Most of our ministers and top civil servants are quite myopic and narrow in their thinking. They follow the practices adopted a few decades ago, and often do not review how these practices should be changed.
One example is the ban on musical instruments on procession for Thaipusam. A second example is the double clearance at the land checkpoints between Singapore and Johor. A third example is the need to register at the security counter before entering an office building.
They should review these practices. What is the purpose? Can the goal be achieved without causing a high cost or a lot of hindrance?
Sure - Thaipusam procession is held in the early morning and is noisy. Some people will complain about the noise. How do we deal with the complain? Surely, the answer is - the noise at any spoit is only for a short while. The processing moves along the road. It happens only once a year. Can we relax the ban?
At the land checkpoint, do we really need double clearance affecting 300,000 travelers every day? Each checkpoint adds another 15 minutes to the people travelling by bus. Can we have a joint checkpoint? Can we have a computer system that allows the traveler to register with the country of exit and to be checked at the country of entry?
We need to find a way to deal with a traveler is not allowed to leave the country of exit? Is this too difficult to handle? How many such cases will happen daily? Surely, we can find a way.
What about the registration at an office building. How many people are affected every day? What purpose does it serve, except to create additional jobs for security guards and waste of time for the visitors?
Surely our ministers and top civil servants should be aware of these matters, provided they come out of their ivory towers.
What about our members of parliament? They are supposed to meet the people regularly. Can they provide feedback on these issues and ask for explanations in Parliament?
Tan Kin Lian
One example is the ban on musical instruments on procession for Thaipusam. A second example is the double clearance at the land checkpoints between Singapore and Johor. A third example is the need to register at the security counter before entering an office building.
They should review these practices. What is the purpose? Can the goal be achieved without causing a high cost or a lot of hindrance?
Sure - Thaipusam procession is held in the early morning and is noisy. Some people will complain about the noise. How do we deal with the complain? Surely, the answer is - the noise at any spoit is only for a short while. The processing moves along the road. It happens only once a year. Can we relax the ban?
At the land checkpoint, do we really need double clearance affecting 300,000 travelers every day? Each checkpoint adds another 15 minutes to the people travelling by bus. Can we have a joint checkpoint? Can we have a computer system that allows the traveler to register with the country of exit and to be checked at the country of entry?
We need to find a way to deal with a traveler is not allowed to leave the country of exit? Is this too difficult to handle? How many such cases will happen daily? Surely, we can find a way.
What about the registration at an office building. How many people are affected every day? What purpose does it serve, except to create additional jobs for security guards and waste of time for the visitors?
Surely our ministers and top civil servants should be aware of these matters, provided they come out of their ivory towers.
What about our members of parliament? They are supposed to meet the people regularly. Can they provide feedback on these issues and ask for explanations in Parliament?
Tan Kin Lian
No comments:
Post a Comment