Lui Tuck Yew Prefers "Private" Transport Services

Dear Mr Lui, what are you talking about? I was puzzled by what you wrote and as a commuter, I couldn't help but give a response here which hopefully you'll read.

You said: "Not only would people have to pay more, nationalising the operators could result in a stagnation of service quality or efficiency over time."

But the problem here is a straightforward one: even though now Singapore's public transport services aren't nationalised, we're ALREADY paying more, and more to come. The service quality and efficiency also are ALREADY stagnating and worse, declining while fees keep increasing!

You mentioned that profit incentive is more viable? However, truth of the matter is that it has now become a serious joke. These transport companies are motivated to hike costs for their own profits, at the burden upon us commuters while showing no improvement in the services and in many instances, service quality dropped. Also, these companies failed to foresee risks. For example, had the MRT station platforms had installed those gates, the tragedies would have been prevented in some way or another. The failure to anticipate and preempt risks is not befitting of a service provider which strives for profit. It doesn't deserve the profits in this case.

Ultimately, this PAP government is simply not bothered about the average citizens' livelihood and well-being. The justifications put forward are not convincing, and only goes to expose the fact that tthis PAP government isn't interested to run public welfare services for the people, either because of sheer ineptitude or sheer laziness (the mentality that, if I can outsource the problem to someone else, why not?).

Dear Mr Lui, you kept harping that all what your government is doing has a simple bottomline: for the good of the people. But I don't see in any way this reflects the sentiment. At present, your assumptions are all wrong. Outsourcing public transportation to private entities by theory can be cost-effective, since the simple thesis is that profits will spur them to improve services and thus safeguard commuters' interests. However, in the absence of market competition here, this assumption has been blown out of the window. What we see here is monopoly of services which bred the following characteristic ills: ossification, laziness, greed, nonchalance, etc.

If you allow these companies to continue this manner, while you PAP government either adopts a hands-off attitude or a half-hearted attempt to 'wayang' as if you're doing something when it's not, then I can only say that Mr Lui, as a transport minister, you failed your duty and mandate to the people.

Please allow me to remind you that you need to revisit your prior assumptions about outsourcing public services to private entities, based on the national context, before making a fair judgment. More importantly, please note the meaning of public transport - it has to be affordable, universal and acceptable. It's not meant to be a money-spinner designed to pay their management staffs obscene salaries at the cost of commuters.

The socioeconomic circumstances faced by average Singaporeans make it imperative for the government to either nationalise the services, or to put even tighter safeguards to shield commuters from such externalities if you still wish to outsource services to private firms. If you can, open the market for competition so as to motivate improvements.

I couldn't help but begin to doubt even more PAP's sincerity in resolving the average Singaporean's socioeconomic woes. Mr Lui, please wake up. Your so-called taking public transport has now literally become a lame attempt at wayanging while you (and PAP) still show that you remain recalcitrant and disconnected with the ground, barely 3 months after GE2011.