I REFER to Tuesday's letter by the Public Transport Council,
'New fare policy is fairer, says transport council'.
I had mentioned in my earlier letter ('Bus, train fare system
must be fair to all'; last Thursday) that with the new transport
fare structure, some commuters must pay more because they already
have a direct route to their destination. There are only so many
ways one can take on the current transport network to get to one's
destination and in many cases, there simply is no more direct
route. By direct, I mean able to reach the destination by the
shortest route possible.
Let me give an example. Suppose a commuter wants to go from
Yishun to Novena. The shortest and most direct route is by MRT,
which costs $1.35. According to the TransitLink website, this fare
band of $1.35 translates to a travelling distance of between
12.41km and 14.4km. Under the new fare structure, this distance
travelled incurs a fare of between $1.37 and $1.45, a difference of
between $0.02 and $0.10.
Another option is bus service 851, which covers 15.5 stages and
costs $1.31 at present. If each fare stage translates to 0.8km, the
entire distance is 12.4km and costs $1.37 based on the new system,
an increase of $0.06.
Both routes travelled are almost a mirror image of each other
and cover about the same distance, which is what I meant by being
'penalised through no fault of their own'.
This is the nub of the problem with the new fare policy:
Commuters are forced to accept whatever fare is placed before them
with no viable alternative at present or in the near future.
In such a competitive society, it matters a big deal if fares go
up, and even more so when commuters begin to notice and ask why
they must pay more when others pay less. This is not an issue about
commuters who choose to take a longer journey and be
cross-subsidised by commuters who make transfers, but one about
commuters who have no choice but to take the only route at their
disposal.
Gregory Lou