A: Justify the decisions with more common-sense-defying reasons. Talk to people like they are devoid of IQ and hope that treating them thus would make them thus.

The LTA-SMRT “initiative” to cope with overcrowding (hah, I think they actually hate the term “overcrowding”; the furthest they go is to acknowledge that there is “crowding”) by hacking away train seats is probably the most senseless initiative I have seen for a long time.

The results of taking away seats are clear:

(i)                  There will be fewer seats (duh),

(ii)                 and a number of passengers that would previously have gotten to sit would have to stand.

(iii)                So, while there is more standing space, this space is taken up by passengers who have “lost” their seats.

(iv)               Even if there is really more space left after taking the above into account, more passengers could enter the train—especially during peak hours when the stream of passengers is endless. (It’s just like how some people will get into a bus even if they have to flatten their noses against the front doors. As long as there’s space, people can get up.)

So why hack away seats? It creates more standing space! (Hah, the LTA and SMRT are right!) But no one can guarantee that the additional standing space won’t be taken up by more passengers.

Perhaps this is what happens when brainy people who might have no experience taking trains come up with hare-brained schemes and try to sell them to customers whom they assume to be bird-brained.

Come on, I’m bimbotic, but not that stupid.

There have been enough public objection to the taking away of seats that the LTA and SMRT departments of justification PR people have to jointly write a letter to “explain” . . . I’m not sure what they are trying to explain. I don’t see an explicit claim that the idea is working in practice. They are explaining the rationale, not proving the effectiveness of their initiative.

The points made by the LTA and SMRT Justification Team:

1. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) and SMRT jointly developed the initiative to remove some seats on some trains based on feedback from commuters about increased crowding during peak periods.

Note that the decision was supposedly made based on feedback that trains are too crowded, not suggestions for seats to be removed.

I expect that the next initiative is this: reduce train frequencies to overcome crowding. Yes, reduce. It will cause trains to be less crowded because commuters will have to explore alternative modes of transport such as equally crowded buses or cabs with absurd peak hour surcharges, buying a car with $2 COE, etc. The possibilities are limitless. Same sort of logic as reducing the number of seats to deal with crowding.

2. We agree wholeheartedly with suggestions to explore adding more carriages or increase train frequencies. We wish to assure readers that this has been fully exploited. Currently, the number of cars per train is already at the maximum of six. [Duh] Since February, SMRT has added nearly 900 additional train trips a week.

Let me summarize your point: we will NOT increase frequencies.

Adding 900 additional train trips? This says nothing about how much less crowded trains have become (if they have become less crowded at all). Aren’t there reports that the number of passengers have been increasing as well. It could well be that, because of the increase in passengers, the additional trips don’t alleviate crowding at all.

Furthermore, even before train frequencies were increased, passengers found themselves having not being able to board trains because they are too crowded. When train frequencies increase, there might be more space. But this space could well be taken up by the passengers who would previously have been unable to board the trains. Less crowded? Not necessarily.

3. To put the initiative in context, of the more than 100 trains in service on the North-South and East-West lines, only 10 trains will have 84 out of their 300 seats each or about 30 per cent removed. These modified trains are deployed mostly during peak periods. The objective is to create more standing room in train cabins, so doorways will be less congested, and commuters will find it easier to board and alight.

Now, that’s exactly where the problem lies. Peak hours are precisely the times when the stream of passengers is endless and many people are just desperate to get to work or get home. In other words, that is precisely when the “additional” standing space will simply be taken up by more commuters. (If not, blame commuters for failing to move to the center of the carriages and things like that).

I get the sense that this whole initiative stems from a much more serious problem than overcrowding in trains, a problem that is worsening by the day. It’s more like a problem of over-population and under-developed infrastructure in the country. I doubt the LTA is really in helping SMRT make more profits by coming up with a method to increase the potential number of passengers in their trains. But it has to address the problem that the whole darn country is so crowded, the roads are ridiculously congested partly because they have not been expanded in tandem with the increase in the number of vehicles, the buses are spilling with passengers . . . .  You don’t want to put more buses into the roads and cause even more traffic jams, with flattened passengers staring haplessly at the crawling traffic as they are harassed by TVMobiles. You can’t keep on increasing train frequencies during peak hours. Some people also don’t want buses to travel similar routes as trains to avoid “duplication”…. Come up with this idea: create more standing space. Tell people that it’s created for their comfort. Whether it works or not, it doesn’t matter. The authorities always have the last say because its Singapore. And those stupid peasants won’t vent their frustrations during elections anyway.

4. LTA and SMRT have monitored the situation and gathered feedback. In a survey of over 700 commuters conducted after [so the decision wasn’t made based on this survey] deployment of the modified trains on Oct 31,

(a)         nine in 10 commuters on platforms and seven in 10 in trains preferred being able to board a train quickly to having a seat.

Yes, of course. If you have a “No Standing” policies, passengers would probably have to wait till the second coming of Christ before they can get into a train. Most people don’t mind standing if they don’t have to stand _and_ squeeze at the same time. But this says nothing about whether they welcome the new initiative or not. Don’t try to fool me just because I’m a bimbo.

(b)         Most commuters also felt it was important to have more standing space in the cabins.

This depends on how you phrased the question. I would say I want more standing space too. But I would qualify by saying that I want more standing space by having fewer passengers around and not by having seats taken away.

(c)         And six in 10 felt that LTA and SMRT have modified the correct proportion of trains.

I’m utterly confused by what “correct proportion” means. Modified in what sense? Correct in what sense? What proportion??? 

Why don’t you simply prove that people now have more space instead of resorting to a survey which might have had dubiously phrased questions that would yield certain results for your manipulations of logic.

5. Aside from seats, other initiatives to better manage crowding have been put in place. SMRT has deployed service ambassadors to encourage commuters to move to the ends of the platform and the centre of trains, an initiative which seven in 10 commuters found effective.

Effective for what ends??? Personally, I tend to move to the ends of the platform without anymore directing me. And I sometimes still find myself unable to board the train. No, don’t blame people for not moving inside. As far as I could see, whenever I couldn’t get into a train, there wasn’t space to move in unless you want strangers hugging one another tightly in the train . . .

Ultimately, I'm just being driven to one conclusion. Perhaps it's wrong and illogical. (But, hey, I'm bimbotic and quite stupid.) The gahmen, the LTA included, wants to increase the population but doesn't want to or doesn't know how to address the problems that come with the increase.

 ................................................
The Letter:
 

MRT seats removed after public feedback à Exactly what’s the feedback??!! We complain that the trains are STILL too crowded after you have added 900 trips a week. So you take away our seats. Lamentable.

WE THANK readers for their feedback on Wednesday on modifications to SMRT trains to allow more standing room by having some seats removed.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) and SMRT jointly developed the initiative to remove some seats on some trains based on feedback from commuters about increased crowding during peak periods. We agree wholeheartedly with suggestions to explore adding more carriages or increase train frequencies. We wish to assure readers that this has been fully exploited. Currently, the number of cars per train is already at the maximum of six. Since February, SMRT has added nearly 900 additional train trips a week.

To put the initiative in context, of the more than 100 trains in service on the North-South and East-West lines, only 10 trains will have 84 out of their 300 seats each or about 30 per cent removed. These modified trains are deployed mostly during peak periods. The objective is to create more standing room in train cabins, so doorways will be less congested, and commuters will find it easier to board and alight.

LTA and SMRT have monitored the situation and gathered feedback. In a survey of over 700 commuters conducted after deployment of the modified trains on Oct 31, nine in 10 commuters on platforms and seven in 10 in trains preferred being able to board a train quickly to having a seat. Most commuters also felt it was important to have more standing space in the cabins. And six in 10 felt that LTA and SMRT have modified the correct proportion of trains.

We fully understand that the removal of seats may be an issue for commuters with special needs, such as the elderly, parents with young children, pregnant mothers and the mobility-impaired. Hence, LTA and SMRT have ensured that all train cabins will continue to have seats; even modified train cabins will still have 36 seats each. As far as possible, these modified trains will not run consecutively at any station platform, so commuters with special needs who prefer the unmodified trains can still have adequate access to seats.

Aside from seats, other initiatives to better manage crowding have been put in place. SMRT has deployed service ambassadors to encourage commuters to move to the ends of the platform and the centre of trains, an initiative which seven in 10 commuters found effective.

Geoffrey Lim 
Deputy Director Media Relations 
Land Transport Authority

Bernadette Low (Ms) 
Manager, Corporate Marketing and Communications, SMRT Corporation