I refer to the report You are out of line, gov't tells Dr M.

While the politicians, past and present, and publicity-seeking personalities fight over who were right or wrong, amidst the hubris and bruised egos, we get to see the true colours, and the capabilities or otherwise, of our leaders; as well as contents of documents which might otherwise never see the light of day under the Official Secrets Act.

Since a decision has been made by our PM regarding the bridge, the continuing arguments seem academic, but useful in our quest for more open discussions and transparency. It is better late than never.

While those with legal experience try to show their prowess in understanding the documents and letters, the layman in me sees what could have been a funny scenario.

With the introduction of 'sand' in the negotiations, Singapore negotiators mentioned that they would be reclaiming land until it nears its borderline in the straits. Imagine if we had proceeded with the 'half bridge'. By the time we reached completion stage ready for connection with the Singapore side, they need to put up a comparatively short bridge to connect!

We would have sold enough sand for them to reclaim land, which might otherwise be in the form of a longer bridge. In effect, they could have had access to rare sand, increased their land area and saved on the costs for their side of the bridge. Win-win-win for them!