In yet another propaganda fake news by the dishonest incumbent dictatorship today (Nov 2), Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan claimed that local train services have reached a “new level of reliability”. The S$1.1 million-a-year minister quoted his own formula and statistics, claiming that rail reliability had increased more than three folds in just nine months:
“Singapore’s rail network has reached a new level of reliability. The overall system had clocked 660,000 train-km between delays in the first three quarters of the year. Last year, the distance was 180,000 train-km.”
The Singapore government uses a fake rail reliability formula, derived locally and not recognised anywhere else in the world, that disregards the length of breakdown time. For example, an 4 hour-long breakdown is treated similarly as a 30-min-long breakdown.
PAP Minister whose Transport Ministry had been called out by the public numerous times for lying about train breakdowns said that he is reaching his “one million train-km” target by 2020, and that certain train lines had “achieved” his 2020 target already:
“660,000 train-km is two-thirds to my target of 1,000,000 train-km between delays by 2020. The North-East and Downtown lines – operated by SBS Transit – have already crossed the 1,000,000 mark. The Circle, North-South and East-West lines – operated by SMRT – have yet to reach the target, although I am confident these lines will reach the target in due course.”
However, rail reliability measurement in other parts of the world Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong, is not segregated by train lines. Each rail company is measured by the total train services they provide, instead of the selective measurement employed by the Singapore Transport Minister.
After pouring praises on himself for allegedly raising rail reliability standards, Minister Khaw Boon Wan then cautioned Singaporeans not to raise the standards too high claiming that safety and cost would be an issue. There is no explanation from the Minister how increasing rail reliability would affect costs and safety:
“However, it would not be sustainable to keep raising standards, as there could be an adverse impact on factors such as safety and cost. Once the system is up to an acceptable level of reliability, the challenge would be to maintain it at that level.”