more motorcycles on our roads, then it must mean we will have to allow fewer vehicles of the other type, and so on, for whatever category of vehicles we exempt. The more categories of vehicles we exempt, the tighter we have got to squeeze the remaining vehicles. So looking at the problem in toto, on balance, the fairest solution is to exercise restraint on all. Restraint on all also means that only the mildest restraint is required. So the resulting system that we have put together is a system that is fair to all and hence, paradoxically, most likely to be welcomed by very few. Because to be fair to all, it means all will have to sacrifice a little. Sir, let me now go into the details of the quota system. (1) Should the quota system apply to all vehicles? In the preamble, I have explained why it should. Indeed, in the last debate, Mr Lim Boon Heng rightly pointed out that all vehicles use road space and contribute to congestion. Hence, we will apply the quota system to all types of vehicles with two exceptions -scheduled buses and school buses. Why scheduled buses? Sir, it is the Government's objective to encourage greater use of scheduled buses because they are the most efficient users of our roads. School buses also provide a very valuable service in transporting young school children, particularly the primary school children, between home and school safely and efficiently.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on the 3rd January 1990, the Parliamentary Select Committee on Land Transportation Policy submitted its Report to Parliament after a lengthy 5-month study. Among its many recommendations was the proposal for a quota system to ensure the free movement of people and goods in Singapore. Sir, this House debated at great length the Select Committee's Report, in particular the quota system, on 15th January. On 30th January, the Government announced that it accepted in principle the Select Committee's recommendation for a quota system. As pointed out during the parliamentary debate and also in the Report, the quota system would be a more effective, more predictable, and more reliable method of restraining vehicle growth compared with the present system of regular increases in road tax and ARF. During the debate, many MPs spoke. The Ministry of Communications and Information had looked at the views of the MPs very carefully. I am happy to report that many of the proposals and suggestions made by MPs during the debate have been found acceptable by the Government. Today, I intend to give the details of the quota system. Sir, the quota system, as recommended by the Select Committee, is simple in principle. In practice, it is very complex. The Government has to take into consideration the interests of all Singaporeans. One of the most important considerations is to be as fair as possible to all road users - existing owners of vehicle, prospective owners, and non-vehicle owners. This objective is extremely difficult to achieve. Why? Because what is good for existing owners may be bad for prospective or non-vehicle owners, and vice versa. Similarly, what is good for owners of one type of vehicles may not be good for owners of another.”
“Booking of a vehicle is a private transaction between the individual and the company and it does not concern the Government at all. APPLICATIONS FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE FROM HONG KONG RESIDENTS (Particulars) 7. Dr Wong Kwei Cheong asked the Minister for Home Affairs, as at the latest available date, (a) how many Hong Kong residents have applied for Singapore permanent residence; (b) how many of them have been granted permanent residence; and (c) how many of these successful applicants have settled in Singapore.”
“Sir, as I mentioned, the intention of the interim registration fee increase was to contain the situation between now and the time when the quota system is in place. I expect to make a Ministerial statement on the quota system and the interim registration fee increases shortly and I will give all the detailed answers. Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): Sir, may I ask the Minister whether he has the figures showing the number of people who have booked to purchase a vehicle before the increased registration fee?”
“The quota system will apply to all vehicles because all vehicles share the same road space. Motorcycles, as of last year, made up about one-quarter of our total vehicle population. With the inclusion of motorcycles in the quota system, a rush to buy motorcycles before the quota system is implemented is expected. Hence, like all the other vehicles which will come under the quota system, the growth of motorcycles must also be restrained during this interim period. Nevertheless, the Government appreciates and understands that many motorcycle owners are from the lower and middle income groups and hence the interim increase has been kept low but still effective enough to restrain its growth. It is kept at one-fifth of the interim increase for the other vehicles. As for the other Question, Sir, the interim increase in registration fees was implemented with effect from 31st January 1990. It applies to all vehicles registered on or after that date. The purpose is to restrain the purchase of vehicles during this interim period and it is therefore not possible to grant exemption to those who register their vehicles on or after the effective date.”
“Sir, the next two Questions are inter-related. With your permission, may I answer them together?”
“There are many more other questions which will have to be addressed if we want to go for a quota system. Sir, Singapore is our city. Singapore is our country. If we do not manage our land transport system well, then life is going to be unpleasant for all of us. We are going to waste a lot of time each day. We are going to be trapped in traffic jams, breathing in polluted air. I believe it is far better that we manage our land transport policies carefully, in such a way that our economy will not suffer, in such a way that the quality of life in Singapore will not deteriorate. Then we can truly build Singapore up as a place that is beautiful, that is pleasant to live in, a place that we and our children would truly be proud to call our home.”