But in the past two years, this seems to have been set aside on the quiet. The transport system is now under severe strain, what with increased demand from a larger population, among other pressing woes.

There are complaints aplenty about congested roads, higher Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) charges, crowded trains and buses as well as unacceptably long commuting times.

Yet we do not have to wait another decade for the completion of the new MRT lines to have a transport system we can be proud of. A few strategic changes now can improve things significantly.

Here are some suggestions. First, more frequent trains. I have taken the MRT train during off-peak hours - at 10am, 4pm and 10pm. I have had to wait for more than five minutes for a train on such occasions. When the train finally arrived, it was crowded and packed all the way to my destination each time.

If more off-peak trains were run, the operating expenses may rise marginally. But passengers would enjoy a significant improvement in comfort level. Less crowded trains would encourage more people to use the MRT, especially during off-peak hours. This increase in business would likely offset higher operating costs.

Here, of course, is the classic 'chicken and egg' problem: If management is required to make more profits, it might be difficult for it to justify deploying more trains. I think what is required is for the regulator to mandate more trains.

Second, feeder buses. To encourage more people to take the MRT, we need to improve our feeder services. Many commuters who do not live within walking distance of a train station have to take a feeder bus to the station.

Feeder buses have to be frequent enough, with waiting times of under five minutes. They should bring the commuters quickly to the train station or bus interchange without too many stops along the way.

This is best achieved by the use of small buses or passenger vans. These can each take eight to 16 passengers, a system used in Hong Kong and a few other cities to good effect. These feeder buses should be run by small operators, independent of the large operators of the train and express bus services.

An alternative is to operate trams to serve the Central Business District or our residential towns. Many cities around the world, such as Melbourne, have this system.

Third, express buses. We should have large buses to provide an express service that takes many commuters on longer journeys with fewer stops and shorter travel times. These services can operate the same routes as those of the MRT, serving as an alternative to the train. This competition would spur the train operators to improve their customer service.

Such express buses can also be used as backups to the train system in the event of a major accident or breakdown. They could also connect some towns directly to offer shorter travel times compared with the MRT.

Fourth, taxis. Though the taxi to population ratio is quite high in Singapore compared with other cities, our taxi service is less than satisfactory. For one thing, ERP charges are a big negative for taxis. I suggest that the taxi driver should pay a daily ERP fee instead of per entry charges. This could encourage taxi drivers to operate where there is demand.

It is better to encourage more people to use taxis than to drive individual cars as this would reduce the demand for parking spaces and lower road congestion as well. In New York City, for example, there is an abundance of taxis as many people do not drive their own cars due to high parking charges.

We should also encourage people to telephone for a taxi. This will reduce the need for taxis to ply the roads looking for passengers. It will also reduce diesel consumption and road congestion. The call charge should be reduced to $1 or could even be included in the starting fare.

Fifth, rationalisation. It is high time we re-organise the transport system and have one company to run the trains and a few companies to run the express bus services.

This will reduce duplication and wastage. If the private companies involved are not able to agree on the terms of transfer, an independent panel may be appointed to decide on these terms.

Finally, regulation. The current approach of leaving it to market forces has not produced good results. Many cities appear to be able to manage this situation better than Singapore. We can learn from their experience.

We need a proactive regulator which can make the appropriate decisions in the interest of the commuting public and business efficiency. It can do this while ensuring that transport operators can still earn fair margins on their capital investments.

Do all these together and we might yet have a world-class transport system.

The writer, a former chief executive of NTUC Income, writes a blog on improving public transport in Singapore at www.tankinlian.blogspot.com