News

I refer to the article, “ ” (Nov 12). We can draw two lessons from this saga. First, regulators would do well to be mindful of the psychological impact of their rules on those affected. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) said that the intent of the warning letter sent to the taxi driver, who had not searched his vehicle for a wallet accidentally left behind, was “to remind the driver of such good practices”. But in this case, the message to reduce the chances of lost-and-found disputes with passengers is clouded by the hardship imposed on the driver. LTA’s objective would be better served with a more practical rule that requires a notice at the back of the vehicle to remind passengers accordingly. In this way, the driver’s due diligence is balanced by the passenger’s duty to safeguard his own property. Another lesson is the importance of taking the initiative to reach out and listen to feedback. That this case came to light only after a social media post and the coverage that followed warrants an examination of whether there are communication gaps that need to be bridged. A bureaucratic approach manages rules to make people work, while a person-centred approach manages people to make rules work. The choice is clear.