In my view, the inclusion of the proposed Penang Island Link 1 (PIL 1) among eight projects being considered under the 12th Malaysia Plan has no merit whatsoever.

Such an expensive project—estimated at over RM7.5 billion for a 19.5 km stretch (about RM385 million per km)—raises serious questions about cost-effectiveness, priorities, and the potential burden on taxpayers.

On a cost per km basis, it is likely to be the most expensive highway in the country today.

In their haste to resolve urban congestion on Penang Island, the state government and the economy ministry may be making a poor decision by pushing through with this isolated, short-term measure.

Any such decision should carefully weigh the long-term economic, environmental and social benefits against its cost and public sentiment.

In this regard, the economy ministry ought to also give due consideration to other urban areas across the country, particularly the various state capitals which are also grappling with similar urban congestion problems.

‘Keadilan’, or fairness, in allocating development funds is crucial. Decision-making regarding the use of taxpayers’ money must be equitable, accessible to all, and effective in addressing pressing issues.

Reducing travel time

The Penang chief minister and proponents of the PIL 1 have argued that the new highway would significantly reduce travel time on Penang Island, especially in areas with chronic congestion.

While reduced travel time is a legitimate benefit, it is essential to question whether such an expensive solution is the best way to achieve this.

Alternatives such as improving public transportation, optimising traffic management systems, and investing in less invasive infrastructure could achieve similar outcomes at a fraction of the cost.

Moreover, building more highways often promotes car dependency, which can exacerbate congestion in the long term, rather than resolve it.

LRT project

The concurrent push for both the PIL 1 and the Light Rail Transit (LRT) projects on the island raises concerns about a clash of priorities.

A well-planned and effective LRT or Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system could address congestion sustainably by reducing reliance on private vehicles and enhancing connectivity.

Overlapping investments risk diluting resources and sending mixed signals about the state’s long-term transportation vision.

The focus should ideally be on complementary projects that align with sustainable urban development goals, making the LRT or BRT a more favourable option.

Recommendations

Before committing to the project, the economy ministry should undertake the following:

• Conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of PIL 1, including its environmental impact, opportunity costs, and long-term economic viability, before agreeing to spend taxpayers’ money to benefit a limited group.
• Prioritise public consultation to ensure the project reflects community needs and garners public support. Wouldn’t the funds be better spent formulating BRT routes for the entire island and Seberang Perai instead?
• Explore alternative solutions to address congestion, such as enhancing public transportation through a BRT system that runs across the entire state, including Seberang Perai, connected via the first Penang Bridge; implement smarter traffic management systems; and improve the existing road network, junctions and traffic flow management.
• Ensure alignment with broader state and national goals, particularly those tied to sustainable development, including the reduction of carbon emissions. Options should include introducing electric or hydrogen-powered buses, congestion charges, and expanding the two-hour parking limit recently imposed by the Penang city council.
• Consider phasing or scaling down the project if the benefits are limited to a small segment of the population while the costs remain disproportionately high.

There is a pressing need to establish a standard framework for holistic evaluation criteria to ensure fair treatment of all state capitals in Malaysia before allocating resources to any individual state.

Any decision taken must prioritise public good, economic benefits and alignment with national priorities, rather than be driven by political considerations.

The author can be reached at: [email protected]

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.