Yong Nyuk Lin
Singapore
“Sir, it gives mc a chance to say again that the modified plan cannot be accepted at this stage. But it does give me the opportunity to answer another point which was raised by the Member for Ton Payoh and which I have missed in my answer, i.e, that the fringe area car parks would not be utilized at night.”
“I am sorry, Sir, for failing to answer all the questions raised by the Member for Sembawang. As regards the full implementation of the recommendations of the White Paper which was meant to be completed by the middle of 1973, I can only say that it was not a 100% implementation of all the recommendations.”
“He said that they threw the mail on the floor. Here again, unless a complaint is lodged, we can do little about it because all postmen and postwomen are being told how to behave and to extend courtesy, and what the correct procedure is and methods of delivery of mail.”
“" And if, God forbid, priority national needs should one day call for a limitation of circulation of automobiles or any other measure, no one would then regard it as an intolerable sacrifice. "For in a society where humanism regains fully its rights, the automobile should not constitute an end in itself," Mr Graber said.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is regrettably true that after many of the estimates for Paya Lebar Airport had been voted, revotes had to be asked for. The reason is that it has taken a long time to get all these development proposals started. They are development proposals really, Sir, and plans have got to be drawn and checked.”
“In these circumstances, I hope it will be appreciated that they are stretching themselves far and wide, and there is always a limit to what a human being can do I can assure him that we will continue to enforce the regulations as far as it is humanly possible before getting a complaint from the Member for Sembawang who says that our enfor…”
The complete record
Every one of 678 lines we hold for Yong Nyuk Lin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 14.
“Sir, arising from the statements made by the Member for Moulmein and the Member for Jalan Kayu, I can assure them that this time next year it will not be necessary for further comments to be made. I shall make another statement of policy tomorrow when we debate the Registry of Vehicles.”
“But what happens when the Government nationalises a company which has not yet got institutionalised management, and corruption on a scale rampant in the former Singapore Traction Company inevitably results? Let us first get management and services improved through tighter supervision from the Ministry of Communications.' That clearly states the Government's official policy towards the SBS which operates the public bus service. We are getting on with the task of tightening up on the management and improving the services of SBS. What is needed is hard work in BSRC. It is in the quiet back-room where the action is - raising the "nationalisation bogey" may get newspaper headlines, but is not the type of constructive criticism which BSRC and my Ministry will gladly welcome to assist them in their task of improving the standards of our public transport service, in the quickest possible time.”
“In my view, if it was possible for us to overcome what was considered by many as the insoluble "pirate" taxi problem of Singapore, and I recall the number of Members in this House who strongly championed the cause of the pirate taxi drivers when we decided to take strong action against them after the publication of the White Paper, there are no grounds for pessimism why the present teething problems of Singapore Bus Service Ltd, given the same determination and resolve, cannot be resolved, if we are prepared to work hard and refuse to be deflected from the objective of creating a public bus service worthy of its name, over the next three years. I speak with reasonable confidence that such an objective can be realised on two counts: - (a) the existence of the tripartite Bus Services Reorganisation Committee (BSRC) which will monitor and supervise SBS operations under my personal supervision and direction, (b) the establishment of the Road Transport Action Committee (RTAC) with five Permanent Secretaries from four Ministries involved with Road Transport, soon after SBS was formed, with the following two objectives: - (i) according high priority to the public bus service; and (ii) adopting various traffic management measures to reduce the present congestion on our streets. May I now conclude my remarks by quoting the relevant paragraph in the Budget Statement made by my colleague, the Minister for Finance, on 4th March, 1974, [col. 76] -- `Meanwhile, the cost of running buses has gone up - half because of wages, half due to higher cost of diesel oil, spare parts and tyres. So the Government has had to allow the bus companies to put up bus fares. There have been suggestions that the Government nationalise the bus companies and subsidise the commuter.”
“(b) The 15-year old intractable problem of thousands of illegal `pirate' taxis which were blatantly defying the law and carrying on as a public transport service was resolved and thousands involved in this form of livelihood were given a chance of finding respectable employment either as bus drivers, conductors, school bus operators, taxi-drivers or as owner-drivers in NTUC COMFORT mini-buses or taxis. And all these had been achieved without any special vote from the Government to get on with this massive task of reorganisation. In July 1973, it was time to plan for the second and final phase of reorganisation of the public bus service by merging the three bus companies into one. This was envisaged in para. 4.2 of the White Paper which reads as follows: - `The ideal situation would be to have just one single Road Transport Authority, so that the bus commuter need pay only once and be able to travel on any service or services, speedily to his destination, with the minimum change of bus, wherever possible. This will take time to achieve and may be considered to be an objective which is outside the scope of this paper.' This was achieved on 1st November, 1973, when SBS came into operation -- only four months after the completion of the three-year White Paper Plan. It has already been explained how SBS was established with an unfortunate number of inherited problems, and it would be trying the patience of Members for me to go over them again.”
“If this problem had been eliminated simply by strict enforcement of existing laws, a large number of owner-drivers would have become unemployed and a popular service would have been lost~ If allowed to grow unchecked, it would have led to the eventual collapse of the privately-owned bus companies.' 7.15 p.m. 'Bus Services - Having been assured of Government's intention to remove pirate taxis from the road, the operating companies were encouraged to expand their bus fleets. The ten Chinese bus companies merged into three groups: Associated Bus Services (Pte) Ltd, United. Bus Company (Pte) Ltd and Amalgamated Bus Company Ltd. Together with the Singapore Traction Company, they ran the scheduled bus services from the time the new routings became effective in April 1971 until the end of the year, when operational difficulties forced the STC to cease operations and its vehicles and services were taken over by the three remaining companies. In 1968 there were less than 1,200 buses in scheduled service; of these 60 per cent were more than ten years old, and 28 per cent were more than 16 years old. The goal of 2,000 buses, set in the reorganisation for 1973, was reached in April 1972. Only one quarter of the fleet was then more than 10 years old, and less than ten per cent had been in service longer than 16 years. They were operating on 141 routes, as shown for each company in Figure 2-10, at headways varying from four minutes to one hour. Bus fares, which were made uniform among companies at the time of reorganisation, are distance-based;...' Sir, two main targets were achieved under the White Paper plan for 1970/73: - (a) The target of an increased bus fleet of 2,000 was reached one year ahead of time.”
“The main recommendations for the improvement of public transport services were: (a) To increase the bus fleet with 600 new additional buses over a three-year period, giving a total fleet of 2,000. (b) Pirate taxis to be eradicated. (c) Ten Chinese bus companies to be amalgamated into three Regional Companies by August 1970. The other bus company, Singapore Traction Company, was to be reorganised. (d) To appoint a transport consultant to make a study as to how the bus services could be co-ordinated and rationalised for maximum efficiency. (e) To encourage the expansion of the school bus fleet by granting of road tax concessions. (f) To increase taxi licences from 3,800 to 5,000. The reorganisation was seen to be a comprehensive plan which was to be implemented over a three-year period and which, if implemented with sufficient imagination and vigour, would bring about a much improved public transport service for Singapore by 1973.' May I turn to page 2-21? `Public Transport Development Since 1968 The 1970 Government White Paper on Reorganisation of Motor Transport Service provided the much needed impetus for the improvement of public transport service in Singapore. For the first time in many years, a detailed and comprehensive examination was made of the many problems confronting the variety of public transport systems. For each of these problems, appropriate remedial action was recommended and problems which had seemed insurmountable began to appear less formidable. An important factor in making the reorganisation possible was the great reduction in unemployment in Singapore over recent years. The pirate taxi problem which threatened to cripple the bus operators is a case in point.”
“I quote, Sir: `In conclusion, Sir, may I say that I shall be guided by three general principles in the discharge of my duties in the Ministry of Communications: First, to ensure dependability of transport service, i.e., to provide a regular, efficient, clean and courteous service to the public; Second, speed of service, i.e., as quickly as possible consistent with safety for passengers and goods; and Lastly, lower cost to the paying public, subject however to both workers and management maintaining high productivity and ensuring a reasonable return for the capital invested.' May I add that these same principles still hold good? It took two long years of patient observation and study before a three-year (July 1970/June 1973) White Paper plan for Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore (Paper Cmd. 21 of 1970) was produced and tabled in this House. May I now quote two relevant sections from the draft Final Report dated June 1973 on the Singapore Mass Transit Study Phase 1 drawn up by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Consultants, appointed by the World Bank on what they thought of the White Paper (page 1-5):- `Reorganisation of Motor Transport Service, 1970 In recognition of the fact that a critical review of public transport services was long overdue, the Minister for Communications tabled a White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore to Parliament in 1970. The Paper identified the problems in relation to various forms of road transport and made recommendations for the alleviation of these problems, particularly for the redevelopment of public transport.”
“Even if the former Labour Front Government had wanted to implement this proposal, it could not have done so because Singapore's reserves had been run down to such a low level, and there was no second Christmas Island to be sold to Australia to find the tens of millions of dollars which would have been needed to nationalise the bus companies then operating in Singapore. When the People's Action Party assumed the government of Singapore in 1959, nationalisation of bus companies was not one of its platforms and rightly so, even to this day!' Then, may I repeat, in the year 1974, 15 years later, it is also not its policy. May I then move on to ? I quote, Sir: `The Member for Ulu Pandan next suggested that as "pirate taxis" are providing service to the public which the bus services are not able to cope with, therefore such pirate taxis should be allowed to operate legally as "express taxis" and that pirate taxi operators should, at most, be subject only to a fine when caught and that their motor vehicles should not be confiscated. In my view, the pirate-taxi problem came into being for two reasons: (1) the growing problem of unemployment in Singapore so that those who do not wish to go on the dole -that is, to seek Social Welfare assistance - turn to hawking or become pirate taxi operators. (2) the inability of the bus companies to provide an efficient, regular and adequate service for bus travellers. Unless the above two problems are resolved, the pirate taxi problem will remain with us for some time to come, as both the problems of unemployment and a better organised bus transport system will need considerable time and effort even to prevent the situation from worsening still further before attempting to resolve the problems.' May I proceed to col. 240?”
“75 million trips for a population of 2.2 million people. Even had there been no upward revision of the bus fares on 10th February last month, Members of Parliament would be voicing their grievances during Budget time. This is not the first occasion that I have had to face criticisms voiced by hon. Members of this House on the state of the public bus service, and the Member for Katong had occasion to refer to remarks made by me in May 1968 and concluded with the words "it is unfortunate that things should have come to an even sorrier pass today, six years later". It would be useful to refer to relevant sections of Hansard as to what I said and the context in which it was made to get a proper perspective. The Member was referring to the debate on the President's Address on 14th May, 1968, and cols. 235-6 of Hansard go as follows: `Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Member for Ulu Pandan (then MP was Mr Lee Teck Him] has raised two important issues during the current debate on the President's Speech which fall within the scope of my new portfolio, the Ministry of Communications, may I be permitted to inform the House, as well as members of the public, of my views on these subjects? I have arrived at these views in the short period of four weeks since assuming my portfolio. Is nationalisation of bus companies in Singapore the answer to our transport problem as proposed by the Member for Ulu Pandan? Is this the panacea to our transport problem? This was, in fact, one of the recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry set up by the former Labour Front Government in 1955, under the chairmanship of Mr L C Hawkins, a member of the London Transport Executive.”
“In other words, a sum of $400,000 would be needed. SBS has also commissioned its architects to put up plans for a washing depot at Jurong where industrial water is available. But it would not be operationally feasible to set up a centralised washing depot at Jurong for the entire fleet of 1,400 or more buses. Depots for washing buses would also have to be located in areas not served by industrial water. If industrial water is to be used at these other depots, the water would have to be transported in bowsers, each of which would cost $40,000 to $50,000. Storage tanks for the water would also have to be built at each depot. The use of equipment for cleaning the passenger compartments is also being studied, besides just getting people to clean up with brooms and so on. When the washing and cleaning of buses is fully mechanised and the present inefficient and laborious system of washing buses with buckets of water is dispensed with, the fleet of public buses will certainly not do injustice to our clean city. But until then would Members of the House please tolerate our "hippie buses" on the road? Sir, much criticism has been voiced by bus commuters and now even by my colleagues, Members of this House, over the present state of our public bus service. I do not deny that quite a number of the criticisms over the inadequacy of SBS, especially during peak hours, are justified. But to be fair some of the outburst arises from other causes, namely, grievances which our people have been subjected to over the past year, especially in the rising cost of living mainly due to imported inflation and the public bus service happens to be a convenient scapegoat to give vent to their frustrations and bruised feelings as it has to serve the transportation needs of as high as 1.”
“In November, 1973, the Registrar of Vehicles was instructed to hold discussions with the Public Utilities Board (PUB) on the possibility of SBS being allowed to use hosed water from PUB mains to wash buses. The PUB stated that it is its general policy that washing of motor vehicles with hosed water from PUB mains should not be allowed. However, it was observed that refuse vehicles of the Ministry of the Environment were hosed down with water from PUB mains in the Government Transport Centres, at Mackenzie Road, Henderson Road and Tannery Lane. It was explained that if these refuse vehicles were not hosed down daily, they would be too dirty and evil-smelling to go on the roads. A request was made to PUB for a similar exception in the case of the public bus fleet, as the man-hours and operational cost of washing public buses, by hand from buckets of water, for a fleet of 1,400 operational buses would be high, besides being ineffective in view of oil and grease. This request was again rejected by PUB. 7.00 p.m. The PUB, however, agreed to consider allowing mechanical washing of public buses using constant amounts of PUB water per bus, provided the amount of water used for each bus would be acceptable. The Bus Services Reorganisation Committee has accordingly directed SBS to install mechanical washing plants for the cleaning of its buses. These automatic washing equipment would be more efficient and economical in the use of water than high pressure hosing from PUB mains. Studies are also being conducted to install water reclamation systems in these plants to recycle the water used in the washing to reduce the amount of water used. The cost of mechanical washing equipment would be about $40,000 for each washing bay and about 10 of these would be required at various depots.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is a field day for MPs on the Ministry of Communications. As there is a guillotine, and since most of the questions should really come under the Head. Registry of Vehicles, if I am not in a position to answer all of them now I shall endeavour to do so when we come to debate on the Registry of Vehicles tomorrow. I shall however try to cover as much ground as is possible on matters of policy, which is really what is expected in a Budget debate and not questions of detail for answer. Firstly, may I answer the few comments by the Member for Anson in respect of the Singapore Telephone Board. It is not correct to say that the Singapore Telephone Board is not giving enough attention to the rural areas because a very large number of underground cable schemes and exchanges have been implemented and more have been planned to serve the rural areas. Sembawang Exchange will have 2,000 lines, and Woodlands Exchange, 2,000 lines. Others that will be planned are Ama Keng Exchange, which will initially have 1,000 lines and is planned to be in operation in mid-1975; Yio Chu Kang Exchange with a capacity of 4,000 lines will be operational in mid-1976; Ang Mo Kio Exchange with a capacity of 10,000 lines will be in operation by mid-1976; and Changi Exchange is currently being expanded to provide 3,000 lines, in addition to 2,000 lines already in operation. Therefore, the rural areas are not being neglected. As I said, Sir, I would like today to touch on one aspect mentioned by the Member for Anson. He mentioned "some of the SBS buses are no better than refuse trucks". May I give an explanation on the sad state of these buses, which I would call "hippie buses" of Singapore?”
“I have already explained, Mr Speaker, Sir, that importers have been told to get the proper documents. If they fail to, whoever buys it is just asking for delay and trouble. If there are instances where the applications were delayed, although they were put in much earlier but were not certified till much later, I would appreciate it if the Member would report such known cases to the Registrar of Vehicles for an investigation to be made. HAWKERS (Registration and resiting) 5. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for the Environment (a) how many hawkers have been registered and how many of them have been resited; (b) how many cases are still under consideration; and (c) if those hawkers affected at development sites will be granted alternative sites until such time as the developments are completed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there should be no delay on the part of the Registry of Vehicles in licensing goods vehicles, if the proper document, i.e. the weight certificate of the goods vehicle, is available to determine its maximum laden weight for purpose of registration. Unfortunately, such proper documents are not available for a large number of imported used or re-conditioned goods vehicles. For such cases, the ROV has requested the local agent to check these vehicles against their manufacturers' specifications and to issue a certificate which is acceptable for registration. For the services performed, a fee of $100 for each vehicle inspected is levied by the agent. Since March, 1973, the agent has issued 987 such certificates for goods vehicles inspected by them. In addition, ROV has, since August, 1973, accepted 152 goods vehicles for registration based on the submission of an extract of registration particulars or plating certificate from the country of origin. The latter measure was undertaken to expedite the registration process. As at 9th March, 1974, the number of vehicles on the waiting list for issue of maximum laden weight certificate by the agent is 227. It has been estimated that the agent could issue up to 20 certificates a week. It should be stated that on 28th March last year, the Registrar of Vehicles did inform representatives of leading importers of used goods vehicles of the need for proper documents to support the registration and licensing of such vehicles. Having these proper documents means the importers need not depend on the certificate issued by the agent and the registration process could then proceed without any delay.”
“Once again, Mr Speaker, Sir, oral answers have been given to the hon. Member in which it has been indicated that SBS invited private motor repairers to deal with the buses. So I think I should leave it to them.”
“Sir, explanation has already been given as to the reasons why SBS would appear to be in difficulties and the efforts that are being made to put them right. It is no use for the Member for Kallang to repeat this matter over and over again.”
“None of SBS's buses has, since 1st November last year, been found by the ROV at the inspections to be so unroadworthy that they had to be scrapped. It should be stated, however, that 107 buses out of a total registered fleet of 2,081 under the name of SBS are officially laid-up, i.e, these 107 buses or 5.1 per cent are taken off the roads because they are either unroadworthy due to being badly damaged beyond repair or have exceeded the permissible age limit for public buses. They will be replaced under the replacement programme of 400 buses within three years from 1st November, 1973.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, all public service vehicles, including buses, are required to undergo inspection by the Registry of Vehicles (ROV) once every six months. They are summoned for such inspection according to a schedule drawn up by the ROV. At these half-yearly inspections, the following are the main items checked: - (a) Steering; (b) Brakes; (c) Lighting; (d) Tyres; (e) Exhaust; (f) Chassis, Body and Suspension (g) Engine and Transmission (h) Accessories - e.g, rear view mirror, windscreen wiper, horn, speedometer; (i) General - e.g, impending failure of the vehicle or any of its equipment or fittings, condition of seating, paint work, bodywork and general condition. Any bus which does not meet the minimum standards at these inspections is required to have the defects rectified and be presented again for re-inspection. There have been instances of buses having to be presented several times for re-inspection before being certified fit for use on the road. Sometimes, buses with serious defects are ordered to be scrapped. Since the Singapore Bus Service Ltd, began operations in November last year and is a carry-over of operations from the three bus companies, a total of 1,047 of its buses were scheduled by the ROV for the half-yearly inspections up to the end of last month, February. Of these, 778 buses passed the inspections and were certified fit. Of the other 269, about 215 did not appear for inspection. This sometimes happens when a bus is undergoing repair or overhaul. In such cases, the ROV usually summons the bus for inspection again after one month. About 7 per cent of these buses which were summoned and appeared for inspection did not pass for a variety of defects. The owners were required to have the defects rectified and to present them again for reinspection.”
“The answer, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that the first campaign is still on.”
“I believe the Member wants the number of prosecutions. The Traffic Police are unable to give the figures of those cases which have been prosecuted only. However, SBS itself has on record that, from November last year to February this year, they were prosecuted on six occasions and paid out $54,465 in composition for smoky exhausts.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I first mention that statistics on the number of cases of buses emitting excessive smoke are kept by the Traffic Police, of the Ministry of Home Affairs, and not the Registry of Vehicles. Unfortunately, as statistics for such cases prior to April 1970 (i.e., start of the three-year White Paper plan for the reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service of Singapore) were not kept separately, it would be necessary for the Traffic Police to manually run through their records of every case of all traffic offences to obtain the statistics prior to April 1970. I therefore regret I am not able to provide statistics for five years prior to amalgamation, as requested by the Member for Kallang at present. However, from the statistics made available by the Traffic Police the number of SBS buses booked for smoky exhausts for the four months since it began operations in November last year, as compared to the number of buses of the three former bus companies booked for the same offence between April 1970 and October 1973, is as follows:- Number of Buses Booked: 3 Former Period Bus SBS (4th months) Companies November 1973 - February 1974 1,247 July 1973 - October 1973 1,500 March 1973 - June 1973 1,029 November 1972 - February 1973 585 July 1972 - October 1972 672 March 1972 - June 1972 1,119 November 1971 - February 1972 984 July 1971 - October 1971 853 March 1971 - June 1971 527 November 1970 - February 1971 454 July 1970 - October 1970 470 April 1970 - June 1970 961 (3 months only) These are statistics of the number of buses booked, which include those cases where action is pending, those where composition has been offered but not yet accepted, those where composition has been offered and accepted, and those which have been prosecuted.”
“When we launched the supplementary public transport service, we did say that we would issue as many as 1,000 licences, of which 600 would be for school buses and 400 for lorries. The number of applications that have been received and approved was about 300. So another 700 licences could still he issued, provided the applicants would send in their applications. SINGAPORE BUS SERVICE LIMITED (Prosecutions for smoky buses) 2. Encik Abdul Aziz Karim asked the Minister for Communications the number of prosecutions during the four months from November 1973 to February 1974 inclusive against the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited for using buses emitting smoke beyond the permissible limit on public roads; and the combined figures for the component companies of the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited for the corresponding periods during the five years before the amalgamation.”
“I think there has been some effect on the takings of the SBS as a result of the inauguration of the supplementary bus transport service.”
“Sir, apparently the Member did not follow my oral answers. It has already been indicated that the Government is not going to allow a bus fare revision without making sure that the management of the company is able to account for its revenue and expenditure to the satisfaction of the Government. So it does not necessarily follow that the company is allowed to revise the bus fares by just putting hands up, as alleged by the Member for Kallang. They `have to justify it. It is too early now to talk of further bus fare increases when the new fares have just operated for only one month.”
“Sir, that is a long-winded statement rather than a question because most of the questions posed have already been answered. The Member is just repeating himself.”
“Sir, I cannot proceed further on that matter. If there are any details which the Member would like to ask, I will be pleased to supply.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with all the best possible will in the world, that promise cannot be made because the bus company runs on oil fuel and that is not within our control. As everybody knows, the whole world waits to hear whether the oil prices will be increased.”
“The tragedy is that the Member does not know when everybody knows. PROBATION AND AFTERCARE SERVICE (Staff turnover) 4. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Social Affairs what the turnover rate is in respect of staff in the Probation and Aftercare Service; and if consideration is being given to a review of the terms and conditions of service of the staff in this section of his Ministry.”
“As you yourself have said, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been saying that for days. But admittedly he is so impervious that nothing goes in.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member for Kallang used the words "human cargo". I would prefer to use the term "human passengers". As I have stated, it is the wish of a person to travel either by bus, school bus, taxi or lorry, and he cannot thus be termed as "cargo" because he has the option. It is admitted that, because of the incapacity of the SBS to provide an adequate number of buses for peak hour travel, supplementary schemes have to be put forward, and we should leave it to the commuters to decide how they wish to travel for the money they are prepared to pay. Service is not for free, whether they travel by taxi, public bus, school bus or lorry. Encik Abdul Aziz: Is it admitted that there are not enough buses right now?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, use of goods vehicles to transport passengers to and from work is nothing new. I am sure the hon. Member for Kallang would have seen, not so long ago, the numerous lorries carrying hundreds of civilian employees of the British military establishments to and from work everyday. Even today, if he were to go to Jurong, and I believe he does go to Jurong, he would see lorry after lorry carrying workers to and from work in the industrial estate. The hon. Member would be pleased to know that, to date, 103 goods vehicles (all lorries) have been issued with licences for the carriage of passengers under the Supplementary Public Transport Service Scheme; of these, 97 are for Adult Worker Contract (AWC) permits and six Public Transport (PT) licences. Those who do not wish to travel on the public bus services provided by Singapore Bus Service Ltd (SBS), or school buses under the Supplementary Public Transport Service, scheme B, should not be prevented from travelling in goods vehicles if they so wish. Whether this supplementary service of goods vehicles being used for carriage of passengers would remain a permanent state of affairs depends on whether it would continue to be needed. Unless peak hour travel demand can be spread through staggered working hours, car-pooling, park-and-ride scheme and other measures, there would continue to be a need for the supporting role of the Supplementary Public Transport Service for peak hour travel, for the foreseeable future.”
“As I have said, Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member is unable to follow the answers but keeps on talking of monopoly and nationalisation. He is obsessed by these two words. It is the duty of this Government to ensure that public transport is the best that is possible in the circumstances, and every effort will be made to ensure that this is so.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, evidently the Member for Kallang has not taken note of the answers to his questions. He has not, therefore, asked questions relevant to the answers. He goes off at a tangent. The reply given to his Oral Question on private car ownership was that all car owners had been given notice that taxes would go up and that it would be costly to maintain a private car. And if they do not take heed of such notice, then I suppose they might go to the Member for Kallang and make a plea at his Meet-the-people sessions. I cannot afford to look at one aspect of the problem only but in the national interest, so that our City will progress economically. Just because he owns a car, it does not mean that he has the right to go anywhere he pleases. That is why we have introduced the reserved bus lanes so that priority is given to the public bus, not the private car.”
“My colleague has also suggested that there are Comfort taxis of the NTUC. I hope the Member is encouraging the people to travel by the NTUC Comfort taxis. There is a long string of alternatives. If people do not wish to travel by SBS buses, they do not have to. There are so many other alternative forms of transport available that the SBS will have to fight for its survival.”
“Now that the Member has elaborated on the question, I am in a position to answer him. It is true that if we discourage private car ownership, there is the tendency for people to travel by public bus. But that is only one alternative. There is also the car pooling system whereby one private car can be used to carry four passengers instead of the present average of 1.3 passengers. The second alternative is that there will be this peripheral car park scheme. Car owners going into this CBD area would have to park their cars in the peripheral car parks and then jump on to the special shuttle bus service, not necessarily the SBS. It has never been indicated that this shuttle bus service would be run by the SBS. The third alternative is the supplementary public bus service or, as somebody has called them, the school buses and lorry buses. They are available and they are a great boon to the travelling public.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will answer the question, but it looks as if it has arisen out of the subject of private car ownership, and comes back again to the SBS.”
“By a combination of taxes on cars, parking fees, restricted entry into the CBD during peak hours and peripheral parking and reserved bus lanes, we must and can ensure maximum freedom of access to the CBD. This is essential to the vitality of the CBD and on our whole economy. An improvement in the public bus service is vital. It is the mainstay of our public transport system and would continue to be important even after we have a Mass Rapid Transit System. This may be in the late 1980's. The Singapore Bus Service Ltd is making the effort to match the Government's initiatives to get the bus services to meet ever higher needs. This year, there should be further improvement in the number of buses on the road and their standard of maintenance. The more difficult problem is to improve performance of bus drivers and conductors. Safer driving and more courteous service need a longer period of re-education. However, courtesy is a two-way process. Considerate conduct and co-operation of the commuters is a necessary contribution to a better bus service.”
“In addition, the reserved bus lanes which have been introduced and are being extended will give buses the priority they deserve on our limited road space. Whether or not there will be more drastic measures to check further increases in ownership of private cars depends on how many new cars will be registered this year, and in the years ahead. As incomes grow, so has the car owning group. The new taxes imposed since January, together with the steep increases in petrol prices caused by the doubling of the price of crude oil since January this year, appears to have had some effect in slowing down the growth of car owners for the time being. However, even with the present number of cars, it is already planned to have a park-and-ride scheme. Commuters will be able to park their cars in fringe car parks and take a special shuttle bus into or out of the Central Business District (CBD) during peak periods. This would help to cut down traffic congestion during peak periods. Car pooling and staggered working hours will also greatly reduce congestion during peak periods. As at 28th February, there were 137,470 private cars registered for use on our roads. If the growth rate of 17 per cent per annum in new registrations in the last three years continues, it will be impossible to solve our traffic problems. We cannot increase our roads by a similar percentage each year. And in the CBD, the increase of road capacity is very limited, despite road widening and one-way traffic flows. The longer we delay action, the more painful and costlier the solutions will be. When car taxes went up in October 1972, all car owners were put on notice. All present and future car owners have to recognise the limits of our road capacity, especially in the CBD.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is the deliberate policy of Government to restrain the growth of the private motor car population in Singapore. When new rates of taxes on motor cars were introduced in October 1972, it was then announced that the higher rates of taxes were made to discourage private car ownership and not for the purpose of raising revenue. However, the number of new motor car registrations for the period October 1972 to September 1973 was 20,459 which represented a 25 per cent increase over the new registrations for the corres- ponding period from October 1971 to September 1972. We cannot sustain such a high growth rate except at tremendous economic and social cost. Therefore, taxes on cars had to be raised again in January this year. In the statement announcing these tax increases, the Finance Ministry again reiterated that this was not done to raise revenue but to discourage private car ownership. It was also stressed that if these increases did not have the desired effect, further revisions of the tax structure would be required until a balance is reached. I am happy to say that, this time, new registrations of private cars for January showed a 50 per cent reduction over new registrations in January last year, while new registrations in February were down by 28 per cent over new registrations in February 1973. It is regrettably true that the present public bus services need further improvement, especially service during peak hour travel. We have authorised a Supplementary Public Transport Service with 259 vehicles (of which 253 are school and other buses and six are goods vehicles) to provide an express, limited stop service, during peak hour periods.”
“Sir, the name SBS means that they carry passengers. The following Questions stood on the Order Paper -- 5. Mr J. F. Conceicao: To ask the Minister for Health and Home Affairs how action is taken against vehicles displaying non-Singapore licence plates which are found breaking traffic regulations; and what course of action is taken when a report from a member of the public is received against such vehicles. 6. Mr J. F. Conceicao: To ask the Minister for Finance if he will explain the principal functions and highlight the main activities and achievements, in the year 1973, of the Weights and Measures Unit of his Ministry. 7. Mr J. F. Conceicao: To ask the Minister for Finance what sort of joint training schemes were conducted through joint industrial training centres in 1973; what further activities are being planned; how responsibility for those schemes is distributed between the Government and the private sector; if there is any intention to modify the basis of co-operation; and in what ways his Ministry supports other forms of industrial training. 3.29 p.m.”
“Sir, I fully agree with the Member that there should be general improvement all round - buses, bus commuters and the public.”
“The purpose of all this is not only to monitor the progress of SBS and set the targets for its management to attain, but also to ensure that the revenue it collects is properly spent. There is a limit to the return on its net assets in buses, which shareholders in SBS may earn. Supervision and scrutiny are necessary to ensure that revenue and expenditure are properly accounted for, and that there is no wasteful expenditure, no corruption, no dishonesty. The Government cannot allow the management of the bus company any fare revisions that would go into wasteful or unjustified expenditure through inefficient management or corrupt practices. The management of SBS would be improved and made organisationally efficient. The BSRC and I intend to see that it will stay so. Meantime, this supervision is giving a team of Government officers experience in detecting flaws in the running of a public bus operation of the scale of SBS. This body of supervisory men will develop the expertise to help ensure that public transport will be run efficiently, not at a loss, nor allowed to exploit the public. For the next three years, the job is for the SBS to get at least 1,000 new buses on the roads, repair the 400 buses that are now immobilised, keep all under regular maintenance, improve driving standards for safety of passengers and others on the roads, more courtesy and consideration by conductors. The best way to achieve this is through the BSRC. Nationalisation will create more problems than we have the capacity at present to solve.”
“Less than three years before that, there were 11 companies, including the former Singapore Traction Company (STC). Then, none of them was operating more than 170 buses, except for the STC which was operating about 500 buses. If Government were to take over the public bus operations, it would have to use the present management of SBS. To do this effectively would be a problem with the existing manpower resources of the Government. No government officer has had experience of operating a bus company. The nearest to such a task is the officer in charge of the Singapore Armed Forces, Transport Division, and that took a great deal of effort to build up from scratch. The Government is conscious of the responsibility to ensure that SBS, the sole operator of public bus services, must be properly managed and must provide adequate essential service. But it cannot be expected to do this when it is operating at a loss. Even before SBS began operations on 1st November, 1973, I established the Bus Services Reorganisation Committee (BSRC). The BSRC, under my personal supervision, receives daily returns from SBS on the bus operations - how many buses were operating for the day, how many buses broke down, how many are in the workshop, how much fare was collected, etc. In addition, monthly reports on the bus operations, as well as monthly financial statements, are submitted by SBS. As from November last year, SBS is also required to send in certified quarterly financial reports. All these returns and reports are analysed and studied. Officers of the Registry of Vehicles cross check by making personal visits to the depots from time to time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have stated that there will be no advantage in the Government taking over the public bus services now operated by Singapore Bus Service Ltd (SBS) which has been in operation for only four months. SBS has shown itself willing to meet the targets and take such measures as my Ministry and the Bus Services Reorganisation Committee (BSRC) have asked. It should be given time to settle down, tighten management, improve maintenance and increase bus services. In answer to the question as posed by the hon. Member, may I point out that Singapore Airlines (SIA) is not a new airline but has developed its management and organisation over one quarter of a century. The Government has been associated directly with its management in the course of this development for many years. Our port has a history of more than one century; in fact, 150 years. Telecommunications in. Singapore goes back into the last century. The Government has been involved in the management of these for many years, and built up on inherited organisations like the Oriental Telephone and Electric Company, Cable and Wireless Ltd, etc. In the case of shipping, there is local talent with the knowledge and experience to operate a national shipping line. Shipping is as old as the history of Singapore. There are numerous shipping companies in Singapore where experience in operating a major international shipping line can be obtained. Unfortunately the position with the public bus services is different. We now have only one company, namely SBS, operating the public bus services with a fleet of 2,000 buses. All the local talent with experience in operating public bus services is in SBS. Prior to November 1973, there were three bus companies. None of them operated more than 1,000 buses.”
“net book value of buses less outstanding hire purchase payments). To get the bus services improved to fair standards to meet the increased passenger load would require net assets of some $90 million. No bus operator can be expected to sink in this capital if they cannot see any hope of even covering costs. Subsidies to help meet operating costs would not result in the improvement of bus services. Capital investments of $65 million would have to be made. Adult bus commuters are already subsidising school children who travel on concessional 10-cent flat rate to any destination. Indirect subsidies through exemption of diesel fuel tax and other taxes, as has been suggested, would not have any significant effect. Tax on diesel fuel accounts for only 0.8 per cent of SBS's total operating costs. Other taxes and licence fees make up 10.7 per cent. Together, they only account for 11.5 per cent of the total operating costs. These go towards general revenue to pay for making roads and maintaining them, bus bays and shelters, bus termini, etc. Wear and tear by buses are very heavy on surfaces of roads and termini. For example, after the Singapore Traction Company (STC) packed up in December 1971, the former three bus companies, now known as SBS, were allowed to temporarily garage the SBS buses at the National Stadium car park during the night. When the bus companies stopped garaging their buses there months later, it cost them $123,000 to make up and restore the surface of the car park worn out by the buses. Sir, that completes my answer to Question 3. I now proceed to answer Question 4.”
“These cost factors are: - (a) the increasing fuel oil price which rose last December and has gone up again this month following doubling of the crude oil price in January - SBS's fuel bill will be up this month by 105 per cent as compared to pre-November 1973; (b) the increasing wage bill which went up in February following implementation of an interim wage supplement of $25 per worker per month and will rise still further in July when the NWC makes its next recommendation - SBS's wage bill, including CPF contributions and related items, went up by 18 per cent as compared to pre-November 1973. New projections which take account of these additional cost factors and an, annual growth in passenger trips of 4 per cent, as against 5.5 per cent by SGV-Goh (Pte) Ltd indicate a loss to SBS over the 15 months from April 1973 to June 1974 of $17.5 million, if the three-year old fare structure remained unchanged,. That the old fares were uneconomic is corroborated by the poor response to the Supplementary Public Transport Service (SPTS). Up to 6th February, in the three weeks during which operators were invited to submit applications, few applications by bus owners and lorry owners were received. On 6th February an announcement was made that the fares chargeable under the SPTS, which were based on the public bus fares structure, would be revised in line with the revision of the public bus fares. Even after this increase, only 189 buses and 134 lorries have joined this supplementary transport scheme. Is it fair and reasonable that the public should pay to financially sustain the bus company or pay for its capital infrastructure? The answer is that SBS started operations with a paid-up capital of $11 million and net assets of $30 million (i.e.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the legal authority for raising fares is in the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 22). The Road Traffic (Taxis and Buses -Maximum Rates of Hire) (Amendment) Order, 1974, published on 9th February in the Government Gazette Subsidiary Legislation Supplement No. 7 of 1974 issued under that Act, authorises the revision effective from 10th February. The reasons why the revision was necessary were given at length in my Ministry's Statements of 3rd and 20th February. Replies by the Secretary of the Bus Services Reorganisation Committee to editorials, reports and letters in the Press also detailed the reasons. I am sure Members of the House would not wish to have them repeated here. Whether the fare revision should have been allowed when the bus service does not meet commuter demands really begs the question. If the old bus fares, which had been in existence for almost three years from April 1971, had continued unchanged, and there had been no interim $25 monthly allowance per worker, and no increase in diesel fuels and other lubricants, spare parts and tyres, Singapore Bus Service Ltd. (SBS) would have had an expected profit in the year ending March this year of $133,000 but losses in the year ending March 1975 and 1976 of $29.7 million and $42.3 million respectively. In these circumstances, it would be difficult to expect the public bus service to improve. No one will throw good money after bad. The projections of profit and loss, just quoted, came from professional management consultants, SGV-Goh (Pte) Ltd, who were commissioned by SBS. However, these projections were made in November last year and did not take into account additional cost factors arising later.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it looks as if I have to answer Questions 3 and 4 at the same time, as it should then cover all the points that the Member has raised, whether they be on Questions 2, 3, or 4.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member is anticipating his Questions 3 and 4. He seems to be very impatient to get on with them. With your permission, Sir, we may as well get on with Questions 3 and 4, and the Member can ask his supplementary questions ad infinitum.”
“Member that measures are in hand to ensure an adequate public bus service, supplemented by other forms of public transport. Further measures are being studied to improve the peak hour congestion in the CBD. A World Bank mission, which was in Singapore recently in connection with the Mass Transit Study project, indicated considerable interest in the work of the Road Transport Action Committee and Bus Services Reorganisation Committee and gave assurance of favourable consideration by the Bank to loan financing of projects undertaken by these two Committees.”