By Sherilyn Goh
The Land Public Transport Commission (Spad) has announced that a revision in public transport fares is due to take place by the end of the month, after a thwarted attempt at raising fares earlier this year. Tiger lays out the case for not raising public transport fares, and questions if the government is truly committed to boosting public transport ridership.
By the end of October, commuters in the Klang Valley can expect the addition of four new stations to the Ampang line – from its existing Sri Petaling terminus to the new Putra Heights station in southwest Kuala Lumpur, where passengers can transit to the Kelana Jaya line – to be fully operational.
The brand new six-coach light rail transit (LRT) train – announced since early January this year – will also finally be utilised, replacing the current twenty year old coaches, which sounds just about the right time to cater to the rising passenger volume in the city.
But hold on, before urbanites can jump and rejoice at the timely expansion, do note that this is coming alongside an imminent, across-the-board revision in both LRT and monorail fares, which will be announced before October 31, according to Spad chairman Syed Hamid Albar.
There goes Tiger’s budget wishlist for this year. Because this sounds suspiciously like a price hike, as Budget 2016 is also set to be unveiled prior to that on October 23. Tiger of course welcomes a plan for price reduction too, but such is rarely proven to be the case.
Fare hike coming?
In fact, Prasarana Malaysia Bhd, the operator of public transport, has already hinted that it is indeed going to be a fare hike, citing increasing electricity tariff and maintenance cost.
Note that a previous attempt to increase prices have been thwarted prior to the implementation of the goods and services tax (GST) in April. The prices for buses, LRTs and monorails were maintained as public outcry over the increase in taxi fares and the anticipated increase in cost of living prevailed.
While the lingering inflationary pressures of the GST and that of a weaker ringgit are still in place, the timing of this move definitely takes Tiger by surprise.
In fact, MIDF Research had expected more subsidies for the transportation sector to encourage the use of public transport in the upcoming budget proposal, meaning that the fare hike is unanticipated given this dampened economic climate.
With the hike of public transport fares at this juncture, one could also reasonably expect inflationary pressures to further edge up in coming months, with spillover effects to the following year.
From what Tiger understands, when you achieve the economies of scale through sufficient ridership that should more than offset your fixed costs, especially after so many years in operations using the same old coaches, one should reasonably be able to cut prices instead.
All things being constant, passenger volumes also increased year after year. 195,000 commuters are reported to board the existing Ampang line daily, with an additional 40,000 passengers expected with the operations of the line’s extension.
The construction of the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) Line 2 and LRT Line 3 are also in the progress, with completion not expected until at least half a decade later. Will this effectively mean that for the completion of every phase, there will be a revision in public transport fares?
While the ridership of the new extensions during early stages is expected to be low, it is up to the government to increase the usage and make the lines profitable.
One would definitely not expect the government to shift the burden to the public, when the urbanites are already burdened with the endless construction projects causing traffic jams and headaches prior to project completion.
And now after project completion that we are further slapped with price hikes? Tiger cannot help but shake her head.
Making public transportation work
When it comes to public transport connectivity, the perennial problem of first- and last- mile connectivity (or lack thereof) has also not been addressed. In fact, do not be surprised when commuters spend more on taxis and feeder buses after getting off their respective train stations.
As you alight at your station, you have the option to wait for the feeder bus which is hardly regular, or to hail a cab which may then cost you more.
Park and ride facilities are also a rare sight, with parking charges also becoming another additional cost. To go to the nearest LRT station from home, and to get to work from the LRT station closest to the office, Tiger spends about RM8 per trip on taxi fares, multiplied by two trips per day, that brings to RM32 just on first- and last- mile connectivity alone.
And this is not including the train fares to get from the end of one line to the other. The fact though, is one spend more on transport than any other expenditures.
Undeniably, public transportation cost is expensive, notwithstanding the associated cost of inefficiency that comes with it. Which makes sense when wage earners just choose to purchase a vehicle instead, not that because it is cheap but that the economic cost may come to about the same, sans the frustration of waiting endlessly and, sometimes, aimlessly.
In other words owning a car is no longer a want but a need given the current state of public transport infrastructure, which explains the sheer amount of new vehicles that get on the road every year. And then we wonder why are KL roads forever congested.
And can you believe that they were just talking about implementing congestion charges? Pfffft. Tiger is glad that Spad has now put the idea on hold, because they too realise that this will never work given the current subpar state of public transportation.
Instead of increasing prices to address the issue, perhaps Spad should work harder on figuring out how to increase public transport ridership, such as offering travel discounts during non-peak hours to disperse the passenger volume across peak and non-peak hours.
It is only when the combined monetary and nonmonetary benefits of using public transport outweigh the cost of owning a car that urbanites would consider waking up extra early and traveling that extra mile to work. Raising fares contradicts just that.
Public transport needs love, too
Not only that the act of raising fares discourages public transport usage, figures also indicate that efforts by the government to boost public transport usage is lacklustre at best.
With the announcement of Budget 2016 around the corner, Tiger is also compelled to raise the point that to make public transport affordable, one can also not be made feasible without subsidies. The Singaporean government projected SGD 4 billion (RM11.8 billion) a year on transport infrastructure and subsidies, in a bid to continuously ensure public transport affordability in the island state.
The UK government spends GBP23 billion (RM145.3 billion) on the transport sector, a chunk of which derived from local transport spending (39%) and railway (23%), with a smaller portion allocated to building roads (13%).
Even when they have some of the best, state-of-the-art infrastructures, one do not get complacent and is continuously coming out with ways to improvise cost and enhance users’ experience.
This is in contrast with Malaysia, where, in Budget 2015, recall that only RM3.3 billion is allocated to the Transport Ministry, and Tiger wonders how much of this goes back to actually developing public transport network?
Instead we see more stimulus spending on building highways and toll roads, which conversely encourages more cars to go on the road.
Compared to the RM80 billion allocated to building highways and infrastructure in Budget 2015 (not including a RM32 billion on MRT Line 2 and LRT Line 3), the budget allotted to developing public transport seems meagre and pathetic in contrast, that they are not even broken down in monetary terms.
In other words, the government is more interested in infrastructure projects rather than executing real reforms to the public transport sector.
The government fails to acknowledge the fact that such capital spending on public transport infrastructure alone is not going to yield the desired results, without continuous brainwork and effort dedicated to making public transport an attractive and affordable alternative.
Budget 2015 clearly showed no drastic will to improve public transport infrastructure in the country, Tiger can only wonder how much of the same could be expected of the upcoming Budget 2016?
Remember that connectivity and mobility form the backbone of any other thriving economy, and Malaysia is no different in this instance.
GRRRRR!!!
You must be logged in to post a comment.