REORGANISATION OF MOTOR TRANSPORT SERVICE OF SINGAPORE

Debate resumed.

Mr J. F. Conceicao: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it would be pertinent to underline the point made in the White Paper that a significant objective of the proposals in this paper is provision for the vast numbers of our people who use the public transport service with better value for the money they spend. I do not think anyone can quarrel with this objective. This principle is quite irrefutable. But some of the details of implementation leave room for some comment.

In discussing this matter with some of my constituents one feature that seems to evoke objection is the age limit to be imposed on vehicles. That there is some public consensus with regard to this has been indicated by the number of times this matter has been adverted to by other Members in, this House. Many people are of the view that the road reliability of a vehicle depends as much on how it is used and looked after as on simply its age. It could be agreed that we would like to encourage owners and the drivers of public service vehicles to keep their vehicles in a constant condition of roadworthiness. This being so, stress should be laid on periodical inspection of vehicles on the basis of reasonably exacting standards. Therefore, if vehicles fulfil these standards, it may be possible to extend their age limit to the number of years, where relevant, originally recommended by the Transport Advisory Board. In other words, it would be possible to extend the lease of life of vehicles beyond the limit decided upon by the White Paper up to the limit recommended by the Transport Advisory Board, provided that such vehicles pass the required inspection test. I wonder if the Minister would deem it feasible to have a lower and an upper age limit for vehicles, a lower limit after which inspection is more stringent, and an upper limit beyond which the type of vehicle concerned will not be allowed to operate.

Another point I would like to refer to is the position of school and pirate taxi drivers. This again is another matter that has been referred to frequently in debate. Whatever the moral strictures-one may level at the pirate taxi drivers, they, together with the school taxi drivers, still pose a social problem. We note in the White Paper a comment that those associated with pirate taxi operations are well advised! to contemplate a meaningful change of occupation. May I add my appeal to that of the Member for Jalan Kayu and the Member for Anson that it might be possible for additional help, counselling and registration to be given to such people so that they may be relocated to useful occupations?

I find the White Paper's reference to "the Republic's aim of building a law abiding, disciplined, tightly knit and organised society for Singapore" most gratifying indeed. I think it is essential to link this concept with traffic on Singapore roads. I would like to emphasise a view that has been expressed in this House before, that seemingly the highways in Singapore constitute the last bastion of a buccaneering disregard for the law. This disregard is not confined to pirate taxis - the highways generally remaining the last stronghold of indiscipline, disorganisation and indifference to others. May I express the hope that the problem of the standard of driving will be attended to with due regard being given to enforcement of the rules of the road. It may be useful if this White Paper is followed by a no less significant declaration really to clean up traffic conditions resulting from a low standard of driving.

7.14 p.m.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Mr Speaker. Sir, I would like to endorse my support, in principle, of this White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore which was tabled in this House recently. Sir, may I refer to page 19 of the White Paper under paragraph 6.11 Pilot Scheme - Taxi stops. I wish to make a comment on taxi stops and on the provision of special slops for taxis in busy streets. I would say that the conversions of the present parking lots and taxi stands to what are to he termed "taxi stops" is a little harsh on the taxi drivers and, therefore, they should be abolished. I would like give two reasons for the abolition of these taxi stops. First, it would only inconvenience passengers if they are to alight at these stops when they are carrying large sums of money to and from banks. Similarly, it would cause unnecessary inconvenience to the old, young and the sick and also to those who carry bulky parcels. Secondly, the system is bound to cause confusion to tourists who visit our country for the first time. Sir, taxi drivers are from time to time asked to give good service to the tourists. I submit that taxis are not the only vehicles which cause congestion on the streets. Privately-owned vehicles equally create a nuisance by picking up and discharging passengers at places convenient to them.

Sir, in page 19 of the White Paper, paragraph 6.12 concerns the age limit for taxis. My colleague, the Member for Sembawang, has taken the trouble to go through the memorandum of the Taxi Transport Association and I wish to support their claim that the age limit of taxis should be extended to 10 years.

Sir, I would like the Minister to clarify another point. What will happen to the licence of an owner taxi driver who dies or has passed the retirement age? Can the licence be passed on to the next-of-kin so as to ensure that no disruption in the family's livelihood takes place?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope that the above suggestions and queries will be considered and answered.

7.18 p.m.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, with urban development and the growth of population, it is quite natural that transport will become an attendant problem. Big cities all over the world face transport problems of this nature. We all know that transportation is an essential factor in our daily routine. Everyone has to travel daily. So the earlier we solve this transport problem, the better it is for our people. It means that they will be able to enjoy the fruits of a comprehensive and well-organised transport system.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the problems facing Singapore at the moment as a big city are quite natural. As early as ten years ago when the Government started planning for urban renewal, adequate thinking was not given to the question of transport. That is the reason why we have traffic jams at present. The transport service is not satisfactory. Public transport is inadequate and this has led to the growth of pirate taxis. This situation is, of course, an anomaly and should be rectified. The bold and far-sighted Minister for Communications presented to this House a White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore last month. The White Paper shows that the Ministry of Communications is determined to overhaul the public transport system within a short period of three years so that a lot of time will be saved for the public. The intentions and the determination of the Minister are praiseworthy. Of course, the present transport system is an accumulation of past ills and a continuation of past maladministration. The reorganisation is therefore timely and necessary.

In this plan of reorganisation, I am afraid that the people who will be greatly affected are the 5,000 pirate and school taxi drivers. If each of them has to support four persons, then about 20,000 people will be affected by the reorganisation. On the other hand, the White Paper also shows that in the reorganisation, about 6,500 new job opportunities will be created. On the face of it, it is not difficult for the pirate taxi drivers to switch employment, but there are other problems which require consideration and solution. Sir, it is a fact that pirate taxis have been in existence for more than a decade. This shows that they serve a public need and that there is value for their existence. All these years, pirate taxis have been providing an essential transport service to our people, particularly the middle, and lower-middle classes. The fares they charge are reasonable. They take our workers to factories and offices, and in the newly-developed housing estates, they perform a very important service. In new housing estates, it takes time before buses can operate. So pirate taxis provide the only reasonable and cheap form of transport for the estate residents. Furthermore, they have also made a valuable contribution to our city and industrial development. Take, for example, the Jurong industrial town. In the early days, there were no buses and there were very few factories which provided transport for their workers. The pirate taxis were the only means of transport for the workers. It is undeniable that they have made a contribution.

The White Paper says that after July next year pirate taxis will not be allowed on the roads. What will happen to the 5,000 pirate and school taxi drivers? The employment and livelihood problems of these people should receive priority consideration of our popularly elected Government. Sir, all human beings have their own dignity and self-respect. If there are other ways out, they will not take to an occupation which is considered illegal. So in handling the pirate taxi problem, the Ministry of Communications must not only look into the legal aspect but also the humanitarian aspect. Tolerance is the key word to a problem of this nature. When our country is prospering, we must ensure that everybody has a share in the prosperity. We do not wish to see part of our population living below the standard of the majority of the people. We are practising democracy and our Government is elected by the people. So the livelihood of the people is the responsibility and the obligation of the Government.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose that the Ministry of Communications should set up a special committee for the conversion of the employment of pirate and school taxi drivers. All these problems are worthy of consideration. The people concerned should not just be written off. This is not the way for an elected government to do things. We must take positive steps and adopt a positive attitude and regard pirate taxi drivers as part of our citizenry. So for the conversion of the employment of pirate and school taxi drivers, I think we can give them special priority for the application of legal taxi licences or bus drivers' licences.

Sir, I hope the Minister for Communications will give consideration to my proposals.

7.26 p.m.

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to make some observations on the proposals set out in the White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore as contained in Paper Cmd. 21 of 1970 and for which the Minister for Communications has moved this Motion. Sir, though I share many of the views expressed by my colleagues, the Backbenchers, however, I do not agree with quite a number of them. The question of public transportation is indeed a very complex problem and, therefore, this White Paper is most welcome and a move in the right direction if we are to have a more meaningful and more efficient public transport service.

Sir, may I refer to bus services? I think the amalgamation of the 10 Chinese bus companies into three regional groupings is a correct move, because many of these bus companies have a fleet of buses ranging from slightly more than 10 to more than 100, and they ply along a multiplicity of routes. So I hope this amalgamation will not duplicate the routes, as I note that such routes will have to be rearranged. I feel there should be several bus termini in the city at which the commuters can catch a bus home. In other words, those buses going to the city will have their terminus at such termini. This, Sir, I believe, will help to ease traffic congestion during the peak hours, although I admit that this may entail some inconvenience to those commuters who have to rely on the buses. This is a possibility into which the Ministry of Communications can look, because I have seen such arrangements carried out quite successfully in several European countries.

With regard to the increase in the bus fleet from the present number of 1,339 to 2,000 by 1973, I believe this increase will not be sufficient to meet the needs by 1973, because the number of commuters will have increased by then. Therefore, I would like to suggest that there be a yearly assessment of the immediate needs rather than that an estimate be made of how many buses will be needed in the next three years. I think it is quite necessary to set up a Road Transport Authority, as mentioned in paragraph 13.3 (g) on page 30 of the Report. Paragraph 13.3 (g) reads:

`The Omnibus Services Licensing Authority Ordinance, 1956 is to be amended to give it additional and wider powers like a Road Transport Authority so that the reorganisation of our Public Transport service can be a success.'

I fully agree with this, Sir, and hope this Authority, when set up, will provide the public with an efficient public transport service.

Sir, let me now move on to the chapter in the White Paper that deals with Mini School Buses. This is on page 16, paragraph 5.5. I would like to seek clarification from the Minister for Communications on the type of such buses and how many students each can carry. I bring up this point because I believe that the scrapping of SCH taxis, which have been carrying children to and from school, is an unwise move. As far as I know, these SCH taxis have been per, forming a social service for the many parents whose children are in the primary schools. These children cannot, like the secondary school students, queue up for the buses. Therefore, it is only right that such mini buses replace the SCH taxis. In other words, the holders of SCH taxi licences and drivers be given the priority to own, and be encouraged to own, mini buses instead of letting the bus companies operate both the school buses and the mini school buses. Whilst I agree to the scrapping of the SCH taxis, I would like to see that they be replaced by mini school buses, because the mini school buses will be able to carry more children than the ordinary SCH taxis. This, I believe, will be most welcome to the many parents who have to rely on SCH taxis.

I now come to the subject of pirate taxis. It is interesting to note from the White Paper that "the majority of the 6,800 private diesel vehicles are believed to be operating as Pirate' taxis." It is also pointed out in paragraph 7.8 that "all those now associated with Pirate' taxi operations for a living are well advised to contemplate a meaningful change of occupation, over the next eleven months . . .". I must repeat this, that I share the views of several Members on this matter. Although it is stated in paragraph 7.7 that there will be job opportunities numbering no less than 6,500, I fail to see the point that before 1st July, 1971, these pirate taxis would have to be off the road, and therefore the operators would have to rehabilitate themselves in a much more meaningful change of occupation, because it cannot be denied that the projection of 6,500 jobs to be created will be spread over three years, and in 11 months more than 5,000 illegal operators will be off the road. How does one equate the two? In this instance, I would be most grateful if the Minister for Communications would care to clarify.

There are some other points to be considered. One is that if these pirate taxi drivers should choose to become bus drivers or lorry drivers, and if they do not possess the necessary licence to drive a heavier class of vehicles, they would have to undergo and pass that examination. Should they wish to apply for a taxi driver's licence, they ought to be successful in the application. Here I am happy to note that the White Paper clearly sees that "there is no reason why licences for taxi drivers should not be freely issued hereafter to any citizen who is competent and able enough to qualify for such licence." But even if such issuance were to be relaxed, I believe it would undoubtedly increase the number of taxi drivers. Here again, another problem will be faced, and that is whether or not we will have sufficient taxis for them. It is noted that the number of taxis will be increased from the present fleet of 3,800 to 5,000. Of the 1,200 taxi licences to be issued, 200 will be reserved for special taxis. I do not think this number of 1,000 taxi licences to be issued to the N.T.U.C.'s Transport Co-operative will be adequate to meet the needs, since 5,000 or more pirate taxis will have to be off the road before 1st July, 1971, and if they decide to switch to the occupations which I mentioned just now. I would like to refer the Minister for Communications to the statement he made in this House on 9th April, 1969. This was in reply to the question by the Member for Bukit Panjang, who is not here. The Minister agreed "that pirate taxis, though running illegally, are performing a form of social function in providing an element of public transport service." This is contained in Hansard, Vol. 28, No. 12, col. 940. Sir, I think his Ministry should assist in the rehabilitation of pirate taxi drivers in this respect. But let me hasten to add, lest I be misconstrued as being mischievous by quoting the reply out of context, that I wish to reiterate that I am firm in my view, because the Minister further states:

`As the adequacy and efficiency of the public transport services improve, there should be a consequent decrease in the number of pirate taxis running on the road.'

In my view, Sir, the position has not changed since then.

With regard to the stipulation that the taxi drivers' age limit be 60 years with a grace of three years, I would make a humble request to the Minister to consider extending it to 65. Sir, I make this request because I have been approached by some elderly taxi drivers who have pointed out to me that they have large families and that their children are either in school or are not earning enough to help maintain their families, and therefore, they drive taxis in order to supplement their income. I earnestly hope that the Minister will sympathetically consider my request. These drivers have also emphasised that if they could afford it, they would not want to work beyond that age, but it is because of their financial circumstances that they have to continue driving taxis.

Several of my colleagues have made the point that the age limit for taxis should be set at ten years as recommended by the Transport Advisory Board, the Chairman of which is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications. Instead, the White Paper has accepted the recommendation of the 1966 Committee of Review, i.e., that the age limit be set at seven years. Sir, I just wish to know the criterion behind this decision, and perhaps the Minister can enlighten this House on how the figure "7" has been decided upon. Sir, I am told that seven years is an insufficient period to recover the high costs involved in buying a taxi, maintaining it, paying due taxes, etc. The limit need to be extended to ten years, which would be a sufficient period, so that by the eleventh year a new taxi could be purchased. Otherwise in the eighth year a new taxi may probably have to be acquired through hire purchase. Sir, I am positive that some transport associations have made written representations to the Minister on this matter, and I can only hope that he will carefully consider them.

It is noted that the age limit for public service buses and school buses is 17 and 20 years respectively. It is perfectly pertinent to point out here that the statement "subject to change of engine every five years" in respect of such buses is, I think, ambiguous. What I wish to know is this: does it mean that after every five years the engine must be completely changed to a new one, or does it mean that the engine should be overhauled or reconditioned? Perhaps the Minister would care to clarify.

Lastly, Sir, I fully support the recommendation that there should be an increase in staff in the Registry of Vehicles. But I feel that the proposed increase is hardly sufficient to deal with problems of such magnitude facing the Ministry and to ensure that the public gets an efficient transport service.

Before I close, Sir, I would like to seek further elucidation from the Minister on "the preliminary study of possible new measures" by two senior officials from the London Transport Board. Reference to this is contained in Hansard, Vol. 29, No. 4, col. 167, dated 22nd December, 1969:

`Two senior officials from the London Transport Board have already submitted "a preliminary study of possible new measures to improve and expand Singapore's mass transport facilities".'

This was the reply by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications to my question, and it goes on to say that the:

`report is being examined by officials from my Ministry and those from the Ministries of National Development and Finance.'

I wonder whether this report will be published, and if so, when. I have asked this because, and again I quote:

`a team of United Nations advisers attached to our State and City Planning Office have in the past two years been studying and assessing Singapore's long-term needs in public transport, including the long-range aspects of providing a mass transit system for Singapore.'

I hope this report is forthcoming because I note that the White Paper states that a transport consultant from South Australia `has been appointed with terms of reference as stated therein.

On this note, Sir, I sincerely hope the Minister will clarify the points I have raised.

7.54 p.m.

Dr Augustine H. H. Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have only a short comment to make on the seven-year age limit of taxis. There would appear to be a consensus that it will cause hardship. I endorse the point raised by the Member for Katong that a properly-maintained taxi may well last beyond seven years, without causing undue pollution.

However, if the seven-year age limit for taxis is imposed, then I think the Minister might want to consider allowing taxis to raise their fares beyond the first mile or other than for the first mile. I think it is only fair that the cost of pollution control should also be partly borne by the travelling public and not solely by the taxi owners.

7.56 p.m.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein): Mr Speaker, Sir, not only do I support the proposals of the Government on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore, but I also wish to congratulate the Minister for Communications on taking such bold and imaginative steps to improve the present transport service. This move is timely as the service at present has numerous defects resulting in considerable discomfort and inconvenience to the travelling public. It can be expected that the radical move as evidenced in the White Paper is likely to bring about attendant problems.

Many of my colleagues in this House have made valuable observations on the different aspects of the proposals as contained in the White Paper, and I do not therefore propose to comment on the details of these proposals. However, I would like to make some observations on the points raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu. He has mentioned that for a bus service to be efficient, there must not only be sound professional management but also the co-operation of the bus workers. I would have thought that to improve the bus service and to increase the comfort of the travelling public it is not only necessary to have sound management with the full co-operation of labour, but that it is also important that the travelling public should co-operate by showing more orderly behaviour, such as queueing up for a bus and not scrambling for places in the bus when it stops at the terminus, particularly during peak hours.

With regard to the co-operation and conduct of workers necessary to ensure an efficient bus service, the Member for Jalan Kayu can rest assured that the N.T.U.C, is always conscious of its role to exhort the bus workers to demonstrate their courtesy to the travelling public.

Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: We hope that the travelling public will also co-operate to ensure their comfort and convenience while travelling in buses.

On the point raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu with regard to the intention of the Government to issue 1,000 taxi licences to the proposed Workers' Transport Co-operative of the N.T.U.C., I can assure him that every effort will be made to ensure the success of the Co-operative. The N.T.U.C, is at the moment finalising the steps to set up the Workers' Transport Co-operative, and they will be made known at the appropriate time.

Among the many underlying social objectives behind the proposal of the N.T.U.C, to start the Workers' Transport Co-operative, let me mention just one. This is to give a stake to the many taxi drivers in the Republic to help them own their own taxis. We hope that in turn they will give a better and more courteous service to the travelling public.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: That is most reassuring, Sir!

7.58 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am most grateful to my colleagues on the opposite Benches for their valuable comments on the Government's very controversial White Paper. As I have mentioned earlier this evening, any plan of reorganisation is somewhat disturbing because it upsets people in their usual way of life. But the business of government is to govern, not harshly but with firmness and reasonableness, and many Members have indicated that we should also be sympathetic. I see no reason why in the reorganisation consideration should not be given to problems which may arise therefrom or which may not have been foreseen in the White Paper. I think .a man must be a fool if he thinks he has the answers to all the problems. But it was necessary to table this White Paper to make it known to all and sundry that something at last is going to be done about road transport.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall attempt, to the best of my ability, to cover all the points that have been raised today by no less than 11 Members. I shall follow the order in which the points have appeared in the White Paper, beginning with the bus service, and followed by a discussion of the other subjects. I think it is useful to touch, first, upon the point raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu when he said that he welcomed the proposed amalgamation of the 10 Chinese bus companies into three companies as a step in the right direction for merging smaller companies into larger units, and the importance of introducing modem management technique. He ended up with the hope that similar contributions would come from the workers, a hope to which the Member for Moulmein responded very well. We do have to get the co-operation of the management, labour and members of the public, because in any change of system or reorganisation, there will be some upset here and there during the transition period, but with a little give and take, an understanding of the larger interests, and the ability to withstand certain inconveniences for a time, all will ultimately enjoy the benefits of a much improved public transport service.

I now move on to the Member for Punggol's comment on the establishment of more bus termini in Singapore. May I draw his attention to page 11 of the White Paper, paragraph 4.5 Study to be conducted on co-ordination and rationalisation of bus routes. The White Paper has been tabled for one month now. There is a paragraph which says that a "transport consultant has been appointed . . , with the following terms of reference: -". If he will look at sub-paragraph (f) , this is one of his terms of reference:

`Determine locations and number of bus terminus reported;'.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: On a point of clarification, Sir.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin resumed his seat.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: The terminus I referred to is one where all buses would forgather and all commuters would go to that place. It is not just a question of whether we need more termini. It is a sort of central station. I hope that clarifies my point.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Both the Member for Punggol and I are laymen. I think we can leave it to the experts to suggest how we can implement the recommendations. What I wanted to say was that this point has not been forgotten. It is being considered, and when the report is available, it will be tabled for discussion, if necessary. The Member for Punggol then dwelt upon the necessity for the establishment of a road authority. He referred in this case to page 30, paragraph 13.3 (g) :

`The Omnibus Services Licensing Authority Ordinance, 1956 is to be amended to give it additional and wider powers like a Road Transport Authority so that the reorganisation of our Public Transport service can be a success.'

Work is going on in the Ministry to suggest various amendments to the legislation and a Bill will be forthcoming before this House.

The Member enquired further whether a change of engine for a bus every five years as required in paragraph 3.9 (e) meant a new engine. The answer is, of course, yes. I believe that covers most of the points on the bus services.

May I now come to taxis which seem to have been given considerable attention. The point that has generated considerable interest, as I can see, is the imposition of the age limit for taxis at seven years. First of all, I would like to reply to the comment by the Member for Whampoa when he said that it would be fair to pass the cost of paying close attention to air pollution to the public by raising taxi fares. I think we should be very hesitant about raising fares, because it will, in turn, mean a rise in the cost of living all round. We actually did that when we increased the taxi fare for the first mile from 40 to 60 cents on the 1st of July. I think that is about as far as we can go at the moment. A good many Members the Members for Sembawang, Paya Lebar, Anson, Punggol, and Katong - all say that this limit of seven years seems to be somewhat hard. They suggest, why not go back to 10 years as recommended by the Transport Advisory Board? As the Transport Advisory Board has done very good work and has assisted me in this very difficult task of trying to put the Ministry in good shape, I would be very hesitant not to accept its recommendation in this respect. But if the Members will be good enough to refer to page 8, paragraph 3.9 of the White Paper, I have given the reason why we have put the age limit at seven years, although the Transport Advisory Board did recommend ten years for the life of a taxi. The sub-paragraph reads as follows:

As TAB's [Transport Advisory Board's] recommendations were made one month before the Anti-pollution campaign was launched by the Prime Minister, it will be necessary to make adjustments to the recommendations of TAB in order to meet the higher standards of performance and maintenance demanded under the Anti-pollution campaign. It has therefore been decided that TAB's recommendations be accepted with.variations: --.

Why seven years? There was already a committee as far back as 1966 which recommended that the life of a taxi should be seven years. We are already in 1970. I think we should have the courage to accept the recommendation of four years ago that seven years is adequate. In fact, if we go back to 1959, no taxis which were more than five years old were allowed on the road. So there is already a concession made to taxi owners.

As regards the economics of it, I will just give a simple arithmetical calculation to show whether the owners of taxis are really made to pay such a heavy price to replace their taxis after seven years. I believe it is generally accepted that a taxi is let out on hire for about $25 a day - one morning shift and one night shift.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: It is about $22.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Let us say $25 for easier calculation, otherwise it might be a little bit difficult. If it is $25 a day, then for one year - let us say, instead of 365 days it is 350 days - it means that if my calculation is correct, it will be $8,750. In other words, the capital cost of a taxi is recovered in one year and the owner is allowed to use it for seven years. I do not think I need go any further on that.

Moreover, it is just common sense that the older the vehicle, the more the repair bill, and it will not be worth while having an old taxi that will not be on the road earning money but in the workshop, and the owner has to pay $400 or $500 for the repair bill. It is cheaper to sell it and get a new vehicle and earn money. I am afraid Members have forgotten the economics of the proposition and have not checked the calculations.

I move on now to the special tourist taxis. I believe the Member for Sembawang has suggested that the 200 taxis should not be farmed out but should go to the N.T.U.C.'s Transport Co-operative. The N.T.U.C, will have its hands full looking after 1,000 taxis. So it is better to allow the other 200 taxis to be let out on tender. May I say that the special tourist taxis will be of a more luxurious type, air-conditioned, bigger in size, with a 2,000 c.c, engine, and probably costing not less than $10,000 per taxi. Fifty of these taxis will cost half a million dollars and 200 taxis will be a cool $2 million investment, so much so that we are going to put them out to tender in four separate lots. I think it is not so easy to have half a million dollars invested in 50 taxis at one time. I think the allocation of 1,000 taxis to the N.T.U.C, is enough to keep them busy for some time.

As regards the age limit for taxi drivers at 60 years, if the Member will refer to page 19, paragraph 6.10 of the White Paper, the recommendation of the Transport Advisory Board is to introduce an age limit for taxi drivers at 60 years with a grace period of three years, and this has been accepted by me. I think it is a bit hard for me to reject this recommendation. Members like me to accept what the Transport Advisory Board has suggested. This is one of the recommendations that it has suggested and now that I have accepted it, they say it is not good enough. I prefer to stick to what is in the White Paper.

The Member for Sembawang has made the suggestion that taxis should be allowed to use car parks. I see no reason why they should not be allowed if the taxi drivers pay for it. Of course, a taxi driver cannot just go to a public car park, parks his taxi for free, and goes for his meal. But if he parks his taxi in the public car park and is prepared to pay the regular 20 or 40 cents, I personally think -

Mr Sim Boon Woo: They are not allowed to do that.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I will look into this matter. I cannot see the logic of it. It is a good suggestion which I am prepared to follow up with the party concerned. In this respect, of course, it is true that the Car Parks Division is in a different Ministry, and I will have to seek their co-operation to agree to this.

I will now answer the question why it is not in my Ministry as proposed by the Member for Sembawang. He said that the Traffic Police and the Car Parks Division should also come under the Ministry of Communications. That is the prerogative of the Prime Minister. I am only the Minister for Communications.

The Member for Jalan Kayu asked about the progress of the N.T.U.C.'s Transport Co-operative. I think the Member for Moulmein has answered him adequately. Since the Member for Moulmein has spoken on it, I shall proceed with other matters.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Changi has raised the question of taxi stops. This is a pilot scheme and, like reorganisation, there are inconveniences arising from it. People are not accustomed to stopping at certain designated places. It is a little upsetting. Originally, it was intended to operate this scheme along four streets. This is stated in page 19, paragraph 6.11 of the White Paper: `(a) Cecil Street. (b) Raffles Place. (c) Robinson Road. (d) Shenton Way.' Since then the scheme has been extended to another three streets, i.e., Collyer Quay, Raffles Quay and Finlayson Green. There are, in all, 16 taxi stops in seven streets. It is a matter of opinion whether or not this scheme is a success. Those who are inconvenienced will say that it is not a success. But many people have said that it is a jolly good idea. They know where to get a taxi. Because, believe it or not, there are some taxi drivers operating in Raffles Place who have made our citizens angry. They just cruise around looking for foreign tourists and refuse to take our own citizens who are prepared to pay for it. Now the people can stand at a taxi stop and jump into any taxi that comes along. I think it is time that taxi drivers who refuse to take fares and, instead, look for foreign visitors, should be pulled up and have their licences suspended. I have given strict instructions that this should be followed. So I think this pilot scheme should be allowed to operate. Of course, the usual story will be, "What about those who are sick?" Not every one is sick. We cannot take individual cases and put them up as examples. I have been assured by the Traffic Police that if it is a sick person who is being taken by a taxi to a dispensary, no action will be taken by them. Of course, they will probably take down the number of the taxi concerned, and if an explanation is given, the incident is forgotten. That assurance has been given to me. So I see no reason why, because of that, we must do away with taxi stops. We must think of the whole and not of the part.

As regards confusion caused to foreign tourists, I do not think it is so. If they come from certain countries in Europe, this is their system. It is time that we learned that what is being done in Britain or in the United States need not be all right for Singapore. There are many things being done elsewhere, not in the English-speaking countries, where wonderful ideas can be picked up. We, in Singapore, should learn from others if it is a good point.

Sir, on the point of legalised taxis, in case the owner of a taxi retires because of age, how shall we deal with his taxi licence? I think this question has caused worry to some people, and I am prepared to consider that the taxi licence should continue with the owner until he dies. It should not be part and parcel of, shall we say, the man's property.

Sir, the real meat of the debate is on pirate taxis. I think we have to be clear in our minds when we talk about this subject and not get involved because of sob stories, sympathy and so on. First of all, we must get down to the root cause of this. Surely our approach to the whole problem is that pirate taxis came into operation because of the inadequacy of the bus services. Since this is a White Paper produced to reorganise the public transport service to improve the bus services, our approach should be, "Yes, how shall we go about it to improve the bus services so that there will be less opportunity for the pirate taxi driver to operate?" The approach should not be to look at the other side of the problem and say, "Poor fellows, what shall we do with them?" The Member for Paya Lebar even suggested that they should be legalised and given special routes to operate. This is doing just the opposite. In other words, he wants a continuation of the present situation by giving them the status of legality.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to clarify what I said just now. What I meant was that we should legalise pirate taxis so that the pirate taxis drivers can still earn a living. For instance, the Speaker of the House was an adviser to the Singapore Ex-political Detainees Association which looks after the rehabilitation of its members. The White Paper does not provide for the rehabilitation of pirate taxi drivers.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, 6,500 jobs are being created and pirate taxi drivers will be given an opportunity to take up these jobs. I see no reason why they should be given special treatment. Here is the opportunity. Here is the way out. Shall I put it this way in discussing this problem without stirring up emotion? Supposing a man gets cheap cigarettes because they have been smuggled into Singapore without paying the tax. Do you raise a hue and cry if the person who smuggled them in is caught and sentenced? Or if the owner of a car will not buy petrol from an authorised petrol kiosk but pinches it from the British Army - the petrol is blue in colour and he is caught, fined, or his car is confiscated. Do you speak on his behalf? Do you pity him because he was only trying to get cheap petrol? Surely any responsible person will say, "Well, he asked for it; he got it."

In this reorganisation, the N.T.U.C, will be forming a co-operative. They welcome the pirate taxi operator as a member of the co-operative. I think it is $50 a share. Do you mean to say that his taxi is worth less than $50? If he means to change, he should join the co-operative. Or even the SCH taxi operators, if they really want to change, it can be done.

The bus companies themselves realise that they will have to increase their bus fleet. According to the White Paper, it is not less than 300 new buses each year for the next three years. Each bus can employ five people. These bus companies are prepared to employ any pirate taxi operator or SCH taxi driver interested in a legitimate job. So we have the N.T.U.C, and the bus owners coming forward to say, "Let us get together to make this plan a success." This is where I think the suggestion of the Member for Jalan Kayu is a sound one. We are prepared to register them if they will come forward. Not many people are prepared to come forward and say, "Yes, I am a pirate taxi operator." I hope the Member for Paya Lebar can assist in this registration. The pirate taxi operator should not just turn up and say that he is a pirate taxi operator. We want to have more facts than just that. I am prepared to conduct a registration campaign.

We have a bus drivers' training school and are prepared to increase the intake from 50 each time to 150. It is a 5- to 6-week course. Bus companies, too, cannot get qualified bus drivers. We are prepared to step up the enrolment.

As regards the point raised by the Member for Punggol, we will step up the issue of vocational licences for those wishing to switch over from illegitimate driving as pirate taxi operators or as SCH operators to legitimate employment. We will do all that. But we cannot concede and give them this and give them that. Some Members say they are poor fellows. They are not poor. They may appear to be poor.

The Member for Punggol says that the plan is offering 6,500 jobs but that it is over a period of three years. Therefore, we appear to be harsh if we ask the pirate taxi operators to stop in a year's time. But if the Member will look into the White Paper again at page 23, 4,150 jobs are likely to be created in the first year. This is no small number of job opportunities. A good number of pirate taxi operators are doing it part-time and earning a few extra dollars. But the number of people who are making a living out of it could very well be 4,000. I do not know. It has yet to be seen.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. I am not saying in any way that taking them off the road in 11 months' time is a harsh move. I am all for the eradication of pirate taxis. Let me make my stand very clear.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Hear, hear!

Mr Ng Kah Ting: But what I am afraid is this: can the Ministry of Communications within this period absorb the more than 5,000 pirate taxi drivers - let us not argue about the figure - and will the job opportunities created by the bus companies, the N.T.U.C., etc., be sufficient? Just now the Minister has mentioned the training of bus drivers at 150 each time.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: It is a 5-week course.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Yes, a 5-week course and the intake will be increased from 50 to 150. This is welcome news and I am happy to hear it.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I think I can now move on to the SCH taxis. It is most unfortunate, Sir, that the SCH taxis have got involved in pirate taxi operations. They started off quite well. When I took over the Ministry two years ago, some of them came to see me because, as I said, the Association's premises are in my constituency. It was at the meet-the-people sessions that they came to see me and I was told that some SCH taxis had been nabbed by the police and they asked whether I could do something for them. That was in November 1968. My answer was, "If the police have already nabbed them, I am sorry I cannot do a thing. But I will advise the Traffic Police to lay off and instead go after the pirate taxis proper. They have got the SCH licences. Lay off until such time as I can decide on their fate." And as stated in the White Paper, Sir, at page 21, paragraph 7.3, you can see the figures of pirate taxi arrests. In 1968, 1.156 pirate taxis were arrested; in 1969, 958, which is almost a thousand. But in 1969/70, no SCH taxis were arrested because I told the Traffic Police to leave them alone until a decision had been made. The relevant paragraph reads:

`The absence of arrests of SCH School Taxis for 1969/70, was not due to exemplary conduct of SCH Taxis but the fact that in November 1968 the Ministry [which is really myself~ requested Traffic Police not to harass SCH Taxis, pending a decision which would be decided under this reorganisation plan.'

Unfortunately, because of this, they just took advantage of the situation and merrily went about pirate taxi-ing proper. The majority of them were not taking school children. They were openly driving up and down the road. They thought the SCH plate gave them protection. That was a very ridiculous state of affairs. Two weeks ago, after the White Paper was published in the Chinese press, I had to instruct the Traffic Police to carry on as they used to. So the SCH taxis, which are operating openly now as pirate taxis, are being nabbed. That is why we hear of people running around and sending petitions here and there supposedly in the name of the Committee for the safeguarding of the livelihood of SCH drivers'. They are not SCH drivers. They are pirate taxis operating as such but with SCH plates. These things have been going on, with transfers of SCH licences at a cost of $2,000 a licence. By buying an SCH licence, therefore, they have a legal way of conducting themselves as pirate taxi operators. This is where we have got to be very clear in our stand. We must differentiate between the genuine SCH drivers taking school children from home to school and from school to home and those who brazenly drive up and down the busy streets picking up passengers, stopping at bus stops and doing things like that. This state of affairs cannot go on. The Traffic Police will pick them up.

The Member for Punggol has asked whether SCH taxi drivers will be encouraged to own and operate mini school buses. The answer is "yes". In fact, there are at least 150 of the 900 SCH licences which are mini buses or station wagons, and the operators have been asked to change their licence to an SCB plate, which is a school bus or a mini school bus series, and the N.T.U.C, is also about to operate such buses. They are vans and station wagons, but not ordinary private cars. So long as they have SCB plates, we can keep a watch on them.

I come now to the goods vehicles. As I mentioned earlier, we received a petition from the Lorry Owners' Association. I think the Members for Sembawang and Jalan Kayu are concerned that there is no indication as to how the phasing out will take place. It stands to reason that it will be phased out gradually over a period of time. Naturally, the oldest vehicles will first have to be changed to new ones. You find a lot of these 25 years old rickety vehicles breaking down in the heart of town, causing traffic jams and so forth. There is no doubt that we do not want an immediate change of all lorries that are more than 15 years old. We will first pick out those that are the oldest, and gradually come to those approaching 15 years for the change-over.

There are a few miscellaneous questions. I have already answered the one posed by the Member for Sembawang, that the Traffic Police and the Car Parks Division should come under the Ministry of Communications. Logically they should, but I am not in charge of the demarcation of duties and responsibilities. That is the responsibility of the Prime Minister. Perhaps if the Member for Sembawang will write a letter to the Prime Minister suggesting this change-over, he might agree, but I think I have enough on my plate. I would prefer looking after my Ministry as it is, for the time being. This reorganisation plan will give me more white hairs than I have now.

The Member for Sembawang also raised the question of the discourtesy of the ROV, staff. Since 1959 the P.A.P. Government has never tolerated discourtesy in Government departments. It is sometimes possible that a member of the staff may have had a bad night, e.g., a scolding from his wife for going home late, and turns up for office the next day with a sour face. This can happen. It is humanly possible. As a rule, we do not encourage discourtesy. If a member of the public has a genuine complaint and is able to say that "I came to the R.O.V, one day and was treated badly by so and so", we will look into it and have the Public Service Commission take action on it. There are disciplinary rules. One must be definite and specific in making a complaint. If it is a genuine case, we will look into it. But it is not quite fair to tar everybody with the same brush.

The Member for Punggol says that he agrees to the increase of staff for the R.O.V. I am very glad that he supports the Ministry's request for more staff. On the other hand, he says that he does not feel that the increase is adequate. I wish the Minister for Finance thinks the same. I would like to say this. If the Member will turn to page 28, paragraph 12.2 (b) Enforcement Section of the White Paper, he will see that in 1962, the original staff of the R.O.V. Inspectorate was 45. Lower down in the third paragraph, it is now suggested to recruit "80 additional men for the Traffic Police (to be attached to ROV.)". The Member says it is not enough, but 80 additional men represent 50 per cent of the present establishment of the Traffic Police. There are only 160 men in the Traffic Police at this moment. And asking for 80 men is asking for one-half of the present establishment! This is already a big mouthful, and if I can get 80 additional men, I think I am very lucky.

The Member for Punggol then refers to the report of the two London Transport officials. He quotes the Hansard of 1969, which is a year ago, and also mentions the fact that in another reply a team of U.N, advisers have been in the State and City Planning Department for the last two years working on a mass rapid transit system. If he will again refer to page 34 of the White Paper, section Ii, under the title Reports and documents etc., he will find item (5) of section II which reads:

`Rail Transit Plan for Singapore, May, 1968 by P. E. Garbutt and F. S. P. Turner of the London Transport Board (Restricted).'

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Why not have the report published?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Unfortunately, the report is not for circulation but for study by the Ministry.

Item (7) reads:

`Mass Rapid Transit Study Monograph No. 8 June 1969, State and City Planning Department (Restricted).'

May I say this - that in the White Paper passing mention was made of mass rapid transit. Since the World Bank has expressed an interest in conducting a feasibility study, we hope that when this feasibility study is completed and it does recommend a mass rapid transit system, then perhaps by the 1980s we will be able to travel either underground or overhead. By then, we will be able to have a proper public transport system with improved bus services on the road and some form of mass rapid transit either underground or overhead.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

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.