Compensation for Commuters Affected by Train and Bus Service Disruptions

Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry has completed its study of the suggestion on compensation for commuters affected by train and bus service disruptions and, if so, what are the conclusions.

Page: 34

Mdm Speaker, today, when there is a prolonged train service disruption, commuters exiting the affected stations will have their fares waived or refunded. Free bus bridging services and free boarding of public buses at the affected stations are also provided. For bus service disruptions, affected commuters are given a fare refund and a complimentary bus ticket for a future ride.

We assess that, for now, the current arrangements are appropriate. Our arrangements are similar to those for the London Tube, where only fare refunds are given. Some other cities provide additional compensation but only for prolonged disruptions. For example, the Hong Kong MTR provides a little more compensation in the form of a 10% discount for a same-day second trip when the disruption lasts for more than half an hour. The difficulty really is that it is not a straightforward exercise to identify who should be eligible if we want a comprehensive regime where we compensate all affected commuters, as this may have to include commuters who detoured using alternative routes as well as those who had to forgo their journey altogether.

We will focus efforts on further improving train and bus reliability. This way, we minimise the inconvenience experienced by commuters in the first place.

Thank you, Madam. I think the Minister is fully aware that each time there is a train disruption, commuters who are affected are unhappy and they are not really appeased by the amount of fine that is imposed on the public transport operators (PTOs). The question really is for the Ministry of Transport (MOT) to think of what else it can do to appease the unhappiness that commuters face. I want to ask whether the Minister could consider implementing a form of compensation to these affected commuters. There must be ways of outlining who are the affected commuters and, really, from that sense, their perspective, it would help make them happier, if not less discontented. Ultimately, fines do not go back to them and they feel that, well, so what if the PTOs are fined? I want a compensation for my loss of time, for the fact that I got to take a taxi to work or rush somewhere. So, really, it is a matter of giving them a fair settlement because of the disruption. And I think the PTO should bear that cost.

Mdm Speaker, I can certainly understand where the Member is coming from. It is a subject that we look at from time to time. The difficulty we face so far is that there are different degrees of inconvenience caused to different groups of commuters. There are those in a very, very severe disruption who may have to de-train, get down to the track and walk to the station. There are those who are stuck on affected trains. There are those who may be able, even though their trains are affected, to drop off at an interchange station and find their way around and they are also inconvenienced because the journey is

Page: 35

longer even though they can continue to complete the rest of the journey on another train. The difficulty is to find a framework that is fair to all these different parties. Much as we have given thought to it over the last year or so, we have not been able to come up with something that we think applies fairly across to all commuters who are affected.

We looked at the MTR practice in Hong Kong. It is for same-day compensation of a 10% discount on a second trip. And if the disruption takes place in the late evening peak hour, for example, then it is a compensation that may not make as much sense as it would, if it had happened in the morning. Even when we look at these different examples, there is no perfect solution that we think is applicable to our case.

Yes, I agree with the Member that the fines may not go directly to those commuters who are most affected. But the fines help, in a sense that it goes towards the Public Transport Fund and, out of the Public Transport Fund, we provide support to those who need it most, meaning the lower-income who are affected every time we have a fare adjustment. This is why we have been able, over the last two fare exercises, to put up to about $7.5 million each time in terms of vouchers to the lower-income families and this, in part, comes out from the fines that are paid by the operators into the Public Transport Fund.

Thank you again, Madam, for your indulgence. Perhaps, I can just boldly make a suggestion to ask MOT to think out of the box. Let us say we compensate every commuter who has popped into an MRT station, give them $5 credit into their MRT card as a form of compensation. The compensation fund helps the lower-income and commuters who are affected may not benefit from that. So, let us think about giving them a compensation of $5, $3, whatever amount it is. Compensate them so that they can feel that, well, I am adequately compensated for the inconvenience caused to me for disrupting my journey. Would MOT consider that?

MOT is open to suggestions. The difficulty is whether commuters who are inconvenienced to different degrees would accept that – an equal compensation applies to all of them, regardless of the extent to which they have been inconvenienced. And I think that is the difficulty.