[MyPaper] Taxi woes and the ghost of 1985
-
[MyPaper] Taxi woes and the ghost of 1985
WHENEVER the state of the taxi service is discussed, my mind goes back to 1985.
That, in my view, was the last time the Government tried to tackle the problem in a fundamental way.
But that experience was so painful, no transport minister since has had the appetite to take on the issue.
Which is why the problems persist, almost 30 years on.
What is the issue?
The Straits Times carried several stories in recent weeks of taxi queues in the city during the evening, with waiting times much longer than they were a year ago.
A Sri Lankan businessman was quoted as saying: "It's the worst thing I hate about Singapore - standing in taxi queues."
One statistic alone tells the story of how poorly the service here compares with that in other cities: Singapore has 29,000 taxis, Hong Kong has only 18,000. But despite their fewer numbers, Hong Kong taxi drivers make more than a million trips a day, compared with fewer than a million here.
So, what's happening?
That 1985 saga was instructive. I know because I was in the thick of it as a young officer at the then Communications Ministry.
The problem then was exactly the same as it is now. Commuters complained they could not get a taxi when they wanted one, that taxi drivers were choosy, refusing to pick up passengers headed for certain destinations, or disappearing just before midnight when the surcharge kicked in.
Sounds familiar?
At the ministry, it seemed like a straightforward analysis - taxi fares in Singapore were too low, relative to buses and the cost of owning a car. If four people shared a cab, it would be cheaper than taking the bus.
The solution? Raise taxi fares substantially to reduce demand, and solve the problem once and for all.
But that wasn't all - taxi diesel taxes were also increased to make the cost of owning and running them closer to that of a privately owned car.
The theory was sound but, alas, we guessed wrongly how sensitive commuters would be to a big fare hike.
Demand for taxis plunged so much that taxi drivers' earnings went down despite the higher fares.
There was an uproar: Commuters were unhappy over the increased cost, and taxi drivers were up in arms that their earnings had gone down.
The Government had to do an embarrassing U-turn, moderating both the fare and tax increases of the original plan.
More significantly though, and with serious implications for the future, it backed off from trying to intervene in the taxi business.
So fares were later deregulated and no longer decided by government but left to taxi companies to determine. The number of taxis on the road was also left to the market until recently.
But the problems have not gone away, hence the spate of newspaper reports lately.
Many suggestions have been made to improve the situation - getting rid of the surcharges, simplifying the fare structure, imposing a minimum cruising mileage, and so on.
Indeed, the Land Transport Authority has just announced changes to the rule requiring operators to have a certain proportion of their fleet on the road during peak hours.
These moves are worth trying.
But I am afraid they will not solve the problem unless Singapore is clear about the role of taxis in its overall transport system.
Unless this is settled, the patchwork of measures that have been tried over the years will continue to frustrate.
Unlike buses and the MRT, which run on fixed routes, taxi demand is more unpredictable, driven by those whose needs cannot be met by public and private transport.
This includes regular bus and MRT commuters who occasionally use taxis, tourists, and even motorists who sometimes find it more convenient not to drive.
How to devise a system to meet so many of these different needs with no obvious pattern to them?
It turns out that getting the price right is the most important.
If it is set too low, demand will surge and service levels will deteriorate unless the roads are flooded with taxis, which isn't possible without causing serious traffic congestion.
If it is set too high and demand collapses, neither commuters nor drivers will be happy, as was the case in 1985.
Because it is so important to get the price right, it cannot be left to taxi companies to decide. They have other commercial considerations when setting the price and may not necessarily take into account the proper role of taxis in the overall transport system.
Indeed, as many critics have pointed out, because their revenues come from renting the taxis out, they have no direct interest in providing good service, apart from meeting minimum regulatory standards.
For these reasons, the correct fare level ought to be decided by the transport authorities, taking into account the overall transport system.
In Singapore, this price should be pegged between public and private transport.
One other factor needs to be taken into account, which is often overlooked.
This is the effect price has on taxi-driver behaviour.
If the price is set too low, a cabby has to pick up many fares through the day to make a decent living. Each fare then becomes relatively unimportant because it represents a smaller part of his overall earnings, as he knows he can pick up another fare just round the corner.
Taxi drivers operating in this scenario would tend to be choosy about the fares they pick.
On the other hand, if the price is set higher and demand is lower, you can expect better service as every customer would contribute a larger share to the driver's earnings.
It's the difference between a supermarket and a boutique.
Both types of taxi service can be found all over the world - the supermarket model prevailing in developing countries, whereas in, say, Tokyo or London, it's a boutique service.
What's critical is that whichever model is chosen must not result only in better service for commuters but also give taxi drivers a better deal going forward.
Their livelihood has to be a priority because a good taxi service can happen only when cab drivers believe there is a secure future for them, they earn decent wages, and theirs is a profession that others respect.
So, whenever changes are made to the taxi service, one critical question to ask is: Will taxi drivers be better off as a result?
There is much work that needs to be done to make these fundamental changes that will result in permanent improvements to the taxi service: determining which taxi model is best for Singapore, setting the correct fare level, the number of taxis needed, the cost of owning and operating them, and the way the business is operated.
These issues require decisions that only the Government can make. But it has to first exorcise the ghost of 1985.
-
yesterday send four pax fm amk hub to woodland, a young gal was waiting for the four paxs.. upon reaching, she ask.. how much? $8.60..
her reply the most honest u can expect from a young gal.. abt 10 - 12 years old..
"so cheap?"
-
y need a transport minister to solve this simple issue?
surcharge for third pax - $1
surcharge for fourth pax - $2
total =$ 11.60
-
now, the young gal will say.. that reasonably..
-
Singapore wants to be number one in everything
-
knn... want to compare to HK.
does he know that the HK cab meter jump faster than our blackie chrysler???yes, flag down is HK$20 for 1st 2km (sgd 3.20) but the jump is HK$1.50 per 200m (sgd0.25)....so for 400m, jump is SGD0.50! ai mai???
so you see, despite hk fare is much higher.....they still drive more trips than us!!!i would love to make more trips.....but no pax!!!
-
Originally posted by Samsun:
knn... want to compare to HK.
does he know that the HK cabyes, flag down is HK$20 for 1st 2km (sgd 3.20) but the jump is HK$1.50 per 200m (sgd0.25)....so for 400m, jump is SGD0.50! ai mai???
I love the idea. ...
Let us own the cab .
Not tc, cdg, prime, smrt ..
Then as owner, we have to take it as our own business. ...
:p
-
Many of these writers love to use to word "increase" increase in taxi fares, increase in flag down rates, per km and so on. My perspective is why not look at decrease, decrease in taxi rental, decrease in public transport fares like MRT and buses would result in many taking public transport too. You do not hv to say, increase taxi fare, because, once taxi fare increase, the demand of good services also increases, and with rental increases, a TD take home is the same, yet he would have to provide more better services to those paxs who pay more and demand more. The way a customer look at a price is not going to bother about your cost of operating, he or she will be looking at how much you earn, same goes to us, we go buy thing and compare with others shop prices, we are not going to bother about the rental of the shop, the bills and the owner pay. Therefore, by increasing fares is not going to help much, and furthermore, increase fares alway come with increasing of rental, that, I guess all traders would have agreed including all TDs
-
Most brothers and sisters here would agree that we use to hear pax saying, "wha, nowaday, uncle, u taxi driver seibei ho tan hor?, because pax only look at the fares, and not our operating cost? And you can see most uncle have to explain until saliva also spew out..