BUS TRUNK SERVICES ALONG NORTH EAST LINE (Withdrawal)

Mdm Cynthia Phua asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether there was any study being conducted by the Land Transport Authority on the travel pattern of residents before the withdrawal of the bus trunk services along the North East Line; (b) why feedback from residents and grassroots leaders was not obtained before the decision to withdraw the essential bus trunk services; and (c) why more time was not given to the residents to find alternative transport before the withdrawal of these essential bus trunk services.

The Minister for Transport (Mr Yeo Cheow Tong): Sir, bus service rationalisation is undertaken whenever a major new train line is introduced. The operators need to do this to ensure that bus services are well-integrated with the train line, and do not end up substantially duplicating the rail system, otherwise this would lead to wastage of resources and raise the overall cost of public transport. The cost of maintaining the excess capacity in the public transport system would then have to be passed on to the commuters in the form of higher fares. I am sure Members would agree that this is an outcome that we would all want to avoid.

As part of any bus rationalisation exercise, PTC requires a detailed study to be conducted on the travel patterns of the affected commuters. The objective of the study is to consider not just how the overall bus-train system can be best optimised for maximum operational efficiency, but also the impact on commuters in terms of travel times, convenience and cost.

The PTC will then review the proposals submitted by TransitLink and ensure that the overall impact on commuters is positive. Members may wish to know that in the recent bus rationalisation exercise arising from the start of NEL operations, PTC did intervene to modify some of the proposals. This was to reduce the negative impact on some of the commuters who were adversely affected by the exercise. This is because while the introduction of the NEL has brought substantial benefits to the vast majority of Singaporeans living along the north-east sector, it is unavoidable that a small number of commuters would still be affected in terms of longer travel times or higher costs. I can understand the unhappiness of those who have been adversely impacted, and I have asked LTA and PTC to ensure that SBS Transit is providing commuters on the affected routes with good alternative services.

Mdm Phua asked why feedback from residents and grassroots leaders was not obtained before the decision to withdraw the essential bus trunk services. Sir, I am sure that TransitLink and the operator would like to do this, if it was indeed feasible. However, the rationalisation of bus services must be evaluated on a system-wide level, rather than based on individual preferences or feedback. The practice is for the operator to discuss with grassroots leaders and Advisors, after the rationalisation has been decided on, in order to fine-tune the changes at the local level. I understand this was, in fact, done last week. Based on the feedback received, the bus operator is looking into fine-tuning the integration of bus services with the NEL. In fact, I understand that it has already improved the capacity on several routes and commuters are now quite happy with the services.

Mdm Phua asked why more time was not given to affected commuters to find alternative transport. I understand that SBS Transit waited about one month after the start of the NEL service before carrying out the bus rationalisation. It had also given more than a week's notice on the rationalisation of the affected bus routes. From past experience, this has proven to be sufficient time for commuters to get used to the new system and the new routes.

Sir, let me conclude by reiterating to Members that the bus rationalisation exercise is an important and integral part of the commissioning of any new train line. It helps to reduce wasteful duplication, and helps to keep our public transport system affordable. Many commuters have benefited from the completion of the NEL line. The commuting experience for many Singaporeans has been transformed largely for the better. However, I appreciate that any rationalisation exercise can never be pain-free and some commuters would invariably be adversely affected. The transport operator has tried to minimise the number of commuters who are inconvenienced, and I can assure Members that the PTC and LTA will work with SBS Transit to ensure that the needs of this group are looked after as best as possible.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Sir, four supplementary questions. Can the Minister share the study of the travel pattern with the ground? And, just to clarify, the Advisors actually asked for the dialogue before the dialogue with the residents was done.

The second question is: as MOT pushes for the integration of the bus and train services, what are the principles and guidelines MOT adopted for this integration? Why was the concession of the bus and MRT fare services for the school children not integrated? With the removal of the many bus trunk services, the children are forced to take buses to the MRT station itself and they would now need to take both bus service and MRT to their school and they have to pay an additional $45 or $52 more depending on what card they hold. This is a 100% increase in the fare. Would the Minister help these poor children and their families by providing a cheaper integrated fare?

Again on the principles of integration, why is SBS Transit allowed to retain the services of 502 from Orchard to Jurong East, which is on the SMRT line, and removed the service from Hougang to Orchard which is on the North East Line?

The last question: what is the relationship between LTA, PTC and TransitLink Private Limited and their roles and decision for the removal of the bus services and the rationalisation of the MRT line and the bus services? I ask this question because this company sent out letters to the Advisors for a briefing but not the operator, SBS Transit Limited, or the relevant authorities like MOT, LTA or PTC.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Mdm Phua wants the study to be shared. Sir, I understand the study is based on the fare payments that are made by commuters along the route. I will ask SBS to see whether they can simplify the study and share it with the Advisors.

The second question is the integration of the bus and train services. What are the principles related to that? She also asked about the concession tickets for the bus and train services for our students. Sir, the integration of the bus and train services is on the basis that since we have the train line and the stations defined, the bus services would then integrate with the train system by ensuring that the commuters living around the train stations are conveyed to the train stations that are nearest to them. This has been the principle adopted for the existing MRT systems when they were implemented and this same principle has been adopted for the integration of the NEL line and the bus routes along the NEL line.

She also asked about the impact on the students who are now required to travel by both bus and train. Sir, the need to travel on both bus and train is already something which is being experienced even before the start of the NEL line because students living in other parts of Singapore may have to travel on both feeder bus and the train system in order to get to school. However, I think the situation with regard to the NEL line is that some students now may have to travel short distances on both the bus and train and therefore if they have to get two concession tickets, one for the bus and one for the train, which is the current system, they end up paying double. We have, in fact, asked TransitLink to work with the bus and train operators to see whether they can come up with an integrated bus and train concession ticket which should then meet the needs of those people who only need to travel a short distance on both the bus and the train.

The third question was how is it that SBS was allowed to retain Service 502 from Jurong East to Orchard. I understand that whilst it serves the two stations, it also serves parts that do not lie within the train line and, therefore, it was justified by SBS that that section was still needed. However, the part that ran from Orchard all the way to the north eastern part pretty much duplicated the NEL line and that is why SBS took out that part. Nonetheless, I have asked LTA to work with PTC and the bus operator to ensure that those people who have been affected by the removal of the express bus services should be given good alternative feeder services so that they can link up to the nearest NEL station in as convenient a way as possible. I understand that SBS has replied that they are indeed looking into it and that, if need be, they will increase the number of buses and frequencies to make sure that those commuters who are affected do indeed have a good alternative service.

Her last question was the relationship between TransitLink and SBS Transit and why is it that TransitLink was involved in the communication process rather than SBS. Sir, TransitLink is a company that is jointly owned by the operators and it is in charge of coordinating the bus routes and payment system for the rail and bus service.

As to why they were involved in the dialogue session in terms of explaining the bus rationalisation, I think it was worked out between SBS and TransitLink as to who would take responsibility for which part of the communication process. As to why the Ministry was not involved, we are involved in terms of keeping a watching brief on what has transpired, and to make sure that the communication process is actually taking place. We are not involved directly in the briefing to the grassroots or the public. We have left it to the operators because they are the ones most familiar with the rationale for the changes and to explain their future plans to the dialogue partners. So we have left it to both TransitLink and SBS to manage the dialogue session.

I would like to assure Mdm Phua that arising from the recent dialogue, I have instructed the staff to ensure that it is not just the mechanics of the dialogue, but to make sure that the preparations for the dialogue are properly done, so that the dialogue can be done in a timely and productive manner.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan (Hong Kah): Sir, first, with regard to the study on travel patterns, I would like to ask the Minister to submit the study to the PTC. Second, who commissioned the study and how does the PTC verify the report? Third, after integration of services, presumably based on the report, will there be any monitoring of the effectiveness of the integration, and for how long will such monitoring take place? The reason I ask these questions is because I have a staff who says that residents in the Jalan Besar area are very badly affected due to the integration of services. As a result of the integration, only two services are available from Jalan Besar to Shenton Way, and they are very packed in the morning.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, SBS and TransitLink do indeed engage a consultant to do the study, because the study of route planning is actually a very specialised area. What the experts do is to mine the data available from the fare payment system, so that they know exactly how many passengers got up in one area, how much they paid, which will tell them roughly where they had gone through. So all this data mining is done by the consultants, and from this outcome, they will then have a fair picture of what are the key travel patterns. And from there, they can then do their route planning as to how the new routes should be structured, and what sort of feeder services are needed.

Generally, this has worked out very well over the past 15 years or so since we had the MRT system and had to rationalise the bus routes. What we have found is that what is needed often is just fine-tuning at the local level. This is normally done along the entire stretch of areas affected by the bus rationalisation. I can assure Dr Amy Khor that if Jalan Besar is also affected, I am sure, in due course, they will also ensure that a review is done along the Jalan Besar area and, if necessary, more buses will be put there.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, the purpose of the NEL and the integration of the bus services is supposed to either reduce cost of public transport or to perhaps make it easier for people to travel. I would like to ask the Minister whether he considers this as integration or disintegration of services because they have removed some of the bus services like Service 501 which provides an express service from Sengkang Town to Orchard Road where a single bus service would have taken a person there. Now, with these changes, they have to take a bus to the MRT station, drop off at another MRT station, and then take another bus again. So they end up not saving but spending more time travelling. Therefore, in this whole exercise, I am not sure whether it has actually caused integration or disintegration of services. Could the Minister ask SBS to try to restore some of these services?

Sir, I disagree with what the Minister said just now about certain bus routes duplicating the SMRT line and they preserved certain routes because there were some additional benefits. If he had the time to look at the bus routes more carefully, he would have noticed that a route like 501, which is an express service, the distance between the NEL and the bus route that is operating is much further than what this so-called Service 502 duplication of the SMRT line. This is really not a very convincing argument. I think the real reason is because the NEL and SBS are operating the same line, and SMRT and SBS are competitors and that is why they retained the second half and omitted the first half.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, Dr Michael Lim asked whether NEL was meant to reduce the cost of public transport. If I recall, I was sitting here when Minister Mah Bow Tan was talking about NEL, and he stressed the fact that the NEL line is going to be an expensive line and that commuters along the North East sector have to pay a premium for the NEL service. So, we never promised that NEL is going to bring the cost of transport down and that it would be cheaper than the existing form of transport. But the advantage of NEL is that commuters will now get predictability of travel time, and I think this is the biggest convenience offered by any train system. Commuters do not have traffic jams to worry about. They know that the train is going to arrive during peak periods, maybe within 5 minutes maximum time interval, which means that if they are unlucky and arrive at the platform just after the train pulls out, they only have to wait a predictable 5- 5 1/2 minutes. Whereas if they are waiting for a bus, they never know when the bus is going to arrive. The headway may be 7 minutes but there could be a traffic jam or an accident, and the bus could be delayed. So the predictability of time travel is a very important fact and I think that has been the feedback we are getting from the happy commuters who have been taking the NEL. At least, now they know when they can leave their home and when they are going to arrive in the office. And quite often, they end the day with extra time because the overall travelling time has been reduced. Of course, as I said earlier on, whilst the vast majority would have benefited, there will be pockets of people who would have been adversely affected. I think this is unavoidable.

In the case of the express bus services, they were put in place because there was no NEL in the past. So the express bus services were really in lieu of the NEL. Now that the NEL system is operational, the logic for having the express bus service in the area no longer exists, and that is why they were removed.

As to why express bus Service 502 was retained because it belonged to SBS while the train system there belonged to SMRT, we have left it to PTC to review. PTC agreed with the bus operators and I would not want to second guess PTC on what led them to that conclusion.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng: Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how can there be more predictability if one took an express bus from point A and reach point B on the same express bus vis-a-vis someone who has to take a bus to the MRT station, drop off at another MRT station and then take another bus to his destination. How can there be more time predictability? I do not quite understand him. Maybe he could enlighten me.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, if you take a short bus ride with the improved feeder bus services, there is predictability of catching the bus. You also do not have to travel a long way where you are liable to encounter all kinds of traffic jams. Therefore, the train ride is at any time a lot more predictable than a bus ride.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Sir, the Minister has not answered my question. Can the Minister share the survey of the travel pattern with the grassroots? I think our grassroots leaders have been asking for this during the briefing itself. Can they show us some statistics of the travel pattern of the people, so that many more feeder bus services can be provided and integrated?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, I did answer that question. I told her that I would ask SBS to see whether they can simplify the reams and reams of data so that it is easily decipherable and share it with the grassroots. I will ask them to see whether they can do it.

Mr Charles Chong: Sir, the Minister has stated that feedback will be obtained after the bus routes have been changed. Would the Minister not agree that if the feedback were obtained before the bus route changes, there will be less hardship, less disruption and also perhaps eliminate the need for MPs to have a late night dialogue session and early morning bus rides?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, as I said, I am sure TransitLink and SBS would be happy to do it if it was feasible. When my bus routes were restructured when the East West Line was implemented, I tried to do a survey, which was really a dialogue with my grassroots people. We received 101 suggestions as to where the bus routes should run, depending on where they and their relatives worked and lived. Whilst it is a very good suggestion in theory, in practice, planning of bus routes is a lot more complicated than just taking a straw poll. It has to take into consideration the actual travel patterns of groups of people, not in terms of asking individuals where they work, because that would not tell you very much at all, unless you can ask everybody who is living in that area. A dialogue session does not really give outcomes that are very usable, but local refinements are useful and needed, and that is where the local dialogue is most useful. And this has been the pattern that we have been adopting since day one in terms of bus rationalisation, and they have worked quite well.

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): Sir, when can we expect the integration of bus fare and train fare concession for students to be completed and materialised?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, I do not have a deadline for that. We have already asked TransitLink to work with the operators to come out with such a scheme. They have to do a study to see what is involved, because there are a lot of complications. Whenever you do an integrated system, there will be complications in terms of revenue sharing and how to compute it. There is quite a fair bit of discussions that need to be done but we will keep on pushing them to come out with a scheme as soon as possible.