Louis spoke up about child safety seats in his Point-to-Point Passenger Transport Industry Bill Speech as follow:

Louis: I also recommend that we require both street-hail and ride-hail services to have child safety seats, as many Members have previously stated as well. It is currently illegal for private cars, including ride-hail services, to ferry children under 1.35 metres without a child restraint appropriate for the child’s height and weight, a booster seat to supplement the seat belt, or an approved adjustable seat belt. Oddly, the street-hail services are exempt from this requirement.

Sir, a Toyota Vios is a Toyota Vios, regardless of whether it is registered as a street-hail service or ride-hail service. This inconsistency in application of the law is not in the interest of the child. Why should there be a compromise on child safety for street-hail? From a safety perspective, there should be equal treatment across the board. Will the Ministry consider harmonising this requirement for both street-hail and ride-hail services?

Lastly, while I agree that it is necessary for the PTC to have oversight of prices, it is important not to overreach. The Bill gives the PTC the discretion to set a pricing policy for fares charged by ride-hailing operators. I would like to clarify when and under what conditions PTC will step in to regulate. What are their considerations and guiding principles of how they will regulate ride-hail services? What are the limits to the powers of the PTC in relation to ride-hail services?

Dr Janil Puthucheary (for the Minister for Transport): On child seats, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Dennis Tan suggested requiring taxis and PHCs to be fitted with child seats when ferrying children below 1.35 metres in height. I must say that when we started consultations for this Bill, there was the sense that this was perhaps something that we could move on and was something we wanted to move on. So, we consulted the public and the stakeholders quite extensively. The opinions were very divided; and it was not that the opinions were divided for one group of people against the other. Amongst the general commuting public, the opinion was divided; amongst the operators, the opinion was divided and amongst the drivers, the opinion was divided.

We were trying to but we have not been able to engineer a compromise in time for this Bill and we thought we would move ahead with these provisions in the Bill today. The matter is live, we continue the conversation, we will study the matter further. One of the reasons why we thought we could move forward with the Bill prior to settling this matter is that there are already the opportunities today for parents to ensure that their children are in child seats. When they book a private hire car, they can indicate that they need child seats. Secondly, they have the ability to bring their own seats with them when they take a taxi. So, one of the considerations was that child seats today are already available and accessible to parents. The argument can be made that it needs to be more widely available, and that has been made by some Members. I actually personally agree. The question is, how to make sure that that is something that the industry can carry and the market can support. We will continue to work on this and I hope Members would be able to support us going forward in trying to achieve that. 

Louis: I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply with regard to the child seat. I am a big fan of public consultation and trying to engineer a compromise. But in this case, it really is a safety issue. I am just wondering whether we should try to compromise when it comes to safety. If you are in a private car and your child is not in a car seat, for repeated offence, you could go to jail. We have such a heavy penalty because of safety. I am just wondering how does the safety disappear when that same car becomes a taxi.

I recognise my colleague, Mr Ang Hin Kee's point about the cost. We are on surge pricing now. For me to go home now is $27; for me to have a Grab car with a car seat is actually only $2 more. For a Grab car with a car seat for a child aged one to three is extra $5. So, it is not three times the price. If it is $27, and for a car seat, it becomes $60 or $80, of course, any reasonable person would say no. But in this case, if $2 more could save the life of your child, I am not sure what is holding us back.

Dr Janil Puthucheary:  Indeed, and as I have made quite clear, I agree with Mr Ng on this, and it is my personal stance. One point is that, it is not that there is no safety. It is possible to assure the safety of that child, and that is currently a choice that parents have to assert. Bring a child seat along into a taxi. It is not that it is not possible. It is whether people choose to do so.

I would like to do more work in this space to see how far and how quickly we can perhaps engage with operators, drivers. The difficulty for taxis though is, truly, that it means they have to carry something with them at all times, and this significantly restricts the options that they have in terms of what they can have as customers.

I would also point out that in our public consultation, a fair amount of the concerns came from the commuting public themselves. If you have three children, as I do, of different ages, and each of them needs a different-sized car seat, potentially, it would be impossible for us to take a taxi unless the taxi had three different child seats in it. If you are a family of five, then you would have to split up into two taxis. But if you are an individual adult looking after three children, it would mean that it would then be impossible for you to get into a taxi which only routinely carries one child seat. And then, what do you do with your other two children?

These are some of the scenarios that were thrown up by the commuting public in our public consultation. And so, we were unable to engineer a compromise. We do feel that there is an opportunity for safety to be secured, as is today. Yes, it could be better and we would like to do more work on it. And I would encourage Mr Louis Ng to participate and help us to get this work done.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year in the past 10 years, what is number and percentage of infants and toddlers injured in motor accidents who were not secured in child seats.

Mr K Shanmugam (MHA): Traffic Police does not have the breakdown of data for the past 10 years. 

For 2017 and 2018, an average of 53 infants and toddlers of age three years and below each year were injured in accidents while in motor vehicles. Twenty-seven percent of the infants and toddlers were in taxis or public buses, for which the use of child seats is not required. Fifteen percent of them were not in child seats. Seven percent of them were in child seats. For the remaining 51%, Traffic Police's records did not track whether they were in child seats. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Prime Minister whether he will allow parents to use the savings in the Child Development Account (CDA) to purchase child car seats.

Mrs Josephine Teo (for the Prime Minister): The Child Development Account (CDA) is meant to support the developmental needs of children, such as education and healthcare. Parents can use the CDA to pay for expenses at Approved Institutions such as child care centres, kindergartens, hospitals, clinics and pharmacies.

In addition to the CDA, the Government provides a Baby Bonus Cash Gift of $8,000 to $10,000 per child, which parents can use to pay for other items such as child car seats.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for Health (a) whether hospitals collect data on the number of children injured in motor accidents as a result of not being secured in child seats; (b) if so, what is the number and percentage of children involved in such accidents in each of the past 10 years with a breakdown according to the age groups of (i) below one year old (ii) between one and two years old and (iii) above two years old; and (c) if not, whether hospitals will start collecting such data.

Mr Gan Kim Yong (MOH): Based on data¹ from the National Trauma Registry, between 2012 and 2018, the number of children aged 9 years and below² who were treated in public hospitals for traumatic injury due to a motor vehicular accident ranged between 106 and 225 cases per year. We are not able to ascertain from the Registry's data whether children injured in motor vehicular accidents were a direct result of them not being secured in child car seats and/or seatbelts.

Among those treated in public hospitals, more than half were known to have used car seats and/or restraints, while the status of the remainder is unknown.

Motorists and their passengers should use appropriate restraints at all times while riding in motor vehicles.

¹ Data available from 2012 when the National Trauma Registry was set up. Data on the use of child seat/seatbelt were based on reports by patients or parents.   

² The law mandates that a person below 1.35 metres in height should be properly secured by an approved child restraint appropriate to their height and weight, or a body restraining seat belt when seated on a booster seat cushion or when using a seat with an approved adjustable seat belt when travelling in a motor vehicle. Reference: Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276) Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Wearing of Seat Belts) Rules 2011 S 688/2011. Based on height-for-age charts for boys and girls aged 4 to 18 years old, the median height-for-age is 1.35m at an age of 9 years. Source: Health Booklet, Health Promotion Board.  

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) for each year in the past five years, how many drivers have been caught for not properly securing passengers who are below 1.35 metres in height with an approved child restraint; (b) how does the Ministry plan to raise awareness about the legal requirement and safety benefits of using child car seats and booster seats; and (c) whether the Ministry intends to strengthen legislation on the requirement to use such seats.

Mr K Shanmugam (MHA): The number of violations where passengers below 1.35 metres in height were not properly secured with an approved child restraint or body-restraining seat belt are appended at Table 1.

In its talks and engagements with the community, Traffic Police (TP) regularly emphasises the need for drivers and passengers to be properly secured. TP also conducts regular enforcement actions. Under the Road Traffic Act, drivers will be guilty of an offence if they fail to ensure that passengers below the height of 1.35 metres wear an approved child restraint or body-restraining seat belt. The composition sums for this offence were raised on 1 April 2019 from $120 to $150 for light vehicles, and from $150 to $200 for heavy vehicles. Offenders will also receive three demerit points. 

As the composition sums for the offence were recently increased, MHA will monitor the situation and consider further action where necessary.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Starting 5 March 2020, passengers in SMRT’s taxis can use booster seats for their young children at no charge.

This six-month pilot programme by SMRT Taxis is supported by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and aims to encourage greater use of booster seats among children aged 4 to 7 who are under 1.35m for safer journeys.

During the pilot, SMRT will progressively equip its fleet of 2,800 taxis with booster seats.

Louis asked the Minister for Health (a) whether public hospitals are now collecting public health data on the number of children injured in motor accidents as a result of not being secured in child car seats; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if so, whether the Government will use the data in the review of its policies on child car seats in taxis.

Mr Gan Kim Yong (MOH): Under the Road Traffic Act (RTA), a person below 1.35 metres in height should be properly secured by an approved child restraint appropriate to their height and weight, or a body restraining seat belt when seated on a booster seat cushion or when using a seat with an approved adjustable seat belt when travelling in a motor vehicle. 

Over the past five years, data from the public acute hospitals showed that of the children aged 10 and below¹ who were treated at public acute hospitals for injuries due to motor vehicular accidents, about 35% reported (by patient or parents) that child car seats and/or seatbelts² were used. There is no data on whether or not child car seats and/or seatbelts were used for the remaining 65% of cases. The data does not show whether the injury sustained from motor vehicle accidents was a direct result of not using child car seats and/or seatbelts. 

Nonetheless, it is well established in international literature that the use of appropriate protective gear and child restraints such as car safety seats, booster seats and seat belts when travelling in motorised vehicles is potentially life-saving and reduces the risk of sustaining severe injuries. Therefore, the Government consistently recommends motorists and their passengers to use appropriate restraints at all times while riding in motor vehicles.

Taxis are exempted from the child seat rule under the RTA because they can be street-hailed, and it is not practical to expect taxis to be sufficiently equipped with child seats at all times to cater to families of different sizes and children of different ages, while providing sufficient boot space for passengers' needs. On the other hand, private hire cars, which must be pre-booked, allow passengers to indicate if they require child seats at the point of booking. The current approach for taxis and private hire cars strikes a balance between safety and practicality. 

¹ Source: Health Booklet (2002), Health Promotion Board. Based on height-for-age charts for boys and girls aged 4 to 18 years old, the median height-for-age is 1.35m for age 9 to 10 years old.   

² Source: National Trauma Registry. Data period: 2015-2019. Data from 2020 was not considered in view that the Circuit Breaker would have impacted the number of cars on the road.   

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide an update on the six-month pilot programme by SMRT Taxis to progressively equip its fleet of 2,800 taxis with booster seats for young children; and (b) whether the pilot will be extended to all taxis companies.

Mr Baey Yam Keng (for the Minister for Transport): Madam, SMRT commenced a six-month Booster Seat Pilot Programme in March 2020, but due to the circuit breaker, it was extended to December 2020.

About 1,750 SMRT taxis were equipped with booster seats for young children. However, the utilisation rate for these booster seats was low, as there were very few requests for the booster seats from commuters. The booster seats remain in the taxis, and SMRT will provide further updates on their usage soon. If there are other taxi companies who are keen to conduct similar pilots, LTA will be glad to consider.

Louis: I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I am just concerned why we are looking at utilisation rate versus safety. We know that children are getting injured because they are not in child car seats during the accident. We know that being in a child car seat can reduce the incidents of death by over 50% if you are in a car seat. So, I urge MOH to look into this as more of a safety issue rather than how many people are going to use it.

Secondly, I know there is a previous MOT reply that it is more practical for taxis to not carry the child car seats. Again, I hope we do not look at it as practicality versus safety. The practicality concerns are addressed already because nowadays, as I have showed the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, the child car seats are really compact; so, it does not take up much space. In fact, some of the booster seats can fit under the driver's seat. So, there is no issue of practicality and again, I hope we look at this at the safety angle.

For private vehicles, if your child is not in a car seat, you could go to jail for it. But somehow, I find it strange that the same car, same model, when it becomes a taxi, the safety considerations just disappear. I hope the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can clarify why.

Mr Baey Yam Keng: I thank the Member for his clarification. As always, every policy needs to strike a good balance, and in this case, for taxi drivers, the cost and also, operational considerations for them. Because taxis are used for livelihood. Taxi drivers make multiple trips throughout the day, serving the diverse needs of different passengers. In fact, we came to this position after public consultation with different stakeholders. Naturally, there was a range of views and one, as advocated by the Member Louis Ng, was that there should not be any compromise. So, all children in all vehicles must be in a booster seat or seat harness.

But taxi operators did highlight the constraints because taxis need to satisfy a boot size requirement for luggage or things carried by passengers. If we add on the booster seat requirement, it may pose a challenge, especially for the new hybrid car models which tend to have a smaller boot.

I thank the Member for showing me a compact booster seat that may be easier to store, but we must also look at – if the rule was or the law was implemented on taxis, it means that every child passenger in all taxis must be seated on a booster seat. First, it is not feasible for taxis to be fully equipped with different permutations of child restraints to cater to the children who may board the taxi. Also, this current exemption will facilitate taxis to offer street hail service for commuters with young children. Because the "flag, board and go" nature of street hails will be slowed down when the taxi drivers need to fix up the booster seats when stopping alongside the road.

This also may lead to some unhappiness among families with multiple young children, because they will need multiple taxis as there may not be sufficient child restraints in a single vehicle; or a larger capacity taxi with the various seats. So, it means that higher costs will be incurred on the families. And I do not think it is wise to impose this during this current economic situation.

But, parents have option of using private hire cars, or PHCs, already, as they are included in this Act. Because PHCs are pre-booked, the passengers can indicate upfront, the seats required and the drivers have ample notice to prepare the seats for the passengers. Therefore, PHCs are included. Today, most if not, all parents of young children should be quite savvy in using ride-hailing apps.

Therefore, I seek the Member's and parents' understanding that the current position does offer options and it strikes a good balance. 

Louis: I agree with Senior Parliamentary Secretary that there is a cost concern, but I hope then it is not the third element where it is cost versus safety. I am speaking up for the private hire drivers as well. We make it compulsory for them, for PHCs that they have to be in car seats. Then again, it is a bit strange that for taxis, it is not. The rationale given is because taxis do street hails. But really, how many street hails are there nowadays, for the taxis? I think a lot of them are based on bookings as well. 

For parents with young children, I really doubt that in today's context, they would actually do street hail. They would also book the taxis rather than go down on the streets and try and flag one down. 

Mr Baey Yam Keng: I thank the Member for his push for this. Safety for all people, especially young children, is important. MOT will continue to monitor the situation. I think while safety is important, but we really also need to consider other implications, especially when it affects the livelihood of people.

One option we could look at, I think, if we see that there is a need for it, would be good to look at maybe ride-hail type of journeys to look into. But we will continue to consult and work with the different stakeholders as we look into this area.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Safety of Children Seated on Parents' Laps While Travelling in Taxis

Louis asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry considers it safe for a child to be seated on his or her parent’s lap while travelling in a taxi.

Mr Ong Ye Kung (MOT): When it comes to road safety, the answer is not a straightforward yes or no, unlike say, extreme sports or stunts. There are all kinds of precautions to keep motorists and their passengers safe – good traffic rules, stringent standards in awarding drivers’ licences, effective traffic management systems, enforcement, and most of all, drivers exercising defensive driving. I know the Member feels strongly about making child seats compulsory in taxis, and if this rule can be implemented without significant costs and inconvenience to passengers and taxi drivers, LTA would certainly have done it. But as we have explained before, the matter is not as straight forward, and we will have to continue to monitor the situation and review the rule periodically.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Check out the discussion on this topic on Louis’s Facebook post here.

Number of Accidents Involving Passenger Cars, Private Hire Cars and Taxis

Louis asked the Minister for Transport for each year in the past five years (a) what is the number of accidents reported for (i) passenger cars (ii) private-hire cars and (iii) taxis; (b) what is the number of accidents involving injuries reported for (i) passenger cars (ii) private-hire cars and (iii) taxis; and (c) what is the number of accidents involving fatalities reported for (i) passenger cars (ii) private-hire cars and (iii) taxis.

Mr Ong Ye Kung (MOT): The statistics requested by the member are detailed in Tables 1 and 2 below.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Check out the discussion on this topic on Louis’s Facebook post here.