Transport Hike in May?
-
Not very good news?
Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong asked the Minister for Transport whether it is justified for Singapore Mass Rapid Transit to demand for more fare hikes when it can register a 25.8% year-on-year increase in net profit of $30 million for the third quarter of FY2006.
The Minister of State for Transport (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) (for the Minister for Transport): Sir, Mr Steve Chia asked whether there is any justification for SMRT to demand for more fare hikes when it registered a 25.8% increase in net profit. First, I would like to note that the third quarter results recently announced by SMRT represent the group results of SMRT Corporation. Besides local bus and train operations where fares are regulated by the Public Transport Council (PTC), the group also has taxi operations and non-local public transport related businesses like engineering consultancy and overseas investments.
On the issue of fare revision, this will be considered by the PTC if and when SMRT decides to apply for one in May. As Members know, PTC is an independent body comprising representatives from different sectors of society, and its role is to regulate bus and train fares to keep fares affordable for the public, while ensuring the long-term viability of the public transport operators.
Under the new fare review mechanism implemented last year, the PTC is required to examine, as a reality check, the Return-on-Total-Assets (ROTA) achieved by the operators. This is to ensure that the operators' returns from bus and rail operations are not excessive when compared to those of other industries with similar risk profile. This is to safeguard commuters' interests when the PTC considers applications for fare adjustments.
I would like to assure Members that any fare revision applications will be scrutinised by the PTC very carefully.
Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, may I ask the Minister of State how much profit should these public transport operators, whether as an individual unit or as a collective group, continue to make before their demands for any kind of fare increase become unjustifiable? That is, will there be a ceiling for their profits where continued requests from them for fare increase become unreasonable? And if there is such a ceiling for their profit, what is that level?
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, when the PTC decides on the fare increase proposals, it will not just look at actual profits. In fact, they will be guided by many other things, one of which, as I have stated, is the Return-on-Total-Assets. In this regard, they could look at the transport operators elsewhere and compare those numbers to see whether these are reasonable. It will not be reasonable nor practical to impose an absolute number. -
if they wan to raise, they have thousand and one excuses to do so..
As a citizens, our voices can only be heard but no response from them...
sigh.....
but, it will not be in may..dun worry..becos it will be after GE and election will not come so soon! haha.. -
Typical style of response from the Ruling Political Party - take a long route in presenting the system, and slip in the main issue that is buried in a heap of spoken garbage, before attempting to address the issue in an oblique manner to the question raised.Originally posted by pearlie27:Not very good news?
Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong asked the Minister for Transport whether it is justified for Singapore Mass Rapid Transit to demand for more fare hikes when it can register a 25.8% year-on-year increase in net profit of $30 million for the third quarter of FY2006.
The Minister of State for Transport (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) (for the Minister for Transport): Sir, Mr Steve Chia asked whether there is any justification for SMRT to demand for more fare hikes when it registered a 25.8% increase in net profit. First, I would like to note that the third quarter results recently announced by SMRT represent the group results of SMRT Corporation. Besides local bus and train operations where fares are regulated by the Public Transport Council (PTC), the group also has taxi operations and non-local public transport related businesses like engineering consultancy and overseas investments.
On the issue of fare revision, this will be considered by the PTC if and when SMRT decides to apply for one in May. As Members know, PTC is an independent body comprising representatives from different sectors of society, and its role is to regulate bus and train fares to keep fares affordable for the public, while ensuring the long-term viability of the public transport operators.
Under the new fare review mechanism implemented last year, the PTC is required to examine, as a reality check, the Return-on-Total-Assets (ROTA) achieved by the operators. This is to ensure that the operators' returns from bus and rail operations are not excessive when compared to those of other industries with similar risk profile. This is to safeguard commuters' interests when the PTC considers applications for fare adjustments.
I would like to assure Members that any fare revision applications will be scrutinised by the PTC very carefully.
Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, may I ask the Minister of State how much profit should these public transport operators, whether as an individual unit or as a collective group, continue to make before their demands for any kind of fare increase become unjustifiable? That is, will there be a ceiling for their profits where continued requests from them for fare increase become unreasonable? And if there is such a ceiling for their profit, what is that level?
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, when the PTC decides on the fare increase proposals, it will not just look at actual profits. In fact, they will be guided by many other things, one of which, as I have stated, is the Return-on-Total-Assets. In this regard, they could look at the transport operators elsewhere and compare those numbers to see whether these are reasonable. It will not be reasonable nor practical to impose an absolute number.
"Return-on-Total-Assets (ROTA) " - ?
When the MRT lines were built, the Government was supposed to have borne the cost of the MRT system NOT the operators.
Why is the Operator expected to exercise 'ROTA' when the total cost of the system is supposed to have been written off as a one-time expense by the Government ?
If the Government aka the Ruling Political Party now decide to charge - so as to recover the capital expense - it should be made public the amount that is being apportioned to the MRT operators.
This amount could be a fixxed rental or lease of the capital assets which were invested from Public Funds for infrastructural development.
In this case, the operator is held responsible to cover its profitability in the manner that its variable costs are taken care of, on top of the Fixxed Rental or Lease that the Government is now charging for the use of those Capital Assets.
Is it not surprising that the Government should quietly change its position now, when it had so loudly and proudly announce - before the MRT was constructed - that the total cost for the entire MRT System will be borne by the Government and the MRT Operator will have a lesser burden ?
We are now witnessing another quiet "BACK TRACKING" on a major issue after political mileage has been made prior to the MRT construction.
Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short memory.
John Kenneth Galbraith (1908 - ) -
May is the cut off date for application for fare review
But if you look at some SBS svs, the standards is below average -
Nothing new. Every year will go up once.
-
Poly students are going to get their pockets burnt again.
-
I suggest PTC to look into the new service standards that looks into indv svs instead of the current as a group taking the average to decide on whether to allow any fare hikes
-
Confirm gurantee chop have one, after elections.
-
Hike, hike.
-
I hope PTC can deal with the bus operators that delibrately causes unecessary bus delays...
There are duplicating svs along some stretches of roads here, yet because 1 sv dun use aircon buses, ppl rather take the aircon sv though it is behind. Got bus they dun wanna take
Also they used to use the reason the needy students needs cheaper bus fares, but now all bus stamps sold are aircon stamp, so isn't the needy student felt 'cheated' if SBS continues to deploy majority non aircon fleet when they are forced to buy aircon stamps?
-
take sub fuel from malaysia and use them in sg..
then no need hike price lo
-
you have a good point there...complain to CASE?Originally posted by sbst275:I hope PTC can deal with the bus operators that delibrately causes unecessary bus delays...
There are duplicating svs along some stretches of roads here, yet because 1 sv dun use aircon buses, ppl rather take the aircon sv though it is behind. Got bus they dun wanna take
Also they used to use the reason the needy students needs cheaper bus fares, but now all bus stamps sold are aircon stamp, so isn't the needy student felt 'cheated' if SBS continues to deploy majority non aircon fleet when they are forced to buy aircon stamps? -
The case is very difficult to get it solvedOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:you have a good point there...complain to CASE?
Because the ppl inside SBS will continue to give you this 'standard' reply. By using non aircon buses on these svs, I suspect they can collect millions more
As for the delibrate delay of buses, I think that's why they whole day say the need for some svs that need double decks. Actually if bth services are aircon, any bus come, ppl will just board... I dun understand this favourtism of bus svs... -
How independent is PTC?
It is just a blackbox to many of us -
PTC or CASE ????
What do you expect from a bunch of executives that do not use the public transport to make comments on the public transport policy ?
They can only assess through dollars and cents.
How come no one comment that the arriving time for the bus meter is a WHITE ELEPHANT and most probably be stolen and COMPLETELY USELESS ?
The bus company is just using new gadgets to justify increasing profits. -
As has been proposed before in the buses forum, a very much better solution than a estimated bus arrival system would be a detailed bus schedule for each bus stop, where the bus arrival schedule would be printed and pinned on the bus stop.Originally posted by Medicated Oil:PTC or CASE ????
What do you expect from a bunch of executives that do not use the public transport to make comments on the public transport policy ?
They can only assess through dollars and cents.
How come no one comment that the arriving time for the bus meter is a WHITE ELEPHANT and most probably be stolen and COMPLETELY USELESS ?
The bus company is just using new gadgets to justify increasing profits.
Besides, there is plenty of unused space in the bus stops, and this would help passengers plan their journey much better. -
looks like elections will be in april
-
Bonus handout from government also in May
-
Have or no have, my bonus payout also wont increase de. Only BOD's dividends increase.Originally posted by ditzy:Confirm gurantee chop have one, after elections. -
The PTC is nothing but a rubber stamp.
-
Who gives a damn about your bonus?Originally posted by Manager433:Have or no have, my bonus payout also wont increase de. Only BOD's dividends increase. We also know the bonus don't go to you. -
Well, they have better find ways to get SBS. And now since the head is Mr Gerald EeOriginally posted by av98m:The PTC is nothing but a rubber stamp.
There is a long list of bus svs that uses more non aircon buses
Crap that they use the explanation "90% of our fleet is aircon", when some svs is 90% non aircon fleet -
been using the same tactic called 'Fu Di Chou Xin' for decades u all still can't detect ah ? tsk tsk tsk....this is tactic #5 lah....see until dun wanna see...
-
ccb another hike...
-
The long list of svs that has more non aircon than aircon buses, oftenly many are very packed during peak hrs
6, 35, 37, 90, 91, 94, 125, 151, 186, 192, 193, 200, 246, 249, 251, 252, 254, 255, 257
Of which, Sv 186 serves CBD, some like 151 are long haul rts serving Hougang and NUS