LETTER | As a fellow taxpayer and long time resident of Petaling Jaya, I write this open letter to address specific concerns about the value of the investment in this PJD Link highway.
We gathered the information on "Key features of PFI (private finance initiative) for PJD Link highway" here. Also, the highlight where PJD Link will be “fully funded” by the private sector without government subsidies using this PFI.
For roughly 10 years, the risk of the former highway project that was known as Kidex, now renamed "PJD Link highway", is a synonym of large scale construction project management, that was going to cut through Petaling Jaya.
We rakyat have time and again, informed that the better selection of transport mode is public transport, not highways. The costs are way cheaper, more passengers can be transported, costs will not be transferred to the public, and no permanent infrastructure and environmental damage.
The public transport route runs along the "same alignment" that PJD Link is suggesting. This is the "shortest path and passes through various dense communities".
Nothing that a good long-double bus system, running along the inner lanes of the three-lane highway can't do. It should reduce the number of cars dramatically during peak hours.
As for the PJD Link highway, it was marketed extensively to help build the stagnant economy, provide jobs, and improve the transport functionalities of the state, which the public sector can't deliver. Or does it really do as it claims?
As a project manager in my 23 years of working experience, I've encountered many obstacles in relation to delivery, specific to budget, scope, and schedule.
In particular, contracts that are privately funded, but parked under PFI, which has extremely high risks.
Under PFI, generally, a private company handles the up-front costs instead of the government. PJD Link highway project costs will then be leased to the public and the government authority makes annual payments to the private company.
Often, the synonym PPP (called public-private partnership) is used. However, we public citizens have often noticed that such initiatives often have dire consequences.
Costing model not transparent
Who is to say that should the project fail (to recoup costs, didn't provide necessary value to state, or fail to be built in time, under costs), that the exorbitant cost will be paid up by said private equities? Wouldn't it not be transferred to the public?
Case in point: In corporate Malaysia, there have been too many "hidden hand deals" that have occurred, where bailouts after bailouts involving substantial costs, all borne by the public, have made headlines. The recent one is Sapura Energy.
For the PJD Link highway, it follows a similar trajectory of highway projects.
PJD Link is said to cost more than RM 8-9 billion (year 2020 pricing), up from RM2.6 billion in 2012. Furthermore, this costing model was never made transparent.
For far too long, there have been many projects, that have been bailed out by the government due to bloated and extreme cost overruns, not to mention failed planning and rework.
In conclusion, we rakyat ask the followings:
The state assemblypersons and representatives demand transparency of the project’s cost structure
PJD Link Sdn Bhd to provide entire studies, related to PFI, risks, outcomes and benefits
PJD Link Sdn Bhd to provide the outcome of the pending Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Social Impact Assessment (SIA) and Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA), if they are ready
Selangor exco for infrastructure, Izham Hasyim, to provide the roadmap ahead without the PJD Link highway
Selangor exco for transport, Ng Sze Han, to showcase a proper "transport blueprint" for Petaling Jaya
The elections are just around the corner. We rakyat will not be able to fund exorbitant projects that last three generations.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
