MRT rules must be read in context

WE THANK Mr Adam Tan for his letter ("Puzzled by MRT rules"; Wednesday).

The Rapid Transit Systems Act provides for the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and its authorised agents to plan, construct, operate and maintain the rapid transit systems. As such, the provisions of the Rapid Transit Systems Regulations should be read in context to understand their intent.

For example, the regulation on "no entry into a train when it is full" provides for an authorised person to direct passengers not to board a train if he determines that it is not safe for it to carry more people, and penalises non-compliance.

In this context, the regulation empowers the staff of public transport operators to regulate passenger activities, and ensure that the MRT continues to operate in a safe and efficient manner for the commuting public.

This is used only when the situation warrants it, and no commuter has been fined for entering a crowded train.



Similarly, the regulation stating that items should not be passed between the paid and unpaid areas is intended to prevent the MRT from being used for trade or business purposes.

As the primary purpose of the MRT is that of a people mover, it is important to minimise the use of the system for the delivery of goods, which would impede commuter movement and add to crowding.

As part of regular reviews, the LTA is currently working with the public transport operators to review our approach towards violations under the Rapid Transit Systems Regulations, so as to better take into account the severity of the breach in relation to the impact it could have on the safe and reliable operation of the rail system.

Helen Lim (Ms)
Director, Media Relations
Land Transport Authority
ST Forum, 31 Jan 2014

Puzzled by MRT rules

BEFORE reviewing the penalties for flouting MRT rules, the authorities and train operators should do more to educate the public on the regulations ("Penalties for flouting MRT rules under review"; last Saturday).

For instance, not many know that it is an offence to pass items between the paid and unpaid areas without going through the fare gates. I often see people doing just that.

It makes no sense for someone to enter the paid area for just a few seconds to pass an item to another person. If security is an issue, items passed into paid areas can be screened by the security staff.

Then, there is the offence of "entering or remaining in a train when it is full", which carries a maximum penalty of $500.

How does one define a "full" train? If the train is full and no one gets off, is that an offence? And if someone manages to squeeze in, will he also be fined? Don't the operators want their trains to be running at full capacity?

Indeed, it is timely for a review of MRT rules.

Adam Tan
ST Forum, 29 Jan 2014

Penalties for flouting MRT rules under review
LTA looking at differentiating violations after student is fined for charging phone
By Christopher Tan, The Straits Times, 25 Jan 2014

THE Land Transport Authority is relooking at how it penalises commuters who flout MRT rules, after a student was fined $400 for using an electrical socket at a station to charge her mobile phone.

The incident, which occurred last August, surfaced on Monday on The Real Singapore website.

Responding to press queries on the student's case, an LTA spokesman confirmed the $400 fine yesterday.

"She pleaded guilty and was fined by the court."

The spokesman also said that the authority is looking at "differentiating violations" under the Rapid Transit Systems (RTS) Regulations, which are spelt out over 17 pages and include offences such as eating on trains, loitering and tampering with equipment.

The LTA declined to say exactly what it will be changing, only saying that it hopes to adopt "a calibrated approach that better takes into account the severity of the violation in relation to the impact it could have on the safe and reliable operation of the rail system".

Sources believe that if the review had been done last year, the student who used the station socket to charge her phone may not have been prosecuted.

The Straits Times understands that the girl was first issued a notice of offence by rail operator SMRT for infringing a regulation which bars anyone from the improper use of any electrical equipment "upon the railway premises". It carries a maximum fine of $5,000.

The LTA then followed up with legal action.

The news of the fine whipped up strong reactions among netizens, with one saying it smacked of "high-handedness", adding that the girl could just have been let off with a warning.

Another wrote: "If don't allow, lock up the socket."

That is what SBS Transit - Singapore's other rail operator - does.

Electrical sockets in public areas of its train stations are under lock and key. An SBS Transit spokesman said it does this "to prevent unauthorised use".

At Changi Airport, free charging points are provided in transit areas. But power sockets elsewhere in the terminals are locked "to prevent any misuse which may affect airport operations".

SMRT said it may start doing the same for its sockets, or put up notices to say they are not for public use.

Apparently, connecting a faulty device may cause electrical interference which could trip up the train system.

According to the LTA, about 1,600 notices of offence were issued last year for infringements of RTS regulations, mainly relating to illegal parking on MRT premises.

In 2008, nearly 3,000 were issued, with more than half given to commuters caught eating or drinking in stations or on trains.

There are more than 30 different types of offences under the RTS regulations, each attracting maximum fines of $500 to $5,000.

Lawyer Vijai Parwani said: "Power sockets are ubiquitous. If one is left in the open, it is not unreasonable for a person to assume that it can be used, especially if it's in a public area and it is not under lock and key."