PHILLIPS RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT GOVT’S RURAL SCHOOL BUS PROGRAMME

on

 

Opposition Spokesman on Transport, Mikael Phillips, has raised fresh concerns about the Government’s rural school bus initiative, which is currently being implemented in select parishes across Jamaica.

Speaking during his contribution to the 2025/26 Sectoral Debate in Parliament, Phillips acknowledged that the People’s National Party (PNP) has long supported the idea of a rural school bus service but said the current rollout under the Jamaica Urban Transit Company (JUTC) lacks critical planning.

Among the key questions Phillips posed to the Government were:

  • What are the age and mileage of the used buses being employed?

  • Where will these buses be parked and maintained on a daily basis?

  • How will the buses be fuelled, and what systems have been put in place to ensure sustainability?

  • Who will operate the buses, and under what management structure?

  • What is the cost of the subsidies involved?

Phillips said that without answers to these questions—and without proper infrastructure in place the programme is "unsustainable in its current form."

As an alternative, he proposed the PNP’s RIDE Programme (Rural Initiative for Delivering Education). This plan would partner with private operators to provide subsidised transportation for 20,000 schoolchildren islandwide, a significant jump from the 4,000 students targeted in the Government’s plan. It would also focus on children from more remote communities who often have to take multiple forms of transport to get to school—many of whom are not served by official routes.

Our Take

Phillips raises some valid and important questions. A school bus programme is critical for rural development and educational access, but throwing buses into a system without proper support structures feels like placing a band-aid on a much deeper issue. While the Government should be applauded for taking steps in this direction, execution matters. Maintenance, fuel logistics, operator accountability, and transparency in costs must be addressed before the wheels can truly start turning on this initiative. If not, it risks becoming another well-meaning but short-lived policy move.

Comments

Post a Comment