News and views from an unique perspective

PAP MP Dr Janil Puthucheary attacks critics: Operators will not ‘profit’ from $1.1 billion dollar bus services scheme

Posted by temasektimes on July 10, 2012

Pasir Ris-Pungggol MP Dr Janil Puthucheary has lashed out at critics of the government’s plan to dole out a shocking $1.1 billion dollar of taxpayers’ monies to purchase buses for operators under the ‘Bus Services Enhancement Programme.’

The move has come under heavy criticisms from many Singaporeans that public monies should not be used to bolster the profits of the bus companies SBS Transit and SMRT.

Both SBS Transit and SMRT are partly owned by Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund Temasek Holdings in one way or another.

However, Dr Janil doesn’t think so and attacked the critics for deliberately spreading ‘misinformation’ in parliament on Monday:

“Some of these concerns are inflammed as a result of misinformation, some of which may be deliberate. The key points that no profit will be made as a result to the BSEP, that the assistance it provides to the operators will be calibrated and adjusted to ensure this is so needs to be explained and discussed.”

Speaking up to support his fellow party MP, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew declared that the programme was not intended to ‘profit’ the Public Transport Organizations.

“I know there are concerns, there are fears, but the way we want to use this money is to make sure the commuters benefit from having more reliable, more frequent, less crowded buses. Certainly, the intent is not for this government to give money to the operators in order to fatten their bottom line. Not all all,” he said.



54 Responses to “PAP MP Dr Janil Puthucheary attacks critics: Operators will not ‘profit’ from $1.1 billion dollar bus services scheme”

  1. bob said

    wth? They got so many profit liao still wan use our monies to buy bus??

  2. Tony said

    Is this Dr Janil Puthucheary the same highly obnoxious and idiotic scum that think he had the special privilege of serving his NS dues by being a doctor and insulting all our NSman as though they are lower class than he is?????

  3. Burn said

    I’m fully behind the 1.1 billion scheme to help the bus companies and the 1.1 billion will be covered by all the ministers and MPs whereby 90% of their monthly salary will be channeled to the 1.1 billion..

  4. Jack said

    When you pay the dinner for someone, the someone would not need to buy his own dinner. Does the someone not have more money in his pocket? Yes, or No?

    I cannot understand our elected MP and nominated Minister reasoning.

  5. Lim said

    “inflammed as a result of misinformation, some of which may be deliberate. The key points that no profit will be made as a result to the BSEP” ?? What misinformation when it is painfully clear that tax payers’ billions will be given on a silver platter to private listed transport companies whose profits go to shareholders? What cock and bull fable is this when I give you billions but ensure you make no profit from the money? Why not mandate these two bloated oligopolies to increase their fleet and improve their performances using their own money raised by themselves? If they can’t meet the standards or find it unprofitable to do so then open up the field to compettion like Hong Kong or London. Why make it so complicated and have this foreign born MP to fight for money for private listed companies instead of taking the side of tax payers?

  6. Abuse of tax monies said

    This investment is seen as the government has no solution to the ailing MRT transport system n the increase in foreign workers that overwhelmed the transport system. It is a strategy to tell Singaporeans that it will benefit Singaporeans in the long run. Government always think Singaporeans are stupid. It is very sad to know that the government is taking this route to resolve the overcrowded transport system by heavily investing in fixed assets using tax payers monies. It is an outright abuse of Singaporeans tax monies.

    • wmulew said

      So what would U have them do. Do nothing and continue to allow the buses to be overcrowded. What kind of stupid logic are U using. The reason why they are spending this money is to make sure that U as a commuter have less crowded buses. U think what, they buy the bus so they can each put one at home for show issit. 1.1 Billion is not a small sum. You think SBS is able to take out that kind of cash in such short notice to get things done? Think again. It’s either the government come up with the money and get things done NOW or U wait YEARS for the situation to improve. Please use your brains before U talk

      • Joe said

        I think you are missing the picture. Yes, it is to benefit US, the commuter. But, if a PRIVATE company cannot “take out that kind of cash in such short notice to get things done”, then do you think the PRIVATE company should be allowed to continue doing business, even exist? Imagine you own a business, and things need to be fixed, but you are unable to do so, do you think the government is going to buy your equipment for you? Pay you staff? I think “Abuse Of Tax Monies” did use his/her brains when he/she talked. I think you are the one who completely missed the target. Either SMRT/SBS come up with the money to buy new buses, failing to do so, they should go under. OR, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION should not be a private sector business.

      • jy said

        If a transport company cannot cater to the needs of Singaporean. Closed it. When the govt throw in money to help them now,how about another 5 years?throw again? The way of solving is still reducing additional citizens in the country so that the transport company,canal company and hdb can cope. Throwing money now is not going to solve the problem. The problem is already there,throwing in money only solve the problem now.. Not in long term. Our generation is almost gone. Most impt is our younger generation.

      • Jo said

        Is SBS and SMRT a PTE LTD or state own? It make a different here of either using the taxpayer money or should the company come up with the money. And also when using the taxpayer money to buy the fleet of buses for the company what do we as a commuter get? A less crowded bus? Don’t forget when we use the service we are paying also and over the years the fare of the ride have been increasing so would it decrease since part of the bus is pay for with taxpayer money?

  7. MT said

    Profit or no profit….it is still using public funds to support business operations of a PUBLIC LISTED company! PUBLIC LISTED company is suppose to raise their own funds through SHAREHOLDERS, NOT Tax Payor!!!! If you want to use tax payors money then you should issue SBS, SMRT shares to all tax payors in return for the $1.1 Billion!!!!

  8. kampong said


  9. Concern Malaysian said

    I wonder why, when someone given up their citizenship he or she still considered belong to their country of origin?????????many people forget when someone given up their citizenship he/she is considered as betrayer to his country of origin. Mind you people Dr. Janil shall never ever smell Malaysian citizen anymore for the rest of life. So please refrain from calling him Malaysian . If for some reason he is not wanted in Singapore , he then can choose to be citizen of any other countries including India but definitely not Malaysia. Good bye Dr. Janil and I wish you all the best for your future undertaking , you are most welcome as a tourist for a limited stay of 2 weeks or may be 1 month occasionally.

    • Angry Stone said

      Do you mean that it is ok if our next president / PM is a ” New citizen ” which has already given up other citizenship of other country? As you had said they are “betrayer to his country of origin” , and you allow “betrayer” to be our Singapore law maker? Sg Gov is a joke.

  10. Naivety said

    Allo Janil!

    Awak boleh balik kampung tido lah…WTF do you know about transport infrastructure systems & transport economics here!

  11. LkySi said

    He cannot make a mark in Malaysia, thats why he is in Singapore – courtesy of a Singapore Chinese wife – a pre-requisite to be in politics in Singapore

    • sorahi said

      …… AND SO ON

  12. mahbok tan said

    Alamak all this PAP parlimentarians are only know how to talkcock like a parrot…!!!! The least is parrot do not have to go to school…KNNBCCB….!!!

    Allo ….. any private companies are operating at their own cost not by using tax payers money lei….!! U still remember STC( singapore Transport company ) UBC , ( United bus company) and Tay Koh Yat …..all this bus companies did they get special money from the govt in the 60’s or 70’s….??? Did the govt loan them money to buy new buses…???

    The shareholders need to fund their on their own by raising up money in the listing market ma not through the GOVT…KNNBCCB…!!!

    This is what i called cronyism , nepotism and corruption by the capitalist…..cos at the end of the day peasants have to pay more….the govt themselves are not expecting its citizen to ask money from them….even our CPF money oso they want to hold and earned interest KNNBCCB….!!!

    This kind of news make me more pek chek with the govt and those 60.1% who vote for them are themselves feeling the pain….good luck to you all 60.1% ….!!! Wait GE2016 and we will ensure that only born in SGpore and served NS are voted into the parliament…..!!!

  13. Invictus said

    Dr Janil, if I follow your argument, then LTA could do better in explaining to the public on how the money is used to benefit the commuters. Can’t blame speculations and misunderstanding if the rationale is poorly communicated.
    The last time LTA explained the rationale for SMRT fare hike is that the consumers will enjoy better service. The COI proves that this is not the case. If we learn from SMRT, what mechanism is in place to guarantee improved service (since you are using public fund) and what LTA will do if these service standards are not met ?

  14. Fox said

    So, HOw many percent of the current congestion can be solved with this 1.1B fund injection?
    Is there a guarantee?

  15. Fox said

    …. if no exact figure, and no guarantee, don’t TUCK around with our money, k…
    U r what? Malaysian MP? of course you can anyhow say coz it concern you least.

  16. corruptpapies said

    Tambi. don’t talk cock, “Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund Temasek Holdings” is just empty shell.

  17. Singaporean said

    The focus is this. The bus operators do not have the capital to buy new buses … our fleet is so old and hence the government has to use taxpayers’ monies to renew a very old fleet. If you want the bus operators to buy new buses, they will have to issue new bonds or new shares to raise the money from investors, which for some reason they were not willing to. Is it because they do not want so much debt? or is it because the debt to equity would be out of whack? The government has to step in to improve the fleet for the citizens’ sake. I get that. And I appreciate that. Don’t let me see them raising bus fares! Don’t let me see them issue dividend to their shareholders, which is largely Temasek? With this huge injection from the government, they better make sure the citizens at the end of day, benefit and not shareholders!!!!!!!!

    • sorahi said


  18. Alan Lau said

    three years can represent Singaporeans ah? I was here for 33 years … that CCB is nothing

  19. kong man under the sun said

    Tell this msia man go home

  20. DaWolf said

    What ever you say Mr. PAP MP. No one listens to you anymore.

  21. No Ns Required to be an MP. said

    All blame government. Come to voting, still vote the same government. Crap ha u people. The best vote in Malaysian without even serving the Army. Stupid 60% Singaporean.

  22. soesg said

    I would suggest temasek times to be more responsible in their news reporting. He is an MP of singapore. Please don’t ise “from Malaysia” to stir hatred. This is truly irresponsible.
    He has a job to represent Singapore. And elected by the people. To stir racial riots is not ethical.

  23. jaded said

    utter rubbish! load of bullshit!

  24. Jonathan said

    I m shocked at how this site is aimed at repackaging any news into hate news. Really wow.

  25. Lui Talk Cock said

    Does the pap really think we are idiots??? What misinformation is he talking about? The fact of this whole farce is that the pap is taking 1.1billion dollars of public taxpayers’ money to purchase buses for the private bus company, whose sole existence is to make massive profits from these monopolised transport services! Instead of holding the bus companies to account towards renewing their fleet and improving service quality, we taxpayers have to foot this humongous bill of buying the private bus companies spanking new buses so they can continue to focus on fattening their already-fat wallets!!!?? What kind of talented pap minister is this, who cannot even do the simple task of connecting the dots??

  26. Unbelievable said

    Unbelievable that a doctor can misinform and argue in this manner!!!!

    Just put it in a layman terms.

    Government using a lot of the taxpayers’ money to buy machines for the operators to earn money from the consumers who are also taxpayers. Then at the end of the day, the profits are shared by the stakeholders including bonuses for the management but not the consumers.

    Where on earth can you get someone to give you a lot of money to do business and at the end of the day you can keep the takings.

    Best part of it is that they are saying that they are doing it to provide a reliable and efficient transport system for the consumers/taxpayers and WE MUST THEN SAY THANK YOU to them.

    What a joke!!!!!!

    Only this thing can happen in Singapore.


  27. Lew S. H. said

    Tell any dumb bus operator in any part of the world that some dumb rich man is going to give him a few hundred buses FOC and guess what he would say!!
    Answer: You think this is your grandfather arh?

  28. Greg said

    If public bus operators were not privatised in the first place then there would be no need for the $1.1billion bailout. These operators paid hundreds of million in dividends since they were privatised.

    It is ludicrous to expect public bus operators to only provide service to profitable routes. Overall financial viability is the goal not viability of each and every route on its own. This shows that the government is run by a bunch of mediocre people. I guess we should expect as much since many of them including PM (“Prime Mediocrity”) are ex-SAF morons.

    • jy said

      I think the govt should not bail them out. As if they do so,mean they have over populate the country which doesn’t give the operator enough time to handle. So whose fault?

  29. Never served NS said

    This never-served-NS MP from a foreign land wanna lord over us . . . . . .

  30. Ron said

    It is a fallacy that privatization of public transport ensures efficiency. Look at SMRT. The bus routes are still unsatisfactory.

    Public transport for a small island country has to be centrally managed. You do not have three PSAs. So, why have different transport companies? Why not set up a statutory board or company and manage the system? It will be more efficient that way.

    There is no need to be profit-centred. Rather, efficiency is more important as breakdowns means workers do not get to work on time and that affects the economy plus add more stress to an already highly stressed society.

    Time to re-think.

  31. wantabetterspore said

    “we want to use this money is to make sure the commuters benefit from having more reliable, more frequent, less crowded buses the intent is not for this government to give money to the operators in order to fatten their bottom line. Not all all,” True but sometimes such comments make me wonder whether our ministers are apt enough cant they see that by giving sbs more buses this would mean they have more sources for generating revenue?! isnt that y netizens n the likes are saying they are fattening the bottom line cant they see that this is why we are concern?! Im for cre8ting more reliable, frequent tpt but if it is at taxpayers cost then cost savings should be transferred to us, in the form of cheaper fares. Otherwise the govt is just throwing money and the money gained from the buses goes back to the pvt enterprises themselves. worst if they say they need to raise prices to fund the new fleet of buses. What about the rest of us?

    • wantabetterspore said

      he is basically just being ignorant of the real issue raised! avoiding it by projecting the fact that we do not understand their intentions o.O

  32. 60+ said

    Why no action taken on ex-CEO of SMRT, COI confirmed that lack of maintenance is one of the causes, SMRT hiring 200 more staff where else when she was there, cut staff. She should to return the million in bonuses to SMRT. The hundred of million in profit should be able to purchase new bus and not tax payer money. The minister want LTA to take part of the blame, cover up.

  33. Jack said

    Now we know why he was born in Malaysia.

    Dr. Janil Puthucheary (born 6 November 1972 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia)

    Puthucheary is the son of Dominic Puthucheary, a trade unionist and founding member of the PAP who subsequently left the party to join the Barisan Sosialis and was detained under Operation Coldstore in 1963. He was released 10 months later, but was barred from entering Singapore until 1990.

  34. kaypoh said

    Yes, by the same logic soon we will be using public monies to buy $9.3mil Sentosa Cove bungalows for each MP, but don’t worry, it won’t fatten their bottom line, their bottom is already fat enough…

  35. i say what i think only... said

    u guys know why they say is not fattening the operators bottomline? their logic is… u got a fixed number of commuters and fix no. of buses with shit frequency. sooner or later this number of buses will fetch and deliver these commuters to their desired destination. it is just a matter of how long it takes, based on bus frequency. for now, there will be more buses hence the bus frequency increases and commuters get to destination faster. on the operator’s end, they have to pay more to get more manpower to drive the buses. same number of commuters = same amount of fares received. more manpower = higher cost. therefore the operators are not profitting but incurring a loss.

    this argument is flawed fundamentally. firstly, with more buses, they are able to allocate more resources to profitable routes such as those in town which perpetually is jammed. with better frequency, more people will tend towards public transport, especially in town areas. this will boost the number of commuters and no. of trips taken by these commuters. It will go towards easing the overall traffic conditions which is unduly conjested due to public transport inefficiency.

    in short, business will pick up, better revenue due to more tools to earn $ (buses). with more resources, they can open up new profitable routes which they couldn’t due to insufficient buses (it is easier to get drivers rather than buses. or rather, cheaper). so please stop denying the 1.1billion is used to benefit commuters and not operators. I agree it is a win-win situation but the rationale of them keeping profits and scrimp and save on much needed buses while taxpayers pay for them is stupid. i bet few months down the road they will claim higher operating expense as a reason to PTC to increase fares again (common sense. higher revenue comes with higher operating expenses).

    eh pudeh, use brain la, don’t be a parrot. u lose out to those at bird park ok?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: