[QUOTE=Unregistered;31147]Plublic transport system is essentially a monopoly/duopoly. Some operations are profitable while others are not. The system must be approached in a holistic manner. While bus operations in general may not be profitable, other operations like running the MRT lines are profitable.[q/uote]

NE line is barely profitable, Circle Line is break even, NE/EW line is profitable but declining very rapidly due to escalating staff & energy cost. All this talk about being holistic is all very good, but what does this really mean in terms of actionable items to turn public transport into a profitable model?

I don't think it's fair to compare an airport business with the public transport business. An airport does not need to go through PTC to raise its terminal charges or taxes nor does it incur the wrath of voters for even raising 1% of fees to cover 10%-20% increase in energy & staff costs.

The probelm is not about nationalizing, it's how to make the business viable. The government already owns 60% of SMRT, and its board is dominated by government folks. I fail to see how acquiring another 40% and "nationalizing" it will suddenly generate surpluses for no reason.

All this talk about nationalization is acutally an euphemism for the government to subsidise public transport for the masses. Whether the government should be subsidizing a public good depends largely on the citizen's percept of its social contract with the governement, so its hard to say whether it is good or bad, but let's call a spade a spade and not beat about the bush by pretending that nationalizing is anything but a call for government handouts.

The Worker's Party being a centre left party has been the voice for transport nationalization. Even they do not pretend that nationalization is going to turn this whole thing into some sustainable surplus unit, but are merely arguing along the lines the need for the government to control costs for a public good.

This is just idle talk that means nothing. You cannot run a sustainable business when your energy cost goes up 30%, staff cost up 7% and PTC bows to public pressure and only allow you to increase fare by a few %. Changing the board of directors into some stat board pannel isn't going to change this fundamental economic fact.

I know the industry as I have actually worked in a private transport company for years. The margins are razor thin and fares usually can't catch up with costs. SMRT / SBS bleeds badly and the governement steps in to "subsidise" them by opening up retail spaces for them to collect rent to make up for the losses. The original idea was that SBS/SMRT was supposed to be on operating contracts with LTA, but it has now evloved into a landlording company where retail spaces are given out to them by the government with nominal payments in order for them to stay afloat and continue to be "profitable". Last I heard they are now even sharing advertising revenue from bus stops with the 2 operators!