MND writes to BM

What do you make of this?

Date	Event
8 Aug 2010	BM sent a report to Minister of National Development via email.
11 Aug 2010	Press Sec/Director of Communications (MND) replied to BM via email, stating that Minister had read the report, and that it had been sent to the policy officers for further study
17 Aug 2010	BM replied to Press Sec/Director of Communications (MND) via email to include more information and asked when MND would be ready with a response.
** Silence **
17 May 2011	BM stated in her blog entry that she had sent report to MND, but no changes so far.
24 May 2011	BM received an undated hardcopy letter (date stamp on envelope = 23 May 2011) from one of the Assistant Directors (Infrastructure) (MND), referring to the Aug 2010 report and stating that MND was initiating a review of the subject issue and would be inviting BM to participate in public consultation discussions. However, the consultation sessions had not been firmed up to date. This letter was copied to Commissioner of Buildings (BCA).

It has been 9 months of silence since I'd submitted my report to MND for the then Minister Mah's consideration in early Aug 2010.
Is it a coincidence that MND's reply is after I put up the blog entry on 17 May 2011?

It can't be that the new Minister of National Development (Khaw Boon Wan) has asked for this as he had only gone into office on Mon, 23 May 2011.

What's the point of sending me a letter when the consultation dates have not been firmed up? Just to let me know that MND is looking into the issue?
After 9 months?
I drafted the paper in 1 afternoon with no kahkia, just the internet, my laptop and me.

Perhaps some enthuz former URA colleagues of mine read the blog entry and forwarded it to their friends or relatives in MND.

Which stage of the policy review are they at now? Has it even started? Has it already been cooked?

I obviously don't mind spending time and energy on helping to review the subject issue.
I am enthusiastic about public policy and administration even when I am not getting paid for it.

However, I am concerned that this consultation will be a perfunctory attempt where the objective is mainly for the relevant officers to be able to later state in his/her report to the new Minister and later to the press that 'public consultation had been carried out with the various stakeholders, including members of public, for the purpose of this review'.

Can't blame me for such a preconception.
I have come across how some public consultations are conducted by providing selective and limited information and/or citing multiple constraints, that all leads to only 1 'possible logical' policy review outcome, i.e. the preferred outcome.

Nobody likes to be taken for a ride. Or be made used of.
Better not try it on me. =)

But who knows?
Maybe this is a sincere public consultation attempt?
I am always skeptically optimistic.
If not, I would not have put up the report to MND, right?