MRT TRAIN SERVICE DISRUPTIONS

MRT TRAIN SERVICE DISRUPTIONS: 1.

Dr Lam Pin Min asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide the number of incidences of MRT service interruptions over the past three years and the underlying reasons; (b) what is the acceptable rate; and (c) what measures are put in place to ensure the reliability of the train services so as to minimise inconveniences caused to commuters.

2.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Transport in view of the recent disruption of train services, whether the Ministry will consider regulations to require a public transport operator (PTO) to pay compensation or damages to its passengers if there is a breakdown in the services provided by the PTOs which is in excess of one hour.

The Minister of State for Transport (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos. 1 and 2 together?

Mr Speaker: Yes, please.

Column:520

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, Dr Lam asked about the number of train service disruptions over the past three years. From 2005 to 2007, the North-South-East-West Line and North-East Line had a total of 66 incidents with train disruption of more than 10 minutes, of which 19 lasted for more than 30 minutes. Out of these 19 incidents, 12 were due to track intrusions and two were due to other incidents caused by passengers, such as the activation of emergency buttons. Five were however due to systems fault, such as problems with signaling and trains.

Under the licensing framework, the train operators are required to adhere to the Operating Performance Standards (OPS) imposed by LTA. LTA monitors and measures the operators’ performance in the areas of service quality, safety assurance and equipment performance through indicators such as Train Service Availability, Schedule Adherence and Severity of Service Disruption. If the operators fail to meet the performance standards without acceptable reasons, LTA will take the necessary punitive action against the operators.

The operators also have in place a Safety Management System, which requires them to continually enhance safety by identifying potential hazards and mitigating them to an acceptable safe level. Besides carrying out internal safety audits, LTA also requires the operators to engage third party assessors to audit their system regularly.

In spite of these measures, train service disruptions will occur from time to time. The train operators have Rail Incident Management Plans (RIMP) and Standing Operating Procedures (SOP) in place to handle such situations. The plans and procedures cover areas such as service recovery, provision of alternative transport such as bus bridging, crowd control and public communications. These plans were activated during the recent incident. LTA will work with the operators

Column:521

to refine the RIMP and SOPs if needed, taking into account lessons from this incident.

Affected commuters may take the free shuttle buses provided or seek a refund from SMRT within three working days of the incident. During examination periods, the operators will provide alternate transport, such as taxis, to affected students so that they will not be late for their examinations.

Mr Lim asked about legislation to require train operators to pay compensation and damages arising from train service disruptions. Under the Rapid Transit Systems Act, LTA can impose a financial penalty of up to $1 million for each incident if the operator is found to be negligent. This acts as a deterrent to ensure that the operators upkeep the system well. It is also in the interest of the operator to minimise any train disruption, and if it does occur, to expedite the recovery process, as prolonged disruptions would have a detrimental impact on their business.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Marine Parade): Sir, will the Minister of State agree that passengers using public transport may suffer losses, in that they may be penalised for being late at work; they may miss an important business appointment; they may have to take taxis to work or other alternative transport? If so, is there any reason why the public transport operators should not be required to compensate these passengers if the delay is due to system fault or signalling fault? The financial penalty imposed on the public transport operators is of little comfort to these passengers if they have to incur additional expenses or costs.

Mr Speaker: Keep your question short, Mr Lim. We only have half an hour for Questions.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan: Yes. That is all.

Column:522

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, it is not appropriate for LTA to prescribe the kind of compensation or damages that the operators should be giving to commuters who are inconvenienced by disruptions. Nonetheless, we note a few points. Firstly, there is a refund mechanism; secondly, there is the financial penalty of up to $1 million for each incident, which is no small matter and which is something the operator would take account of if it persists in not meeting standards. Lastly, and most importantly, there are Service Availability Operating Performance Standards for the transport operators. For the Member's interest, for the second half of 2007, SMRT's Train Service Availability was 99.94%, which is above the 98% stipulated by the standards.