Home New Writers Is Penang still leading?

Is Penang still leading?


Follow us on our Malay and English WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram, Tiktok and Youtube channels.

Penang can lead again: Just discard the SRS transport proposal and return to the original Halcrow plan, writes Eric Cheah.

When Penang fell to the opposition in 2008, Penangites were ecstatic because we thought real change was coming.

We did see many positive changes. For one thing, the political change in Penang encouraged folks in other states to vote for change – and in the 2018 general election, we embraced the “New Malaysia”.

After the election euphoria subsided, the new state administration settled in and went about expediting its “Penang Transport Master Plan” or PTMP. This grand proposal by SRS Consortium, however, is different from the transport masterplan put forward by the original transport consultants, Halcrow.

The SRS proposal will cost RM46bn, and some believe it could even exceed RM50bn – excluding the cost of the land reclamation to create three artificial islands. We are still being told that this proposal will solve all traffic congestion woes.

But the SRS proposal is extremely unlikely to deliver all that it claims it will.

Not only that, the environmental risks will be significant. The six-lane RM9bn Pan Island Link highway will pass close to the Air Itam Dam (through PIL 1) – and that itself presents a major risk.

The SRS plan could also threaten the financial stability of the state and degrade fishing waters.

It is bad enough so many fish have already died along Penang’s northern coastal waters – attributed to the unusually high presence of phytoplankton resulting in reduced dissolved oxygen. (See this article “Reclamations and Red Tides”, written by Filipino marine biologist Angel C Alcala, who discusses the sudden blooms of certain types of planktons, red tides and land reclamation in coastal areas.)

READ MORE:  Why bulldoze mega-reclamation in Penang?

Shockingly, the 2015 proposal by SRS Consortium, which was selected to implement the Halcrow masterplan, deviates significantly from the Halcrow masterplan, adopted by the state government in 2013.

The Halcrow plan was actually hatched by AJC Planning Consultants Sdn Bhd, Halcrow Consultants Sdn Bhd and Singapore cruise consultants, who were engaged in 2011 by the Penang government and the Northern Corridor Regional Implementation Agency to come up with a Penang transport masterplan at a cost of RM3.2m.

After almost two years of research, meetings and workshops with the public, Halcrow came up with its blueprint that would include about RM10bn worth of public transport infrastructure:

  • Three major tram routes totalling 60km radiating from George Town:
    • to Tanjung Bungah in the north
    • to Bayan Lepas in the south
    • to Air Itam/Paya Terubong
  • Two shorter tram lines in loops within George Town
  • Three bus rapid transit routes (with dedicated bus lanes):
    • Butterworth to Machang Bubok
    • the Southern Corridor from Butterworth to Simpang Empat
    • a third route serving the Bayan Lepas Free Trade Zone
  • One commuter rail line from Pinang Tunggal to Nibong Tebal
  • Ferries:
    • Butterworth to George Town
    • Butterworth to Gurney/Queensbay
    • Queensbay to Weld Quay

With a bit of modification, the original Halcrow plan will still cost around RM10bn and provide an integrated public transport system for both Penang island and mainland Penang (see “How to slash Penang’s transport infrastructure cost to RM10bn“).

So far, I have read a couple of feeble explanations from the present administration why the Halcrow plan is not being implemented.

  • It is a conceptual plan whereas the SRS proposal has a funding model ie the land reclamation to create three artificial islands
  • Penang people will never give up their cars!
READ MORE:  Syabas kerana membatalkan lebuhraya PJD Link di Selangor; sekarang hentikan penambakan mega di Pulau Pinang!

The first argument can be easily dismissed. If the state does not take the Halcrow plan seriously, then of course it remains a conceptual plan!

The second sounds reasonable at first. If the whole public transport system is not revamped, drivers would definitely not want to give up their cars.

But then the state government sidelined the Halcrow plan just like that in favour of the SRS proposal. Does this not reflect a failure by the state government to take the more sustainable Halcrow plan seriously?

We need traffic solutions – yesterday – or preferably within the next couple of years, not hallucinatory solutions that will take almost a decade to realise.

What many cannot avoid seeing now is that Penang is leading in the wrong areas – landslides, floods and dead fish.

But I believe Penang can lead again. Just discard the SRS proposal and return to the original Halcrow plan.

The Pearl of the Orient can and must shine again.

Eric Cheah is a former national chess player and social activist who has fought for the rights of Vietnamese workers who were exploited, trafficked or unfairly prosecuted.

The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
  1. Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
  2. Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
  3. Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
  4. Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
  5. Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
Support our work by making a donation. Tap to download the QR code below and scan this QR code from Gallery by using TnG e-wallet or most banking apps:
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Aaron chong
Aaron chong
6 Sep 2019 4.03pm

Why embark on such a costly and risky project(PTMP) when our current Rapid Bus system, which can actually move people not cars, leaves so much to be desired.
Currently, public transport in Pg hardly takes up to only 5% modal share as compared to private vehicle use, and improving bus infrastructures such as access to good bus shelters and shaded walkways coupled with a reliable service with adequate frequency is very much needed to increase ridership in our buses and is yet to be in place.
It will be foolish an irresponsible too to ignore also the effects of climatic change, strain on our environment and ecosystem and the destruction of our precious fish banks and fishermen’s livelihood.

Simon Tan
6 Sep 2019 1.32am

The construction of an RM8bn LRT system – the state’s preferred mode – is expected to take about seven years. So what are we going to do in the interim? Why not optimise the use of the present fleet of Rapid Penang buses? Who knows, with better knowledge, software and more buses (State Government buy own buses for CAT and return tens of buses to Rapid Pg), it could turn out that an improved bus service is all Penang needs to ease its transport woes.

Zulfikar Aziz
Zulfikar Aziz
6 Sep 2019 9.14am
Reply to  Simon Tan

I was told that presently there are total of 55 buses used for various CAT routes. So much improvement of rapid Penang service can be realised almost immediately once the state govt returns these buses to rapid and purchase own buses to be run by rapid for the CAT bus program. Some of the buses purchased should be small buses suitable for feeder route services.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x