Author |Yan Comb Building.
In the early hours of this morning, Shanghai's order was changed.
The ban on online car-hailing at Pudong Airport, which was previously scolded on the hot search, has made new progress.
The Shanghai Transportation Commission has decided to resume online car-hailing services in the Pudong Airport area from now on to meet the travel needs of the general public. The reason is "based on the recommendation of the general public passengers".
A vigorous embargo came to an end in a hurry. It's not good to find it on the steps, what is it called according to the advice of the citizens? Who suggested the ban on ride-hailing before? Now think of the citizens?
In fact, this incident should not have happened in 2023 AD, let alone in the relatively open Shanghai. The reason is simple:
First, one city, two regulations, is unreasonable. Shanghai Hongqiao Airport not only supports ride-hailing operations, but also gives them one hour of free parking, while Pudong Airport, also in Shanghai, has become a flood of car-hailing beasts.
Could it be that Hongqiao Airport and Pudong Airport are not in the same Shanghai, not the same ** management? Such "one city, two rules" is obviously not convincing. Before the ban, the opinions of the masses were not consulted, and when they were scolded, they said that it was for the good of the masses.
Could it be that the masses you are talking about and the masses who express their opinions on the Internet are not the same masses?
Second, leaving a seam is unreasonable. Pudong Airport has banned ride-hailing operations, Didi, AutoNavi, Meituan, and even local mass travel is on the blacklist, but there is one gap: the airport's own airport travel.
Isn't airport travel an online car-hailing service, not an online reservation? Of course not, the platform has become the only online ride-hailing service provider for 14 million airport passengers every year, and the price is 360 yuan within 60 kilometers, which is three times more expensive than other online ride-hailing services.
It's a bit ugly. So in the end, it is for the good of the masses, and whether there is any benefit behind it, just ask the boss Zheng Xiuli.
Third, administrative interference with the market is illegal. China has an anti-monopoly law and a fair competition review system, both of which clearly state that administrative organs shall not abuse their power to act and formulate regulations that contain content that excludes or restricts competition.
Moreover, Shanghai itself also has regulations on online windmill taxi operation services in 2016. Therefore, the ban on online car-hailing at Pudong Airport is obviously illegal, and the administrative interference is obvious, which not only discredits the free trade zone, but also violates the spirit of modern rule of law.
Citizens have the right to choose which mode of travel they choose. No one wants to take a taxi, and if they don't find the reason from the taxi, they will ban online car-hailing, which is very ridiculous compared to not letting the opponent's ball play if they want to win.
Is this still in line with international standards? Not only has it undermined credibility, but it has also affected the world's confidence in Shanghai's business environment. I believe that not only will the Yellow River and the Yangtze River not flow backwards, but also the Huangpu River.
These three articles alone are enough to nail this ban to the pillar of shame of modern rule of law civilization. Although I can change my mistakes and be good, I can't do it if I am moved like Lao Hu and say bad things as happy events.
Shanghai did not use its power to delete the article and ban it in the face of this public opinion, which is worthy of praise. And being able to lift the ban from the good as the flow reflects Shanghai's open-mindedness and magnanimity.
Of course, what he said is not without a little truth. Because it is not uncommon for people like Shanghai Jiaotong to be sick but let others take medicine, it is very rare to be able to face it head-on and make immediate changes.
After all, you have seen that the two whistleblowers in Mashushan and Dangshan Li Ping have been arrested for so long, and the investigation team has not been able to give a single result. Therefore, there are really not many compromises to the common people like the Shanghai Transportation Operation Bureau.
However, I found that it was the Shanghai Transportation Commission that abolished the ban on online car-hailing this time, and it was the higher-level management department of the Shanghai Transportation Bureau, which means that it was not the Shanghai Transportation Bureau that corrected its mistakes, but the higher-ups to set things right.
Then the problem is not as simple as changing the order every day, there is a high probability that the investigation will be launched at the same time, whether there is power collusion behind this, whether there is interest transfer, I am afraid that some people will not be able to sleep.
If it weren't for the fact that we had entered an Internet era, if it weren't for the people's staring at it, I don't know how many things these arrogant powers would have done to seek rent-seeking and be a dog.
It is a pity that we have adhered to the market economy for so many years, and have put power in a cage for so many years, and now we often have to rely on higher power to restrain power.
If power can't be caged, then we may be the ones who are caged.
The process of modern rule of law civilization is the process of putting power in a cage.