Re: Changes to COE: Government includes car engine power to categorisation
https://www.facebook.com/notes/hri-kumar/coe-a-missed-opportunity/590869350959666
[h=2]COE - A Missed Opportunity[/h]
September 15, 2013 at 4:17pm
The question on most lips following the latest tweak to the COE system is whether it will lower COE prices for Category A cars.
That is no doubt LTA's intention. But it must know that price is largely driven by the market and the number of COEs on offer. So, the change was really directed at moving certain "luxury" makes from Cat A to Cat B. In short, it was an act of appeasement. But good policy?
To me, it was a lost opportunity for the LTA to articulate a meaningful strategy or provide a clear vision we can get behind. It is plain that no matter how it changes the COE system, the LTA is not going to satisfy everyone. Some have already complained that the tweaks are anti-family as many models of larger, family cars will now be in Cat B.
My objections are different. Differentiating cars by engine capacities and power output is meaningless. Indeed, as some have rightly pointed out, we now disadvantage cars with more efficient engines. How does that make sense? Are we back to the drawing board if more "luxury" brands produce engines with less than 130 bhp? How about cars with engines which can be significantly enhanced after sale with software upgrades?
Appeasement never works. If a system has no backbone, it will wilt under pressure. COEs by definition control the number of cars on the roads. The LTA should therefore focus on what type of cars we should promote. Very few will disagree that we should encourage cleaner, quieter, more energy efficient cars. If 1.3l turbo-charged car is cleaner and more efficient than a 1.6l car, should we not encourage more people to buy the former? What has engine power got to do with anything? I realise some want an element of social equity in the system. We can still achieve this by allocating more COEs to, and bringing down the prices of cleaner cars so that they are more affordable than "dirtier", less efficient ones. That is a principle I believe most will get behind.
A vision worth pursuing is one that has Singapore with more electric cars on the road. Electric cars are tailor-made for Singapore, where the average commuter will travel less daily than the range of a car on a full charge. They are quieter, have no emissions and a full charge costs a fraction of a full petrol tank. We will need the infra- structure to support them. But we can easily mandate that all new public and private housing developments, malls and commercial car-parks have sufficient charging stations etc. The demand may not be there now, but that is a chicken and egg issue. Make it easier to buy an electric car and provide the infra-structure, and more will make the change.
There has to be, to some extent, a leap of faith. But that is what having a vision is about. And who better than us to show the world what can be done if there is conviction and the ability to make long term plans?
~ Hri Kumar
