3Boys, firstly, I am not cheering at this at all and this is not what I want. Secondly, I don't quite get your point.
1. Are you saying that WP alone can have so much influence in the recent decisions made by the govt as a team by making such populist statement?
(The above statement was made by Hougang MP)
2. Do you mean PAP, the larger party in the government team should not fall into such popular vote tactics by putting in the 1.1B into the transportation for improvement to please the people?
apologies first off, although I included your quotes, it was not directed at you, just speaking in general.
Do I think the WP, despite its miniscule presence in parliament, can wield so much influence? Hell, yes! Its all about leverage. The take a leftist position, and the PAP need to react, to avoid losing even more votes. The scary thing is that the WP only seem interested in catering to their own constituency (as in supporters) and not assuaging the concerns of others who may feel that they are a little too far left. Anyhow, this is not the place for a prolonged political discourse.
I have no issue with the $1.1B spent. Having won their round with the government on pushing greater spending on transport, WP now proceeds to extract their pound of flesh "Transport operators cannot profit from it, their shareholders should not be smiling, no cross subsidy please."
Really Mr Png?? Now you are starting to p*** me off. The g'ment should just give 50 shares of SMRT to every household in Singapore and just quash this nonsense once and for all.
LTA can do more obviously, the service standards bar can probably be set higher, but anti-corporate speak.......c'mon!
No worries 3Boys.
W2G pretty much sums up my thoughts about this query on the 1.1B spent, which is why I say I am not cheering nor this is what I want.
Like you, I have no problem in the 1.1B spent but perhaps the accompanying conditions from the govt from the gifting of buses and maintenance can be clearly tabled to allay any unnecessary speculations on benefitting the shareholders. I believe when they proposed a budget of 1.1B, there would be detail plans rolling up to this so it would not be difficult to table that. I see WP doing their job to question on our behalf, but perhaps I would have preferred if it has come from a member from PAP, which I strongly believe could have happened too.