On November 4, 2019, Singapore announced the ban of personal mobility devices (e-scooters) effective the next day.
E-scooters to be banned from Singapore's footpaths starting Nov 5
Given that these PMDs are not allowed on roads, they are effectively limited to cycling paths and park connector networks, limiting their use for personal mobility.
But the decision drew a lot of public outcry as these devices have been widely used by food delivery services, and the almost-immediate ban affects everyone in such businesses. This resulted in an announcement that PMDs can be traded in for cash.
S$7 million in grants to help food delivery riders trade in e-scooters following footpath ban
Having been in the public service for many many years, I thought it was a really bad move by the government in the way that this was handled.
When I was in the public service, I was taught (drilled into me) that anything the government does must be well-thought, because any resemblance of walking back or amending any decision will result in loss of public trust in the government. Any policy, once public, is a commitment that needs to be upheld. This is not to say that the government is never wrong; on the contrary, it means that all those working in the government need to do their due diligence to ensure that every single policy has been thoroughly researched and deliberated, every angle considered, so that any policy that is announced is the best policy for that time.
Anything less will give people the impression that the government is not up to standard.
I wonder where such standards have gone.
Well, it is not just Singapore. A recent happening in Japan was what prompted me to think about this, and I was all ready to criticise the Japanese government until Singapore decided to join in and show that it is at the same level.
In short, Japan's education ministry announced it was going to use private English exams as part of university entrance exams. And readily drew a ton of outcry because such a move will favour those living in bigger cities, who have better and easier access to those private exams compared to students living in the countryside. The ministry eventually walked back its decision, announcing delays, which again caused issues since some people have already started to make arrangements to take those exams (which cost money).
Private English tests for Japan university entrance exams delayed after minister's gaffe
At the end of the day, it all boils down to this: the government needs to think through all its policies thoroughly before making any decisions. To do otherwise is a lack of due diligence, and therefore undermines public trust in the government. Such a lack of trust will eventually hinder the government in working for the people, rendering it ineffective when taken to the extreme.
"Engage brain before mouth."
E-scooters to be banned from Singapore's footpaths starting Nov 5
Given that these PMDs are not allowed on roads, they are effectively limited to cycling paths and park connector networks, limiting their use for personal mobility.
But the decision drew a lot of public outcry as these devices have been widely used by food delivery services, and the almost-immediate ban affects everyone in such businesses. This resulted in an announcement that PMDs can be traded in for cash.
S$7 million in grants to help food delivery riders trade in e-scooters following footpath ban
Having been in the public service for many many years, I thought it was a really bad move by the government in the way that this was handled.
When I was in the public service, I was taught (drilled into me) that anything the government does must be well-thought, because any resemblance of walking back or amending any decision will result in loss of public trust in the government. Any policy, once public, is a commitment that needs to be upheld. This is not to say that the government is never wrong; on the contrary, it means that all those working in the government need to do their due diligence to ensure that every single policy has been thoroughly researched and deliberated, every angle considered, so that any policy that is announced is the best policy for that time.
Anything less will give people the impression that the government is not up to standard.
I wonder where such standards have gone.
Well, it is not just Singapore. A recent happening in Japan was what prompted me to think about this, and I was all ready to criticise the Japanese government until Singapore decided to join in and show that it is at the same level.
In short, Japan's education ministry announced it was going to use private English exams as part of university entrance exams. And readily drew a ton of outcry because such a move will favour those living in bigger cities, who have better and easier access to those private exams compared to students living in the countryside. The ministry eventually walked back its decision, announcing delays, which again caused issues since some people have already started to make arrangements to take those exams (which cost money).
Private English tests for Japan university entrance exams delayed after minister's gaffe
At the end of the day, it all boils down to this: the government needs to think through all its policies thoroughly before making any decisions. To do otherwise is a lack of due diligence, and therefore undermines public trust in the government. Such a lack of trust will eventually hinder the government in working for the people, rendering it ineffective when taken to the extreme.
"Engage brain before mouth."
1 comment:
Open-ended questions for Japan's new university entrance exams scrapped
Japan's government walking back the entire thing now, not just English. Poor, poor, poor staff work.
Post a Comment