The Thailand Consumer Council (TCC) has taken a bold stance, urging the public sector to subsidize public transport fares through funds generated from personal vehicle, land, and windfall taxes. This significant suggestion emerged from the inaugural meeting of the Consumer Council for Public Transportation Users, with a mission to exchange ideas and foster projects aimed at developing a safer and fairer public transport system.
Boonyeun Siritham, the TCC president, voiced his concern regarding the development of Thailand’s public transport system—lamenting the exclusionary nature of planning which fails to involve consumer participation. Moreover, he highlighted the authorities’ disproportionate focus on enhancing services in Bangkok and its environs, often neglecting the provincial regions.
Siritham elaborated that much of the development work has been skewed toward road infrastructure, favoring personal vehicles. Consequently, Thailand is evolving into a metropolis dominated by cars and motorcycles. He argued that the lack of input from actual users is exacerbating public transport issues. As an example, he cited the recent change in bus route numbers, which ended up causing more user confusion instead of providing greater convenience.
Echoing Siritham’s sentiments, TCC Secretary-General Saree Aungsomwang stressed the potential of reduced public transport fares to attract more passengers. She proposed that the government could utilize taxes from personal vehicles, land, and other windfall sources to support these subsidies. Saree firmly believes that a shift from investing in road construction to fortifying provincial public transport systems is crucial.
Illustrating her point, Saree referenced the substantial budget of 34 billion baht, initially allocated for a double-deck motorway project, which she argues could better serve by being redirected to procure electric buses and enhance the public transport network, not just in Bangkok but across provincial areas too.
Bhuntin Noumjerm, a member of the House Committee on Consumer Protection, shared a similar concern. He highlighted the stark reality that there seems to be no foreseeable plan over the next four years to focus public transport policy on provincial areas, as power remains concentrated in Bangkok.
Adding to the conversation, TCC Assistant Secretary-General of Transport and Vehicles, Kongsak Shinkrailat, unveiled plans for the “Road for All” campaign. This campaign is designed to develop an equitable system for everyone, urging consumer participation in service enhancements, especially for electric train services. The ultimate goal is to reduce the reliance on personal vehicles while promoting the conversion of old vehicles to electric and solar power.
In their comprehensive proposal, the TCC called for the government to manage the fiscal budget in a manner that alleviates travel expenses for the public, aiming to keep such costs below 10% of the minimum wage. They also suggested establishing a fund to support the expansion of public transport services to provincial areas, reducing the dependence on fossil fuels responsible for PM2.5 dust pollution and global warming.
Moreover, the TCC recommended that the state should support the private sector in providing public transport services. This dual approach of engaging both public and private sectors aims to create a more efficient, sustainable, and inclusive public transport system that benefits all Thai citizens.
I completely agree with the TCC’s approach. It’s high time we diverted funds to public transport. The current system is a mess!
But road infrastructure is crucial too! Cars and motorcycles aren’t going anywhere. Isn’t it better to strike a balance?
I get your point, but focusing too much on roads just adds to traffic. Public transport needs a boost to offer a real alternative.
But LinS, improving roads also reduces congestion. Let’s not forget that it’s a win-win if managed properly.
Why only Bangkok? Provincial cities need better transport too! This bias needs to end!
True, but Bangkok is the economic hub. Shouldn’t it get priority?
Tourism in provinces would get a huge boost with better transport. It’s not just about Bangkok!
Using taxes from car owners to fund public transport is fair. If you pollute more, you should pay more.
Absolutely! It’s a great way to incentivize greener options.
But it’s not fair to punish those who can afford cars. They pay enough taxes already.
It’s not about punishing, it’s about responsibility and creating a system that’s fair to everyone.
Right! Plus, it’s the future. We need to adapt or be left behind.
This ‘Road for All’ campaign sounds ambitious but doable. Electric buses everywhere would be amazing.
Finally, someone talking about reducing reliance on personal vehicles. Pollution is getting out of hand!
True, but how realistic is it? People love their cars.
Loving cars won’t help when we can’t breathe. Time for tough love!
I think the TCC’s idea to keep travel expenses below 10% of the minimum wage is fantastic. It would be a huge relief for many.
This seems like a dream. When has the government ever managed funds effectively for public benefit?
True, but we can’t lose hope. We need these changes urgently.
Don’t be so cynical, Bobby. Change is slow but possible.
What about the private sector? Shouldn’t they also play a part in this transformation?
They should, but will they do it without incentives? Doubtful.
Exactly, that’s why government support is crucial. We need a joint effort.
I’m all for electric and solar-powered vehicles. The sooner we start, the better.
Yes! Clean energy is the future. The sooner everyone realizes this, the better.
But is it affordable for everyone, Paul? Might not be practical for now.
Costs are coming down, Skeptic. With the right approach, it can work.
I’d happily switch to electric buses if they were more available and reliable.
This campaign is a step in the right direction but it needs proper monitoring to avoid corruption.
So true, Natasha. Without transparency, it could all go to waste.
Public transport has been overlooked for far too long. I hope this initiative sees real action.
Government plans always sound great on paper. Let’s see if they can actually deliver.
Guess we’ll just have to wait and see. Pressure from the public can help make it happen.
Can someone explain how windfall taxes work? I’m confused about that part.
Windfall taxes are extra taxes on unexpected gains, Hana. It’s like hitting the lottery and having to pay taxes on it.
How is it guaranteed that the funds from these taxes will actually go to public transport? I have my doubts.
There’s no guarantee, but public advocacy and transparency can help ensure that.