Our leaders have all been afraid of making tough decisions about the public transportation system.

Monopolistic situations are inherently bad for the consuming public. In monopolistic situations the consumer does not have a choice of service/product provider. In cases where the product/service in question is a need and not a want, the consuming public does not even have the most rudimentary choice of to buy or not to buy. In such scenarios, since demand is artificially predetermined and sustained by the necessity of the product/service and a dearth of options, quality invariably suffers.
Think of the world of business as a society populated by prices and quality which are policed by natural market forces. Whenever prices and quality disagree, natural market forces bring order. The absence of natural market forces leads to both prices and quality running amuck.
There are two types of monopolies. Those which develop as a result of one entity driving all of its competitors out of the market through rigorous competition, and the other which is created by the only entity with the authority to regulate competition, government. Of the two mutually exclusive concepts, though the former is in no way ideal, the latter is by far the less desirable due to its demonstrably problematic inherent characteristics. A business which weathers free market storms and survives to be the sole provider of a commodity (tangible and otherwise), did so by offering value for money—learning important lessons in customer service, marketing and innovation along the way. Moreover, they are aware that if the price to quality ratio— taking into account environmental mitigating factors—becomes unfavourable, the door of opportunity would be opened for competitors to provide viable alternatives. A government bolstered monopoly has no such burdens. The checks, balances, and competitive discipline that would ordinarily be determined by an impartial free market is devolved to politicians— enough said.
The discomfort of a lack of guarantees and the cramping of the perfunctory monotony of a made-to-order market is necessary to induce labour so that value could be born. Why then has St Lucia’s public transportation system not been liberalized or at the very least diversified? I mean, the government has not even shouldered the responsibility of regulating quality in the sector, let alone full management as is the case in Barbados with the Barbados transportation board. Why are public commuters in St Lucia still at the unmitigated mercy of the NCOPT (the bus driver run organization which regulates the public bus sector)?
The first reason why this untenable situation persists is because successive governments lack the political will to change the status quo. Everytime there is even a whisper of an allusion that the government is thinking of diversification, all hell breaks loose. Bus drivers and their sympathizers inundate the various talk-shows with allegations that the government of the day is against de malaweh and is attempting to deny them an opportunity to feed their families. They even resort to political extortion through the disruption of the everyday life of the average
St Lucian by withholding their service—unconscionably abusing the fact that the public commuters do not have any other way to get from A to B. They hold St Lucia to ransom (the ransom being a continuation of the status quo) until the crescendo of cries of the affected and malcontent deafens the self-indulgent politicians to the voices of those of us who desperately want choice, and forces their (government’s) capitulation and acquiescence. The ironic thing about this is not that the ingrate bus drivers use the monopolistic crutch handed to them by the government to beat that very government with. It is not even that the rampaging bus stop bullies, while actively attempting to ingratiate themselves to the wider public, callously use one in the same public to achieve their selfish desired ends. It’s that the consuming public has not realized that the bus driver’s getting what they want means that they (the bus riders) are not getting what they want— value for money. They seemingly do not realize that as long as the NCOPT maintains its stranglehold on public transportation they can never logically realize the best bang for their buck.
The second reason for the sustenance of this conundrum of objectives is that the bus drivers have been able to accomplish a feat significantly more impressive than the devil convincing the world that he does not exist. They’ve managed to convince the
St Lucian public of the fallacy that owning a mini bus is not a lucrative endeavour. I can forthrightly refer to that notion as a fallacy because at one point I considered investing in a mini bus, and investigated the positive and negative business aspects of mini bus ownership before doing so. In preparation for this business move into unfamiliar territory I questioned a wide cross section of bus drivers from a number of bus stands. I will not delve into every minute detail of what I learned, but the crux of it was that there is quite a bit of money to be made in the field- even when one factors in the various operating cost which they so skillfully use to underpin their repeated requests to raise bus fares.
According to the many bus drivers with whom I spoke, they are raking in the doe. Do not take my word for it look at the facts:
• There is a mad rush of people wanting to enter the field. There are quite a few long standing applications to ply all the routes and more coming in on a daily basis.
• Bus drivers rent their road bands out for upward of $600.00 and sell them (and with them the right to ply a route) for in excess of $60,000.00. I personally got one rental offer and two offers to sell. Isn’t the conventional wisdom that the price of an item is indicative of its value?
• There is no monitoring system and certainly no abundance of effort to ensure that bus drivers pay their income taxes or NIC contributions. In fact, the president of the NCOPT, in a recent interview on DBS’s News Maker Live, all but admitted that there was at the very least a problem with bus drivers paying their dues when he mentioned that the association was looking into putting something in place to facilitate it.
• The vast majority of mini bus owners do not drive their buses. They hire drivers. This means that the profit is significant enough for them to maintain their investment despite the fact that they are paying a driver’s salary on top of all their other overheads.
• It is a fact that quite a few bus owners own multiple buses. If the investment is so precarious or unsound, why do they continue to re-invest in it?
It irks me to hear bus drivers attempt to make what they do sound like a charitable service or bemoaning the fact that they cannot raise bus fares without government’s approval. The reality of the matter is that these guys have a pretty sweet deal. In a competitive environment they would be forced to lower prices and drastically alter their business structure (perhaps trading the multiple mini buses for coasters and having fixed bus schedules) and their approach to customer service in order to survive.
I am not going to delude myself into thinking that any government will grow a pair and alter the current situation. I do not think it an unreasonable expectation though, to expect closer regulation by government and for the NCOPT to be proactive in fixing many of the ills which currently afflict the sector. I know that they will undoubtedly rebut any assertion that they are not beingproactive by pointing out changes such as their fairly recent attempt to have their drivers dressed in a uniformed manner. But, in my opinion, enough is not being done. We still have bus drivers who carry passengers while intoxicated and attired in the most unkempt of manners.
I have heard bus drivers use the most colorful language to insult and belittle passengers for daring to request that they obey the rules of the road.
I am sad to say that I think that the bus drivers could enjoy a free reign over the public transportation system infinitum because politicians will always be politicians.
The only thing that could possibly alter this reality is if St Lucians get sick and tired of being sick and tired of being taken for a ride—no pun intended.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites