The future of Barbados’ Transport Board has reignited public debate, raising critical questions about the kind of society the nation aspires to build. A proposal currently under consideration suggests the complete divestment of the Transport Board, severing all workers and offering them the opportunity to purchase buses at discounted rates. A newly established Mass Transit Authority would oversee regulation, with the government providing limited subsidies for electric bus charging and battery replacement.
On the surface, this plan appears innovative, aiming to reduce government expenditure while empowering workers through ownership. It could be viewed as a progressive step toward modernizing a system plagued by inefficiencies for decades. However, such a significant shift warrants a thorough examination of its implications.
For years, the Barbados Economic Recovery and Transformation (BERT) program has scrutinized state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Prior to 2018, SOEs received transfers equivalent to nearly 8% of GDP, placing a substantial strain on public finances. Consequently, the government has faced persistent pressure to cut subsidies, enhance management, and, where feasible, transition entities toward cost recovery or privatization.
The Transport Board, long criticized for its financial losses and inadequate fleet, has been a major fiscal concern. Yet, it is more than just a government-owned business. For countless Barbadians, it is a lifeline—ensuring children reach school, workers arrive on time, and the elderly remain connected. Public transport is not a luxury but a fundamental public good that sustains the economy and fosters social inclusion.
Thus, the proposed divestment cannot be evaluated solely in financial terms. While reform is undeniably necessary, the privatization of public transport under current economic conditions carries significant risks.
This proposal is part of a broader trend. The government’s plan to lease Grantley Adams International Airport for 25 to 30 years exemplifies its shift toward public-private partnerships. Over 50 SOEs are under review for reform, signaling a transformative redefinition of the government’s role.
Potential benefits of the Transport Board’s divestment include increased efficiency and reduced political interference. Reduced subsidies could free up resources for essential sectors like healthcare, education, and housing. However, the risks are equally, if not more, substantial.
First, financial risk poses a significant challenge. Electric buses are costly assets, and even the government has struggled with these expenses. Can former Transport Board workers, now entrepreneurs, manage such risks? Who will address breakdowns or cash flow issues?
Second, fairness and access are at stake. While some routes are profitable, many are not. Rural and low-income communities rely heavily on the Transport Board, as private operators often avoid unprofitable routes. If the system is fragmented into profit-driven owner-operators, how can Barbadians ensure reliable and affordable service? A regulator could help, but only if it wields real authority.
Public transport is integral to daily life, and Barbadians deserve transparency and accountability. What standards will operators meet? What rights will workers and passengers have? Major decisions must not be concealed in technical documents, only to surface amid controversy.
Reform is undeniably necessary, but it must be grounded in clear policy, public consultation, and a commitment to serving all Barbadians—not just profitable routes or vocal interests.









