Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Set up govt committee to set record straight on defective SMRT trains

As much as the report “Train cracks cast doubts on China’s rail ambitions” (July 8) casts doubt on the calibre of Chinese supplier CSR Qingdao Sifang Locomotive, there are issues to ponder closer to home.

The trains must guarantee long-term quality, reliability for smooth operation of the MRT system. TODAY file photo

The trains must guarantee long-term quality, reliability for smooth operation of the MRT system. TODAY file photo

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp
Raymond Koh Bock Swi

As much as the report “Train cracks cast doubts on China’s rail ambitions” (July 8) casts doubt on the calibre of Chinese supplier CSR Qingdao Sifang Locomotive, there are issues to ponder closer to home.

Singapore, as a First World country, takes pride in practising transparency, sound corporate governance, meritocracy and being the best in our corporate and public sectors, with a world-class transport system.

What went wrong, however, with the defective trains supplied for SMRT’s use?

When SMRT itself is beset by many issues with its delivery capabilities as an efficient public transport operator, this problem could not have come at a worse time.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) awarded the contract to buy the trains. Such decisions involve millions of dollars and the interests of the public, and must guarantee long-term quality and reliability for the smooth operation of our MRT system.

One wonders whether the LTA chose the right supplier for our MRT system, on which the public’s demands will continue to grow over time.

Let us consider that, in 2014, Massachusetts transport officials rejected CSR owing to its unacceptable quality and technical standards.

In the same year, the LTA ordered another 91 trains from CSR and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, presuming that the supplier remains technically competent and reliable. What does Massachusetts know that we do not?

Can we do pre- and post-delivery quality control to ensure that these trains are in good shape? Sending 26 out of 35 trains back to China seems as if we are returning nearly a whole barrel of rotten apples.

The first order from CSR came in 2011. Did we have a sufficiently good and uncontestable experience to make a second order of the CSR-made trains?

We should learn from this experience and ensure that we pay for the best. Quality cannot be compromised by cost whenever public interests are at stake. SMRT needs the trains to enhance its operational capabilities.

A high-level governmental committee should be set up to investigate the facts, put the record straight and stop the speculation rife on the Internet on this matter, as well as reinstate public confidence in the LTA and other bodies involved.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.