As all of us know and can see, there are more and more ERP gantries put up throughout the country. For those of us who read the Straits Times, it was reported on July 6, 2008 that 5 S'pore River ERP gantries kicked in on Monday. The new gantries, which will bring the total number of gantries in Singapore to 65, will charge $2 from 6pm to 7.30pm and $1 from 7.30pm to 8pm.
Being dutiful Social Studies students ;) you are supposed to be objective about the whole issue. In other words, we must see the good and the bad behind ERPs.
The Good:
ERP aims to solve traffic congestion in the city areas as well as important roads. By making motorists pay to use certain roads at certain timings, the government is reducing congestion during these timings as those who are not willing to pay will not use these roads during the peak hours. This will then solve the traffic congestion problem which could affect our economic efficiency.
The Bad:
If you read ST's Forum on 7 July, there was an article by a Tan Wee Liang... "What happened to the original purpose of the certificate of entitlement (COE)? Isn't it supposed to be the ultimate tool to limit the number of cars on the road? If the COE is doing its job well, why are the roads so choked that the authorities have 'no choice' but to set up ERP gantries everywhere to control traffic?"
Should traffic congestion be solved by limiting the number of cars for sale (through COE) and fewer ERP gantries or through allowing more cars for sale and increasing the number of ERP gantries? Both solutions have their own problems. When you allow more cars, more people can own their cars but they will be frustrated with the extra road use charges which makes it difficult to use their cars anytime they want. But if you make it difficult for people to own a car, they will also be unhappy. Either way, people will complain.
What is my take on this? With the rising inflation, I too am feeling the pinch. I have sworn to save money by taking public transport to and from school.
Need to ensure I have substantial savings in my bank account in the event I am sacked for all the relative untruths I tell my students in class :P
Being dutiful Social Studies students ;) you are supposed to be objective about the whole issue. In other words, we must see the good and the bad behind ERPs.
The Good:
ERP aims to solve traffic congestion in the city areas as well as important roads. By making motorists pay to use certain roads at certain timings, the government is reducing congestion during these timings as those who are not willing to pay will not use these roads during the peak hours. This will then solve the traffic congestion problem which could affect our economic efficiency.
The Bad:
If you read ST's Forum on 7 July, there was an article by a Tan Wee Liang... "What happened to the original purpose of the certificate of entitlement (COE)? Isn't it supposed to be the ultimate tool to limit the number of cars on the road? If the COE is doing its job well, why are the roads so choked that the authorities have 'no choice' but to set up ERP gantries everywhere to control traffic?"
Should traffic congestion be solved by limiting the number of cars for sale (through COE) and fewer ERP gantries or through allowing more cars for sale and increasing the number of ERP gantries? Both solutions have their own problems. When you allow more cars, more people can own their cars but they will be frustrated with the extra road use charges which makes it difficult to use their cars anytime they want. But if you make it difficult for people to own a car, they will also be unhappy. Either way, people will complain.
What is my take on this? With the rising inflation, I too am feeling the pinch. I have sworn to save money by taking public transport to and from school.
Need to ensure I have substantial savings in my bank account in the event I am sacked for all the relative untruths I tell my students in class :P
No comments:
Post a Comment