City residents should reject MTR critics’ grandstanding

Hong Kong came first in a recent independent survey of public transport in all the major world cities. The survey rated each city’s public transport system by efficiency, affordability and convenience.

At the center of the Hong Kong system is, of course, the Mass Transit Railway which, regrettably, came under strong criticism for a series of embarrassing mishaps in two major railway construction projects.

Budget overruns and long delays are common among many mega projects around the world. But such transgressions are taken particularly seriously in Hong Kong, where people are spoiled by the near perfect past record of the MTR Corporation, a public company majority owned by the government, of excellence in engineering and service.

A few years back, MTRC’s expatriate CEO was subject to gross humiliation at the Legislative Council and subsequently dismissed for the delays in the construction of a new railway line. Apparently, he was found to have done nothing wrong and was duly compensated by MTRC for the early termination of his contract.

This time, the situation is different. Several top engineers at MTRC were let go under a cloud and the case has been referred to the police for investigation of alleged deceptions and cover-ups. The chairman, who submitted his resignation, was asked to stay until a new CEO was in place.

Meanwhile, politicians on both sides of the aisle, the usual crowd of habitual government critics and the media are having a field day dumping on the company and dragging its reputation through the mud. Earlier denials in language and manner that were widely seen to be outlandishly arrogant and inappropriate have done tremendous damage to the company’s standing in the public’s mind.

Now that the company’s mistakes have been exposed and are being investigated by the police and a special independent commission with the power to call witnesses, what’s the point of these nonstop attacks from the peanut gallery? The company may have bitten off more than it can chew by taking on the construction projects. But the unforgiving public and its intolerance, as demonstrated during the previous occasion of delays, could be a factor in shaping the culture within the engineering department that has led to the latest scandal.

It is important to bear in mind that MTRC is one of few public transport operators in the world that can produce a profit after charging for depreciation year after year while providing an affordable service to the public. The underground railway fares in Hong Kong are comparatively cheaper than those in most other cities.

That’s accomplished without any government subsidies. In fact, MTRC has helped to enrich the public coffers by paying taxes in addition to sizeable annual dividends to the government, which has a larger than 80 percent stake in the company.

The reputation of the MTR, established through many years of consistent service, has given it the credentials to bid successfully for management and operation contracts overseas, including London, the city that built the world’s first underground railway. It may sound like a cliche to say that the MTR is the pride of Hong Kong. It’s also true, despite the attacks by grandstanding politicians in recent months. Many Hong Kong people are angry at the company for allegedly lying to them about the mishaps that raised concerns about structural safety of parts of its new construction projects. Such concern has obviously overshadowed the company’s achievements in many other areas.

The public has the right to demand corrective measures. But Hong Kong people should not tolerate the blatant exploitation of the mishaps by some politicians and many critics to advance their personal agenda. In doing so, they have unfairly tarred the entire MTR staff with the same brush.

MTRC management, meanwhile, has to adopt a more open and transparent policy, especially at the time when public trust in the company is brought into question. It is the public that provides the major source of the MTR’s income and to whom the company is ultimately responsible.