Give way to buses scheme is disingenuous (Ver3.1)

Give way to buses scheme is disingenuous (Ver3.1):

[Better title: Why LTA allowed a scholar to classify a bus as a pedestrian]

The most ridiculous explanation: “How the Scheme Works- The Mandatory Give-Way to Buses Scheme is similar conceptually to a zebra crossing, except that it is meant for buses.”

http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/on_the_roads/traffic_management/mandatory_give_way.html

1. Have the authorities considered the interests of cyclists, whose established medium to transportation is evidently healthier and 'greener'? Already making a personal sacrifice in sunny Singapore, should the hot, sweaty cyclist also be expected to stop and give way to smoky buses, (the newly crowned 'pedestrians' of the road)?
   
2. What if it is a taxi/ car/ private bus etc exiting the bus lane: should motorists before the 'yellow box' give way too? Would all drivers (including foreign talents and tourists) understand the new markings?
   
3. Re inventing the wheel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinventing_the_wheel): There already exists in LTA's arsenal of road rulings system, the normal and full day bus lanes system (continuous and dotted), yellow lines (single & double, straight & zig-zag) , yellow boxes (spanning 1 or more lanes), ERP gantries, bus only green lights. These are all established and easily understood conventions unlike this new LTA rule which obviously contradicts both the existing “Changing lane without consideration for other road users” rule found on the SPF website (http://driving-in-singapore.spf.gov.sg/services/Driving_in_Singapore/Information/roadsafety/causeandtips.htm ); and the common rules of overtaking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtaking) .
   
4. Given the counter intuitive nature of the new law and the fact that a bus is in many ways NOT a pedestrian, can bus drivers and other commuters be logistically expected to relate harmoniously under such ill considered laws, not to mention the existence of some new/ demented drivers on our roads: local or foreign: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/09/19/drivers-dementia.html?ref=rss .
   
5. Such regulatory ambiguities will have the following results:
   • Tragic accidents/ near misses due to ignorance, mis-communication or lapses in judgment.
   • Heavy vehicles eg trailers which cannot logically stop in time may take the 2^nd inner lane thus posing a road hazard and slow down overall traffic.
   • Ambulances/ emergency vehicles may be slowed down as their drivers deploy extra caution against buses when using the left most lane.
   • Dangerous confusions amongst bus drivers on who it is that actually has the right of way.
   • Overall road traffic congestion due to accidents, and the extra care needed to discern each driver's intentions/ disposition in such ambiguous situations.
   • Chain collisions could occur as some excitable car drivers suddenly screech to a halt to avoid $130 fine/ 'collision' upon seeing the buses' right signal blinking; only to discover that the bus driver has again changed his signal to allow a late arriving commuter to board.
   • Difficulties in enforcement as those caught could always argue that the bus was not obvious in its intentions/ suddenly pulled out without due warning.
     
6. I've always accepted of bus lanes as effective if well planned; easily policed and helpful to both cyclist and emergency vehicles both of which should have as special place on roads as buses. These regulations, in addition to an affordable and well planned public transport system would surely make land transport in Singapore a hassle free experience.

BT, May11, 2009: “By the end of this year, LTA will take over the role of Central Bus Planner (CBP) and will be reviewing the island-wide bus route plans to optimise network efficiency.”... “There is an average cost of $7,000 per location ”... (http://www.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20090511-140749.html ). Regrettably, LTA must now swiftly review its inappropriate regulations and contain the wasted expenditure.

Whilst, LTA's new role as CBP implies new responsibilities, I hope this is not the usual high-handed approach towards achieving departmental goals. A place for proper consultation and consideration exists in this case as the roads in question serve a myriad of users. It is obvious from LTA's article (at http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/on_the_roads/traffic_management/mandatory_give_way.html) that in haste to show 'progress', LTA's approach has been myopic and parochial; the main parties consulted it seems were only '200 commuters' and 'public transport operators'. I doubt LTA consulted SPF, cyclist's associations, emergency vehicles, vehicle insurers and general bus drivers before implementing these laws.

This narrow, elitist mode of administration will ultimately fail and cannot be the modus operandi of a government that prides itself for integrity, service and excellence. (http://www.gov.sg/index.htm )

In conclusion, this ill-considered regulation as ridiculous as it is dangerous, shows the need to have committed and qualified individuals managing our civil service and our ministries. Slip-shod, distracted, half baked scholars in their ivory towers wont do; and Singaporeans must ensure so by voting towards stable and sustainable politicians and policies.

I've made my case, those stupid ornaments must go.

Ref:

STOMP 24Aug09: “I gave way to bus -- and got rammed from behind”, http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=83988

STOMP 18Aug09: “I am one of many 'victims' unfairly fined $130 under new 'give way to bus' rule ”, http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=83368