LTA Scholarship Interview Afterthoughts #1

So this series of posts is pretty much the catalyst for me starting this new blog. Anyway let me give you some background info on what happened:

• I was selected to go for the first round of interviews sometime in Apr 13.
• I was notified that I was selected to advance to the second round of interviews in May 13.
• And then I was selected for the final round of interviews a few weeks ago.

For the second round of interviews, I was supposed to prepare a 3-minute presentation on one of 2 topics. The topic I eventually settled on was on how we could address land transport challenges in Singapore. (The other topic had to do with cars.) And for the final round of interviews I was told to prepare the same presentation. So here is the presentation in its final form:

I felt confident after my second round of interviews. But I definitely did not feel calm after my final round of interviews. So what happened during the last round of interviews?

#1. There was a critique of my presentation
This was fair enough, though there was very intense discussion on the following points.

#2. We discussed the cons of an expanded MRT network
While I suggested an expanded MRT network (who in Singapore hasn't thought of this idea already?), the senior management were hesitant about this, citing concerns about cost (mostly), even though it would probably be more expensive to experience sustained MRT disruptions, like those that happened in Dec 11, which are more likely to happen as the system ages.

#3. There was an intense discussion about cycling
As a regular cyclist (before NS, anyway), I was not very happy when I found out how little regard the interviewers had for cyclists. I remember one key moment when we were talking about cyclists at zebra crossings. While the interviewers said that cyclists have to dismount when crossing zebra crossings, I disagreed totally. I raised 2 counter-questions:

1. Do motorists push their cars across the zebra crossing?
2. What if random pedestrians (or a random child) decide to run across the zebra crossing?

I argued in the first question that if the reason why cyclists should dismount at zebra crossings is to slow them down, shouldn't motorists slow down in the same way while crossing zebra crossings? So why not make them dismount as well?

And in the second point, if the motorist goes too fast while at the zebra crossing and fails to spot a runner/child crossing the zebra crossing, then whose fault is it? Is it the motorist or the runner/child? And if in this case the fault lies with the motorist, when the accident is between a motorist and cyclist the fault automatically goes to the cyclist, even though the latter incident is nearly identical as the former incident? (This point made me rather worked up!)

#4. I discovered that LTA's senior management rarely takes public transport, and are motorists.
This point kinda ties in with the previous point, though it can stand as a separate point on its own. I ask only one question here, "How do you implement sound policies if these policies won't even affect you?"

The above were my thoughts during the interview. My immediate afterthoughts will follow this post, so stay around!