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