Bus fares update, gov’t and lawmakers share mixed feelings

Lam Hin San (left) and Raimundo do Rosário

Secretary for Transport and Public Works, Raimundo do Rosário and director of the Transport Bureau (DSAT), Lam Hin San were at the Legislative Assembly (AL) to discuss the Traffic Consultative Council’s (CCT) proposal to raise the bus fares and establish a fare system that benefits residents preferentially to non-residents. This issue was raised by lawmaker Ella Lei.

During the debate, several lawmakers criticized the government regarding the new measure, expressing doubts over the need to adjust the fares, and questioning the fare change targets and whether they are justified.

The government officials refuted the criticism, noting that although the measure is unpopular, it is justified due to the low ratio of funding from users of the bus system, who, according to government figures, are currently paying only 30 percent of the true operating costs of the bus system, the rest being subsidized through public government funding. 

Opening the debate, lawmaker Ma Chi Seng highlighted that the issue is “directly related to the purchasing power of the population,” questioning if the subsidy currently granted by the government to the bus companies is being “appropriated” and if there was any study done by the government to support the measures.

On behalf of the government, Rosário replied that the measure is not a result of any studies conducted, as “it is not necessary to conduct a study to know this.” According to Rosário, the idea of “balancing” the bus fares stems from the CCT and its members, and the aim of such an approach is to “balance the ratio of the shares paid by the users and by the government for the public transportation service.”
Rosário noted that the “last update [to the fare system] was 10 years ago,” and that, “we believe that the majority of the people will be able to bear this expense, as increasing from MOP2 to MOP3 is not that much.” Rosário further noted that “in Hong Kong there is not any kind of subsidy.”

Citing figures gathered by his office, Rosário said, “72 percent [of the money granted to the bus companies] is from the subsidy from the government.”

The director of DSAT added that in the last few years, the distance travelled by the users in bus rides (factor used to calculate the bus fare and subsidy) “has grown from around six kilometers to about 10 kilometers, creating added pressure over the companies too.”

Lawmakers Angela Leong, Ella Lei, Ho Ion Sang and Mak Soi Kun called for the government to pay attention to vulnerable groups in society, especially the elderly and people with disabilities.

Rosario replied that the government is not aiming to remove the benefits enjoyed by older residents, who currently pay only MOP0.30 per ride. Instead, the proposal aims to maintain the current fare during non-peak hours, while increasing the fare to MOP1.50 during peak hours, so as to discourage them from riding the buses during these hours.

One of the main reasons for the imbalance in the fare ratio, according to Rosário, is due to “the salaries of drivers that grew a lot due to the increase in passengers and the lack of bus drivers.”

Lam compared the salaries of bus drivers, noting that “in 2011, the [average] salary was MOP11,000, while in the last month of last year, the average salary was MOP28,000.” He added that the salaries “are accountable for 60 percent of the total of bus companies’ operational expenses”, an increase of 46 percent since 2011.
Lam added that, “with this adjustment we are introducing, we want to improve the convenience of public transportation as well as increase the size of some of these public transport {vehicle].”

Lei and Song Pek Kei asked the government about the reasons for the fare raise, and if they were related to the “lack of money from the government”. In response, Rosario said that it was just an update to ensure a fair system, which had been previously supported substantially by the government. The purpose of the fare changes is to shift the proportion of funding between bus users and the government to 40 percent – and tentatively to 50 percent – when the LRT enters into operation.

Responding to doubts from lawmakers Agnes Lam and Au Kam San, Rosario mentioned that the fare update would be a “demand” from the companies that the government was assuming as their own initiative. Rosario explained that the bus companies (due to the contracts) will be getting the same amount, either from the government or from passengers. He concluded,  “I’m only trying to do what you always ask me to do, that is not to waste public funds,” and “by balancing the ratio we will save the money that is granted to the companies by public subsidies.”

Raise to have little impact over locals

During yesterday’s debate at the AL, Raimundo do Rosário said that the proposal to increase the bus fares would have little impact on locals.

The Secretary for Transport and Public Works was replying to lawmakers’ questions on the topic, noting, “the majority of the people are using the ‘Macau Pass’ [cards] and not paying with currency”. He added that the fare raise would see an increase of “MOP1 for trips in Macau [peninsula] and MOP0.50 for trips in Taipa”, although the cost of trips to Coloane would remain the same. He explained that the idea of raising the fare to MOP6.60 would only apply to users without a Macau Pass, which generally would extend to tourists and infrequent visitors to the region.

Lawmaker Ng Kuok Cheong questioned the reason for the major raise to be registered in Taipa, questioning, “Does this have to do with the operation of the Light Rail Transit which will begin in Taipa?”

The Secretary responded, “We cannot update or we can update. We can do something or do nothing,” noting that the opinions collected from the members of the Traffic Consultative Council had to do with complaints from the population since 2015 that “non-residents” were occupying all the buses and not leaving space for residents to travel around the city.

He added that this is the reason behind the proposal that would benefit residents over non-residents.