Social Commentary (2): A dose of flexibility

Think nothing of eating a sweet on the MRT? Or having a sip of water? You would be surprised to know that indulging in such acts could result in a fine being slapped on you. In fact, a woman was fined recently for eating a sweet on the train. In my opinion, the rules banning eating and drinking on the MRT should be more flexible, and allowance should be made for certain food items, such as sweets, to be consumed on the MRT in special cases. The main reason for banning eating and drinking on the MRT is to maintain cleanliness, and while this may sound perfectly reasonable, it should not apply in all cases.

Cleanliness on public transport, such as the MRT, is something taken for granted in today’s society, where dirt and bacteria are viewed as unacceptable. In Singapore’s drive to be a powerhouse in the international economy, and a leading tourist attraction, nationwide cleanliness is of the utmost importance because it would greatly affect how we are perceived. Even the man on the street would agree that cleanliness on public transport is a must, since it reduces the chance of him falling sick and having his day-to-day activities interrupted.

Going back to the main issue, how then do we ensure cleanliness on the MRT? One of the solutions would be to ban eating and drinking, which is a rule that is currently in place. Imagine a situation where people consume their meals while travelling on the MRT in order to save time. The smell would be unbearable, and the mess, unfathomable. The food droppings would likely attract pests such as ants and rats, and greatly compromise the cleanliness of the train cabins; at the same time, germs and bacteria would be spread around easily, increasing the rate of disease transmission. From this, it can be seen that a rule banning eating and drinking on the MRT is certainly needed.

However, the consumption of certain food items, such as sweets, should be allowed on the MRT in special cases. For example, the woman who was fined for eating a sweet on the train had done so because she was feeling giddy and thirsty at that time. The sweet had likely prevented her from fainting, and allowed her to feel slightly more comfortable. This qualifies as a special case, and the woman should not have been fined, especially since the consequences could have been dire had she fainted. Besides, the consumption of a sweet on the MRT will not affect its overall cleanliness, since the sweet will merely be popped into the mouth and left there.

In response to the uproar after the above-mentioned case was made public, Transport Minister Raymond Lim said that “those who might need to eat or drink for medical or special reasons could still do so, but should first approach MRT staff for permission”. How practical is this, really? Taking this particular case as an example yet again, does it seem likely that the woman had the time to approach the MRT staff, considering that her need was urgent? All she wanted to do was to make herself feel slightly better as quickly as possible, and get to her destination safely. This clearly shows the need for some flexibility in the rules banning eating and drinking on the MRT.

In conclusion, the needs of a small minority should be accommodated, while ensuring that the standard of cleanliness in the MRT is maintained. There should be greater flexibility in the rules banning eating and drinking on the MRT, where allowance is made for the consumption of certain food items. A less rigid society precedes progress.