- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
Mar 31, 2010
COE price spike: Govt not entirely right
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
SECOND Minister for Transport Lim Hwee Hua's view ('COE spikes not due to formula change: Lim Hwee Hua'; Monday), that the Government's new formula to determine the number of replacement COEs was unconnected to the surge in prices of certificates of entitlement in the latest exercise, bears scrutiny.
The change to the new formula coincided with the exercise. The Straits Times also indicated bigger-than-expected cuts in COE supply after the new formula was announced by Transport Minister Raymond Lim ('Big drop in COEs ahead', March 12).
While Mrs Lim is right in pointing out that the number of COEs allocated was a function of the number of cars deregistered, it is equally true that the function was changed. Certainly, other factors such as the economic recovery led to the price spike. But it is unfair to suggest that the Government was entirely not responsible.
First, there is no objective, scientific way to determine whether the new formula could not have caused the sharp spike in COE prices. Second, the policy was formulated by the Government.
A more considered response - which acknowledges that the COE formula was one of several factors that led to the rise in COE prices - would have been more appropriate.
A more measured response would have encouraged public discourse rather than give the impression that public feedback was unnecessary because the Government is right.
Tan Jiaqi
COE price spike: Govt not entirely right
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
SECOND Minister for Transport Lim Hwee Hua's view ('COE spikes not due to formula change: Lim Hwee Hua'; Monday), that the Government's new formula to determine the number of replacement COEs was unconnected to the surge in prices of certificates of entitlement in the latest exercise, bears scrutiny.
The change to the new formula coincided with the exercise. The Straits Times also indicated bigger-than-expected cuts in COE supply after the new formula was announced by Transport Minister Raymond Lim ('Big drop in COEs ahead', March 12).
While Mrs Lim is right in pointing out that the number of COEs allocated was a function of the number of cars deregistered, it is equally true that the function was changed. Certainly, other factors such as the economic recovery led to the price spike. But it is unfair to suggest that the Government was entirely not responsible.
First, there is no objective, scientific way to determine whether the new formula could not have caused the sharp spike in COE prices. Second, the policy was formulated by the Government.
A more considered response - which acknowledges that the COE formula was one of several factors that led to the rise in COE prices - would have been more appropriate.
A more measured response would have encouraged public discourse rather than give the impression that public feedback was unnecessary because the Government is right.
Tan Jiaqi
