Between these two reasons, the latter should not be placed after the former, as convenient and inexpensive (not merely affordable) public transport is the catalyst to contain the population of private cars.

Mr Lim’s proposal for a merger with SMRT poses a risk to the commuting public. It might not lead to convenient, seamless travel as the merged entity would not want its bus service to cannibalise its train service.

If this proposal is to be accepted, it is imperative to ensure that it would not cause commuters to have no choice on the type of conveyance to travel in, and the fares would not earn the merged entity the high return an operator in a truly free market expects.

In the article, SMRT president Saw Phaik Hwa said a bus-versus-train set-up – Mr Lim’s other proposal – could mean duplication of resources and, as a result, higher fares. She also said that it may not be environmentally sound.

However, I believe when buses truly compete with trains, the train operators would lose a great deal of revenue to the bus operators. Hence, the train operators would have to decide whether raising fare or lowering profit expectations and further improving productivity are the answer, which, I am quite sure, would be dictated by market forces – the fairest arbiter for the true monetary value of a good or service. And if the market supports a higher fare, so be it.

Lastly, we all know that technology has and will continue to reduce pollution. Having a few more bus services would not make Singapore environmentally unfriendly.

However, allowing two public-transport operators to continue operating with almost no competition would make life more difficult for the majority of Singaporeans, which in turn fuels the desire to own a car, which is precisely what the Transport Ministry’s review wants to mitigate.?