OCT 20 — Aren’t Malaysians fed up with the continuity of failed transport policies being implemented by the Malaysian Government?

Last week, a nationwide toll hike across major highways was put into effect by the Malaysian government. The increment of these toll hikes were up as much as 100 per cent for certain highways such as the Sprint Expressway. To make matters worse, DBKL (Kuala Lumpur City Hall) even proposed for congestion charging to be implemented for users driving into Kuala Lumpur by the year 2017. 

These changes are undoubtedly not popular among the Malaysian public. However, before conducting further analysis and debate, it is important to first look into the government’s point of view around the matter. The rationale behind the planned increase in transportation costs could be linked to the effort in reducing traffic congestion at urban areas. Based on the supply-demand economic theory, once the cost of using private transportation is increased, road use demand and traffic congestion will be reduced.

This argument is certainly valid to a certain extent, but the government fails to consider the macroscopic perspective of the transportation woes. Without a credible get-around alternative transport route, the affordability, mobility and welfare of certain segments of the population is reduced. By increasing toll prices at such excessive rates, a lower-income proportion of the population will suffer the most by being excluded from using these basic necessities because they simply could not afford to pay for it anymore.

Taking Selangor as an example, according to government figures, the average median wage for state is roughly around RM2000 per month in 2014. Now most of the Selangorians rely heavily on highways to get to work and their desired destinations. Assuming that a typical commuter in Selangor passes through 4 tolls per day, with an average hike of RM1 per toll, the increment in transportation costs is calculated to be at least RM120 a month or RM1440 a year! Bear in mind, this additional increase in toll fares alone take up as much as 6 per cent of the expenditure of an average median wage for a Selangorian.

Not only that, Prime Minister Najib Razak unashamedly issued an indirect threat to reduce the amount of BR1M (1Malaysia People’s Aid) allowance in order for the highway concessions to remain unchanged. However, the BR1M allowance provided by the BN government is only as little as RM750 per annum. Based on the calculations above, the BR1M allowance is clearly insufficient to cover the hike in toll fares as an average Selangorian is expected to fork out an extra RM1440 a year because of it.

Hence, what is the point of the government giving out BR1M allowance on one hand, and taking double the amount of money out from the rakyat’s pocket on the other hand? Not to mention that the introduction of GST, as well as other price hikes should technically also be aided by the BR1M allowance was not yet factored into account. Does the government still believes that BR1M is the miracle solution that can solve all financial problems of the people?

Of course, the government argues that nothing can be done to maintain the toll fares as the concession agreements was signed 20 years ago. Nevertheless, why isn’t the agreement or contract among highway agencies scrutinised by the same government back then prior to it being signed? Thus, in order to be fair to Malaysians, I strongly believe that the government and its crony companies must be transparent and report on the actual use of this additional funds generated from hiking toll rates.

Moving on to the case of congestion charging in Kuala Lumpur, it makes perfect sense for the government follow the footsteps of Singapore and London on their success in reducing the number of motorised vehicles into a highly congested urban area. However, the government, or in this case DBKL again fails to consider the wider problems and consequences of implementing such policy.

Taking London as an example, the introduction of congestion charging in the year 2003 played a key role in reducing the amount of traffic in its city centre. The percentage of motorised vehicles as a primary mode of transport dropped from its peak at 50 per cent in the 1990s to 37 per cent today. As a result, the commuters in London shifted towards using rail travel as an alternative for mobility around the city. This paradigm shift is only made possible with the success model of the London Underground tube network.

Coming back to our capital city Kuala Lumpur, does our buses and rail infrastructure have the capacity to cope with a sudden surge in commuters using public transportation in the short term? Is the inter-connectivity of our public transportation system good enough so that the people can use them with ease and convenience? Bear in mind that the LRT Line Extension Project again does not entirely solve all our public transportation woes. Hence, without an improved public transportation system, the introduction of congestion charging around KL cannot be justified in the foreseeable future.

Drawing a conclusion based on the points raised above, I believe that the Transport Ministry should reconsider the economic consequences of existing transport policies in affecting the welfare of the people. Is it fair for ordinary Malaysians to constantly be scapegoats for increased transportation costs for profits? What happened to the promise made by the BN government to gradually reduce toll fares in its manifesto before the 13^th General Elections? 
 

* This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.