Tuesday, July 31, 2007

WebQuest Report: Cigarette Consumption

We all know that cigarettes are price inelastic, demerit goods, and when consumed, lead to air pollution, which is a negative externality. A negative externality is the cost imposed on a third party during production/consumption of a good, and no compensation is made. The case of passive smoking proves to be a very serious one as recent research carried out by the International Agency for Research on cancer showed that passive smoking causes lung cancer in non-smokers.

In this case, the marginal private cost, MPC, is the cost incurred by the smoker in buying the cigarette, and any accepted risk he is willing to take with regards to contracting lung cancer. The external cost would be that the people around the smoker experiences discomfort, as well as possibility of getting lung cancer. The marginal social cost, MSC, would be the cost to the individual, as well as those others affected by the cigarette smoke.

In the case of negative externality, the smoker always consumes the cigarettes at a quantity greater than that of the socially desired output, over consumption of cigarettes. This would result in the MSC being greater than the MPC, giving rise to an external cost, imposed on the people around the smoker. Consumption of cigarettes by the individual at market equilibrium also results in the society incurring a welfare loss.

Our society currently faces a problem of having many smokers, as stated in the article "Tobacco wars: Singapore the picture of health" that 14 percent of our population smokes. This gives rise to a large amount of external cost, which is not socially desired as production and consumption of cigarettes is not at social output. As a result, the government has to intervene, and lay out measures to reduce the amount of smoking. As cigarettes are price inelastic goods, introducing taxes on cigarettes may not be very effective, as it would not work well in deterring smokers from smoking. Thus, our government has set up various measures such as "having to have up to 50 percent of the front and back covers of cigarette packs bearing any of the six pictures of people who have contracted diseases due to smoking that the Singapore government has chosen to appear on a rotational basis." Also, the government has implemented laws such as the banning of smoking in certain areas so as to reduce the harmful effects of passive smoking.

The use of taxes is good as using taxes to internalize external cost is very appealing. It allows markets to continue operating according to market forces. Although costs have been inflated by taxes, consumption and production decisions are made while firms and households are free to pursue their self-interest. However, since cigarettes are price inelastic, the implementation of taxes may not be very effective in controlling the problem and reducing smoking as an increase in price would not have a great effect affecting the consumption of cigarettes. Laws and regulations, in this case, is more beneficial as it is a command-and-control policy, and is generally accepted that use of compliance standards through laws has led to a reduction in pollution levels. The outcome is predictable, unlike the use of market-based approaches such as taxes. However, there are monitoring and enforcement costs involved in government agencies having to monitor and ensure that regulations are adhered to.

Credits: Chelsea Chang, Shawn Poh, Marcus Foo, Leow Yan Ling and Wang Enshen

WebQuest Report: Compulsory Education

1. What are the governmental ministry and agencies that oversee the policy?

- Compulsory Education (CE) was implemented in Singapore from the new school year commencing 1st January 2003 by the Ministry of Education
- Compulsory Education Act is practiced, under which parents could face fines or jail if they do not send their children to national schools or government-approved Muslim schools.

2. Who are the direct parties involved in the transaction? Are there any indirect (external) parties that are involved or affected by the transaction?

- The first cohort of pupils coming under CE are Singapore Citizen children born between 2nd January 1996 and 1st January 1997 who are residing in Singapore
- Singapore Citizen children born between 2nd January 2001 and 1st January 2002 will be due for Primary 1 for the school year commencing 1st January 2008. The Primary 1 Registration Exercise for this cohort of pupils will take place from July to August 2007

3. Are there any other supporters or critics of the policy? Examine their views.

- Compulsory education is strongly supported by the Committee on Compulsory Education and organizations that they consulted for various reasons:
1. To give the children a common core of knowledge which will provide a strong foundation for further education and training
2. To give the children a common educational experience that would help to build national identity and cohesion.
- There are no critics towards compulsory education.
- However, there are some exceptions for those who attend designated institutions, home-schooling and those with special educational needs

4. Do you think that the good or service is being under or over produced/consumed?

- Compulsory education is under-produced
- Reasons:
1. Compulsory education should not only cover until primary school education, but also include up to secondary.
2. In today’s society, having a PSLE certificate is not enough to earn a living. Statistics have shown that graduates even ave difficulties finding jobs in the society now, what more about those students with their PSLE certificate?

5. Do you agree with the Singapore government’s policy in addressing the issue?

- Yes, we do.
- Compulsory education provides students with the basic knowledge they should obtain. However, it is not sufficient to for the students to enter the work force. A higher education is required to substantiate the higher living standard in Singapore.
- Compulsory education is a positive externality. However, it might give rise to free-riders who do not appropriate compulsory education and take advantage of it. For example, a student studying might play truancy and not get worried as no matter what he/she does, he/she still has a place in school and has to complete his/her compulsory primary education.
- Compulsory education is a means to move Singapore towards a knowledge-based economy.

Credits: Margareth Salim, Reuben Chan, Adeline Goh and Nguyen Quynh

WebQuest Report: Banning of Chewing Gum

"If you can't think because you can't chew, try a banana."

1. What are the governmental ministry and agencies that oversee the policy?

The chewing gum ban was initiated in January 1992 by Goh Chok Tong, who had just taken over as Prime Minister. The restriction on the distribution of chewing gum was enacted in Singapore Statute Chapter 57, the Control of Manufacture Act, which also governs the restriction of alcohol and tobacco. The ban includes importation and sale of chewing gum in Singapore. Chewing gum is banned in Singapore under the "Regulation of Imports and Exports (Chewing Gum) Regulations." Except for chewing gum of therapeutic value, the "importing" of chewing gum into Singapore is absolutely banned.

The proposal to ban chewing gum was brought up to the prime minister then, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, by the Minister for National Development as chewing gum contirbuted to serious maintanance problems such as disruption of train services. This was the main factor for the policy and ban as it had huge economic repercussions to the infrastructure.

The ban was seen as the only solution to the problem since the cost of cleaning and damaged cleaning equipment is expensive to the 5 million infrastructure.

2. Who are the direct parties involved in the transaction? Are there any indirect (external) parties that are involved or affected by the transaction?

The direct parties involved would be the government and citizens of Singapore. Generally, the citizens are affected as they are not allowed to consume the chewing gum. Those who were in the chewing gum manufacturing industry are also adversely affected due to the coercive closing down of the industry. This has also led to the loss of jobs and a certain amount of unemployment.

Indirectly, Singapore has lost one avenue of exportation and revenue. As a result of the ban, the government also received less tax revenue. Jobs then need to be created to cater to who lost their jobs due to the ban.

However, by carrying out the ban, the government was able to save the money which was previously used for maintenance of public infrastructure. Thus, money could then be directed and used elsewhere. For example, the money could be channeled to Research and Development instead.

Applying economic theories, the banning of this demerit good was implemented as the revenue earned from exportation and the chewing gum industry was not able to cover the cost of maintenance incurred by the consumption of chewing gum

3. Are there any other supporters or critics of the policy? Examine their views.

Before our citizens adapted to the ban, they often would travel to neighbouring countries such as Malaysia to purchase their gum. However, Singaporeans gradually got accustomed to the absence of chewing gum as time passed. Surprisingly, no black market for chewing gum in Singapore ever emerged.

International attention
However, it was not the case for other countries. Singapore received intense international coverage and attention from civil rights activists. This was one of the many other factors that created Singapore's "nanny image".

Singapore leaders did not give in and simply defended our own rights to making policies and stated that this would achieve greater benefits in return.

Credits: Germaine Goh, Lim Yong Ern, Chuah Peiyi and Veronica Lee

WebQuest Report: Childhood Immunisation

In Singapore context, childhood immunisation covers children from time of birth to an age of 12. During that period, a child would have received more than 20 shots of a variety of vaccines to immunize him/her against a multitude of infectious diseases which include tuberculosis, hepatitis B and measles. This has resulted in the dramatic reduction in the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases in the younger population.

Childhood immunisation (CI) is a merit good, in other words, a socially desirable good. CI is considered a ‘private good’ which have the characteristics of being rival and excludable. It is only made available to those who are willing to pay for the good and if the demand is high, others may not get to enjoy it.

However, positive externalities occur when we consume CI. For example: A person who goes for immunization positively affects those around him because there is one less possible carrier of that particular disease. Since consumption of CI is socially benefiting, the government had to make certain vaccinations compulsory for all children. In their view, if individuals were left alone to make decisions, such a merit good will be produced and consumed at sub-optimal amounts. Therefore, they need to intervene to encourage increased consumption of CI.

The government intervenes by providing subsidies so that more people can afford for CI. The subsidy will serve to correct the misallocation of resources arising form positive externalities since it can be easily implemented to increase production and consumption. However, this will require increased government expenditure. This financial burden will be brought over to working Singaporeans who will have to pay higher tax rates. Therefore it will be translated to a higher cost of living.

In conclusion, childhood immunization is an example of a market failure where there the market mechanism fails to supply at a socially efficient level since demand is ever-changing. This is because it is up to the consumer to decide how much he is willing and able to pay for the benefits he is receiving and it can vary. Also, we need to consider the presence of unequal distribution income, thus causing some groups of households being deprived of such a merit good.

Credits: Tan Chin Chuen, Kenneth Wong, Wang Enshng and Mark Lui

WebQuest Report: Film Censorship Issues

1. What are the governmental ministry and agencies that oversee the policy?

In the past, film censorship in Singapore was largely strict as its population is deeply conservative. It was necessary to prevent any offensive political, racial or religious, violence or sexual themes from being screened to the viewing audience, as this might upset the balance of Singapore's delicate multi-racial society.

Presently, Singapore’s regimental film censorship has been lightened. This enables most of Hollywood’s major films to be released locally after several cuts by the Board of Film Censors.

The importing, making, distributing or exhibiting of films in Singapore is governed by the Films Act of 1981. Films are first presented to the Board of Film Censors (BFC) to review. The BFC classifies the films under different ratings for different groups of audiences (eg. PG, NC16, R21 etc.) before they are released to the public.

Critics of this policy, such as Alex Au, argue that the true intention is to buttress the continued political dominance of the People's Action Party, and to do so partly by promoting the Government's social engineering efforts.

2. Who are the direct parties involved in the transaction? Are there any indirect (external) parties that are involved or affected by the transaction?

The direct parties involved includes the whole population of Singapore which include children, teenagers , adults and the aged. All age groups will thus be affect by the film’s various standards and limits (PG, NC16, M18, R21). External parties would include entertainment companies and outlets which sell forms of video entertainment which will include content from films shown (VCD, DVD, etc). Films banned in Singapore would not be able to be sold in outlets in Singapore and these forms of censorship would be a negative externality to the companies and outlets who sell video cd’s as it would be less income coming in.

3. Are there any other supporters or critics of the policy? Examine their views.

The Censorship Survey 2002 conducted by the Censorship Review Committee on a representative of 1000 respondents has shown that on average, 70% of respondents were satisfied with the current censorship standards. Technological advancements have spawned a new array of media formats and communication platforms, which have in turn challenged the existing censorship policies and guidelines. For example, film bans are becoming more irrelevant in this age of broadband Internet access; this allows users to download films from websites that are hosted overseas. (Internet penetration rate is 59.4%, while 24.2% of our households have broadband access.) This survey indicates the strong public support (65%) for the retention of the age 21 restriction from 70% in Censorship Survey 1992.

The results of the survey has shown that respondents generally supported less censorship for adults (53%) and, in particular, more censorship for the young. A little more than half of the respondents supported the existence of controlled places where disallowed content can be watched or purchased. 71% of the respondents felt that parents and not the government are responsible for what their children see or hear, however, 84% of them would not take any action even if they were unhappy with the film’s content. 67% of respondents thought that censorship for local and foreign mediums should be the same. Nevertheless, critics claim that such findings are limited as they do not consider the wider context of the film and its effect on the viewer.

Censorship itself is insufficient to maintain the moral tone of our society as it also depends on the industry, artists and community and on what the society deem as being acceptable standards for media content. A shared responsibility among various stakeholders is needed for censorship to complement public education for greater media awareness.

4. Do you agree with the Singapore government’s policy in addressing the issue?

I think censorship is useless in the eyes of the many people who watch movies online/downloaded or those who frequent video CD outlets. Even though films in Singapore are given strict ratings, underage audience may still view it through the many avenues mentioned above. Nevertheless, it is also the duty of the government to protect the country’s youths and children from material which might harm them such as extreme gore and violence as well as pornography Many lobby for the banning of films and TV programmes, on the grounds that media images of sex and violence are in part responsible for the decline of moral standards in society. Accounts from psychologists and researchers clearly prove the link between violent acts and exposure to violent images.

However, in order for the censorship to be successful, control over the internet must also be ensured which is almost impossible. Ahh I don’t know what to say. Ok bye-bye. Oh yeah, parents play an important part too … shouldn’t allow their young children to watch movies such as SAW. Less censorship and cuts should be put in place for movies which have adult rating. Since adults are already mature enough to understand the consequences of their actions should they follow acts shown on movies…I should think they know right from wrong and too much censorship is bad.

Credits: Aretha Poh, Adarsh Dinesh, Wong Shi Yi and Woo Yuan Ying

WebQuest Report: Banning of Chewing Gum

"More than the freedom to chew, Singaporeans need the freedom to choose. Until they get it, Singapore will remain clean, green -- and boring."

This is a comment made by a blogger about the ban of chewing gums in Singapore. It is undeniable that Singaporeans live in a clean environment, but arguments against the ban include Singaporeans lacking creativity, ingenuity and entrepreneurial drive -- qualities that are vital for the country's survival in the modern world economy.

The Ministry of National Development has taken authority over this issue. In January 1992, Goh Chok Tong imposed the ban. After the ban was announced, the import of chewing gum was immediately halted. However, a reasonable transition period was given to allow shops to clear their existing stocks. After that, the sale of chewing gum was completely terminated but there are singaporeans who try to "smuggle" gum from neighbouring countries. Despite that, no black market for chewing gum in Singapore ever emerged.

On the other hand, there were supporters of the ban. Another blogger writes:
"If Singapore didn’t ban chewing gum, the seat at the cinemas, buttons in the lifts and etc will fill with dry up chewing gum..."

Some people stuck it under restaurant tables; others dropped it on the sidewalk, gumming up the streets. Chewing gum was even blamed for delays on the mass rapid-transit system when gummy doors got stuck and held up the trains.

Councils in foreign countries have long complained about the problem and in particular the cost of cleaning up the remains of chewing gum. This is an example of a social cost, a negative externality. Westminster Council point out that the cost of cleaning up chewing gum costs them in excess of £100,000 a year.

In Singapore’s context, the ban had these externalities greatly reduced and more benefits were yielded.

Credits: Chanel Lam, Ethel Soh, Jeanette Yuen and Ryan Chia

WebQuest Report: Cigarette Consumption

The ban of smoking in various premises aims to dissuade people from smoking. This policy hopes to inconvenience smokers causing them to feel that it is easier to quit smoking then to put up with the inconveniences posed, such as, not being able to smoke whenever and wherever they want as well as having to be conscious of not lighting a cigarette in the wrong area. By implementing this policy, not only would the government be able to influence the mind of a smoker giving some them an inkling of quitting smoking, non-smokers would also benefit. Non-smokers would no longer have to bear with the unbearable smoke in public places which causes detrimental harm to their health if exposed in large amount. Even in small amount, it may cause people with sensitive noses to be irritated. Furthermore, the amount of smoke inhaled by a smoker in one puff is less then that of a passive smoker. Smoking is therefore a negative externality (MSC>MSB).

Marginal Private Cost (MPC):
- Cost of buying the cigarettes for the smoker.
- Harm to smoker’s body, i.e. lung cancer, stroke.

External Cost:
- Discomfort of passive smokers around the smoker.
- Harm to passive smoker’s body, risk of getting smoking related diseases.
- As these passive smokers seek medical attention, bills and loss of man hours also result.

Marginal Social Cost (MSC):
- Cost to smoker + Cost to those affected by the cigarette smoke.
- MSC = MPC + External Cost

From the statistics (http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/statistics.aspx?id=5526), it is obvious that the diseases that smoking causes are one of the main causes of death in Singapore. An example is cancer. It has been on the top of the chart over the years. Smoking might have been the main cause of such a high percentage of people dying due to cancer (28.5% in 2006). Other diseases on the chart caused by smoking include heart disease, cerebrovascular disease.

Footnotes:

From 1st July 2007, smoking will be prohibited in
- Entertainment outlets e.g. pubs, bars, discotheques, lounges (including KTV lounges), nightclubs, etc.

Areas Covered By Smoking Ban (1 July 2007)
- With effect from 1 July 2007, all areas of the premises, including any outdoor refreshment area (ORA), will come under the smoking ban.
- However, the licensee of the premises may designate up to 10 per cent of the indoor refreshment area (IRA) as smoking room(s).
- For outlets with ORA, the licensee may designate up to 20 per cent of the ORA as a smoking corner. This is in addition to the smoking room(s) in the IRA.

Source: http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=2822

Credits: Zoe Wong, Toh Hao Li and Xu Lu

WebQuest Report: Childhood Immunisation

Childhood immunization was implemented is because it applies a positive externalities to the society. Positive externalities is the simply the side-effect that the society received when an action is done. In this case the side-effect is beneficial to the society and to the person who did the action too.

First of all, immunization as what we know is a preventive measure to prevent people from getting a particular disease. It is similar as an investment (economic speaking), since we spent a sum of money for things that do not bring benefit and satisfaction straight-away after we consume it. The benefit effect may be enjoyed later, when other people get the disease, while you are not.

This brings benefit to the society because it cuts down the chances of the society to get infected by a disease if a child is immunized. The benefit is double since the immunized child and the society are now become less vulnerable to the disease. Next, by immunizing as many people as possible against a certain disease, the disease could eventually be eradicated from that area as all people there cannot contract this disease. Statistically, 3 million children die every year due to diseases that they could have been immunized against. To keep the infant mortality rate in Singapore lower, and hence have a higher quality of life, the government would have to implement this plan. Furthermore, for every $1 spent on immunizing a child, society saves up to $29 in the form of man hours not lost.

There are other related benefits that can be drawn by immunizing children. This immunization cuts down losses in man hours due to illness contracted from diseases that could have otherwise been prevented or avoided. Furthermore, other possibly benefits immunization include the fact that it acts as a preventive measure as they are less susceptible to disease and children in particular are more likely to attend school and earn more income over their lifetime. A new study on the economic effects of vaccinations from the World Bank finds that well designed and comprehensive vaccination programmes have a positive effect on savings and wealth and encourage families to have fewer children which lead to less demographic pressures on scarce resources. More subtly, it can be good for an entire population since, if enough of its members are vaccinated, even those who are not will receive a measure of protection.

Yet, still there are negative externalities too to every action we took. If a child is scared to be immunized in form of injection, he will cry and refuse to be injected, thus cutting down time for the doctor to serve other patients. Moreover, the child can also act violently to avoid this, thus causing problems to his parents and doctors.

All in all, since the positive externalities outweigh the negative externalities, childhood immunization is beneficial in nature. More countries should actually adopt regulations that make immunization compulsory to the young, thus helping the nation from contracting severe diseases that could hinder their progress. Thus, more resources can be channel for other means to enhance the development of a country.

Credits: Guan Yangyue, Michelle Law and Esther Herjanto

WebQuest Report: Implementation of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP)

Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) is an electronic system of road pricing based on a pay-as-you-use principle. It is designed to be a fair system as motorists are charged when they use the road during peak hours. The ERP system uses a dedicated short-range radio communication system to deduct ERP charges from CashCards, which are inserted in the In-vehicle Units (IUs) of vehicles before each journey. Each time vehicles pass through a gantry when the system is in operation, the ERP charges will be automatically deducted.

The governmental agency that oversees ERP is the Land Transport Authority (LTA). LTA reviews the traffic conditions on the expressways and roads, where the ERP system is in operation, on a quarterly basis and during the school holidays. To discourage motorists from speeding up or slowing down to avoid paying higher ERP charges, the LTA decided to make ERP changes more gradual.

The implementation of the ERP system affects all motorists who pass under the gantry, when they use the particular road. This includes car owners, bus drivers, taxi drivers, motorcyclists, etc. For car owners and motorcyclists, they will incur a private cost, as they have to pay a sum of money for using the road. This is different in the case of taxi drivers. Their passengers are the third parties that are not directly involved in the consumption of the good, i.e. using the road. This is evident in that passengers will have to pay the ERP charges in addition to their taxi fares. As for bus drivers, the bus companies in Singapore, namely SBS and SMRT currently absorb the ERP charges. However, this may change if LTA decides to increase ERP charges so as to effectively curb the problem of traffic congestion. When this happens, bus companies may have no choice but to pass on the cost to consumers so as to prevent them from incurring a loss as a result. Thus, consumers are once again the third parties indirectly involved in consuming the good.

The supporters of the Electronic Road Pricing Policy feel that road pricing is a good instrument to use to internalize most of the external effects which includes accident externalities that arise when extra vehicles on the road increase the probability that the other road users will be involved in an accident. With ERP, we can make sure that road users do not use specific roads during peak hours unnecessarily which can in turn minimize the effect of traffic jams and reduce the number of road accidents. Hence the ERP is an effective policy since it ensures that all road users are being evenly distributed on all the roads in Singapore. With the minimization of traffic jams and reduction in the number of road accidents in Singapore, we can help to save more of road users’ time.

The critics of the Electronic Road Pricing Policy feel that in terms of negative environmental externalities, road pricing is probably not the optimal instrument for internalization. Taxes on fuel or emission fees, for instance, charge vehicle emissions in a more direct way and they are very simple to design. The negative environment externality includes pollution of the environment due to the emission of greenhouse gases which may affect one’s health. Hence ERP is indeed not a very suitable way in curbing this problem since the revenue the government gets from ERP would not help to solve the problems of global warming. So it will be indeed more appropriate if government place a tax on fuel and not on the usage of roads.

Roads are produced by the government because it is a public good which is non-excludable and non-rivalry, having positive externalities to the society. Therefore, the private sector is not able to produce and market roads profitably. Directly and indirectly, consumers and producers benefit from them. It offers convenience to the former and supports the activities of the latter. It has to be government to implement ERP because only government has the authority to collect these “taxes” in order to pay for the external costs.

The overconsumption of roads (demerit goods) leads to traffic congestion (market failure) which is caused by negative externality arising from private car driving. Therefore, government needs to implement ERP which is equivalent to the marginal external costs drivers generate so as to ensure that the roads will function at the optimal efficient level; other consumers and producers will then be able to travel smoothly without time wastage. To achieve an optimal allocation of resources devoted to road use, the MSB of road use has to be equal to the MSC of road use. Furthermore, as road use is income inelastic, as incomes rise, people use their cars more and more families would have cars. This increased in economic activity and geographical mobility meant that there are likely to be more cars on the road which does not solve the problem of traffic jam. Hence, government needs to implement ERP so that those who want to use “popular roads” have to pay an additional charge. This implementation of ERP would reduce the amount of traffic on the roads especially during peak hours resulting in efficient use of the roads, benefitting both consumers and producers.

Credits: Joy Ong, Png Hui En, Aloysius Ng and Yeo Mei Shi

WebQuest Report: Implementation of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP)

Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) is an electronic system of road pricing based on a pay-as-you-use principle. It is designed to be a fair system as motorists are charged when they use the road during peak hours.

Externalities:

Negative externalities will result if ERP was not implemented. Serious traffic conjestion would arise if no charges were put into place and with that, a negaitve externality would have to be bourned. Traffic congestion will delay the transportation of goods to their various destinations and result in economic loss and workers may be caught in the jam, reducing the company’s productivity as the workers’ time spent on the roads could be used to earn profit for the firm; investors would pull out from a country that offers low efficiency and income. Furthermore, excess number of cars on the roads would cause air pollution and this may bring about health risks to the public which in turn will bring a decrease in productivity in workers as well as a high cost of medicial fees that has to be incurred by the government.

Other the other hand, the implementation of ERP brought about positive externalities. The public get to enjoy a clear-air environment and hence less likely to fall sick and therefore work productivity can be increased. Furthermore, as traffic congestion is relieved, drivers would not have to wait for long hours and they are likely to be in better mood and therefore they could perform better in their job requirements which would in turn bring about economic growth.

There are other countries with road pricing systems similiar to that of Singapore. Its main motive is also to relieve traffic comjestion, especially during peak hours.

In Norway, road pricing is fully electronic using a system called the Autopass with most local drivers purchasing a tag which is automatically read on passing the detectors. The same system is used throughout Norway for toll roads and congestion charging schemes etc. Motorists without a tag pay a fee at a manual barrier.

Road Pricing is definitely a good way to reduce traffic conjestion. Take Thailand as an example, on the average, 2hrs are wasted everday on traffic jams, which brought about huge economic loss.

Responses of the public on ERP:

An interview was conducted with a group of adults, aged from 25 to 45 who are frequent users of private vehicles to find out their views on the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) in Singapore.

They were asked if the implementation of ERP benefited them in any way, and most gave positive feedbacks. Mr. Tan Chee Leong, a businessman whose office is located in the Central Business District (CBD) said, "Every morning I drive to work, and it is normal to have the CBD crowded with vehicles. However, with the implementation of the ERP, the traffic jam was greatly reduced at the outskirts of the CBD, as motorists are discouraged to use the roads in CBD to get to other destinations. I am seldom late for work anymore."

Another feedback came from Mrs. Goh Li Ming, who said, "During weekdays, I would often go to Orchard Road for shopping. The gantries located on the roads that link Orchard road to the CBD benefited me a lot. Motorists will be charged twice if they use Orchard Road as a shortcut to enter the CBD, which discouraged them and diverted them to use other roads to get to their destinations. As a result, Orchard road is less jammed, making my shopping trip there more pleasant."

Most of the other adults felt the same way. Though they always complain about having to pay for ERP, in truth, they gain a great deal from this implementation. Another benefit of ERP that they mentioned was the level of pollution. When the roads are congested, car exhaust will accumulate in that area. ERP will reduce the amount of traffic in that area, which as a result, lower the level of pollution and allow people to enjoy a cleaner surrounding.

One major criticism is that road pricing would hurt the poor. It would not. The purpose of road pricing is to earn from the richer of the society. Those on high salaries would be happy to pay a few pounds to be able to get to their work at 9am without having to rise at the crack of dawn. Those earning good wages would travel then and pay for the privilege. Those having low incomes would travel at other times of the day to avoid having to pay. However, survey results have shown that nearly 65% of people in the lowest real income category do not own a car. Thus, they would be unaffected by peak charges.

Credits: Gao Ya, Jane Wong, Rachel Pek and Koh Kaiyan

WebQuest Report: Compulsory Education

1. What are the governmental ministry and agencies that oversee the policy?

Background: The Compulsory Education Policy in Singapore

According to the Compulsory Education Act, a child of 'compulsory school age' is one who is above the age of 6 years and who has not yet attained the age of 15 years.

A child of compulsory school age born after 1st January 1996, and who is citizen of Singapore residing in Singapore, has to attend a national primary school as a pupil regularly, unless he/she has been exempted from compulsory education, e.g. a child with special needs, a child attending a designated school, a child receiving home-schooling.

The Compulsory Education Act (Cap 51) provides for the establishment of a body to be known as the Compulsory Education Board to carry out the duties.

2. Who are the direct parties involved in the transaction? Are there any indirect (external) parties that are involved or affected by the transaction?

The direct parties involved includes and primary and secondary schools/institutes (which forms the suppliers) and all Singapore Citizen children born between 2nd January 1996 and 1st January 1997 who are residing in Singapore as well as the Singapore Citizens children that are residing overseas, whom are required to sent their personal particulars and address of overseas school he/she is or will be attending (forming the consumers). Government intervention is in the form of Compulsory Education Board.

Yes. Indirect parties affected may include the workforce, as this Act would mean that the number of students whom graduate to move on to secondary and tertiary education is relatively constant, thus these students in batches attains a higher level of education on average as compared to years prior to the implementation of this Act.Hence,increasing competition for the limited jobs available on the market especially those of knowledge-based industries(R&D) which requires people with higher educational certificates.

Also, an increasing pressure on the market to create greater number of jobs for these graduates results. The Publishers of school textbooks are also affected, as compulsory primary education would mean compulsory purchase of textbooks.

3. Are there any other supporters or critics of the policy? Examine their views.

There are supporters of the Compulsory Education policy. They agree because education is indeed very important to one's livelihood. Literacy is the basic requirement if one wants a proper job. This policy also shows the development of Singapore. The young generation is the country's pillar in time to come. They need to be equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to be productive citizens in a knowledge-based economy which Singapore is progressing or has progressed into.

There are no critics of this policy. There are only benefits to the young generation. Nevertheless, MOE has also considered exemptions. Those who attend designated schools, or home schooling or children with special needs are excluded from this policy. However, for the students from designated schools and home schooling , they still have to take PSLE but at their own pace within the age of 11 and 15.

4. Do you think that the good or service is being under or over produced/consumed?

I feel that compulsory education, since being implemented in 2003, has seen a huge success as all the children in Singapore will have a basic education. This ensures that their job opportunities are much better off compared to people without even basic education. I feel that this system is not being over/under produced/consumed but, is adequately produced/consumed. This is because there has not been any significant externality present on any person yet. There appears to be much to gain from this scheme as people are able to keep up with the ever-evolving society. And, armed with a basic education, they have more room for competition compared to those without any education at all.

5. Do you agree with the Singapore government’s policy in addressing the issue?

The policy of compulsory education has two objectives.

First, to give our children a common core of knowledge which will provide a strong foundation for further education and training that will prepare them for a knowledge based economy. With the paper chase still predominantly existing in our education system, qualifications is a must-have in today's society. And in order to receive higher education and training then the fundamentals have to be in place first!

Second, to give our children a common educational experience which will help to build national identity and cohesion.We are now living in a multi-racial society and conflicts between races are inevitable. Look at what happened during the 1960s' racial riots and racial segregation in the country then. So in order for the nation to progress to higher standards as a nation, compulosry education is compulsory, especially at a tender age, as to increase the interaction between others of different races and religion. This would then expose us to the different types of culture and customaries, allowing us to accept others for who they are.

Credits: Carine Tan, Ringo Hong, Chua Yun Yu and Wong Zhi Ying

WebQuest Report: Film Censorship Issues

1. What are the governmental ministry and agencies that oversee the policy?

A branch of the Media Development Authority called the Film Censorship Board

2. Who are the direct parties involved in the transaction? Are there any indirect (external) parties that are involved or affected by the transaction?

The direct parties involved are; the distributors of the films, MDA, production crew. The indirect parties involved are; the target audience.

3. Are there any other supporters or critics of the policy? Examine their views.

Critics:
- Audience who believe in the freedom of expression
- The production crew
- Foreigners, especially from those countries with more slack rules.
- Cultural fans who believe that the censorship of a film destroys its cultural value and distorts that message it was originally trying to bring across.

Supporters:
- Government
- Audience, mainly parents who wish to protect their children
- Conservatives who wish to preserve moral values.

4. Do you think that the goods or service is being under or over produced/consumed?

It is neither. These goods are for entertainment purposes, as entertainment cannot be properly quantified, it cannot be said that a film is over or under produced. Furthermore, there are many substitutes for entertainment. However, the reason why the government has imposed censorship rules is so as to reduce the negative externalities that certain images would have on a certain audience. Some citizens may feel that the service is overproduced as too much is censored or that as the film is restricted to only a certain age group. The service, to some is under produced as they still see a number of things that should be cut but was not cut by the MDA. It is wise to preserve some of the cultural scenes to make it dynamic and lively, but not overly so such that the negative externalities are too high, costing far more than what it's worth.

5. Do you agree with the Singapore government's policy in addressing this issue?

It is hard to measure the exact external cost; therefore, it is better to be safe rather than sorry. After all, cultural enlightenment can be obtained from other sources; however, it is best to reduce the negative social cost to minimum. This however, encourages to a certain extent, piracy as people look for substitutes to fulfill their desires. There is however, some unhappiness at the fact that the guidelines to what is acceptable and what is not keep changing. It would be better if the MDA were to decide on a set of rules once and for all. They are also not transparent enough when it comes to declaring the guidelines as it is constantly changing.

Credits: Sim Yok Teng, Jane Lau, Kong Yiting and Nguyen Don