apostrophe wrote:Thread: [QUESTION] SBS getting taxpayers' money: Is it justified?
Honest question. Hope someone can explain to me.
SBS is public listed, so basically they get their money from investors right?
So how can they receive taxpayers' money for their company? By that account, won't it be the same for other companies to get access to taxpayers' money to upgrade their services/products?
Or did I miss something here? TIA.
AFAIK, MRT hardware is owned by SG govt: trains, tracks, stations etc etc, but SMRT is the company hired to run the svc: they provide for maintenance, drivers, security, run the service etc etc and then keep some of the profits subject to meeting some performance quality standards that the LTA (aka Mr Lui Tuck Yew) sets it, shareholders gain under optimal conditions where standards are met.
So the LTA has since used the same logic for bus services: U see, people who use buses are generally poor... otherwise, with the exception of the env. conscious, would have chosen pte car/ taxi as their choice mode of tpst, but with Singapore's world record population density, then the roads would be super clogged... so govt has to ensure that public tpst remains affordable despite the increasing fuel costs which if SBS/SMRT were to pass directly to consumer, would mean costlier bus fares all round... but the PAP cannot allow this bc many SG citizens don't earn enough to afford expensive bus fares (20% increase expected by this estimate)(they will all return to bicycle transport to save costs and perhaps increase the road casualty rates if they are not proficient cycling (some cleaners earn only $600 p.m., n need to support a family on that salary too; govt medical expense will increase with increase in road casualties occurring) etc).
Being pte/ public listed is thus no obstacle to receiving this cash n hardware injection worth S$1.1Billion in so far that the contract details are spelt out and remains the property/ investment of the SG govt. The bus company cannot sell the inventory for profit and in fact shall be bound by performance standards to which a penalty may be imposed for under performance.
Likewise, many SGporeans receive medisave top-ups which can be used at both public and private hospitals (e.g. Raffles, Mt.E) and perhaps even abroad (Johore hospitals)- it remains a subsidy usable within certain limits for a defined purpose, the status of the hospital (pte vs public/ public listed) NOT being of significant limitation.
In conclusion, Singapore has developed much since the days of being a small fishing colony and as such, Singapore government services (aka control) now spans various services and industries- being privately owned / even publically listed is per se, no longer a limitation to receiving government subvention in so far as it's purpose remains focused upon the public good.
-------
PS: Me am no legal expert, but this is my take.
__________________
=============
AT:
HWZ:
10July2012: [QUESTION] SBS getting taxpayers' money: Is it justified?
No comments:
Post a Comment