The Democrat Party fired the first salvo last month with the announcement that it would build seven new lines, consisting of underground as well as elevated rail systems, totalling a combined length of 139 kilometres and costing Bt265 billion. Not to be outdone, the Thai Rak Thai Party soon after pledged that it would add 10 new routes, totalling 333 kilometres and requiring Bt582 billion to build.

In a brilliant ploy of one-upmanship, the Thai Rak Thai Party also threw in an enticing add-on, saying that passengers using these new mass transit lines would be charged a flat-rate of Bt15 per trip - a move that created quite a sensation among members of the public eager to take advantage of cheap rides. The Thai Rak Thai Party did not provide any details as to how it plans to finance such infrastructure mega-projects and how it is going to keep the fares down without the use of subsidies, which must come from the taxpayer.

The problem is that if the Thai Rak Thai Party's promise sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

It matters little whether the Thai Rak Thai Party intends to find investors to build and operate the new mass transit lines or if the government would invest directly in the projects and operate the services alone. The proposed flat rate would prevent operators from recouping their investment - not to mention turning a profit - and will necessitate the injection of billions of baht in taxpayer money to keep them afloat.

The Democrat Party's proposal is more realistic as far as project financing and commercial viability are concerned because, unlike Thai Rak Thai, the Democrats are not promising more than they can deliver. They realise that market forces must largely determine fares for mass-transit services, with perhaps just the right amount of government intervention.

The rail-based mass transit systems currently available have enabled the public to make smarter choices when it comes to the modes of transport they use in their everyday lives. Many, including car owners, have learned to mix and match their modes of transport to suit their convenience and requirements. They may drive part of the way, then hop on mass transit, then jump in a taxi, a bus or even walk, depending on their destination, the time of day, and whether they are in a rush.

Life in Bangkok has become more tolerable if not more enjoyable. Productivity should rise as people spend less time stranded in traffic and, hopefully, more time at work. They should also have more time for rest and recreation because they do not need to spend as much time commuting. Problems associated with traffic jams, such as mental stress, pollution and the fuel that is wasted by idling vehicles, have diminished and become more manageable.

Having two major political parties vying to try to improve the quality of life in Bangkok is not altogether a bad thing. But it is irresponsible to be pandering to the unprincipled wants and needs of the masses with populist policies. Let's not forget that during the economically difficult times ahead, the government will have to ensure that the rest of the country - not just Bangkok - also receives attention matched by their fair share of budgetary allocation.

It must be remembered that the original mass-transit master plan for Bangkok presented only a few years ago called for a 91-kilometre subway network to be completed over the coming decade. Judging from the electoral promises made by the two major parties, this original plan has already been expanded several times over. Any additional investment in Bangkok's mass transit systems should be made wisely with a view to optimising cost-effectiveness and ensuring fair distribution of limited national resources.