AFTER the Mercedes-Benz scandal and the breakdown of the proposed Rapid Terengganu bus service (or Intercity Express), one wonders what the next transport story will be.

The bus service never started operations, yet the state government bought buses.

Now it does not wish to operate the service as it would compete with private bus services. So it is keeping the buses idle, with no return on its investment.

The latest story is similar. The state government bought eight buses with "architectural" designs of East Coast houses. Four of them are operating as a free local shuttle; the others are not operating because they cannot collect fares since they have no Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board (CVLB) permits.

The most recent update is that former menteri besar Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh has contacted the media to state that the buses were never supposed to be collecting fares and it was intended for the service to be free.
Once again, the state government has gone ahead and invested in a product (public transportation services) and bought assets (buses) without understanding the business that it is getting itself into.

Because it does not understand and does not plan and invest, it is wasting state funds on assets that are not being used. Fortunately, the solutions are simple. In the case of the bus service, the state government should sign a contract with a reputable bus operator to operate the service for three to five years.

The state government would pay the bus operator a fee for operating the service and maintaining the buses, while the former would keep all revenues from the fares collected.

If the operator meets key performance indicators set out by the state government, it might receive a performance bonus and its contract would be renewed. If it does not meet the indicators, it could be penalised and lose its contract to a competitor.

This solution would allow the state government to make use of the assets that it has (buses and routes) and, at the same time, maintain the quality of service, without having to operate the bus service directly.

As for the "architectural" shuttle buses, the solution is simple as well.

The state government should run the buses as a free shuttle bus service.

The bus service would reduce traffic congestion and encourage more visitors.

The cost of operations would be balanced by the economic growth in Kuala Terengganu.

Since the government has a sizeable fleet, it makes no sense for the buses to operate because they would lose money. The service can be made viable with a creative solution.

It was stated that the bus service is popular with tourists. I suggest placing a donation box and "pay-what-you-wish" sign next to the driver to get around the requirement for a CVLB permit.

The state government would not be collecting fares but, rather, requesting donations from bus users.

It is possible that the state government could collect more money from donations than from charging a 50-sen fare.

I hope the state government will develop an understanding of public transportation and employ its resources to benefit the people.