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.”
- 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 tired, sweaty cyclist also be expected to stop and give way to smoky buses, (the newly crowned 'pedestrians' of the road)?
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, or would further misunderstandings result in more overall motor insurance premium increases?
- Re inventing the wheel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinventing_the_wheel): There already exists in LTA's arsenal of road rulings system ( http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/on_the_roads/road_safety/be_a_responsible_motorist.html ): 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) . All experienced drivers would know that obeying new rule obviously means contravening the old.
- Given the counter intuitive nature of the new law and the fact that a bus looks much more a motor vehicle then a pedestrian, can bus drivers and other commuters be logistically expected to abide harmoniously by such ill conceived laws, not to mention the possibility of some inexperienced, even unknowingly demented drivers using our cosmopolitan city roads: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/09/19/drivers-dementia.html?ref=rss
Such regulatory ambiguities will have the following results:
- Tragic accidents/ near misses due to ignorance, mis-communication or lapses in judgment.
- Heavy vehicles eg heavy container trucks/ lorries which must avoid sudden braking are forced to take the 2nd inner
lane thus causing further confusion and road delays.
- Ambulances/ emergency vehicles may be slowed down as despite using a clear left most lane, their drivers deploy extra caution against buses in bays just in-case a charging bus causes a collision.
- Dangerous confusions amongst bus drivers on who it is that actually has the right of way, the one exiting the bay or the one going straight.
- Overall road traffic congestion due to accidents, and the extra care needed to discern each driver's intentions/ disposition in such ambiguous situations makes driving a confusing and stressful experience.
- Chain collisions http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/this_urban_jungle/236430/i_gave_way_to_bus__and_got_rammed_from_behind.html 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 'offenders' could always argue that the bus was not obvious in its intentions/ suddenly pulled out without due warning, time would be wasted on the appeal process.
- I've always accepted bus lanes as effective if well planned. They are easily policed by camera wielding wardens and useful to both cyclist and emergency vehicles both of which should have a more special place on roads then buses. The continued application of these well established regulations, in addition to an affordable and well planned public transport system would surely make land transport in Singapore an internationally recognised 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 to rein in the wasted expenditure.
Whilst, LTA's new role as CBP implies new responsibilities, I hope this is not the usual myopic approach towards achieving departmental KPI goals, success at all costs and the exclusion of all other concerns. Surely 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 29Apr09 media article (at http://app.lta.gov.sg/corp_press_content.asp?start=2118 ) that in shameless haste to declare the trial a success, LTA's approach has been high- handed and cursory; the main parties consulted it seems were only '200 commuters' and 'public transport operators'. I doubt LTA consulted the traffic police departments, cyclist's associations, emergency vehicle drivers unions, motor insurers and general bus drivers before implementing these laws. (29April09: http://app.lta.gov.sg/corp_press_content.asp?start=2118 )
This narrow minded, 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 cursory as it is dangerous, shows the need to have committed and qualified individuals managing our civil services. Slip-shod, distracted, half baked scholars in their ivory towers won't do; and Singaporeans must ensure so by seeking out a stable and sustainable government and policies.
I've made my case, those stupid ornaments MUST go.
Ref:
How the scheme works (3july09): http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/on_the_roads/traffic_management/mandatory_give_way.html#MainPar_0007
STOMP 29Aug09: “I gave way to bus -- and got rammed from behind”, http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/this_urban_jungle/236430/i_gave_way_to_bus__and_got_rammed_from_behind.html
STOMP 19Aug09: “I am one of many 'victims' unfairly fined $130 under new 'give way to bus' rule ”, http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/what_bugs_me/107792/unfairly_fined_130_under_new_give_way_to_bus_rule.html
Ver1.0 (this article) posted to REACH web site on 22.8.09. http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/YourDiscussionCorner/tabid/117/ptid/414/threadid/2541/forumtype/posts/Default.aspx
Comments n update at: http://social-progress.blogspot.com/2009/09/give-way-to-buses-scheme-is.html pls, thanks :).
:).
Reason why feedback article is NOT on LTA forum site: 'Full name and NRIC are required' there: https://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/members_area/membership/register.html
No comments:
Post a Comment