[BT] CHT "having a car-lite vision does not mean that our total car population cannot increase"

[priore]

The planned injection of up to 20,000 additional Certificates of Entitlement (COE) from February is not linked to any potential implementation of distance-based road pricing, Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat said in Parliament on Tuesday (Nov 12).

“We have not made a decision on whether to implement distance-based charging, though ERP 2.0 gives us the option to do so,” Chee said.

There is a need to study this further, including with the data from Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0, as there may be trade-offs, he added.

But if distance-based charging is eventually implemented, there might then be scope for a further increase in the COE quota, he said. This is as the mechanism would give the Land Transport Authority (LTA) an additional tool to manage congestion.

Chee was responding to parliamentary questions on COE quotas and ERP 2.0, as well as their impact on road traffic.

Asked how the injection of COEs aligns with Singapore’s “car-lite” vision, Chee said the government remains committed to the vision, and “having a car-lite vision does not mean that our total car population cannot increase”.

(article continues)

https://bt.sg/AGx4

 

[priore]

Mental gymnastics on a whole new level.

I am truly lost.

Car-lite doesn't mean car population cannot increase. So what does "lite" means? "Lite" during certain times of the day by distance based charging during peak hours if it is introduced?

Secondly, I quote
"Chee replied: “If indeed there is a change, whether it is due to removal of flexi-work arrangements or other reasons, then we will have to respond accordingly using this tool that we have, which is usage-based pricing and ERP 2.0 "

If u need to work, u need to work right?

If company stipulates 8am, 8.30 am etc... How would usage pricing change this?
Making it more expensive doesn't deter anything if you have to report by certain timing right?

It's precisely because start work timing by-and-large is 8am/8.30am/9am that's why there is this thing called "rush hour/peak period" right???

You're not detering anything, you're just making it more expensive to go to work isn't it?

You mean can tell boss "boss, sorry peak period charge extra $10, I go office later".

Are you hearing yourself?

Obviously gov cannot force companies to stagger work start timing or flexi work - you can only encourage.

Cannot solve the problem then at the very least don't add to it - to our cost of living.

 

[PaboJames]

Means the car lighter in weight?

 

[Suporter]

I regards their tokcok as hot air...

 

[ZETMAN]

my ang moh not good. can anyone explain what exactly they trying to say here ?


is this the same as although I feel like i aims to be a refined and cultured person but that doesnt mean i cant scold them *******?

 

[mryang]

The planned injection of up to 20,000 additional Certificates of Entitlement (COE) from February is not linked to any potential implementation of distance-based road pricing, Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat said in Parliament on Tuesday (Nov 12).

“We have not made a decision on whether to implement distance-based charging, though ERP 2.0 gives us the option to do so,” Chee said.

There is a need to study this further, including with the data from Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0, as there may be trade-offs, he added.

But if distance-based charging is eventually implemented, there might then be scope for a further increase in the COE quota, he said. This is as the mechanism would give the Land Transport Authority (LTA) an additional tool to manage congestion.

Chee was responding to parliamentary questions on COE quotas and ERP 2.0, as well as their impact on road traffic.

Asked how the injection of COEs aligns with Singapore’s “car-lite” vision, Chee said the government remains committed to the vision, and “having a car-lite vision does not mean that our total car population cannot increase”.

(article continues)

https://bt.sg/AGx4

the inconsistencies in the article. Here's a breakdown of the key contradictions:

- COE Injection and Distance-Based Charging: The article initially states that the COE injection is not linked to distance-based charging, but then goes on to suggest that distance-based charging could be used in the future to manage congestion and might even lead to further COE quota increases. This creates a clear contradiction. If the COE injection is independent of distance-based charging now, why would it be linked to it in the future?

- Car-Lite Vision and Increased COEs: The article emphasizes the government's commitment to a car-lite vision, but then announces the injection of 20,000 additional COEs, which would likely increase the total car population. This creates a tension between the stated vision and the actual policy decision. How can the government simultaneously pursue a car-lite vision while increasing the number of cars on the road?

- Post-Covid Travel Patterns: The article mentions that flexible work arrangements have reduced car usage post-pandemic but also acknowledges that more companies are mandating a return to the office. This raises questions about whether the government's assessment of post-Covid travel patterns is accurate and whether the COE injection will be effective in the long term.

These inconsistencies highlight the complexity of the issue and the challenges faced by the Singaporean government in balancing competing goals. The article leaves readers with more questions than answers about the future of car ownership and traffic management in Singapore.

 

[我是内鬼]

Can he like explain in other languages or dialect? I don’t understand his English at all

 

[bio_chap]

highest paid salary also never means no corrpution

 

[testart]

Respect this CHT. He always has a way to argue.

 

[Mancunian2]

 

[Red Ronin]

trying to quit smoking doesn't mean you cannot smoke more cigarettes in one day.

 

[CheeKeong108]

Mandating minority representation in GRC contest does not mean the elected GRC cannot carry on work without the minority MP

 

[whatheheck]

he explain until he thinks as long as he gets a sentence out , it's a win ah

 

[otakuflick]

Compared it to the population increment, 20k a funny one.

 

[boon_hou]

no matter what can earn $$$

 

[Medicated Oil]

The car population will increase.
Just that the commoners will not be able to afford it any more.
That is the hard truth.
So, it will be car-lite for the peasants.
What so difficult to explain ?

 

[pushtopen]

if really implement distance based charging then pls do away with road tax and coe

no difference from taxi and phv so there should be no barriers to ownership since the entitlement in certificate of entitlement no longer holds true as you're charged on a per use basis

it's the same freaking concept of owning a fridge that charges you money for each time you retrieve something from it

road tax can easily be incorporated into the distance based charge

 

[lenscapes]

I have a car, my wife have a car. We are both professional comes to mind.

 

[ZaiNan]

Means he want the best of both worlds

Whats wrong with making more money

 

[chickenpiez007]

the inconsistencies in the article. Here's a breakdown of the key contradictions:

- COE Injection and Distance-Based Charging: The article initially states that the COE injection is not linked to distance-based charging, but then goes on to suggest that distance-based charging could be used in the future to manage congestion and might even lead to further COE quota increases. This creates a clear contradiction. If the COE injection is independent of distance-based charging now, why would it be linked to it in the future?

- Car-Lite Vision and Increased COEs: The article emphasizes the government's commitment to a car-lite vision, but then announces the injection of 20,000 additional COEs, which would likely increase the total car population. This creates a tension between the stated vision and the actual policy decision. How can the government simultaneously pursue a car-lite vision while increasing the number of cars on the road?

- Post-Covid Travel Patterns: The article mentions that flexible work arrangements have reduced car usage post-pandemic but also acknowledges that more companies are mandating a return to the office. This raises questions about whether the government's assessment of post-Covid travel patterns is accurate and whether the COE injection will be effective in the long term.

These inconsistencies highlight the complexity of the issue and the challenges faced by the Singaporean government in balancing competing goals. The article leaves readers with more questions than answers about the future of car ownership and traffic management in Singapore.

meant next time silver serpents need to proofread their responses for ministars against Chat-gpt first.....