LCQ4: Railway service disruption
********************************
Question:
It was reported that near the peak hours in the morning of the 11th of this month, signalling system faults of the East Rail Line (ERL) caused suspension of train service of the entire ERL for more than two hours, which affected hundreds of thousands of passengers. As several passengers had made their way on their own onto the railway tracks by opening the emergency exits of the trains, staff of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) had to escort these passengers to leave at the nearby stations and inspect the railway tracks to ensure that all passengers had been cleared before the train service could be resumed. Such work lengthened the service disruption. Despite the efforts made by MTRCL to relieve the crowding of passengers according to its contingency plans, a great number of passengers were stranded at the various ERL stations and on the trains. Also, free shuttle bus service was seriously inadequate and directions were unclear, causing chaos and uproars. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether the Government will urge MTRCL to enhance its contingency plans for implementation during railway service disruptions, including (i) improving the crowd control measures, (ii) stepping up broadcasting at stations and on trains, (iii) improving the communication channels among the staff, (iv) strengthening staff training on crisis handling skills and providing staff with clear guidelines, and (v) stepping up public education on the rules for passengers to use the emergency exits of trains;
(2) as it is stipulated in the current Service Performance Arrangement that MTRCL must pay a fine for any railway service disruption lasting 31 minutes or above, whether the Government will review the calculation method for and raise the levels of the fine, with a view to reducing the occurrence of service disruptions through the implementation of more effective measures by the company's management; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(3) whether the Government will conduct a comprehensive review on its policy of designating railway as the backbone of the public transport system, so as to avoid the recurrence of the situation that the traffic of an extensive area is paralyzed during a railway service disruption; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
The following is my consolidated reply to the Dr Hon Elizabeth Quat's question:
Hong Kong is a densely-populated city with limited road space. Our challenge is to provide efficient and reliable public transport services for over 12 million passenger trips on a daily basis. Railway transport is a green and efficient mass transit which alleviates traffic congestion and attenuates roadside air pollution, and also unleashes the development potential of areas along the railway lines. Thus, the SAR Government has all along adopted railway as the backbone of the public transport system, while coordinating the complementarity among different public transport services, with the aim to providing a comprehensive public transport system. Under such policy, the MTR provides services to over five million daily passenger journeys. Overall, its performance is safe and reliable.
Nonetheless, the Government understands that railway service is highly related to the daily living of the public. It is of paramount importance to keep enhancing its safety and reliability so as to reduce the occurrence of incidents and to respond swiftly in the event of an incident. For this purpose, the Government has put in place a stringent regulatory system. The Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (EMSD) regulates and monitors the safe operation of the MTR system, and investigates into railway incidents in accordance with the Mass Transit Railway Ordinance. The Transport Department (TD) monitors the service performance of the railway network and handles complaints received from the public. At the same time, as the majority shareholder of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL), the Government has been requesting the MTRCL to enhance its maintenance and upgrade its railway system in order to minimise the occurrence of incidents.
Moreover, government departments require the MTRCL to formulate contingency plans for various kinds of railway incidents. In case of railway service delays, the MTRCL will, where situation warrants, activate suitable established measures, including deploying more staff to assist passengers and providing shuttle bus services. In case of major incidents, the MTRCL will inform government departments, other public transport service operators and the media, and disseminate train information to passengers through different channels as soon as possible, so that the public may keep abreast of the latest development. It is understandable that shuttle bus service is an emergency supplementary measure with limited carrying capacity, and it can hardly replace normal train service.
Regarding the contingency plan and investigation on the day of the incident on January 11 this year, as we all know, the MTRCL implemented measures according to the contingency plan, including deploying over 320 staff to assist passengers and implement crowd management measures; and arranging for over 130 free shuttle buses to carry over 16 000 affected passengers within half an hour after the incident. The MTRCL also put up large signage containing shuttle bus information at affected stations and maintained close communication with the TD and the media; disseminate information to passengers about railway service disruption and other public transport and connecting bus services through various channels such as broadcasts at stations and inside train compartments, information display at stations and road signs, web page and smartphone applications etc.
After learning of the occurrence of the incident, the TD immediately launched the Emergency Transport Coordinator Center to coordinate other public transport services. On that day, 21 franchised bus routes strengthened their services during the incident to assist in serving the affected passengers. The TD and EMSD also deployed personnel to the stations to observe the situation on site.
All in all, the MTRCL has taken measures in a swift and orderly manner on that day to minimise the impact of the disruption on passengers. Nonetheless, the Government and the MTRCL are highly concerned about the cause of the incident and how the contingency arrangements can be improved. Government representative in the MTRCL Board has relayed our concern on the incident and requested the MTRCL to conduct an in-depth investigation. Regulatory departments have also requested the MTRCL to submit a detailed report on the incident in two months. To improve handling of emergencies in the future, we will review the existing contingency plan together with the MTRCL, in the light of the experience drawn from the incident.
Moreover, the Government and the MTRCL are concerned about the fact that some passengers opened the train door on their own and walked on the tracks during the incident. To ensure safety of passengers and to avoid further service delay, the emergency door release should only be used under the direction of the train captain in case of emergency. The MTRCL will continue to educate the public including the use of emergency exits on train, through different channels. The MTRCL will also continue to arrange regular trainings for frontline staff with simulations of various train incidents, and collaborate with various government departments in conducting drills to familiarise staff members with contingency plans and steps to handle emergencies.
The Government and the MTRCL completed the first review of the Fare Adjustment Mechanism in 2013 and introduced the Service Performance Arrangement (SPA). While the MTRCL should be held accountable for serious service disruptions, lesser disruptions, e.g. disruptions of a duration below 31 minutes, should not be treated as serious cases lest the frontline staff may rush their repair works under undue pressure, thereby putting railway safety at risk.
We have examined views from the public on the SPA in the review last year and overall, the SPA had been operating smoothly over the past few years. Despite so, in response to the Government's request and the views of the public, the MTRCL agreed last year to raise the maximum penalty per incident under the SPA from $15 million to $25 million.
The Government holds a high expectation for railway services in the same way as the public, and will continue to strengthen its oversight on the MTRCL's railway services and safety through various channels.
Thank you President.
Ends/Wednesday, January 31, 2018
Issued at HKT 16:10
Issued at HKT 16:10
NNNN