Enhancing Public Transport…

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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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 criticalcommunications infrastructure • Far less money has been invested properly into public transport than in other infrastructure

5. 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

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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 onincreasing operator profitsrather than mobility

9. Real Investments in Public Transportation • Change of Attitude – We are investing in infrastructure which is an assetfor 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 carsfrom our roads daily • Fewer jams = greater economic productivity & economic growth

10. 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

11. 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?

12. 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

13. The bottom line of public transport… KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS in: Accessibility Availability Reliability Safety Comfort MAKE TRIP FAST AND COMFORTABLE MAKE GETTING TO PLACES SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD MAKE TRANSFERS CONVENIENT AND HASSLE FREE • 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.

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

15. 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

16. Recommended Structure Public Feedback Parliamentary Committee Finance Ministry (Funding) EPU (Planning) NPTA (Vision & Standards) LPTA NCER (Oversight) LPTA KV (Oversight) LPTA KL-Sel (Oversight) LPTA IDR-S (Oversight) LPTA ECER (Oversight) 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.

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

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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME M Zulkarnain Hamzah 019-280-0608 Sek 4, Shah Alam zk9@hotmail.com http://transitmy.org klangvalley.transit@gmail.com It is easy to join TRANSIT’s online discussion group. Just email klangvalley_transit-subscribe@yahoogroups.com!