Reader Response

In the article “Dubbed 'the best in class': 6 things about Hong Kong's MTR rail system”, Lee (2015) reports about one of the world’s most profitable system: MTR Corporation. With high train frequency, passengers rarely experience delay even during peak hours in which trains arrive every two minutes. Investments of over HK$6 billion have been made on optimal maintenance and service improvements which ensures that the system operates efficiently and effectively. Maintenance, restorations and service enhancements on train system takes up about a third of MTRC's funds. In terms of safety and security, the system is being controlled by an Operation Control Centre to prevent any shortcomings and place emphasis on reacting to downtime efficiently with the use of the black “incident box”.  It is agreeable that Singapore has much to improve on its MRT system. While it may be beneficial for Singapore to learn the ropes from Hong Kong, it is unfair to solely use Hong Kong’s MTR system as a benchmark due to the differences in area covered by train and the cost of riding the subway in Singapore and Hong Kong.

These days, large organizations turn to benchmarking to help improve their overall performances through identifying improvement opportunities, defining best practices, and creating a competitive environment within the organization (Ward Group [Ward], n.d.).  In this case, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan had “identified the MTR, which is run by the MTR Corporation, as the system that local rail operators SMRT and SBS Transit should use to benchmark reliability standards.” As of late, Singapore has been experiencing quite a number of train disruptions due to train faults that would often result in delays of up to an hour. On the other hand, Hong Kong’s MTR system “enjoys an on-time rate of 99.9 %” and passengers experience a delay of at most five minutes every 300,000km travelled” as reported by Lee (2015).  Using Hong Kong as a benchmark would push local rail operators to seek and define best practices to cater to the needs of Singaporeans which would result in an increase in satisfaction. However, though local transport operators should view Hong Kong's MTR as a prime example and use it as a benchmark to a certain extent, it is important to take into account the varying factors.

In an article “How Does Our MRT Compare With The Subways of Other Cities?”, JT, a contributor for the National Library Education & Outreach (NLB, n.d) states that through LTA statistics, it is known that Hong Kong’s MTR covers less ground as compared to the MRT. To make up for this, Hong Kong thrives on its efficiency and reliability. Based on another article “Hong Kong: High frequency of trains, larger capacity than S’pore”, Sim (2013) talked about how one MTR train has the capacity to carry more passengers than an MRT train as one MTR train comprises of eight carriages while an MRT train only comprises of six. Furthermore, MTR trains suffer fewer delays and arrive more frequently.  Hence, though Singapore’s MRT system efficiency is not on par with that of Hong Kong’s, both countries’ area of focus is different. Singapore puts in more effort in expanding the train coverage area to create easier access and boost convenience for all Singaporeans while Hong Kong’s area of focus is boosting efficiency. It would be unfair to both countries if we were to compare against what the other country’s area of focus is.

Another factor to keep in mind would be the affordable and relatively inexpensive cost of riding the MRT. Going back to the article “How Does Our MRT Compare With The Subways of Other Cities”, JT reports on how compared to other cities, the price of riding the MRT is one of the clearer advantages of Singapore’s train system. JT references back to an LTA report which “compared fares between cities using the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) factor, which converts prices relative to how many units of each country’s currency is required to purchase a standard set of goods and services.” This report showed how our the train fare in Singapore took up a smaller percentage of our daily spending as compared to other cities. As the saying goes, you pay for what you get. By being able to provide lower train fares, it suggests a proportional relationship towards the amount of money local rail operators receive from train fares. This would mean that as compared to other countries, local rail operators may have slightly lesser money to work with on maintenance. 

All in all, while it is agreeable that Singapore has much to improve on, it is unfair to solely use Hong Kong as a benchmark as both countries have to make certain trade-offs while focusing on other factors of the system as mentioned earlier in the previous chapters. I believe with time and additional resources, local transport operators will be able to carry out substantial improvements on our rail system.

821 words

 Reference:

Ward Group. (n.d.). Benefits of Benchmarking. Retrieved from https://www.wardinc.com/benefits-of-benchmarking/ 

Kok, L. M. (2016). Dubbed 'the best in class': 6 things about Hong Kong's MTR rail system. Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/dubbed-the-best-in-class-6-things-about-hong-kongs-mtr-rail-system#xtor=CS1-10

National Library Education & Outreach. (n.d.). How Does Our MRT Compare With The Subways of Other Cities? Retrieved from http://www.nlb.gov.sg/sure/how-does-our-mrt-compare-with-the-subways-of-other-cities/

Sim, R. (2013). Hong Kong: High Frequency Trains, Larger Capacity Than S’pore. Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/hong-kong-high-frequency-of-trains-larger-capacity-than-spore