Category: Singapore

This was an op-ed that was published in the Straits Times Review section on 19 July 2011, under the title “Consider the economic reality of transport here”. I would like to express my appreciation to my friends and fellow Party members who contributed to this article. It was a team effort.

————-

Minister for Transport Lui Tuck Yew recently criticised the Workers’ Party’s (WP) proposal for a not-for-profit National Transport Corporation to replace the current two listed public transport companies.

Mr Lui claimed that WP’s proposal had “serious downsides, chief amongst which commuters and taxpayers (yes, even those who don’t take public transport) are likely to end up paying more, and possibly, for a poorer level of service over time”.

He added that “it is the profit incentive of commercial enterprises that spurs efficiency and productivity improvements”.

Market failures in public transport

These are simplistic and tired old arguments about the virtues of private enterprises which fail to fully appreciate the economic reality of the public transport industry in Singapore.

Firstly, taxpayers who do not take public transport already contribute to the provision of public transport in the form of taxes that pay for the construction of roads, the development of rail lines and the purchase of the first set of trains on every new MRT line.

Secondly, public transport is an industry rife with market failures which the Minister seems to ignore.  The current regime where SMRT Corporation (SMRT) and SBS Transit (SBST) each provide both rail and bus services provides an illusion of competition.

The reality is that SMRT and SBST have clearly delineated areas of responsibility with no route overlaps.  This makes each of them a de facto monopoly provider in their own particular areas.

Commuters do not have the freedom to switch between providers whenever they choose to, nor do we see public transport operators (PTOs) fighting to acquire and retain customers like airlines do with promotions, discounts and loyalty programmes.

The monopoly status is also reflected in the consistent high returns these companies earn. Freed from the discipline of genuine market competition, they have few incentives to raise service standards and keep prices low.

To say that shareholder discipline will create such incentives is naïve at best, and wrong at worst.  Shareholders seek higher profits, not better or more affordable services.  The government must examine whether a public utility should be owned and operated by what are effectively private monopolists earning monopoly rents.

Mr Lui claims that the current regulatory regime is a “robust” one that does not allow operators to benefit at the expense of commuters.  This is a remarkable assertion once we consider the profits of PTO’s—$215.4 million last year alone.  The fines imposed for not meeting service standards pale in comparison to these profits.

Continue reading “Overhauling Singapore’s public transport model”

This was my response to media queries I received on Tuesday (12 July 2011) regarding public transport fare increases:

———

The Workers’ Party (WP) has, in our 2006 and 2011 Manifestos, called for the MRT and public buses servicing major trunk and inter-town routes to be brought under a National Transport Corporation which will oversee and provide universal transport service to all. The National Transport Corporation should not be profit-oriented but should aim to provide public transportation services on the basis of cost and depreciation recovery.

This would avoid a situation like we have seen on Monday (11 July 2011) where, despite earning profits of $215.4 million* last year, the two public transport operators are still applying for what threatens to be the single biggest fare increase to hit commuters in recent years.

Having a National Transport Corporation would not necessarily mean higher subsidies or a loss-making endeavour. If competently run, the Corporation could reduce costs associated with the duplication of functions and roles.

We have seen many examples of efficiently run publicly-run service providers in Singapore in the past. It is a fallacy to think that the two public transport operators today represent genuine competition which imposes market discipline that ensures efficiency and good performance.

—–

* SMRT Corporation’s and SBS Transit’s profits for the year ending March 31 were $161.1 million and $54.3 million respectively.

Ms Sangeetha Bysheim wrote in to the TODAY newspaper on 7 July appealing for her 75-year old diabetic father to be allowed to use his Medisave to pay his full bills for his regular check-ups and medication. Currently only about 20 per cent of his bill can be charged to Medisave and the rest has to be paid in cash. She explained that her father has a lifetime’s worth of savings in his Medisave and argued that this was a perfect age to start tapping fully on the funds.

In their reply today (July 9th), the Ministry of Health reiterated the government’s long-standing position that they want to “manage the extended use of Medisave funds carefully to prevent the premature depletion of members’ funds”.

The Workers’ Party (WP) had in fact proposed in its 2011 Manifesto that “Medisave withdrawals for outpatient medical treatment should be further facilitated (e.g., for specialist and major outpatient services), subject to a cap on usage” and that “patients above 75 years old should be allowed to use Medisave for medical treatment without restriction” (Healthcare chapter, pg 37).

I had also raised this proposal during my General Election Rally speech on May 2nd at Moulmein-Kallang GRC. The proposal came at the tail end of a long list of other proposals on public housing and healthcare that I had expounded on in my speech.

At the time, I thought that it might have been a more niche issue that wouldn’t find much resonance with the crowd. To my surprise, when I read out that line, there was a huge cheer from the crowd (even though I didn’t exactly deliver it with much emotion or emphasis).

Continue reading “Medisave use for patients over 75”

Many people were pleasantly surprised to learn about my Workers’ Party (WP) colleague Chen Show Mao’s announcement that he will be giving up this law firm partnership to focus on his duties as an MP. He was a partner of a major international law firm, Davis Polk, who has chosen instead to devote his time and energies to a noble endeavour that he believes in.

Show Mao has in one fell swoop demolished the PAP’s long-standing argument that you need to pay million dollar salaries to attract good people into politics. This was in addition to his pivotal role in demonstrating that the opposition–and the Workers’ Party in particular–is able to attract our country’s best into its ranks.

I applaud his move and I hope many more captains of industry and top professionals will follow his example and step forward to serve Singapore in the political arena.

A friend recently posed this question to me: If you were the managing director or country manager of your company, would you give it all up like Show Mao did?

My answer: I didn’t wait to find out.

Continue reading “Political sacrifices, political choices”

It’s Father’s Day today–my third as a father. My daughter is two-and-a-half and my son is approaching his 11th month.

My two kids have brought Elena and me so much more joy than we ever imagined. Neither of us were the “I adore kids” types before we had our own brood. In fact, we waited five years after getting married before having children. Fortunately we were in our mid-twenties when we tied the knot, so we had a bit of time to spare on our biological clocks to enjoy being dinks (double income, no kids).

Now that we have our own two kids, I can’t imagine life without them. Nothing beats coming home from a hard day of work and having my girl run up to me and exclaim, “Daddy, 回来了!” (Daddy’s home) and giving me a big hug; or picking up my son and looking into his bright eyes, full of excitement and promise.

Continue reading “Fatherhood”

This is a speech I delivered at the Post-General Election Dialogue organised by the National University of Singapore Society (NUSS) on 26 May 2011. Other panelists where Ho Soak Harn, Benjamin Pwee, Nicole Seah, Harminder Pal Singh, Vincent Wijeysingha and Alex Yam. We were all asked to speak in our personal capacity.

Continue reading “NUSS Post-General Election Dialogue”

I would like to say a huge big thank you to the residents of East Coast GRC for their warm support and tremendous turnout in the last General Election 2011.

Thank you especially to the 49,429 voters (or 45.17%) who voted for the Workers’ Party team. I’m sorry we didn’t manage to win, but I believe that your votes still counted. The 8 WP MPs and NCMPs in the next Parliament will be your voice too.

To the voters who didn’t vote for WP, we heard you too. We will continue our work in East Coast GRC and strive hard to win your confidence and trust by the next election.

Continue reading “Thank you, residents of East Coast GRC”

On May 7th, Vote for the Workers’ Party!

Vote for WP’s East Coast GRC team, consisting of Eric Tan, Png Eng Huat, Glenda Han, Mohamed Fazli Bin Talip and Gerald Giam!

Click on the links to view the candidates’ profiles. Click here for 5 reasons to vote us into Parliament.

We look forward to serving residents of East Coast GRC!

Please spread this video to every Singaporean you know, before 7 May.

Your vote is secret. Vote with your conscience, not with fear. Vote for the candidate(s) whom you think can best represent you.

Speech by Gerald Giam at Workers’ Party GE 2011 Rally on 4 May 2011 in Aljunied GRC.

Continue reading “5 Reasons to vote for Workers’ Party this election”