Taxi becomes public transportation??

[Tommy]

국회에서 택시법이 통과된 가운데 정부가 거부권을 검토 중인 것으로 알려졌습니다.

복수의 매체들은 청와대 관계자의 말을 인용해 지난 해 31일 국회 본회의를 통과한 택시법(대중교통 육성 및 이용촉진법 개정안)에 대한 거부권을 검토 중이라고 보도했습니다.

국회 통과가 되었지만 비난여론이 많아 아직 최종 결정이 난상태가 아닌데요, 여러분은 택시 대중교통법 찬성이십니까, 반대이십니까? 아래 Pros, Cons 아래에 여러분의 소중한 찬반 이유 댓글(in English)을 달아주세요~

To deny the rare display of bipartisanship would be a slap in the face, but to agree to the new taxi bill, a chain of actions could be triggered to hurt the government’s commitment to fiscal health.

With less than two months remaining in office, President Lee Myung-bak is faced with the tough choice of whether to sign a new taxi regulation into law, which will test his finesse for statesmanship one last time.

It was passed in the National Assembly on Jan. 1 with overwhelming bipartisan support. The new bill proposes including taxis within the category of mass public transportation that was previously the exclusive domain of subways, rails and buses.

The bill does so by altering the selection criteria for public transportation. Previously, the necessary requirements to be considered public transportation were an established destination route, fixed time schedule, and being capable of transporting multiple persons.

But the new law drops the requirements for established routes and a time schedule, and instead broadly defines public transportation as that which transports people in a designated area approved for business.

The new legislation designating taxis as public transportation passes the National Assembly on Tuesday. (Yonhap News)

The new legislation passed with support from 222 lawmakers from both the right-leaning Saenuri Party and the left-leaning Democratic United Party, with five opposed, and 28 abstaining.

The shift in designation from a private business to public transportation would allow the taxi industry to receive hefty government subsidies and other benefits totaling 1.9 trillion won ($1.78 billion), which would add significant stress to the nation’s fragile fiscal health.

Under the new designation, the taxi industry would be eligible to receive fuel subsidies, various tax breaks, guaranteed minimum wage, and reduced transportation fares at toll gates, among other benefits.

“It is unfortunate that the law passed despite the government having taken in the National Assembly’s proposal and offered special legislation entailing a comprehensive solution plan as an alternative to the taxi law,” a senior Cheong Wa Dae official told reporters on Wednesday.

Cheong Wa Dae previously opposed the legislation on the grounds that it would upend public transportation policy and financially burden the government during a time of grim economic prospects. But exercising a veto would also present new problems as the law passed with wide bipartisan support.

“We are in a dilemma as the taxi law was passed under agreement between the ruling and opposition parties,” the senior official was quoted as saying.

The Ministry of Land, Transport, and Maritime Affairs also issued a statement on Tuesday expressing a sense of “despondency” and “regret” over the passage of the law. The Ministry is expected to relay its concerns to the presidential office.

“When the taxi law is considered at the Cabinet meeting this month, we will carefully deal it,” the senior official said, adding that the presidential office has not excluded the possibility of vetoing the law.

Critics of the new law point out that taxis account for only 9 percent of total transport, while buses and rail, including subways and trains, account for 31 and 23 percent, respectively. Given the disparity, it would be unfair to include taxis in the same category of mass transportation and bestow similar benefits as buses and rail.

Furthermore, experts say that the new law would not help resolve the fundamental problems affecting the taxi industry.

“The new law is an incongruous solution because it ignores the issue of oversupply (of taxis), which is the biggest problem, and also attempts to solve the financial difficulties of the taxi industry by legislation designating (taxis) as public transportation, which is unprecedented in the world,” said Seong Nak-moon, a senior researcher at the Korea Transport Institute.

The bus industry had threatened to stage an all-out strike ahead of the Dec. 19 presidential election to oppose the inclusion of taxis as public transportation, but lawmakers greased the standoff by including additional subsidies to bus drivers exceeding 260 billion won ($244 million).

The lawmakers’ spendthrift handling of the nation’s purse subsequently generated criticism and accusations that the lawmakers had kowtowed to populism.

“(The passage of the law) will remain as a bad precedent that condones tantrums thrown ahead of elections for the sake of territorial selfishness,” said Park Ji-soon, a law professor at Korea University.

By Samuel Songhoon Lee (songhoon@heraldcorp.com)

[Tommy]

Pros

[페퍼민트]

Do you really think a taxi is only for few people and luxury transportation?
The foundation and meter based fee is much cheeper than other country like UK,western Eroupe.( They dont admit a taxi is public goods)
I think you all have an experience taking taxi for not missing first class eventhough you were too young to earn money.
Also we easily decide to catch a taxi after drinking a lot.
If a taxi is luxury transportation and not for public how could we do that?
Three Boys beside me wearing northface has just caught a taxi. I dont know where they will go.^^

[Tommy]

Cons

[비단별(Jessie)]

I don't agree that the idea of taxi is public transportation. Of course the people who don't own their vehicle might be helped by taxi from time to time & taxi might help the efficiency of conditions of traffic.
But taxi users are limited to certaine people who wants to pay more for their convenience in irregular routes. It means that not eveyone helped by taxi, and it's a matter of choice. It's hard to regard taxi as public goods.
So, I don't want pay more tax to support taxi business, which is more likely to private business rather than public business.

[페퍼민트]

Pros 쓰고보니 내 주장펼치기도 전에 제시의견을 반박하고 있네!ㅎㅎ이런 황망한 경우!

[Hari]

Am... it maybe true that taxi sometimes can turn into an alternative to public transportation. And I also think ppl need Taxi for certain justifiable reasons, meaning its not just a luxury good for public. But if we take a closer look into the problem we r facing, what made taxi drivers stand up and ask for more subsidies was not abt the recognition as a public transportation, but abt securing the minimally required income to get by. And what causes it is simply too many taxis are on the road. Therefore, any policy that can reduce the num of taxis will do the job, and in the case of taxi law,

[Hari]

s gonna only cause greater cost to society and unfair burdens to ppl who are not taxi riders. How to lower the number of taxis is another story but, unless we root out the cause of the problem, Taxi law will only worsen the situation and spawn a bigger disaster for us all to suffer. Taxi s gotta be there to serve public, but we dont need that many and feed them with the tax that can be used for better purpose.

[초이]

It's easy think of it, Taxi is not a public transportaion, isn't it?! And i don't understand that why the governers accepted the rule without our permission, the governer desided it as a political capacity, not the public interests.

[메메]

Wow, it's so good. Such a heated debating atmosphear! Looks good. And each argument is also pretty good.^^