NEW BUS ROUTES (Applications received and number approved)
Legislative Assembly of Singapore · 22 May 1957 · 1st Legislative Assembly
Official Report, 22 May 1957, Vol 3, Issue 11 · Open in the reader (summaries, search, filters)
Mr John Ede asked the Minister for Communications and Works how many applications for new bus routes have been received by the Omnibus Licensing Authority since the setting up of that body, and how many of such applications have been approved.
Mr Chew Swee Kee (for the Minister for Communications and Works): Mr Speaker, Sir, the number of applications for new bus routes received by the Omnibus Services Licensing Authority since the setting up of that body on 16th April is 13. Two such applications have been approved and one has been referred back to the sub-committee of the Authority for reconsideration.
Mr John Ede: Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Minister state the reasons why the Omnibus Licensing Authority is being so obstructive in the matter of allowing new bus routes?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: Sir, I wish to draw the hon. Member's attention to the recommendation in paragraph 246 on pages 56 and 57 of the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Public Passenger Transport System of Singapore, commonly known as the Hawkins' Report. It says in paragraph 246:
"It does not appear to us that textual amendments to the legislation setting up these temporary arrangements need be extensive, but we consider they should include a provision that the new licensing authority would work under any directions of a general character given by the Minister for Communications and Works, and that one such direction should require the licensing authority not to undertake a reorganisation of existing routes pending the establishment of the new body, whether public authority or company, and not to authorize or approve new or extended routes except any which are necessary to give transport services where they are not already provided (with whatever minor overlapping may be unavoidable.)"
It is based on this recommendation in the Report that the Minister directs the Authority that it should regard its functions as being transitional pending the unification of all the omnibus service undertakings in Singapore. It should accordingly not license any new or extended route except where, in the opinion of the Authority, it is required to give an essential transport service. Sir, the Omnibus Services Licensing Authority has not been obstructive.
Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker, Sir, in the case of new applications which probably have been submitted before the Authority for over half a year, why were not the applicants informed whether their applications were approved or rejected or in the process of being considered?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: Every applicant, Sir, has been informed of the decision of the Licensing Authority.
Mr Lee Choon Eng: Arising out of the answer given by the Minister, is it correct for the Government to say then that only two applications have been approved and over twenty have been rejected or disapproved?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: Yes, two applications have been approved and one, as I have said, has been referred back to the Authority for consideration.
Mr Lee Choon Eng: What about the twenty and more?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: The others have been rejected.
Mr John Ede: Is the Minister aware that large newly developed areas of Singapore require new bus routes and that these are necessary? Will he issue a directive to the Authority to give more assistance to the public?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: As a result of large developments of housing estates, I have already given instructions to the Authority to consider the needs of the public in relation to transport.
Mr Lim Choon Mong: Is the Minister aware that an application as far back as September 1956 has not as yet got a reply?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: As far as I know, no such case has ever happened.
Mr Lee Choon Eng: Will the Minister state whether any application for deviation of routes within the main route is considered a new route and will the Licensing Authority consider such an application?
Mr Chew Swee Kee: Sir, it is sub-judice to answer that question because some of the applications are for the deviation of present routes and I would rather not give a definite reply now in order not to prejudice any decision that might be reached by the Authority.
Mr Seah Peng Chuan (Kampong Kapor): Does the Minister think that this delay was due to corruption or what?
Source: Singapore Parliament Official Report (Hansard) for 22 May 1957. Republished on SGParliament.