The refusal of the PAP government to ban PMDs is weak leadership for all to see

Just yesterday evening, I was nearly hit by a speeding Personal Mobility Devices (PMD) on a pedestrian walkway along River Valley Road.

The arguments put forth by PAP ministers are idiotic. One, PMDs complement our larger efforts towards a ‘car-lite’ society. Two, it bridges the first and last mile gap of some public transport such as the MRT. Those are clever and seductive rhetoric but they cannot stand up to deeper scrutiny.

Let us note that PMDs are not required to be registered, owners do not pay road tax and have no third-party insurance cover whatsoever. The speed limits imposed on them is more academic and to pacify the general public than to achieve any meaningful purpose.

In reality, the danger and menace that many PMD riders pose on the pedestrian walkways or even blatantly on public roads far outweigh any clever arguments. I do not hope to see any young children, pregnant women or elderly people being hurt badly by anyone such rider anymore.

I will only agree that PMDs can continue to be used on our roads and pedestrian walkways provided they must firstly be registered with LTA, they must have full insurance cover for everybody’s benefit, effective enforcement efforts against their irresponsible use must be stepped up and the penalties for their offences must be substantially enhanced.

In such a situation, it will be win-win for all road users and law-abiding PMD users will have nothing to fear. Singaporeans must learn that they will again pay heavily with an incompetent government like in this official couldn’t be seriously bothered with PMD menace case.

Ultimately, I consider this PAP government’s decision not to ban the use of PMDs as a lack of his in-depth understanding about the dangers and menaces that many such riders pose to other road users on a daily basis. This is plain weak PAP leadership on full display for everyone to see.

 

Simon Lim

 

 

Sponsored Content

24 Responses to “The refusal of the PAP government to ban PMDs is weak leadership for all to see”

  • LIONS:

    IS SG AS OPEN OR MORE OPEN THAN FRANCE?
    PARIS IS LIBERAL,YOU CAN GO NAKED AND DANCED ON A TABLE IN YOUR CANTEEN AND YOU WONT BE OSTRACISED.
    HERE,YOU want to show outsider you are open society and very *current*; like you have PMDs in your 20 feet WALKWAYS,WE HAVE OURS ON OUR LITTLE 5-FOOTWAY????

    WTF! Our scholars who come back think they can CON their PERM SECS by presenting everything that looks nice and good on projectors and papers and the perm secs probably ok it becos he was not paying attention and only thinking about his family’s GOURMET COOKING CLASS IN THE SWISS ALPS???

    THERE ARE SO THINGS SCHOLARS COPY AND PASTE HERE THAT ARE NOT SUITABLE OR EVN RELEVANT TO OUR TINY RED DOT????

    SCHOLARS NEED TO GO TO PRIVATE SECTOR FOR INTERNSHIP.
    INTERNSHIPS AT GOVT AGENCIES AFTER APPOINTED TOP POSTS IS USELESS!!!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • NotMyProblem:

    @Simon; PMD is not like POFMA, it don’t affect the PAP a little bit.

    POFMA is to protect PAP monopoly in Parliament. Whereas PMD will never have a chance to come in contact with any MP as none will be walking along the pedestrian walkway.

    Even Joseph Schooling was paid to say something about fake news in support of POFMA.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • oxygen:

    PAVEMENT IS FOR PEDESTRIANS, all mobility vehicles are weapons of harm, injury and maybe death destruction if not in proper managed control of irresponsible use because of its speed and huge impact if adversity strikes.

    All PMDs, motorised cycles and such must be for the road use only, just like all motorcycles which have third-party insurance.

    PAPpypolitics got their skulls inside their an*ses advocating otherwise of allowing such motorised transports on pedestrian pavements.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • 44:

    If you no accident,hospital

    No work.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • 44:

    If no accident,

    How to import other country resident!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Cronies Meritocracy:

    Is there conflict of interest if the pmd committee members start importing electric scooters to sell when they are providing the suggestions to the relevant authorities?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • LIONS:

    Already,not a few serious accidents caused by inconsiderate PMD-users.
    Pedestrian FOOTway is called such and not cycling track for a REASON.
    LTA MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD ANY ACCIDENT CAUSE PEDESTRIAN INJURIES OR EVEN DEATHS.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • LIONS:

    Allowing MOTORISED MOBILITY DEVICES ON FOOTways is irresponsible public policy n practice.

    For ELDERLY with restrained physical mobility and those with poor eye-sight and/or hearing impairment,the SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PMDs riding on FOOTways can pose serious problems.

    So,WHO GOT RIGHTS ON FOOTways?
    Is it the PMD-USERS or pedestrians on FOOT?
    WALKING ON FOOTWAYS HAS BECOME STRESSFUL FOR ELDERLY,KIDS,THE PYHSICALLY HANDI-CAPPED N OTHERS.

    Now,there is no more LEISURE WALKING,IT HAS BEEN TURNED INTO STRESSFUL WALKING BY THE DAFT POLICY.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Already reqd 2 register ???:

    @ Let us note that PMDs are not required to be registered, ???

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Blur Simon:

    You mean Simon Lim didn’t know that E-Scooters are required to be registered with the LTA.???

    Please lah, do your homework and don’t anyhow talk coc*k.

    PMD includes mobility device for people with special needs. KNN…Don’t burn the whole forest because few monkeys inside leh… creating more hardship to others.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Badhearted Evil Person:

    Cronies Meritocracy:
    May 15, 2019 at 11:53 pm (Quote)
    “Is there conflict of interest if the pmd committee members start importing electric scooters to sell when they are providing the suggestions to the relevant authorities?”

    In a word: DEFINITELY!

    Hope fervently the elderly mother or sickly child of one of those MPs who vehemently and adamantly still refuse to sanction these killers off anywhere on our island will one of these days be knocked down seriously enough to be warded to the ICU never ever to wake up again (and suffer a fate similar to Patient No.1 who was admitted to SGH May 12, 2008, never to open her eyes again to see her grandchildren again but only to greet Pluto in Hades a few years later), and hopefully soon, too, as we pray to Ox-head & Horse-face to come take their lives quickly!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Badhearted Evil Person:

    oxygen:
    May 15, 2019 at 10:49 pm (Quote)
    “PAVEMENT IS FOR PEDESTRIANS, all mobility vehicles are weapons of harm, injury and maybe death destruction if not in proper managed control of irresponsible use because of its speed and huge impact if adversity strikes.

    All PMDs, motorised cycles and such must be for the road use only, just like all motorcycles which have third-party insurance.”

    Well said.

    I would have gone further:
    Pedestrian paths are for pedestrians.
    Pedestrians, according to any English dictionary, are people walking.
    Therefore, except for legs – and ‘assisted movers’ like strollers, prams and wheelchairs – all other forms of non-natiural movement/mobility are banned, leg-powered bicycles included!

    I say “banned’ and not “to be banned’, “should be banned”, because THERE IS ALREADY A LAW THAT has been around since the 1960s THAT EXPLICITLY THE USE OF BICYCLES ON WALKWAYS (pedestrian pathways, in language today); bicycles, having two wheels (and not small wheels, mind you, meaning it can travel fast, much faster than normal human walking or even running speeds), can and must only be ridden ON THE ROAD, in other words, TARMAC only, along with other vehicles with wheels! Folks may go check Singapore’s statutes, or ask their friends in the legal circle (those knowledgeable ones lah, of course, especially the old hands) to confirm what I’ve stated.

    And it has baffled me, to this day, why
    - actually it all started with Marlboro Tan’s GRC intern, that ex-ST/ex-ISD chewhoo-poh from Ipoh, Irene, who made it okay with her ‘ramming’ through pariahmen some stupid thing that allowed cycling on pathways back in the 90s, and no one questioned the wisdom (or rather the idiocry) of it all, all because, besides being a self-professed avid cyclist (more like her being a RECYCLED thing among her PAPer colleagues), she wanted to have a pet thing associated with her ‘reign’ in her little part of the GRC right before she made enough as a SGP MP and retired to her Ipoh kampung with the multimillion$ earned here -
    nobody has ever questioned the silent ‘passing through’ of legislation that suddenly allowed, not only cycling on walkways (already a dangerous enterprise itself, to other pathway users), but the plethora of even more dangerous tools of movement (motorized, thus more powerful) that some smart-alec idiot thought so cleverly to name PMDs!

    Somebody needs to be shot, sent to the gallows or guillotine for this.

    Just like the HDB architect back in the 70s up to the 80s who was clever enough to save construction costs for the Board by receting thousands upon thousands of flats without the lift stopping on every floor (as if some floors were resided in by anyone, family!). I believe this smarty is also the one who…

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Perspective:

    PMDs are to assist the physically handicapped with independent living/mobility and therefore they should be allowed to share pedestrian walkways. However, users should be licensed and trained to operate the device for their own and others’ safety. The risk of PMD users being run over on roadways is much higher than on pedestrian walkways but if they abuse the privilege and pose a danger to pedestrians by driving recklessly, they should be suspended/banned from using the device. As for insurance, its a matter of affordability. Cyclists should not be allowed on pedestrian walkways as they can be fast and reckless sometimes. Pedestrian walkways are for pedestrians; cyclists are not pedestrians; they are also not physically handicapped.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • 新家破人唔死都没用:

    Perspective:
    May 16, 2019 at 1:52 am (Quote)
    “PMDs are to assist the physically handicapped with independent living/mobility and therefore they should be allowed to share pedestrian walkways.”

    What birdtalk you chirping ’bout, man!? 鳥人講鳥話,真不愧是島上「爛鳥朗」。

    PMDs, we all know, are mere toys, devices which are used by the young and irresponsible
    - yes, ‘crippled’, you’re right, ‘mentally’ crippled who cannot decide to use their leg power properly but just wish to boost their ‘walking the earth’ & ‘covering the earth fast, faster than everyone else’ -
    which,
    in the hands of its many users (not just irresponsible foreigners who use them like they have no tomorrow mainly becuse this is not their homeland, their elderly relatives are not here so they have no emotional stake and kindred link here, but also stupid stinkypoolians who have not been properly and sufficiently educated enough in six decades of PAP rule to homogenize into a single nation like the Japanese and the Taiwanese to be civic conscious and considerate of their fellow countrymen and even fellow human beings to be allowed to even import foreigners who will despise any sillypoorean for trying to educate them on proper manners & right social behavior as daftpooreans themselves have failed in every aspect of nationhood,
    are in fact wrongly abbreviated in this instance, in the case example of Sinkeverpoorerland.

    The correct one, judging from the way these mostly made-in-cheebyenah devices are used by their owners lforeign or local, should be:

    WMDs – WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

    And thank yew harry muck for One Nation, One Stinkingpool (of uncouth, uncivilized PeeAndPoo-ers)!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • LIONS:

    And,PMD-USERS/CYCLISTS ridinh across pedestrians crossings at traffic junctions creates safety hazards for others.
    PMDs used by the handicapped are different from that of other PMD-USERS.

    HANDICAPPED PMD-USERS ARE NORMALLY CONSIDERATE UNLIKE THOSE NORMAL PMD-USERS WHO SPEED RECKLESSLY EVEN ACROSS TRAFFIC JUNCTIONS.

    OUR IBFRA-STRUCTURE ARE NOT PMD-ready.
    Tge infra-structure shud have been put into place before allowing PMDs.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • LIONS:

    So,what kind of PMDs shud we allow our FOOTways?

    I am sure Simon is not referring to PMDs used by handicapped as even such HANDICAPPED-PMD-USERS are at risk too from other types of motorised PMDs/cyclists riding on FOOTways.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Mary:

    Every morning from commonweath MRT towards Bouna Vista there is this helper with her charge riding on the PMD. Wonder if the employer is aware or has given her blessings. It is very dangerous for both of them.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • oxygen:

    @ Perspective

    PERHAPS A CONCESSION MAY BE GRANTED to allow the physically handicapped use of PMDs on pedestrian walkways BUT STRICTLY RESTRICTED to this LIMITED group only.

    As it is, highly urbanised density living, PMDs are NOT SUITABLE either on the roads for themselves or the pedestrian walkways for walking traffic. As the population ages and density living intensifies with massive foreign influx, the risk aggravations to all parties must escalated rapidly.

    EXCEPT FOR THE EXEMPT GROUP OF HANDICAPPED, it should be BANNED NOW.

    As for insurance, it can’t be avoided.

    Perspective: As for insurance, its a matter of affordability.

    Why?

    oxygen: PAVEMENT IS FOR PEDESTRIANS, all mobility vehicles are weapons of harm, injury and maybe death destruction if not in proper managed control of irresponsible use because of its speed and huge impact if adversity strikes.

    Public safety insurance is like DEBT – it MUST BE AND DEFINITELY WILL BE SATISFIED by either the borrower or the lender. THERE IS NO ESCAPE FOR THIS ONE.

    If the borrower defaults, the lender pays for the penalty of financial loss. How can the borrowers be given a free lunch ticket to damage his/her creditors exclusively. If the lender refused to absorb all his loses, he sues the debtor for bankruptcy to cushion his loss quantum. The debtor must share responsibility for his risky undertaking and behavior outcome.

    THE DEBT OUTSTANDING DONT SIMPLY DISAPPEAR BY GENEROSITY OF FORGIVING – this DOES NOT EXIST in reality.

    IT BECOMES A MORAL HAZARD if PMD users avoid insurance cover. So, who is paying for $50K to $300K medical bill of the injured, maimed or comatose cases landed in hospital and a life-time of personal-dependent living care thereafter?

    Motorised vehicular transports and bicycles must be banned on pedestrian pavements. These are deadly weapons in the hands of irresponsible users bullying elderly, pregnant women and children.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • oxygen:

    @ Badhearted Evil Person

    RIGHT ON THE DOT, MATE. The risks/harm caused by reckless behavior of PMDs and motorized transports on pedestrian pavements to walking traffic is EXACTLY THE SAME as to other road users of DRUNKARD DRIVERS.

    Civil and tort liability law apply.

    So who is the IDIOT/S in PAPpypolitics invent the exception to civil and tort law liability when they prosecute drunkard driving at the same time?

    Is this not another page of WINDY HAPPY CONTRADICTION of PAPpy-law of “we do what we like, never mind what the law says” mantra again.

    I suspect it will get a LOT WORST when population density escalates rapidly and MRT/buses transport capacity is completely overwhelmed. LTA will simply price short distance travel of less than 5 km very expensively forcing everyone to move about on PMDs/motorised transports on pedestrian pavements to save costs leaving the elderly, pregnant women and children to the adversity fate of serious accidents happening.

    The car-lite whisper is simply singing rhetorical cover of rich travel in cars, the poor either rely on motorized bicycles or walk and be run over by motorised transport zigzagging on pedestrian pavements just like drunkard drivers but without civil and tort law liability because courts are overwhelmed with floods of caseloads volume they can’t handle and lawyers laughing.

    PAPpypolitics are really badhearted evil people indeed.

    Badhearted Evil Person: Well said.

    I would have gone further:
    Pedestrian paths are for pedestrians.
    Pedestrians, according to any English dictionary, are people walking.
    Therefore, except for legs – and ‘assisted movers’ like strollers, prams and wheelchairs – all other forms of non-natiural movement/mobility are banned, leg-powered bicycles included!

    I say “banned’ and not “to be banned’, “should be banned”, because THERE IS ALREADY A LAW THAT has been around since the 1960s THAT EXPLICITLY THE USE OF BICYCLES ON WALKWAYS (pedestrian pathways, in language today); bicycles, having two wheels (and not small wheels, mind you, meaning it can travel fast, much faster than normal human walking or even running speeds), can and must only be ridden ON THE ROAD, in other words, TARMAC only, along with other vehicles with wheels! Folks may go check Singapore’s statutes, or ask their friends in the legal circle (those knowledgeable ones lah, of course, especially the old hands) to confirm what I’ve stated.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • John Richards:

    I think we got to wait till some PAP MP or their kinfolk get hit by one of these PMDs before the law gets changed. So don’t hold your breath ‘cos nothing will get done till a major accident involving one of PAP”s very own. Suck it up guys!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Partial truth?:

    @@@ Let us note that PMDs are not required to be registered,

    Simon, u are exactly 1 of reason fake news law implemented.
    U botch the job for opposition.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Perspective:

    I was thinking only of the physically handicapped. PMD license should be issued only to those with genuine mobility issue (medically certified) not fake handicaps. Those who are physically able to walk do not need assistance with mobility device. All other motorized vehicles should be kept on the road with proper licenses and insurance.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • oxygen:

    @ Perspective

    YES YES YES for that clarifications. Clap, clap, clap.

    Perspective: I was thinking only of the physically handicapped. PMD license should be issued only to those with genuine mobility issue (medically certified) not fake handicaps. Those who are physically able to walk do not need assistance with mobility device. All other motorized vehicles should be kept on the road with proper licenses and insurance.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • zzzz:

    PMDs should be registered and bearing a number plate with an anti-tampering seal.
    Any dangerous act can then be reported easily and this surely can deter those wannabes who can’t even afford a real motorbike.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...

Leave a Reply

 characters available

Member Services
Self-SupportMembers Login
Sponsored Advertisement

Search On TR Emeritus
Sponsored Advertisement

Most Recent Comments
  • Father of the Constitution: “I predict future happiness for Americans*, if they can prevent the government from...
  • Discard Your ID Card, Be An FT: HarderTruths: May 21, 2019 at 1:02 am (Quote) “As far as FT think and behave, the...
  • HarderTruths: Some people are roasting in Hell right now. Others are on their way. Does it matter then who f**ked...
  • HarderTruths: When you find yourself in a burning house you can either try to save people who don’t believe the...
  • oxygen: @ Jessie Aw ful YOUR POINT OF PROPOSITION IS NOT INCORRECT of political strategy. My caution is these...
  • Haigen-Diaz: For fourteen centuries, the Hui have practiced Islam while holding positions as military generals and...
  • HarderTruths: Keep religion out of politics. If in doubt take a holiday in Libya or Yemen.
  • Haigen-Diaz: @ Believe in 1-party rule ‘If a majority of people support it, what is the problem?’ I think...
  • 中共朝鮮民族大學講師 金燦榮: 摸蛤蟆: May 21, 2019 at 9:39 am (Quote) “当吴庆瑞博士是财政部长的时候,听说通过投资而取得新加坡永久 居留权的投资额已经是新币一百万元了!...
  • TruBlu: A WOLF IN SHEEPSKIN IS STILL A WOLF IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY. NO AMOUNT OF GRINING IS GOING TO HELP. YOU CAN LIE...
  • TruBlu: tkl,you are targeting the wrong sgs. the 30 pct here are oredy well aware. its the 70 pct that need to be...
  • Prisoner 46664 - Nelson M.: MarBowling: May 20, 2019 at 7:05 pm (Quote) “This Nigerian MF can now rub shoulder and...
  • ganeshsk: MR/ Tan K L We have to express our opposition by voting the PAP out coming GE.
  • Tee-Tee-A-Ta-Ta: Happy to Migrate: TKL I have done my own research on singaporeans for over 20years. My...
  • Tee-Tee-A-Ta-Ta: TKL aka ‘Ye Fong’ is a joker. Why take him seriously? tan kIn lIan ...
  • Young: People are fighting in coffee shops and mrt trains etc.. At least a good start.
Announcements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Visitors Statistic
Latest Statistic