[sustran] Private Monopoly and Vested Political Interests in SA

[Wendell Cox]

To Eric and the group ---

Please forgive me if a version of this arrives --- I seem to have lost a
previous draft, but hopefully this will say the same thing....

The private bus companies (commuter) are highly subsidized. They also hold
monpolies. There has been some competitive tendering in the past (little
compared to the total private service) and much more will happen now under
the Mandella government's new initiatives. Around the world private bus
operators that hold monopolies have told me they are unsubsidized --- more
often than not they have concocted an interesting way of defining subsidies
as operating revenues.

There are good reasons for "appeasing" the kombi-taxi industry ----

1. It provides more than 40 percent of the black work trips --- a non-SOV
market share not matched by any mode in western Europe or the US.

2. The kombi taxi industry has political power --- which means they must be
appeased. Just like the transit unions in the US --- whose political power
has routinely violated the interests of transit customers and the cities
they serve by providing (shall we say rationing) services through the
imposition of higher than market costs. Or take the NYC Transport Workers
Union, which is standing in the way of expansion and development of the van
industry, which many people find superior in terms of mobility compared to
the fixed route service. It is no wonder that people seek alternatives, and
begin commuting by car. All of this is to say that political reality is
political reality. The kombi taxi industry has political power. The US
transit unions have political power. There seems to be little in recorded
history to suggest that powerful political interests are inclined to put the
good of society ahead of their own interests. Too bad that in all of this
the people and our cities are the victims. 

None of this is to retreat from my position that the kombi taxi industry
represents a very important resource in SA --- it seems to me that the
appropriate direction of policy is to make the best use of what is there
already, while supplemnting that with things that make sense and truly
improve transport in the urban areas. All of that has to be pursued in the
context of the financial limitations facing the central, provincial and
local governments.

Best regards,
Wendell Cox


>Thanks for the informative answers, but I am still puzzled, and it is
>one of the reasons that I asked the original question in the first
>place. I have heard from several quarters that most public bus
>>services are completely un-subsidized.  Last year I met the accountant
>for Golden Arrow bus company who told me that neither his company nor
>his competitors get a dime of subsidy, either capital or operating
>subsidy.
>
>Another question is why the combi-taxi people so damned important
>to appease?  Are they precluding all efforts to build up regular
>fixed route transit systems that don't involve operating "turfs".
>
>I hope Walter gets some work in SA, it would be very interesting
>indeed. Perhaps with a new Prime Minister coming in......
>
>Eric
>
>
>......  previous stuff deleted .......
>
>
>
WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning
The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
http://www.publicpurpose.com
Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
P.O. Box 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA

"To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
that is no higher than necessary."