Public Opinion

Public opinion is always changing according to circumstances and interests involved. While someone might fight tirelessly over something benefited them, they might not willing to do so if it goes against their interest. For example, recently a group of residents demonstrated against the closure of an access road with the reasoning that it will inconvenience them. However, someone rebuked saying that the same group of people have objected to the linking of an access road bypassing their neighbourhood few years ago with the same reason. Public opinion can be a sword with double edge, it is useful as a tool to gauge public views and people's acceptance, but at the same time can be annoying if minority of the people have different views from the majority. Under such circumstances, the authority should be brave enough to make a decision that benefited the community at large. The sentiment, emotion and individual self interest should be put a side. Having said this, it is always a difficult decision to make as both side of the divide will try to lobby for decision favoured them. It must be tough for decision makers.

What went wrong then? Somebody said prevention is better than cure. We should have planned comprehensively and thoughtful first. We should have put a threshold on development in relation to the capacity of infrastructure. This must be an ideal situation. Planning is very dynamic and the effect of planning is only can be seen with effective of execution. If a planned township is supposed to be supported by efficient public transport so that private trip generation and car ownership is reduced, but is not there, then I think planning per say should not be blamed in total.

Similarly, according to the early agreement, an access road should have built after 10 years, but it did not materialise for reasons that best known to the developer. In this case, the buyers must have felt short changed and they should have demanded a valid reason from the developer, i guess.

Nobody should be hypocrite.