Have public transport from day one

I COMMUTE over 50km from home to the office.

The fact that my job also requires me to go for assignments adds to the mileage I register on a workday.

And I am not alone; many others who live on the fringes of the Klang Valley check in similar mileage on a daily basis.

I could opt to take public transport but it would take double the time to get to my destination.

And, I would be tired and stressed by the time I got to the office.

Many people, especially young adults who work in the city centre, have opted to buy houses in the outskirts of the Klang Valley due to their more affordable prices.

Many of these new housing developments have not been built along bus routes or close to train stations.

Like it or not, every household would need a vehicle or two to get around.

Cars, which were once deemed a luxury, are now more of a necessity.

When I ask around why many do not use public transport, the answers are similar: “it takes too much time”, “it is not cheap either”, “poor first- and last-mile connectivity.”

An efficient and cheap public transport option is the only way to reduce our dependence on private vehicles.

There is a lot of talk globally about reducing carbon footprint, with our government also rolling out many initiatives.

Carbon footprint is the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, primarily carbon dioxide, caused directly and indirectly by human activities.

Transportation is one of the top contributors to GHG emissions.

Reliable public transport like the LRT and MRT is not available in the outskirts of Klang Valley. - Filepic

One way to significantly lower the carbon footprint is by improving public transport, which should in turn reduce private vehicle ownership. While public transportation in the city centre is good, connectivity to the outskirts is not.

Often, residential developments in the outskirts are built with no direct connection to any public transport, creating a need for private vehicles.

To lower the number of private vehicles on the road, the government must ensure that a reliable public transport system is in place at new residential developments.

The minimum requirement would be for buses to ply every residential neighbourhood and pass through key areas such as commercial centres, clinics, markets and schools.

I am sure that if there were a reliable and economical alternative to private vehicles, many would take advantage of it.

Granted, there may not be many passengers in the beginning.

But ideally, the needs of even one commuter should matter.

Take Japan for example. The Kyu-Shirataki station was kept open by Japan Railways just for one regular passenger − a student − a decade ago.

The Japanese government had wanted to close several train stations in rural areas due to poor ridership. However, the Kyu-Shirataki station was kept open for an additional three years so that the student could commute to school until she completed her studies.

From what I’ve seen locally, public transport systems are in place only after an area is densely populated.

People in areas initially without public transport would likely already own private vehicles and be less reliant on buses or trains when they were eventually introduced.

They would have gotten used to driving themselves and would find it difficult to adapt to a new mode of transportation.

Therefore, there is a need to inculcate the habit of using public transport early instead of getting them to switch later.

The congestion in the city centre is getting worse; some people spend two to three hours on the road daily.

Before the situation takes a greater toll on our physical and mental health, something needs to be done.