**********************************************
Following is a question by the Hon James To Kun-sun and a reply by the Acting Secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Yau Shing-mu, at the Legislative Council meeting today (March 18):
Question:
In the past three months, there were a number of accidents of passengers falling onto rail tracks while waiting for trains on the station platforms of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL), and the stations involved have not been fitted with platform screen doors (PSDs) or automatic platform gates (APGs). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether:
(a) the Government has assessed if the safety of the aforesaid passengers having been endangered, because some stations currently do not have PSDs or APGs fitted, constitutes an act of default under franchise as described in section 16(1)(a)(iii) of the Mass Transit Railway Ordinance (Cap. 556); if it has made the assessment; of the details; if it has not, the reasons for that; and whether the authorities will request, under section 28 of that Ordinance, MTRCL to immediately retrofit PSDs or APGs in interest of safety at those stations which do not have such facilities; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(b) the government representatives on the Board of MTRCL had raised at last year's Board meetings the immediate retrofitting of APGs so as to safeguard passenger safety; if they did, of the circumstances under which the requests were made; if not, the reasons for that, and whether the government representatives had requested MTRCL to stop collecting from passengers or reduce the surcharge of $0.1 per journey before the retrofitting works were completed; if so, of the details; and
(c) the Government has deployed in-house staff or engaged overseas experts to review if the timetable for the APG retrofitting works submitted by MTRCL and its explanation that at present APGs cannot be retrofitted at the stations of the East Rail Line and Ma On Shan Line (including the difficulties in such areas as retrofitting works and implementation) are reasonable; if it has, of the details; if not, the grounds for the Government to accept the MTRCL's explanation?
Reply:
President,
(a) The design and safety measures of the railway station platforms of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) are in line with international practices and there is no safety problem. Any new railway projects and modification to major facilities need to be assessed and approved by the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (EMSD) to ensure compliance with safety requirements before commencing operation. Therefore, MTRCL has not breached the Mass Transit Railway Ordinance (the Ordinance) or the Operating Agreement (OA).
Most advanced railway systems worldwide do not have automatic platform gates (APGs). Instead, most of these systems have implemented other measures to safeguard the safety of passengers awaiting trains at the platforms. Railway lines constructed recently, such as Taiwan High Speed Rail and the new Shepherd's Bush Station of London Overground, do not have APGs. The measures that MTRCL have adopted are also comparable to those in other places. These measures include
(i)the yellow lines painted along platform edges to draw passengers' attention;
(ii) broadcast of public announcements to advise passengers on approaching trains;
(iii) installation of CCTV cameras at station platforms to facilitate platform monitoring; and
(iv) the deployment of additional station staff and platform assistants during peak hours to manage passenger flow, provide assistance to passengers and maintain order.
We will continue to monitor the safety of our railway system to ensure that the railway corporation designs, constructs, operates and maintains the railway in compliance with safety requirements.
(b) The Government has all along been conveying the community's requests to MTRCL at MTRCL Board and other working levels. Moreover, representatives of MTRCL attend from time to time meetings of the Legislative Council to listen to Members' views and relay them to the Board.
The Government will continue to encourage MTRCL to actively explore measures to further enhance railway safety.
Currently, MTRCL collects 10 cents per Octopus MTR journey for the retrofitting of platform screen doors (PSDs) at its 30 underground stations. The retrofitting programme was already completed in 2006. The total cost of the programme of HK$2 billion is equally shared between MTRCL and the passengers. For the latter case, the expenditure of HK$1 billion was to be met through collecting 10 cents per Octopus trip from passengers. As the accumulated amount still falls short of the required amount of HK$1 billion, the collection arrangement will continue until 2014 when MTRCL estimates that the required amount will be collected in full.
(c) Retrofitting of APGs at platforms of an operating railway line involves highly complicated works including major modifications to the platform structure, ventilation system and earthing protection system. Furthermore, works have to be carried out during the very tight non-operating hours (2am to 5am) at night so that disruption to railway service could be minimised. Temporary mitigation measures need to be implemented every night to mitigate possible noise nuisance caused to nearby residents. After detailed examination, EMSD agrees that the technical difficulties mentioned above will inevitably further reduce the time available for the retrofitting works every night.
On the other hand, EMSD has also followed up with MTRCL on the progress of the retrofitting programme. MTRCL has completed the tendering process over the last few months and started the design of the retrofitting works as scheduled. The works programme involves the works of design, prototype on site testing, manufacturing and installation of APGs which MTRCL has condensed as far as practicable, and will carry out some works in parallel, with a view to completing the project in 2012.
As regards retrofitting APGs on East Rail Line (including the Ma On Shan Line), EMSD, after studying the situation at the platforms and the actual operation of the railway, agrees that for safety reason satisfactory mitigating measures will need to be put in place to address the inherent constraints of the platforms before installation of APGs can be considered. The platforms of some East Rail Line stations are more curved with wider platform gaps. Retrofitting APGs will cause sight line obstructions to wide platform gaps. Having considered the above, MTRCL needs to explore the feasibility of the mechanical gap filler (MGF) system before considering retrofitting APGs to ensure the safety of its passengers. MTRCL already commenced a trial on the MGF system in mid-2008.
During the site visit by the Legislative Council Panel on Transport Subcommittee on Matters relating to Railways in December 2008, MTRCL also explained to Members that a number of issues would need to be addressed when considering the retrofitting of APG at East Rail Line stations, including additional dwell time caused by the verification of MGF status required prior to train doors opening or train departure and the implication on train headways and signalling system, reinforcement of platform structure, etc.
MTRCL expects that the trial to further test the performance of the MGF system can commence in April 2009 in phases; and the full review will be completed by the end of 2009.
We understand that Members would like to see an early completion of the project. The Government will continue to closely monitor the progress of the retrofitting works, in order that the works could be completed as early as possible while achieving the primary objective of ensuring safety.
Ends/Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Issued at HKT 15:11
NNNN
