The daily giving continues

Yesterday marked the completion of 5 months of our daily food distribution which began on 7 April 2020, the first day of the Covid-19 Circuit Breaker.

Yesterday was also special, because we had a young helper, Ethan Tan. I had met his dad and mum, Alan and Sharon who are the third generation operators of a Nonya food group. It began as a push cart stall and then as a hawker stall in the Tiong Bahru market. The stall is still running in the market, but the third generation owners have also expanded the concept into a chain of HarriAnn Nonya food cafes in busy workplaces downtown.

Getting the Nonya cakes from the central kitchen early in the morning

From a casual conversation with Alan and Sharon two weeks ago, we moved into getting their delicious kuehs to the recipients at Eunos Crescent. Ethan, just 11, wanted to help in community projects, so he joined along, waking up just after 6am to go with dad and mum to the central kitchen to bring the kuehs over.

Serving the cooked food with Nonya kuehs

The Tan family who sponsored the kuehs and our regular helpers at Eunos Crescent

When most of the distribution were done, Helen the lead volunteer, took us to see the community garden that she and another helper have cultivated. Sadly, the bananas and papayas were constantly plucked by others, despite a warning sign not to pluck and with CCTV monitoring. Even the banana leaves have been cut by unknown people.

The Papaya tree which has been losing its fruits to unknown people despite the warning sign

Over the past 5 months of food distribution, we had our daily packs of rice or noodles from a social service organisation. Occasionally like yesterday, we had sponsors for other items – eggs, dry rations, rice, biscuits, soap, detergent, bread, cereals, 3-in-1 beverages, tau huay (soya bean curd) and now kuehs.

It is great to see the active involvement of local residents and kind sponsors who have made the food distribution sustainable, despite many challenges we have faced and are continuing to face. Most of the helpers for this daily charity programme are themselves residents in the rental flats but willing to lend their time and energy to do daily charity. Glad to see young ones like Ethan starting out early in life to be involved. Let us not get weary from doing good.

Cracking the GRC System and Shattering Race-based Politics.

There are many interesting lessons from this GE. I will just touch on two and perhaps reserve the rest for another day.

1. GRC – no longer the fortress

Kudos to Mr Low Thia Khiang for showing how a GRC can be broken down in 2011. After some hiccups, the operations are now running smoothly, with ratings similar to that of any PAP town. The 2011 takedown of Aljunied saw the loss of two full ministers (one very senior one) and a senior minister of state. Some attributed it to LTK and that it would be hard to repeat a GRC takedown without another LTK.

In 2020, without LTK and with a relatively unknown and young team, the Sengkang GRC has fallen. One 4G minister and two other office bearers have been taken down in one fell swoop.

East Coast and West Coast GRCs were nearly lost, and might have been lost if not for the movement of heavyweights Heng Swee Kiat and Desmond Lee to these. WP stronghold Hougang aside, PAP’s four worst performing constituencies are in the GRCs – Aljunied, Sengkang, West Coast and East Coast. Even the PM-in-waiting could only just manage to salvage East Coast GRC. All these in a pandemic-GE in which ground campaigning became super limited due to a long circuit breaker after the EBRC report was out.

Singaporeans no longer just buy the story that we cannot afford to lose a GRC because of the ministers inside. Even the future PM is not seen by Singaporeans as indispensable. No, Aljunied residents did not repent in 5 years. They did not repent even after 10 years. Aljunied has shown the way for other GRCs to follow when rubbish did not pile 3-storey high as predicted by the PAP. A new IT system has been developed by the WP-run TC and ready to be used in new opposition-led wards.

It is a crying shame that the IT system should even have been weaponised in the first place. The PAP was just using the politics of fear to hold back voters who were afraid of the unknown. Fewer are now afraid, and even fewer will be in 2025.

When PM said several years back that the size of GRCs would be reduced and that there would be more SMCs, really, it was just a token reduction. Now they will have to seriously judge the GRC system.

The opposition has too few SMCs to contest in and there are few SMCs in areas that the WP are known to be interested in (the better performing ones since 2011 have all mysteriously vanished). Ministers or not, the stronger opposition parties have been forced to move into GRCs and future loses of ministers can be expected if this GRC game continues to be played.

2. Race-based politics

The WP’s team in Aljunied GRC has three minority candidates (only 1 is required) and two chinese. Yet it won with an even bigger vote share against a PAP’s team with 4 chinese and 1 minority.

The best performing GRC by the PAP is led by an Indian, Mr Tharman together with 2 newcomers and 2 relatively lightweight previous MPs. The new official leader of the opposition, with 10 elected seats, is Mr Pritam Singh, a minority. The position was handed to him by Mr Low, chinese educated and fluent in dialect. New and capable people of all races continue to join even though a minority is helming the Workers’ Party.

Who says Singapore is not ready for a minority PM. Who says minorities cannot hold their own in GEs? Dr Paul Tambyah polled over 46% against a 3-term chinese MP. Why do we need to reserve presidential elections for minority candidates and set qualifying criteria to be so ridiculously high?

55 years after independence, Singaporeans have learnt to judge people for their abilities and not for their race.

If you believe that our political system needs to be reformed, please share!

---

Note: This article was first written as a Facebook post and re-posted here (with minor edits) for easier future referencing.

Accounting for how $93 billion is being spent

Mr Han Fook Kwang, Editor-at-Large for the Straits Times wrote a good piece “Covid-19: Make sure the $93b is well spent”.

He made several strong points. Here is an extract from his piece on one part which I wish to follow up on:

“President Halimah Yacob’s in-principle approval was sought and granted for past reserves to be used. …

Approving the use of the reserves is an important task, but it is also equally critical to make sure that it was used for their intended purposes.

Do the elected presidency (EP) and CPA have these monitoring powers? I could not find anything in the Constitution regarding this. But it seems to me that some review has to follow.

If you approve funds for a particular scheme, you should want to know its result, and what action was taken if it did not achieve its objective or fell short. …

The EP’s primary role as a second key safeguarding the country’s reserves is intended to prevent a future rogue government from raiding it. To do this job well, it should have some review powers over whether those funds were used for the purposes which it had approved and if they had achieved their objectives.”

These were questions I had too. And my WP colleagues in parliament covered some of these quite well already in the debate on the fourth budget, the Fortitude Budget. A summary is here by a former senior leader with The Straits Times, Tan Bah Bah: “Faisal Manap: Did in-principle President Halimah Yacob know the exact amount of our reserves?”

The government’s reply? “I am surprised that both Mr Faisal and Mr Dennis Tan had to ask. It is public information that under our Constitution, the President has access to information about the size of reserves. Under Article 22F of the Constitution, in the exercise of her functions under the Constitution, the President is entitled to any information regarding the reserves. In addition, on the MOF website, it is already mentioned that the President has full information about the size of the reserves.”

Well done then. So it will not take the Accountant-General “52 man-years” to produce the list of physical assets of the Government, something which our first (oops, second – things are sometimes confusing in Singapore) Elected President, the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong had to struggle with the Government on. I am not sure if he ever got his answer.

The mystery of the size of our reserves aside, Mr Han raised the important question of accountability in the way money is spent. No one will question that we need an extraordinary budget to deal with a major global crisis that will impact jobs and lives. Speed is important as the crisis is immediate and widespread. All four budgets were approved in quick time. The combined size of our response to Covid-19 is nearly double the annual government budget. How well will the money be spent? How effective have they been to address the situations they were intended for?

These are important questions because we will need to know for better response to a future crisis on this magnitude. Could the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) be better designed? Companies that continued to do well or even better during this period, such as the supermarkets, got the JSS too. Some companies have stepped forward to return the money or donate them to charity. Yet, many companies continue to close even with JSS. Jobs continue to be lost. There is no perfect solution. Some form of JSS is necessary, but some post-mortem certainly can be done. How well did the major recipients of the funds respond? Mr Han cited the aviation sector. Yes, they need help for sure. How did they use the money and were they effective? We do not know how much the government has and will continue to spend on fighting the explosive spread of Covid-19 in the crowded foreign employees dormitories. Did we fairly apportion enough of the huge intervention costs to the dorm operators? Did we let off too easily the operators who have not done well in implementing measures to manage epidemic which they should have been doing? Did we execute the rent relief properly such that the money did flow down fast enough to tenants? The list goes on.

The President approved $52 billion from the reserves (the balance are from budget surplus and from borrowings which have to be repaid by the next government). What roles will the President have in scrutinizing how well the money have been spent and how effective the schemes have been. I hope it will be a big and important role. ‘Ownself check ownself’ is not always the best.

探讨部长对新加坡建筑业的看法

□ 余振忠

上周，贸工部长陈振声问：新加坡是否愿意接受每年在这里出生的2500个婴儿长大后成为建筑工人？

他的假设是：新加坡目前有30万外籍建筑工人。新加坡工人的生产力能达到外籍工人的三倍，那么我们将需要10万名新加坡工人来取代。假设我们要在40年内让新加坡工人取代外籍工人，我们每年将需要2,500个孩子，占每年约8％的本地出生的婴儿。

他认为，由于我们国家小又缺乏自然资源，新加坡不能像其他国家那样减少外籍工人。

部长似乎在暗示，我国高度依赖外籍工人的情况是不可避免的。几周前，我写了一篇关于新加坡迈向近150万客工的旅程的文章，详细介绍了过去30年外籍工人人数迅速增长的经过。我将在本文中回应部长。

让我们查核部长的论点。

（一）部长的那套计算法的基础是让本地工人完全取代建筑业内所有的外籍工人。我们并没有要求完全取代所有的外籍工人。我们呼吁的是停止过度依赖外籍工人，停止不断增加外籍工人的人数。我们呼吁采取经过深思的有效方法来纠正这个偏差，并认真地使从事于建筑业成为 新加坡人可行的一个选择，从而使建筑业内的新加坡人人数量显著增加。

在新加坡人眼中，建筑业的形象已经很糟糕了. 一提起建筑业我们就只能想到低工资和低技术客工. 部长的这番话对建筑行业的形象一点帮助也没有。现实情况是，在许多其他地方，拥有从事艰苦的工作的技能，是可以赚取不错的报酬。在日本，澳洲，瑞士或芬兰，当地人并不拒绝许多这方面的工作。建筑行业内有些工作其实需要拥有熟练技术和经过专门训练的。

（二）部长同时也假设新加坡建筑工人的生产力是外籍建筑工人的三倍。这个数字可能是来自全球建筑业界内最佳例子，例如在澳洲和日本这样的地方，当地人的生产力确实比目前新加坡的建筑工人高出三倍或更多。

这的确是一个很大的假设。与其他发达国家相比，我国目前的生产率还差得远。为什么我们还不设法让新加坡人进入这个行业？随着我国的经济在1990年代开始扩大，新加坡选择了与其他发达国家不同的道路。企业家沈锐华（Jack Sim）最近在他的脸书帖子中分享了一些有趣的观察。沈锐华分享说，当他在1979年踏入建筑业时，这个行业内的职位分为以下的类别：非常熟练的“大工”（Master Craftsmen）、训练有素的“中工”（Skilled Craftsmen）和学工（Apprentice）。 沈锐华感叹道来自上海的大工都已经逝世了。新加坡本土的大工退休了。马来西亚的大工已经回国。取代他们的泰国人也已经回国。日本人和韩国人也同样已经回国了。他观察到，新加坡开始引进许多“从未干过一天建筑活儿”的人。建筑客工的工资虽然很低，但是由于要缴交高额的劳工税和提供住宿的费用，雇主的成本却不低。如此大规模地雇用低薪工人代替熟练工人的结果是令本地人对这些工作没有兴趣。

今天，与发达国家相比，新加坡建筑工人的生产力相形见绌。想要让新加坡建筑工人的生产力比外籍建筑工人高三倍，说归说，然而要做却是另一回事. 澳洲和日本取得的成就是经过一番长久的努力。

（三）接下来，让我们研究在那些当地人参与度高和生产力高的国家，对建筑成本有什么样的影响。部长指出：“在许多其他国家，部分建筑业的工作由当地工人来做。在某些情况下，这会导致聘用这些当地工人的成本变得相对昂贵；在其他情况下，由于缺乏人力，建筑项目需要更长的时间才能完成。”

在《 2019年特纳唐逊国际建筑市场调查》（图表摘录如下）中，我们发现新加坡、澳洲和纽西兰的城市与东京之间类型相似的建筑项目的成本相差不大。另一份利比（Rider Levett Bucknall）2016年国际建筑市场的报告中，以每平方米总建筑面积计算的建筑成本，新加坡和澳洲城市之间的总建筑成本非常相似。一名澳洲建筑工人的平均年收入为63,830澳元。新加坡的建筑工人能得到多少？

资料来源：2019年特纳唐逊国际建筑市场调查（第17页）

 

资料来源：摘自利比国际建筑市场情报（2016年第三季度）。请注意，在进行建筑成本比较时，价格以当地货币（澳元、纽西兰元和新元）为准。

如果我们看看日本，他们的建筑程序是高度紧密结合为一和非常高效率的。根据日本建设情报中心基金会称，该行业存在紧密的整合。当基础工程施工完成后，下一个进行结构工程的团队在第二天就立即开始施工。他们的项目策划管理系统可以让各个承包工程的公司之间交换信息。在日本，他们还需要建造可以抵抗地震和台风的建筑物，这就比在新加坡建筑更具挑战性。然而，它们的总体建筑成本却可以与新加坡相差不大。

给当地工人支付较高的工资没有导致总体成本过高。杰出商人和酒店业巨头何光平在2011年的一次采访中分享说，他的公司在澳洲、纽西兰和泰国等地都有建筑开发的经验。他感到震惊的是：当他们在纽西兰建造酒店时所雇用的工人数量大约是他们在泰国建造酒店时所雇用的10％，因为这些工人受过良好的训练。

（四）部长说新加坡人口少，这是正确的。然而，纽西兰、瑞士、芬兰、香港和其他一些小的发达国家亦然，在这些国家当地人从事建筑业的比例高。部长还说：“如果我们在这场相对游戏中失败，那不幸的是，我认为新加坡的未来将不会像我们期望的那样。”在以上所提到的国家当中，有些还是非常具有全球竞争力的，尽管这些国家的建筑业主要由当地人从事。实际上，这其中一些国家正在与新加坡激烈竞争，以成为区域中心和金融中心。

那我们能做些什么呢？我们不能等市场进行自我调整。我以学前教育行业和护理行业为例，来加以说明。

在2000年代，学前教育行业并不受年轻的新加坡人所欢迎。员工流动率很高，很难吸引优秀的本地人加入该行业。由于雇主找不到本地人，外籍教师越来越多。 2011年之后，政府改变了观念。全国推动了学前教育业的发展，同时政府也开办幼儿园，为职前和在职教师提供大量培训机会和奖学金，将教育部和社会及家庭发展部负责学前教育的部门合并为一个机构（新加坡幼儿培育署），并提供了更多资金。

政府大力推动的结果是：如今的学前教育行业吸引了年轻的新加坡人。现在有良好的职业前景。就说我的女儿吧，她决定在理工学院选择修读幼儿教育，因为她能够获得奖学金而且从事学前教育的工作稳定。她发现自己喜欢上这个行业，并且一直留在这个工作岗位，并且在同一个专科进一步深造。 

我的侄女是一名护士。她的A水准成绩优异，她选择了护理课程。护理行业之前也是一个形象不太好而且薪金低的行业。经过新加坡工艺教育学院、理工学院和大学在一起努力大力发展该行业，加上提供奖学金，更高的薪金和改善就业前景，再加上积极的推广，年轻的本地人再次踏入这个行业。

 如今，每当有人谈论说我们过于依赖客工时，行业协会都会迅速做出回应，说削减客工将扼杀企业和破坏经济。他们并不完全错。我们的情况已经变得如此糟糕，我们不能仅依靠市场来做调整。我们不能仅要求雇主提高工人的生产力，减少客工，自己想办法雇用新加坡人。尝试这样做的公司可能会在短期内发现自己因为成本价格太高被淘汰出局。我们需要一个行业一个行业来改革：改革那些生产力低的行业，改革那些工人大部分未受过训练的行业，及那些新加坡人没有兴趣从事的行业。整个系统多个环节都损坏了。我们需要政府在国家的层面大力推动解决这一问题，包括在多个领域发挥领导作用。外籍工人的招聘和培训方面一团糟。工人们掏出大笔钱来到这里，背负着沉重的债务，而中间人赚了大钱。许多人甚至没有在自己的国家从事建筑或在相关的行业的工作过。宿舍经营者给他们提供很多人都认为拥挤不堪和条件相对差的住宿，赚取丰厚的利润。

随着我们扩大经济，新加坡采取了与其他经济体不同的道路。澳洲、纽西兰、日本、香港、瑞士、芬兰和许多其他发达经济体并不特别依赖低工资的客工，尤其是在建筑业。在这个行业，工人可以得到像样的薪金，受过更好的培训，生产力更高，同时可以更好地操作自动化机械。这些都是经过多年方取得的成效， 因为那些国家的政府打从一开始就决定不能依赖低成本的客工。

为了纠正新加坡数年来对这方面的忽视，我们不能仅要求市场自我调整。私营公司被迫接受当前的状况，因为他们本身都无法改变整个大局。这是我的建议：

（一）意识到我们有一个深刻而迫切的问题需要立即采取行动。

（二）市场已经无法解决这个超大的问题，甚至行业协会也无法解决。

（三）正如我们为其他行业所做的一样，我们必须全国一致做出很大的努力。这比学前教育或护理要复杂得多。

（四）重新使建筑业成为新加坡人愿意从事的职业，从学校开始，提供像样的薪金，提供奖学金，职业前景，在开始的阶段为新加坡人提供某种工资补贴，等方面着手。

（五）政府可能需要在国家层面做出一些干预，例如招聘客工，培训（甚至在客工的本国），宿舍等。向日本人学习如何将整个项目管理流程整合在一起，利用科技来实现施工团队和承包项目的公司之间的快速交接。

（六）最后，由于数十年来的忽视而造成的这种严重的情况，需要花数年的时间来解决，必须通过跨部门和专属的机构来负责推动。

我不是这个行业的专家。我收集来自世界各地的数据，来探究我们给自己制造的问题，提出我的看法。要纠正我们过分依赖低薪客工走错的路，将需要很多年。我们为自己能聘请到世界上最好的A团队来当政府而感到自豪（并不断提醒我们新加坡是永远不可能有B团队的）。我们为自己计划未来的20、50，甚至100年而感到自豪。

但是，以日本、澳洲和欧洲等其他发达国家的经验表明，拥有一个由多数当地人从事，并且是高技能高生产力的建筑业是可行的。他们的工人可以获得合理的薪金，从事建筑工作是一种有技能且受人尊敬的职业。尽管我们可能要花很多年才能做到，但很显然的政府需要协调工业改革。

这次冠病危机凸显了政府必须为建筑业和其他行业做重要和长远的改革，纠正我们使用了错误的劳力密集的增长政策，造成了低工资行业，过于依赖客工，也使到一群新加坡工人的工资偏低。

我们需要大刀阔斧改革，而不是用一些似是而非的假设和花言巧语来把问题撇开，等下一代来解决。

注意：这里表达的是作者的观点。

(original English version is here)

Monopoly of Wisdom will Cripple Singapore

At a May 15 virtual forum on the topic, “What are the sacred cows that Covid-19 might force us to reconsider?”, a panel of academics and other prominent social commentators believe that the Covid-19 pandemic is challenging some of the Government’s “sacred cows”. These include the country’s addiction to cheap, transient labour and what the panelists described as the policymakers’ “fear of social responsibilities” and the idea that they hold “the monopoly of wisdom”.

Yes, I feel much needs to be done. Covid-19 has brought to the forefront issues which our society has been sweeping under the carpet for far too long.

1. We have a long entrenched and ever growing reliance on foreign workers. We were not like that years ago, definitely not under the first generation leaders who had repeatedly warned that we should never let ourselves become too dependent on low cost migrant workers. Those advice were swept aside in the chase for stellar annual GDP growth when the 2G leaders took over and grew worse over time. I have traced the 30 years journey of how we got to this mess today : https://yeejj.wordpress.com/2020/05/12/1-5-million-fw/. Just in case we think this is unavoidable, many developed economies such as Australia, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong have done far better especially in the construction industry compared to us by taking a different path.  The productivity of their largely local-based construction workers are way higher than their counterparts in Singapore.

2. Assoc Prof Theseira spoke about the myth of Singapore exceptionalism. Former NMP lMr Sadasivan said that the Government needs to come to terms with the fact that it “really does not have the monopoly of wisdom”.

For far too long, given the vast success of our first generation of leaders in transforming Singapore and shutting down criticism, Singapore has gone deeply down the path of believing that only the government has all the wisdom, that we only have enough for one A team, etc. We have been conditioned since young, from schools to just follow rules. The government celebrates creativity and innovation only when they fall in line with what they like to see, but clamps down or withhold support when they feel ideas are not consistent with their views. There are many examples. Just to name one, graphic novelist Sonny Liew had his grant of $8,000 from the NAC revoked on the eve of the official launch of his novel, The Art Of Charlie Chan Hock Chye for ‘sensitive content’.  He went on to become the first Singaporean to win at the prestigious Eisner Awards, considered to be the ‘Oscar Awards of comics. He won not one, but three awards at that event.

Only the government can be right and all other views are portrayed as dangerous for society or ‘irresponsible‘. As former veteran Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow had warned, many in government think they are little Lee Kuan Yews when they have not yet earned their spurs, preaching and dictating others like they know-it-all, and even mocking other world leaders.

Bold change so far happens mostly when the ruling party feels their hold on near absolute power is being threatened, such as after GE2011. Unfortunately, group think has and will impede Singapore from innovating and moving forward. I believe too often, the false sense of exceptionalism will make us complacent, lazy to think deeply, just follow rules and unwilling to embrace divergent views.

I have long believed that only when the competition becomes stronger will the government be forced to be more innovative and more responsive. I remained even more convinced after GE2011.

Covid-19 has exposed that our government does not always know it all and that we do not always have the ‘Gold’ standard. We should be humble to learn from others, whether from other countries or from Singaporeans with differing views. Given the uncertainty of the 21st century, we need to learn to embrace diversity to continue to be relevant.

 

(Note: a shorter version of this was earlier posted on my personal FB page)

Privatising Profits and Socialising Costs

We need to be mindful of privatising profits and socialisiing costs.

It was recently report that the government will absorb additional operational costs for dormitory operators during the circuit breaker. Responding to queries from The Straits Times, the Manpower Ministry (MOM) had said that the Government will offset the increase in operating costs for operators of purpose-built dorms, factory-converted dorms and construction temporary quarters owing to the longer hours workers now spend in their residences.

To qualify for additional relief from the government, the criteria certainly must be more than what is the operators’ normal running cost versus the additional costs incurred due to measures required due to Covid-19.

Firstly, the operators would, like all businesses in Singapore, qualify for Jobs Support Scheme (JSS), support for foreign staff, property tax rebates and perhaps other measures. These must be factored in before allowing them to claim additional costs. When ECDA made all preschools give 50% rebate on net fees for Apr and May to Singaporean parents, the main rationale was that centres already receive JSS and foreign staff support from government and these must be used to provide the fee rebates. All preschool centres definitely had increased costs during this period due to additional cleaning, health screening, additional MCs for staff, etc, on top of loss of revenue due to withdrawals and deferred enrollments. The centres all bore these costs as part of the expectation that these are part and parcel of their business risks.

The dorm operators, especially the larger ones, seemed to have been rather profitable in the good years as the government pushed foreign workers away from HDB and other places into large dorms in a short period, plus a constant growth of low wage migrant workers coming to Singapore. Have all the operators complied with the regulations, health and safety measures required by the Foreign Employees Dormitories Act? Or were a number flouting regulations and cutting on costs needed to implement these? Surely their level of readiness must be factored into how they would qualify for additional support.

While I can understand that the situation at foreign workers dormitories is urgent due to the fight to contain massive explosion of Covid-19 infections, I do hope the authorities will be very careful in reviewing carefully all applications for additional relief. It seems to me from a cursory read of the Straits Times report on this issue that the criteria to give out additional relief is far too simple and these businesses can continue to enjoy the normal good profits they make and no mention was made on whether the regular generous business support that they already received from our Budgets would be taken into account. We must not double support them given that they already automatically receive support like all Singapore-based businesses. There should be sharing of pain, in fact more needs to be borne by the operators as they had benefited in the good years and they will want to continue to partake in this business after Covid-19.

Storm over PMDs – Reflections of a motorist, cyclist, pedestrian cum PMD user

Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs) have grabbed the headlines recently for all the wrong reasons. PMDs started in a small way in the past but ownership grew with LTA’s masterplan in 2013 to better facilitate first and last mile legs of commuting through better connectivity for walking and cycling, and exploded in 2017 with the Active Mobility Act that allowed PMDs onto footpaths albeit with a speed limit of 15 km/hr and with food delivery companies tapping on PMD users. Along the way up till the sudden ban announced on 4 Nov, effective the next day, there had been fatalities and many injuries, many happening on footpaths. There had also been several flip-flops by the government along the way.

You can read more of the short and explosive history of PMDs here: why-are-pmds-banned-from-footpaths/.

Let me share my thoughts as a motorist, cyclist,, pedestrian and PMD user.

I use PMD only casually because my daughter owns one which she use for commuting to her workplace under 1 km from her house. She will of course be surrendering her machine for cash incentive soon as the PMD will effectively be useless as the route is not connected by cycling tracks. A pity because it was indeed her most feasible and fastest way of commuting daily. In the few times that I used her PMD for convenient short commutes, the ride has been smooth, fast and incident free.

I am also a cyclist since I was young, both for exercise and for commute for specific purposes. I had long been concerned about the safety of cyclists because our roads are generally not friendly to cyclists and motorists tend to be impatient. I am concerned because I had a bad accident when I was young. I was in college or varsity at that time, cycling around my house in the Siglap / Bedok area. A lorry carrying workers sped past me very fast and knocked the side of my bike handle. The impact flung me onto the pavement. I distinctly heard a worker at the back of the lorry saying in Hokkien, “Hit already, run quick.” Yes, it was hit and run. I did not see the number plate as I was thrown suddenly onto the pavement. The handle was damaged and I had bruises and cuts but thankfully no broken bones. I composed myself after a while, pushed back the handle as best as I could and pushed the bike home. Since then, I am very wary of our roads even though I still do cycle. As much as possible, I avoid using the roads when cycling even if it meant the ride would be slower.

When I entered parliament, I made a few calls for more cycling paths and better sharing on the roads with motorists. I remember after one of my speeches, then MP Irene Ng spoke to me and said it was a relief that more have started speaking in parliament for cyclists. She had been a lone voice for some time advocating for this. Tampines Town where she was an MP for, was chosen to be Singapore’s first cycling town with more cycling tracks provided for.

The response from the government to her call, my call and those of a couple of other MPs had been the usual that we do have a Park Connector Network that now runs across most of the country. Yeah, it is good for leisure but for serious daily commute for work, shopping or to fetch kids? Nah, most of the time it will not get you to where you want and it is still bad and dangerous to cycle on the roads. So every time I see MND allocating generous monies at estate upgrading in the private estates, I wonder why they do not look at putting more budget for cycling paths. Frankel Estate, right next to my place is going for upgrading soon. I doubt it will improve my cycling experience much. I hope I am wrong.

I deliberately tried riding bicycles in other big cities and was impressed with my day-long experience at San Francisco. There, people can literally depend on biking to and fro work, even for long distances, and many do. They do not have cycling tracks all over the city but where there are roads, provisions are made for sharing of the road with bikes. And even when there were no special markings or provisions on the road for cyclists in San Francisco such as in the suburbs, cars were very disciplined to let us cycle past first. I rarely get motorists in Singapore giving way to me when I am cycling. For my safety and to be on guard, I always assume they will be aggressive and they usually are. After my accident years ago, I constantly watch over my back wondering if some speeding vehicles will squeeze too close to me. I have cycled in cities in Japan too and generally, the experience have been much better than Singapore. Here is a link to some cities we can learn from.

With PMDs now confined only to cycling routes (no footpaths and no roads), the spotlight is now on the bicycle infrastructure. Some improvements have been made by the government especially since 2013 but the infrastructure is still grossly insufficient. And it will be a long time before it will even be meaningful, so some other measures such as how some roads can be marked for sharing be implemented and motorists and cyclists better educated on sharing the roads. There are many cities we can learn from, if we are determined to truly make riding safer and more useful. With bicycles, there is not a lot of pressure on the government to act because it is still a small group and most do not rely on cycling daily. However with PMDs, it is now so widespread because the government had previously made it friendly to own and use and suddenly it has to solve a problem that it had helped to create.

As a pedestrian, of course I welcome the ban on footpaths because our footpaths are generally quite narrow, and Singapore is becoming more crowded. People have said that if we ban PMDs on footpaths because of injuries and deaths, must we also ban cars on roads because there are even more deaths and injuries due to vehicles? Well, roads are meant for usage by cars and pedestrians are supposed to use the roads safely at junctions and crossings and to use with care when crossing in other segments, according to safety rules. Footpaths are meant for pedestrians, which include vulnerable ones like old folks and kids. If we allow automated machines and unfortunately some do not control their speed well, then footpaths will forever be dangerous.

As a motorist, I have experienced PMD users dashing across road junctions or zipping in and out between vehicles. PMDs users have to understand that at road junctions, motorists are conditioned to look out for users with the speed of walking. I have witnessed a couple of near nasty accidents where a PMD user dashed out of some paths or buildings onto a zebra crossing or traffic light. No doubt they have the right of way because it is a designated crossing but motorists have to look left and right at junctions. So when PMDs travel at a fast speed dash onto a crossing, the motorist may have already checked that it was clear on the left and looked to the right and suddenly the PMD appeared in front on him / her as the car started to move.

I know some motorists will be unhappy reading this post and question why I am advocating for ‘road hogging’ bicycles and potentially even PMD users to share some segments of the roads (as it is in some cities). It will take more studies but I think that until we have enough bicycling infrastructure, we will need to think about sharing on the roads. Motorists will need to understand that there are other users on the roads and the slower lane of some roads may be used by others.

Lastly, I hope in considering what to do with PMDs, we can actively explore the use of technology. Technology can help us track speed real-time and determine the location of PMDs. It can determine whether the user is registered or licensed (assuming if we move to a path of having users to buy insurance or pass a test). Right now, the explosiveness of the use of PMDs and the frequency of accidents have caused several sudden policy announcements. Many are understandable frustrated because they followed what the government said, traded their non-UL2272 compliant PMDs to compliant ones recently only to find their investments have been made practically useless other than for leisure.  Allocating $7 million for trade-in grants for food delivery users will only solve the issue for a small segment and even so, it is a poor solution that may not work for some of those doing food delivery. It will push more fast vehicles onto the road when our motorists are not so understanding of sharing the roads with other vehicles. We can explore how technology can be used to enforce regulations real-time. We also need to figure what regulations we will need to allow PMDs to start using more of our infrastructure again, and which part of our infrastructure can be opened up for use in a safer way.

 

Note: These are my personal opinions and not necessarily that of the Party’s.

 

 

Go!

American best-selling author, H. Jackson Brown Jr. had this advice: “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.”

That quote was made several decades ago, when travel was slower, more expensive and difficult. Today, with our highly interconnected world, it is so much easier to set off to explore the world. Perhaps more than just travelling, we can set our minds to sail away from the safe harbours of the mundane things we have become familiar with.The world is now constantly on the move. So we can set ourselves the target to learn something new each year. Challenge yourself to master a new skill or to do things differently.

As the year 2016 comes to a close, perhaps the best word to summarise my 2016 is the word “Go!”. Amongst other places, I finally visited the remaining two countries in ASEAN that I had then yet to visit. We even started business projects there, albeit cautiously on a small scale first.

2016 was a year that I set myself the target to venture out – in business, in travel and even in the things that I do. Driving a manual left-hand drive car in the crowded streets of central Vietnam was a first, and quite an adventure too, especially when the online navigator took us onto small paths we later found out were for motorbikes only. I had hesitated to turn into the small alleys but my Vietnamese friend with me (who was himself unfamiliar with the roads there), said, “Just go lah!”. Thankfully, we made it through after an arduous 30 minutes, with the car unscratched, squeezing with motor bikes and with padi fields inches to our left and to our right.

Learning to ski at 51 seemed ambitious and I had some nasty bruises to show for the many falls. Fortunately, I survived to continue with the rest of an all-AirBnB self-planned budget trip across South Korea with my family. Learning the hover board was thankfully much easier. Doing a live storytelling session was interesting, especially with a top radio DJ and a prize winning storyteller from USA in the same session as me. Doing live doodling performances on stage without my artists in three cities in China in front of officials and business leaders was initially intimidating. Learning to cook certainly benefited my family. I now have some decent dishes to show for a year of regular cooking :).

Not sure what 2017 will bring. Hopefully more interesting things to do, more projects to get ourselves busy with, and more places to see. Life is too short to hold back. Happy New Year and just go lah!

 

Thank you for 2015!

 

Yes, 2015 has been an eventful year. Not the outcome we may wish for, but thanks for the journey.

Thanks for being with me on the journey.

Thanks to my wonderful team mates for being together in the contest.

Thanks to the many who had given so much of your time and resources. Thanks for your sweat, thanks for your tears. Thanks for your cheers, thanks for your hugs. Thanks for the many kilometres travelled together. Thanks for the new friends made, thanks for old friendships rekindled.

Thanks to the many who gave us drinks on our hot and tiring visits, and for the occasional snacks to give us the energy to go a bit longer. Thanks for your many words of encouragement.

Thanks for a year that I shall always remember.

To the many who had come my way this year, as William Shakespeare put it in the Twelfth Night, “I can no other answer make but thanks, and thanks, and ever thanks…”

See you all in 2016. Wishing everyone a fulfilling year ahead.

 

Places and buildings, Japan

Some buildings and places we visited in Japan, Nov-Dec 2015

Walking tour of West Shinjuku, Tokyo

The Mode Gakuen Cocoon Tower in Shinjuku

View from the observation tower on the 45th floor of the Shinjuku Sumitomo Tower. Entrance is free.

Inside view of the Shinjuku Sumitomo Tower

World’s largest pendulum clock in Shinjuku NS Tower. We visited the skywalk bridge and found to our pleasant surprise that there were many reasonably priced eateries there for such an expensive looking place.

 

Miyajima, one of top 3 official scenic spots of Japan

The famed Itsukushima shrine in Miyajima at low tide with a multitude of visitors on a public holiday.

No obstacles can stop these business professionals from visiting the shrine, not even having to carry luggages over the sand and to brave the huge crowd on a public holiday.

 

Flowing stream and autumn leaves

A shop sign in Miyajima. Someone should ask President Obama if he likes green tea ice cream. We did anyway 🙂 President Obama did visit Tokyo, Japan in April 2014 and perhaps green tea ice-cream was served?

Naritansan Shinshoji Temple and Garden, Narita Town

An old Pagoda

A closer look at the pointed roof of a temple building

Shadow selfie – lots of photos to take in this beautiful temple and garden!

Beautifully landscaped garden

Peaceful walk in the garden

 

More Temples, Shrines and Castles

Kyoto

Higashi Honganji, Kyoto

Sign outside Higashi Honganji

Nijo Castle, Kyoto

Himeji

View from park

View from walkway into castle

View from castle lower floor – packed with people queuing to enter

View of city from window on a top floor

 

Towers, towers everywhere, in cities and in towns

Cycling past the Tsutenkaku Tower in Osaka’s Shinseikai area, originally builit in 1912 supposedly inspired by the Eiffel Tower in Paris and rebuilt after the war . Weather was nasty during our stay in Osaka, with intermittent rains

Goryokaku Tower, Hakodate

Zoomed-in view of Goryokaku Tower and its neighbourhood from Mount Hakodate in late afternoon

Kyoto Tower on a gloomy and rainy day

View of Sendai from hotel room on 18th floor, with a building towering over its neighbourhood.

Sleepless in Sendai. Night scene from hotel room, facing the tower

The 100m tall Beppu Tower in the background on a late afternoon

 

Matsushima, another  of the three most scenic places in Japan

“Matsu” means pine or 松. You will find lots of pine trees here, little islands, clear blue waters, beautiful sky and lots of boats. Well worth the slow 40 minutes train ride from Sendai.

The 252m-long bridge to Fukuura island

Perfect weather for a walking tour of the bay of Matsushima

 

Hakodate, viewed from Mount Hakodate from 330pm till 5pm

 

The 8 hotspring “hells’ of Beppu

Bubbling mud

Beppu’s own Old Faithful, erupting more frequently at around 20 minutes interval

and some the animals and plants in the “hells”

 

Hiroshima Atomic Peace Memorial Park

 

Toya – Nishiyama and the destruction caused by Mount Usu’s eruptions

A lake formed after Mount Usu eruption in 2000

Destroyed and abandoned kindergarten

Cold wind blowing across the crater

A town abandoned

Destroyed old garbage incinerator

and the cold, cold walk after last night’s snow

 

Lake Toya, where G8 leaders met in 2008