The issue raised in the Assembly in context with losses incurred by the Smart Bus Service launched under the Smart City Mission crossing crores of rupees on monthly basis needs to be looked with a changed perspective because government being the welfare state should spend money for the welfare of the people as the entities elected as popular dispensation are not for making profits rather they should find out ways and means to ensure public-welfare as far as possible.
Every penny spent on people without an element of prejudice or discrimination cannot be termed as wasteful expenditure especially if the money is dissipated for a public cause.
It is pertinent to mention that the Jammu and Kashmir government had admitted that the ambitious Smart Bus service requires huge funds for operations especially after the government’s decision of making this service free for fair-sex members of society honouring the National Conference’s election promise.
The disclosure came after Mian Mehar Ali, MLA Kangan, sought details of the project’s financial performance during the recent Assembly session. In the Kashmir Division, the operational cost per kilometre stands at Rs 60.74, while the revenue generated per kilometre is just Rs 12 — leaving a loss of Rs 48.74 per km and a total daily deficit of Rs 9.74 lakh. In Jammu Division, the situation is no better. The running cost there is Rs 62.66 per km, but the revenue is only Rs10.01, translating into a loss of Rs 52.65 per km and a daily shortfall of around Rs 10 lakh. Together, both divisions are incurring a cumulative daily loss of Rs 19.75 lakh.
Now these figures have been highlighted by many in J&K as wasteful siphoning of public exchequer especially on account of free rides to women but what is to be seen here is that government is formed to take steps and spend money on the people for their welfare and not for making profits because after all government is not a business establishment.
No doubt, the management of public exchequer should be feasible and sustainable, and this responsibility lies on the shoulders of those sitting at helm. Take an example, if the government spends on roads and other civic infra construction, there is no return of money and this also could be consider as a loss but no one considers it to be a loss.
The need of the hour is to look at the smart e-buses with the same prism and those raising objections should ponder over the matter and consider this also as spending on public welfare. As far as out of the proportion losses are concerned, the people at helm should take steps by increasing fare, stopping pilferage by delinquent staff and taking other measures.
