REORGANISATION OF MOTOR TRANSPORT SERVICE OF SINGAPORE

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

5.36 p.m.

The Minister for Communications (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Mr Speaker, Sir, as a fairly lengthy Ministerial statement was made by me on 22nd July, 1970, consequent upon the presentation of the White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore, now on record in Hansard, Vol. 30, No. 4, it will therefore be superfluous to repeat what has already been said previously.

It will, however, be pertinent for me to comment on certain important developments, since the White Paper was published six weeks ago. It would be a mild statement if I say that the White Paper had stirred some public interest and discussion. Reorganisation of any kind is disturbing, especially for those who will be affected by its recommendations and will be required to make a change or an adjustment to their former way of life.

First of all, I wish to express my thanks and appreciation to my Parliamentary Secretary, the Member for Tampines, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture, the Member for Stamford, for their kind assistance in producing, at short notice, the Chinese translation of the White Paper, the official version of which was printed in English.

It was thus possible for Members of Parliament, who are more conversant with the Chinese language, to be supplied with a proper Chinese translation of the contents of the White Paper, as well as to obviate the possibility of confusion in the Chinese press, which may occur through variations in the interpretation of the text by different translators. I should like to take this opportunity also to thank the Chinese press for their wholehearted co-operation in printing the Chinese version of the White Paper (in instalments) over a number of issues, namely, the Nanyang Siang Pau (11 issues), the Mm Pao Daily (nine), the Sin Chew lit Poh (seven) and the Shin Mm Daily News (four). This responsible action, of which I am most appreciative, on the part of the Chinese press has ensured that the large Chinese reading public are aware of the actual contents of the White Paper, and thus puts a stop to those who, for reasons of their own selfish interests, are opposed to the principles of the White Paper and are bent either on misinterpreting, confusing or frustrating the public outcry for a long-overdue reorganisation of the public transport service of Singapore.

That reorganisation will proceed is clear. As to details of implementation, some adjustments can, of course, be made provided there are good reasons or any new information is brought to light, when it would be foolish and unreasonable not to accept them.

Despite many press reports of supposed unhappiness over the implications of the White Paper, only four petitions have been received so far, and will be given due consideration:

Firstly, the Singapore Lorry Owners Association of 1lB, New Bridge Road.

In a letter dated 8th August, 1970, the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, and now Minister of State for Finance, in his capacity as legal adviser, forwarded a petition from the Singapore Lorry Owners Association claiming that "70 per cent of the vehicles owned by the members are over 15 years old".

Secondly, the Singapore School Transport Association of 40B Lorong 17, Geylang.

Their appeal was dated 14th August, 1970, and I have agreed to meet their representatives in my office on Saturday, the 5th of September. I may add that the Association's premises are located in my constituency of Geylang West.

Thirdly, the Taxi Transport Association.

Their appeal was dated 20th August, 1970.

Fourthly, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce.

The letter, signed by the President of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, was dated 1st September, 1970, and was received at my office at 5.00 p.m, yesterday. The appeal was stated to be on behalf of:

(a) The Singapore School Transport Association; and,

(b) The Pro-tern Working Committee for the protection of the livelihood of School Taxi-drivers.

I have already said that the Singapore School Transport Association will be meeting me on Saturday.

As for the so-called "Pro-tem Working Committee for the protection of the livelihood of School Taxi-drivers", may I refer to the press release issued by my Ministry yesterday, which was published in some newspapers this morning but not in all papers. May I, with your permission, Sir, read the first part of the press release which has relevance to this so-called Working Committee? I quote:

With reference to an undated open letter in Chinese purporting to be issued under the hand of a certain Ng Eng Lam, as spokesman of a "Committee for the Safeguard of School Taxi Drivers' Livelihood" whose identity is unknown, there is, however, on police records, one Ng Eng Lam (NRIC 0665851 B), whose last known address is Block 61, 270A Stirling Road, Singapore 3, has had three previous convictions for operating pirate' taxis, and is currently wanted by the Police, under a warrant of arrest in respect of a road accident.

Furthermore, the Singapore School Transport Association has informed the Ministry of Communications that none of its members has the name of Ng Eng Lam; neither has Ng Eng Lam been authorised to represent its interests.'

Sir, this is the time for Backbenchers to speak up on the contents of the White Paper.

Sir, I therefore beg to move,

That this Parliament approves the proposals of the Government on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore as set out in Paper Command 21 of 1970.

Question proposed.

5.46 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, on the 22nd July of this year the Minister for Communications introduced a White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore. This Paper, which contains several thousand words, enumerates the various problems facing our public transport service. It also very frankly discloses the various shortcomings which the Ministry of Communications has faced in the past. For instance, in its foreword, the Paper gives three possible reasons for the present unsatisfactory state of our public transport service, namely:

`(a) Lack of definite policy in the past, with ad-hoc decisions being made as and when problems arise

(b) Lack of continuity in the incumbent of the important post of Registrar of Vehicles (ROV). Since 1959 (11 years ago) there have been eight officials filling this post. This state of affairs is certainly not conducive to proper management of the Department.

(c) More financial support is needed to recruit an adequate number of qualified staff, to provide proper facilities and equipment to enable ROV to perform, implement and to enforce its multifarious duties.'

On this point the White Paper specifically mentions that the income of the Registry of Vehicles totalled $60 million in 1969, whereas the expenditure was only $1.2 million.

Sir, I agree with the three reasons given. In fact, the situation in the R.O.V, in the past was rather chaotic. At the same time, it is only a branch of the Ministry of Communications which has control over it. The Ministry of Communications was set up only in 1968.

This White Paper also proposes several measures to rectify the situation, the most important of which are to improve the services of buses, taxis, school taxis and school buses, the amalgamation of bus companies, and the eradication of pirate taxis.

Another important measure is the anti-pollution campaign which is aimed at maintaining the health of our two million people. This should merit our support and attention.

The White Paper also proposes to impose an age limit for various kinds of public vehicles, and to purchase a further number of buses, taxis, and other vehicles which will involve an expenditure of $50 million.

From all these measures we can see that the White Paper is a significant and historic step in the reorganisation of our public transport service. Sir, these measures will have far-reaching effects on those who are engaged in the transport service. The reorganisation plan is expected to be completed in three years, and as it will affect the livelihood of tens of thousands of our people, I suggest that the Minister should carry it out with the utmost care and tact. In implementing it, he should formulate good, practical and proper methods and regulations in order to improve the public transport system. At the same time, he should try to bring about a better transport system that will help our people and promote our industrial and commercial development. Furthermore, the reorganisation plan should not adversely affect the livelihood of the workers and others who are engaged in the transport service. If it is carried out in this way, everyone will support the Government in its far-reaching and farsighted reorganisation of the public transport system.

I would now like to touch on the introduction of the age limit of taxis. According to the White Paper's proposals, the age limit of taxis is set at seven years. In other words, if taxis are over seven years old, they will be delicensed. With this stipulation, within the three years of the implementation of the plan, about 30 per cent of the present 3,800 taxis, or 1,200 taxis, will have to be replaced. Undoubtedly this measure will have very serious consequences for taxi owners and drivers.

Sir, I have received a memorandum from the Singapore Taxi Drivers' Association, representing the labour side, and also a memorandum from the Taxi Transport Association, representing the taxi owners, complaining about their problems. The Singapore Taxi Drivers' Association thinks that the age limit of taxis should be set at ten years, because taxis are better cared for and looked after than private vehicles. The Taxi Transport Association also holds the same opinion, and has advanced very good reasons to support this view. The first reason is the cost of a taxi. At the moment, the majority of taxis are of the Morris Oxford model. The cost of a taxi together with accessories is $9,500. On top of it, there will be an expenditure of at least $5,000 to pay for licence fees, tyres, insurance, inspection and repair charges, etc. And the yearly income is about $6,000. Balancing out, the yearly profit will be not more than $2,000. If a taxi is de-licensed according to the seven-year stipulation, then after depreciation of $1,000 per year and payment of interest, if it is acquired on hire purchase, how can a taxi owner or driver make a profit in the end? There are also some taxis of Mercedes-make. The cost of such a taxi and accessories is more than $15,000. If we set a seven-year limit on this make of taxi, it means that every year there will be a depreciation loss of $2,000. Thus these taxi owners will not be able to make a profit out of their cars.

The second point is the emission of excessive smoke. According to figures given in the White Paper, out of 1,413 buses, there were 515 cases of smoky exhausts. Of the 6,652 lorries, there were 1,828 cases of smoky exhausts. Of the 3,816 taxis, there were 894 cases of smoky exhausts. From a comparison of these figures, we can see that there were fewer cases of taxis with smoky exhausts than buses or lorries. This goes to prove that taxis are better maintained than other public transport vehicles. In addition, taxis have to undergo inspection twice a year. If a taxi is found to be in poor condition, it will not be allowed to operate. From this, we can see that taxis are subject to very strict controls.

All the complaints by these Associations concern the livelihood of several thousand people. According to statistics, 4bout 1,000 new taxis will be made available to taxi drivers to own their own vehicles. For instance, recently the Government licensed 600 taxis which belong to this category, and they were bought on hire-purchase terms or from loans from finance companies. If the seven-year age limit is imposed, then the taxi owners will incur an unnecessary loss. At the same time, this will also adversely affect the proposed Workers' Transport Co-operative, to which the Government has given a $6 million loan. In the end, the Government may not be able to get back the money loaned out. Who then is going to pay for it?

Another matter is the saving in foreign exchange. At the moment, there are no locally produced or assembled taxis. So the purchase of every new taxi will incur a loss in foreign exchange. If we can extend the age limit, we will not lose any foreign exchange but instead will be able to provide jobs for those people in the taxi business. In addition, according to the White Paper, the Transport Advisory Board has proposed the age limit of taxis to be set at 10 years. Of course, this has the concurrence of the representatives of the people concerned. I believe this proposal is of practical value, and in view of the valid reasons given. I think the Minister should carefully reconsider and change the age limit to ten years.

Now I would like to touch upon the increase in the number of taxis. According to the White Paper, the Government intends to issue 1,200 new taxi licences, 200 of which will be for special taxis. On this question the Taxi Drivers' Association has, in its memorandum, put forward a different proposition. According to the Association, our transport system at the moment is already in a state of confusion. There are various kinds of taxis, for example, ordinary taxis and SZ taxis. And if there is to be another kind of special taxi, then it will create further confusion, especially to tourists from abroad. Therefore, the Association suggests that these 200 taxis should also be allocated to the proposed Workers' Transport Co-operative. If the Government decides to increase the number of these special taxis to serve passengers, then, in that case, the marking of this type of taxis should be different. For instance, a different colour should be painted on the top of these taxis in order not to mislead the passengers.

The Taxi Drivers' Association is also of the opinion that at the present stage no more taxi-driver licences should be issued because there are now more taxi-driver licences than taxis. There are 14,000 taxi-driver licences, whereas the number of taxis is only 3,800. Hence, many taxi drivers with licences do not have any taxis to drive. They cannot do anything but stay at home. The Association proposes that in the process of setting up a Workers' Transport Co-operative, the authorities should take into consideration the ratio of the number of taxi drivers to the number of taxis before any decision is made.

The Association has also made a new proposition regarding the retiring age of taxi drivers. It thinks that any taxi driver on reaching 60 years of age should be allowed to continue with his occupation provided he is certified by a Government doctor to be healthy and fit for his job. There is no need for a grace period of three years.

I think most of the propositions have merit. The White Paper is aimed at improving the public transport service of Singapore. On the other hand, the Government has the duty to safeguard the livelihood of the taxi-drivers. It should try to avoid causing any difficulties to their livelihood when the new measures are implemented.

Now I would like to touch upon the replacement of overage goods vehicles. According to the Table of Statistics in the White Paper, of the 6,652 goods vehicles, about 30 per cent of them, namely, 2,200, are already 15 years old and they need to be replaced. On this point, I am of the opinion that the replacement should be carried out in stages, because goods vehicles are very important to the transport industry, to our prosperous building industry, and the Port of Singapore Authority. They are also necessary to importers and exporters. They cannot carry on their business without them. At the moment, there is no plant for locally assembled goods vehicles. Therefore, the new vehicles will have to be bought from abroad. As a result, we will lose a lot of foreign exchange. I therefore suggest that the replacement of goods vehicles should be carried Out progressively so as not to affect the business of those sectors in industry which use them.

Next I come to the setting up of vehicle factories, either Government-owned or joint ventures. According to the White Paper, in the 3-Year Plan, it is necessary to buy 900 buses at a cost of $31.5 million, and 2,400 taxis at a cost of $20.7 million. The total equipment cost is about $50 million. In addition, there will be an increase of 450 school buses, and a total of 2,200 goods vehicles will need to be replaced. Undoubtedly a very large sum of investment will be involved.

In its conclusion, the White Paper also points out that this is a great challenge to the people in the transport industry. First, there is a very good opportunity for investment in the transport service and, as a result, the drivers and other people involved will have better jobs. If the White Paper is not wrong, there will be about 6,500 new jobs created. Second, the motor industry, especially the locally-assembled vehicle industry, will have greater opportunities open to it. Third, the local banks, finance companies and the Development Bank of Singapore can also avail themselves of the opportunity to enter this field. It is correct to say that it is a great challenge to all of them. I feel that given determination and spirit, the commercial firms and the industrialists should be able to set up a vehicle assembly plant. It can be set up either with private capital or capital from the Government. The Government can even set up its own local vehicle assembly plant. In partnership with the private sector, it can set up a jointly-owned car manufacturing factory which can assemble or make various kinds of vehicles. It is no problem for the Government to get the money to do so. At the same time, we have people with the necessary expertise to set up such a factory and manage it. This will provide long-term investment opportunities which will save a lot of foreign exchange and also provide more jobs for our local citizens. So it is like killing two birds with one stone. I hope the Minister will seriously consider this point.

Next I come to the question of the administrative system in the Ministry of Communications. I think it should be unified. In addition to the reorganisation of the public transport service and the purchase of more vehicles, there is also a need to have enough public officers and adequate equipment to cope with our requirements. The most important point is that the administrative system should be unified. At present the system works on this basis. The R.O.V, is responsible for the issuance of vehicular licences and the collection of vehicular taxes. The Traffic Police is in charge of traffic regulations and the testing of drivers. The Car Parks Division is in charge of car parks and taxi stations. But this division is under the Ministry of National Development. This triumvirate set-up will necessarily give rise to confusion and will affect the efficiency of the public transport service. The three departments should be unified into one in order to do away with the confusion obtaining at the moment in the various departments. I feel that all matters relating to transport and communications should be under the Ministry of Communications. Not very long ago I suggested to the Minister that these departments should be merged into one and the Minister took a favourable view of my suggestion. Now I will repeat here that the Minister should merge together all the various departments which now deal with the public transport service. Hence, the R.O.V., the Traffic Police, the Car Parks Division and the road building section should come under one department. Under a unified management, a unified policy on public transport will not only be achieved but, at the same time, it can also better cope with the problem of public transport in our country. We can achieve a double result with less effort.

Sir, with the increase in taxis, I feel that the Ministry of Communications should lay out more parking lots for them in order to enable the taxi drivers to pick up their passengers more conveniently. I also feel that all car parks should be open to taxis as well. This will enable the taxi drivers to take their lunch or to rest there. At the moment, foreign imported cars and other kinds of vehicles can park in the car parks. Only the taxis cannot. What is the reason for this discrimination? If the taxis are allowed to park in the car parks, they are prepared to pay parking fees. After all, they are also local citizens. Why should there be discrimination against taxi drivers? It is really difficult to comprehend this situation. I hope the Minister will, in the reorganisation of the public transport service, take the necessary measures to remedy this unreasonable situation.

To sum up, the various proposals enumerated in the White Paper not only create a new task for the people in the transport industry but they also pose a new challenge to all the people. They will have to adapt themselves to the new situation brought about by this reorganisation. Of course, to reorganise in tow the public transport service is a very onerous task. However, I believe that under the spirited and experienced leadership of the Minister for Communications, the programme will be smoothly carried out.

I would, however, like to remind the Minister of several points. First, the reorganisation should be carried out with the utmost care, and sympathetic consideration should be given to the livelihood and difficulties of the people affected by the reorganisation. The reorganisation should also not adversely affect the development of our commerce and industry and the livelihood of the people in the transport industry.

In addition to this, there is the attitude of Government servants. Recently, I received certain complaints about the discourteous and arrogant attitude of public servants towards members of the public. If this is true, I urge the Minister to look into this problem and see to it that the officers concerned carry out their work efficiently. Public officers should understand that they are servants of the people and their salaries come from the taxes paid by the people. Therefore, they should serve the people courteously. They should not abuse their powers and embarrass or oppress the people, especially now that we are carrying out a large-scale reorganisation of the public transport service. Public servants should maintain a fair and just attitude in carrying out their duties. Only thus can this large-scale exercise receive the full support and co-operation of the people, and the objectives of the White Paper achieved, so that in the 1970s we can have a completely new and efficient system of public transport.

6.16 p.m.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, since the publication of the White Paper, quite considerable public interest and concern have been aroused. Apart from the proposed age limits of the various types of vehicles, two other areas have caused most concern. One of these is the all-out action against the pirate taxis and the other is the total abolition of SCH taxis. Whilst it may be argued that it is not the duty of the law to protect the illegal, one cannot help but sympathise with the plight of those who have been compelled by circumstances to resort to pirating on the road. These so-called pirates, I submit, Sir, have been the by-products of our own restrictive and unrealistic taxi licensing system and a totally inefficient public transport system which has failed miserably to cater for the needs of the travelling public and, as a result, has encouraged the growth of the pirates. Now that the ills have been diagnosed and the cures prescribed, I feel that we should not ignore altogether the useful albeit illegitimate, contribution made by the pirates and the legitimate contribution from those operating SCH taxis. Accordingly. I feel that certain special arrangements ought to be made to commence registration of all those who have been engaged in pirating and in the operation of SCH taxis with a view to finding them suitable alternative employment opportunities.

Like the Member for Sembawang, I am concerned, Sir, about the fate of the 2,200 goods-carrying vehicles which are more than 15 years old. Sir, whilst a grace period will be allowed in the case of other vehicles that are to be phased out on account of age, there is no indication as to how the 2,200 overage goods-carrying vehicles are to be phased out. There is no recommendation anywhere in the White Paper. Sir, I do hope that this does not suggest immediate replacement and that a reasonable grace period will be allowed during which the vehicles should preferably be submitted to regular stringent inspection by the authorities in view of the fact that these vehicles are the greatest offenders on the road in terms of air pollution. Whatever the grace period finally decided upon, it should be sufficiently long to allow for adequate replacement so as not to disrupt our commercial and industrial activities. The tremendous expansion in both sectors, I understand, has considerably increased the demand for lorry service. Calculating on the basis of an average price of $20,000 per lorry - although some lorries may cost a lot more a total of $44 million is required to finance the replacement of our complete fleet of overage lorries. Bearing in mind that a great number of these lorries are owned by individuals of no substantial means, I am doubtful whether they will be able to find adequate financial support to effect the necessary replacement within a short period. I feel sure that this point has not escaped the attention of the Minister and that the programme drawn up to phase out these goods-carrying vehicles will be reasonable and sufficiently flexible to ensure a smooth change-over.

Last but not least, I would like to touch upon the proposed merger of the 10 Chinese bus companies and the establishment of three separate companies. Sir, the ultimate success of the comprehensive changes proposed for the entire public transport system hinges largely upon the successful operation of the three new companies. Their performance will therefore be watched most closely by all concerned. And as it must be the first occasion locally where a fairly large number of companies go into merger together, their success will inspire others both in commerce and industry to undertake similar exercises in order to obtain the benefits of economies of scale. I sincerely hope, therefore, that in structuring the management of the three new companies, those concerned at the top will not hesitate to introduce modern management techniques. In particular, it is important that they appreciate and accept the need for professional managership to ensure efficiency in management.

Sir, a sound management without the co-operation of the workers will however not give us an efficient bus service. And as far as this is concerned, I have-no doubt that our union colleagues will see to it that union members are made to realise their responsibility to the public and will co-operate to the utmost with the management in bringing about an efficient bus service to the people of Singapore. Speaking of the union, Sir, I am reminded that the proposed Transport Co-operative will be given certain privileges and will therefore be playing a fairly important part in helping to bring about the changes envisaged. As such, they should be organisationally prepared and competent to undertake the task ahead. May I ask the Minister what arrangements or preparations are being made by the union in this connection?

6.23 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications (Mr Phua Bah Lee): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, since our independence, owing to the growth of our economy and the increase in the indices of income of our nationals, the high purchasing power of the people has directly stimulated the prosperity of our transport industry. Therefore, more effective control of the increasing number of motor vehicles has become our pressing task at the moment. Certain parts of the regulations and laws are no longer adequate to meet the present transport conditions. On the other hand, in order to match urban renewal, there is the need systematically to link up the various satellite towns, industrial districts and housing estates. This entails the reorganisation and readjustment of the public transport service. I quote paragraph 1.1 of the White Paper:

`Good and efficient communications form the life-blood of any modern economy. As Singapore takes justifiable pride in being the fourth busiest port of the world, we must not allow its progress to be retarded by a lagging Public Transport system.'

This correctly explains the important position the public transport industry occupies in our national economy.

Further, the White Paper proposes certain measures which will not only help solve the present problem of public transportation, but also, at the same time, serve as guiding principles for the future in this field. From the ratio of our population to vehicles, it can be seen that the majority of our people are making use of buses as their chief means of communication. But what kind of service is now being rendered by the present 11 bus companies to our people? There are buses from three or four bus companies running on the same service routes, whereas on other service routes the passengers have to wait for a solid half an hour before a bus comes along.

In addition, there is an inadequate number of vehicles whose service is irregular and not punctual, causing long queues of waiting passengers. We can read many complaints from the public in the newspapers about this. This, therefore, has indirectly helped the development of pirate taxis. Bus companies and taxi operators have complained about pirate taxis robbing their business. But they themselves will not take positive steps to improve their own services. The cause of this situation lies in the fact that the 11 bus companies lack a unified organisation and management and they do not show the common sense of responsibility. They manage their own affairs separately and their business is based on their personal interest. As for the safety, time and convenience of passengers, it is not their business. Thus, on the one hand, they are making use of overage vehicles to extract the maximum possible profit, and, on the other hand, they are causing unnecessary waste by duplicating their services along some service routes.

In view of this situation, the Government proposes to reorganise the 11 bus companies. This has become an important subject in the White Paper. The Government proposes to amalgamate the 10 Chinese bus companies into three district or regional companies. It also proposes that the Singapore Traction Company should also reorganise and readjust itself and be turned into the fourth district company so that, through division of work and co-operation, the various bus routes throughout our country will form a complete link-up. Thus in the fields of management and service, it will be easier to adjust, rectify and organise. At the moment, the 10 Chinese bus companies have completed their initial stages of amalgamation. I believe this exercise will soon be completed. I welcome very much the judicious decision and the co-operation of the Chinese bus companies to help the Government carry out this reorganisation plan.

Next come taxis which occupy the second position in our public transport service. According to a conservative assessment, the total intake for taxis every year is not less than that for buses. From this we can see that the profit for taxis is quite high. At present, the number of taxi licences is limited to 3,800. This limitation has become fatal to the taxi industry, because it has not only caused speculators to hoard taxi licences by various means in order to fetch better prices on selling them, but also, at the same time, it has indirectly fostered the development of pirate taxis. Therefore, in order to remove the anomalies that at present exist with the taxis, we should assess the services rendered by them and adjust their number.

Next, we come to the school taxis and pirate taxis. First, the school taxis. They are pirate taxis in a different form. The main reason for their existence is the poor bus service, and the fact that school buses are not widely used. In order to ensure the safety of school children, the Government decided to legalise such "pirate" taxis in the past. In this way school taxis have come into being. They are marked differently with SCH plates and have to pay S24 a year in addition to the fee paid by private cars. However, they make use of this legal cover illegally to accept fares along the road, Their practice is to take other passengers in addition to school children. This is against the original intention of the Government when it legalised this kind of taxis. The SCH taxi drivers themselves have also infringed the principles and the conditions under which they were registered. Therefore, the Government has no alternative but to take strict measures to replace them with school buses.

Pirate taxis pose a serious problem in our public transport service. The operators are infringing the law by accepting fares along the road. Even their car discs are secured through illegal means. At the same time, they are using overage cars in poor condition to serve the passengers. What they want is only to get fares from the passengers. They do not care for their safety. It has been shown that the passengers of pirate taxis who lost their lives as a result of accidents did not get any compensation. This is very pitiful. The Government allows free competition in commerce, but pirate taxi operators and school taxi operators are engaged in unequal competition. The Government has a duty to protect the interest of taxpayers just as it has the duty to take measures to protect the interest of legitimate businessmen from smugglers. The Government has tried its best to eradicate pirate taxis, but the anomalies and ills existing in the public transport service plus the fact that people want a quicker and more convenient service have created favourable conditions for the existence of the pirate taxis. Their operators make use of this need as a pretext for their legality. if we legalise pirate taxis, the existence and the service rendered by buses and ordinary taxis will become meaningless. Also, public transport and order on the road will become unmanageable and chaotic. The eradication of pirate taxis not only ensures the safety of passengers, but also safeguards the rights of people who are legally operating buses and taxis.

As regards anti-air pollution, this is a problem that we will have to face seriously in view of the introduction of the anti-air pollution campaign. All engines emit some kind of waste gases which will directly affect the health of human beings. This matter does not have any political implications. Whoever you are, your health will not be less affected by the air pollution, In our country, air pollution is caused less by the existing new factories than by the exhaust of motor vehicles. In busy commercial districts and densely populated areas, the problem is more serious because the smoke emitted by motor vehicles has even impeded the growth of trees and plants. We can therefore gauge the degree of its seriousness. In the final analysis, the cause of this situation is mainly due to diesel cars. Not all cars emit black smoke. Of the diesel cars, the worst offenders are public transport vehicles and overage vehicles. In the case of the former, for example, buses and lorries, the cause is excessive loading. In the case of the latter, it is their unlimited period of use. The latter include pirate and SCH taxis, taxis, and some other vehicles. The emission of black smoke is obviously due to lack of proper maintenance. This should be attended to. To control this situation, we have stipulated that public transport vehicles should be inspected regularly and should keep up to the required standards. We will also raise the tax on private diesel cars, which include SCH cars. On the one hand, this is to discourage the purchase of diesel cars as private cars. On the other hand, this is to curb the development of pirate taxis as well as keep the number of diesel vehicles to a minimum. The fines on vehicles emitting smoke will also be increased. This will make car owners pay attention to the maintenance of their vehicles.

Finally, all laws and stipulations should be effectively carried out by executive organisations. Without them, there will be no achievement. The efficiency of the Registry of Vehicles is not up to the required standard. The R.O.V, is weak and ineffective. Many tasks properly within the province of the R.O.V, have not been carried out. Some other departments are carrying out some of these tasks. Even some minor tasks are not carried out. In this way, the authority of the R.O.V, does not go beyond its threshold.

In the R.O.V, there is a lot of confusion and inefficiency. This is mainly due to a shortage of staff and equipment. In order that the R.O.V. should play an effective role, we should strengthen the staffing position and also give it adequate authority and equipment. Only thus will it be possible to help in the reorganisation and development of the public transport service. Judging from the above, we can arrive at one conclusion; that is to legislate and, through the executive bodies, to implement the reorganisation of the public transport service. The results of this will, of course, be:

(1) Better organisation and more regular working conditions for those people engaged in the public transport service. This will provide more jobs for our citizens.

(2) After the reorganisation, more vehicles will be needed for the transport service, thus providing more investment opportunities in the public transport service which, in turn, will generate a new source of strength for our economic development.

(3) Improvement in our environmental hygiene and the safeguard of our health will be an undeniable fact.

(4) A better, more direct and time-saving public transport service for the broad masses of our people will emerge.

6.42 p.m.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in recent years the public transport service in Singapore has posed a very serious problem. In order to solve it and to ensure that there is a smooth flow of traffic in our streets in Singapore, the Government has set up a Transport Advisory Board for a comprehensive survey and study of the transport service system in Singapore. The efforts of this Board have culminated in the White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service in Singapore. From the aims and views of this White Paper, we all agree that the premises have been well established and most encouraging and worthy of our support. On the one hand, the proposals will ensure that traffic will flow freely and smoothly in Singapore so that it does not become a hindrance to our economic development and progress. On the other hand, the proposals will also ensure that the public will be given a time-saving and convenient means of transport to move around. Indirectly, the proposals will ensure control of air pollution caused by public transport vehicles. There are, however, certain provisions which are either too strict or far from being perfect. These will not only affect those who are involved, but will also cause the people affected to make unnecessary sacrifices. Therefore, careful consideration should be given to see that proper adjustments are made.

First of all, I would like to deal with the question of school taxis. Some four years ago, Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the growing problem of pirate taxis in Singapore and the fact that pirate taxis do play an important role in public transport, the Government decided to issue school taxi licences for these vehicles in order to make good the inadequacies of transport for our school children. Accordingly a lot of people applied for these licences.

From statistics released by the R.O.V, in June this year, of the various classes and types of vehicles registered, there are 1,127 school taxis and school buses, the majority of them being school taxis. This figure is more than double the number of buses owned by the Singapore Traction Company. Therefore, it can be seen that so long as there are solutions, popular support is certain. At the moment, we cannot simply write off the licences that were issued four years ago and require the licence holders to switch over to mini buses overnight, or within the time of 11 months.

There are certain illogical restrictions mentioned in the White Paper. For example, school taxis are not to be transferred. At the time when these licences were issued, the applicants had to go round raising money to buy their vehicles, diesel cars for example. And up to now many of them have still not yet paid up their loans. But now the Government require them to raise another loan to buy a new mini bus. The previous loan not having been fully paid up, who in their right senses will lend more money to these people? Furthermore, the existing school taxis will be given the death sentence because of the increase in diesel tax. Who will buy diesel vehicles for private use?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the passengers of school taxis are mainly school children. Because there is a limit to the fares from school children, school taxi drivers are only able to make enough money to keep body and soul together, quite apart from having to maintain their vehicles. Little did they realise in the early days that, by the 1st of December this year, they would have to pay 50 per cent more in diesel tax, and another 50 per cent by the 1st of July next year. This increase in diesel tax will undoubtedly be an unbearable burden on them. This-is quite a cruel and heartless measure.

Let me now deal with the question of pirate taxis. The existence of pirate taxis is a fait accompli. The Government has been continually taking action against them. But I think that in the course of such action they have adopted a policy of closing one eye to it. This-could not be denied because we can see that over the years the public transport system in Singapore has worsened. There have been complaints about the inadequacies and the chaotic state of public transport. And what is preposterous is the claim by a bus company, which operates in busy city areas, that it is running at a great loss, to the tune-of millions of dollars. And this claim is made at a time when many, many passengers have to queue up for a long time for its buses.

These inadequacies and the unsatisfactory state of affairs give rise to the existence of pirate taxis. To some extent, these pirate taxis help to solve-the transport problem of commuters in Singapore. The people have been served quite satisfactorily by these pirate taxis which ply between housing estates and industrial estates. Rain or shine, the people get the services they need at very moderate rates of fares. Judging from the present situation, buses do get crowded and overflow with passengers at some time. There are people who are not prepared to wait for a long time for buses during the rush hours. So they take taxis or pirate taxis which normally operate between housing estates and industrial estates. Although the fare of pirate-taxis is slightly more than that for a bus, that is to say, a difference of 5 or 10 cents, on the whole, pirate taxis play the intermediary role between taxis and buses in serving the need of passengers. So while we are diversifying our public transport system, I think there is room for the pirate taxis. Plans for proper control can be executed to legalise the existence of pirate taxis, which are a fait accompli. Operators or drivers of pirate taxis and school taxis have taken loans at high interest rates to buy their diesel vehicles in order to provide this wonderful service to people in all walks of life. They have to sweat and toil to earn their living and to look after their families. Over the years of operation, they have gained experience and know their business.

Conscionable people have full sympathy for this kind of illegal operation. Why cannot we try to help them solve their problem? Why cannot we discuss with them to find a proper solution? It is regrettable that this is not being done. And to do away with all this illegal operation by persecution and police action will not solve the problem. The more you arrest them, the more you will find them on the road. And if you take stricter action, you will probably drive them to desperation, and that will lead to unthinkable social problems and consequences.

It is, therefore, my view that certain routes should be designated for the operation of these pirate taxis, so as to give the operators and drivers a means of livelihood. This will be the best method. Alternatively, we can classify pirate taxis as second-class taxis. I think they are prepared to talk things over, and are also prepared to accept all reasonable arrangements that we can suggest.

Mr Speaker, Sir, next I would like to deal with taxis. In the White Paper the Government has decided to issue 1,200 new taxi licences. At the moment, there are about 14,000 taxi drivers to 5,000 taxis. This ratio, I think, is a comfortable one, and taxi drivers do not have to worry about having no taxis to drive. They will not be unemployed in view of the number of taxis available. Undoubtedly this decision is good news for many taxi drivers.

Unfortunately the White Paper also proposes to impose an age limit of seven years for taxis. This means that a taxi has to be replaced every seven years. I think this is a waste of money. If we assume that a new taxi costs $12,000 and the money is obtained by way of a loan at the rate of, say, 10 per cent per annum, the interest will amount to $1,200 per annum, capital and interest to be payable within seven years. This means that every month the instalment will come to more than $200, quite apart from expenses on maintenance, road tax, insurance, and other incidentals. With all these items taken into account, every month a sum of more than $300 will be involved. And if after seven years the vehicle is still in good and serviceable condition and yet has to be replaced, will that not be a loss? If the vehicle is -to be sold as a private car, I think very few people will be interested because of the increased tax on diesel cars. Why cannot we extend the age limit of taxis? By doing so we can, on the one hand, save a lot of money in foreign exchange for the country, and, on the other hand, we will enable the taxi operators to earn a few dollars more, so that they will be in a better position to buy a new vehicle the next time.

It is also stated in the White Paper that because a taxi is put to hard use, it is on the run for almost 24 hours in two shifts. I think this is purely guesswork. As far as we understand, most taxis do not run about in the streets after 1.00 a.m. They are all parked in petrol kiosks or such other places until at least 6.00 a.m, or later before they are on the road again. And during the period when they are supposed to be in use, the taxi drivers also take time off for rest. You do not expect them to keep on driving for 12 hours on end. It is, therefore, clear that the actual time a taxi is being used is between 12 and 15 hours.

In the case of buses which are to serve the same purpose, an age limit of 17 years is proposed without any good reason being given. Why cannot the age of a taxi be about half that set for a bus?

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is clear that the public transport service of Singapore is in a very serious state. While we agree to the proposals in the White Paper for a comprehensive reorganisation, the Minister for Communications should emulate the Housing and Development Board, which has successfully solved the housing problem, in the solution of the public transport problem.

7.02 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, permit me to comment on certain points emanating from the statement by the Minister for Communications on the subject of the reorganisation of the motor transport service of Singapore consequent upon the presentation of the White Paper to Parliament on 21st July, 1970.

Whilst agreeing that the broad outline of the principles in the White Paper is sound theoretically, I do not think certain details of the plan are near enough to what I would call a realistic approach. The Minister for Communications has emphasised, as one of the guiding principles under which the White Paper is drawn up, that it would be a simple yet workable plan and capable of immediate implementation. But from what I gather from the existing condition in our motor transport system, I would rather say that the dimension of the problem is far greater than what the plan is able to solve and certain proposed steps do not deal realistically with the existing problems.

The White Paper aims at weeding out all pirate taxis within a period of one year, and in order to take the full brunt of the unemployment problem due to this measure, it has proposed to create over the next three years not less than 6,500 job opportunities under the plan. If my estimation is not wrong, there are at least 7,000 to 8.000 genuine pirate taxi drivers in Singapore. When I say genuine drivers, I mean those whose livelihood depends solely on driving pirate taxis. I understand that there are some drivers who drive pirate taxis only part-time. The question now is this. How can this tremendously large number of drivers, whose means of earning their livelihood is suddenly terminated, find alternative employment? The White Paper has proposed to create 4,150 job opportunities in the first year of the plan. In respect of numbers, it will not solve the problem. It will be worse in terms of vocation and the suitability of these men to fit into new jobs. These men who have spent many years behind the steering wheel will be faced with difficulty in getting adapted to their new employment. Does the White Paper include a training programme for these people similar to that which the Naval Base workers are now undergoing? Whilst we all believe in the benefits of a law-abiding, disciplined, tightly-knit and organised society, we must not achieve this object by non-humanitarian methods.

The second point I would like to raise is with regard to taxis. Anyone with some power of observation can easily see that the increase of 1,200 taxis, of which 200 will be special tourist taxis, is far too small a number to offset the shortage in our public transport system.

The imposition of the age limit for taxis at seven years appears to me to be too short a period to be justified economically. Any taxi owner can tell you that running a taxi at, present is not as profitable a business as it is thought to be, with the present high rate of road tax to be paid every year and owners having to spend a considerable sum of money on repair bills in order that their vehicles can pass the inspection of the Registrar of Vehicles. If every owner has to make plans to replace his vehicle every seven years, he will find that it will be unprofitable to run a taxi any more. In order to continue his business he may have to demand extremely high charges from the driver who hires his taxi. The final result is that it is the public who ultimately pays the bill. If every taxi has to undergo a mechanical inspection at the Registry of Vehicles annually and has to be proved serviceable and safe. I do not see why an unrealistic age limit should be set for taxis. After all, even a three-year old vehicle can be found unserviceable if the owner does not properly maintain and service it. I would like to propose that this age limit be lengthened to a more realistic period and that the mechanical inspection of public transport vehicles at the Registry of Vehicles be strictly enforced. In this way, I think we will come nearer to a more realistic approach to ensure that the public transport vehicles are safe for use and that they are economically feasible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Communications has already pointed out that these measures will affect the livelihood of a few thousand people. Owing to their wide social and economic repercussions, we would like him to give more careful thought and consideration before implementing them.