Letters | How MTR can plan ahead for unavoidable service disruptions

Readers discuss the need for proactive rather than reactive crisis handling, clarifying the purpose of the penalty for disruption, and caring for teachers’ emotional well-being

Reading Time:4 minutes

Passengers at the Tiu Keng Leng MTR station were asked to leave on March 22, when the Tseung Kwan O line had to be suspended due to malfunctions in both the power supply and the signalling system. Photo: Handout

Published: 11:30am, 28 May 2025

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at letters@scmp.com or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification

With one of the highest percentages of public transport dependence among major cities, Hong Kong’s urban life hinges to a large extent on the reliability of public transport. When a disruption hits its mass transit system, such as last week’s five-hour shutdown of the MTR’s Tseung Kwan O line during the evening rush hour, it doesn’t just delay commutes; it shakes public confidence.

As infrastructure ages, some service deterioration is inevitable. But resilient cities prepare for problems, not ignore them. In the US, metro systems in New York, Boston and San Francisco now face routine service failures – riders left not by choice but due to lost reliability. Hong Kong must not go down that road.

Last year, the MTR proved it could manage scheduled works on the Kwun Tong line, with Prince Edward, Mong Kok, Yau Ma Tei and Ho Man Tin stations closed for cable hanger replacement. But planning for scheduled maintenance is easy. What truly builds trust is planning for the unplanned.

MTR Corp must shift from reactive to proactive crisis handling. Current responses are often ad hoc and vary by incident. Instead, MTR could maintain pre-coordinated response plans across peer transport providers and communicate tailored alternatives to passengers in real time via the MTR app. Disruption may be unavoidable, but confusion doesn’t have to be.

Its performance evaluation should also move beyond narrow technical metrics. Current penalties focus on service downtime, but passengers feel delays more broadly. A train delay may be 15 minutes, but a passenger delay could spiral into hours when connections are missed and alternatives are unclear, especially across the harbour. Penalties and improvements must reflect the full passenger experience.