LTA found a way to miraculously cut number of train delays!

Imagine you are working in LTA. You are in charge of reducing the number of train delays. There’s a new Minister for Transport. He needs some way to show the public that he is on the ball, that he’s up to the task. After all, he is known for cleaning up shit. He needs to live up to that reputation. He wants results. He wants them now. Your neck is on the line. You need to come up with some way to cut the number of train delays. Immediately. What do you do?

You change the way you count train delays. That’s how. You change it to exclude train delays that are caused by “external factors”. In other words, you exclude the “factors beyond the control of the operators and LTA, such as passenger action”. For instance, if the train delay is caused by someone’s foot getting stuck in the gap between the train and station platform, or when someone trespasses onto a track, don’t count them.

Straits Times senior transport correspondent, Christopher Tan, highlighted, perhaps with a bit of sarcasm, “Not unexpectedly, figures collated with this new method are noticeably lower than previously. For instance, under the old calculation, there were 12 major breakdowns (those longer than 30 minutes) last year. Under the new system, there were 10. In the first nine months of this year, the authority said, there were seven such disruptions while, with the previous method, there would have already been seven in the first six months.” It reminds me of this clip from Yes, Prime Minster:

Of course, this change can be justified. Hong Kong’s MTR and New York City Transit use similar methodology. So switching facilitates “international benchmarking”. What does that mean exactly to commuters? Nothing. Essentially it still means LTA and the rail operators still have some way to go before we can be sure that train delays will be significantly reduced. As Dr Walter Theseira said: “While I agree with the principle of making our rail reliability statistics comparable internationally, for commuters, a disruption is a disruption, regardless of cause. Some types of passenger action which contribute to delays can be reduced by revising the design of stations and trains.”

More importantly, Dr Theseira highlighted that, while the overall statistics have, delays lasting more than 30 minutes improved, which causes the most inconvenience for members of the public, “have not budged significantly in recent years, even with the revised methodology”. Dr Theseira explains why delays lasting more than 30 minutes cause the most inconvenience: “While service can be recovered readily for disruptions of a few minutes, major disruptions force commuters to travel by alternative modes of transport, and we don’t have the capacity in the rest of the transport system to accommodate such a large volume of commuters readily during peak-hour major disruptions.”

So. Yes. There may be good reasons to change the way we count train delays. But LTA still has its work cut out. Let’s hope that Minister Khaw lives up to his reputation of miracle cleaner of shit. At least let’s hope that there won’t be any more major train delays till the next year.

[Featured image: photo of East-West line disruption from Photo by Robin Choo]


4 thoughts on “LTA found a way to miraculously cut number of train delays!

  1. Reputation of miracle cleaner of shit – Really ? This former Penang boy creates more shit – look at MOH, MND and now Transport ? The civil service mentality is there – they will find creative ways of measuring “shit” and try to convince us that there is “improvement in shit”. After all, you have to justify the million $ salary. But then, we can’t envy PM Lee – that is the depth of the talent he has at his disposal.

    Liked by 1 person

    • A couple or so years following on my return to Singapore after more than 2 decades working overseas, I recall one morning more than a decade ago, that I became very agitated by some really stupid ( least, I thought so then, and still do now …) statement some hot shot was proudly declaring to the national press. I’m not able to recall verbatim but the subject was the planning for and provision of number of beds in our public general hospitals and it went along these lines:
      “…when it comes to planning available capacity to meet projected demand of hospital beds in the impending years, I ( this hot shot..) prefer to plan for something LESS than the required demand, rather than for MORE..” and he followed it up (..or maybe even, preceded ..) by some dribble aimed at sharing his personal values (..I think it was about his reluctance to waste..).

      I recall jumping up from my chair and swearing out aloud (..also not verbatim, but I think you get the idea…) :
      “WTF is so wrong or for that matter, so incomprehensible about planning for the REQUIRED ( it only, projected ..) demand.?!!”. After all, wasn’t this critical public health resources we were talking about.? Not how many more seats were we going to add to our new concert hall. I clearly recall thinking out rather loudly, “I suppose as a hot shot, it never occurs to him to think of the considerable anxiety and even guilt of not being able to have a loved one admitted into an affordable ward in the event hospital beds were short when his loved one needed it.”

      AND … some years down the line, did almost all, if not all, of our general hospitals have to place desperately needed additional beds in the corridors.? Did we not immediately embark on a crash expansion program of bed capacity.? My memory may already be failing me here but I do not think we were doing it because of the bird-flu or SARS epidemics then. Even if wrong bout the timing, I still think that the OBVIOUS thing to do was to, have actual required capacity determine the ideal target rather than deliberately “discount” a vital national resource no less, based on nothing more than a arbitrary personal whim.

      Since then I have remained rather sceptical about certain appointments, (but then don’t we always anyway), and I’m still prepared to keep a relatively open mind right now. However, that’s not saying that a certain hot shot does not continue with a considerable confidence deficit as far as I’m concerned. Let’s see where this latest “magic show” takes us.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s