THE story of Singapore is illuminated by its land transport policy.
That daily bus trip may feel wholly unexceptional.
But the cool, smooth ride is a wondrous world away from the patchwork bus systems and the lurking pirate taxis that once peddled erratic mobility in the 1960s.
Though imperfect, today's road-and-rail network makes it possible for the progress- minded island to run as a fast-paced and efficient country and economy.
For the transport system seeks to heighten mobility, so personal lives and the national economy are not crimped by wasted hours, creeping productivity and health hazards.
Land transport also tracks the nation's road to the developed world.
The country was built road by road, and system by technology-rich system - and very much pushed along by powerful political will too.
Electronic Road Pricing is an example.
Leaders elsewhere have danced around this unpopular congestion control.
Singapore - habitually undeterred by political costs after doing the strategic sums - can lay claim to being the first in the world to establish city-wide road pricing and a few other innovations.
But the desire to be world-class also carries the weight of higher expectations. Singaporeans are now discerning and demanding, and expect the best and the fastest.
The middle class, for instance, would like a choice of premier bus and taxi services, unless public transport can truly deliver a seamless commute with top service.
And what about unclogged expressways, and simply more of them?
And the desire of many to own a car?
Transport policy will always be a political and emotional issue, since it touches the wallet and embodies middle-class hopes.
Transport policy is also exciting, transforming a nation's life and economy. It colours the atmosphere, quickens the pace and changes the scenery.
Roads define a nation. America's open road is a picture of its engineering genius and independent spirit.
Singapore's transport system chronicles the solution-seeking spirit of a country that cuts a methodical path through the tangle of clashing agendas that multiply within a diverse population.
Hopefully, it is both a logical and vibrant path.
In 1996, the White Paper on Land Transport drew the road map for a world-class transport system.
A decade-plus later, the ideas will be updated when the Land Transport Review is released next month.
Ahead of the review, it is clear that some issues are unchanged. For starters, in official eyes, the path to free-flowing traffic is clear:
If only people will cool their passion for cars, and hop onto buses and trains.
But it's also a tricky manoeuvre for planners here.
The reality is that the big push to prioritise public transport - and so decongest roads - is a policy in transformation.
For road blocks are still being dismantled and these include: The delayed Circle Line must start running to add fuller MRT connectivity.
The wait for buses should shorten too. And even that stroll to the bus stop or MRT station can be more pleasant.
Question marks remain over whether the bus, MRT and taxi policies are the best.
This is precisely why the Land Transport Review is so timely. It will address transport challenges of the next 10 to 15 years, taking the nation further along its quest to be liveable and world-class.
Transport Minister Raymond Lim is mindful of all the lingering issues, but he is decisive on his cornerstone policy:
Public transport is the key to a liveable city.
"Public transport is the most space-efficient way to transport large numbers of people in a complex city state," he says in an interview with Insight on the thinking behind transport policy.
"A car takes 30 times more space per travelling person than a bus," he points out, ready with numbers.
Public transport must be a choice mode, he concludes.
Where's my bus?
PEOPLE call perennially for direct buses. But to spread the transport web island-wide in the least pricey and most beneficial style, a trunk-and-feeder system was chosen.
So, a Sengkang resident with a Jurong job may jump onto a feeder bus outside his flat to access a long-distance trunk bus or the MRT line - then use a feeder again.
With this, people live with the hassle of transfers. The trade-off: higher frequencies.
The alternative of direct buses trying to link all points of the island is deemed too complex and wasteful. This can result in "a bus timetable as thick as a telephone directory'', says Mr Lim.
"You can't navigate that."
The thinking is that the trunk-and-feeder will stay - but must change on three principal fronts: waiting time, travel time and overcrowding, say Mr Lim and commentators.
Mr Michael Palmer, MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, agrees with the model, with caveats. The MRT is comfortable and fast, he says. The kink is its interface with buses.
On the ground, his Sengkang folk gripe that they wait 10 to 15 minutes for a feeder bus, which then takes 10 to 15 minutes to get to the MRT.
So speedier connections really matter. Punctuality too.
"In Switzerland and Germany, you can actually set your watch by the time the bus comes," he remembers.
Mr Lim recognises that the trunk-and-feeder is "not doing as good a job as it should".
The good news is that commuters are actively surveyed, and policy is indeed forming to uplift the daily commute.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is reviewing the integration of buses and rail to minimise transfers. It will quicken frequency of basic buses from 15 to 10 minutes.
Hopes of merger
HERE, the SMRT and SBS Transit each run segments of the rail and bus systems.
Despite the hoped-for benefits of competition, a 2006 Public Transport Council survey showed that bus riders were still "fairly dissatisfied" with waiting and travel time, and overcrowding.
Corporate competition has also sent very odd signals.
SMRT decided in 2004 to give away a Nissan March car to reward its bus and train commuters.
"What company has marketing where you are promoting your competition?" wonders transport policy expert Paul Barter of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
"Their competition is not SBS. Their competition is the car," he asserts.
This irony or anomaly seems to flow from flawed competition and a lack of imaginative links between the big listed transport providers, and this is an unsettled issue.
Introducing contracts for the transport providers may improve service. The threat of a new entrant entering the sector through competitive bidding can keep SMRT and SBS Transit focused on efficiency.
Another idea is merger. Former transport minister Yeo Cheow Tong still hopes the two firms will seek a way to integrate one day, as those in Hong Kong did. Its two major train operators merged, and lowered fares this month despite global fuel increases.
Integration can result in economies of scale. It will end duplication of routes, technical expertise, and more. It can grow the transport pie for all.
Mr Yeo sounded out both players, especially when the North-East Line began running, and all the inefficiencies were starkly clear.
"They all realised that hey, there are benefits, but the devil's in the details, how to value each one, how to balance the benefits," he says.
"I hope they continue exploring, find a way forward to eventually integrate."
Circle Line's moment
ONE more road block will be overcome when the Circle Line starts running in 2010. Then, more people will not need to travel to the city interchanges, but can change trains at the periphery of the city.
That will free up capacity and relieve the overcrowding.
The MRT network is now close to two-thirds of its final size, at 138.2 km.
The Circle Line, Downtown Line and Boon Lay Extension will in future push the total rail length to 215.3km.
Earlier, planners had debated the moment to launch the critical Circle Line. "You launch it too early, it's a $5 billion asset, hardly used, and it's a huge loss," Mr Yeo says.
"But if you launch it too late, then the current lines will be overcrowded."
It's a judgment call, with so much public cash involved.
He's still wistful that the 2004 Nicoll Highway collapse set back the Circle Line by possibly two years - but hopeful about the new lines ahead.
Vexing, vibrant taxis
ONE more sector to fix: Cabs.
Both the possibilities and the perennial complaints are greatly fascinating.
First, why the protests?
These run the gamut from touting to cab unavailability, from dour drivers to a surfeit of surcharges.
Just to highlight two issues:
Cabs are treated not as a premier service here, but as a fairly cheap alternative to buses and trains.
Another factor is that the taxi industry is deregulated - fares in 1998, supply in 2003.
A free market lets taxi companies set prices.
One question is whether operators have enough incentive to adjust fares to match inflated demand, given that their revenue flows from vehicle rentals rather than fares.
It is toughest to find a cab in the evening inside the Central Business District (CBD). The new city surcharge plus peak fare - announced by ComfortDelGro - may help normalise this situation.
The LTA thinks this is the right direction. Cabs must be priced at a level matching their "door-to-door chauffeured services", says Mr Jeremy Yap, LTA's acting group director of vehicle and transit licensing.
He also presents the brighter side of deregulation.
The industry is now "more vibrant" with seven innovative players - up from two major firms of which ComfortDelGro has been dominant.
"So customers can avail themselves of more options, differentiated services." Choices include MPV taxis, and soon LPG-powered cabs.
The fleet has ballooned 25 per cent from 2003. This is a rise from 19,000 to 23,800.
"Of course, it's not perfect," says Mr Yap, but the LTA engages with a spectrum of stakeholders to improve taxis, puts "mystery customers" in cabs for audits, pores over monthly surveys.
Recent ideas include proliferating CBD cab-stands for safety, which reduces empty cruising cabs as well.
Call-centre standards (See box) will improve. These are exciting days, he indicates.
Perpetual worriers
PUZZLES remain.
How much will the Circle Line change commuting life, or are expectations too high? Will taxi companies tussle between business decisions and the decongestion mandate?
Is integration of the bus-and-rail providers possible, and rational?
One conundrum is not going away. Says Mr Palmer, the MP: "Trying to persuade people not to use the car and instead use public transport is not going to go very far, not at the prices we pay for cars."
Glance at the 1996 White Paper, and there is a sense of deja vu. The wish for quality transport remains, for one. Balance between cab supply and demand is still sought.
What has changed?
The LTA counts the air-conditioned Toa Payoh transport hub and the North-East Line among its milestones.
Since 1996, the transport system is also supporting a 25 per cent surge in population.
Transport Minister Lim urges a little perspective: "The perennial issues will remain, and in fact, become more complex, as travel demands become more varied over time."
Even the Land Transport Review will be a work in progress. Importantly, he says, there is a process to continually relook and refine policies to meet travel needs.
Unresolved issues do not detract from the system's strengths, but mean the worrying and strategising do persist.
He says a global panel told him that Singapore has a good system, so the danger is slipping into complacency.
His response: "Members of the public keep us on our toes. And in any case, we're perpetual worriers.
"We worry what's going to happen next, what we should do, so constantly we're trying to make it better."
