Friday 14 September 2007, St Julien Village: An elderly citizen lost her leg following a violent bus collision. Most of us would say it was an unfortunate accident and could not have been foreseen. Or was it? We all know how public service buses, commonly called ?bus individuel? operate. Even the Minister knows. Failure to take appropriate timely action to improve service and reduce accident risks has resulted in Mrs Jugoo?s leg being amputated. How many more limbs and lives will be lost before the government realizes that the public transport system, as far as ?bus individuels? are concerned, is in complete shambles, and no longer responds to the country?s modern needs?

In all democratic countries, it is customary for public officials, including ministers, to immediately accept responsibility for any accident or incident happening in a service under their control... Here, it is up to Dr Beebeejaun to decide whether or not he will carry Mrs Jugoo?s ordeal on his conscience. But we, members of the public and bus users, want answers from him and from his National Road Safety Council and Road Transport Advisory Board, who have, among their roles, to advise the Minister on the formulation of policies on road transport planning, management and economics and safety; Who has failed and why?

We have got a fragmented public transport where hundreds of disparate operators will never be able to provide a reliable, efficient and sustainable service, however much subsidies are pumped into it. It is impossible to benefit from economies of scale if each owner runs his bus independently, does his own maintenance, buys his own spare parts, employs his own staff, etc. There will never be a service standard and quality will always suffer as operators will be continuously competing with each other. Operation costs will always escalate continuously competing with each other and costs will always escalate beyond control, and the public traveller and taxpayer will both be eternally fleeced through frequent fare hike and subsidies to fund this disorganized, poorly managed system that defeats all economic and productivity principles. We have got organizations like the NPCC and NESC, whose roles include advising the government on how to enhance productivity and efficiency, but who fail to notice this white elephant. There is also an environmental hazard as each bus owner is likely to dispose of his used engine oil in his backyard unlike a centralized professional disposal at a bus depot...

Most public complaints hover around non-issuance of tickets, conductors and drivers incorrectly dressed or not displaying identity badges, their rudeness towards passengers, especially the elderly, refusal to embark students and pensioners, speeding to compete with other buses, overloading, being under the influence of alcohol, etc. In a bid to collect more passengers, many buses refuse to leave bus terminus according to official time-tables, then crawl all the way, expecting passengers to crowd at intermediary stops. Passengers may not be aware that buses have to complete a trip within a time frame set by the NTA, failing which, a penalty is imposed whereby they have to wait some four hours before undertaking the next trip. This is the reason why buses are forced to speed to catch up, after having wasted time initially. They exceed speed limit on busy narrow village roads, overtake dangerously on sharp bends, and tend to intimidate other road users. Passengers are not given ample time to get in or out. Some buses play blaring music much to the inconvenience of elderly passengers. The general upkeep of most buses is pathetic. Destination indicators are not readable enough. Buses sometimes divert at will and compel passengers to alight or change to another bus mid-way. In short, individuel buses make their own rules, and passengers have to agree. Conflicts do arise where certain exasperated passengers complain and it is not uncommon to see violent incidents spark.

Increasing mobility

A new fully integrated efficient transport system will encourage more people to leave their cars at home and travel by bus. Such a system will provide opportunities for introducing smart cards, season tickets, daily or weekly bus pass allowing unlimited travel or multiple changes across routes, thereby increasing mobility at reduced cost and higher convenience. Service will be disciplined and up to a set standard. Every measure to combat traffic congestion be it bus lane, or new link roads, etc will fail if the most important aspect is overlooked: i.e, a complete rethinking of the transport system. We have far too many buses which are grossly under-utilized. An ?individuel? bus does an average of four to five trips per day! Too many buses remain idle, choking our bus stations. Compare that with London buses with an average of 11 journeys per bus per day, and Singapore, about 10 trips daily. In these cities you rarely see more than two buses per route at the terminus. Here, up to 25 buses may be queuing at each stand! Mumbai BEST buses do on average 15 journeys each daily. If our average usage is doubled, only half the number of buses will suffice. This means we already have excess capacity which will easily accommodate people wishing to leave their cars at home. Where is therefore the rationale to issue more bus service licences? Many operators have complained on radio that there are too many buses on some routes. The NTA recently invited applications for four new bus services, and the irony is that existing bus owners, who keep complaining they are running at a loss, were the first to queue up at MSI Building! The NTA should have pulled four buses from existing routes with surplus buses and reallocate them to the new routes advertised. Granting four new licences would mean paying a further Rs 120,000 monthly in the form of subsidy. This is absurd...

A concerned passenger