In that one single word - entitlement, lies my beef with how we as a country, Singapore, deal with our car ownership problem. The problem lies in the fact that we're a small country crawling with an overpopulation of cars. The system we came up with to deal with said problem is coined as the "Certificate of Entitlement".
Basically the COE is a licence that Singaporeans can bid on. There is a quota every month - July's was 1429 for Category A. Say there are 20000 bidders and the lowest 1429th bid was $50000, everyone (who bid higher than the 1429th bidder) would pay $50k for their successful COE bid. Successful bidders would then pay not only for the COE but also the price of the car.
An important note to remember would be that the licence has a validity of 10 years - after which the car has to be scrapped or a new COE purchased to 'extend' the lifespan of the car.
Toyota RAV4:
Toyota USA reports the car with a retail price of US$23680 = (SGD$31867)
Toyota Australia reports a price of AUD$30886 = (SGD$31245)
Toyota Singapore has it at SGD$174888 = (SGD$174888)
Pretty insane no matter which way it's looked at.
July 2015 COE results
Paying these kind of prices (that obviously favors the rich - they can afford to bid more) sticks in the average Singaporean's craw because, we have a pledge (which I have to recite daily) purporting to uphold justice and equality.
Let's be clear.
It is not equality when equality is built upon maintaining a status quo which favors the rich. To rub salt in the wound? Let's call it a Certificate of Entitlement - you know, a Certificate where one is deserving of privileges or special treatment - where said privileges or special treatment is conferred by the amount of money you have.
I believe Singapore is fast approaching that time when it will be awfully obvious that only the well-to-do can afford to maintain and purchase new cars every decade (heck, make that every year). This is being foreshadowed by the increasingly common calls by various ministers to Singaporeans urging us to switch to public transport. Extrapolate that if you will. It could take 10, 20 or maybe another 50 years but we can see the end game - the common man will be squeezed off the roads of Singapore (if they haven't already), unless something changes.
I came across an interesting page (
Inconvenientquestions.sg) with some points being raised there (from just 3 posts) and I summarize as thus;
1) When people make the switch to public transport, will it be used to justify an increase in fares?
2) Owning a car will became a thing that only the rich can afford.
3) How to determine a need for a car from a want.
4) What about people who need to travel for work or the disabled?
5) COE adding to cost of having a bigger family.
6) COE as a system has failed (or rather hasn't been equitable) because richer families tend to have multiple cars whereas the common man must toil to afford their single ride.
7) some alternative ideas about bidding for and transferring ownership of COEs.
Singapore desperately needs something different. Our planners need to think out of the box - pronto, especially if rumours to increase the population are true.
Car ownership is obviously a problem.
We have tried to tackle that by increasing the cost of owning a car.
That has worked to some extent but has come at a cost of delineating the line between the rich and the 'not so' rich.
Let us start by removing car ownership.
Yes, that's right. Rather than telling some Singaporeans that they are entitled to a car because they are rich enough to buy a certificate, let no one Singaporean own a car. In the process, we'll score another first - "1st nation with zero car ownership!"
For this to work;
1) Make a bicycle network has to be beefed up - make it part of the public transport system.
2) The private car population in 2013 stood at 540,063, while the taxi population stood at 27,695. Statistics gleaned from
Land Transport Statistics 2014.
- Remove all private cars (rich or poor) and increase the taxi population by tenfold or more.
- Taxi fares to be reduced and simplified - no nonsense about peak hours, pick-up surcharges or what nots.
- Profit sharing among taxi drivers.
3) Buses run more frequently with a higher degree of predicting their arrivals times must be implemented.
4) A re-imagining of the roads. The lane closest to the curb should be the bicycle lane, the second lane the bus lane, the 3rd and 4th lanes (if any) for the taxis and goods vehicles.
5) Public transport must be profitable. That cannot be denied but the profits cannot be excessive OR if profits are excessive, they
must be funneled back to society.
- Taxi and bus companies have profits limited at a certain % of their operating expenses. Enough of this nonsense about increasing their bottom line every year with fare increases.
- Excess profits past that % be distributed amongst the drivers.
- OR funneled to charity purposes, maintaining public transport (for example the bicycle network)
6) Staggered work/school times.
- This will NOT work if the whole of Singapore is still going to work or school at the same time.
- Perhaps a different starting and ending time for work and school for the different zones so that the taxi population can cope with the numbers.
What are the benefits?
- Increase the number of taxis - increase employment
- No more over-crowding on roads.
- Hopefully less accidents between bicycles and vehicles
- Less pollution.
- Easier for emergency services to get to their destinations.
- Better health - from increased cycling activities.
- Think of the industry that'll spring up from maintaining all them bicycles on the roads.
I like my plan but I've probably missed out on a million and one reasons why it wouldn't work. The primary reason probably the same reason we still have cigarettes despite everyone Tom, Dick and Harry telling us it is bad for our health.
Still it is good to daydream. Especially on a lazy Sunday.
