Debated in Parliament on 3 Nov 2014.
Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the findings of the 18-month evaluation study on our road management measures that lead to the recommendation of implementing Singapore's next generation electronic road pricing system based on Global Navigation Satellite System technology; (b) what is the projected cost of maintaining the current ERP system relative to the new proposed system; (c) what will be the alternative use of land space freed up by the existing gantries; (d) what is the potential impact on motorists in terms of total ERP charges for long-distance compared to short-distance travellers; and (e) whether the Ministry is confident that the desired outcomes in managing our transport system can be achieved under the proposed system.
Mdm Speaker, the 18-month System Evaluation Test was a technical assessment to determine if Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) based on the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) technology can broadly carry out three functions. One, to conduct and enforce congestion charging, including distance-based charging; two, to collect and disseminate traffic data; and three, to provide other value-added services, such as electronic road-side parking. The conclusion is that it can.
The tender for GNSS-based ERP is ongoing and, as such, I should not disclose any of our cost estimates as it may well skew the tender submissions. What is clear, however, is that maintaining the current gantry system, which has been in place since 1998, will not be financially prudent.
The annual operating cost has risen by 80% over the last decade and a large part of the system is coming to the end of its life-cycle and will have to be replaced even if we do not move to a GNSS-based system. Physical gantries also take up land that could be freed up for more roadside greenery, for example, which would also be visually more pleasing. Although I have no doubt that many motorists would miss the presence of those gantries when they are eventually removed, especially as we have come to love them very much when they are not switched on.
Page: 37
The GNSS-based ERP can help traffic management in several ways. First, it can allow for distance-based pricing along the congested roads where we decide to implement ERP, which is more equitable as motorists will be charged according to the distance that they travel on these congested roads. However, exactly how much motorists will be charged, whether for short or long distance travel, will depend, amongst others, on the state of congestion then and what it takes to shift the traffic. Second, GNSS-based ERP is a smart technology where every vehicle can become a sensor for LTA to develop a more accurate and "live" picture of the traffic situation and intervene as necessary. Third, the same data can be broadcast to motorists to help them better plan their journeys and avoid congested roads.
While GNSS-based ERP can, indeed, improve traffic management as I have described, it alone cannot ensure that our roads continue to be relatively smooth-flowing overall. This requires a holistic approach through vehicle growth and population controls and the enhancement and promotion of public transport.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I have one supplementary question. Will this new GNSS ERP system infringe any form of privacy rights since it is able to track the whereabouts of every vehicle?
I think this is certainly something that we will pay very close attention to. What I can assure Members is that the data is aggregated and is anonymised, and that is usually how we would treat the information from traffic systems.
Some clarifications for the Minister. I think GNSS generally is good. But can I ask the Minister how it would impact different motorists, for example, taxi drivers who dwell and travel more distances within the congested roads as well as commercial and delivery vehicles which have to also dwell longer in congested areas? The second question is whether or not there will be an enlargement of the ERP catchment area. There is always a concern that when you leave your house, there is an ERP.
Mdm Speaker, I want to thank the Member for the two very good questions. First, we want to try to make sure that it is an equitable system. Today, I think what happens is that for as long as you pass the gantry, you are charged the same amount, regardless of the extent of travel along the priced road.
Going forward, we do have the option of pricing it in a different way. We will have to make sure that we take into account some of the implications on different groups of users and to try and arrive at as fair a solution as possible.
Page: 38
The second supplementary question was on the enlargement of the area. I had said earlier when I spoke on this subject in May last year – at the point of transition, only those congested roads that are then priced would be priced when we move to the GNSS-based ERP system. Subsequent to that, we will continue to adopt the same principles as we have today, which is that pricing is actually based on congestion along the affected roads.
I just want to expand upon the question from Mr Zainal just now. What safeguards would be in place to ensure that the privacy of the drivers is not compromised and that the data is not misused? I understand that this system would not be subject to the Personal Data Protection Act. Would it be made clear to the public what information would be collected and what it will be used for?
I thank the Member for that supplementary question. As I mentioned in reply to Mr Zainal Sapari earlier, what we can assure Members and commuters is that we will anonymise and aggregate the data. If we look at the situation today with all the mobile devices and how they are being used and how that can actually already be used to track the location of any particular individual, I would think that the situation with the GNSS-based system should not be of any concern.
PAPERCUTS