How should public transport fares be subsidised (if at all)?

Question

Do you think that the Singapore Government should consider subsidising public transport fares? What if that means higher taxes? How should this be dealt with?

Answer 1

Our Transport System is World-class in the the Singapore Govt's own World!! Dream World!!

The price increases are forcing the public to subsidise these Transport Companies for their poorly managed costs.

Our Govt officials should be more sincere in dealing with issues, instead of coming out with stupid arguments in the extremes of a totally free of charge transport system. They know damn well that this is not the expectation of the public. Wake up Raymond Lim & Stop digressing from the main issue like an idiot. You want respect, please give more intelligent responses. Don't waste our energies on frivolous arguments. Take action to improve the situation.

The opposition Party has shown our Govt that they can better manage the cost of Lift Upgrading programs in Potong Pasir at more than half the Govt's Cost. So buck up & stop your stupid arguments.

Anyway, we don't need the Govt to subsidise the public transport fares, if the transport companies do their part to stay viable and cost-efficient.

This is possible, if our Govt & PTC work on improvements in the following areas:

1) Better use of MRT & Bus Terminals as Real Estates to generate extra Income. Learn from Thailand in using more of their Terminal Spaces for Advertisement TV Panels & Shopping Carts. The extra Income should be used to subsidise the operating costs (Overheads, Expenses & Maintenance Costs). Advertsing Space at Bus Stop should be sold thru more Agents or Auction Bidding System, since they are currently under-use.

Our Transport Companies are building shopping centers to earn more Income, but fail to use existing Real Estates efficiently for Income creation.

2) Discourage clutch mentality in our transport companies. Our transport companies know that the Govt will do whatever is needed to keep them viable, as their services is vital to the economy & the people.

This is the same reason for the bad state of the US Auto companies, that are waiting for Govt assistance to keep them afloat, as they know very well that the economy is dependent on them.

Our transport companies should concentrate on improving their processes & cost-cutting measures, instead of relying on the same few lame excuses to support their price increases.

3) Profiteering should be discouraged for Public services, by setting a limit to the profits that can be allowed for such services. This will keep out aggressive investors with expectations of high ROI. Bonds with lower returns & lower risk, can be issued to the public to keep out aggressive shareholders.

4) The Govt should do it's part in making sure that these public services companies don't suck the blood out of people who depend on these essential services, as well as don't encourage or rely on price increases to get better ROI for the shareholders.

5) Our Public Transport Council have to do a better job in auditing these transport companies with emphasis on productivity & cost-efficiency in logistics & management.

6) Curb Overhead cost - discourage unnecessary high pay by not employing over-qualified people for regular functions. Outsource high expertise functions to experts instead. This will reduce cost in the long-term.

7) Staff & Management pay should be kept low in public services, as it is suitable for people looking for higher job security & less demanding job scopes. As such, people who are looking for high paying jobs, will be forced to take up more demanding jobscopes where their capabilities are needed.

8) Introduce Relief Drivers to reduce Driver's overtime cost. This could avoid Safety issues from over-worked Drivers and generate jobs for the people.

Answer 2

This question really sets one thinking... Subsidising with or w/o increasing tax might cause a surge in people who take public transport, this means it will include those who can really afford a car and this imply that they actually kind of abuse the welfare given to the poor, although the cut in the number of cars on the road is a plus point.



This might cause the bus companies to have to bring in more buses for the increase in demand and it will be back to square one as cost is also increase.



Not subsidising the fares at times like this will really make everybody suffer. The saying that you will have to spend the moment you step out of your house is especially true in these times, at least you will still have to pay for the bus fare.



The only possible solution is not whether to subsidise the fare but how to adjust the fare according to the economy situation of the average people. Currently everything has been going up and never seems to come down. GST, ERP, transport fare, food and etc. Even in a recession.



Bus services are also a point to consider. We are already paying so much and we still have to wait half an hour for a bus? LTA can really revise their way of accessing on should they approve the fare hikes. Bus companies claims that they are making LESS profit and not NO profit due to a portion of commuters not paying the fares.



At the era where one trip may maximum cost $1.50, this is not such a big issue. As the fare increases, more people WILL attempt to cheat on the fares. When that happens, the bus companies will again make the same claim to raise the fares. This in turn goes on into a vicious cycle with no end.



Maybe it will be a good idea for LTA to control the overall public transportation. This way, they can not only monitor the profit of these service providers closely, they can also monitor the quality of service they provide. Most importantly they can react accordingly to the situation to increase or decrease the fares.

Answer 3

i feel it does not matter if public transport are subsidized or not. Either way, we (read: taxpayers, common folks) are footing the bill. What REALLY matters was if public transport companies should be listed. With sole monopoly to the whole market and zero competition, how can the govt justify the reason of deregulating the public transport sector decades ago? Yes, we have two major public transport companies, but is there competition between them??

The talk about higher fare prices lead to better services is really an insult to the intelligence of all commuters out there who take public transports on a daily basis. Years after years, it is the same old squeeze during peak hours, is that an improvement?

Maybe it time for our dear transport minister and his ministry to take a reality check and start taking public transport to work. Maybe then they will better understand, how "good" and "world class" our transport system have become.

Higher fares are not the answer to every problem that arises in Singapore. Sometimes the problems lie in the management and efficiency of each individual company. The tax payers should not be penalized and made to pay more for the problems that arise directly / indirectly due to poor management while the companies themselves used these self created problems to justify for higher fares to improve their already high profit margins.

Answer 4

The transport minister's handling of the whole question of public transport fares is simply amateurish. (1) How can it be possible to say that oil prices have no direct impact on fares? (2) In spite of next year's expected worldwide recession, how can a minister not even have the courage to take a stand to say firmly that there won't be a fare hike next year? (3) And in increasing taxes to subsidise transport fares, as a bus commuter AND tax payer, does that mean I am also subsidising my own bus fares by paying more tax?! (4) If the fares are linked to wages, does the expected large lay offs next year also mean that fares will drop accordingly?



The government must subsidised public transport fares because it is it's responsibility to ensure that the well being of its people is taken care of and the country is being run efficiently. Otherwise, let the market dictate and competition has proved that prices will be competitive.

Answer 5

I think we are getting it all wrong, if we say subsidising public transport means more taxes.



If the government just pass on the monies that we take from the motorist, namely ERP, which is supposed to solve our road congestion problem, to subsidise the public transport then it will have the desired effect.



But if we keep using ERP as a source of revenue. Then the price differential between private and public transport will continue to remain small. Don't dream that our problem will ever be solved. Just be prepare to pay more and more.



So the question should be " should the private transport user be made to subsidise the public transport user ". Higher tax is never an issue.

Answer 6

If the public transport system is "world class" the fares must commensurate with its service. However, here we are not experiencing such service.

Why?

1) the buses are either too old or the newer ones are not practical (if you have boarded them before , you know which type i m talking about)



2) not sure is it the bus schedule management are poor or the traffic condition of the route where these buses ply , quite often we see buses of the same service number arrived together , as a result the long waiting time if you have been waiting for it. One example is service number 13.



3) some bus captains deliberately slow down when their schedule is ahead of time , hence making the bus journey very uncomfortable. Contrary to this they would speed off at every bus stop if they are behind schedule.



4) because of the mindset to provide excellent service there times especially during peak hours the bus captains would wait for as long as 15 minutes to accomodate all passengers who wish to board the crowded bus (not sure is they observing safety risk). In order to achieve excellent service would the bus companies management deploy more feeder buses instead of packing the buses.



5) Relating to point 4) Noticed that the passengers are also at fault they are reluctant to move up the upper deck eventhough there are seats available especially if the MRT station are only three stops away. Example are Service number 88 when picking up passenger alon Bishan street 22.



With all the 5 points that i have observed i think the PTC should not think about increasing bus fares anymore instead focus on improving service level and as oil prices have gone down it is also time for the bus companies to revise the fares downward so there is no need to think about the Government subsidising by means of .... introducing higher taxes...... let us look at it the realistic method, i would appreciate it if the Organisation and Government work out a transport system of world class and fare system that adjust according to the essential commodity price.

Answer 7

People can't have it both ways. Either your taxes are going up or you're going to be paying a fare. In my opinion, it's better to have the government run it for a couple reasons. One, they're in it for the same way they are education. It's not about profit. Two, people who work for the transit will have safer job. With all the economic problems, a private company could go under and lay off loads of people.



Singapore's a smaller country. It's the second most densely populated country in the world. There's a lot of money in Singapore. Most people with high education status in the world are accepting towards socialization. Whether that be medicene, college education, transportation or other things. This will help in tourism as well which is a large industry there. Tourists want an affordable way of traveling around. It's expensive traveling around. Especially longer distances. If the government were to subsidize it, they could lower the rates as an appeal to the public. They may make less profit in the process of doing so, but they probably wouldn't need to hire many new people since the fertility rate in Singapore is low enough to keep the population from rising.



I'm not currently aware of what private company operates throughout Singapore. Or if there are multiple ones of them. They'd have two ways to approach it though.



1) Go the route the Japanese Government would on subsidizing a brand car (i.e. Toyota).



The companies would remain. But they'd be caped at making at a certain level. What ever exceeds what ever that cap is would go back to the government which would be used to help the companies.Say for example they said you can only make 300 million for this year.If they don't make that much though, the government covers the difference. It provides a safety net to the company. The more the company grows and inflation rises, the higher that gap goes. Obviously there'd have to be much cooperation in this process.



2) The government takes over and runs it as it's own company. In New Jersey where I live, we got NJ Transit. It's a state owned company. All the profits go directly back to the state. That along with plenty of other things though is the reason why we have the highest real estate tax. And high taxes in general. Even though we're the 8th most populated and 4th smallest state in size though, it's not efficient in ninety percent of the state for local travel. But although not cheap, it's good for long distance traveling.

Answer 8

First I do not agreed that Government should FULLY subsidised Public transport, that will means passing the whole cost to the Tax Payer. However I resend Public Transport companies being listed. Public Transport Companies first responsibilities is to serve the common mass, the public. By being listed, it now have to serve it's shareholder first. And with the ever Lust for profit, they have to maintain Profit Growth year on year, which means they have to raise fare every year. Governmnet should buy back ttansport companies and de-list it. Imagine if all our public hosipital are all public listed, what will happen than? higher medical fees of course, the argument here is the same for the transport companies.

Answer 9

First of all, Public Transport (bus & train) is meant for the masses. Majority of those people who take public transport are working class as they can't afford to buy cars. So with this view in mind, it would make sense to subsidise for this group of people.



For those who can afford cars and can afford taxi everyday...well, i leave it to the Transport Minister to decide.



During the morning and evening rush hour, it is no joke in taking bus or train... people are squeezed to the maximum capacity of the transport, Why? everyone in the train/bus are either trying to get to work on time or to school on time or trying to go home early to have a good rest. Do that day in and day out and you will definitely feel pissed.



Subsiding Public Transport should not be from higher taxes. It doesn't make sense to Subsidise on one hand and increasing tax on the other. The fund required to subsidise should come from such source as in ERP, Traffic fines, Road Taxes, GST etc. that's my view anyway.



I feel quite weird as we are encouraged to take public transport, With the increase numbers taking these public transport, Cost for taking public transport are not coming down but going up instead. What gives??



My opinion is that if the transport fare cannot be subsidised, at least no increase for the time being.

Answer 10

Public transport = Transportation for the public (citizens) who couldn't afford to owe even the cheapest price of Kia or Toyota in town... Its also known as a "time-sharing" transportation for everyone to move from one place to the other...



Im not that smart alec to answer this question much but I would appreciate if the government could help the citizens who are earning about >$1500 a month to live by while the whole world is being hit by inflation. Even 10 cents of reduction per fare would make a difference to some people...

Answer 11

I am curious about this word "subsidy"? When Govt collect taxes, they are supposed to be used again for the benefit of the people. May I know how much is being used for public transport. Like the US, I think our public transport is "subsidising" our corporate leaders (directors, etc) through the profits obtained by the companies concerned. Let's look at this matter seriously first and then consider the higher taxes later. Please be honest with the people as Singaporeans of today are well-read and understand the global situation very well. - R Noentil

Answer 12

I don't think public transport should be subsidised too much. If they are subsidised, then people will end up paying more, not less. It's unfair on practically all citizens. Tourists get free transport (they normally take taxis anyway), but even those citizens who do not take transport will be penalised for others' sake. It's horrible.



"not for profit"? Oh, how you wish. Look at NKF. "Inflation rates" when the economy crashes? Again, rubbish (I would have liked to use a stronger word).



I wanna emigrate. If I ever decide to come back again, I would become a PR and worry about it then. I'm pretty sure that only students get any benefits at all anyway, and even then, mostly those who can't afford their education.

Answer 13

Yes. The government should subsidise the public transport fares. I think Singapore should learn from Japan.

Answer 14

Yes, of course it is not fair on we commuters if the fare is not subsidised...If that is the case of not subsidising, then go ahead to improve our public transport services as the service is very very lousy as a whole...The waiting time for the buses and trains should be improved...The conditions of the buses and the trains should also improved...The driving skills of the drivers should be improved especially those that u all just recruited from China...I encountered an incident last Saturday on the 20 December 2008 at about 2.55 p.m. taking a bus 185 from Jurong West Ave 1 towards Jurong West Sports Complex...The driving skill of the driver was so horrible to that extent of us, really must find a seat to sit down and even though u were seated down...We must have safety belts around us in case of us falling out from our seats...Just imagine the way of my description of the skill of this driver from Mainland China...We can conclude that the Singapore Bus Services should not have recruited people from China just becos the costs of their labour is cheap...The Singapore Bus Services should improve the welfare of the drivers working for the SBS Transit and not to recruit such low skill personnels to work for SBS Transit...Another incident is on Hari Raya Haji, whereby we queued up a long time to top-up our ez-link cards...There were 3 customer service assistants at the customers on that day, but only a counter was servicing the customers...The lady who serviced us at the counter, did not know how to communicate well with us in simple English...Probably, other foreign workers do not understand Singapore English that well...My hubby & myself had a hard time having to repeat the sentence again and again to her...It was so frustrating on a Public Holiday...My conclusion is to improve the service of the public transport if the government thinks twice of subsidising our public transport fares....

Answer 15

Subsidising public transports = Car drivers having to pay more. No way. Perhaps the best way is to tag the public transport fares to a formula. Transport Fare Rate = Inflation Rate + Petrol Rate + Fixed Profit Margin Rate

Answer 16

claims that they are making LESS profit and not NO profit due to a portion of commuters not paying the fares.



At the era where one trip may maximum cost $1.50, this is not such a big issue. As the fare increases, more people WILL attempt to cheat on the fares. When that happens, the bus companies will again make the same claim to raise the fares. This in turn goes on into a vicious cycle with no end.



Maybe it will be a good idea for LTA to control the overall public transportation. This way, they can not only monitor the profit of these service providers closely, they can also monitor the quality of service they provide. Most importantly they can react accordingly to the situation to increase or decrease the fares.

Answer 17

Actually I am disappointed in the manner Mr Lim viewed the question of whether transport fares can be subsidised.

When I read the news article (I am not at the dialogue session), the request was not for free transport but a fare reduction to ease the present economic downturn.

The response was hard and an over-reaction (in my opinion) and unwarranted.

If the government is not for the people, then what is it for?

If requests like this is treated in such manner, I question the philosophy of public service.

Is the philosophy of public service agencies to make profits (increasing every year, even years of recession) out of the public they serve?

Is this the consequence of privatising our public service agencies?

At times like these, the possible solution provided by a senior public servant is to increase GST (taxes) in order to fund subsidies? What happen to the profits they had accumulated throughout the decades?

I felt disillusioned by the way our requests are treated compared to the faith that we are supposed to have in a top-notched public servant.

Maybe it is the stress and pressure that evoke such a response.

It is still my hope that the welfare of the public can be first considered when policies are drafted and not the dividends to share-holders.

Answer 18

I would imagine that the job of the transport minister is to only generate tonnes & tonnes of $$ for the government.



He would never spare any thoughts for any fellow Singaporeans who rely heavily on public transport every day. I am very doubtful if the minister had ever travelled on a packed bus or mrt. And I suppose he should, in fact, do it one day.



I strongly feel that the government of the country should be in charge and manage the public transport system, especially to a little country like Singapore.



"Public Transport" as its name implied is meant to be for the public, and its objective is never to make big profit and even so if it is operating at a lost, it must still carry on its normal function and play its role fairly.



Donkey years back, our smart government has "made" the then SBS to become a private company, so that the government will be the 3rd party as the watch dog.



They are also too smart and efficient, NOT in taking care of the needy of the nation, but instead finding its way to generate tonnes and tonnes of $$ for themselves every day.



Some day some prices increased, and they will give you some sort of rebate to ease your tension.



Never believe what they say.



Today, they may tell you: " Yes, oil prices had gone up, so we have to hike the fare."



But when oil price fell beyong half, they would tell you: "hey, sorry folks, fare is not directly link to oil price."



They like to treat us like a 3 year old kid or idiots.



Finally, I think we all deserve a fair priced public transport fare, not subsidy or higher taxing.

Answer 19

There are a few things gov MUST consider in the downturn.



1) Bring the GST back to 3% or less. Afterall, GST is the reflection of what people earn and how much tax they can pay and afford.

2) Bring the transport cost (including Taxi fare) down by 30% or more. Gov offer subsidy to those who are needy. However, I want to bring up a point here " why do gov consider only those family below certain income group are needy? In today's geo eco situation where a lot of common man lost >50% of wealth in finance Tsunami, income is receding and inflation is skyrocketing. I strongly press that all common man are needy and deserve the right to servive thru the economic downturn.

3) Last, Gov employee salaries need to be reviewed. It should also pegged to market situation.

Answer 20

Public transport is a form of business for profitability too. Its CEO & the management wants profit to hit their business quota, the staffs want their salary and bonuses. Want it to lower the fare? Don't use it then! Everyone boycott it! When the demand is no longer there, the price will drop. Public Transport staffs will be axed, service standard will drop, trips will be delayed. All the negative happenings and complains will rise! Come on Singaporeans, whether it is good or bad times, prices of goods and transport will always be on the rise. Businessmen always have all the excuses to raise their prices. Want to live here comfortably? Pay for it! We've already done it for decades, it'll never change. The government should spend its budget on other form of important matter, not public transport. Subsidy on public transport will only make it more demanding and expensive in future.

Answer 21

Yes, I think the government should explore the idea of subsidizing public, at least partially, a co-payment scheme perhaps. And the budget can be from taxes from private car owners such as ERP, Road Tax and COEs.

One way of controlling the population of the private car on the road is to use the tax revenue collected to subsidize the the public transport. If the government can determine a formula and put aside a certain meaningful percentage of the road revenue to subsidize the public transport, and when the population of the private car on the road goes up, the cost of public transport will come down and in turn will make Singaporean think hard about buying car and hence, it will naturally lead to reducing the number of cars on the road.

Instead of discouraging Singaporean to own a car by adding more ERP gantries, which is hugely unpopular all the while, I think government should try to control the car populations by means of encouraging Singaporean to give up their cars by subsidizing public transports.

I agree it would not be easy to construct such scheme, but, I strongly think that it is achievable.

Answer 22

No brainer question. For a small country like Singapore, it should be heavily subsidised if not free for SINGAPOREANS.



In this way, the traffic situation will be greatly reduced, and we can say goodbye to all the ERPs that are sprouting up faster than mushrooms. For those who are not local, Singaporeans are especially known to love freebies. haha. thus i can safely say we'll get a much improved traffic situation.



BUT i don't believe the govt will ever subsidise or give free public transport for Singaporeans, cos ERP (electronic Road Pricing) is a money spinner for them, despite the claims by them otherwise. We as consumers and public road users can feel it.

Answer 23

I think it is the right time for the Singapore Government to consider subsidising public transport fares.



The oil prices in the International Market is one of the lowest in recent times.



It would also encourage more people to travel by public transport and reduce the number of private vehicles on the road.



Air pollution will also be reduced consequently.



Subsidising public transport fares always need not mean increse in Government expenditure.



Operating cost of public transport could be reduced by optimisation of available resources. Consider route optimisation. so that peak hour rush and vehicles being held at signals could be balanced.



Present bus floor level at the rear side is too difficult and cumbersome to access. In short routes passengers are not utilising those seats fully because of the aforesaid reason.Better to look for design change in such cases.

Answer 24

I will support our goverment shall subsidise the public transport fares at this global recession. Oil price drop definate will reduce our public transport expenses, it is for sure. If our government said that provide subsidise but with high taxes, for my opinion it serve no purpose. Thus either way our citizen still suffer and no gain thing.

If company have profit, it should refund more benefit to their employee and gain them respect and loyal. if good time no reward and bad time retrenched, I think most of the worker will left the company when there is any opportunity.

Answer 25

Yes the bus fare can be kept affordable, if the Government Lower or abolished the diesel tax and also abolished the ERP for all for all Public transport The saving can be then pass on to the Public at large. I understand the both company's SBS and SMRT, are paying million of dollars for the both diesel tax and ERP. The Government should consider the move seriously.

Answer 26

Read the answers posted by some of the most helpful people.



I just have something to bring up on the Public Transport: Advertising Fees. That is definitely another channel of profit for these companies.



I'm truly sick of all the inflations, and that the Govt had "revised" their wages, and all that crap. From where I stand, I see that a lot of shops selling out their products and closing, and that the buildings are being erected with Capland. I know this because I come across their properties overseas being built.



Fuel prices have come down, but for how long, we are never sure. It could just be some decoy. The 30c fuel surcharge sure is removed from the meter, but we still have drivers not taking "street pickup" and rather wait for "calls". We can't blame them for doing so; they have an expensive rent to pay.



It may be tough in the coming days. The question on subsidy isn't going to be a question, but a forewarn of the things to come.

Answer 27

I agree with what hogmalel said.



I also feel that the transport minister doesn't put himself into the shoes of the public. At this time of financial crisis and economic unstability, we need someone who has the authority to step out and say there will be no hikes for the next 6mths or so since singapore is in technical recession. Commoners need to use the public transport to work and earn a living. This is not something luxury which they can avoid.



Another question. "Oil prices is not directly linked to transport fare hikes". This statement really put a strain into the minds of Singaporeans. Do buses run on water???

Answer 28

Yes, they could consider subsidising transport fares.



Before the last elections, GST was at 5% and now it's 7%.What benefits do we get out of it? Yes, we were given a subsidy of between $100 to $500, even young adults who have their names as permitted occupier gets a lower amount if their parents owns a bigger flat, or private apartment. Even with this subsidy, how long can it last us? I got about $150.. and that cannot even cover the GST spent over 5 months.



The transportation charges rose because of the so-called rise in oil prices. It is true that oil prices did go up then, what about now that oil prices have gone down, don't you think that they should lower the prices of transportation too?



Then there is our favourite ERP gantries. WTH? I pity those who stay in Toa Payoh.. The government is practically striping us of our hard earned money.



How to go about dealing with this. What can we do? If we petition, the government comes up with some lame excuse. If we riot or strike, we go to jail or worst get beaten to death. If we raise our objections in public we end up like the poor late JBJ.



It's our fate., If we continue living in Singapore. We pay more, but don't earn more. The rich stays rich and the poor stays poor.

Answer 29

Yes, I think it should.

The prices have risen alot over the few years, and it's about time the prices go back to normal.

Also Cab fares have increased so much.

Some people end up paying S$40+ when in traffic jams

Now that oil prices decreased, the public transport should also decrease prices as then it is fair to the public.

Taxes should remain the same, if taxes increase, then what is the point to decrease prices for public transport?

Answer 30

whether is through Govt subsidy or bus company, I felt they should lower the fare even it means a 5 - 10 cents reduction. At least make the consumers feel appreciated.



When times are bad, consumers shows their understanding by accepting the price hike. Since oil prices has hit real low, a little thought means so much!



I agree with some who has said this : If we keep our public transport fares more affordable, it would encourage the people (be be Singaporeans or travellers) to use the transport system, rather than buying more cars to jam the roads.

Answer 31

In the first place, the reason to raise the fares was due to oil price hike. Now the reason is bus fare hike is not related to oil price.



By this simple point any idiot can see the bigger picture. Imagine public transport operator request for price hike was rejected... They declare bankrupt, people lose they job, transport system breakdown....



No choice but to approve except occasional wayang. Like sales, mark up the price, reviewed but still approve at lower price hike.



Younger generation are getting smarter. Don't think we can still except these SOP answers. They have got to come up with better reasons. Sick of the same excuse....



Don't always tell your teacher your dog ate your homework. Change an excuse.



In summary, it will never happen! At the most you get NTUC voucher. Thats all.

Answer 32

What is the percentage of those who live in private housing vs public housing?

What is the percentage of people who take private cars vs public transport?

Very few people with too much money and live luxuriously vs the majority who slogs everyday and get a small portion of the liquidity in the economy.

It is easy for people to say no to public transport being subsidised because they are NOT the ones who takes the transport at peak hour on a daily basis. OR ARE THEY??

Answer 33

I agree in part with nyc. A public transport service should have a cap on their earnings.

They also need to answer to the public with their wages scheme and the bonuses paid to the directors and CEO. Someone did mention it is hard to control, but Singapore only has a two companies handling public transports (MRT and buses), so it shouldn't be that hard.



Lastly, I think they should have strict caps on foreign employment. There is mention that money earned from public transport can help to fuel employment opportunities and stimulate economy. Good! But the job priority should go to a Singaporean



Yeah, and agreeing with the good ppl above, I've waited long periods for buses too

Answer 34

Public transport fares should not increase at the whim and fancy

of the operator. Every year the company are making profits.Why the increase ? PTC should not approve it.

The government must see that such increase, is very taxing on the

lower income citizens and the retired senior citizens.

Ministers (Raymond Lim) can talk alot and the press will publicise

their excuses when price increased. They do not take public transport

because they are dirt rich with such big fat pay. Have a heart for the

poor citizens. Even a few cents count.

Answer 35

The Singapore Government should subsidised public transport fare.



Many analyst like to compare Singapore with Hongkong. As I recently went to Hongkong (which I have been there for more than 20 times over the years). No doubt the fare is HK$3.40 aout S$0.68cents per trip of no matter how many stage you travel. From what I estimate, the longest stage meaning travel from the terminal to terminal, over 10kilometeres, you only pay S$0.68.



Also, my ex- Hongkong colleagues bring us around in the New Territory, equivalent to our Chua Chu Kang district. We board a light rail, which cost us HK$3.40, and we transfer to another bus which was free as you travel the same route and then transfer to another MTR or MRT (in Singapore) which we pay only HK$0.20 meaning a transfer of 3 different public transport and yet we pay only HK$3.60.



Yes, there are many bus fare which is slightly more expensive, meaning express bus - which has lesser bus stop and also short-cut through tunnel or cross-harbour tunnel. Also, the express airport bus.



Do not always say we have the cheapest Public transport fare in the world. (Go and experience yourself). Do not sit in the office (government official) and keep saying our public transport is the cheapest.

Answer 36

Actually I find it very funny. It not about subsidised or wat.



If i didn't recall wrongly, public transport price increase is due to increase of petrol pricing, now they say they increase due to the market, base on singapore growth...blar blar blar....



Last yr i recall public transport fare increase 3 or 4 times in a year. aiya...should have make some newspaper cutting to find out the date.



anyway in this bad market, hope it don increase anymore transport fare already.



Recession coming, people fighting for survival, many couples also postpone their marriage or giving birth.



Like that then how can we fulfil our PM request to boom singapore population?



If anymore increase in taxes, fares, GST or ERP, i believe situation will be worst.



So hope everything put on hold till market getting better then increase so none will find excuse to complain.



take it slow, do not make the pyramid turn upside down

Answer 37

One thing in my mind, public welfare related companies should not make high profit.



Subsidise? It can be define into 'direct' and 'indirect'.



Direct = direct injection of money.

Indirect = inject in a form of asset or money.



Every company tend to earn profit to keep running their business, so as public transport. Operation, management, maintenance and renewal of vehicles will take cost. Besides, non profitable route and timetable also balance by some profitable line.



In my opinion, the fare can keep low if government can 'indirectly' subsidise to public transport. How? Let's take it this way...



Interchange can define as a interaction of place for all varies kind of public transport. Example like buses, taxi, railway transit and etc...

What can we find "MORE" here? There will be MORE people here. MORE people = MORE business opportunities! MORE business opportunities = I can open a shop here!



How the above related to 'subsidise'? Very simple, public transport operator must have the priority to development of this interchange, like shopping mall, shopping centre, shop lots and etc. Example, government give the development green light to public transport operator only. Now, they can get extra money from rental, sell of properties and etc income 'indirectly'.



In this way, money from government will less and all this income actually will be from us and we will pay it happily (caused fare and tax is low, and is convenience for us to shopping at interchange too).



Should the above example shown a form of "INDIRECT SUBSIDISE"? Should them (public transport operator) rise the fare or tax?

The above example is that practicle? Correct me if I am wrong... :P

Answer 38

I feel that our transportation fares are way too high as compared to other countries and it seem that they are raised every now and then, even in times of recession. People who took public transport are normally the middle and lower class and this is very taxing as it is a every day expenses.



And whats the link between the fares and taxes?????

Answer 39

What "if at all", it should be a MUST- no question about that!!! Given that there are many people jobless, esp those with families to support- since the start of the year, prices of necessities have gone up and after the prices have come down, the govt is still not lowering prices such as those found in NTUC, at least not substantial enough, leaders can say we all suffer together, but they are still receiving the same or at least quite the same huge pay month after month while many of the people can't even compete for a job as nothing has to done to allocate jobs/job-related training opportunities to Singaporeans as opposed to many underlying structures favouring foreigners. The People of Singapore are suffering, and if this is a testing ground to survey opinions by government agencies, i would want to help champion the cause of many fellow singaporeans, graduates and non-graduates for the government to be emphathetic and be concerned about the livelihoods of the citizens. Where is the good governance of the 60s-90s, I hope i can be as proud of being a Singaporean as i used to be because the quality of our life is going downhill for many.



Just the other day, i was buying chee cheong fun at the market, used to be 1.50 for a plate mixed with yam cake, now the stall is selling it at 2.00, smaller plate and the pieces are 60% what they used to be. Same thing with many things, roti-prata size is also shrunken, hum jinbenn is so small. No wonder businesses are also suffering. These are just some minor observations. This morning while waiting for a bus, a be-spectacled middle-aged man in his 30s came up to me and asked me for some money, surprising he was not shy to ask me for some financial assistance and tell me that he has been unemployed for so long, i can only give him 20cent since I am the sole bread winner of the house.

Answer 40

when the proposal for the bus companies here to go privatized under the so called deregulation or free market many years ago, the reason given out was that with increased competition between private companies, the majority public will be able to have better services and access to public transport with fares being kept competitively low. This is all bullshit! i was thinking to myself that our government is throwing away one of the main responsibilities of being a good government...they passed these responsibilities to the private companies, with only the useless PTC giving out crap reasons time and time again to justify the ever increasing fares. The basic fact is that all these listed companies have their own well known responsibilities, that is to ANSWER TO THEIR SHAREHOLDERS!! Look at their annual revenue for all these past years will paint you a really really clear picture. When these revenues are reported out in the news, the authorities have the cheek to even reply saying that bus companies also need to make revenue and profits to justify to their shareholders and also sustain the operating cost. Oh come on, if operating costs are really that high, how did these high revenue and profit comes about??? And where is this so called competition??? With one bus company mainly operate in the north and with its counterpart in the other portion, where the hell the competition goes to???



And now when the economy is bad and Singaporeans are suffering with many jobless and a lot more will be in the coming year ahead, i really feel sad that our elected government, (the one we voted and paid with our tax payer money), continued to refuse subsidy... by warning us (again) on rising taxes. Is this really how a good responsible caring government should be? I am really sad that the pioneers and the old guards have left us....



Thus, my answer to this no brainer question is....YES!

Answer 41

Well no need to debate or argue so much about this public transport issue. Did anyone ever heard of transportation fares go down before? there will only be forever increase in prices living in singapore only. if people not happy what to do? faster get out from singapore loh. lol.

Answer 42

Is it still a public transport in the first place?

Government has given so much authority to the private company like SBS and SMRT to run the whole system.

There are always good and better reason not to subsidised public transport fares BUTTTTTTTTTTT



REMEMBER: WE ONLY VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO CAN MAKE BOTH SIDE HAPPY! DONT TROUBLE US!!

Answer 43

One word "subsidising" or "No subsidising" Using whose money ? End up also ours money. Singapore is cash rich country. But everything keep increase. Question is where is the money going ? Purchase new bus ? ( Yes, few buses on the road and new fly around the world) improve Service ? ( Do you think have ? Then this thing just keep quite loh ). Government need money then will any how increase GST, ERP .... Never know ous pinch !!!!!

Answer 44

Govt subsidies to keep transport costs down may not be the answer.



Why don't transport operators strictly enforce rules like "No eating and/or drinking"? Fine those flouting the rules. The extra income from these fines should help transport operators' so that goct subsidies would not be necessary.



Every time I ride on the MRT on a daily basis, i have never failed to spot people who openly eat and/or drink!



It is annoying and indeed senseless to repeatedly make public announcements about the prohibition against eating/drinking on the MRT trains and in the stations when the transport operator has no intention to enforce it.

Answer 45

Base on wat MR LIM has said,



Mr Lim said: "The money still must come from somewhere, right? It is about a 1.5 percentage point increase of your GST. So, now it is 7%. You want it to be free, do you want the GST to go up to 8.5% to run a completely free bus and train system?"



1st point) I think he talk without using his brain if GST went up to 8.5% and we will able to get free transport why not.



2nd point) Singaporean pls think do you think that our GST will stay forever 7% come on it will increase some where so how when the market turn good.



3rd point) As a minister no confident to ensure singaporean that it will be no increment of fare during this down turn. So what the point of having a transport minister who draw million dollar yearly. I think that money should be use as a subsidise for public transport that even a better idea.

Answer 46

Firstly, the issue of subsidising public transport should not arise. Instead, there should be a logical and fair reduction of fare's in line with the reduction of oil prices, irrespective of what the govt. officals want us to believe. By increasing taxes, this will increase the burdern on the "bread winner" of the family and as such should not be employed.

If reasons of increase in oil prices were cited to justify the price increase in electrical bills and transportation in the past, it is only logical that a reduction takes place when prices reduce.

Answer 47

I dunno why singapore always talking about subsidising this and that makes one wonder if subsidies are actually applicable , I remember many years ago there are no such word as subsidising and prices are affordable and reasonable after this word SUBSIDIES came in everything became very expensive and unreasonable priced and unaffordable .

You can see obviously that the companies has been making TONS and TONS of profit at he expense of the man in the street ,

Perhaps they use the word of subsiding to replace profiteering instead , like bus drivers are called bus captain

Bus drivers and bus captain has no slighte3st similarities and this term is to mislead the public , a captain is an officer who is in charge or directing or supervising and not same compared to what a driver is doing .



SCARRRY

Answer 48

When the oil went up, they said "hey the diesel has increased thus we have to increase the fares to cover the increment."



When the oil went down, they said "hey, the oil doesn't affects the public transport fares very much, so we will not decrease the fares."



So you think will there be any subsidising? NO! unless they can make more money...

Answer 49

NOPE, The government should not subsidized the public transport, but The government should not apply any ERP charges on the public bus when plying the ERP route as the cost are eventually borne by the passengers. The government has been saying that ERP are used to reduce traffic flow, and those people that can afford cars should pay for it,therefore, ERP charges should not apply to public buses since people are taking a GLC company alternative transport to reduce traffic jams and it is certainly not a luxury transport such as taxis or private cars. The ERPs is another form that The Government is making money from its people.



To further help reduce public burden, ERP charges should not be applied to commercial vehicles such as lorries and company's van as these are not luxury vehicles and they are only ferrying commercial goods such as essential items or supplying office materials or doing some forms of delivery. There are no alternative ways to make deliveries at off-peak hours. Further to that the Government had already apply a GST on all forms of services, so ERP is another profit making scheme on such commercial vehicles since they have no choice but to ply the route to make deliveries or collections. To avoid ERPS is certainly not productive as it delays deliveries.



Ambulance or Civil Defense should not be paying for ERPs as well. Are police cars paying for ERP too ? If they are, ERPs is certainly employed partially to reduce traffic flow, the other reason is $$$$$ to the company that manages ERP.



GSTs - to further help the people, GSTs should not be applied to a certain household income group paying their utility bills.





KEY Essential goods such as rice (non fragrant rice), oil, should not be taxed under the GST to help low income group.

Answer 50

What is the Government waiting for? Since the Public Transport companies are ranking in big bucks every year based on their announcements. Why let the common ppl suffer. Remember: A good government take cares of their ppl and think in their shoe. Anyway, our transport system still sucks and charge so much. I have to squeeze and worst still see my friends and family being tug everyday during peak hours. What the Government think, funny is it. We knew you all dont take public transport but do think in our shoe pls.

Answer 51

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/364326/1/.html

quoted:

SBS Transit and SMRT attributed the need for a fare increase to soaring energy and fuel prices.



Anyway, I felt what Mr Lim said was a bit too harsh.



http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cna/20081222/tap-794-public-transport-fares-issues-ra-231650b.html quoted:

Mr Lim said: "The money still must come from somewhere, right? It is about a 1.5 percentage point increase of your GST. So, now it is 7%. You want it to be free, do you want the GST to go up to 8.5% to run a completely free bus and train system?"



Its like telling the citizens that no matter what you have to pay and pay. However, since he made that comment, I would not mind taking up his proposal.

On usual basis, my public transport fares will be around $ 200 a month. If the increase in 1.5% of tax is equivalent to $ 200, I would have to spend $ 13,000 a month. Since I do not have such a big payslip, I will be supportive towards his proposal.

Answer 52

Ques 01:



Ans:Wait long long.They already know what to do.This is just a wayang and I am bored so I also participate.



Ques 02:



Ans:It is not surprising.We have got to be fixed in some way or another.The ultimate objectives are express in $ and cents.Other areas are non-priority.It is like are running a business.



Ques 03:



Ans:Good question.Lower the salaries of the top people further.The $ can be subsidy revenue for many areas such as public transport.Make them work harder.Turn on their pressure cookers and make them sweat.I am not paid to think for them.Since they get so much $,power and recognition,they can do their magic.If something were to happen,the people will be affected first.Good.Clap.clap.they get my respect.Bad.Mistake fixed and the familar pharse will come on,Lets move on.

Answer 53

When the prices goes up for any reason whatsoever possible, why not does it come down when for that same reason? Where is the fairness? Why cant profit margins be reduced? Without the middle class the Rich cannot get richer....I am happy with what is happening in the Financial World now....a lesson for us to learn from...but if this continues be it the government or the public....time as come to cut back TOTALLY. Dont go out and be happy within :-)

Answer 54

Our government and public transport operators should work hands in hands to grant our elderly workforce, and majority of the average middle income groups more concessionary rates for public transport.



There is no meaning of concessionary grant to the elderly workforce by restricting the hours of travel when they need to frequently travel and move about in their course of work.



The concessionary grant should be given to them even during economy boom time, not to mention at this present time of economy downturn, and especially in the coming two, or three years when there is sure of economy recession and more job lost due to financial turmoil regionally.



When cost of oil went up, operators of public transport immediately jack up the fare citing the cost of oil was the main reason. Now, the cost of oil has dropped more than $100 per barrel, why must we need to debate the issue of lower fare. I don't see any subsidy of our govt, whilst the operators make good profit every year.



Low cost, efficient service and comfortable travel initiated by our transport operators would effectively reduce road congession within our city, and also the numbers of private cars on the roads.



Singapore is just a small city, yet there are more daily travel frequency by our workforce to and flo working places within our city, hence it is good profit for our public transport operators. If public transport is reliable, and cost is reasonably low, and most commuters enjoy the travel by public transport then there should be no reason why there were more private cars on the road causing more congession.



Our taxi fare is the only one in the world that very few commuters understand its multiple level of charges at different time frame, besides its fare is high as considered

by most workforce commuters when at time of need to hire it.

Answer 55

I should thank our Transport Minister Mr Raymond Lim for the great enlightenment. I would denfinitely support the idea of an additional 1.5% increase in GST for the free transport proposal.



This is highly feasible and green too. It will encourage most to switch to free public transport thus less carbon emission. This will free up more road space for future growth and have space for more green lungs.



Free public transport will boost tourism as tourists will enjoy the free rides on MRT and buses. It will become more attractive to foreign talents with a healhier city living and thus spur more growth for the country. Property prices here will be given a boost due to the clean and green concepts of healthier living. Singapore will becomes a convenience without the polution city.



Who know, this free transport may even win us our first Nobel Prize for clean, green and achievable concepts of city living. A world class model.



1.5% GST increase is denfintely worth for a healthier and convenience Singapore. Mr Raymond Lim said in his election slogan "Moving Ahead, Staying Together" is realise in this free public transport concept. I'm in for this this ride.



Thanks for this great proposal.



Chew Bakar

Answer 56

where this GST go to ? i can't see any help for the poor, but more & more poor & old singaporean on street asking for money .can singapore government see ? public transport subsidised by singapore govemment & transport company( lower thier profit) because we having

hard time form the coming years .we don't need new' bus' but just

asking for lower fare to all singaporean not just 'poor' singaporean.we

are sick of company that had high profit but stll asking for more .

Answer 57

transport companies are still making profits and all are government-owned. singapore govt has enough money to subsidise without raising taxes (look at how we survived without gst for 20+ years).... but the question is not should they subsidise, it is WILL they subsidise?



look at malaysia, hiv drug costs 30$ a month where here it costs 900$ for the same drug. malaysia can subsidise, why not singapore? because singaporeans will develop their "crutch mentality"? i think singaporeans are just very LAME (lol).

Answer 58

Of course the government should think of subsidising public transport. But sad to note that among the countries in south east asia, Singapore government is the only government that don't believe in such policy. You find that in Indonesia and Malaysia though the government is poor in terms of balance sheet and foreign reserve, the people enjoy huge subsidy for basic necessities, fuel, medical care and most importantly food. Hence alot of our brothers and sisters are going to Johore to buy the food. Singapore govt wishes the people to be self-suffice and solve the the cost of rising living standards through savings or taking up more part-time job. Even to the extent of encouraging your spouses to work.



It is hard for the government to change. Especially when the transport minister doesn't believe so. One can deduce his stand when he threaten to increase GST to 8.5% when the question of subsidy is brought up. There is no linkage of free transporation and increasing GST. When Singaporeans are paying 7% for GST, it doesn't mean that they don't pay for transportation. In fact besides paying for the transportation they also let the transport companies earn a decent profit.

Answer 59

Yes, they should, it affects the people's livelihood and other aspects of living.



Also, the method of calculation is dubious. How did PTC derive all the numbers on CPI and Wage increase.



the Transport Minister said that transport fees are not linked to oil prices but to inflation and wages. I do not see how transport fees are related to wages when my real wage had been decreasing steadily for the last three years. I used to pay $1.48 for travelling to my office three years ago per trip, now I pay $1.67. I begin to wonder if the govt has pegged the increase in transport rate revisions to the pay of people who own cars and do not take buses or MRT?

Answer 60

Well pardon me. By now all sgporeans should have already realised that things in sg will only increase never decrease. And at most you will have more rebates when you transfer between your trips using the public transport. The only thing that maintain is our wages. 10 yrs ago, a general clerk wage is ard $800 to abt $1000 (entry level). And till now I can still loudly say... it's still the same. If improvement is made on the wages, then who will still complain abt anything that's going to increase? Just my two cents worth.

Answer 61

To me the issue of whether higher taxes could be implemented so as to offset the subsides for public transport fare is secondary.

The primary issue is whether our so-call public transport providers should be consider as public transport providers when profit is the primary priority.

Answer 62

We are not asking for handouts. But public transport should not be a means of revenue for the government. Despite making millions of dollars, fares keep rising. Where's the government's sense of social responsibility?



Mr Lim talks about the amount of money that he needs to pinch from somewhere? Then where does all the revenue from ERPs, Road Tax, COEs, etc. go to? Not enough to pay his salary perhaps.



The cost of public transport is highly inflated. Service standards are not acceptable for the price we pay. We don't need fanciful things that adds to higher operating costs... we just need functional and efficient means of public transport that serves our needs.



Look at our trains - PACKED.... buses - frequencies FAILS... never on time as scheduled... Taxis - Expensive but NEVER AVAILABLE when you need them despite surcharges and peak-hour rates... WHAT IS THIS...



PRICES KEEP GOING UP but efficiency and service standards are not in tandem...



CUT THE BULLSHIT MR LIM.... your previous MOT did a better job than you... at least their KPI isn't to fill the coffers but serve the people... Isn't that what PUBLIC transport suppose to do? Serve the PUBLIC?

Answer 63

Yes, they should consider.



One thing that is bugging me whenever I see a typical explanation from the government about not lowering the fares when the oil prices or other related factors that was presented by the operators to substantiate the price increase previously was that : they always quote wage increment, inflation etc as the "other reasons/factors" for price not able to go down.



Please dont treat us as stupid fools, provide us with the figures and information, give transparency and let us be the judge ourselves to check you numbers.



I believe most Singaporeans are reasonable and they will accept price increases if it is reasonable and transparent.



What many are unhappy about is the way all these increases are handled and the lack of transparency and half-truths the govt is always painting. Show us everything and let us decide, please.

Answer 64

Public transport should be partially subsidised by the government, and it does not have to relate to higher taxes.



There had already been additional sources of income gained from public transport in the recent years. Just look at the proliferation of ads at the bus stops and mrts, decals on the buses, ads blaring through the tv on the buses and mrts, and the development of shop spaces on mrts and bus interchanges, which translate into rental income for the transport companies.



Now that the economy outlook is bleak in the coming months ahead, public transport companies should shelve plans for those bell and whistle things, eg fleet expansion or upgrade, air con interchanges, bus tracking systems etc, which are "nice to haves" to a consumer. The primary purpose of transport is to get from point a to b. Having a choice, i believe consumers would rather pay less for their fares, rather than having plush cushion seats or sparkling new trains (with 4 extra seats missing!)



And i do not understand why Singapore, being so fond of emulating first world countries, have not implemented free city buses on weekends, or sales of monthly unlimited ride tickets on buses and trains.Some states in australia have free city buses/half price train rides on weekends. This not only injects vibrancy in the city with the greater flow of human traffic, reduces the number of cars on roads, it is also creates goodwill to tourists, and fosters better family relationships through more outings together.



There should also sales of monthly unlimited ride tickets on buses and trains for adults. With monthly unlimited rides, people who currently drive cars due to the inconvenience or inaccessibility to mrts or the right bus stop to board the bus to their intended destination, will be motivated to switch to public transport as it will not cost them more to take different means of public transport.



Having monthly unlimited tickets will also create greater efficiency and better distribution of the passenger traffic.Passengers have the incentive to switch between bus and trains mode, which take them nearer to their intended destination,and freeing up space for other passengers which require that specific mode of public transport. There will be no loss to the public transport companies, as the train/bus road plyed per trip is a fixed cost to them, irregardless of the number of passengers on board. In fact, having a more distributed passenger flow could bring in the car owners, which had previously been put off by the crowding on public transport. This is a win win situation for all parties.

Answer 65

Why do you call it public transport? why not just call it transportation? "to subsidise public transport but need to increase tax" ... from a minister of a country with the highest paid civil servant in the world? you need to be more convincing than this

Answer 66

It is high time we be realistic. Our buses and mrt already airconditioned and with tv mobile. What else do you want? Transport companies cannot keep citing fleet improvements to increase their fares. Taxi fares came down due to decrease in oil prices.and so with many other transport operaters. Why are"nt Smrt and SBS doing the same.? Why is the Transport Minister protecting them?

Answer 67

There are three questions:

1) To subsidize, you can take from the government's earnings/reserves to help people pay. Unless you say government has no earnings/reserves. Then we are really in trouble.

2) Should government consider? This should not even be a question, because if the government is not there to take care of its citizens, why do you think people elect it?

3) What higher taxes? Aren't regular taxes, COEs, ERPs, GST, TV licenses, town council reserves, market-based pricing of HDB flats enough? Where has all that money gone?

Answer 68

Anyway, we don't need the Govt to subsidise the public transport fares, if the transport companies do their part to stay viable and cost-efficient.

Answer 69

No...public transportation should not be subsidised. If it's run efficiently, costs can be kept low without asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

Answer 70

We don't need subsidis, we need resonable fare . Everybody know bus need disel to run so it must corelated to disel price ( Idiot also know ) . The more subsidise you get the more you are being tax somewhere. The situation here is seen like we negotia with pirate, the more reason you give they answer you very funny answer ( look like elephen also can climb up to tree )

Answer 71

I just hope that Singaporeans are not treated as individuals who can't think. Singapore Government mentioned that GST has to be increased if our transport system is to be fully subsidised. My question is do Singapore citizens have the rights to know where have our 7% GST gone too? What are the improvements made since the 2% hike?



I draw reference to transport systems in Hong Kong, China, and Japan. All have different GSTs, but all lower than in Singapore. I have travelled to these countries and apparently their transport system is much more well developed than in Singapore. Their network seems to be more convenient. Correct me if I'm wrong, and sometimes these make me wonder why!



My suggestion here is to use ERPs and COEs to subsidise our public transport system. Anyway, what are all these money used for in the first place? Not accounted again? Money from these areas is to encourage more Singaporeans to use public transport and it is the most relevent source of money. Other than erecting more ERP gates, how about having more constructive use of this money.



However more complex issues are related here such as the interest of the shareholders of SMRT or SBS since they are still run by private sectors. It may not be easy to monitor the subsidies as in it is difficult for the US government to regulate the money used for bailouts. Who knows? Private companies may just use the money for their bonuses next year!



Singapore govenment is resourceful and efficient. I believe these are problems for them to ponder but not for an insignificant citizen like me to solve. Let's pray we will have a better life after the next election.



Just feel like putting in more comments here....



It took me only 1 min to think of increasing GST to 7.5% to make up for the extra money spent to subsidies the public transport system. Give me 1 more min and I will tell you it needs 2% increase in GST and 2 more mins to tell u 3% is needed. So can I be a MOT too?



I hope our ministers do not only give a rough figure to answer to the masses without thinking through the after effects. Have u considered what are the side effects to Spore economy by increasing GST? Do you dare to increase in the first place?



Let me tell you this. By increasing GST without giving much thoughts will only cause Spore to lose her competitiveness to other countries such as Hong Kong. Want to take the chance? If Sporeans now say they do not mind to take the increase in GST to have a fully subsidised public transport system, how long you will need to implement it? I guess never.



Do we Sporeans ever ask for returns when more ERPs are erected and did we ever get anything from the revenue gained from these gates? I guess not. But our MOT asks for returns when we ask a favour to have our public transportation subsidised! I think this is ridiculous! To give is a virtue. Haha .... think i can work in a charitable organisation.



Oh! I feel I am more stupid since I dont get the point of what our MOT is trying to bring across! Well, I guess I just lack the 'talent'.

Answer 72

PPL... wake up...

do you think they care? ALthough i must say SOME of them are really nice n caring.



Looking at the things mentioned, and the way he say it. Says alot about what he is doing and whether he deserve the job or not.



Agree with what the others said above.We are just Puppet Cows, Letting them step all over us and milk us. What to do? They are voted in.



I tried to think back and see if there are any incidients that THEY really listened to the public. From Utilities to Public Transport...Seems like there isn't (can anyone remind me?)



I THINK their current main concern is to attract more and more people into Singapore to maintain competitiveness. They are more interested in planting more ERP to earn more revenue. Where got time to plan for subsiding package?



Please also understand their "difficulty". I bet they themselves have suffered alot of losses in Investments. Of course they care more about their pocket than the public. Normally the HOD of each department is to GENERATE MORE REVENUE & CUT COSTS.



They are not saints. Its not like they are sacrificing themselves to serve the public for miserable amount of money. They earn ALOT. Else why do you think our Minisiters pay pakage is highest in the world?



IF I am President of the United States, I rather come to Singapore and be minister. Will earn more i guess...HAHA but I AM NOT. :D



Its Your CHOICE. If you dont like this, you can do 2 things.



1) get your son/daughter study hard and be Minister next time.(I hope i can one in the next life. lol)



2) Dont vote for them, and let other party take over (and pray that the next party would be better.) But be able to accept the consequences.



That's Life Pals.... :(

Answer 73

What else is new? Going to have snap elections soon correct? OF COURSE government now give out freebies and good news... AFTER BLINDLY electing the old guard back into power, then all the merapek pattern will start to emerge, with REASONS FOR EVERY TAX INCREMENT AND INSERTION. Then all those peanut members that voted for them will start to whine how lousy this whole thing is... what goes around, comes around, choose your leaders wisely... who's fault, OUR fault, why, majority of us peanut gang, no guts to change the government what... so what to do, say the government good, let them take advantage and we can just complain like sissies la...

Answer 74

Yes, but not by reducing the price but through rebates and tax subsidies. In this way, Singaporeans can take benefits.



Do you see that our public transport are often taken by tourists and foreigners too? Anyway, most Singaporeans these days drive or take taxis... :)

Answer 75

Why should the government subsidise things that the people need? If the people need it they will pay for it anyway, they have no choice. Government will only subsidise things that the people don't need or want; as an incentive..

Answer 76

When oil was $150 a barrel. You raise bus and mrt fares. Now oil is less than $50 a barrel. You should reduce the bus fare and MRT fare. Fair is fair.

Answer 77

Recently the transport ministry decided that we shld curb traffic jams by disallowing taxi's to stop in all roads in the CBD area, strictly only allowed at Taxi stands. This led to a frenzy of building taxi stands even in the tiny lanes all over. After all the bulding was completed then the rule were modified that its only applicable where buses ply. Taxi stands that they built in all corners are now like white elephants. No one uses them in the tiny roads. Was this an unnecessary cost due to poor planning?

Answer 78

Transport must be reduce because oil prices has come down so much. When transport increase one of the reason is because of oil prices increased.



We know there will no wage increase for staff in all sectors thus the reasons not increase is not proper.



Government has a lot of surplus when time are bad please use the fund.

Answer 79

It is very simple answer. The GOVT. don:t bother and care less. They are only interested in filling up their coffers. But they still want the votes so they can carry on filling their coffers. They will only do lip service just to show that they are doing 'something'. If singaporean still doesn't realise these, they are definately the most dumbest and stupid people in the world. Good luck, Singaporeans

Answer 80

Yes, because it means helping the poorer and needy even if each trip can rebate 10cts...



And it can encourage economy to grow as people would take bus more often once they find it is cheaper..



Why must eveytime make money? And why never drop back prices once raised? And why cant lose abit sometimes, Since it is for the people to benefit?

Answer 81

often we see buses of the same service number arrived together , as a result the long waiting time if you have been waiting for it. One example is service number 13.



3) some bus captains deliberately slow down when their schedule is ahead of time , hence making the bus journey very uncomfortable. Contrary to this they would speed off at every bus stop if they are behind schedule.



4) because of the mindset to provide excellent service there times especially during peak hours the bus captains would wait for as long as 15 minutes to accomodate all passengers who wish to board the crowded bus (not sure is they observing safety risk). In order to achieve excellent service would the bus companies management deploy more feeder buses instead of packing the b

Answer 82

YES, with the present crisis the government should @ general public

are facing HARD time. More over the OIL prices are DROPPING. The

government also study about PETROL TAXES that are high compare to others country. We hope to REDUCE petrol taxes especially transport & utility.

Answer 83

Government should subsidise. Why higher tax....7% is already high.

In fact government should reduce tax now to ease cost.

Answer 84

Yes...it should be as flexible as our wages. When fuel costs goes UP, you have all the reasons to increase the fare. When fuel costs goes down, please adjust accordingly. To be FAIR to passengers....PLEASE...Singapore is a democratic society where fairness and transparency should always be look upon at any circumstances. The increase in number of passengers over the years should be able to cover your cost and increase profit margin...why so greedy?

Answer 85

Maybe Mr Lim is too busy that he forgotten that the reasons given for all the previous increased were the oil price has increased! Now what happen when the prices are suppose to come down? Mr Lim can you give a better reason?

Answer 86

I think the issue is not subsidy but capping the profit of the company by nature of their limited competition. As long as the bus company remain profitable, it is a corporate social responsibilty of the companies to try to ease the burden of commuters bearing in mind the majority of users of public transport are not high income earners.

Answer 87

My God .. how much? Did you tell them you didn't want to buy the train just 6 tickets for you & your family. It usually costs me around £87 for an open return from Newcastle - Gt Yarmouth. (pp) but if you get an Apex ticket which you have to book at least 7 days in advance tell them the time you wish to leave & the return time they will get the nearest train to that time & it usually costs £54 (pp) big saving £33. each I think the price you were quoted was off the radar screen

Answer 88

Whatever the decision and outcome on the fares, the government and operators will always win.

Answer 89

Yes, I think they should. There are many social benefits to public transport.

Answer 90

OF COURSE!!!

This sector should be opened up to private operators if it does not serve the PUBLIC...a little competition goes a long way. This is just my opinion!!

Answer 91

No.



soon, it will lead to all other things being subsidised and the economy will tumble.

Answer 92

up the gst to 8.5 percent and give me all year round free transport. is the transport minister serious to say if we up the gst by 1.5 percent, we will get free transport!!?? what are we waiting for? do your math and we all lower income will benefit.

Answer 93

Yes cos they have the money to invest in loosing banks(UB/S/CITI) 14B when such funds can be invested in her citizens who are suffering.

14 B can last till we tide over the current situation.

Answer 94

The economy is bad now. Why can't the government do something to help the citizens who had voted them to the parliment without being asked?

Answer 95

People, people. Why can't everybody understand. Any changes or implementaions will heavily affect the common citizens.Do you all honestly think that your views are heard??????? lol. . . .

Answer 96

the government should let wheel bound handicap passenger, FREE not even subsidy!!!!!!



they want to promote social Integration but they don't even show any social responsibilities.

Answer 97

Yes, as an essential service.

Answer 98

i really don't know wat the great problem is firstly... everything here goes up n neva comes down.. like our age. if the government decides everything for us then why get opinion from us.. it really a puppet world here in singapore.. price should be subsidiesse

Answer 99

does the government really bother about what we think. at the end of the day the question "what goes up and never comes down".. answers that question.. taxes goes up, prices goes up.... everything goes up....

Answer 100

Jus wait til GST gets 8.5%, it would be FREE !!!