Punggol’s new mall opens, but old woes remain
SINGAPORE — Two farms may now sell fish again after a The fishes affected by the oil spill at the fish farm near Pulau Ubin. precincts, fewer parking lots with new standards for private developments (LTA) said on Friday (Nov 9) as it announced new standards for . Making dating a walk in the park. Jun 5, The smooth oreo fish at ArtScience Museum's new exhibition on deep-sea marine life, . Five new areas to be 'car-lite' precincts, fewer parking lots with new standards for private developments Authority (LTA) said on Friday (Nov 9) as it announced new standards for . Making dating a walk in the park. Jun 17, Market Street Car Park to close on June 30 NURUL SYUHAIDA Land Transport Authority (LTA), residents at a condominium in BukitTimah are . Afghan role for Taliban, if it plays by rules AMRULLAH SALEH has been a lot of media attention on nursing homes in recent days, with some people angry at.
P3s have a proven global reputation for managing mega projects efficiently and effectively—this is significant, as the need and demand for major highway and public infrastructure projects are expanding in the U.
Often Public-Private Partnerships P3s get a bad rap—particularly, when it comes to tolling projects; the public questions the need for tolling, and expresses concern about the motives and interests of a private entity when it comes to serving the public good.
It is important to note that P3s are not the panacea for all transportation problems. The P3 model is an effective, value-for-money procurement method but only for the right projects. Tolling and P3s are not a means of delivering non-feasible projects.
When the proper factors are found to exist, allowing private companies to take the lead and the risk through P3s can provide solid financial savings and benefits to the public by delivering well designed, constructed, maintained, and operated, state-of-the-art highway and transit related facilities. The infrastructure projects will stimulate economic growth and build legacy for countries along the way. I had the pleasure to join the other forty some leaders that are involved in the OBOR and infrastructure development with a diverse sector representation which made the trip particularly rewarding.
We had the opportunity to meet with various senior Thai government officials including the Thai Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, as well as many leading Thai companies. On the business level, the highlight was the discussions on how Hong-Kong-based companies can help the development of the Eastern Economic Corridor EEC. The government hopes to complete the EEC byturning these provinces into a hub for technological manufacturing and services with strong connectivity to its ASEAN neighbors by land, sea and air.
The government predicts the creation ofjobs a year in the manufacturing and service industry by through the EEC. This funding will come from a mix of state funds, public-private partnerships PPPsand foreign direct investment FDI.
The public sector has a major role to play, in facilitating and attracting private sector investors to realise the full potential of aspirational development like this. Offering and facilitating attractive incentives from the public sector to unleash the full potential from the private sector is key. Development vs Destination The second stop of my trip was Vietnam.
The property market there is rapidly emerging. Driven by the young demographic, growing middle class and the boom of the tourism industry, especially high-end tourism, urban residential property and hotel development are in particular demand. In my view, it is of paramount importance not to view property developments in isolation, as a holistic and comprehensive planning approach would be the solid foundation for any development success.
Atkins has successfully delivered a number of high-profile architecture and masterplanning projects in the property market in Vietnam. Our multi-award-winning Landmark 81, at m tall when completed, is a testament to that. We believe that a comprehensive understanding of urban development to create a destination which offers future users or tenants an impeccable experience is something that no planner or architect should overlook.
Or what is the use of a fast transport system when there is no destination to go to? And I am proud to say this is an important value that Atkins can add to our clients. We have started following up with some of the major players, and are working hard to create unique value propositions. Hong Kong hosts headquarters of many top international firms. The rich resource of top professionals in a wide range of services, such as accounting, law, construction, engineering and business management, also makes Hong Kong a go-to destination to seek professional advice for project preparation to close the funding gap.
The HKTDC-led trip was a great example of the breadth and depth of expertise that Hong Kong has to offer to support major infrastructure developments in Asia, and Atkins is proud to be part of that!
No room for short sight Of course, a key aspect for the success of any development project, regardless infrastructure or property development, is to look into the future. Sustainable decisions must meet the need of today and the aspiration of tomorrow, taking into consideration rapidly changing technology. In our industry, there is no room for short sight. Today, there are over 30 projects co-funded by UK government, undertaking feasibility studies, trials and testing of CAVs.
This pattern is repeated across the globe with countries such as the USA, Dubai, Singapore and China, investing heavily in this market. For many people, there is often an assumption that when driverless cars are on the network all vehicles will be fully autonomous. This is known as Level 5 SAE. However, for those working in the industry there is still a level of uncertainty around reaching Level 5 and how to address some of the key issues surrounding Levels 3 and 4 of autonomy.
At these levels, transfer of control between the vehicle and the human driver known as the handover process would be required as the vehicle will not be fully autonomous. Understanding the handover process is important from a safety, traffic management, technology, and legal and insurance perspective. For example, the length of time it takes someone to regain full control of the vehicle, represents a meaningful risk to insurers.
Importantly, understanding when control is transferred between the vehicle and driver has liability implications. To date, research on handover has focused on more experienced drivers, at high speeds and involving single handover requests.
This is not necessarily typical of the day to day driving experience in urban areas. Drivers with varying levels of experience; Lower speeds 20, 30, 40 and 50 mph typical of an urban environment; Driving simulator and road experiments; and Shorter driving periods with multiple handover requests.
This first trial sought to gain a deeper understanding of: How long it took participants to engage with the driving controls steering wheel, brake, and accelerator after a handover request; Whether typical manual driving performance is achieved after handover; At what time during the handover period is typical manual driving performance achieved; and For how long does the driver maintain typical manual driving performance during the handover period?
The findings indicate that without a structured process there could be safety implications associated with transferring control from the autonomous system to manual driving at the speeds tested 20, 30, 40 and 50mph. Depending on the speed of the vehicle, it could have travelled a considerable distance before the driver has regained typical driving performance and full control of the vehicle.
Although, the trial focused on planned handover, if these findings were translated into a situation where emergency handover is required, there could be further safety implications. This needs further exploration, and must consider factors such as how long the driver has been inactive, vehicle speed and road conditions.
There are also potential implications for highway network performance. This could result in a bunching effect on the network if handover is required at specific locations and vehicles either manually driven or in autonomous mode slow down to respond to this event. This could create a shockwave effect across the network, contributing to delays and congestion. To mitigate these issues, a structured handover process must be developed. Japan was among a handful of countries to express support for the US.
Junichiro Koizumi, the prime minister, reiterated his moral backing for Washington, despite clear indications that Japanese public opinion is largely against the war. I understand, and I support the start of the use of force by the United States," he said. Mr Koizumi's announcement was followed by news that Japan's financial regulators would hold an emergency meeting to discuss ways to support the stock market, which is hovering at year lows and threatening to trigger a fresh financial crisis.
South Korea put its armed forces on a higher state of alert amid fears that North Korea could attempt to escalate tensions over its nuclear weapons programme while the US is preoccupied in Iraq. President Roh Moo-hyun chaired an emergency session of the country's national security council to discuss the effects of the Iraq campaign on the Korean peninsula.
Mr Roh is expected to issue a statement of support for the US action and there are plans to send hundreds of non-combatant South Korean troops to Iraq. However, the region in fact has been no less divided on the Iraq question than has Europe. Foremost among them, certainly, is John Howard. From the onset, the Australian prime minister has steadfastly endorsed the Bush administration's view that the Hussein government represents a serious threat.
To the groans of his countrymen, Howard has pledged 2, troops to the U. Security Council resolution, but agreed with London and Washington that it was not a legal bar to action. In Japan, where polls suggest up to 80 percent are opposed to the war, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has nonetheless sided with the Bush administration rather decisively.
Hooking the dinosaur of fish
Japan's pacifist constitution allows its PM far fewer options than Australia's: Koizumi can't send troops. Nevertheless, later on, perhaps, his government will contribute to the post-war reconstruction.
Koizumi's supportive stance is not only opposed by the Japanese public but by many totems in his own ruling party. For any Japanese PM, ordinarily a low-profile figure at best, Koizumi's stand is unusually bold. Seoul's stand is notable because of the new Roh Moo Hyun government's policy differences with Washington over the North Korean issue, the Korean public's anti-Bush mood, and the general Korean worry that Washington's preoccupation with Iraq may embolden North Korea to cause new problems or in general to ratchet up peninsular tensions.
Even so, Seoul has offered to send military engineers to aid coalition forces in Iraq and, like Japan, help in the reconstruction. In Singapore, top officials for many months have been publicly assuming the American use of force to go after Saddam. Last week during a parliamentary debate, the foreign minister, Prof. Jayakumar, laid out in full Singapore's reasoning for its support of the U.
It implicitly concurred with the Bush administration's conflation of the war on terrorism with the elimination of the Hussein regime and with its chosen method of remedy. Agreed Philippines President Gloria Macapagal last week: That view is widely held in the region, especially in neighboring Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, where criticism of the U.
Officials there and in neighboring countries worry that many moderate Muslims will be radicalized by the invasion. Even the remarkably steadfast Howard has been careful, lately, to avoid implying that U.
Despite the qualification, his government is almost as far out on the political limb as the British. If the region does have anyone approaching a Tony Blair, it has been, for better or for worse, Howard. But even the Australian PM can't be very happy about this tragic turn toward war. In this situation, the problem of "making friends" has gradually developed from a tactical issue to a strategical one.
For Russia, France, Germany or China the debates on Iraq with USA and their allies, apart from economic reasons, to a big extent had to do with the necessity to counteract to the American hegemony, as well as with a wish to make their role in the international politics more significant. The so-called small countries, not having an opportunity to seriously influence the course of events, nevertheless, are involved into the Iraq crisis solution process indirectly, and, choosing one of two ways of Baghdad disarmament, volens nolens show their priorities in the foreign policy.
From the US point of view, the attitude of various countries to the Iraq problem is "a proof test", and many States pass this exam quite succesfully today. According to the US State department, published last Tuesday, their position on Iraq is openly shared by 30 countries, while "the governments of approximately 15 countries agreed to support Washington silently". In his yesterday speech to the nation G. There are six obvious US supporters among the post-Soviet Republics: If Azerbaijan until recently tried to use roundabout statements about its "supporting US efforts, direceted at the elimination of mass destruction weapons and the quickest possible solution of the crisis on the basis of the UN charter", the other five abovementioned countries could not permit any serious hesitations to themselves.
Thus, Georgian administration last year addressed to the United States a proposal to "help by all means", in the case that a military conflict occurs in Iraq. And this February president E. Shevardnaze offered to Washington to allocate the American military aircraft on the military airport of Vasiani, moreover, the Georgian side considers an establishment of a permanent American military base there after the war to be important, of course in exchange for moral and financial aid of the Americans, who will have to push Russians out of the region.
Yesterday David Tevzaze, minister of defence of Georgia, again declared that Georgia was ready to collaborate with the USA in its action against Iraq in any form, if it is necessary. It's well-known that Uzbekistan is viewed by Washington as a key country in the process of strategic re-orientation of Central Asian countries towards USA. And there are all bases for such perception. Firstly, Uzbekistan in left the Collective Security Treaty of CIS and in the beginning of October,it concluded an agreement with USA, as per which the American troops were provided with significant rights and authorities during the anti-terrorist operations carried out by USA from Uzbek bases.
USA are going to rent one of them - Khanabad, for 25 years around 3 thousand American staff and fighters. Apart from this money, the Bush administration offered for a financial aid in the amount of several billion dollars. It is noteworthy that Andrew Coat, director of Pew Research Center and head of a global issues research project entitled Global Attitudes Project, not so long ago, commenting on the results of the interview, carried out on the subject of the attitude towards USA in the world said that the "dissatisfaction with the United States has grown in the last two years".
According to Coat, in this tendency of growing anti-Americanism there are two exceptions - "a new friend and ally Uzbekistan", which lately "has become one of the main recipients of American aid". It is not surprising that the official Tashkent this month repeatedly stated that "Uzbekistan supports USA in its wish to disarm Iraq". In response to the loyalty shown by Uzbekistan, on Tuesday, the 18th G. Bush sent a letter to Karimov with an expression of gratitude for its contribution into the struggle against terrorism and the support of the States policy concerning Hussein, as well as a promise not to forget "those who stood with us".
Following the January letter from eight national leaders: A risk of losing a possibility to join EU, to which the leaders of France and Germany hinted lately according to J. Chirac, "they have lost a wonderful possibility to keep silent" did not diminish the zeal of these new Europeans, Baltic nations included.
Moreover, perhaps due to a generally nervous situation in Europe, the administrations of Baltic countries in the last weeks allowed themselves a few unwary remarks concerning the leaders of France, Germany and Russia. In particular, prime minister of Estonia S. Callas, in an article in the newspaper "Postimeas", dedicated to the Iraqi problem, said that Estonian support of Washington on this issue is also due to a necessity to takre into consideration a possibility of an "aggression against Estonia on the part of Russia".
Lukashenko, president of Belarus, stands on a diametrically opposite position. The specifics of the country relations with Iraq and the United States, as well as its strong interest in the CST membership, of course, id not help to maintain real possibilities for manoeuvring. Ukranian administration despite its statements on its intention to send an Ukranian chemical batallion to one of the Gulf countries i nthe case of a war on Iraq, has still not given a clear response to the question on the support of USA.
Anyway, Ukraine is not on the list of the thirty obvious States supporters. It should be observed, however, that yesterday president L. Kuchma said that he was deeply concerned with the beginning of military operation in Iraq and he even stressed that "Ukraine always was against the armed way of resoving world conflicts".
Kishinev rarely comments on the Iraqi subject, although the president V. Voronin remarked that "the ways of Iraqi problem settlement must be found within the UN Security Council". However, its membership in the GUUAM, where three member countries out of five aready spoke in support of the USA, as well as a pro-American behaviour of Romania that is so close to it in all respects there they think that "the war on Iraq - is a favourable chance not only for the image, but also for the future of Romania", which is preparing to join NATOcan undoubtedly influence the Moldova position in the nearest future.
The attitude of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Armenia to the war on Iraq is defined by their wish to maintain the growing US aid and not to lose the support of Russia, which, by the way, recently tried to investigate the degree of reliability of its CST partners, proposing on its last meeting in Moscow a discussion on the Iraq problem as the main subject.
However, to these countries an assertion can be applied that due to subjective and objective circumstances, they are forced to agree on cooperation with everybody, who can help them with "finance, arms, moral support", while they often find themselves in "complicated and contradictory situations".
Singapore aims to drive up standards for autonomous vehicles with test centre
The neutral Turkmenistan, that kept silence for so long about the American military preparations, recently, during a short period of time, made two diametrically opposite statements. First, at a meeting with J. Niyazov observed that the country supported the US position on the Iraqi problem: The position of Kazakhstani authorities on Iraq in the last few weeks was, as usual, vague and even ambiguous, although not so contradictory.
Observing that the Republic "remains on principled positions of the support of UN and is in favour of the solution of key international problems only within this organisation", the ministry makes quite an ambiguous statement, stressing that the efforts of the international community on a peaceful disarmament of Iraq "proved to be vain, also due to the destructive position of the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein".
However, further in the document the MFA hurries to remind that "Kazakhstan remains faithful to the basic principles of strategic partnership with USA and hopes for that a further development of equal and mutually beneficial relations with this State will continue". Today, of course, there are various points of view on the efficiency of Central Asian States multi-vector policy. Michael Denisson, researcher on Kazkahstan and Central Asia from Leeds University, in his interview, published in the "Newsweek" yet last summer observed: But in some cases the multi-vector policy can become deadening and not to bring positive results.
For instance, in the West because of political games several countries become outsiders and relations with them are not welcome.