THE Government wants public transport ridership during morning peak hours to hit at least 70 per cent - up from 63 per cent today - in 12 years' time.
With population growth, that translates to just over 10 million trips a day - nearly double the 5.6 million today. An ambitious target and a daunting task, to say the least.
The two new rail projects - the Circle Line and Downtown Line - are expected to be up and running by then. But they will soak up only a million more rides a day at the most. We can build more lines, but it will take time.
Which is why the bold initiatives to overhaul the bus industry are necessary. And urgently so.
The most radical measure in this overhaul is the opening up of the industry to more players.
A case of deja vu? Older Singaporeans will recall the days when public transport buses were a hodge-podge of green, red and yellow.
The buses were run by a group of private operators and drivers often raced each other on the road to pick up more fares than their rivals, at the expense of safety.
To keep costs low, bus upkeep was minimal.
It was competition all right, but not the competition that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) is going back to.
The competition the LTA has in mind is one where different players bid for "route parcels'' and not fight over individual routes. These parcels will be drawn up by the authority, which will assume the role of master bus route planner next year.
The first tenders are expected to go out after next year and better commuter service will be the overarching consideration. That means whoever bids will have to convince the LTA its proposal will serve the commuter best.
And failure to deliver will have punitive consequences.
But for real competition to thrive in such a set-up, the LTA may have to give some concession to newcomers. This is to offset the strong advantage the incumbents have built up.
Otherwise, the only successful bidders might just be SBS Transit and SMRT Buses. A recent attempt to open up the feeder bus routes to private operators was a non-starter because no one could meet the strict requirements, such as having low-floor buses with wide doors.
How exactly the planned liberalisation pans out remains to be seen, but one thing is clear. By taking over the role of route planner from the two bus companies, the LTA will be in a better position to coordinate the various bus services and whenever possible, coincide them with the MRT timetable.
And it will do so without the profit motive - something which may well be in the way of better service today.
However, that does not necessarily mean bus commuters will have more direct services or lower fares than today's - even if in theory, better efficiency from better planning should result in cost savings.
The new regime calls for a hub-and-spoke system which is likely to result in more transfers. But unlike transfers today, centralised route planning will ensure swift and comfortable transfers.
Transfer penalties will be done away with. In other words, a commuter who completes his journey with a combination of bus or bus-train services will not pay more than one who does so on a single bus or train.
For those who make transfers today, this should result in lower expenditure. Whether they will continue to do so after the market opens up remains to be seen.
Will the LTA rationalise bus and train fares? If so, will bus fares rise to meet train fares? Will the North-East Line's "premium" fares be brought down, or will other MRT fares rise to meet them?
Will the new regime add cost to the system? And if so, who will bear it - commuters or taxpayers in general?
The LTA does not have answers yet. But deputy chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee on Transport Ong Kian Min suggests the fare review mechanism could be tweaked so commuters will benefit more from efficiency gains in the new regime.
But even if fares do creep up a bit, it may be worth the faster and cushier service. After all, how else can public transport be more compelling than what has long been the most seamless mode of transport: the car?
