Archives

by Aryadasa Ratnasinghe

During the colonial days, bus transport was a luxury for passengers to travel to distant places, and very few buses operated on selected routes.

In those days passenger traffic was at an ebb, because less people travelled for work in urban areas. Most of the buses were owner-driven, with no conductors to collect fares, and money was collected by the driver, whenever a passenger got in. Unlike today, there was no hurry for the driver and he took his own time to reach the destination.

As I could remember, in 1937, there was one bus operating from Hatton to Kandy, and the bus fare was Rs. 2.25 either way. Then, a gallon of petrol (6 bottles or 4 litres) was Rs. 1.20 and, therefore, the bus fare was cheap.

The bus was like an owner-driven taxi, and sometimes, it stopped near kiosks to pick up passengers having tea. There were no bus-halts unlike now, nor Traffic Police to apprehend the culprits.

Most of the drivers were thugs, with one tooth covered with a gold plate for easy recognition. They often knocked down rivals on the road, when overtaking their buses, which sometimes ended in brawls and fisticuffs.

The bus magnates, who operated large fleet of buses, astutely inveigled themselves under a monopoly and a position of indispensability. Sometimes, thugs were hired which led to much confusion in road passenger transport.

The Motor Car Ordinance, No. 45 of 1938, was the first attempt to control unrestricted competition in road passenger transport, through a system of licences specifying routes and time schedules for the operation of buses.

The next stage was a scheme of rationalisation of the transport industry, on the recommendations of S.W. Nelson, by eliminating wasteful operation costs, and by a more economical use of vehicles with increased capacity. These buses were put on the road and were known as 'Nelson-bodied buses', which are now off the road.

The new scheme came into force, with the enactment of Omnibus Services Licensing Ordinance, No. 47 of 1942, which established a system of controlled monopolies, which were to be subjected to certain measures of public control.

The individual bus operators were merged into economic units, in the form of limited liability companies, which were granted exclusive rights of operation on specified routes, to prevent competition.

For providing improved services for the public, through better organisation and management, the Motor Traffic Act No. 14 of 1951, which followed the Rutnam Commission in 1949, required these bus companies to be converted into public limited liability companies. The reluctance of these organisations to respond to measures of control, was inquired into by the Omnibus Services Commission in 1954.

As there were many monopoly abuses, inefficient organisation and bad management, the Commission recommended the immediate formation of a transport corporation with government and public capital. But, before the recommendations were implemented there was a change in the government.

The government which came into power (Maha Jana Eksath Peramuna) in 1956, under the late S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, followed a policy of nationalisation of road passenger transport services. By the Transport Act of 1957, all buses were transferred from private to State ownership and on January 1, 1958, the Ceylon Transport Board (CTB) was established, with 77 units under its administration.

The companies that were absorbed to form the CTB were the South-Western Bus Co.Ltd., the High Level Bus Co. Ltd., the Green Line Bus Co. Ltd., the Blue Line Bus Co. Ltd., the Madhyama Lanka Bus Co. Ltd., the COC Bus Co. Ltd., and many others that were in operation throughout the country.

After the takeover, the CTB had to scarp a large number of buses which were found to be uneconomical, and to invest on new buses. With the enactment of the Transport Board Law No. 19 of 1978, the CTB was restructured creating the Sri Lanka Central Transport Board (SLCTB), with nine Regional Transport Boards, operating a fleet of 14,212. buses.

The government augmented facilities for road passenger transport, by allowing the private sector, to join in providing a regular and a more efficient bus service to the commuters, along with the SLCTB.

The private sector operators, taking the advantage, continued with added vigour, as a challenge to the SLCTB. When the government lacked the financial resources to buy new buses, the private sector operators took the opportunity to enlarge their fleet of buses as they were able to finance the purchase of new buses with higher loading capacity.

In 1966, to overcome the challenge, the SLCTB got down a large fleet of secondhand double-decker buses from the London Transport Board, and they were put on the roads to meet the demand for increased passenger traffic. But, they were withdrawn from plying due to the high cost of spare parts and heavy diesel consumption.

With the enactment of the Private Omnibus Services Act, No. 44 of 1983, private participation in bus transport increased at an alarming rate, and those who were able to buy new buses, put them on the road, as a source of income.

The aim of the government was to provide an efficient and an adequate road passenger transport system, at reasonable charge to the public, and to encourage and promote private sector participation in providing adequate buses to meet the public demand. The private buses earned good profits, by competing with the SLCTB, which was not geared to the task, due to lack of funds.

The upsurge in travel necessitated a rapid expansion of the bus services, to accommodate the ever-increasing passenger load, specially heading for Colombo from outstations for purpose of business or for work, with the expansion of job opportunities in Colombo.

The issue of season tickets for schoolchildren to travel in SLCTB buses was not followed by the private bus operators, which was one of the reasons for the SLCTB to operate at a loss. Regular commuters were also issued with season tickets at a discount of 35% of the normal fare. At the beginning, the peak demand for private buses was in the year 1984 when 3,926 new buses were registered with the Department of Motor Traffic.

Today, the number stands manifold, while the SLCTB is panting for breath, due to lack of funds to buy new buses as well as spare parts to give them a new life.

According to the Ministry of Private Bus Transport, "the operation of buses from their terminals, is the responsibility of associations, framed under Act No. 44 of 1983, to ensure an organised and efficient transport system in the country". But the picture today is quite different from what it was intended.

As we know, through experience, the private bus drivers are neither disciplined nor adhere to the Highway Code strictly. over speeding and negligent driving are a common feature among them. They only fear the Traffic Police and when they see a constable on the road, they are the best drivers.

Most of the drives who are at the wheel of private buses, are men of young blood, who have obtained the licence to drive heavy vehicles, by crooked methods, and sometimes, by offering bribes or oiling the palm of men who promise to get the licence on payment of a fee. These drivers do not have the experience at the wheel and are vulnerable to accidents which happen in the split of a second.

There are bus conductors who drive buses, and according to Traffic Police some of them do not posses the competence to drive. They over speed the safety limit, without thinking that there is impending danger ahead, and even at level-crossings, they ignore the danger signals, and cross over the rail track, even after seeing an approaching train. This is not courage but foolhardiness.

From an overall point of view, most of the road accidents involve private buses as shown through the press media and the electronic media. Some of the private bus drivers have knocked down pedestrians crossing the road along the yellow belt.

Another serious mistake they do is that they pick up passengers, away from bus-halts, and stop on the middle of the road, for them to get in, embarrassing other users of the road.

There is no administrative machinery to discipline them and to punish for their faults.

The liberation of the economic policy in 1977, resulted in a sudden increases in traffic demand, and the World Bank, as far back as 1989, under Credit 944 CE, provided US $ 53 million for the improvement of the bus services in Sri Lanka. Today, there is a large fleet of new buses plying on the roads.

www.ceylincoproperties.com

www.Pathmaconstruction.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright © 2003 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager