From the comments:
Perakath exposed my ignorance and made some points worth digging out of the comment pages --
Every [Blueline] bus has the owner's name and address painted in small letters near the rear "door", or lack thereof.
I believe the police routinely impound 'killer' bluelines and cancel their licences. But the problem with the individual ownership system is that it's very easy for another relative to step in and take over the licence. The government's plan to introduce corporate fleet ownership and consequent accountability is an attempt to overcome this. And it's a plan that might work. If a Tata group company were running the buses, say, I'm sure they'd train their drivers well and remove incentives to speed.
You're right about how it should be easy to phase out Bluelines, though. They could do it in one swoop, if they wanted to. Further, if the DTC could sort out its issues and actually operate with a view to making a profit, it's losing crores of rupees in opportunity costs every month. Why have Bluelines at all? A monopolistic DTC would generate far more revenue for itself, if they introduced enough buses to satisfy the demand. Chennai is an example of how it can work-- there are no private stage carriage operators in Madras.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I don't agree with you on this. The Government's role should only be limited to regulating the transport system, which it has repeatedly failed to do. Why should the govt get into transport business? or any business for that matter? In india, there are state run companies that produce jams, pickles, soaps, shampoos, juices, paper, textiles and everything you can ever think of. Why should the govt do all that? It should Disinvest every damn state run company and create strong TRAI like regulatory bodies with and extensive set of powers - that is my suggestion.
would like to know your views.
ps - stumbled on your blog only today.. I particularly liked your post on tacit indian signs.
Post a Comment