Proposed amendments to regulations were not followed through, the Democratic Party legislator says
SAMUEL CHANsamuel.chan@scmp.com
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 30 September, 2015, 12:01am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 30 September, 2015, 1:28am
Passengers carry large luggages on MTR at Tai Wai Station. Photo: Edward Wong
Recent rows over how the MTR Corporation enforced its by-laws governing baggage size could have been prevented had the government honoured a promise in 2010 to review regulations of the railway operator, a lawmaker said yesterday.
The regulations, known as the Mass Transit Railway By-Laws, were sometimes ambiguous and so outdated that, if strictly enforced, they could lead to more "absurd" situations, James To Kun-sun of the Democratic Party warned.
Instances of ambiguous by-laws were the prohibition of an "attempt to consume any food or beverage" and the use of foul language, To said.
"Take loitering as an example. The act itself is illegal under the MTR by-laws," he said.
"But outside MTR premises, the act of loitering per se is not illegal; only loitering with a criminal intent is illegal. So the same act is legal above the ground but illegal underground."
The MTR Corp triggered public outrage for intercepting three student commuters within a week this month for carrying bulky musical instruments - a guzheng, or Chinese zither, in the first case and a cello in the other two cases - while allegedly being more lenient towards parallel-goods traders from the mainland.
Areas that To said needed improvements included creating signs that were clearly understandable to everyone, even people who could not read Chinese or English.
He also urged the government to accept "long overdue" amendments similar to those he had proposed for by-laws governing other locations - the Kai Tak airport and Ocean Park.
To was referring to a proposal he laid out in 2007 to revise the MTR by-laws.
Then transport minister Eva Cheng had promised a full review of the by-laws within 12 months after the MTR's merger with the Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation.
In 2010, the government proposed in a 70-page report the revisions to be made and designated September 1, 2010, as the date of implementation, the lawmaker said.
Since then, however, it had been stalling on the issue, and this May, the Legislative Council was informed the government considered the amendments "not necessary".
Last night, the Transport and Housing Bureau reiterated the government's written response to Legco in May that it considered revisions to the by-laws "not necessary".
http://m.scmp.com/news/article/1862545/outdated-mtr-laws-behind-recent-baggage-disputes-lawmaker-james-says
