COE: Another solution that may make more money, but may not solve the problem?
COE: Another solution that may make more money, but may not solve the problem?
By Leong Sze Hian
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/03/coe-another-solution-that-may-make-more-money-but-may-not-solve-the-problem/
I refer to the report “LTA announces changes to Vehicle Quota System” (Channel News Asia, Mar 11).
The report states that the number of COEs is likely to be reduced, which means car prices may go up.
Will higher COE prices mean more revenue for the LTA?
The report also states that the annual allowable growth rate of vehicles halved from 3% to 1.5% last year. This begs the question: Why did we take so many years to finally decide to half the allowable growth rate?
Transport Minister Raymond Lim explained to Parliament on Thursday how the LTA persistently over-projected the amount of cars to be scrapped each year.
He said that the reason was that LTA persistently over-projected every year.
In his own words:
“Let’s say last year we over-projected for the current year, if we over-project it again, we add to the problem”.
So, it would seem from the remarks in Parliament that the LTA allowed the vehicle population to grow at double the sustainable rate, because it persistently “over-projected” the number of vehicles to be scrapped year after year.
Has the LTA performed to expectations in managing sustainable vehicle growth?
Probably not.
Minister Lim also said: “This direct replacement system is similar to that implemented before 1999. But back then, as quota numbers were released annually, there were complaints from industry players that the time-lag was too great”.
Why are we going back to the original system we used before 1999? Since, according to Minister Lim, “there were complaints from industry players that the time-lag was too great”, why didn’t LTA simply change it its policies earlier?
What has been the outcome of all this “self justification”? Why is it assumed that what didn’t work in the past would once again become the best way to make it work in the future?
Well, perhaps a lot of money?
Let’s look at the Budget.
Which ministry has the highest estimated Operating Revenue (other than the Ministry of Finance at $35.9 billion) for FY2010 of $2.7 billion? Answer: The Ministry of Transport.
For revenue from Excise Duties, the highest contributor is Motor Vehicles at $425 million, a whopping increase of 17.5 per cent over FY2009.
For Licenses and Permits, the highest contributor is Transport and Communication at $1.2 billion, a whopping increase of 34.1 per cent.
What Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) do we use to evaluate our transport ministry?
Maybe there is something wrong with the KPIs?
Did persistently over-projection resulting in much higher vehicle population growth lead to higher revenue?
Would reducing supply of COEs now also lead to higher revenue?
Would returning to the original system before 1999 lead again to higher revenue?
As an analogy, if a company pays its CEO more money when the traffic that he is supposed to regulate becomes more congested, when customer satisfaction declines because they keep having to pay more for a deteriorating service, and alternative public transport options are also declining in service standards and public transport fares keep rising, what is the incentive for the CEO to improve his performance?
Perhaps we need to align the KPIs with the desired outcomes.
How about penalizing the LTA when traffic congestion increases by transferring some of its revenue to subsidize or improve public transport, give more incentives for “green” vehicles if vehicle pollution increases, demand more subsidies if public transport service standards decline, and demand more transport infrastructure spending if traffic benchmarks deteriorate, etc ?
Normally, most countries have to spend money to solve a problem, but in Singapore, too often, the solution makes more money instead, and the problem never seems to go away! Uniquely Singapore!
Retune the COE quota
Retune the COE quota
By Chemical Generation
The government just announced a change in the COE quota system. From April onwards with a pro-rated formula first and then every 6 months from July, the car population growth rate would be the number of deregistered vehicles in the previous 6 months period plus 1.5% of the current car population.
The aggravating factor to the decreased supply of COEs is that since COEs are fewer, its demand and price becomes inflated, there would be more people holding on to their cars. Hence, the actual number of deregistered COEs recycled into the market would in turn be fewer.
The car industry community is forecasting trends of 30% fewer COEs and higher prices for new cars as a result. Kia has already increased car prices by $5000 for Cat A cars, the staple category for the middle class driver.
For the car buyer, the road ahead is fraught with racing prices. In February 2000, the COE for a 1600cc car and below was a frightening $43,998 and in that year, the COE dipped to a so-called lowest price tag of $32,800 in December.
Whether there would be a repeat of the terrifying period when COEs for small cars hovered in the $30,000 and more range remains to be seen.
Is the COE quota reduction good or bad news? Without question the answer would depend on whom you ask.
Authorised dealers would feel the brakes applied on their sales. Used car salesmen see it as an opportunity for them to compete again as buyers might find the prices of new cars with new COEs daunting. Car buyers would generally be irritated that their desire to change cars every 3-5 years would be more costly than before and the post-1990 Singaporean disposable car culture might stall for a while.
Car owners, however, might heave a sigh of relief as there would be fewer cars on the road and a corresponding decrease in the frequency and intensity of traffic jams consequently, depending on where and when one drives.
Over-extending a bit, taxi drivers might also see this development positively as those who do not want to take buses but would not buy a car, might end up taking taxis as a substitute to owning a car.
Strangely and probably as a result of bad market forecasting, NTUC’s car-sharing business is coming to a stop when this announcement on the reduced COE numbers could actually revitalise the car-sharing niche market. Furthermore, the government’s purse would also fatten from higher COEs. On the other hand, fewer number of cars on the roads might mean fewer car-related taxes e.g. road tax, ARF.
The government seems to be swinging back to the argument that it wants the car population controlled. In the past few years, the government allowed the growth of cars because of the public’s expectation of car ownership. Hence, while owning cars became less expensive relatively, car usage became more expensive with the erection of more ERP gantries and more punitive ERP rates. Nevertheless, the sudden surge in cars was not a result of government generosity but bad maths.
The LTA came clean that the formula for using projected deregisteration of cars for the year instead of the actual deregistration of cars for the past year, swerved the regulation on car population into a ditch.
In recent years, Singapore’s vehicle population growth rate was greater than 5% instead of the allowable growth of 3% stipulated between 1990 and 2008. Last year, when the allowable growth rate was halved to 1.5 per cent in an effort to slow down the car population size, the actual growth was 3.4%.
Since 1990, the COE demand and supply has been based on what you can bid and what the government wants to release into the market. This is probably the easiest way to manage the car population – i.e. car buyers outbid each other to own a car, or cars.
Therein lies the conundrum – is there a better route to control of the traffic problem? Yes, assuming the government breaks free of the COE mindset.
Controlling the car population need not only be through the failing COE system. The direction to take is that it is not about regulating the car population per se, it is about controlling car congestion on the roads even without the COE. It is not about not making people own cars, but making driving so expensive that they would not want to use their car unnecessarily.
Without the COE the car is “cheap” considerably. Car owners therefore won’t feel pained if they leave their car at home and routinely take public transport. This is the re-tuned thinking into allowing car ownership without causing car congestion.
The Off Peak Car scheme, as an example, already offers potential if it can be revamped to a mainstream rather than minority car ownership scheme. Allow people to own cars, but driving it indiscriminately becomes a hole in the pocket, this thus potentially decelerating the car congestion problem on the road.
LTA announces changes to Vehicle Quota System
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1042955/1/.html
LTA announces changes to Vehicle Quota System
By Hoe Yeen Nie | Posted: 11 March 2010 1606 hrs
SINGAPORE: Changes to the Vehicle Quota System will be made in April. This was announced by Transport Minister Raymond Lim in Parliament on Thursday.
A new formula will be used to determine the COE quota. This will allow authorities to better manage the growth of the vehicle population, by removing yearly fluctuations in supply.
Under the new methodology, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will recycle the COE quota from the actual vehicle de-registrations in the most recent 6-month period back into the system. LTA says this eliminates the need to make any corrections due to any under- or over-estimation.
Traffic jams are a familiar frustration for many drivers. And efforts by transport authorities to curb the number of vehicles on the roads have had limited results.
For example, as of May 2009, there were 907,566 vehicles on the road. In January 2010, that had grown to 929,277 – an increase of 2.4 percent, higher than the allowable growth rate of 1.5 percent.
In Parliament on Thursday, MPs called for tighter controls.
Hri Kumar, MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, said: “As a matter of logic, we cannot allow car growth indefinitely. So what is the long-term strategy, particularly when we run out of roads to build?”
One solution is to change the way authorities calculate the number of Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) for release each year. Currently, this is largely based on an estimate of the number of cars to be de-registered or scrapped each year. Other factors include the annual allowable growth rate and adjustments for under- or over-projections from previous years.
But as authorities found out, estimates aren’t always reliable.
Minister Lim said: “Dr Lim (Wee Kiak) asked, I think his first question was, how is it that we persistently had this over-projection, that we should have washed it out the following year. The reason is that we persistently over-projected every year. Let’s say last year we over-projected for the current year, if we over-project it again, we add to the problem.”
So from April, the calculation will take into account the actual number of vehicles taken off the roads. This includes both de-registered cars and temporary COEs that have expired or were cancelled.
And instead of an annual quota, figures will be revised every six months. Take for example, there are 800,000 vehicles as of January. Based on the allowable growth rate of 1.5 percent, there will be an additional 6,000 COEs for sale every six months. On top of the number of vehicles de-registered in the same period – for example 20,000 – this means the COE quota for July to December will be 26,000.
This direct replacement system is similar to that implemented before 1999. But back then, as quota numbers were released annually, there were complaints from industry players that the time-lag was too great.
Now, however, with a switch to a six-monthly revision, Transport Minister Lim said the time-lag issue is reduced. His ministry is also not ruling out shortening the quota period further if necessary.
Mr Lim added that further changes to the annual allowable growth rate, which halved from 3% to 1.5% last year, may be carried out in 2012. The move is meant to be more responsive to the market, and car dealers said they no longer need to second-guess the authorities when deciding the amount of stock to bring in.
But with the changes, the number of COEs is likely to be reduced, which means car prices may go up.
- CNA/ir
Big brother to drive away cars
Do we really want to wait for the government to bulldoze the legislation to introduce this?
Big brother to drive away cars
INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH
By SEAH CHIANG NEE
The Singaporean’s love affair with the car remains strong, but the authorities seem determined to break up the relationship with a plethora of taxes designed to make owning one as stressful as possible.
RECENTLY when I joined the ranks of Singapore’s home down-graders in search of a more modest place, I was guided by one principal consideration. I wanted a place that is no more than 10 minutes’ walk to a train or bus station.
Public transport is crucial as I prepare for the inevitable day when I will have to surrender my old four-wheeler to the junkyard because of rising operating costs.
I believe that owning a personal car in land-squeezed, overcrowded Singapore will one day become so exorbitant that it will be out of reach of most middle-class Singaporeans.
The way our demography is moving, I see little prospect of the current motorist avoiding the move to public transport at least partially. It will not augur well for the aged and the handicapped.
The population will continue to rise, but land space will remain the same.
At the moment, the Singaporean’s love affair with the car remains strong, but it will fade as new fiscal measures are tightened.
(A word on trains and buses: they are generally well run, better than most that I have used elsewhere. During rush hour, however, some stations are nightmarishly packed and it becomes a put-off.)
Saying goodbye to the car is never an easy thing for Singaporeans, and some would rather abandon the country for another where cars are cheap.
A plethora of taxes, some uniquely designed in Singapore to reduce the car population, has succeeded marvellously well in two areas – cutting traffic jams and lightening the Singaporean pocket.
In few countries does a car cost as much as it does in Singapore. Any government that tries the same will be out the door in the next election.
As a result, Singapore has only 12 cars per 100 people, half of Hong Kong’s 24.
The taxes are so devilishly complex that it will take a whole chapter to list them and explain how they work.
The purchasing costs include these mind-boggling factors: Registration fee, cost price, road tax, COE (certificate of entitlement), additional registration fee (140% of OMV or open market value) and customs duty (31% of OMV).
Understandably, many Singaporean buyers do not fully understand them; they simply pay – and grumble.
A medium-sized 1,600cc Japanese car costs around S$60,000, enough to buy a bungalow in many neighbouring countries.
Monthly expenses (including depreciation, insurance, electronic road charges, road taxes, etc) are S$2,000 a month, a little less than what a fresh graduate earns.
“We all know that owning a car in Singapore is a luxury,” blogged a writer. “If you don’t have a car, how do you know whether you can afford one?”
His answer, quoting Salary.sg, was you must earn S$7,650 a month. This means that the average middle-class Singaporean (household income: S$7,000) can operate a car only with some financial stress.
The speed with which the government is building more rail lines – the plan is to double the present tracks by 2020 – has convinced me that it means business in working to wean Singaporeans off the car as much as possible.
It wants 70% of peak-hour trips by Singaporeans to be taken on trains and buses by then.
A survey showed how tough it is. Despite the recession last year Singaporeans using public transport during the morning rush hour dropped from 63% to 59%. Car usage has gone up.
With the government gearing up to rebalance it, this trend will not last.
To fight jams and raise revenue, the government has erected some 80 Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries that digitally tax passing vehicles at selected places and times.
The fees are adjusted upwards or downwards depending on traffic volume.
But controversial as they are, the ERP gantries may be soon be torn down to make way for a new (and probably costlier to the public) way of controlling traffic and raising revenue.
Singapore could be the first country to use the GPS or global positioning system to track vehicles on the road for tax purposes. Operation is expected this year or next, after an expected snap election is held.
The move may be unpopular among voters with an adverse impact against the government. Over the long-term, if not immediately, it will increase transport costs for Singaporeans.
The satellite-tracked electronic system would technically charge drivers using any road any time in Singapore – if so desired.
It highlights how efficiently clever the Singapore authorities are at using the latest high tech to charge the public.
When the GPS system comes into being, I may trade in my car for the train, health permitting. At present the gantries can’t make any money from me since I avoid passing those machines when they are in operation.
That may change in future. A drive to my estate corner coffee shop for my morning noodle may invite the satellite to start clicking up a bill, I fear.
That may prompt others to join my car-less life. Those who have a higher threshold of pain may also be discouraged by other social costs, including loss of privacy.
Apart from charging people for using the roads, the GPS can also track traffic offenders, including illegal parking, beating the red light and intruding into a bus lane.
The Straits Times warned: “Singaporeans will have to watch not only their back, but high in the sky whenever they think of committing a traffic offence.
“The GPS is also able to determine if you had been speeding along any roads, including going beyond that 15km/h speed limit at the road outside your car park.”
Do you still think the car will remain a luxury in Singapore?
Come May 2010, Malaysians need MyKad (MY ID card) to fill tank
The Malaysia government wants to limit the amount of subsidized petrol to Malaysians more so to stop profiteering.
The hassle of filling up the gas tank
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/33918
2010-01-13 18:31
When visiting gas stations to fill up the tank, make sure you have your MyKad with you come May 2010.
Without MyKad, your cash or credit card will not get you even a single drop of petrol!
I have no idea whether we will also need to swipe our MyKad to buy sugar, cooking oil and the like in the future.
The Malaysian government may be the only one in this world that needs to verify a buyer’s identity before he fills up his petrol tank.
This reminds me of communism, where the people needed to show their identifications when buying a loaf of bread.
But then that was an era long gone.
At a time when ASEAN states and China are opening up their markets towards one another, I have no idea the policy of selling petrol on identification is meant to show off MyKad’s multiple functions, which even many developed countries pale in comparison, or to stop foreigners from buying cheap petrol here.
If we are doing it just to show off the multiple functions of MyKad, then we should rightly feel proud, as a pocket-size MyKad can accommodate at least eight different functions.
Any data, from personal particulars to whether the cardholder is suffering from VD as well as his wealth and other private details, will be unreservedly exposed with a MyKad reader.
This is of secondary importance, and the worst thing is that there is no product assurance on the extremely vulnerable MyKad chips.
Imagine you are in a hurry for work, school, or some business meeting, but having an empty tank in front of a gas station MyKad reader that refuses to accept your identification.
JPN urges the public to replace their chips if found damaged, showing that such a possibility is very real.
Imagine half the country’s population rushing to JPN to replace their MyKad just to fill up their petrol tanks, and the additional burden on JPN’s side.
If the new policy has been a counter-measure against foreign car owners who have poked the loopholes in the earlier policy of allowing foreign-registered vehicles to fill up their petrol tanks only within 50km from national borders, and up to 20 litres before leaving the country, then it is by all measures a very poor contrivance.
Foreign vehicles, especially those from Singapore, have brought much bigger economic benefits to this country than the profits they have sneaked away from our petrol allowances.
Inconveniences experienced at petrol pumps will only drive them away.
If we do this merely to stamp cross-border smuggling activities, then the anti-smuggling squads should work a lot harder to check their activities instead of transferring the hassles to motorists across the nation.
It is necessary for us to prevent foreigners from enjoying our petrol allowances, but not to spend huge sums of money acquiring MyKad readers and inconvenience motorists! (By TAN POH KHENG/Translated by DOMINIC LOH/Sin Chew Daily)
MySinchew 2010.01.13
4 new ERP gantries
4 new ERP gantries
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_477218.html
The Land Transport Authority announced on Thursday that four new gantries will be set up in Marina Centre, north of the East Coast Parkway, as the area is part of an enlarged Central Business District. –ST PHOTO: LAU FOOK KONG
THOSE who drive or cab to the Marina Sands integrated resort or Marina Bay Financial Centre will face a new set of electronic road-pricing gantries planned for the area.
The Land Transport Authority announced on Thursday that four new gantries will be set up in Marina Centre, north of the East Coast Parkway, as the area is part of an enlarged Central Business District. An existing gantry in Central Boulevard will be removed.
The four new gantries are in Marina Way (an exit road from the Ayer Rajah Expressway); Marina Station Road (near the new MRT station); and two on either direction of the new three-lane dual-carriageway Bay Bridge that links the new business and entertainment hub to Raffles Avenue.
The additions bring the number of ERP gantries in the CBD from 39 to 36.
LTA chief executive Yam Ah Mee said the new gantries are necessary because they form a cordon around the expanded CBD. Without them, motorists will use the new roads there to bypass congestion-priced roads in the city centre, he added.
The erection of the new gantries will be done in stages. The first one on the Bay Bridge leading out of Marina Centre will be up in April, while the others will up some time in the third quarter. The Marina Sands resort is expected to open from April, while the Marina Bay Financial Centre is due to open by the third quarter.
New EcoBoost engines for next-generation Focus
The trend for many car manufacturers is to head towards smaller engines complimented with forced induction either via supercharging or turbocharging with the latter the more popular choice given its higher efficiency levels. Big engines will be heading the way of the dinosaurs if companies such as Ford & VW have their way.
New EcoBoost engines for next-generation Focus
http://www.enginetechnologyinternational.com/news.php?NewsID=18806
Having debuted at Detroit Motor Show earlier this week, Ford has confirmed that the all-new Focus will be powered by a new breed of EcoBoost engines, which will include a 1.6-liter unit and eventually a 2-liter heart.
At the center of Ford’s EcoBoost family is a new combustion system that features high-pressure direct fuel injection, advanced turbocharging, and twin independent variable valve timing. The fuel injection system injects fuel into each cylinder in small, precise amounts at a pressure of up to 200 bar. The variable valve timing on the intake valve and camshafts help the four-cylinder EcoBoost engines to optimize gas flow through the combustion chamber at all engine speeds, further enhancing efficiency and performance.
But fuel economy and low emissions are only part of the EcoBoost story. Performance is also important – especially as the 2-liter derivative is destined for North America and Australia. So, strong low-end torque is the order of the day as the engines have to compete with diesels in Europe. As a result, the BorgWarner-supplied turbochargers have been designed to feature small, low-inertia rotors that spin at speeds in excess of 200,000rpm. The turbines are carefully selected to ensure that maximum torque can be achieved at 1,500rpm or less. Ford says that careful matching of the turbo units ensures the new EcoBoost engines remain powerful and responsive at speeds in excess of 5,000rpm.
Both the new Focus and the next-generation EcoBoost engines are an important part of Ford’s global growth plan. Discussing the new powertrains, Ford of Europe CEO
John Fleming, said: “The new family of EcoBoost four-cylinder petrol engines coming later this year is a key element of Ford’s global blueprint for sustainability
“We believe these engines will provide customers with a genuinely attractive alternative to diesel and hybrid power units, delivering highly competitive fuel economy and cost of ownership.”
And the Focus is just as important. Created for most global markets – thus mirroring the launch strategy of the Fiesta – the Focus will roll out of production facilities in North America and Europe. Ford’s new c-car platform, which includes Focus, C-Max and Grand C-Max, is expected to generate sales in all regions of two million units annually by 2012.
<!–14 January 2010
–>
More Perks For Off-Peak Car (OPC) Owners
More Perks For Off-Peak Car (OPC) Owners With Launch Of Revised OPC Scheme On 25 January 2010
1. From Monday, 25 January 2010, motorists will enjoy more perks with the launch of the revised Off-Peak Car (OPC) scheme. These perks comprise the following:
(a) Unrestricted usage of OPCs on Saturdays and on the eves of 5 public holidays; and
(b) Cash rebates for conversion of normal cars to the revised OPC scheme of up to $1,100 for every six months’ registration as an OPC.
2. As announced by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) in August 2009, these initiatives aim to make the OPC scheme more attractive so as to encourage more car owners to opt into the scheme. This serves to support LTA’s overall objective to better manage congestion during peak periods.
More driving hours with revised OPC scheme
3. Under the revised OPC scheme, all newly registered OPCs and normal cars converted to the revised scheme, on or after 25 January 2010, will enjoy unrestricted usage on Saturdays and the eves of 5 public holidays. These public holidays are namely, New Year, Lunar New Year, Hari Raya Puasa, Deepavali and Christmas.
4. The removal of usage restrictions on Saturday and 5 public holiday eves will have to be accompanied by corresponding adjustments to the tax concessions. The annual road tax discount will be correspondingly reduced from $800 to $500 under the revised OPC scheme. The minimum annual road tax will be $70, instead of $50 under the existing OPC scheme. This means that existing OPC owners who opt for the revised OPC scheme will have their annual road tax discounts reduced by between $20 and $300. This is because the tax concessions given to OPC owners were computed taking into consideration the restricted usage periods.
5. Vehicle owners who register a new car as an OPC under the revised OPC scheme will continue to enjoy an up-front tax rebate of up to $17,000.
6. Existing OPC owners can apply to convert to the revised OPC scheme on or after 25 Jan 2010 to enjoy the extended usage hours in exchange for reduced tax discounts with payment of a one-time administrative fee of $100 and applicable road tax top-up. Please refer to Annex A on details of application for conversion to the revised OPC scheme. Those who remain under the existing OPC scheme are required to purchase an electronic day licence (e-Day Licence) if they wish to drive their OPC between 7am and 3pm on Saturdays and eve of the 5 public holidays.
Cash rebates for conversion to revised OPC scheme
7. From 25 January 2010, owners of normal cars and converted OPCs under the existing OPC scheme who opt into the revised OPC scheme will enjoy a cash rebate of up to $1,100 for every 6 months the car is registered as an OPC, until the car reaches 10 years old. The car must be kept as an OPC for at least 6 months after its conversion, except in cases of deregistration or when the OPC reaches the age of 10 years, to enjoy the cash rebate. Under the existing OPC scheme, this rebate of $2,200 per year is paid as a lump-sum only at the point when the car is deregistered and is still PARF-eligible.
8. Motorists can calculate the 6-monthly cash rebates using the formula as follows:
| {QP (Bid Cat) + [(Additional Registration Fee rate x Open Market Value) - Actual Green Rebate]} †
———————————————————————- x $1,100 $17,000 where: QP (Bid Cat) is the actual Quota Premium paid at registration Actual Green Rebate is the actual green rebate utilised at registration (if applicable) † Amount capped at $17,000 Note: The above formula applies only for a full 6-month cash rebate period. Adjustments will be made for any pro-rated cash rebate period. |
9. Information on the cash rebate for conversion of a normal car to an OPC is available via www.onemotoring.com.sg from 25 January 2010, under LTA e-Services > Online Enquiries > OPC/WEC Conversion fees.
Update of the e-Day Licence system
10. The e-Day Licence system to provide OPC users with more convenience when buying an e-day licence has been progressing smoothly. Some 125,000 e-Day Licences were bought successfully through the various sales channels. About 87% of these e-Day Licences were bought through the self-service online channels.
Sale of e-Day Licences through the Various Channels
| Channels | 9 Nov – 31 Dec 2009 | Percentage |
| AXS stations | 70,444 | 56% |
| Internet | 31,228 | 25% |
| MobileP@y | 7,817 | 6% |
| SingPost & AAS counters | 15,970 | 13% |
| Total | 125,459 | 100% |
11. In 2004, there were only about 5,000 OPCs. Today, there are about 47,000 OPCs, a nine-fold increase over a 5-year period. OPCs currently make up about 8 percent of the car population in Singapore.
Annex A: Application for conversion to the revised OPC scheme
