SINGAPORE: During the parliamentary sitting on 16 October, Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat defended the Public Transport Council’s (PTC) latest fare review exercise. He emphasised that the PTC’s primary goal is to keep public transport fares affordable for commuters while ensuring the system’s financial sustainability.

In response to questions from fellow Members of Parliament, he assured them that the PTC adopts a gradual approach to fare adjustments, aiming to minimize the impact on commuters.

MPs including Saktiandi Supaat from People’s Action Party (PAP) raised concern over the financial implications of deferring fare increases, specifically on public transport operators and the sustainability of the system, as well as the impact on funding for service improvements and infrastructure projects.

Nominated MP Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant inquired about the reasons behind the fare revision recommendation, the steps transport operators have taken to enhance service levels, and the major cost factors that operators need to monitor closely.

In response, Mr Chee explained that the PTC is guided by the fare adjustment formula, which takes into account economic and social factors, such as fare affordability, rising costs for both commuters and the public transport industry, and the overall economic climate.

For this year’s fare review, the formula produced an adjustment of 3.3%, driven by core inflation and wage growth in 2023, though moderated by a decrease in energy prices from their 2022 peak.

After including the deferred quantum of 15.6% from last year, the maximum allowable fare increase was 18.9%.

However, PTC opted for a 6% fare increase—less than one-third of the maximum quantum—to maintain affordability and financial sustainability.

Bus and train fares are set to increase by 10 cents per journey for adult commuters starting from 28 December 2024.

Mr Chee also highlighted the government’s commitment of $250 million in additional subsidies to cover the funding gap and mitigate the impact on commuters.

This is on top of the $2 billion in annual subsidies for bus and train services, as well as up to $900 million over eight years for the Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme.

However, he cautioned that while the Government has provided these subsidies to help cushion fare increases in recent years, they are ultimately funded by current and future taxpayers.

He stressed the need to gradually close the gap, which is a key part of this year’s fare review. The PTC has also signaled its intention to continue with a gradual approach to future fare adjustments.

In response to fare increases, the Government has made Public Transport Vouchers (PTVs) available to help lower-income households.

“The Government understands Singaporeans’ concerns about costs of living. That is why we revised the income eligibility criterion this year, from monthly household income per person of $1,600 to $1,800. This allows 60,000 more households to qualify for a PTV this exercise.”

He added that the government also increased the PTV amount from $50 in 2023, to $60 this year. This will cover about 6 months of the fare increase for lower-income households.

To encourage rail and bus operators to uphold high service and reliability standards, Mr Chee reiterated that the system incorporates both “carrots and sticks.”

He noted that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has implemented various measures to hold operators accountable for meeting these standards, including imposing penalties for lapses and establishing incentives for good performance.

On fare structures and revenue models in different cities, Mr Chee highlighted that cities like Hong Kong and London implement annual fare adjustments, while others, such as Seoul, have recently made significant fare increases after extended periods without changes.

MP questions effectiveness of Public Transport Vouchers in assisting low-income households with fare hikes

Saktiandi Supaat, MP for Bishan–Toa Payoh GRC then raised concerns about the Public Transport Vouchers (PTV) and their effectiveness in helping lower-income households manage public transport fare increases.

He questioned how the Government determines the quantum of PTVs (the voucher amount) and whether it could be included as part of the overall budget rather than being decided on an ad-hoc basis.

In response, Mr Chee explained that the Government reviews the size of the quantum and the coverage with each fare review exercise, considering what is necessary to help lower-income households defray about six months of fare increases.

He noted that there is flexibility built into the PTV application process. Households with more members can appeal for additional PTVs to better address their needs, and these appeals are managed through grassroots networks.

In response to Saktiandi’s suggestion of including PTV decisions within the national budget, Mr Chee explained that the timing of fare reviews and the PTV allocations differ.

The PTC’s fare review recommendations come later in the year, and only then can the Government size up the PTVs based on the recommended fare increases. Hence, PTVs cannot be pre-determined within the budget process.

Transport Minister opposes link between fare adjustments and train service reliability

Yesterday (15 Oct), Mr Chee, in delivering his Ministerial Statement addressing the recent East-West Line disruption, dismissed a suggestion from Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam to link fare adjustments to train service reliability, asserting that public transport service levels and disruptions should remain distinct from fare setting.

He highlighted that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) investigates service disruptions, establishes accountability, and imposes penalties when necessary.

He clarified that operators who fail to meet reliability targets also forfeit payments under the government’s incentive schemes.

Mr Chee explained that the annual fare review aims to ensure fares align with changes in operating costs, thereby maintaining the financial sustainability of the public transport system.

Challenging the Minister further, Mr Giam asked how commuters could be assured that fare increases would result in tangible improvements in service reliability.

Mr Chee acknowledged Mr Giam’s concerns but emphasised that different strategies are employed to achieve specific objectives, including monitoring performance and incentivising operators to uphold high service standards through penalties and rewards.

He argued that integrating service reliability into fare adjustments could have detrimental effects. Holding back on fare increases, which are essential for covering rising operating costs, could result in a chronic financial shortfall, ultimately impacting service quality and reliability over time.

Additionally, he noted that depending on government subsidies to bridge the shortfall would require taxpayers to foot the bill.

In a speech delivered on 16 October 2024 in Parliament, Associate Professor Jamus Lim, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Sengkang GRC, expressed his admiration for Team Singapore athletes at the 2024 Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games.

During the motion titled Olympic and Paralympic Achievements, Lim particularly acknowledged medallists Jeralyn Tan, Maximilian Maeder, and Yip Pin Xiu for their outstanding performances and achievements.

Assoc Prof Lim began by extending his appreciation to all national athletes, stating that their dedication and sacrifices, whether they secured a medal or not, exemplified their passion and commitment to the nation.

He noted the extraordinary efforts of Jeralyn Tan, who secured a medal in boccia at the Paralympics, Maximilian Maeder, who became Singapore’s youngest Olympic medallist in kitefoiling, and Yip Pin Xiu, who continued her dominance in the pool by winning two gold medals in backstroke events.

Despite these commendations, Assoc Prof Lim raised questions about the disparity in the monetary rewards offered to Olympians and Paralympians in Singapore.

He noted that, under the current system, cash rewards are given under separate programmes: the Major Games Award (MGA) for Olympians, managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC), and the Athletes’ Achievement Awards (AAA) for Paralympians, overseen by the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC).

Assoc Prof Lim highlighted that these rewards are funded by the Tote Board, a government agency, leading him to question why the government has not taken steps to ensure parity between the two.

He recalled previous Parliamentary questions posed by both the Workers’ Party and the People’s Action Party, alluding to bipartisan concerns over the unequal treatment of able-bodied athletes and athletes with disabilities.

Assoc Prof Lim argued that, while the SNOC and SNPC are technically non-governmental organisations (NGOs), their close ties to the government through sponsorship and council membership—some of which involve current and former ministers—suggest that the government can exercise influence over the award structures.

Addressing the economic arguments for unequal rewards, Assoc Prof Lim pointed out that athletes generally compete for the love of their sport rather than financial gain, yet still require financial support to continue competing at the highest levels.

He argued that monetary rewards, though secondary to passion, play a crucial role in allowing athletes to sustain their careers, especially during periods where success may be uncertain.

Assoc Prof Lim also refuted arguments that Paralympians should receive smaller rewards because their competitions are less popular or have fewer participants.

He equated this reasoning to arguing that athletes in less popular sports like sepak takraw or silat should receive smaller rewards compared to footballers. In his view, such distinctions undermine the value of diverse sporting disciplines and achievements.

Expanding on this argument, Assoc Prof Lim cited the example of the U.S. women’s soccer team, which, despite drawing larger audiences and generating more revenue than their male counterparts, fought a lengthy legal battle for equal pay.

Similarly, he pointed to the case of athletes in the billion-dollar NCAA leagues in the U.S., who receive limited compensation despite the vast revenues their performances generate.

He concluded his economic analysis by stating that the market dynamics of supply and demand do not justify the current disparity in rewards for Olympians and Paralympians.

Rather, the issue should be viewed through a moral lens. According to Assoc Prof Lim, Paralympians deserve equal recognition for competing at the highest levels, regardless of their classification or the number of competitors in their categories.

In his closing remarks, Assoc Prof Lim urged the government to take an active role in ensuring equal monetary rewards for both groups of athletes, following the lead of countries like Canada, the United States, and France, which have already implemented similar policies.

He argued that such a move would align with Singapore’s broader values of equality, compassion, and non-discrimination.

Assoc Prof Lim’s call to action was framed within the context of broader societal goals, with the Workers’ Party having long advocated for equal opportunities for all Singaporeans.

He concluded by stating that recognising the achievements of all athletes equally, through financial rewards, would be a significant step towards fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.