Non-profit PTSC

Still, we are entitled to expect more of this essential service. Millions of dollars are pumped into the PTSC, yet the entity is accumulating debts, such as the $28 million it owes – alongside the Police Service – to the Vehicle Management Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago.

The PTSC is a statutory body governed by the Public Transport Service Act Chapter 48:02. Under Section 8 of the Act, the corporation is mandated “to provide a safe, adequate and economic public transportation system, adapted to the needs of the country.” Yet, clearly the PTSC has not been “economic” over the last five decades.

In response to questioning from members of a Parliament committee, PTSC Chairman Edwin Gooding said it would take some time before the corporation could produce a profit. He said the more immediate objective of the company is to slowly wean itself off the Government subventions on which it currently depends, get new buses and improve service on its routes.

It’s hard to believe it now, but at one stage buses were incredibly popular. With the decline of rail the bus became the “great vehicle of public transportation” all over Trinidad. This, despite the rapid rise of the car.

The establishment of the PTSC arose out of the report of a working party on bus transport in Trinidad and Tobago appointed by the Government on November 21, 1964. It was comprised of senior government officials and representatives of the trade unions concerned. As a result of their findings on December 2, 1964, the Government decided that public (or State) ownership of the bus transport industry should take effect from January 1, 1965. Yet, five decades later, State ownership has reaped few rewards.

In contrast to Trinidad and Tobago, many other countries have privatised their bus service. So much so that in 2010 in the UK, the State criticised the private companies running buses over profiteering.

This, perhaps, is the reality which State ownership is meant to prevent.

The fact is public transportation is still an essential service. Though buses are now eclipsed by cars, a large proportion of the population still depends on the buses to take them to school, work and to pursue various activities. This is particularly so in rural areas still inflected by the dynamics of the unequal allocation of resources in the country.

As such, the PTSC performs a noble service in a situation where it is doubted it would be sustained if placed in purely private hands.

That is not to say there might be some model of private ownership that might work. For instance, the PTSC could seek to consolidate its presence within urban areas by taking advantage of the fact that some people would prefer to take a bus instead of taking on the hassle and responsibility of car ownership.

If commuters were given a choice between a fast, efficient, well-designed bus network and driving themselves in hours of traffic, they are likely to chose buses. For this to happen, there must be a substantial change in our understanding of the PTSC.

It must no longer be perceived as a service for the outliers and the elderly.

It must be placed at the centre of our urban pulse.

Needless to say, all of this assumes proper systems and procedures are in place at the PTSC and that it is effectively managed. Yet, there have been many complaints about problems with the stock of buses and the leakage of funds.

It’s time to redesign the PTSC and to get it back on the road. Assuming the service is environmentally friendly and efficient, it can play a part in our sustainable development.