I WAS surprised to read in yesterday's report that bus and train fares will go down by 2.5 per cent ('New bus, train fare system'). To peg charges to the distance travelled is a great system of calculation. Thank you, Public Transport Council, for such a good move.
Bennie Cheok
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_517466.html
Bus, train fare system must be fair to all THE Public Transport Council's decision ('New bus, train fare system'; yesterday) to implement a distance-based system to calculate transport fares with effect from July 3 is a novel approach.
While the council says it will lead to greater savings for nearly two out of three commuters, my concern is for the third of commuters who must pay a higher transport fare than at present.
It seems highly unusual that we have to penalise a significant number of commuters just because they have a direct route to their destinations. Through no fault of their own, they find themselves having to pay more so that the majority can pay less. There should be as much fairness as possible and this should not be at the expense of the minority, or anyone for that matter.
The aim should be to improve everyone's life while not worsening anyone's life in the process. I hope that future fare calculations will be done with this in mind.
Gregory Lou
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_517597.html
SMRT spokesman (extract): "We have therefore shared our productivity gains with commuters. Whilst the fares will be reduced by 2.5% from 3 July 2010, the 15-month fare discount of 3% will end on 2 July."
ReplyDeleteLooks like General Election is around the corner
ReplyDeleteHow many of the commuters are concerned about saving that few cents over a trip? This should not be the focus of the majority who take public transport daily.
ReplyDeleteShould we beleive that the current exercise has a bottomline to help the public?
Pegging charge to distance is not fair if the bus route goes in circle, i.e. bus no.14 goes into a U-shape before leaving Bedok South through Upper East Coast Road.
We have a close to first class public transport hardware but not software. The software system sucks for the money invested.
The public should be provided with a reliable bus schedule and efficient service to cater for traffic condition on top of a safe trip, currently not being guarantee after the serious accident at Eunos.
The latest fare exercise seemed to be barking on the wrong tree to the public. We welcome review on public transport system. The issues should be addressed at the roots which are the waiting time, indirect route, poor coordination among bus and MRT and effective management of bus team. When we see 2 buses of same route no. arriving the bus stop, we can assume that the waiting time has run. What is the corrective measure in place? Not to mention it is common to see more than 3 or 4 buses of same route no. at one bus stop. Such basic measure to prevent this to happen has not been in place for the last 20 years.
The saving of the few cents is meaningless if the quality of the bus system is not improved. I doubt there is any improvement when the panel of people controlling the system lifeline is unchanged. Very sad.
Loh
re April 22, 2010 8:41 AM
ReplyDeleteI also noted this statement earlier in the press. Does it mean comes July 3, the commuters will get 0.5% less discount...then the bus fare actually goes up by 0.5% with the new fares kick in.
Any comments/observation welcome.
Bus systems have been around for more than 75 years. Ours have been analysed, adjusted and now this.
ReplyDeleteOf all our MBAs, learned people sitting on the PTC.. does it take rocket science?
Lets hear and have evidence that ALL the council members have taken rides on the bus recently for the past 2 months on a daily basis. ( taking buses when they were in school does not count )This cannot be arm chair leadership.
There are many whys.. first it was
long distance, now, its short distance. I used to work at the airport and SMRT launched a bus service # 985. It was excellent. For $1.33cts including GST I could sit for the next 25mins ( fastest) and read and get off at terminal 2.
After running it for about 2 years, it was removed. Responding to my email, they claimed the route was not profitable. I replied that I was willing to pay 300% more! But no.. it will not work.
Suspiciously, withdrawal of the service happened as ridership of the trains from Tannah Merah to Changi stations was reported to be poor.
I understand that the PTC has the role to play to ensure that a large percentage of the public can afford and yet allow the transport companies to make profits.
Both these conditions can be met:
A) increase wages to meet the cost of public transport.
But, NO! say the National Wages Council and the rest of the damned councils and damned so called leaders of society. Anyone who speaks up for the public is silenced, subdued.
I have no intention of owning a car
I need public trains & buses to get where I need to go in my country. I took buses from birth ( with my parents ) through school, NS, work and now when I am unemployed.
Everything for the MNC and foreign investors, what about me?
Thanks for the tax rebate for being an ex NS man, thanks for Singtel shares, thanks for a beautiful skyline, thanks for keeping our country safe and secure... thanks for the NEw economic restructuring shares.
I am now suppose to sheepishly, tail between my legs, walk away and be eternaly grateful?
Yes, I am. and with my life I will repay this miserable debt.
You should calculate how much you are paying now for transport & when July comes, then you will know whether you are actually paying more or less.
ReplyDeleteI am already immune to any announcement of lowering a certain cost around election time, as I know very soon we would be back to square one after the big GE, citing a jump in the cost of providing such service or goods.
ReplyDeleteI'm tired of listening to lies and untruths. I'm pepertually numb.
Dear Mr. Tan,
ReplyDeleteThe fairs are going up, not coming down! Hopefully someone can help me to understand how they arrived at the 2.5% savings.
The minimum bus fare for the first 3.2km would go up from 69 cents to 71 cents; on top of that you pay additional 10 cents increase per KM thereafter! The news only showed the new fairs but not the current ones. Yes, there is a rebate if you change bus/mrt within certain time limit. So through some so called survey that was never shown to us, the BIG HEADLINE was 2.5% savings! I thought the Minibond guys were "clever"! sigh...
REX comments as follows,
ReplyDeletehonestly i don't understand the mathematics being presented. It is very confusing.
it's the same as saying the increse of gST will help the poor. It's pap-logic, it is not meant to be understood by the masses.
rex
The current government has really master the art of confusing the mass to perfection.
ReplyDeleteThey are always using complex mathematics, statistics, formulas to confuse the people.
I think they are still overwhelmed by the number of zeroes in their bank account since giving themselves the obscene pay raise in 2007 that they are having difficulties to appreciate $10 or $100 now.
It is high time for people who can speak a simple language that 99% of the population can understand to run the country.
Merlion
Very confused.
ReplyDeleteIs it "increased" or "deceased"??
In the long run, consumer will suffer more even if there is just a slight increase in fare in future.
Is it "bad news" rather than "good news"?????????
I welcome distance-based system, but why it is per KM charging and not per meter?
ReplyDeleteThe distance between two bus stop can be as short as 300m.
Effectively, there is a 0.5% increase in fare.
ReplyDeleteThis is because the saving of 2.5 % is using the un-discounted base of current prices as reference. That is, currently there is a 3% discount which is expiring very soon. So after giving a 2.5% discount there is still a net increase of 0.5% in fare from July.
Since one will be encourage to take the shortest route to destination,
ReplyDeletemultiple transfers will be inevitable,
the initial base charge for subsequent boarding shall be waived.
The big headline "fares reduced by 2.5%" is misleading. If you read the details, I do not think there is any reduction at all, but merely a case of robbing peter to pay paul, and overall still higher revenues for the operators. In other words it is a fare hike.
ReplyDeleteThe PTC is just there to rubber stamp.
Once again, complex formulas, and hybrid systems.. like CPF LIFE, complex scenarios, like COE, I just dont get it! like HDB pricing, I dont understand it, like insurance too.
ReplyDeleteIn New York city ( Manhattan ) board any bus, pay US$1.25 and thats it!
In Amsterdam, buy a ticket on the tram, transfer as many as u like and return within 1 hour.
In Frankfurt, buy a ticket, any distance, return, transfer within 1 hr, no problem.
Even a goodhu can use and understand.. but here in Singapore:
No!.. must be complex!!
Bunch of nincompoops.. arm chair ones too!
Just to understand the fares one has to pay for public transportations, Singaporeans have to be a mathematician.
ReplyDeleteWhat the heck is going on?
patriot
Anyway, I hope all these changes will still make the transport operators earn fat profits. My financial future depends on their share capital appreciate and dividend payouts. I will know by next financial year. The more they earn, the richer I get. Everyone happy. In fact, I will be quite disappointed if they did not earn more from the consumer or if they have to spend more just to keep the consumers happy.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the difference between waiting for an extra 5 mins or 10 mins? At most, walk a little faster when you reach your destination - it also keeps you fitter. I certainly hope to see trains and buses fully utilized to optimize my dollar value instead of half empty buses or mrt trains.
a SMRT, ComfortDelgro shareholder.
2.5% is rather immaterial. I don't mind having fares increased by 100% if service level is improved by 100%.
ReplyDeleteHow much of the "profis" will go to u "shareholders"???
ReplyDeleteWhy so happy when they make more profit while others suffer???
To anon 9.57PM:
ReplyDeleteWell, so far, transport companies are yielding dividends that averages about 4% p.a. which, to me, is good for a low-risk investment portfolio. With the increase in population, pricier car ownership and higher oil prices, it is inevitable that more people will use public transport. You cannot fight this trend.
As shareholders, we expect the share price and/or dividends to appreciate with time with better performance in the company. There is nothing wrong with this.
Also, no one will "suffer" per se, because even if got increase, it is in line with inflation, which is about 3%. Distance based pricing is fair - it is just like pay as you use. The further and more you travel, the more you pay. They should have implemented long time ago.
If you don't like to take bus or mrt, you have other alternative modes of transport: brisk walk (if the destination is less than three bus stops away), bicycle, scooter, motorcycle, taxi, car pool, rent a car, and finally own a car. In fact, my ang mo associate cycles to work. Nobody is forcing you to take public transport.
There are costs that is predictable in running any company, and this needs to be recovered otherwise it will not attract anyone to start any business.
ReplyDeleteA transport company has many costs that needs to be accounted for even before the start of operations. So for example, if we want more compettition in the hope that we get cheaper tickets to travel or better service in terms of route and comfort. Lets take a look at the fees, licences required to launch a bus company.
Company Registration with ACCRA
$300
Bus Service License- unknown
Bus Operator's License - unknown
LTA road tax for buses - dependant on bus engine capacity
Cost of bus
Cost of staff
Cost of training
Cost of parking
Cost of fuel
Cost of insurance
Cost of maintainence
Cost of cleaning
Cost of sofware design
Clearly, it will cost millions in 1 year. How much cheaper can a bus ride be?
There must be a margin for profit, otherwise it becomes a welfare service.
It is perhaps this margin that can be reduced to keep prices low.. the alternative is to raise wages.
@Anon April 22, 2010 11:15 PM
ReplyDeleteYou oviously do not fall under the low-income category or have never been poor before.
Can you tell a elderly worker working as a cleaner earning $600/mth wages why her transport fees have to include dividens to the public transport company's shareholders and high bonus for the management/directors?
Your remark "If you don't like to take bus or mrt, you have other alternative modes of transport: brisk walk" is insulting to the people who have no other option but to take public transport.
Freddie
"Freddie" @7:08PM
ReplyDelete>> You obviously do not fall under >> the low-income category or have >> never been poor before.
There is no basis for this statement.
>> Can you tell a elderly worker >> working as a cleaner earning
>> $600/mth wages why her
>> transport fees have to include
>> dividens to the public
>> transport company's
>> shareholders and high bonus for
>> the management/directors?
Are the transport operators running welfare organisations? When the operators get privatised and listed on the exchange, the shareholders are already getting dividends, regardless or not the so-call $600/mth elderly is taking the public transport or not.
>> Your remark "If you don't like
>> to take bus or mrt, you have
>> other alternative modes of
>> transport: brisk walk" is
>> insulting to the people who
>> have no other option but to
>> take public transport.
The suggestions are options that are workable. Just because you don't care to try doesn't mean that it cannot work and certainly it is not meant as an insult as you would narrow-mindedly categorised. Think creatively about problems instead of waiting for the government to spoonfeed you.
a person who work about 10 hours per day including lunch ( skip breakfast at time), 8 hours sleep , 1 hour for personal hygiene and grooming, 1 hour transport, left with 4 hour for housework and family, children. Assuming lucky enough weekend no need to work and still healthy enough, weekend go for course upgrading to stay relevant so can still be relevant enough to work after you have graduate from your last school for more than say 20 years at 45, before that you will have to go for course upgrading.
ReplyDeleteand now he is thinking maybe he need to cycle for part of his travel to work or transfer bus, and wake up 1 hour earlier everyday..
FYI, Mr Brown cycles to work and cycles back. He is a respected blogger too with a family to upkeep, including an autistic child. And he is already approaching 40 or around there.
ReplyDeleteIf he can do it, why not you?
Whether things happen or not depends on the individual and not on the circumstances. Rather than waste time criticising, complaining and waiting for things to happen, please stop whining and think outside the box (as what Mr. Tan KL would say).
@Anon April 22, 2010 11:15 PM
@Anon April 22, 2010 11:15 PM
ReplyDeleteIf you were from a low income family, I would like to see you tell your elderly mother to 'take a brisk walk or cycle' to work as Mr Brown can do it, so can you! Such remarks reflects your simplicity and insensitivity in thoughts.
While the public transport operators are not welfare organisations, they are monopolies (although the govt would have us think otherwise) and receive subsidies from the government (abet with inflated or fudged values). These public transport operators are duty bound to provide the cheapest possible transport fares to the mass public in the most efficient manner.
I do not expect the elderly lady to get a free ride but I do not think she should be made to pay for the shareholder's dividens and managements high renumeration/ bonuses. I expect her to be paying a subsidised transport cost due to the many benefits the public transport operator receives from the govt, who ultimately gets the money from working s'poreans.
I will let other readers to decide if your statement "the shareholders are already getting dividends, regardless or not the so-call $600/mth elderly is taking the public transport or not" is a valid one.
I am sure it will not bother you the challenges that low income people face and how big a difference a few dollars in transport savings can make to their lives, so long as you receive your annual 3-4% dividens.
Afterall, the low income people only have themselves to blame because they are always 'whining' and cannot 'think outside the box'.
I think you will be better appreciated commenting on pro-PAP blogs.
Freddie
rex comments on Freddie's mail, as follows,
ReplyDeleteIs there such a thing as pro PAP blog? The last i heard even the ypap blog has more brickbats than bouquets. A certain reporter in the straits times, tried to misconvey the statistics but in Temasek Rveiw blog, a blogger called Kojakbt challenged her with a post full of concise details, and she was never been seen there ever since.
rex
Interesting blog regarding the public transport fares. Now a days fares of transport rises. This will helps u more.
ReplyDelete