Taipei: Several road safety groups criticized the Highway Bureau on Tuesday for its plan to introduce a mandatory “pointing and calling” requirement in driving tests, arguing that the regulation lacked consensus from civil groups and could compromise traffic safety.
According to Focus Taiwan, after a meeting with road safety groups last Friday, Highway Bureau officials announced that the driving test for sedans would include a new “pointing and calling” requirement starting June 2. Luna Chen, chairperson of the Taiwan Vision Zero Alliance, stated at a news conference in Taipei that learner drivers who fail to perform the newly required action during the test will not pass.
Chen criticized the Highway Bureau for showing “a complete lack of respect” toward civil groups, stating that the government rushed to make the decision and used civil groups as endorsement tools. “Pointing and calling” is a safety confirmation method that originated in Japan, involving gesture and verbal confirmation to prevent operational errors, as explained in a social media post by Transportation Minister Chen Shih-kai last October.
Teddy Lin, a member of the alliance, noted that currently, only drivers of certain bus lines in Taiwan are required to perform such checks before turning at intersections. Lin highlighted that even drivers of large trucks have only been encouraged to stop before turning since last August, with no mandatory “pointing and calling” checks.
He further argued that the new requirement for sedans would be difficult to enforce and could disrupt traffic flow, thereby compromising safety. Roy Lo, a member of the Taiwan Motorcycle Rights Promotion Association, echoed these concerns, suggesting that the requirement could significantly slow down traffic.
Lin recommended that all drivers should perform “shoulder checks” at intersections and crosswalks and check their blind spots, actions not clearly mandated under current regulations. In response, the Highway Bureau issued a statement clarifying that the “pointing and calling” requirement was still under “internal discussion,” with June 2 as a proposed, not official, implementation date.
The bureau emphasized its commitment to consulting with relevant stakeholders and reviewing the policy to ensure it meets practical needs. It also clarified that no civil group endorsements were sought for the new requirement.
