Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/kl-singapore-hsr-high-speed-rail-project-azmin-10546402
(Updated: )
Eric Foo
Apart Singapore other parties may also claim compensation or sue for termination of contract.... So don't suka suka brushing aside a contract just because he became the oldest PM in human history.
Daniel Tan
K Tan Don yes i do agrees with u but let the minister do their work as this is a test for them to see how competent in decisiom making and judgemet are they.
My main worries is could the fy account of hsr màlaysia is able to be in BLACK!
As of till now i dont see any survey reports on the estimated principle cost and volumne of users within malaysia it self.
Base on the data volume obtain from all carriers in and out between cia and klia, it is difficult to substain the cost of recovering the interest it self not to say about the cost of maintanance.
My main worries is could the fy account of hsr màlaysia is able to be in BLACK!
As of till now i dont see any survey reports on the estimated principle cost and volumne of users within malaysia it self.
Base on the data volume obtain from all carriers in and out between cia and klia, it is difficult to substain the cost of recovering the interest it self not to say about the cost of maintanance.
K Tan Don
Daniel Tan, i have no issue letting ministers do their work. I just see many impatient people shouting for blood, full compensation, etc. Actually the cost of building the HSR is one huge thing..the cost of maintenance is also another big issue for us in the long run..I am sorry but, our infamous crook, Mr Scumbag Najib promised too much to Singapore..which caused a lot of disappointment when our new government needs to cancel this and that..yes, perhaps Tun announced the intention to cancel to early..but this is a new government..our new government will need time to sort out mess and study all the contracts..If those Singaporeans think that by day and night will blasting Tun, things will change when Anwar takeover ( if he takeover, you know is always so near yet so far case), yeah right..but they will not get another sucker like Najib as our leader..
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don - "If those Singaporeans think that by day and night will blasting Tun, things will change when Anwar takeover ( if he takeover, you know is always so near yet so far case), yeah right..but they will not get another sucker like Najib as our leader.."
---
I take issue with your above statement.
Singaporeans do not interfere in your political leadership.
You have not understood the anger trigger by your Dr M - who is stoking tension by blaring over the press about revising water agreement and about canceling HSR through the press, and blaring "we know what he want" to cancel, and then say "defer" - keep flip-flopping without going through diplomatic protocol.
You are further distorting facts.
---
I take issue with your above statement.
Singaporeans do not interfere in your political leadership.
You have not understood the anger trigger by your Dr M - who is stoking tension by blaring over the press about revising water agreement and about canceling HSR through the press, and blaring "we know what he want" to cancel, and then say "defer" - keep flip-flopping without going through diplomatic protocol.
You are further distorting facts.
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don - Your Economic Minister sounds more professional and reasonable in assessing the whole HSR situation - knowing that it does not only impact another Sovereign Country, but also many international multi-national corporation where many foreign Country leaders are also lobbying for this project.
He knows that this need to be handle sensitively and according to agreement which is enforceable by the International Law --- and all Foreign Leaders are watching carefully how Malaysia handle this HSR issue --- in case you are not aware about the weight of the issue.
Blaring over the press, flip-flopping hot and cold - just reveal how "professsional" you hold up yourself in the eyes of the International Community.
This Economic Minister to date hold up well in his speech.
He knows that this need to be handle sensitively and according to agreement which is enforceable by the International Law --- and all Foreign Leaders are watching carefully how Malaysia handle this HSR issue --- in case you are not aware about the weight of the issue.
Blaring over the press, flip-flopping hot and cold - just reveal how "professsional" you hold up yourself in the eyes of the International Community.
This Economic Minister to date hold up well in his speech.
Like · Reply · 1m
K Tan Don
Ricky Lim, lets make things simple, if during negotiations, your minister ( who sadly happened to be an ex- Malaysian) love to keep the HSR project running, pls suggest something constructive or some options to help to keep the project alive..else just let our economics minister how much compensation to pay, so that he can relay back to our PM.
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don - This sounds more constructive, reasonable and professional.
Like · Reply · 1m
Codee Chang
K Tan Don Singaporeans were genuinely happy for Malaysia when PH won the election. But Mahathir and even LGE were bent on using the media, particularly the international media, to take cheap shots at Singapore because they think this would pressure Singapore to give in to their terms regarding the HSR. From encouraging Singaporeans to vote against the their government to reviving dated issues regarding water and even repeating cavalierly to the press that it was "not urgent" to inform Singapore officially of Malaysia's stance on the HSR, your leaders have been grossly out of turn. What puzzles me is why Malaysians like your good self expect Singapore to take such behaviour meekly. And get upset when we respond in kind.
Ricky Lim
Azmin said apart from meeting Khaw, he is also planning to meet Singapore’s Minister for Trade and Industry Chan Chun Sing in a bid to find an amicable solution to the HSR project.
==
Quite obviously, this Minister understand the full rationale of this HSR project - that it is not a "transport project per se" - but also have its economic angle.
Interestingly, Malaysia has appointed a Economic Affair Minister (instead of a Transport Minister) to discuss the HSR issue.
Which lead to the point of :-
Posted in :- 16 Jul 2018 06:09PM (Updated: 16 Jul 2018 06:13PM)
Ricky Lim
There are always some misperception about justifying high cost infrastructure project - and he correlation to direct collection of fees to recoup the capital cost.
Cost & Benefit Analysis done in this manner - will always result in a project no go - because multi-million or billions infra cost - will never be able to be recoup by collection of fares.
It is the Economic activities provided by the infra access - that need to be added into the equation of the Cost & Benefit Analysis - before a project can be determined if indeed cost outweigh benefits or benefits outweigh costs.
Because if the CBA is negative, our side will never approve this project and this project will never have gone ahead - because our side are usually very careful in spending our taxpayers money.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Scenario 1
Thus for a politicians who want to cancel the HSR project, it will justify CBA by :-
(1) Computing planning, design, building and operation cost of HSR.
(2) Computing fare charges for the duration of the lifespan of HSR.
Outcome :- Cost > Benefits = Project not feasible.
Conclusion :- Project Cancel
Scenario 2
For CBA calculated based on Economic Benefits:-
(1) Computing planning, design, building and operation cost of HSR.
(2) Computing fare charges for the duration of the lifespan of HSR.
(3) Projected Economic Activities and the Multiplier Effects.
Outcome :- Cost < Benefits = Project is it feasible (go and guess)
Conclusion :- Project to go ahead or not (go and guess).
==
Quite obviously, this Minister understand the full rationale of this HSR project - that it is not a "transport project per se" - but also have its economic angle.
Interestingly, Malaysia has appointed a Economic Affair Minister (instead of a Transport Minister) to discuss the HSR issue.
Which lead to the point of :-
Posted in :- 16 Jul 2018 06:09PM (Updated: 16 Jul 2018 06:13PM)
Ricky Lim
There are always some misperception about justifying high cost infrastructure project - and he correlation to direct collection of fees to recoup the capital cost.
Cost & Benefit Analysis done in this manner - will always result in a project no go - because multi-million or billions infra cost - will never be able to be recoup by collection of fares.
It is the Economic activities provided by the infra access - that need to be added into the equation of the Cost & Benefit Analysis - before a project can be determined if indeed cost outweigh benefits or benefits outweigh costs.
Because if the CBA is negative, our side will never approve this project and this project will never have gone ahead - because our side are usually very careful in spending our taxpayers money.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Scenario 1
Thus for a politicians who want to cancel the HSR project, it will justify CBA by :-
(1) Computing planning, design, building and operation cost of HSR.
(2) Computing fare charges for the duration of the lifespan of HSR.
Outcome :- Cost > Benefits = Project not feasible.
Conclusion :- Project Cancel
Scenario 2
For CBA calculated based on Economic Benefits:-
(1) Computing planning, design, building and operation cost of HSR.
(2) Computing fare charges for the duration of the lifespan of HSR.
(3) Projected Economic Activities and the Multiplier Effects.
Outcome :- Cost < Benefits = Project is it feasible (go and guess)
Conclusion :- Project to go ahead or not (go and guess).
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim
How Economic Activities and multiplier effects feature in a transport infrastructure projects?
For eg. in a Mass Rapid System :-
(1) It facilitate quick access, mass transit of many commuters, and high speed transportation with modern amenities - that will attract even high premium commuters with spending power.
(2) In each station - for embarkation and dis-embarkation where commuters converge - it will attract amenities for Economic activities - such as shopping mall, retail shops, eateries, property developers building high-class condo, properties, housing estates, transport amenities such as car park, buses, local rail etc.
Such development of economic activities will bring huge multiplier effects to the vicinity - spuring investment, business setup and create jobs.
(3) The ease of physical access will spur more travel, more business, more jobs - that will contribute to the economic growth.
Thus depending on how one assess the transport infrastructure.
A short term view - is to see it from a transport angle --- and is a sure way to kill the project.
A long term view - is to see it as a conduit to facilitate physical access - to boost Economic growth - and people can see that it is a multiplier effect for Economic activities, investment tools, and business potential for job creation.
--
So the above discussion is for the Economic Affairs Minister to assess the HST projects vis-a-vis Economic catalyst --- rather than focusing solely on cost of the projects.
Accounting guys - will look at an infra project as "cost" - where "cost" is the paramount.
Sales guys - will purely look at the economic revenue - with no regard to "cost".
- Both viewpoints are undesirable.
An economic guy - will assess the project from both cost angle + economic angle ---- in his feasibility studies - that cut across both transport ministry and economic ministry.
For eg. in a Mass Rapid System :-
(1) It facilitate quick access, mass transit of many commuters, and high speed transportation with modern amenities - that will attract even high premium commuters with spending power.
(2) In each station - for embarkation and dis-embarkation where commuters converge - it will attract amenities for Economic activities - such as shopping mall, retail shops, eateries, property developers building high-class condo, properties, housing estates, transport amenities such as car park, buses, local rail etc.
Such development of economic activities will bring huge multiplier effects to the vicinity - spuring investment, business setup and create jobs.
(3) The ease of physical access will spur more travel, more business, more jobs - that will contribute to the economic growth.
Thus depending on how one assess the transport infrastructure.
A short term view - is to see it from a transport angle --- and is a sure way to kill the project.
A long term view - is to see it as a conduit to facilitate physical access - to boost Economic growth - and people can see that it is a multiplier effect for Economic activities, investment tools, and business potential for job creation.
--
So the above discussion is for the Economic Affairs Minister to assess the HST projects vis-a-vis Economic catalyst --- rather than focusing solely on cost of the projects.
Accounting guys - will look at an infra project as "cost" - where "cost" is the paramount.
Sales guys - will purely look at the economic revenue - with no regard to "cost".
- Both viewpoints are undesirable.
An economic guy - will assess the project from both cost angle + economic angle ---- in his feasibility studies - that cut across both transport ministry and economic ministry.
Like · Reply · 1m
Derrek Chang
The decision is not so much of deferment or scrapped the HSR. There were talks or rumours that Dr M seems more content to award the HSR to Japan consortium, despite most of us clearly know the idea was mooted by Chinese "one road, one belt' initiatives. Dr M knows clearly that Japan will be most willing to come over and lend its expertise, using Japanese technology to rival the Chinese one. Also knowing that Chinese invested lots of monies and many companies were setup in M'sia with view the HSR project will be awarded to Chinese Railway Constrn. At worst, there were request if AIIB to finance the project at very competitive lending rate should Japan win the bid for the construction, clearly an insult for a Chinese initiated lending institution. Clearly an amicable solution is needed not just for Sin-M'sia, but also the many manhours of investment and cost outlay by Chinese consortium in Malaysia itself. Once this is not handle well, inevitably, many Chinese investors will stop investing in Malaysia and that would certainly be a major upset for Malaysia in long run.
Like · Reply · 10m
K Tan Don
Codee Chang..we don expect you to take such behaviour meekly. All i m saying is Tun is part of new government. You should look at dealings with new government, PH. True, sometimes Tun may say something not pleasant to u guys, but if relationships with new government turn sour, whorever take over the baton from Tun will also have difficult times dealing with your country..if you guys are hoping Anwar will take a better n more friendly approach, let’s cool down the tone..you dont have to upset with every single statements made by Tun ..for example he wish to have a second national car project...we know is not going to happen..in fact u guys should be thanking Tun for making that statement on government change. This will help your government to take note of your opinions..before is game over for them. For example your government spent so much on infrastructure n facilities that it needs to keep on increasing GST..it is convinced n tried to convince u guy that is the only option..how long will u endure that? Ok next few years GsT to 9%, ok lah u still can stomach..but when GST hits 15% to 20%, how still no problem? Government will always try to convince n paycho the people to accept their policies..yeah we know SG govern is more clean..no doubt..anyway by the end of the day, it is u people to decide whether you guys can still live with increasing high cost of living n policies changes..I personally think that no single party or group of people should rule a country for more than 50 years..that is not healthy..it is up to the citizens to make the decision when the time come when majority of people tolerance on the government have exhausted..
K Tan Don
Interesting proposal but Mark Chen, please advice your minister to propose that to our economic minister.. Any constructive feedback/options is welcome
Like · Reply · 8m · Edited
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don -
"For example your government spent so much on infrastructure n facilities that it needs to keep on increasing GST..it is convinced n tried to convince u guy that is the only option..how long will u endure that? Ok next few years GsT to 9%, ok lah u still can stomach..but when GST hits 15% to 20%, how still no problem? Government will always try to convince n paycho the people to accept their policies..yeah we know SG govern is more clean..no doubt..anyway by the end of the day, it is u people to decide whether you guys can still live with increasing high cost of living n policies changes.."
---
You have again make interesting assumptions about Singapore fiscal policies.
You assume that Singapore is like Malaysia - who need to raise GST to finance the HSR project.
I am telling you, you are wrong.
Singapore fiscal policies of raising GST is not due to HSR project (which our Government has disclose that HSR has immaterial effect on the need to raise GST to finance it).
Raising GST is a structural change to how Singapore transform the mix of variables in administering its fiscal policies --- which has nothing to do with HSR project.
"For example your government spent so much on infrastructure n facilities that it needs to keep on increasing GST..it is convinced n tried to convince u guy that is the only option..how long will u endure that? Ok next few years GsT to 9%, ok lah u still can stomach..but when GST hits 15% to 20%, how still no problem? Government will always try to convince n paycho the people to accept their policies..yeah we know SG govern is more clean..no doubt..anyway by the end of the day, it is u people to decide whether you guys can still live with increasing high cost of living n policies changes.."
---
You have again make interesting assumptions about Singapore fiscal policies.
You assume that Singapore is like Malaysia - who need to raise GST to finance the HSR project.
I am telling you, you are wrong.
Singapore fiscal policies of raising GST is not due to HSR project (which our Government has disclose that HSR has immaterial effect on the need to raise GST to finance it).
Raising GST is a structural change to how Singapore transform the mix of variables in administering its fiscal policies --- which has nothing to do with HSR project.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Structural changes to fiscal policies that Singapore announced was make in the last Budget.
(1) With global headwinds of government altering their fiscal policies - such as reducing taxes - it is imperative that Singapore cannot rely on increasing income tax, corporate tax to form the major bulk of the fiscal revenue to finance the spending needs of Singapore.
(2) Singapore demography is featuring more older population that will need higher social spendings on health and elderly welfare needs
(3) Need to spend more on investment into our future economic needs, security, R&D on future economy etc.
(4) Changing economic landscape where digital economy is gaining important and form a growing significant portion of our Economy.
(5) The need to keep Singapore the financial hub and wealth management hub.
--- Given the above backdrops, restructuring of variable mix of our fiscal policies - moving from income tax mix to consumption tax mix, exploring new tax revenue source such as the digital tax as more and more transaction are done via online eCommerce, looking at income earn to form one of the variable of the tax mix by Sovereign Funds become imperative.
Thus,
(1) GST increase (consumption tax) - which is unpopular but necessary is feature in our fiscal policy.
(2) New Digital tax become necessary
(3) Half of the Revenue from Sovereign Funds to finance the Government spendings (and half plough back as capital to further growth the wealth) become imperative.
(1) With global headwinds of government altering their fiscal policies - such as reducing taxes - it is imperative that Singapore cannot rely on increasing income tax, corporate tax to form the major bulk of the fiscal revenue to finance the spending needs of Singapore.
(2) Singapore demography is featuring more older population that will need higher social spendings on health and elderly welfare needs
(3) Need to spend more on investment into our future economic needs, security, R&D on future economy etc.
(4) Changing economic landscape where digital economy is gaining important and form a growing significant portion of our Economy.
(5) The need to keep Singapore the financial hub and wealth management hub.
--- Given the above backdrops, restructuring of variable mix of our fiscal policies - moving from income tax mix to consumption tax mix, exploring new tax revenue source such as the digital tax as more and more transaction are done via online eCommerce, looking at income earn to form one of the variable of the tax mix by Sovereign Funds become imperative.
Thus,
(1) GST increase (consumption tax) - which is unpopular but necessary is feature in our fiscal policy.
(2) New Digital tax become necessary
(3) Half of the Revenue from Sovereign Funds to finance the Government spendings (and half plough back as capital to further growth the wealth) become imperative.
K Tan Don
Ricky Lim i m not here to discuss your government policies. Sure your government n GST supporters can give 1001 reasons..there is always some tolerance level people can accept..9% gst ok..15% gst..30% gst..no matter how the government put it..by end of day how many persons will be able to endure such increase..n to what level..if your government continue to think GST increase can be offset by goodies confidently n continue to test people tolerance..Yes, I m anti-GST obviously
Ricky Lim
Having say so, as raising GST consumption tax --- no matter how justifiable will always be unpopular with the population because it affect every strata of the population - from low-income, middle-income and high income.
Singapore Government is always mindful of the impact of GST that it has on the people - and will always come up with compensation package to ensure that low-income and middle-income will be the least hit by the GST.
Among the compensation packages are :-
(1) GST credit (that range from hundreds to thousands of S$ dollars) to offset the impact of GST increase.
(2) Power and utilities rebate (few hundred dollars)
(3) Town council rebate (hundred of dollars)
(4) Income tax cut (that will help the middle and high income people).
plus many other measures.
Study show that low-income people and majority of the middle income people - are less affected by the GST increase (in fact, if they maintain their current spending habits - will in fact profit from the GST offset).
High income earners pay for a big bulk of the GST increase - because they are the one for spend on big ticket items like house, luxury cars, luxury bags, jewelleries, yacht, dining in high-class gourment restaurants etc.
So the GST increases (we have done it more than 4 times) - has raise ruckus initally - but then the people are able to accept it eventually - after they discover that their spending powers are not affected or badly affected.
Singapore Government is always mindful of the impact of GST that it has on the people - and will always come up with compensation package to ensure that low-income and middle-income will be the least hit by the GST.
Among the compensation packages are :-
(1) GST credit (that range from hundreds to thousands of S$ dollars) to offset the impact of GST increase.
(2) Power and utilities rebate (few hundred dollars)
(3) Town council rebate (hundred of dollars)
(4) Income tax cut (that will help the middle and high income people).
plus many other measures.
Study show that low-income people and majority of the middle income people - are less affected by the GST increase (in fact, if they maintain their current spending habits - will in fact profit from the GST offset).
High income earners pay for a big bulk of the GST increase - because they are the one for spend on big ticket items like house, luxury cars, luxury bags, jewelleries, yacht, dining in high-class gourment restaurants etc.
So the GST increases (we have done it more than 4 times) - has raise ruckus initally - but then the people are able to accept it eventually - after they discover that their spending powers are not affected or badly affected.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don - so K Tan Don, don't bring your experience of GST increase - and put it on the context of Singapore and try to stir emotion in Singapore.
Your experience of GST increase in Malaysia - are no where near how Singapore do the GST increase - and don't assume our political landscape will follow what your Malaysia has undergone.
Especially if you don't want others to shoot back at you - when you put forth your flaw experience into others.
You have alot to learn from others - so stay humble.
Your experience of GST increase in Malaysia - are no where near how Singapore do the GST increase - and don't assume our political landscape will follow what your Malaysia has undergone.
Especially if you don't want others to shoot back at you - when you put forth your flaw experience into others.
You have alot to learn from others - so stay humble.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
K Tan Don
Ricky Lim, sure anyone can shoot back at me..thank u..we have ao many debates with UMNO cybertroopers on GST for many months..I m only giving an example..but not interested to discuss further on GST implementation in Sg. I only responded to your comment because you wrote five paragraphs on why need to implement GST mah..me i m only giving an example that GST is one factor make people unhappy..but u wrote five paragraphs in respond..so i feel there is a need to respond to your hard work..if i don reply to your comment, that is very rude of me
Ricky Lim
K Tan Don - Thanks for your clarification. What apply to you and logical to you - may not apply to others.
Remember this online news is not only read by you and me.
It is read widely by many people - Singaporean readers, Malaysian readers and the World readers who come online that read CNA news.
They will form judgement and opinion on what they read online.
Remember this online news is not only read by you and me.
It is read widely by many people - Singaporean readers, Malaysian readers and the World readers who come online that read CNA news.
They will form judgement and opinion on what they read online.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Eric Pang
Mark Chen :"why not we do a butter trade we pay for the HSR free for Malaysia and Malaysia give us in return water free for another 200 years...what do you say?"
Ha ha sorry Mark, have to disagree with you on this one? Maybe in the future not too far, with techology (e.g. nano technology) break thought, we have a even cheaper method in both producing energy and turning sea water in drinking water.
However agree we should have more trade between both SG & MY
Ha ha sorry Mark, have to disagree with you on this one? Maybe in the future not too far, with techology (e.g. nano technology) break thought, we have a even cheaper method in both producing energy and turning sea water in drinking water.
However agree we should have more trade between both SG & MY
Codee Chang
K Tan Don Thank MM for arrogantly trying to manipulate Singapore's domestic politics? Surely you do not think for a minute that he means Singapore well. The new Malaysia he envisages that is clean and business friendly is a carbon copy of Singapore. Stirring discontent among Singaporeans is his way of scuppering Singapore's success.
Thank you for your concern. But Singaporeans do not vote blindly. As far as taxes go, Singapore has very low income and corporate tax. At the same time, it is a country moving towards more socialist policies. Doing more for the vulnerable. This costs money. Ask Europe. The bottom line is, Singaporeans and its government have developed a trust bank. We know not all good policies are popular.
But I digress. I was merely responding to your point about Singaporeans' reaction to MM and reminding you to be mindful that the negativity stemmed from his unwarranted jibes and snipes.
Thank you for your concern. But Singaporeans do not vote blindly. As far as taxes go, Singapore has very low income and corporate tax. At the same time, it is a country moving towards more socialist policies. Doing more for the vulnerable. This costs money. Ask Europe. The bottom line is, Singaporeans and its government have developed a trust bank. We know not all good policies are popular.
But I digress. I was merely responding to your point about Singaporeans' reaction to MM and reminding you to be mindful that the negativity stemmed from his unwarranted jibes and snipes.
No comments:
Post a Comment