Privatize Bus services as MRT solutions-

[Nice-Gook]

Yup,folks.Back to the basics.It's that simple.MRT is a diseased line.PAP & SMRT keeps on prescribing panadols.The sickness needs a major surgery not symptom management.

The immediate solution is to privatize bus routes.Let the operators choose their routes.No more monopoly. The fares must be dictated by the LTA.

It's gonna take a lot of load off SMRT.....while LTA and SMRT can slug it out as who gonna pay for MRT surgery.Besides,I reckon two years time is the minimum for solid solutions.Meanwhile,commuters must not be punished for PAP monopolistic blame game.

Privatization of buses also creates job opportunities for old and aged locals.And entrepreneurship can thrive once more in this barren land.


What say you?

 

[halsey02]

They had scheme "B" buses before, the private operators found it stiffling, fees too high, times too short & routes in which they can't make any revenue to cover costs. This is not the answer.

The answer lies in purging the country, especially the way we we tolerate people who are, sloppy, inefficient & never transparent with their actions. Fair to pay them high renumeration, but it is also fair to sack those responsible for the errors, without having to ask, or the public demanding them to leave. To be paid that kind of money, there must be honour also.

 

[captainxerox]

They had scheme "B" buses before, the private operators found it stiffling, fees too high, times too short & routes in which they can't make any revenue to cover costs. This is not the answer.
.

scheme B, a derogatory label imho, should be brought back to challenge the oligopoly and nip away at its profits. esp since smrt and sbs don't really compete with each other e.g. their turf is geographical. with private buses, then we can benchmark smrt and sbs better.

 

[Kohliantye]

They had scheme "B" buses before, the private operators found it stiffling, fees too high, times too short & routes in which they can't make any revenue to cover costs. This is not the answer.

The answer lies in purging the country, especially the way we we tolerate people who are, sloppy, inefficient & never transparent with their actions. Fair to pay them high renumeration, but it is also fair to sack those responsible for the errors, without having to ask, or the public demanding them to leave. To be paid that kind of money, there must be honour also.

And may I add, "To be paid that kind of money, there must be honour also, AND A WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY like a true gentleman. With positions comes responsibilities.

 

[Nice-Gook]

scheme B, a derogatory label imho, should be brought back to challenge the oligopoly and nip away at its profits. esp since smrt and sbs don't really compete with each other e.g. their turf is geographical. with private buses, then we can benchmark smrt and sbs better.

What is worse is that oligopoly as Temasek Holdings is unaccountable to none.Contrast with any commercial company whose accounts are open to scrutiny.Even in privatization PAP can set boundaries unreachable by our commercial community,Like the requirement for our presidential candidates.It is so tuned that only PAP ex-ministers becomes qualified.Hence,PAP can do the same in the name of privatization where only their cronies can compete for state assets.

Privatization of state assets is the norm in the global village.The key requirement to take up such opportunities lies in the huge capital one can muster and most importantly the expertise in running such companies.Both are beyond for normal local citizens....Hence usually foreign MNC's compete for this piece of pies.But since most state controlled monopolies are usually strategic goods and services; foreigner's equity is usually limited to below 50%.....even than the expertise to run such monopolies is scarce among locals.For example say,our bus services.Previously there were many bus operators with know-how.Today we have only SBS and Transit with the know-how of operating bus routes.

Good examples are Russia and Indonesia.When the former USSR broke to pieces and communism gave in to capitalism.The opportunity to make a quick buck was abundant.In fact all Russian billionaires made their buck during this time....But the vast majority of Russians under communism could not understand how capitalistic economy worked.So 99.999% Russians could not benefit out of this liberalization.....only those Russians with foreign connection made billions.

Close at home when Indonesia was reeling under the Asian financial crisis during 1997.Their currency depreciate over 300%.The smarter ones moved their liquidity to Singapore and moved the monies back to Indonesia once their currency hit rock bottom.What it actually meant was that now they can buy Indonesian assets for one third of their previous value.Because Indonesian finacial institutions were under tremendous stress;their state assets went on fire sales.Most of their banks,telecommunications and media industries became foreign owned.Singapore benefited out of this.

What I am simply saying is that privatization of state assets itself is no good to a nation.The capital and the expertise to run such companies must be available to the public.Under the PAP governance both the capital available and expertise to run strategic portfolios had been kept within their crony circle.