日韩午夜精品视频,欧美私密网站,国产一区二区三区四区,国产主播一区二区三区四区

When the public hearing on raising taxi fares opened in Beijing yesterday, there had already been ample public input via numerous media reports in the past week.

The time limit of the hearing predetermines that no answer will be immediately offered to questions raised by the public.

However, whatever the final fare increase will be, the merit of the decision made by local pricing authorities hinges on whether they've given an attentive ear to public opinion.

A city-wide campaign to crack down on unlicensed taxis was launched by local authorities just days before the hearing.

In itself, such an act is long overdue to restore order and fair competition in the taxi industry.

Unlicensed taxis have undercut their licensed counterparts with competitive pricing and sometimes using illegal means while exposing passengers to higher transportation risks.

Strengthening the regulation of the taxi industry with a heavy hand over unlicensed taxis is indeed good for the safety of passengers.

Nevertheless, if it is meant to mollify taxi drivers' fears of raised fares that might potentially drive passengers further toward their unlicensed competitors, such a stopgap measure simply shows that local authorities have failed to grasp what the public is saying.

Had it not been for public skepticism about taxi companies' allegedly huge profits, a price hike in taxi fares as a natural result of soaring fuel prices would have been much more easily bought by most passengers.

When the public is asked to join the government's effort to help share the burden that higher oil prices impose on taxi drivers, it is unthinkable that the taxi companies could be left intact as the tabled price hike proposal suggests.

The public hearing should have been a chance for taxi companies to clarify doubts about their financial conditions. Unfortunately, media suspicion and criticism invited by their financial reports indicates otherwise.

According to their statement, taxi companies only earned a very slim profit margin although, by monopolizing taxi licenses, they collect a de facto license fee of up to 5,200 yuan (US$650) a month from every taxi driver who, meanwhile, makes only 2,000 yuan (US$250) a month.

Yet findings were widely reported that management costs had been improperly inflated. And that the basic salary deducted before taxi drivers' payment to the companies was recalculated to lower the nominal profit margin in these financial reports.

The public has a right to know if there is any creative accounting in materials provided for the hearing. Misleading information will not lead to fair policy-making.

If strong public support is deemed crucial to justifying a rise in taxi fares, policy-makers should first have taxi companies clear up questions raised by the public before they endorse any price adjustments.

(China Daily April 27, 2006)