Labour MP Joseph M Sammut said today that Transport Minister Austin Gatt must assume the consequences of political responsibility for the failure of the bus service reform and resign.

He was speaking at the opening of a nine-hour debate on an Opposition motion criticising the government's handling of the reform and calling for Dr Gatt's resignation.

Dr Sammut said the purpose of the reform was to get more people to travel by bus and to discourage car use. This had not been achieved.

The people had not been happy with the previous bus service. The condition of the buses was poor and they were not air-conditioned. Many drivers were rude and sometimes they did not follow their schedules or routes.

Nonetheless, there were routes which served most localities. Undoubtedly, however, there had been a need for reform.

The government had promised a wider route network,  air conditioned buses, more frequent services, better, more disciplined drivers and even an SMS service on bus arrival times.

Transport Minister Austin Gatt had said the reform was three years in the making. But it was a total failure. Many buses were too big for the roads, the route network was very inconvenient, people suffered long waiting times, and commuters were even asked to produce their ID cards before paying their fares.

The failure of the bus service had not only hit regular commuters but also tourists.

This reform, Dr Sammut said, had cost millions of euro and somebody should be held accountable.

The reform was meant to have have reduced the number of cars on the roads, but instead, the roads were flooded with cars because the bus service was inexistent or unreliable.

The promise of cleaner air had not been realised because there were now more cars on the road.

People were waiting more on bus stages, and journey times were also taking considerably longer.

There were rumours that the bus service had already lost €2 million. Under the old system the subsidy was €9m per year. On the basis of the Arriva contract, the subsidy would cost €6.5m per year. But the government was paying €55m for the old buses.

For €30m the government could have bought new buses or revamped some of the old ones. The government could also have saved the useless €400,000 paid to consultants for the new route network, which was a total failure.

Dr Sammut referred to the figures given by Arriva claiming an increase in commuters. He asked who Arriva thought it was kidding, when the roads were full of private cars. Furthermore, it was well known that numbers were up on the various buses because the people had to use the interchanges, meaning two trips to reach the same destination.

Dr Sammut said he could not understand how the people could believe Arriva or the Transport Authority that the situation was about to change, when hardly any progress had been made and the system was still in a disastrous state.

The bottom line was that Transport Minister Austin Gatt was responsible, as well as Transport Malta, which had drawn up the new routes and failed to ensure there was a better bus service.

There was now confusion about what will happen on Monday. Many of the routes will revert to the old system, meaning thousands of euros on the interchanges had been wasted. The government had said the cost of the changes would be borne by taxpayers. So this was a case of going back to the future, with increased costs for taxpayers.

Dr Sammut said the decision to impose a charge for the use of the Park and Ride in Blata l-Bajda was a blow to Valletta businesses. It was also another case of poor planning and the tariffs there had been revised after complaints by the PL. The situation, however, was still not satisfactory.

The total failure of the reform at a cost of €120m was a serious matter and the people, therefore, expected the resignation of Dr Gatt, his political appointments and the senior management of Transport Malta.

Assuming political responsibility also meant shouldering the consequences, Dr Sammut said.

Rural Affairs Minister George Pullicino said the opposition had failed to present any proposals and throughout the consultation period it was nowhere to be seen.

Had the opposition analysed all the public documents that had been available?

Those who believed they were an alternative government should also do their homework and analyse the government’s proposals.

He noted that while Parliament in Malta was debating public transport, other European Parliaments were debating the economic crisis.