Jeffrey Siow’s COE defence sparks sarcastic call for ministers to give up cars to benefit more Singaporeans

[blankies]

mrbrown i tot support PAP?
wing grow hard now dare to make fun of his master...

He never. ...

 

[Nuclear Boy]

"What's wrong with making more money?"

 

[haveyourcake]

Kim Huat only made one valid point, PHV is competing in the private car category.

other than that I think Mr Siow arguments are quite valid

no leh, isn't the purpose of COE and ERP to control the number of cars on the road?

doesnt it defeat the purpose if you farm it off to PHV drivers who are basically on the road the whole day?

 

[yves]

Kao pei Simi who voted for them ah.

 

[grevq80o]

Comments​

Jeffrey Siow’s COE defence sparks sarcastic call for ministers to give up cars to benefit more Singaporeans​

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s defence of COEs for private-hire vehicles is drawing public backlash. Satirist mrbrown and netizens are sarcastically suggesting that ministers give up their own cars if they truly support a shared-use model for efficiency.

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s comments on the allocation of Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) have sparked a renewed wave of public scrutiny.

In a 11 June interview, Siow defended allocating COEs to private-hire vehicles (PHVs), arguing that doing so benefits a wider pool of Singaporeans compared to private car ownership.

Siow refuted suggestions that PHV operators inflate COE prices and hurt the car ownership aspirations of individuals.

He maintained that shared transport models ease congestion and reduce bidding pressure.

“Shared access benefits more people,” says Siow​

“If you have one COE left to allocate, is it better… to give it to a private car owner who then drives maybe two trips a day and leaves the car in the garage, or is it better to share the car among a much larger group of Singaporeans who can have access to the use of a car when they need it? Surely it must be the latter, right?” Siow asked.

He underscored that Singapore’s limited land area prevents widespread private car ownership.

Thus, the COE system remains the government’s main tool to distribute limited road space equitably.

While no significant COE reforms are planned, Siow mentioned that current efforts focus on the implementation of ERP 2.0 and installation of on-board units across all vehicles

Satirical backlash: ‘Kim Huat’ weigh in​

The policy defence quickly drew a satirical response from blogger Lee Kin Mun, known as mrbrown, who released a TikTok video on 17 June via his comedic alter ego Kim Huat.

Kim Huat proposed ministers relinquish their government-issued cars—renamed “Political Holder Vehicles”—and suggested they book PHVs for official duties using a “ministerial app.”

“Better yet, all ministers should give up their private cars, not efficient mah,” he quipped, mockingly echoing Siow’s reasoning.

The satire gained traction, with netizens amplifying the critique and questioning whether government leaders were prepared to embody the same shared-use values they promote.

Public pushback targets COE structure​

Online platforms including Facebook page of the Straits Times, and The Business Times were soon populated with comments critical of Siow’s argument.

One user proposed that if PHVs are truly more efficient, ministers and their families should lead by example and give up private vehicles.

Another argued that the COE system now favours wealthy rental firms able to outbid individuals, undermining fairness and public trust.

Several comments also pushed for reforms such as capping COEs per household, separating business and private quotas, and re-evaluating vehicle lifespan policies to improve equity and sustainability.

Rethinking COE’s original goals: congestion or revenue?​

Debate intensified over the core objectives of the COE system. While it was originally introduced to manage congestion, some netizens suggested the policy has evolved into a tool for revenue generation.

One comment wrote: “The only reason to allow the system to remain unchanged is 70% of what we spend on vehicle ownership goes to the Government.”

Others asked whether the system should shift from ownership-based quotas to usage-based COEs, which could more accurately target congestion control.

They argued that such a move could eliminate price volatility and market distortions associated with arbitrary quota releases.

Mr J Siow, preash say more of such comments.. ur Acting Ministership will become Minister of State-ship.
Those dunno the difference , it's a demotion.

He is Acting minister because he is still on probation.

Better screw up now and get demoted to minister of state bah.. u parachuters dun deserve anything at all.

 

[JivBunny]

Comments​

Jeffrey Siow’s COE defence sparks sarcastic call for ministers to give up cars to benefit more Singaporeans​

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s defence of COEs for private-hire vehicles is drawing public backlash. Satirist mrbrown and netizens are sarcastically suggesting that ministers give up their own cars if they truly support a shared-use model for efficiency.

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s comments on the allocation of Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) have sparked a renewed wave of public scrutiny.

In a 11 June interview, Siow defended allocating COEs to private-hire vehicles (PHVs), arguing that doing so benefits a wider pool of Singaporeans compared to private car ownership.

Siow refuted suggestions that PHV operators inflate COE prices and hurt the car ownership aspirations of individuals.

He maintained that shared transport models ease congestion and reduce bidding pressure.

“Shared access benefits more people,” says Siow​

“If you have one COE left to allocate, is it better… to give it to a private car owner who then drives maybe two trips a day and leaves the car in the garage, or is it better to share the car among a much larger group of Singaporeans who can have access to the use of a car when they need it? Surely it must be the latter, right?” Siow asked.

He underscored that Singapore’s limited land area prevents widespread private car ownership.

Thus, the COE system remains the government’s main tool to distribute limited road space equitably.

While no significant COE reforms are planned, Siow mentioned that current efforts focus on the implementation of ERP 2.0 and installation of on-board units across all vehicles

Satirical backlash: ‘Kim Huat’ weigh in​

The policy defence quickly drew a satirical response from blogger Lee Kin Mun, known as mrbrown, who released a TikTok video on 17 June via his comedic alter ego Kim Huat.

Kim Huat proposed ministers relinquish their government-issued cars—renamed “Political Holder Vehicles”—and suggested they book PHVs for official duties using a “ministerial app.”

“Better yet, all ministers should give up their private cars, not efficient mah,” he quipped, mockingly echoing Siow’s reasoning.

The satire gained traction, with netizens amplifying the critique and questioning whether government leaders were prepared to embody the same shared-use values they promote.

Public pushback targets COE structure​

Online platforms including Facebook page of the Straits Times, and The Business Times were soon populated with comments critical of Siow’s argument.

One user proposed that if PHVs are truly more efficient, ministers and their families should lead by example and give up private vehicles.

Another argued that the COE system now favours wealthy rental firms able to outbid individuals, undermining fairness and public trust.

Several comments also pushed for reforms such as capping COEs per household, separating business and private quotas, and re-evaluating vehicle lifespan policies to improve equity and sustainability.

Rethinking COE’s original goals: congestion or revenue?​

Debate intensified over the core objectives of the COE system. While it was originally introduced to manage congestion, some netizens suggested the policy has evolved into a tool for revenue generation.

One comment wrote: “The only reason to allow the system to remain unchanged is 70% of what we spend on vehicle ownership goes to the Government.”

Others asked whether the system should shift from ownership-based quotas to usage-based COEs, which could more accurately target congestion control.

They argued that such a move could eliminate price volatility and market distortions associated with arbitrary quota releases.

Thank you for voting for Pay And Pay.

COE should not be based on years but instead distance to make sure roads don’t get too jammed.

If one is to purchase a car, with a COE of up to say 200k km with a distance based road tax based on time of the day. Once the 200k is up, either surrender the car or top up the COE.

The more I drive during peak, the more I congest the road, the more I pay.

If I don’t need the car, I don’t drive, I get to keep the car longer for the time when I need to drive it.

Extension of the “COE” is also distance based and age of the car, ie >10years old extension get to pay extra premium.

Currently, if I pay $100k for the COE. You be darn sure I am going to drive like no tomorrow to make sure I get my money back for that 10 years

 

[dambio]

Yes. One important life lesson that everyone can learn as a human being is... dun preach something to others if you are not doing it.
论语，己所不欲，勿施于人。

权力在手，天下我有！ 你能拿我怎么样？！

 

[JivBunny]

Mr J Siow, preash say more of such comments.. ur Acting Ministership will become Minister of State-ship.
Those dunno the difference , it's a demotion.

He is Acting minister because he is still on probation.

Better screw up now and get demoted to minister of state bah.. u parachuters dun deserve anything at all.

People worked for years to get to be MOS or Snr MOS.

Even Chee Hong Tat didn’t get to be a minister without going thru the MOS path.

This guy comes in straight up is Acting Minister already.

 

[Joseph12]

Comments​

Jeffrey Siow’s COE defence sparks sarcastic call for ministers to give up cars to benefit more Singaporeans​

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s defence of COEs for private-hire vehicles is drawing public backlash. Satirist mrbrown and netizens are sarcastically suggesting that ministers give up their own cars if they truly support a shared-use model for efficiency.

Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow’s comments on the allocation of Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) have sparked a renewed wave of public scrutiny.

In a 11 June interview, Siow defended allocating COEs to private-hire vehicles (PHVs), arguing that doing so benefits a wider pool of Singaporeans compared to private car ownership.

Siow refuted suggestions that PHV operators inflate COE prices and hurt the car ownership aspirations of individuals.

He maintained that shared transport models ease congestion and reduce bidding pressure.

“Shared access benefits more people,” says Siow​

“If you have one COE left to allocate, is it better… to give it to a private car owner who then drives maybe two trips a day and leaves the car in the garage, or is it better to share the car among a much larger group of Singaporeans who can have access to the use of a car when they need it? Surely it must be the latter, right?” Siow asked.

He underscored that Singapore’s limited land area prevents widespread private car ownership.

Thus, the COE system remains the government’s main tool to distribute limited road space equitably.

While no significant COE reforms are planned, Siow mentioned that current efforts focus on the implementation of ERP 2.0 and installation of on-board units across all vehicles

Satirical backlash: ‘Kim Huat’ weigh in​

The policy defence quickly drew a satirical response from blogger Lee Kin Mun, known as mrbrown, who released a TikTok video on 17 June via his comedic alter ego Kim Huat.

Kim Huat proposed ministers relinquish their government-issued cars—renamed “Political Holder Vehicles”—and suggested they book PHVs for official duties using a “ministerial app.”

“Better yet, all ministers should give up their private cars, not efficient mah,” he quipped, mockingly echoing Siow’s reasoning.

The satire gained traction, with netizens amplifying the critique and questioning whether government leaders were prepared to embody the same shared-use values they promote.

Public pushback targets COE structure​

Online platforms including Facebook page of the Straits Times, and The Business Times were soon populated with comments critical of Siow’s argument.

One user proposed that if PHVs are truly more efficient, ministers and their families should lead by example and give up private vehicles.

Another argued that the COE system now favours wealthy rental firms able to outbid individuals, undermining fairness and public trust.

Several comments also pushed for reforms such as capping COEs per household, separating business and private quotas, and re-evaluating vehicle lifespan policies to improve equity and sustainability.

Rethinking COE’s original goals: congestion or revenue?​

Debate intensified over the core objectives of the COE system. While it was originally introduced to manage congestion, some netizens suggested the policy has evolved into a tool for revenue generation.

One comment wrote: “The only reason to allow the system to remain unchanged is 70% of what we spend on vehicle ownership goes to the Government.”

Others asked whether the system should shift from ownership-based quotas to usage-based COEs, which could more accurately target congestion control.

They argued that such a move could eliminate price volatility and market distortions associated with arbitrary quota releases.

Haha

Oh Jeffrey
Past high level director at Ministry of Transport
So fast put foot in mouth
Perhaps next time don't do interviews so quickly eh?

Can see Lawrence thinks highly of those civil service types, like him

 

[lalalalalala]

As usual. Vote already jjww.

Gotta love sinkies

 

[lizzykai]

See OBU alrd know what kind of ministry it is Liao

 

[Can Or Not]

no leh, isn't the purpose of COE and ERP to control the number of cars on the road?

doesnt it defeat the purpose if you farm it off to PHV drivers who are basically on the road the whole day?

Wa Lao… why you don’t get it?
PHV drivers basically = taXi drivers
get it? public transport providers…

 

[daylight]

this new acting transport minister is trying too hard to please sinkies

 

[niefeng80]

Does he know that many pple apply for PHV just to get 100% financing ? But use it like a private car but once in a while do some trips.

In other words, the MAS ruling of the 60-70% does not apply anymore?

 

[Cactus123]

I also have one logic…if got 100 coe given to car owners who drove only home to office and office to home (eg 2x daily), compared to given to PHV who drive at least 20x daily..which scenario will result in more traffic congestion on the road?

 

[Firestorm1978]

Dont renew lor

How not to renew? Buying new car (for a similar size like my current one) is even more expensive la.

 

[fandango]

See lar. You appoint a career senior civil servant to be political leader and minister. All group think.

 

[AudiA6]

He was duly elected, then appointed to office.

Of course he now has the "mandate" to say whatever he wants to say now.

Just have to guai guai listen, and obey.

You put him there, remember

 

[elimmel]

no leh, isn't the purpose of COE and ERP to control the number of cars on the road?

doesnt it defeat the purpose if you farm it off to PHV drivers who are basically on the road the whole day?

He’ll tell you the coe is fully utilised for the benefit of the public….

 

[eversomighty]

We are supposed to have more numbers of COEs now compared to what we had 10years ago.. so u tell me who is the real ghost? PHV or LTA