Enhancing Public Transport… …in the Kinta Valley Summit on Urban Public Transport 09 November, 2008

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 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 large- scale 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

To make people use public transport… TRIP (Mass) transit journey is too tiring ROUTE Transit routes are very complicated PLATFORM Transit points are not accessible MAKE TRIP FAST AND COMFORTABLE MAKE GETTING TO PLACES SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD MAKE TRANSFERS CONVENIENT AND HASSLE FREE

Organization and Regulation Too many government agencies Not enough power/ability/willingness to enforce regulations Incomplete understanding of what public transport can offer to a community Focus on the “Lower-income group”  low expectations Competition does not help the public transportation industry Operators may sacrifice quality, service, mobility, safety, rights of workers, etc. safety

Who does what in public transport TRIP Collective movement of people ROUTE Servicing common corridor with greater efficiency PLATFORM Facilitated by pooled resources (stations, street signals, dedicated lanes etc) This highly systemic and strategic task should be entrusted to a centralized authority with a high-level of legislative and enforcement powers This operational task is typically taken by private or quasi-government operators. Pooled resources refer to commonly shared infrastructures funded by taxpayers. Ownership by local and regional level authorities is a must.

Regional / local planning Local governments focus on traffic management and cater to cars Development planning does not include public transportation early enough Planning is not coordinated with other governments within the region Private model – improvements/proposals often focus on increasing operator profits rather than mobility

Real Investments in Public Transportation Change of Attitude – We are investing in infrastructure which is an asset for this nation Rail infrastructure is the most efficient way to move people and goods Complete, accessible rapid-transit networks increase people’s mobility Better planning + mobility = better quality of life Remove thousands of cars from our roads daily Fewer jams = greater economic productivity & economic growth

Universal Accessibility/Design NOT just “facilities for the disabled” simplify access to life for everyone Meet the needs of people of all ages and abilities "Universal design is the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design." –Ron Mace

Enhancing Development and Reducing Infrastructure Costs Urban growth may be “planned” but often leads to urban sprawl  More than 1000 suburban “housing estates” in the Klang Valley Suburban and exurban communities are often “low- density” Transport infrastructure is often inadequate Providing infrastructure is costly for local councils/government Mobility requires private transportation  money  “Automobile apartheid” Infrastructure is inadequate  How long can it last?

Transit-oriented Development Communities designed around public transport hubs Pedestrian and people friendly Environmentally friendly Economically sustainable if planned properly Lowers taxes and infrastructure costs

The bottom line of public transport… KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS in: Accessibility Availability Reliability Safety Comfort The measurement of performance is the key, because…… If you can’t measure it, you can’t control it… If you can’t control it, you can’t manage it… If you can’t manage it, you can’t improve it. MAKE TRIP FAST AND COMFORTABLE MAKE GETTING TO PLACES SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD MAKE TRANSFERS CONVENIENT AND HASSLE FREE

So How? What are the Solutions? 1. Parliamentary and DUN Committees 2. National Public Transportation Authority Introduce and maintain National Standards Integrated Planning across Malaysia 3. Local/Regional Public Transport Authorities Regional and Local Planning e.g for Kinta Valley Controls routes, fares, assets Operators under contract to provide services 4. Encourage and use public feedback

A new model for public transport Local / Regional 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

Recommended Structure Parliamentary Committee LPTA IDR-S (Oversight) LPTA KL-Sel (Oversight) LPTA NCER (Oversight) LPTA ECER (Oversight) LPTA KV (Oversight) NPTA (Vision & Standards) NPTA (Vision & Standards) Finance Ministry (Funding) Public Feedback Bus and Rail Operators are under contract (time limited) to each LPTA. The Ministry of Finance would buy buses and provide capital funding where needed. LPTAs would own the buses and routes and maintain local oversight and provide direct operations subsidy where needed. EPU (Planning) EPU (Planning)

A new organizational model KPIs in: Accessibility Availability Reliability Safety Comfort INPUTS Taxpayers Money Infrastructure Technology Resources Labor CONSUMED OUTPUTS Passenger/mile Passenger/energy unit Infra. KPIs Service KPIs PRODUCED OUTPUTS Journey covered/labor Operational cost/mile Vehicle seats/mile COST EFFECTIVENESS COST EFFICIENCY SERVICE EFFICIENCY OPERATORS’ SCOPE AUTHORITIES’ SCOPE Fair allocation of risks and responsibilities between operators and authorities

UNIFORM FEE COLLECTION (integrated ticketing system) A new financing model TRANSPORT AUTHORITIES COMMUTERS OPERATORS Contracted to: Private local GLC-funded local Private foreign PAYOUTS BASED ON DISTANCE TRAVELLED AND DRIVING MANHOURS PENALTY IF KPIs NOT MET EXTRA FEE FOR VALUE-ADDED SERVICE CIVIL DUTY LOCAL / STATE GOVT Quit rent rates depend on proximity to transit connections Congestion charges, summons FEDERAL GOVT Taxes, royalties, duties, levies FUNDING PENALTY IF KPIs NOT MET Non-discriminating distribution of tax revenue and fee income to cover entire population

Think past the “Mega-project” People want connectivity and convenience! Mega-projects take time and cost money Other forms of rapid transit do exist These are the cost- effective, quick, comprehensive solutions we need

The view from TRANSIT Indiscriminate expansion not needed Go back to the “hub-and-spoke” model 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

A Plan for Action Short-Term (up to Dec 2009) Present the view of public transport users as a single voice Ensure that the revamp by Combined Bus Services (CBS) includes public feedback – get yourselves to the table! Make sure that Ipoh Council and CBS enforce existing regulations (no Pajak system) Improve accessibility of bus services

A Plan for Action Mid-Term (up to 2012) Work with Ipoh Council and Perak government to fill in “missing links” in infrastructure (hubs, bus lanes) and network (more “rapid-transit” lines) Further investment in “rapid-transit” networks Invest in expansion of KTM Komuter (fleet, frequency, services) to link Ipoh to KL and Penang

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME M Zulkarnain Hamzah Sek 4, Shah Alam It is easy to join TRANSIT’s online discussion group. Just