SINGAPORE – Private chauffeured services are not taxis, but
are becoming increasingly available via third-party taxi booking
apps.
And the fact that the law covering the emergence of this new
technology in the taxi landscape will not be regulating private
limousine services booked via such apps just yet was cause for
concern among Members of Parliament (MPs) debating the legislation
yesterday.
For now, operators must make it clear upfront that these are not
taxi services, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said as the
Third-Party Taxi Booking Service Providers Bill was approved by
Parliament.
For instance, an operator such as Uber has the Uber Taxi app
and, for budget limo hires, the UberX app.
But with some commuters caught unaware by the expensive
charges levied for these services, and taxi drivers complaining
about private drivers at taxi stands, three of the four MPs who
spoke during the debate felt that more should be done.
In response, Mr Lui stressed that taxi services and chauffeured
vehicle services remained two distinct industries, “even though the
line today is no longer as clear as it was before”.
He noted that chauffeured vehicle services are not new: People
have used these for corporate trips or special occasions such as
weddings.
“But what’s different today is that the technology has made
these services much more easily accessible and easier in terms of
matching passengers to chauffeured cars more seamlessly, just like
how technology has improved the matching of taxis to commuters,” he
said.
Still, Mr Lui acknowledged the concerns and pointed to existing
laws that require such services to be pre-booked.
Also, commuters cannot hail them in the streets, and private
cars cannot be used for chauffeured services.
With the new regulations, a third-party taxi booking service
provider must distinguish its various services through distinct
icons and by highlighting the different charges clearly and up
front to customers.
If commuters request for taxis, the service providers must
despatch licensed taxis with drivers who hold valid vocational
licences.
MP Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio GRC), who is also executive adviser
of the National Taxi Association, said: “It’s important that
education efforts be enhanced and enforcements be undertaken so
that there is no confusion among commuters, taxi drivers and these
drivers as to what the regulations relating to these two different
types of transport services are.”
Mr Lui noted that the Land Transport Authority has been stepping
up checks, for instance, on one-man private operators waiting at
taxi stands.
MP Seng Han Thong (Ang Mo Kio GRC) suggested that private limo
drivers must hold a vocational licence or certificate to better
safeguard commuters’ interests.
In reply, Mr Lui said the authorities will monitor the need to
regulate these drivers, but that the key is now to encourage
training and improve the drivers’ competencies.
Among other issues put forth, Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) Lina
Chiam questioned the need for regulations that deviate from free
market principles, saying that this can be best decided by
users.
Fellow NCMP Gerald Giam asked why the authorities will issue
licences based on demand for third-party bookings instead of
letting potential entrants make their own assessments.
Mr Lui, who described the Bill as a “light-touch approach”,
agreed that potential entrants must still assess the market.
But with cabbies worried about not receiving prompt payment of
fares from operators, the latter have to be held financially liable
so drivers are treated fairly.
He said: “It’s no good for the taxi industry if we just let in
any and every applicant, even though it may be below the threshold
to enter the market.”
