THEME: Transport Fare hikes

Fares that go up when oil prices come down. Higher and higher COEs, recurring train service disruptions, bus delays and hard-to-get taxis, proliferation of ERP gantries, transport fare hikes, traffic jams and over-packed trains and buses. These issues continue to surface at the elections and the voices are getting louder each time. Let's take a look at fare hikes.

Fare hikes for buses and trains are subject to approval by the Public Transport Council ("PTC") which has a review mechanism that recently won an international award at the 61st UITP World Congrezz & Exhibition in Milan for providing a fair and transparent fare formula to cap the quantum of fare adjustment. This mechanism is meant to ensure that commercial operators cannot simply pass on their costs increases to commuters.  Whilst this ought to provide some assurance that every fare hike approved by the PTC was carefully reviewed before being approved, it does little to calm negative public sentiments. And the problem seems to be a matter of faith.

There are many who do not see the PTC as an impartial body because its council members are appointed by the government and the government is seen as the ultimate owner of the bus and train operators which are earning huge profits each year. This belief was reinforced recently when a fare hike was approved on the basis or rising operating costs in the midst of falling oil prices and the CEO of SMRT appointed by the government in 2012 was paid millions in his remuneration package despite continuing disruptions in train services.

How can we restore the public's faith in the PTC? Perhaps, members of the PTC could be appointed by an independent commission and members of the PTC should include substantial representation from VWOs and commuters. At the same time, any application for fare hikes should not be allowed if the non-technical costs exceed a certain percentage of the total operating costs incurred in the provision of transport services. This idea is somewhat akin to the concept behind the existing 30/70 efficiency ratio in fund raising by charities and institutions of public character in order to qualify for tax exemption on their funds raised.

Efforts directed at maintaining the public's faith in a fair and equitable system for allowing and determining price hikes are necessary. Afterall, there is a strong social element in the provision of public transport services unlike other businesses. The paramount interest of the public transport operators must not be to maximise profits but to provide public transportation at what the public accepts as reasonable and affordable.

You're never too early for politics

Although the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee ("EBRC") was formed 2 months ago, its formation was not disclosed until questions were posed by 2 MPs in Parliament on Monday, 13 July 2015. 

Once the EBRC report is published, parliament may be dissolved anytime soon. The EBRC is chaired by the Secretary to Prime Minister and will consider the population shifts and housing developments since the last boundary delineation exercise. 

The re-drawing of boundaries for every election has become part of the rules of political contest in Singapore. This has been the subject of much political debate. The main accusation is that it tilts the playing field in favour of the ruling party. Being a sports nation, perhaps a sports analogy will be useful. With the EBRC, we are seeing a sportsman who is competing with his team and unilaterally laying out the playing fields. He also decides on the timing of the competition and how many players for each field. 

Now that the EBRC has been formed, the task to redraw the electoral boundaries have begun. Based on past elections, the completion of this task may take up to four months and the re-drawing will have an impact on where and how potential candidates will contest in the elections. 

Once the report is published, parliament may be dissolved and a writ of election issued even within a day. All these uncertainties which favour the ruling party do stand in the way of healthy and constructive politics and it is hoped that there would be changes to improve the electoral system to make it a more level playing field that is imbued with both the spirit of sportsmanship and fair-play.

Politics has the power to close one's minds instead of opening them. For politics to continue to serve the purpose of the larger good and not become a tool of unsavoury politics, participation especially from those who are truly concerned about social justice and equality, is instrumental. Age is no barrier. You're never too early for politics. Only too late. 

Come join me in my journey to make Singapore a better place. Email to me at happylivingsg@gmail.com with your name, age and contact number, so that I can keep you posted on my upcoming walkabout at Whampoa SMC and if you are free, just join me and serve the residents together. 

My Choice - Whampoa SMC

Today 14 July 2015, marks my last day as a member of NSP. Early in the morning, I sent a text to the party's President to bid him farewell and to wish him and the party well. He responded cordially with his good wishes.

Since stepping down as Secretary-General of NSP, I have been invited by other political parties to join them. Unfortunately, I had to politely decline each of their kind offer. At the breaking-of-fast dinner held at the Islamic Restaurant this evening, attended by representatives of the various alternative parties, I was interviewed by the media and press, and they were interested to know my plans.

I have already made up my mind to go independent and informed the reporters of my intention to contest in Whampoa, one of the places where I have been regularly visiting to do volunteer work in the past years. To some my friends in politics, both the idea of going independent and disclosing my choice of ward to contest in the next election so soon were against conventional political wisdom. But, why should that always be the case? If they earnestly wish to improve the electoral system, they must be ready to challenge conventional wisdom and think out of the box. 

 

I was asked if I was concerned about three-corner fights. This seems to be a common worry for potential candidates and the voters. Again, my thoughts are quite different. I feel that voters are entitled to make their choices and to decide who to vote for without interference. With closed-door negotiations to avoid multi-corner fights, the voters' choices become limited to only those who are allowed to contest by private treaty. That seems to run against the very idea of an open democratic system.

In any event, for a maturing democracy, voters should not be afraid of making choices. If the voters' objective is not to dilute the votes for the alternative party candidates by them agreeing not to engage in three-corner fights, the voters themselves will unwittingly stifle the development of a truly multi-party political system. The voters need to find the courage to face the ballot box just as much as the candidates themselves.

Ultimately, it will be the voters who will decide the outcomes in every election. May the voters not only have the courage to choose but also the wisdom to know how.

THEME: From SMRT & SBS Transit to MRT Commuters: Perfecting Attitudes

In my last blog on our MRT System, I stopped at the COI report on the train disruptions in December 2011.

The COI report was delivered on 3 July 2012 and the essence of it was simply this. Both the regulator (LTA) and the operator (SMRT) had not paid enough attention to the maintenance of the ageing NSEWL, resulting in recurring disruptions train services. In conclusion, the Committee expressed that "With the various recommendations implemented, the COI is confident that future incidents, should they recur, will be much better managed."

Since the release of the COI report, steps have been taken by LTA and SMRT to address most of the problems in line with the recommendations of the Committee. On 11 March 2014, LTA even released news of its "Rail Network Enhancements" on expanded capacity, shorter waits and more travel options. There were plans to add more trains, upgrade signalling system for NSEWL and new rail lines for faster and more connections. However, the latest incident on 7 July 2015 suggests that some basic problems have yet to fully addressed. This was also the perception given when the promise for better train services reliability was qualified by SMRT at their subsequent press briefing co-chaired with LTA (http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/smrt-chief-desmond-kuek-apologises-for-train-disruption-promises-better-train).

The breakdown of our MRT system is not just a matter of our rail network failing. The latest incident has further revealed that our overall public transport system is ill-equipped to cope with the fallout of a major train service disruption (http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/mrt-disruption-puts-strain-buses-taxis). It is therefore imperative for us to deepen our analysis of the entire situation, including how to address public frustration. For a start, the people are not convinced that another CEO appointed to SMRT in October 2012. who does not have the relevant technical skills or experience in running a train operator. was the right move. And for LTA to repeatedly impose a fine on SMRT for delays hardly solves any problem.

The cause of the frequent breakdowns and disruptions are technical in nature. The long-term solution is for both LTA and SMRT to appoint an independent 3rd party technical expert in the field of urban-rail operations to fully investigate and recommend all the measures to be taken to effectively address the problems once and for all. Both LTA and SMRT can then look into implementing the recommendations, which may eventually require a lot of understanding and patience from the public. I believe that the public would understand and be able to withstand the periods of disruptions necessitated in carrying out these recommendations to prevent recurring train disruptions that cause so much more inconvenience to everyone.

Meanwhile, improvements can be made in the communication of train disruptions and the provision of alternative transport for affected commuters. One measure is to ensure that clear and immediate dissemination of information of disruptions are further made at all transport waiting points, including bus stops and taxi stands. There should also be deployment of ground staff to guide train commuters to the location of supporting bus services and to provide bus information. Ad-hoc taxi stands can be set up for those who wish to take taxis and support staff can help in calling/hailing taxis. In addition, motorists who are en-route could be roped in to help ferry commuters and help alleviate the heavy load on buses and taxis.

We do not live in a perfect world. What is important is that we learn how to perfect our attitudes towards every difficulty that comes our way. Only then can we become a great nation.

THEME - Transport: From MRTC to SMRT & SBS Transit

Yesterday's disruption of the NS and EW train services was unprecedented. Never has it happened before that two major train lines would be disrupted at the same time. Has the worst yet to come? What will it be? Are we ready for it?

I will be writing a series of blogs to reflect my thinking on a couple of topical issues. I have chosen the acronym, THEME, to represent the 5 major topics. 

The letter "T" stands for Transport and with the massive train disruption yesterday, it is timely for me to start with our Mass Rapid Transport ("MRT") system. To get a better grasp of the topic, it's always good to put things in perspective.

From MRTC to SMRT & SBS Transit 

Our rail-based urban transport system or MRT was once the toast of our people, praised for its comfort and speed. But in recent memory, it has been the cause of much unhappiness in a nation where most people commute by train.

When our MRT system was built, the regulator of train services was also the operator. It was known as the Mass Rapid Transport Corporation ("MRTC"). Formed in 1983, MRTC took over the role of the provisional Mass Raid Transit Authority ("MRTA") to oversee all roles and responsibilities of the train network. It would later be combined with the Registry of Vehicles and Roads & Transportation Division to form the new Land Transport Authority ("LTA") in 1995. 

The initial cost of building the MRT was S$ 5 billion and on 7 November 1987, the first line (NSL from Yio Chu Kang to Toa Payoh) was launched. On 6 March 2000, the Singapore Mass Rapid Transport Corporation was formed and it became the operator of the MRT lines. It was set up as a public-listed company to be a multi-modal public transport operator, providing rail transport services, taxis, engineering and commercial services. 

On 20 June 2003, when the NEL was completed at a cost of S$ 4.6 billion, SBS Transit Ltd (previously known as Singapore Bus Services Ltd) was appointed by LTA as the second train operator to foster competition with SMRT. Currently, SBS Transit Ltd runs the NEL and DL ("Downtown LIne") whilst SMRT runs the NSL, EWL and CL ("Circle Line").

Train disruptions

Prior to 7 July 2015, there has been a number of disruptions in train services. The NSL and EWL broke down due to power traction failure. As many as 250,000 commuters were affected and this was not the first time a major disruption has occurred. 

In December 2011, 2 major disruptions in the NSL led to the formation of a Committee of Inquiry ("COI") to investigate the causes of a series of disruptions that had occurred over a period of time. If you wish to appreciate the severity of the problems that plague our MRT system, the COI report provides a good start. Here's the link http://www.mot.gov.sg/news/COI%20report%20-%20Executive%20Summary.pdf

(To be continued).

NE & EW Train Service Disruptions on 7 July 2015

Train disruptions have truly become a regular feature in one of the finest transport system in the world. We are not talking about anywhere else but our own MRT system.

The NE and EW lines were disrupted this evening at about 9.15 pm due to "traction power fault". The incident brought back memories of the two major train disruptions in December 2011 which led to the formation of a Committee of Inquiry. Thousands of commuters, including myself, were caught in the melee tonight. 

I was already in a train and had just reached Eunos station when I heard an announcement from outside the train.The announcement was in Mandarin and was repeated in the same language. It was not clear to me if I should leave the train. Finally, I heard the English announcement from the train PA system about the major disruption and that free bus rides are available for train commuters. Everyone then disembarked and left the station.

The bus stop outside the station was crowded with train commuters. I saw Bus Service Number 30 and queued to board, not knowing if this was one of the free buses. The bus driver spoke only in Mandarin and many non-Mandarin speaking commuters had a hard time getting clarifications from him. It took some 5 minutes for the bus to move out of the bus bay because of the communication issue. The bus arrived a the depot in Bedok and was emptied quickly. I was heading further east and wanted to take a taxi home but there was a long, snaking queue at the taxi stand and only two taxis were in sight. 

I decided I had to trouble my wife to pick me up. By the time I reached home, one hour had passed after I alighted from the train. Sadly, this is not the first or second time that major train disruptions have happened. Train disruptions have become too common and we were told to accept breakdowns as a regular feature. This cannot be. Our trains have become the main transport carrier in our transport system. Any disruption will cause grave inconvenience to hundreds and even thousands of commuters who commute by train daily. Are the people who oversee and operate our train system not capable of solving the problems that are recurring all too often? What has gone wrong?