National Transport Policy 2019-2030 and Penang’s transport infrastructure

The newly launched National Transport Policy 2019-2030 (NTP2030) aims to set the agenda for our country’s transport sector along with the technological advances enabled by the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Asian Development Bank (ADB) estimated that the second largest sector (35%) with investment need is in transport infrastructure. That translates to US$37 billion a year for developing economies to enable them to “continue its economic growth momentum, eradicate poverty, and respond to climate change.”[1]

Separately, in Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank’s (AIIB) report, the projected investment need for “transport infrastructure to support trade and economic growth” was in the region of US$500-900 billion a year.[2] In fact, the transport sector took up the largest share of AIIB’s services.[3]

However, among 22 developing countries in the ADB’s report, Malaysia was the third lowest with infrastructure investment. Neigbouring countries such as Philippines, Myanmar, Indonesia, and Vietnam had invested more in infrastructure than Malaysia.[4]

Vietnam is currently building not one but two metro lines (Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi), and had the third highest infrastructure investment among the 22. Recently, Vietnam has even surpassed Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia as the best destination for investment.[5]

The development of transport infrastructure is widely recognised as a top priority for progress. In view of this, the NTP2030 is definitely timely and very significant for Malaysia’s development.

These regional development and national focus are all the more significant for a state like Penang that is currently implementing a transport master plan (PTMP).

The five policy thrusts of the NTP2030 serve as good guide for PTMP. In fact, these five areas are covered in one way or another in the PTMP.

Penang’s transport plan that covers land and sea mobility aims to improve the transport sector (policy thrust no.1). The balanced approach of expanding road network while building reliable public transport such as the Light Rail Transit (LRT) is intended to maximise efficiency of existing and upcoming transport infrastructure (policy thrust no.2).

PTMP’s several development phases set a long term trajectory that covers not only the island but also the mainland in order to create seamless mobility for people and goods transfer through multiple modes of public transport (LRT, bus rapid transit, tram, monorail) and road network, thus in-line with NTP2030’s policy thrust number 3.

Green technological ecosystem (NTP2030 policy thrust no.4) is constantly developing with better electric vehicles and more energy-efficient rail system. PTMP will have to be reviewed at each phase to ensure the best green infrastructure to be implemented.

With regard to expanding transport services into the global supply chain (NTP2030 policy thrust no.5), a better transport infrastructure developed through PTMP will definitely create a more convenient and reliable mobility experience to fulfil the demand of the logistics sector.

Currently, over 80 per cent of total electrical and electronic (E&E) products manufactured in Penang is exported from the state’s airport into the world.[6] Moreover, the airport will be anticipating to accommodate 20 million passengers a year from the present 7.8 million.[7]

A good transport infrastructure connecting the airport to the E&E ecosystem and central places should be prioritised.

Penang will have to move fast and move ahead with the PTMP while the nation is gearing up our transport infrastructure through the NTP2030. Other countries like Vietnam will not wait for us. They are moving ahead aggressively to get a bigger share of the global economy.

The mobility future of Penang and of Malaysia should not be derailed by the anti-growth, anti-progress, and anti-development mentality displayed by NGOs like the Penang Forum.

References

[1] Asian Development Bank, Meeting Asia’s Infrastructure Needs, p.xii, 45

[2] (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Transport Sector Strategy: Sustainable and Integrated Transport for Trade and Economic Growth in Asia)

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObDJyc1P1eI&t=2736s (from 36.30-36.35)

[4] Asian Development Bank, Meeting Asia’s Infrastructure Needs, p.29.

[5] https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/492507

[6] Sari Wahyuni, et al, The Key Success Factors of Penang as the Silicon Valley of the East, SBS Journal of Applied Business Research, vol.1, September 2012; Prema-chandra Athukorala and Suresh Narayanan, Economic Corridors and Regional Development: The Malaysian Experience, ADB Economics Working Paper Series, No.520, December 2017

[7] https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2019/10/21/transport-ministry-penang-international-airport-will-be-expanded-to-accommo/1802294

Costly to demolish Penang's existing buildings for bus or tram system

As Penang is gearing up to construct Light Rail Transit (LRT), the civil group Penang Forum had organised a forum called 'Penang Light Rail Transit: A Solution or Financial Distress' over the weekend to reject the plan and to replace the LRT with Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART), Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), and conventional tram system.

The main difference between the NGOs’ suggestion and the State Government’s is whether to build the transport system on the ground or on elevated tracks.

The NGOs want the system on the ground, regardless if it’s ART, BRT, or tram. Their main rationale is that it is cheaper.

The basis for the NGOs’ claim is the Halcrow Report, prepared by consultants in 2013 as a guide for Penang’s transport plan.

But the NGOs are wrong for two reasons.

First, the estimated cost stated in Halcrow Report that the NGOs referred to is unverified and incomplete.

Halcrow’s estimate doesn’t even include the cost for land acquisition, which can go up to the billions, depending on the roads and properties to be acquired.

Here is Halcrow’s disclaimer which the NGOs do not show to the public (The 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', page 39):

“It should be noted that all infrastructure provision costs exclude costs associated with land acquisition. It should also be noted that these cost estimates have been produced for the sole purpose of gaining a high-level understanding of the overall costs that are likely to be associated with implementing the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy'. As such, they are based on the adoption of a number of assumptions that are yet to be verified through the undertaking of more detailed feasibility studies.”

Halcrow made it clear that their estimation was unverified and incomplete.

To be sure, the ART is not listed in Halcrow Report. Nonetheless, the unverified costing listed in Halcrow for other on-ground transport system has been misused by NGOs.

The second reason why the NGOs are wrong is that they have failed again and again to take note the important qualification stated in Halcrow Report about transport system that is built on ground in Penang.

Halcrow explicitly warned that on-ground system will add more traffic problems to the existing roads (The Highway Improvement Plan, page 7):

“On Penang Island, particularly within George Town and on the approaches to George Town, many of the existing roads are fronted by established development and are already catering for a wide mix of transport uses. The introduction of an extensive Tram and Bus Rapid Transit system, as proposed under the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', with [sic] further add to these problems.”

As stated in Halcrow, transport system that is built on ground such as tram or bus rapid transit will cause more problems to the present built environment in Penang.

If Penang wants to build on-ground system (ART, BRT, or tram), many existing buildings and structures will need to be demolished to construct new roads as dedicated lanes for bus and tram.

For any State Government to acquire premium land with standing building to be demolished to build on-ground public transport will cost a lot.