LTA vs SMRT over ACS(I) train charter: When a public display of regulation is not needed

By Devadas Krishnadas, Published TODAY, 28 Aug 2014

On Tuesday, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) said it is looking into taking action against SMRT Corporation for permitting its trains to be chartered by a school to convey students to a sports event. The LTA has taken the view that its permission should have been sought before SMRT agreed to the charter.

The LTA’s position has several points of weakness.

First, as a matter of principle, the chartering of trains is no different from doing the same for buses or cabs. Further, the chartering of trains has been commonplace for large-scale events such as the National Day Parade and its previews.

Second, the chartering of trains is more than simply novel. It helps ease the traffic on the roads by reducing the number of heavy-load vehicles and is arguably more efficient for transporting a large number of people, as in this case.

Third, it reflects and reinforces a permission-seeking culture that limits the behaviour of organisations — in this case both the school and SMRT — to find the best ways to utilise their finite resources.

Fourth, the news that the trains had been chartered was made public before the event and so the LTA had time to intervene if it truly felt chartering would degrade the provision of services to the public. It did not do so. Why not?

REGULATORY CULTURE

This episode has also put the spotlight on the regulatory culture adopted by the LTA and applied to all public transport operators.

If the issue boils down to whether permission is required, then it speaks of a low-trust, rigid culture between the regulator and SMRT.

This is worrying as it suggests there has been a breakdown in the relationship between the two parties, with the regulator more concerned about the appearance than the substance of operations. If so, it may make managing public expectations more challenging, as the public will be left questioning the rationale of the regulation.

Instead, the issue should be whether due care had been taken by SMRT in determining whether there would be a disruption in service before it agreed to the charter. This would indicate a high-trust, flexible relationship with the regulator that focuses on total merit rather than specific slices of interest in decision-making.

The LTA should not be second-guessing SMRT or other transport operators it regulates on every operational decision. This would introduce inefficiencies and also reduce confidence on the part of the transport operator to make decisions.

How we deal with episodes such as this tells us more about ourselves than about the event itself. Singapore and Singaporeans should be known for being rational in making assessments and not for making knee-jerk reactions or over-reading into impressions. In a complex space where trade-offs are a regular feature of life in the nation, we do not have the luxury of friction-free decisions, but that does not mean we need to be fractious on every issue.

Returning to the issue of the regulatory culture, much can and should be improved so that there need not be a public exhibition of regulation on each and every operational issue that appears to have the potential to invoke passing public interest. This is not to keep regulatory matters opaque, but to avoid tripping into a culture of appearance- rather than principle-led regulation.

Devadas Krishnadas is the chief executive of Future-Moves Group, an international strategic consultancy and executive education provider based in Singapore.

LTA not taking action against SMRT
By Joyce Lim, The Straits Times, 30 Aug 2014

THE Land Transport Authority (LTA) will not take further action against SMRT after the train operator failed to seek its approval before providing chartered train services to a school.

In a statement yesterday, it said it has reminded SMRT "to respect and fulfil its licence obligations, and that its primary focus must continue to be on providing timely and good service to public commuters".

The LTA also noted measures taken by SMRT to ensure there was no impact to normal train operations and commuter safety.

It transported 3,000 Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) students from one-north station to watch the National C Division rugby union final at the new National Stadium on Tuesday.



Earlier this week, SMRT was criticised by some netizens for allowing ACS(I) to charter the five trains. The LTA said on Tuesday that it would take "appropriate action" against SMRT for not seeking its approval before providing the private services.

However, SMRT said it was not the first time it had provided such services without informing the LTA, adding that it encourages more schools to charter its trains during off-peak periods.

The company said it is a "genuine and worthwhile" way of transporting a large number of students efficiently and safely.

The LTA agreed that "with careful planning and execution, occasional train charters during off-peak hours can be carried out in an efficient manner without adverse impact to public commuters".

It also emphasised the need for all rail licensees to seek prior approval from the train service regulator before operating any chartered train services.

It said: "For the past charters for National Education shows, the LTA, being a member of the National Day Parade Executive Committee, has oversight of transport arrangements required and works closely with partners such as SMRT. That was why for these past charters, SMRT was not required to specifically apply to LTA for permission.

"The LTA has a responsibility to safeguard the interests of the commuting public, to ensure that train services are provided as scheduled, and any additional chartered trips do not adversely affect the quality of train services for commuters and the maintenance of the trains and rail network."

SMRT encourages more schools to charter trains during off-peak periods
By Joyce Lim, The Straits Times, 28 Aug 2014

Despite some negative feedback from commuters and the possibility of a penalty by the Land Transport Authority (LTA), SMRT is encouraging more schools to charter trains from them during off-peak hours should they need to transport a large group of students.

In a statement posted on its Facebook page on Thursday, SMRT's managing director Lee Ling Wee said: " All things considered, we feel the effort was genuine and worthwhile as it transported a large number of students efficiently and safely."

But Mr Lee noted that the operator would in the future keep the relevant authorities updated on such arrangements.

In the past two days, SMRT has received some flak from netizens after it allowed Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) to charter five trains to ferry 3,000 students to the National C Division rugby final at the new National Stadium. LTA had said on Tuesday that it would take "appropriate action" against SMRT for not seeking its approval before providing this private service.

While SMRT acknowledged that it should have sought prior approval from LTA, it emphasised that it was not the first time that it had provided such services.

"The charters are not without precedent. Tens of thousands of students from many schools have experienced similar charters done in support of National Education shows in recent years - all moved efficiently and safely and without fuss. No permission was sought from LTA in these charters," said Mr Lee.

As to comments from members of the public on why SMRT was able to pump in extra trains for this purpose but not when commuters complain of crowded trains, Mr Lee explained that the trains used had been withdrawn during off-peak hours due to low passenger loadings.

"While the current train fleet is insufficient to meet commuter demands during morning and evening peak periods in the operation of the Circle Line, the overall average train capacity utilised throughout the day is only 20 to 30 per cent. Hence, there is excess capacity during off-peak hours to cater for private charters," he said.

He said that he was "grateful that the school informed us beforehand" as this gave SMRT time to make operational scheduling decisions and minimise impact to other commuters.

He noted that all stations along the line remained open to other commuters and trains ran at their usual frequency.

"The story may have been different had 3,000 students descended on the Circle Line with no prior notice at the same time without crowd control measures in place, catching commuters and our station staff by surprise," he said.

We should have sought approval: SMRT
Train operator has explained why it allowed school's charter, says LTA
By Janice Tai And Lee Jian Xuan, The Straits Times, 28 Aug 2014

TRAIN operator SMRT has acknowledged that it should have obtained the authorities' approval before allowing Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) to charter five trains to take students to a rugby union match.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) told The Straits Times yesterday that SMRT has explained to the regulator why it allowed Tuesday's charter and admitted that prior approval should have been sought. LTA did not reveal the reason.

The LTA spokesman said: "As a regulator, LTA is responsible for ensuring that train services to the public are provided as scheduled, and that any additional trips in the network do not adversely affect such services."

SMRT did not answer questions from The Straits Times.

ACS(I) had chartered trains from One-north station to take at least 3,000 staff and students to the Singapore Sports Hub at Stadium MRT station for its match with St Andrew's Secondary.

The LTA issued a statement later on Tuesday saying it would take "appropriate action" against SMRT. The authority has not said what penalty it could mete out, if any.

The episode has sparked controversy among the public, especially on social media.

Most people that The Straits Times spoke to felt SMRT should have sought approval from the authorities before it entered into the private arrangement.

Auditor Joshua Goh, 26, said: "Trains are a public service so while I understand that they were trying to support educational and sporting causes, they should do it in the right way."

Others said they were not too bothered, as long as their commute was not affected.

Education manager Michel Veltman, 49, who used to live in Holland, said: "This happens sometimes in the Netherlands, and no one really cares."

While some felt the episode was simply an issue between the LTA and SMRT, others questioned whether the school did the right thing in chartering the trains in the first place.

Some felt the school was being considerate in chartering separate trains so that other commuters would not be affected by students packing the regular trains.

Facebook user Marie Lim said: "Thanks for being considerate and not crowding the public trains, and for cutting down traffic by not having 20-30 extra chartered buses on the roads."

Chairman of the ACS board of governors Richard Seow, who spoke in his personal capacity, said: "This is a national school event involving two government-aided schools at the National Stadium, not a private party."

Mr Seow added that train schedules were not disrupted. "The scheduled trains still ran and the chartered trains ran in between the regular trains."

ACS(I) student Dominick Wee, 15, who took the chartered train that day, played down suggestions that a group of privileged students had been travelling in luxury. "We were super squashed and some of my friends had to sit on the floor," he said.

However, Mr Kleve Tan, writing on The Straits Times Facebook page, said the incident showed that train services could be improved. "If they can allocate five extra trains on top of (the) regular (scheduled ones), why can't they keep the five trains running daily to ease congestion?"

Creative ideas should be encouraged, not condemned

MY INITIAL delight at the move by Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) to charter trains to ferry students to a rugby final has turned to dismay after finding out that the Land Transport Authority is considering sanctions against SMRT ("SMRT faces sanctions for allowing private use of trains"; yesterday).

The innovative idea seemed like a win-win arrangement. It was a unique, cost-effective way to foster cohesion and school spirit among the students, while allowing SMRT to utilise its excess capacity during off-peak hours.

In contrast, the LTA's decision to reprimand SMRT for "not seeking approval" displays an inability to look beyond set rules and fixed parameters.

I believe measures were taken by SMRT to minimise disruption to the public, by running the chartered trains during off-peak hours and alternating them with normal train services. And there have been no reports of train delays or of service delivery to the public being compromised.

At a time when the Government is trying to encourage thinking out of the box, talk of imposing sanctions against SMRT seems counter-intuitive, even if the rules were bent a little.

One hopes that the LTA, along with other government agencies, can exercise more flexibility in future.

Collin Ho Yih Xian (Dr)
ST Forum, 28 Aug 2014

Fuss over train charter a case of elite-bashing?
By K Kalidas, TODAY Voices, 28 Aug 2014

One wonders what the fuss over Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) chartering five trains to transport its students and staff to a rugby match, which was during the off-peak period, is all about.

If a neighbourhood school had done the same, it would probably have been lauded as a fresh idea. Furthermore, should SMRT Corporation be faulted for a seemingly good commercial decision to generate additional revenue out of trains sitting in the yards?

The Land Transport Authority is expected to have oversight of SMRT, and it is inconceivable that the former had no inkling of the chartering. Is it reacting after the incident became public knowledge? (“LTA may take action against SMRT over ACS rugby charter”; Aug 27)

Chartering or booking of public spaces or services is not unusual. Even parking lots can be booked en bloc for marriages, funerals and grassroots functions.The public must be fair and balanced even if this is a so-called case of elite-bashing.

Why the fuss over chartering of trains?

I READ with dismay that SMRT faces possible sanctions for permitting Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) to charter its trains to transport students to a rugby match ("SMRT faces sanctions for allowing private use of trains"; Wednesday).

Some members of the public have criticised the decision to allow public transport to be used for private purposes. However, let us examine the issue objectively.

The Schools National C Division rugby final can hardly be considered a private function. It was a major event that necessitated ferrying up to 3,000 supporters to cheer on the school team.

This is also not the first time SMRT has provided such charters, as it has ferried tens of thousands of pupils from many schools to National Education shows in recent years.

Why has this charter by ACS(I) become such a big issue, since most commuters were not affected by the one-way off-peak arrangement?

Was SMRT's primary focus to serve the commuting public affected? Since the chartered trains ran between normal train services and intervals were maintained at normal levels, we know the answer to that question.

SMRT should be lauded for working with schools to ferry students to large-scale national events, such as National Day Parade rehearsals, safely and efficiently. Would the alternative of chartering up to 80 buses be more viable, or lead to even more flak from the public and motorists?

If a neighbourhood school had chartered the trains, would it be as savagely criticised?

ACS(I) is seen as a brand-name school with many of its students coming from privileged families. Is this the reason for the public backlash?

The whole issue may be nothing more than a storm in a tea cup fuelled by critics taking a shot at perceived elitism.

Edmund Khoo Kim Hock
ST Forum, 30 Aug 2014

Key difference in this arrangement

THE contract between the Land Transport Authority and SMRT does allow for private charters, subject to approval ("SMRT faces sanctions for allowing private use of trains"; Wednesday). Unfortunately, SMRT ignored the protocol.

I am sure Dr Collin Ho Yih Xian ("Creative ideas should be encouraged, not condemned"; Thursday) will agree that closing an eye to such indiscretions will send the wrong message about integrity.

What is the point of having contractual obligations and regulations if they can be flouted without consequences?

I am relieved that the plan went rather smoothly, for I shudder to imagine the backlash if public services had been compromised by it.

In the interest of transparency, perhaps SMRT can reveal how much it charged the school for the service.

The whole journey is circuitously long compared to a trip by private coach via the Ayer Rajah Expressway and East Coast Parkway.

Given the hassle involved, I am surprised Dr Ho could have considered the whole exercise a "unique, cost-effective way to foster cohesion and school spirit among the students".

Aren't there far more creative ways of achieving the same purpose, such as sending the children to boot camp to teach them some independent survival skills?

I hope SMRT and supporters of the move can understand the key difference between providing private charters to ferry students from various schools for national events, and one that served a specific student body at a time when the general perception of SMRT as a public transport operator is far from stellar.

Toh Cheng Seong
ST Forum, 28 Aug 2014

SMRT may face LTA sanctions for allowing ACS(I) to charter trains
By Wang Meng Meng, The Straits Times, 26 Aug 2014

Train operator SMRT could face possible sanctions by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) for allowing the use of its trains for private purposes.

Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) yesterday chartered five MRT trains to ferry its students, staff and alumni to the Schools National C Division rugby final at the Singapore Sports Hub - the first schools final at the new National Stadium.

An LTA spokesman yesterday said: "Under the Circle Line licence, SMRT has to seek LTA's prior approval for the provision of train services that are not open to the general commuting public. In this case, SMRT did not seek our approval before agreeing to provide the service. We are looking into the appropriate action to take.

"We have also reminded SMRT that its primary focus must be to ensure good service delivery to the commuting public at large."

In response, SMRT said chartered trains run between normal train services and strictly within off-peak hours. "SMRT assures passengers that train intervals are maintained at normal service levels at all times."

SMRT had on Monday said that it had previously worked with schools to charter trains and transport students for large-scale events such as National Day Parade rehearsals.

From 1pm yesterday, about 3,000 members of the ACS(I) family boarded the trains from one-north station to Stadium station, where their rugby team beat St Andrew's Secondary 28-8 in the final.

Pictures of the trip were posted on social media. While many praised the innovative idea, some netizens slammed the decision to allow public transport to be used for private purposes.

ACS(I) charters MRT trains for rugby final
By Sanjay Nair, The Straits Times, 26 Aug 2014

ALL trains lead to the National Stadium - at least for 3,000 students and staff of Anglo- Chinese School (Independent).

To mark today's historic Schools National C Division rugby championship clash at the new Singapore Sports Hub, the first school final to be held there, the school has chartered five MRT trains to transport supporters to Kallang.

The match pitting ACS(I) against defending champions St Andrew's Secondary (SAS) is expected to attract more than 5,000 spectators at the 55,000-capacity stadium. And the large turnout is the reason that ACS(I) has taken the unusual approach of getting MRT trains to shuttle their students.

ACS(I) principal Winston Hodge said students, parents and alumni had expressed interest in attending the "special game", which starts at 4pm.

He said: "As we would have needed at least 80 buses to transport our students and staff, the trains are a cost-efficient way of taking them from school to the Sports Hub safely and with ease." ACS(I) and SMRT declined to reveal the cost, but The Straits Times understands that it would be about $2 a head.

Students will be dismissed progressively from 11am for lunch, before being escorted by teachers to one-north station near the school's Dover Road campus for the 40-minute ride. They will travel directly to Stadium station on the Circle Line.

SMRT has previously worked with schools to charter trains transporting students for large- scale events such as the National Day Parade rehearsals.

In response to queries from The Straits Times, SMRT's vice- president for corporate information and communication Patrick Nathan said requests for chartered trains are reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure there is no interference with regular services, and the services are carried out during off-peak hours.

"SMRT believes in supporting local education and national initiatives and will continue this support without compromising our core service delivery in ensuring reliable, safe journeys for all passengers," Mr Nathan added.

Match tickets are free, but offered only to family members, friends and alumni of the two schools. SAS' teacher-in-charge of rugby Daniel Thiam said the school will send around 400 supporters to the stadium.

In last year's final, SAS beat the same opponents 14-13 to lift the Goh Keng Swee Shield for the first time since 1990.

ACS(I) rugby coach Adrian Chong said: "I cannot remember other school rugby sides ever getting a chance to feature in such an iconic setting."

Post by SingaporeSports.sg.

ACS(I) recapture crown in front of entire school at the National Stadium
By Sanjay Nair, The Straits Times, 27 Aug 2014

ANGLO-CHINESE School (Independent) student Matthew Robinson, a slight 14-year-old described by coaches and peers as the best scrum-half of his age in Singapore, took a disbelieving look around the National Stadium and shook his head.

"My hands are still shaking - I can't believe I just played on this field, in front of a big crowd," said the 1.58m tall teenager, pointing to 6,000 boisterous spectators.

With the Schools National C Division winners' medal slung around his neck, Matthew and his comrades knew they had been a part of something special.

They had won the first schools final to be held at the crown jewel of the Singapore Sports Hub, comprehensively beating arch-rivals St Andrew's Secondary (SAS) 28-8 to avenge a one-point defeat in last year's final.

Perhaps most importantly, they had done it in front of their entire school, who arrived in style via five chartered MRT trains where school cheers and even a birthday song echoed across the carriages.

The entire occasion had a big European football match feel to it.

School anthems were sung with gusto, faces and giant banners were painted in team colours and of course, there were a few Mexican waves across the terraces too.

ACS(I) student Jared Leow, 16, sporting a painting of the school crest on his left cheek, said: "I came for the rugby World Club 10s and the Juventus football friendly at this stadium - the atmosphere here today is far better.

"I had my first taste of the Kallang Roar."

Backed by tries from Tristan Yeow, Douglas Ang, Isaac Tan and Josh Quan, the schools rugby powerhouse clinched their 17th title in the division since 1993.

The hour-long encounter had its fair share of tackles, tries and tiffs. But when it ended, sportsmanship prevailed as both sides exchanged handshakes and formed a huddle to pray.

"Fair play to ACS, they had everything to lose as the clear favourites but the pressure didn't seem to get to them," said SAS coach Nick Dance.

The 500-strong St Andrew's contingent gave a standing ovation to their team, some of whom were in tears as they collected their runners-up prize.

They can take credit for being the first side to restrict ACS(I) to less than 67 points in this year's competition.

The SAS pack did not get inside the opposing 22m line in the first half, too busy trying to fend off incessant attacks from their well-drilled opponents.

"This is probably the strongest team we have had since 2002 - there's speed, guile and the man-mountains to take opponents down," said long-time ACS(I) coach Adrian Chong, who was embraced in hugs and back-slaps after the final whistle.

"What most people don't see is the sacrifices made by these boys - training most evenings, even on weekends, while juggling their studies and social life."

Playing under a closed dome, the youngsters could barely hear each other - let alone their coaches on the sidelines - amid the cacophony of songs and screams from both sets of supporters.

ACS(I) players were put through mental visualisation exercises in the days leading up to the clash to maintain their calm and focus.

Burly No. 8 Mikha Khaleel, who stands at 1.75m and weighs 89kg, impressed with his reading of the game, and was often seen encouraging nervous team-mates.

The 14-year-old said: "We definitely felt pressure with all our classmates and family watching.

"But we knew if we kept our focus, we would win.

"We wanted to be the first schools rugby champions in this stadium - history is ours."

Much ado about school's train charter
Great day for school sports eclipsed by LTA-SMRT exchange
By Marc Lim, Sports Editor, The Sunday Times, 31 Aug 2014

An image from the Schools National C Division rugby championship final between Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) and St Andrew's Secondary last Tuesday has been making the rounds online.

It is of both teams coming together to say a prayer and shake hands after battling each other on the field - a nice touch by the arch-rivals.

This is the story that should come to mind when people talk about the first schools final at the new National Stadium. Instead, that historic event for school sports will now be remembered for the very public exchange of words between the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and public transport operator SMRT over the charter of MRT trains by ACS(I).

The picture of foes coming together epitomises all that was missing in the LTA-SMRT saga, which involved the release of four press statements over four days and suggested little synergy between the two.

In the end, the head-on collision that seemed imminent was averted last Friday night when LTA said it would not be taking SMRT to task after all for failing to seek approval before chartering trains to ACS(I).

For SMRT, fined multiple times by the LTA over the last few years for service disruptions and breakdowns, the decision will come as a relief. For LTA, under pressure from commuters unhappy with a strained public transport system, the move, it said, showed that it takes its responsibility to safeguard public interests very seriously.

Yet, most of us watching the drama play out over the last few days have been left wondering what the fuss was all about.

ACS(I)'s unorthodox move to charter trains was done in part to mark it being in the first schools national sports final at the new National Stadium. To support their rugby team, about 3,000 students, staff and alumni boarded five trains from One-north station to Stadium station last Tuesday.

The decision to opt for trains was two-fold, said the school. One, it would reduce a logistical nightmare. The school estimated that it would need at least 80 buses to move that many people, which would put a strain on traffic around the stadium. Auxiliary police might also have been needed to manage traffic.

Second, at about $2 a head, the trains were more cost-effective than buses. SMRT was convinced the arrangement would have no impact on normal train operations, given the school's 1pm non-peak hour departure, with the chartered train shadowing a normal service train.

It was almost a perfect plan, save for one boo-boo: SMRT failed to seek LTA's approval, as stipulated under its Circle Line licence.

Never mind if precedents had been set, with schools opting for similar arrangements to shuttle students during National Education shows and National Day parades. SMRT still erred and for that, LTA felt it needed to be told off publicly. Yet, it is hard to see how the public wrist-slapping would benefit either party. It speaks more of the lack of communication between the two than anything else.

At a time when "conversation" seems to be the buzzword in the political arena, LTA's "fire first, ask questions later" approach is out of sync.

In a strongly worded statement last Tuesday, it said it was "looking into the appropriate action to take" against SMRT. Last Friday, however, LTA confirmed that the chartered rides had no impact on normal train operations and commuter safety, and so it chose not to sanction SMRT.

The authority's perceived change of heart makes one wonder if a better approach would have been for it to have some patience and check on the severity of any breach, before issuing a private warning.

Instead, the very public nature of the episode not only made the situation seem bigger than it was but also threw up more questions.

On Facebook posts and online forums, many wondered if the reluctance to be harsher had to do with ACS(I) being an elite independent school. But some also wondered if the LTA felt compelled to act because an elite school was involved, and it needed to ensure such schools do not enjoy special privileges.

In the end, it was a smart move by the school to secure the most efficient and least disruptive way to get its big contingent of supporters to the Sports Hub in the shortest time.

And it is a smart move by SMRT to make this charter option available without disrupting normal services because this fits in with its role as a public transport operator.

How differently this might all have played out if more of us knew you could charter trains, or if LTA could have seen the upside of supporting such a move by the train operators.

Besides, if you're heading to the Sports Hub, nothing beats taking the train there.

For everyone who knows school sports, an ACS(I)-St Andrew's rugby final is always special, and when the showdown between these arch-rivals is the first school final at the National Stadium, it has added significance.

On a day when sports should have been the winner - and a school's ability to move 3,000 supporters a spectacle in itself - it is a pity that the day will be remembered for an unnecessary public display of regulation.

Beyond fairness
There are other values which complaining netizens should be upholding such as generosity
By Sharon Loh, The Sunday Times, 7 Sep 2014

The day after my second daughter was born, the older one, who was about 13 months old, was taken to hospital to meet her.

Hey, sweetheart, I said, as her grandfather held her over the cot so she could look into it. Meet your baby sister.

Perhaps we were expecting angels and butterflies.

My older child reached into the cot and, very deliberately, smacked her not quite day-old sister.

Shocked, her grandfather snatched her away from the baby, who slept on, peacefully.

The older one was not much more than a baby herself, but she was savvy enough to recognise the situation for what it was.

She wailed - perhaps as much for her lost innocence as well as the arrival of another.

To this day, the same umbrage is still taken by either child, one way or another, in our household.

"Why do I have to do my laundry and not her? (Answer: She has none.) It's not fair."

"Why does she get to choose where to go for dinner? (Translation: I don't like Thai food.) It's not fair."

"Why was she born with brown eyes and brown hair? (Note: You were too.)"

"Why does she exist? (No answer.)"

You got it.

It's not fair.

I assume (hope) my family is hardly unique but, honestly, I would devote my life to good works if I never had to hear those words again.

Instead, I fight the temptation to stick a knife into my brain owing to the impossibility of bestowing largesse perfectly equally.

I remind myself that "it's not fair" is the expression of a child who is powerless to change her circumstances, but has yet to understand that fairness is not a god-given right so much as a privilege, born from a collective agreement to cede power to the group.

That it is in fact something one must buy into, constantly, and know as well when to decline to fulfil a worthier calling.

Rightly or wrongly, we teach especially our older children to "give way", to learn to be magnanimous; occasionally we have to swallow "unfairness" to enable the wheels of the family unit, company, community, civilisation, etc to run smoothly.

Resources are finite and left to the natural order, those who are weaker will get trampled in the rush to survive.

The desire to share is so nascent compared with the dislike of losing out that many countries must enshrine it as an ideal: A democratic society based on justice and equality. One Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Indeed, the unhappiness many people here have felt in recent years may be boiled down to their feeling hard done by.

It's unfair that foreigners should get our jobs, vie for the same homes, have the same privileges as citizens. So what if they contribute to the economy and pay the same amount of taxes?

Once again, I have to fight the motherly instinct to say, get over yourself. Fact is, no one owes you a living and if the playing field has been levelled, it is probably because someone in power has made it so (usually someone who has power because you gave it and can take it away).

That injustice exists is undeniable but, by and large, most Singaporeans do not have true cause for complaint. Self-pity is at the root of many a perception of unfairness.

The negative reaction by netizens to a school that chartered a train to take its students to a rugby game was a prime example of an incident that became about fairness when it really was not.

Leaving aside the spat over protocol between the Land Transport Authority and SMRT and arguments about whether this was a creative transport solution by the school, much of the outcry implied the initiative had somehow robbed other commuters, as well as "less privileged" children, of their rights.

Resentment spilt from this post on our news website: "The problem with these elite schools is that they are flushed with money to enable them to pamper these privileged kids. I don't think it comes cheap chartering the whole train and they were arrogant enough not to seek approval and this guy called it creative. What a joke."

Some netizens implied the school had used its connections to pull strings and others wondered if a neighbourhood school would have been allowed to do the same thing.

Yes, according to the SMRT, who said other schools had chartered trains before for big events such as the National Day Parade. The train operator also said it ran the train during off-peak hours and took care that it did not affect normal train service.

Even this assertion was disbelieved by some, although no one on the day seemed to have noticed any disruption in the service.

The needless storm in a teacup (fuelled, some said, by the media) had me wondering how a simple train ride had become a question of entitlement.

After all, were these children not our own?

What's more, they had paid their own way and they did it with minimal inconvenience to other commuters.

So any umbrage taken beyond this is a reminder that the unhappy child still resides within us.

It is she who is constantly on the lookout that no one else gets "special treatment", even if it is for someone as precious as her own family.

There seems little point building wonderful sports venues or anything if we cannot build a community that is generous with one another.

In raising tomorrow's adults, I dearly wish they would hold lightly to "fair" and tightly to things that actually matter, like looking out for their own brothers and sisters.

Luckily, the SMRT stood by its action, telling The Straits Times it "believes in supporting local education and national initiatives and will continue this support without compromising our core service delivery in ensuring reliable, safe journeys for all passengers".

I'm glad there was an adult in the room.