NEWS of improvements to the public transport system since January has been a welcome relief to commuters like myself.

The current system, especially the train, is decidedly better than travelling by car or taxi at peak times.

More often than not, however, the wait for a bus is long and frustrating. And more so after 9pm, when frequencies dip - but not passenger numbers.

The Government has announced plans to improve things by leaps and bounds.

It will centrally coordinate bus and rail networks next year to cut waiting times and ease transfers, in the hope that 70 per cent of all journeys during morning peak hours will be by public transport by 2020 - up from 63 per cent now.

In slightly over a year, at least 80 per cent of bus services have to run at intervals of not more than 10 minutes at peak hours, from 15 minutes now. And there will be more bus lanes.

I feel these figures can be improved even further, given that more journeys will likely be taken in the coming years.

Transport Minister Raymond Lim aptly described the "new philosophy" of planning transport through the eyes of the commuter - from the time he thinks about making his journey to the time he reaches his destination.

But does the public transport system see itself going further, and having a part to play in creating a sense of equity at a time when the income gap in widening?

This gap is reflected in the profiles of commuters.

According to the General Household Survey 2005, residents in lower-income households, smaller HDB flats and holding lower-skilled jobs rely more heavily on public transport.

Some 59.9 per cent of working persons, with monthly household incomes below $2,000, commuted to work by some form of public transport, compared to 42.1 per cent of their counterparts whose households made $8,000 and above.

And only 4.8 per cent of those in the lowest-income group travelled by car, compared to 43.7 per cent of those in the highest bracket. The others either did not require transport, or used chartered vans, motorcycles or other private transport.

So public transport is the default option for many.

It is also the great leveller: Executives in ties jostle with lower-wage workers for that inch of space on buses and trains, even if there is often a choice for the former to ditch the train or bus for the comfort and convenience of a car or cab every now and then.

Yes, there are gripes about fare hikes, and concern that the less-skilled are put off by jobs that involve them having to pay a fair bit to get to and from work.

But subsidies like transport vouchers help reduce the pinch on the poorest, even as the Government maintains that fares have to reflect operating costs at a level the market can bear.

The issue goes beyond fares, however.

It is about providing a solidly accessible and world-class means of travel that reaches all areas, and does not make it compelling enough for people to have a car.

So that whether you share a train with over 1,200 others or a bus with 100 others, you need not take significantly longer than if you drove.

But should you be stuck in a jam or some delay, the experience should also be a pleasant - not a suffocating - one. Hence plans to ease overcrowding on trains and buses are good.

But travel time can be speeded up by sensible tweaks like letting people board buses from the rear, especially at interchanges and crowded stops.

According to the General Household Survey 2005, working commuters who use both the train and bus took some 51 minutes on average to journey from home to work, compared to 27 minutes for those who went by car.

By 2020, the plan is for public transit journeys to take no more than 1.5 times that by car, down from 1.7 today - but this could fall faster.

Transport may not be a big flashpoint at a time of economic uncertainty, but shorter waits and less crowded buses may help people feel that transport planners care about people and not just how much they can make by filling buses to the maximum.

Having to wait 20 minutes for the bus home after a long day - and then having to squeeze into an overcrowded one that others may not even get to board - contributes to a sense of dissatisfaction that while some people can get about much faster, they have to settle for second best: a packed-to-the-brim public transport service.

Could some of this sentiment be behind the grouses about the recent announcement that fare cheats will be liable for a $20 fine from July - when it is a hassle to get a refund when overcharged?

I wonder how many of those caught, and others who will risk the fine come July, cheat because they feel the urge to save those few cents?

By contrast, improved services that come at no more than 10-minute intervals, often less - including to the furthest corners of HDB estates - would signal to folk, especially those who feel the odds are against them, that they matter.

Better public transport could well raise spirits, at a time when some feel they have to work harder for a shrinking pay packet just to keep their jobs.

At least they can get to work and back in comfort, and in a timely fashion, and not feel like they are like sardines in a can.

This article was first published in The Straits Times on May 9, 2008.