Plan for the long-term

R

CONNECTIVITY and convenience are the key to encouraging greater use of public transportation.

Hence, the recent reports involving the Light Rail Transit (LRT3) project in which the Finance Ministry announced that it would be doing away with at least five proposed stations, reducing the number of coaches and train sets as well as the size of stations, are somewhat contradictory.

While there may be merit to the Government’s decision to revisit or even shelve the proposed High Speed Rail project from Kuala Lumpur to Singapore, and the East Coast Railway Link (ECRL), projects like the LRT3 and the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) are lifelines for working-class Malaysians and at the same time, critical in alleviating increasing traffic congestion in the Klang Valley.

Whether the LRT3 project costs RM9bil, RM16bil or even RM31bil, the bigger question to answer is whether Malaysia is committed to providing a world-class public transportation system, and how far as well as how much of that commitment will be translated into benefitting the people who depend on public transportation including those who may be persuaded into trading their car keys for a train ticket.

The success of any public transportation system and service is ultimately dependent on political will to invest in establishing an efficient, convenient and preferred mode of transportation as well as commitment to introduce regulatory reforms to subsequently promote and advance the use of public transportation.

It is estimated that only about 20% of Malaysians use public transportation. Malaysia’s rail network that includes the LRT, MRT, Monorail, Express Rail Link and KTM Komuter is still unable to efficiently serve the Klang Valley’s estimated 7.2 million people over an area spanning 2,800sq km.

The inadequate rail network means stations are located too far away and many still need to take a bus, taxi or rely on e-hailing services to get to the nearest station.

Political will is the most important factor in deciding whether Malaysian cities are equipped with the desired rail connectivity or even dedicated bus lanes.

Even with all this in place, encouraging the use of public transportation will require the introduction of unpopular regulations such as higher parking charges, reducing the number of parking bays, introducing vehicle entry permits into the city (like Singapore) and restricting/reducing the number of vehicles on the road to alleviate congestion.

While cost savings is certainly in everyone’s interest, it can also mean spending today as opposed to 10 years from now .

Spending on longer trains, more train sets, bigger stations and even more stops for the LRT3 project today is no different to the construction of the KL International Airport which took many years to increase its capacity.

If cost is the overriding factor, would it not be in the government’s interest to renegotiate the terms and conditions that would reduce the amount LRT3 project delivery partners (PDPs) reportedly stand to earn from the project especially since MRCB is a government-linked company?

It would not be entirely ridiculous to call on the PDPs to perform an act of “national service” – of course not for free but for a significantly reduced profit margin – considering the LRT3 is after all a government project intended to benefit the rakyat.

Who knows, the experience may even be so successful that it becomes a model for future projects with a high degree of national interest.

HITMAN

Shah Alam