Causeway was built to boost S'pore at Johor's expense
-
The Straits Times – 21 Dec 04
Causeway was built to “boost Singapore at Johor’s expense”
“Singapore developed into a business and port hub because the Causeway was built by British colonists who wanted to curb the potential growth of southern Johor, the Menteri Besar of Johor has said.”
If it is true, then the government must really study hard into the proposal put forth by Malaysia in the replacement of the Causeway by a straight bridge. Do we allow most ship to bypass Singapore using the "whatsitsname"; johor port?
If the Causeway is replaced by a bridge, Singapore Ports have to fight for the survival by better service and lower costs to retain the existing shipping lines and attract new lines.
The move by MPA to lower the tariff is in the right direction, albeit in a very small step.
Bigger steps should be taken by the Government. The overall cost of doing business in Singapore should come down and come down fast.
Lucky for Singapore that even if the Causeway is to be replaced by a bridge, the hazard and travelling time through the channel will be much bigger and longer than coming to Singapore Ports.
With the more efficient service provided by PSA over time (new port development, new equipment, new management with new thinking), the balance should tip in favour to Singapore.
Hope the government can help in reducing costs as well as help in infrastructure support to PSA and the survival of Singapore. -
Talking nonsense... Didn't PTP ate into our business years back when we have recovered now?
Without the bridge, would Johor have prospered? -
Malaysia is not talking rubbish.Originally posted by sbst275:Talking nonsense... Didn't PTP ate into our business years back when we have recovered now?
Without the bridge, would Johor have prospered?
Up till now you may be right to say that without the causeway, Johor will not develop as fast as it should be. From here on ward it could be different story with the development of PTP
Moving forward, once the causeway is replaced by a bridge, then the potential of PTP is that much brighter, with the help provided by the Malaysian government in the liberal provision of infrastructures support development.
Had Singapore Ports recovered from the threat posed by PTP? No. The threat is always there. If we are not careful (do not watch our costs and services provided), we could lost more lines down the road.
In another word, PSA's profit came down (lower cost to shippers) since PTP saga, and will have to stay down to remain competitive. The result is that singapore is getting less margin. -
Wait... We have recovered in terms of volumeOriginally posted by PatrickLTH:Malaysia is not talking rubbish.
Up till now you may be right to say that without the causeway, Johor will not develop as fast as it should be. From here on ward it could be different story with the development of PTP
Moving forward, once the causeway is replaced by a bridge, then the potential of PTP is that much brighter, with the help provided by the Malaysian government in the liberal provision of infrastructures support development.
Had Singapore Ports recovered from the threat posed by PTP? No. The threat is always there. If we are not careful (do not watch our costs and services provided), we could lost more lines down the road.
You go check PSA volume, it is 18.79M TEU for Jan - Nov... In 2001, it was 15.52M aft Maersk moved out
Nope... This has nothing to do with the bridge, PTP can thrive well if it can improve its service... Bridge is JUST USED FOR POLITICS
AND this is not the view of the Federal Govt, This Abdul Gandhi is Like Dr M, everyday scold SG... So I dun listen to him...
Again... PSA profits rose as of the new policy of bo li duo xiao... Lower handling charges made lines to call SG with more boxes -
If Maersk had not make the move to PTP, PSA could be handling around 22MTEU today and not 18.79MTEU as quoted (in term of volume). The profit margin could be in term of +billion and not half to three quarter of it I guess.Originally posted by sbst275:Wait... We have recovered in terms of volume You go check PSA volume, it is 18.79M TEU for Jan - Nov... In 2001, it was 15.52M aft Maersk moved out -
Em... In a sense so, but this is business... CMA CGM also shifted to PKL years backOriginally posted by PatrickLTH:If Maersk had not make the move to PTP, PSA could be handling around 22MTEU today and not 18.79MTEU as quoted (in term of volume). The profit margin could be in term of +billion and not half to three quarter of it I guess. -
If the Causeway is replaced by a bridge (added advantage to PTP), Singapore Ports have to fight for the survival by better service and lower costs to retain the existing shipping lines and attract new lines.Originally posted by sbst275:Em... In a sense so, but this is business... CMA CGM also shifted to PKL years back
In doing business, I believe PSA (just like any business in Singapore) cannot go it alone and need the help of government in reducing costs in doing business (eg port charges, port dues, tax on bunker fuel, tax on portable water, etc) as well as help in infrastructure support to PSA. -
Well... Govt has cutted ratesOriginally posted by PatrickLTH:If the Causeway is replaced by a bridge (added advantage to PTP), Singapore Ports have to fight for the survival by better service and lower costs to retain the existing shipping lines and attract new lines.
In doing business, I believe PSA (just like any business in Singapore) cannot go it alone and need the help of government in reducing costs in doing business (eg port charges, port dues, tax on bunker fuel, tax on portable water, etc) as well as help in infrastructure support to PSA. -
And FYI, boats (Those of 8000 TEU +) cannot use the Terbau Straits.... Because of the Eastern side which is very narrow due to Ubin...
-
Whatever the Port over either side and what goverment is really not important.
What important is those poor motorcyclist, motorist, walker, bus taker, lorries. What happen to them. they need to travel in out everyday.
They cost of the bridge is going to go up tremendously. who is gonna cover that? are the port authority subside us as they reap lots of profit from it? NO...
Imagine the high bridges, those pity walker gonna climb the bridge like a hill.
What about then the causeway was dismantle?
How are they going to go through by tuas???? Imagine the bus and lorry going motocycle and car through at tuas... i takes 4 times the times and there is no MRT at TUAS, no proper bus station and bus stop there???? Somemore imagine the 2 little lane at tuas... the Jam will be 5 to 6 times the time.
What is the purpose to build a new bridge without solving the JAM problem? Its already 6 lane at causeway. Are they gonna build a 8 laner Bridge?
Who suffer and who reap profits?
Is it justificable?
Things are already good there why destroy it? SOlving the Jam problem is by building a more bigger custom complex at JB and expand the Police check at spore and double the amount of Immigration booth. -
Tuas reminds me of something... Abdul Gandhi has said something wrong... The Tuas Bridge practically banned boats to pass through, thanks to the pilingsOriginally posted by LittleTiger:Whatever the Port over either side and what goverment is really not important.
What important is those poor motorcyclist, motorist, walker, bus taker, lorries. What happen to them. they need to travel in out everyday.
They cost of the bridge is going to go up tremendously. who is gonna cover that? are the port authority subside us as they reap lots of profit from it? NO...
Imagine the high bridges, those pity walker gonna climb the bridge like a hill.
What about then the causeway was dismantle?
How are they going to go through by tuas???? Imagine the bus and lorry going motocycle and car through at tuas... i takes 4 times the times and there is no MRT at TUAS, no proper bus station and bus stop there???? Somemore imagine the 2 little lane at tuas... the Jam will be 5 to 6 times the time.
What is the purpose to build a new bridge without solving the JAM problem? Its already 6 lane at causeway. Are they gonna build a 8 laner Bridge?
Who suffer and who reap profits?
Is it justificable? -
You ask very sensible questions.Originally posted by LittleTiger:Whatever the Port over either side and what goverment is really not important.
What important is those poor motorcyclist, motorist, walker, bus taker, lorries. What happen to them. they need to travel in out everyday.
They cost of the bridge is going to go up tremendously. who is gonna cover that? are the port authority subside us as they reap lots of profit from it? NO...
Imagine the high bridges, those pity walker gonna climb the bridge like a hill.
What about then the causeway was dismantle?
How are they going to go through by tuas???? Imagine the bus and lorry going motocycle and car through at tuas... i takes 4 times the times and there is no MRT at TUAS, no proper bus station and bus stop there???? Somemore imagine the 2 little lane at tuas... the Jam will be 5 to 6 times the time.
What is the purpose to build a new bridge without solving the JAM problem? Its already 6 lane at causeway. Are they gonna build a 8 laner Bridge?
Who suffer and who reap profits?
Is it justificable?
Things are already good there why destroy it? SOlving the Jam problem is by building a more bigger custom complex at JB and expand the Police check at spore and double the amount of Immigration booth.
When the causeway were built, Singapore and Malaysia were undeveloped, the Brits did not have the $ to built a bridge to span that long, even if the technology was available. Did the Brits really thought Singapore, a small island, would develop into a separate nation from the Malay peninsular? And why should they favor Singapore? At that time, the best way was to dump soil and built the causeway. Abdul Gani is picking up the shits Mahathir left behind. With the piling from the abandoned seafront city along the west coast of JB sticking out like sore thumbs, now with a big land cleared for nothing, Abdul is having problem answering his people.
Now lau Goh told pak Lah after 2011 we will not renew the water agreement and after 2065 we will be truly self sufficient in water, and with Changi air base operational the need to fly over johore is no longer a matter, what other cards does Abdul have to play? Cannot blame Singapore liao so blame the British lah. After all, the Brits responsible for the causeway died long time ago.
A bridge replacing the causeway will only benefit the some people in Malaysia who got the contract to build the bridge. Singaporean will have to pay money for nothing, the Malaysian traveling by bus will have to take a long, long walk just to reach Singapore.
Port business will be least affected by the new bridge. Stupid are those who took Adbul Gani seriously. -
Abdul Gandhi talks without evidence...
That Tuas Bridge cannot allow big boats to pass, neither the narrow Punggol - Pasir Ris - Changi channel allows
What he is trying to do is to vent his anger against us... Must be because of the air pact for RSAF -
Anyway, I have learnt to ignore him as he is not the ppl @ Federal GovtOriginally posted by sbst275:Abdul Gandhi talks without evidence...
That Tuas Bridge cannot allow big boats to pass, neither the narrow Punggol - Pasir Ris - Changi channel allows
What he is trying to do is to vent his anger against us... Must be because of the air pact for RSAF -
High cost problems are not the problems of government, it seems.Originally posted by sbst275:Wait... We have recovered in terms of volume You go check PSA volume, it is 18.79M TEU for Jan - Nov... In 2001, it was 15.52M aft Maersk moved out
Nope... This has nothing to do with the bridge, PTP can thrive well if it can improve its service... Bridge is JUST USED FOR POLITICS
AND this is not the view of the Federal Govt, This Abdul Gandhi is Like Dr M, everyday scold SG... So I dun listen to him...
Again... PSA profits rose as of the new policy of bo li duo xiao... Lower handling charges made lines to call SG with more boxes
Why I say this. Let us all look at facts. Before PTP, no one in the government ever once mentioned there was any high cost problems.
When big carriers stopped calling at PSA ports, in 2002 and incomes of PSA started dropping, then and only then had PSA or ministers realized there was a high cost problem. Yeo Ning Hong first arrogantly refered to Singaore's PSA fees and charges as competitive on service and not on costs to justify its past "don't bother" attitude about high costs.
Next, HDB had been very smug all the years about its housing program - to build more flats more designed flats etc. No botheration about public moneis or high costs.
Then Journalist Lee Han Shih (of Lee foundation) who needed not to depend on journalism for a living wrote a long report in the Straits Times about HDB losing millions and in the red and its staff 2,000 being a drain on public monies. Up to then, none of the ministers who were supposed to be scholars to help Singaporeans to be competitive never mentioned such high cost problems with HDB.
Again, it was the same with SIA. It was only after frightening SIA's losses hitting headlines due to budget airlines' lower prices that there would be an admission of high cost problem by ministers or MM Lee. Actions were taken on pilots instead of government high cost policies.
So far so good. Economy recovered due to external market's recovery. Credits were given to ministers and government policies became important again one by one and big bonuses paid. Radio 958 listeners were so pissed off with the 2.3/4 months' bonus that they practically condemned all the government for self-rewarding.
Singaporeans once again would be lectured as if they are the ones to improve to make Singapore competitive but not the slowness of ministers in recognizing or reacting to high costs affecting all the government departments.
Must there be one minister for one issue within PMO? Must there be double staffing for HDB and Town councils, PA and CDCs.
Prices and fees would be allowed to go up no further actions to follow up addressing the PSA- HDB- or SIA- type high costs- hidden but unreported.
I would admire any civil servant or minister for his or her gut to dare to write like Lee Han Shih to his department to reduce over-staffing and over-promotions or for abolitions of so many committees to excuse primary officers like permanent secretaries paid hundreds of thousands' salary to solve them.
Savings on unnecessary costs can then be passed back to people's medical and retirement piggie banks to help in retirements. Foreigners like PTP, Mahathir or budget airline chiefs are actually doing Singaporeans a favour because none of the civil servants or ministers would have the gut to bring up to MM, SM or PM.
For a start, let's hear if PA/CDC/Town council would do their jobs like the private sector or MNCs - cut back on double staff to handle the same problems as HDB has found out after huge losses. Ngiam Tong Dow senior civil servant now after retiring realizes that he cannot make monies for HDB Corp to pay for civil servants once privatized. That means all government departments may be spending excessively as witness by such HDB losses.
Estates are deteriorating anyway. All must ask their MP what benefits have Town council/CDC/PA and all the mayors (additional promotions) brought. They should do more with less - the new formula for success.
-
I tell you simply, the Govt then thought they are prone to any threats... It was only after PTP then they learnt to be flexible... That's why now discounts are given esp to bunkering which PTP is trying to snatch...Originally posted by robertteh:High cost problems are not the problems of government, it seems.
Why I say this. Let us all look at facts. Before PTP, no one in the government ever once mentioned there was any high cost problems.
When big carriers stop coming to call at PSA ports, and incomes of PSA started dropping, then and only then would PSA have realized there was a high cost problem. Yeo Ning Hong first arrogantly refered to Singaore's PSA as competing on service and not on costs to justify its past "don't bother" attitude about high costs.
Next, HDB tried to project a picture of smugness about its housing program - to build more flats more designed flats etc. No botheration about high costs.
Then Journalist (background Lee foundation) who was quite financially okay and who needed not to depend on journalism for a living wrote a long report in the Straits Times about HDB losing millions and in the red and its staff 2,000 being a drain on public monies. None of the ministers who were supposed to be scholars ever mentioned such high cost problems with HDB.
Again, it was only after frightening losses hitting SIA due to budget airlines' lower prices would the ministers or MM Lee react to high costs as problems.
So far so good. Economy seemed to have recovered not due to our ministers doing but due to external market's recovery. Credits would be given to all the ministers and government policies one by one and big bonuses will be paid.
The talk down sessions will revert with Singaporeans being lectured to improve this and that but high costs will not be admitted as a problem at all to be solved by any department.
Prices and fees would be allowed to go up but no preemptive actions would be taken to cut back of unnecessary expenditures until crises grow big and intolerable like in the case of PSA, HDB or SIA.
I would admire the guts of ministers would dare to cut back of departmental over-staffing and over-promotions or abolitions of uncalled for committees of all types and pass back saving to our medical and retirement piggie banks of citizens to help in retirements.
For a start, let's hear some cost saving from say PA/CDC/Town council who should not need double staff to handle same problems as HDB have been handling. Estates are deteriorating anyway so what benefits have they brought about. Government of the new age should cut back costs all round and do more with less. -
It's Ghani, not Gandhi!
-
Can lah, big boats can pass through Punggol, Pasir Ris and Changi, unless you are referring to those super super big boats, then really cannot go through. If not how big boats ended up in the wharves in Sembawang and Senoko? And the port of Pasir Gudang ( Johor port )? Now they are planning the third port in Johor, at the river mouth of Sungei Johor, North of Tekong and Ubin.Originally posted by sbst275:Abdul Gandhi talks without evidence...
That Tuas Bridge cannot allow big boats to pass, neither the narrow Punggol - Pasir Ris - Changi channel allows
What he is trying to do is to vent his anger against us... Must be because of the air pact for RSAF
Even if big boats can go through the whole Selat Johor, the traffic flow will not be huge, Selat Johor is not as wide as Singapore Straits. Moreover, smaller boats such as fishing boats, sampan, canoe, tugboat, passenger ferry, navy vessels, Police Coast Guard and bumboats ( both Singapore and Malaysian ones ) also used Selat Johor. What about the kelongs? Not the kelong in the soccer matches, but the floating fish/prawn farms, will be a hazard for ship navigation. Meanwhile, an area reserved for vessel anchorage for quarantine will also be needed. -
Yes... 8000 TEU boat rules the shipping world today... Even can pass through, what abt the pilings at Tuas Checkpoint? FYI, boats using PGU are of 2000 TEU as majority are intra - Asia rts... Sembawang Wharve gets cargo ships...Originally posted by PJ_Quek:Can lah, big boats can pass through Punggol, Pasir Ris and Changi, unless you are referring to those super super big boats, then really cannot go through. If not how big boats ended up in the wharves in Sembawang and Senoko? And the port of Pasir Gudang ( Johor port )? Now they are planning the third port in Johor, at the river mouth of Sungei Johor, North of Tekong and Ubin.
Even if big boats can go through the whole Selat Johor, the traffic flow will not be huge, Selat Johor is not as wide as Singapore Straits. Moreover, smaller boats such as fishing boats, sampan, canoe, tugboat, passenger ferry, navy vessels, Police Coast Guard and bumboats ( both Singapore and Malaysian ones ) also used Selat Johor. What about the kelongs? Not the kelong in the soccer matches, but the floating fish/prawn farms, will be a hazard for ship navigation. Meanwhile, an area reserved for vessel anchorage for quarantine will also be needed.
What we meant are main boats of 4000 TEU and abv -
Ai yah!
It's why spend $500 million for something that is to your detriment, lah.
Who want. -
This thread is about Adul Ghani’s allegation that “Causeway was built to boost S'pore at Johor's expense”. True or not? Does Singapore have the obligation to replace the causeway with a bridge, wasting Singapore taxpayers’ millions or billion and inconveniencing thousands of commuters everyday, to boost Johor economy. In consideration, should we build the bridge to allow up to 8000 TEU vessels to go under, thereby helping PTP, at the expense of PSA?? PSA have to cut costs to compete, with or without the bridge. What the %%$##@ has the bridge got to do with HDB or Town Council costs of running HDB estates?? Lets not allow politician to steal the fish from the muddy water.
Guess what Adul will say next? The air traffic control right was given to Singapore at the expense of KL so from now on KL will resume control; Changi Airport was built at the expense of Senai Airport, so Changi Airport should close??? -
I think Abdul Ghani should take a step back and solve the problems rampant in Johor state before coming to talk about something which is at the Federal level.
-
Em... Big boats (Abv 3000 TEU) cannot cross the Tuas Bridge... So, building the Causeway is redundant... If they want to sy to allow boats to pass through...Originally posted by sgdiehard:This thread is about Adul Ghani’s allegation that “Causeway was built to boost S'pore at Johor's expense”. True or not? Does Singapore have the obligation to replace the causeway with a bridge, wasting Singapore taxpayers’ millions or billion and inconveniencing thousands of commuters everyday, to boost Johor economy. In consideration, should we build the bridge to allow up to 8000 TEU vessels to go under, thereby helping PTP, at the expense of PSA?? PSA have to cut costs to compete, with or without the bridge. What the %%$##@ has the bridge got to do with HDB or Town Council costs of running HDB estates?? Lets not allow politician to steal the fish from the muddy water.
Guess what Adul will say next? The air traffic control right was given to Singapore at the expense of KL so from now on KL will resume control; Changi Airport was built at the expense of Senai Airport, so Changi Airport should close??? -
Ya... He should improve the lives of Johorians... Esp the chinese felt that they are neglectedOriginally posted by LazerLordz:I think Abdul Ghani should take a step back and solve the problems rampant in Johor state before coming to talk about something which is at the Federal level. -
PTP wons the service from Maersk not 100% because of the lower pricing and better service. Initially also thought so PTP are good.
Maersk bought some 30% of PTP that why they stop at that port. Reason..... in this case every ship they stop there saves 30%.
If the bridge is not mean for big big ship what is the purpose to build it? Why waste so much $$$ for some small boat to crossover? And i guess that will be only a ship passing at the bridge at a time.
I have driven from Taman Perling to the opposite of Tuas and it took 20 minutes of distance. And i also stuck before on the 2nd bridge for 1 hours after paying 4 times the cost of causeway. Another 20 minutes are need to travel from JB donwtown to Taman Perling. Is it worth? spend so many times, so many petrol and still stuck in the Jam(only 2 lane each side with few custom booth).
PTP is belong to a Arab merchant who got lots of project from m'sia government.
Is it justtificable to make him richer with the cost of both spore and malaysian government $$$ and also burden the citizen?
He susgested the idea, so i think PTP shall pay and bear the cost right?
The fees shall be same at RM2.4 and S$1.2 with the excess paid by that PTP for each motorist travel in and out. I would assume the new cost will be some 4 to 5 times higher as the second link which was build years back is already so expensive and almost 3x the toll charges.
What about pollution, oil spill?
Are any of the CENTRAL and FEDERAL ppl think of that? Economics are already not doing good yet they wanna burden the ppl. Do they think of their poor Johorean where hundred of thousand of ppl travel in and out everyday. The causeway is the median to their rice bowl. And thousand of sporean who were dispatch to work in Johor for those factory and offices?
It will be great if any of the both side minister travel at those working hours like 5am to 9am and 5pm to 8pm. Let them stuck in the traffics of motorcycles, busses, walking ppl, lorries, cars and also custom. The amount of traffics is tremendious and dismantling the cause is fatal. Let them know the ppl hardship.
There was a time where was a suggestion to build a open up type bridge. What will the jams be like if bridge was open-up for the ship to went pass?
From JB custom to Pelangi? or from Spore custom to few klilometres(over Kranji racecourse) of BKE.