Leong Sze Hian and Joshua Chiang /

We refer to the report “PTC to review fare adjustment formula after 2012”  (Channel News Asia, Jul 14).

Fares formula valid until end 2012?

It states that “[t]he Public Transport Council (PTC) will review the fare adjustment formula for subsequent years after 2012 when the validity of the current formula ends”.

The current formula is : 0.5 CPI (Consumer Price Index)  + 0.5 WI (Average Wage Increase) -1.5%

On what basis does the statement say that the current formula’s validity ends in 2012? What is it that will make the formula invalid, and thus open for review, only after 2012?

The last fare increase was in 2008 at 1.7 percent. If the current application by transport operators for an increase of 2.8 percent is passed, it would mean a total fare increase of 4.5 percent for the period of 2008 till now. During the same period, real median wages have DECLINED by 3.9 percent.

Surely, a formula that may result in a total fare increase against a real median wage decrease over the same period needs to be reviewed now, and not until 2013!

In the same article, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew reportedly said it is “usually the profit incentive of commercial enterprises that spurs efficiency and productivity improvements.”

In this connection, the distance fares were implemented last year when for the first time in the history of the current formula, the result would have been a decrease in fares for all commuters across the board!

While the PTC should be allowed to “deliberate on the fare adjustment proposals properly and to come to its decision”, surely it should not be allowed to do another fait accompli on commuters.

As to the Ministry of Transport (MOT) saying the deliberations will bear in mind the interests of commuters and “long-term viability of the public transport operators”, as the Workers’ Party’s statement on 14 July has pointed out, with a total profit of $215.4 million last year, surely the “long-term viability of the public transport operators” may not be at risk if the fares increase application is rejected.

Higher service standards: Really?

The Transport Minister also argued that nationalizing the public transport system has “serious downsides” as commuters and taxpayers – including those who do not take public transport – are likely to end up paying more and that they may also see lower service standards over time.

He added that there will be “little incentive to keep costs down, if a nationalised public transport operator works on a cost-recovery basis and depends on the government for its funding”.

Has the Minister forgotten that the operators’ reason for applying now for a fare increase is due to “costs pressures”?

Also, going by the Minister’s reasoning, shouldn’t we be privatising more Government agencies and monopolistic providers of public goods and services, instead of maintaining or creating new ones?

Does he not wonder how most other countries do it with public transport operators that are truly “public”?

Whilst on the subject of “lower service standards over time”, we must say that we have to agree that transport service standards have been deteriorating over the last few years in Singapore.

We have noticed a trend, when taking the MRT or buses during peak hours, that more commuters may be travelling in the reverse direction to their destination so that they do not end up seeing so many trains and buses go by filled to the brim, had they waited at their normal stops. This may actually result in more commuters being unable to get on board even as trains and buses just depart from their terminals, because more people are travelling backwards towards the terminals.

In spite of this trend which is clearly a deterioration in service standards, we still have one of the most expensive fares in the world, primarily because we do not have unlimited travel monthly passes like almost all other developed countries like Hong Kong, Malaysia, the United States and the United Kingdom.

Record profits again?

Since it was said in conjunction with the implementation of distance based fares last year that the operators’ would lose out in revenue, because two-thirds of commuters would pay less, why is it that the combined profits of the two operators have once again hit a record high for last year?

This, like practically every reason (or as some may say- every conceivable excuse), given for increasing fares in the past, has failed the ultimate test of eventual statistical outcomes.

P.S. Leong Sze Hian has written more than 50 articles about public transport over the last decade or so.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

【选举】刘韦伶:牵连甚广 无家可归为迫切民生课题

刘韦伶指出,无家可归并非只是失业者的课题,其中也包括没屋遮顶的低薪阶层以及面对租赁问题的居民,她认为这都是迫切需要探讨和解决的民生课题,并提出了数项解决方案。 前进党丹戎巴葛候选人刘韦伶今早(7月8日)在脸书帖文指出,她昨日(7日)和媒体在互动时,提到有关无家可归的课题,以及可以采取的解决方案。 建屋局限制及合租问题 帖文中,她指出,除了失业者,低收入群亦面对无家可归的困境,如清洁工人与保安人员。“他们无可奈何得露宿街头的其中几个主要因素,如想在靠近工作地点租房子,却发现并不便宜;过了午夜时分无法使用公共交通工具及必须在隔天早些时候开始轮班工作。” 她表示,生活工资的定义需要重新探讨,逐步落实具体建议,并为这些底薪群体制定更人道的工作时间,才有希望改善他们的情况。 此外,她认为建屋局对租赁组屋申请者所设下的限制条例,如申请者等待时段、种族固定配额等,以及联合单身计划中同居租户问题,也是导致无家可归的原因。 刘韦伶指出,我国政府朝向房产权国家发展,因此较不支持增加租赁组屋的供应(新加坡公众租赁组屋–不得已的居家抉择,第八页,李光耀政策学院,新加坡国立大学)。 就联合单身计划方便,她披露,有者是因为搭配上不合适的租户而引发冲突,包括需要照顾有肢体或精神残疾的租户,最后选择露宿街头。 租赁房屋欠缺及家庭收入问题 她也就目前受冠状病毒19疫情影响而选择售屋的情况指出,售屋者在当局的规定下,售屋后30个月才能申请入住租赁租屋。 而若家庭总收入被评定有所增加,即表示他们必须缴付更高的租金。同时,有居民指出,租金也可能随着政府批准的家庭每月总收入门槛,即1500元而提高。 因此,她认为增加租赁房屋的供应,缩短等后期,并慎重考虑个人隐私空间,把家庭“总”收入改为净收入正在制定标准,才能更好得解决问题。…

【冠状病毒19】时隔36天中国武汉出现新确诊 吉林省舒兰市列“高风险”

中国自去年底爆发疫情以来,疫情一度陷入极为严重的态势,尤其湖北省武汉。经过数个月的封闭式抗疫后,疫情开始出现好转,甚至一度不再新增本土确诊病例。然而,时隔36天后,又再次出现新增确诊病例,这亦是武汉自4月4日以来,再次新增确诊病例。 据中国国家卫健委表示,湖北省于本月9日再次新增本土确诊病例一例,翌日再增五例本土确诊病例。由于武汉市东西湖区的疫情警戒,湖北省正式被提升为“中风险”区。 截至10日,中国再次新增确诊病例17例,其中10例为本土病例,分别是吉林三例、湖北五例、辽宁一例,黑龙江一例,另外为七例境外输入病例,均在内蒙古;无新增死亡病例。 另一方面,黑龙江,吉林两省也先后爆发疫情,更跨省传播到辽宁省会沉阳,令舆论担忧东北三省的防疫病。 吉林省舒兰市提升“高风险” 吉林省卫健委员会日前简报,吉林市新增3起本土确诊病例,通过舒兰市确诊病例直接接触患者,再重新补充11例新冠状肺炎确诊病例,因此吉林省舒兰市疫情风险等级被提升为“高风险”。 吉林省已发布通告,舒兰市从10日起所有公共场所及娱乐场所全部关闭、禁止集会活动,铁公路、计程车等运输全部停运,封城到家户,各社区都只保留一出入通道,每户一天只准一人出外购买生活物资,其他人都被禁足在家。 据《新浪网》报道指出,目前感染源仍未查清,而新增的11例本土病例均系5月8日吉林省通报的舒兰市确诊病例的关联病例,包括其丈夫、姐姐、姐夫等人。

扎吉哈:职场歧视问题下降 逾八成求职者称未被歧视

人力部与国家发展部国务部长扎吉哈表示,有关工作场所中的歧视已下降了65巴仙,超过八成的求职者称自己在工作场所时并未被歧视。 非选区议员贝理安于昨日(3日)国会询及是否针对工作场所内的歧视问题,针对员工进行调查。 扎吉哈在昨日(3日)国会中透露,若要证明工作场所的歧视问题,并非取决于其感知调查,更应该关注人力部的相关投诉数量,而人力部近年来所收到的投诉已逐渐减少,从2015年的580宗投诉,下降至2018年里只有200宗,而2018年中的200宗功占据人力部所接收到的总投诉量不足1巴仙。 他续指,人力部曾在2018年进行公平就业做法调查,发现逾八成的求职者认为,无论是性别、婚姻状态、孩子人数、种族与宗教、国籍等都并非成为求职时的障碍,而且大多数员工认为在工作条件、福利、培训及职业发展等方面,都受到了公平的对待。 同时,他称含有歧视性的招聘广告目前也很少见,并透露过去十年中,妇女和老年人的就业机会也有所改善,例如55岁至64岁的就业率从2009年的57巴仙上升至2019年间的68巴仙;而同时,25岁至64岁的女性就业率则从2002年64巴仙增至2019年的73巴仙。 除了就业率增长,扎基也表示,性别薪酬的差距也随着时间的推移,从2002年的8.8巴仙降至2018年的6.3巴仙。 然而,针对相关调查,贝里安表示是否能够提供更多细节,包括在调查面临歧视性做法时的受访者,扎基指出,他无法立即提供更多细节,因为当初仅问道政府是否进行调查,但他也透露,仍然会有少数雇主会“故意规避就业原则及要求”。 不过他披露,在该项调查中共涵盖了3100人和3400家企业,因此达到了可信标准。尽管没有具体调查日期,但他透露,人力部也将会在今年晚些时候,发表一份相关公平就业的调查。