Dynamic Improvements to Public
Transportation in Malaysia
ABF Public Transport Forum
October 28-29, 2008
Presentation Structure
Introductions – who we are
Resolving Public Transport Issues in
Malaysia
Regulation has to change
Organization has to change
A New Model for Public Transport
Making it happen
Conclusion
So…who are you?
The Association for the Improvement of
Mass-Transit (TRANSIT), Klang Valley
A diverse group of public transport users
A united voice for the passenger
Our Goal
to ensure the voice of the passenger is heard in
public transport planning, regulation, and
operations
To increase awareness about what public public
transport can bring to our communities
Resolving Public Transport Issues in
Malaysia
MYTH:
Public Transport is a mobility service for poor people
Hence the following misunderstandings:
Investment in private transport is more important for
the nation than investment in public transport
Supporting the needs of private transport users is a
priority in Malaysia
There are no “choice users” of public transport
We should give the users (those poor souls) the
cheap, basic service that they want/need
Real improvement to public transport requires largescale investments such as LRT or monorail
Resolving Public Transport Issues in
Malaysia
FACT:
 Public transport provides 3 functions for society
Mobility for those not using private transport
Development tool to reduce infrastructure costs
A business operation with potential for profits
 Investment in public transport is investment in
critical communications infrastructure
 Far less money has been invested properly into
public transport than in other infrastructure
Why don’t “choice users” choose to use
public transport?
TRIP
(Mass) transit journey is too tiring
ROUTE
Transit routes are very complicated
PLATFORM
Transit points are not accessible
To make people use public transport…
TRIP
MAKE TRIP FAST AND COMFORTABLE
(Mass) transit journey is too tiring
MAKE GETTING TO PLACES SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD
ROUTE
Transit routes are very complicated
MAKE TRANSFERS CONVENIENT AND HASSLE FREE
PLATFORM
Transit points are not accessible
The current system cannot work because:
The single most important competitor to public transport is private transport
Taxpayers’ money has not been used to fund common infrastructure to
support public transport the way it is used to
build and maintain roads for cars.
TRIP
Collective movement of people
ROUTE
Servicing common corridor with greater
Operators pitted against each other will take every cost
efficiency
savings they can get away with in absence of any
reasonable standards, regulations and enforcement
PLATFORM
Facilitated by pooled resources (stations,
street signals, dedicated lanes etc)
Mass transit vehicles SHARE travel space with private vehicles
Operators maximize whatever they can squeeze from any loophole in public
infrastructure (i.e. loitering of parked buses, unruly road hogging and speeding)
Regulation has to change
Public transport is not coordinated
Various disconnected services operated by
various disconnected corporations
Some important questions
Why are government corporations competing
with private corporations?
Will the S.P.A.N. be just another agency? (#14)
Does the government have a clear, realistic plan
for public transport?
Are government and operators listening to us?
So?
To do this we must appreciate and
understand all functions of public
transport when we plan, regulate, and
operate these services
Is the service providing universal accessibility?
Is the service enhancing development?
Is the service planned and implemented to
reduce other infrastructure costs?
Have we maximized the benefits and
minimized the costs?
Are we planning ahead or planning too late?
The importance of planning:
TRIP
Collective movement of people
ROUTE
Servicing common corridors with greater
efficiency
PLATFORM
Facilitated by pooled resources (stations,
street signals, dedicated lanes etc)
Who does what in public transport
This highly systemic and strategic task should be entrusted to
a centralized authority with a high-level of
legislative and enforcement powers
TRIP
Collective movement of people
ROUTE
Servicing common corridor with greater
This operational task is typically taken by private or
efficiency quasi-government operators.
PLATFORM
Facilitated by pooled resources (stations,
street signals, dedicated lanes etc)
Pooled resources refer to commonly shared infrastructures funded by taxpayers.
Ownership by local and regional level authorities is a must.
The bottom line of public transport…
MAKE TRIP FAST AND COMFORTABLE
MAKE GETTING TO PLACES SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD
MAKE TRANSFERS CONVENIENT AND HASSLE FREE
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS in:
Accessibility
The measurement of performance is the key,
Availability
because……
• If you can’t measure it, you can’t control it…
Reliability
• If you can’t control it, you can’t manage it…
• If you can’t manage it, you can’t improve it.
Safety
Comfort
Change the regulation…
Public Transport is a “rakyat issue”
Public Transport Oversight and Regulation
should be handled by a Select
Parliamentary Committee
A Centralized Authority (S.P.A.N.) to:
Create national standards for public transport
Integrate planning with National Physical Plan
Determine funding needs and provide funds
Invest in critical improvements to infrastructure
Change the regulation…
Local / Regional Authorities are
empowered to carry out the regulation of
public transport
Local / Regional Authorities would be integrated
with economic growth regions
Focus on local and regional planning as
identified in the National Physical Plan
Ownership of crucial public transport
infrastructure
Provision of investment capital and funding
A new model for public transport
Authority  provides & owns all vital
infrastructure (incl. routes)
Operators  contracted to the Local or
Regional Authority for a 3-5 year period
Contract  through open tender and KPI
Operators are paid a contract fee for
services provided with additional
incentives for meeting/exceeding KPI
Feedback from passengers becomes vital
A new organizational model
Fair allocation of risks and responsibilities between operators and authorities
KPIs in:
 Accessibility
 Availability
 Reliability
 Safety
 Comfort
CONSUMED OUTPUTS
Passenger/mile
Passenger/energy unit
Infra. KPIs
Service KPIs
INPUTS
Taxpayers Money
Infrastructure Technology
Resources
Labor
SERVICE
EFFICIENCY
PRODUCED OUTPUTS
Journey covered/labor
Operational cost/mile
Vehicle seats/mile
A new financing model
Non-discriminating distribution of tax revenue and fee income to cover entire population
LOCAL / STATE GOVT
FUNDING
Quit rent rates depend on proximity
to transit connections
Congestion charges, summons
PENALTY IF
KPIs NOT MET
TRANSPORT
AUTHORITIES
FEDERAL GOVT
Taxes, royalties, duties, levies
CIVIL
DUTY
COMMUTERS
EXTRA FEE FOR VALUE-ADDED
SERVICE
OPERATORS
Contracted to:
Private local
GLC-funded local
Private foreign
The view from TRANSIT
Indiscriminate LRT expansion not needed
Go back to the RapidKL “hub-and-spoke”
model used from 2006-2007
This time, we make it work!
Authority builds vital infrastructure (hubs, lanes)
Authority directs local councils to identify bus
routes
All bus operators under contract to Authority
Packaging of “Areas” will combine lucrative trunk
routes with express and suburban routes
TRANSIT’s Klang Valley Network
Our “Strategic Plan” - Start from the basics
Make the bus service work well
Enhance the bus services by introducing critical
infrastructure (lanes, hubs)
Introduce “Quality Bus” or “Rapid Transit”
services to improve speed, frequency, reliability
Then, we invest
How many passengers per direction per hour?
Choose the appropriate technology to meet our
needs  maximize benefits at the lowest cost!
Ex.  Kelana Jaya LRT to Lembah Subang
To move 10,000 pax/d/h we can choose:
LRT
Capital
Cost/km
Pax/d/h
(000s)
Right-ofWay type
Flexibility
Monorail Tram*
Bus*
RM250- RM150300 mn 200 mn
9-25
6-20
RM40150 mn
4-15
RM2550 mn
3-10
Class A Class A
none
Class
A/B/C
some
Class
A/B/C
greater
Community Urban
Urban
U/Sub
U/S/Rur
Growth
2 gen
3 gen
2 gen
none
2 gen
Moving 10,000 passengers/d/h
So what does that mean?
 The LRT solution is not the only one we should
look at – the costs are higher and benefits lower
 Mass-Transit  only when demand is proven
 For congested urban areas, monorail may be a
more cost-effective solution than LRT
 Rapid Trams have the greatest combination of
costs, capacity, and flexibility
 Rapid Transit on main roads (BRT, Trams) and
expressways (ERT) is the best way to introduce
rapid transit to our communities
Uses the existing (and paid-for) road infrastructure
Construction costs are lower so more km of routes
Can be built faster and fine-tuned more easily
Perhaps you want to see lines on a map?
-ve > +ve
 I feel it is an attempt at
misdirection
we see the map, we
think the line will be built
We stop asking those
serious questions
We wait and wait and
wait and promises continue
 but no improvements!
Ex. Subang Jaya LRT
Ex. Penang Monorail
Conclusion
Understand what makes public transport
works best (utilizing all 3 functions)
Public Transport is a “rakyat issue”
Involve the rakyat & involve them
S.P.A.N. plus Local / Regional Authority
Gov’t management + Private operators
Fair allocation: funding, resources & risks
Maximize benefits, minimize costs!
Keep it simple and make it work!
Thank you for your time
Moaz Yusuf Ahmad
Moaz.ahmad@gmail.com
012-248-3330
On behalf of TRANSIT
http://transitmy.org
Klangvalley.transit@gmail.com
klangvalley_transitsubscribe@yahoogroups.com