Profitable public transportation is an oxymoron. While there are some rare cases in Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan, most are rather property developers instead of transit providers, expecting a capital-intensive public transportation provider such as KTMB to be profitable is arguably a farfetched vision – a fallacy.
An article in the Star on Monday, 16 April 2012, entitled “Govt plan to change KTMB management is fresh attempt to revive firm” argued that it was not impossible for KTMB to be profitable as it did between 1993-1995. The article further stated that KTMB began to post losses in 2007 through 2009, the last time its financial statements were made available. Anecdotically, KTMB has provided much better service starting in the latter phase as compared to the 90s – take the Komuter service for example. What is missing in the article is a discussion on the inverse correlation of the losses with KTMB success stories.
There is a serious conflict between seeking profitability and at the same time maintaining and operating the system to serve along unprofitable rail lines – the East Coast line may fit this description. The reality is as long as there is public utility to be derived from KTMB services, the government is expected to play some roles. This is true event if KTMB is dissected into infrastructure manager and operator.
What is probably more pragmatic is to develop an integrated intercity transportation plan that includes clear roles for KTMB and other public transportation providers including bus operators and airlines. Such a policy could designate significant roles for KTMB to focus on transporting passengers and freight along the West Coast. As a result, the East Coast rail line could be abandoned while buses and low-cost airline services could be expanded with higher frequencies to major cities in Pahang, Terengganu and Kelantan. By the same token, the airlines including the national carrier could abandon or reduce the frequencies of some of the short routes along the West Coast while focusing more on the more profitable long-haul routes to East Malaysia and internationally.
Is it really a lost cause to make KTMB profitable? How could KTMB emulate the alluded success stories in places like Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan? Are there any other potential land value-capture opportunities? How about moving headquarters and staff housings from strategic locations in KL to the KTMB campus in Perak? What other new business KTMB could venture into? Operating/maintaining railway systems overseas (e.g. Middle East, Africa)? While labor issue is sensitive, it will also probably need to be addressed to lower KTMB’s operating ratio. Last but not least, freight is gold. What measures are needed to increase freight traffics from and between ports including Butterworth, Port Klang, Pasir Gudang, Tanjung Pelepas and Ipoh (inland) from 2-3 trains per week to the level closed to the Padang Besar- Prai cargo transportation of 12 trains per day? Is there any potential to collaborate with our northern neighbors to realize the Trans-Asia landbridge project for freight transport?
It is all easier said than done. The government efforts to revamp KTMB do have merit. However, borrowing a term from railway signaling, they should “proceed with caution”.
