Why Loke Is Wrong About Congestion Pricing

---

 
By Boo Jia Cher
I recently came across transport minister Loke Siew Fook’s statement that Kuala Lumpur’s public transport system isn’t adequate to support congestion pricing. This view is not just misguided —it’s a missed opportunity to address the capital’s worsening urban mobility crisis.
While Loke’s concern for commuters is understandable, his argument overlooks a crucial point: KL city centre already has a relatively well-developed public transport network, making it entirely possible to navigate without a car.
The public transport system effectively serves most residents, especially those near transit hubs who rely on it daily.
Obviously, there is room for improvement in alternatives to driving: pedestrian and cycling infrastructure are subpar, buses frequently get stuck in traffic (highlighting the need for congestion pricing), bus stops could be more user-friendly, train stations could be modernised, and train frequencies could be increased.
Contrary to Loke’s assertions, congestion pricing wouldn’t burden citizens; instead, it would tackle the core issue: an excessive number of cars on the road.
Loke’s argument assumes that everyone is a car owner and would therefore be negatively impacted by congestion pricing.
In reality, non-drivers suffer the most. They endure air and noise pollution, buses delayed by car traffic, sidewalks and bike lanes obstructed by illegal parking, and safety risks from excessive private vehicles in an already crowded urban environment.
Cities like London, Stockholm and New York have demonstrated that congestion pricing works. It reduces traffic, improves air quality, and makes streets safer for everyone, not just car owners.
New York’s implementation, coupled with dedicated bus lanes, have significantly cut down travel times and improved commuting experiences for all.
The notion that we must wait for a “perfect” public transport system is a fantasy. What we have already works, and further improvements should be pursued. Before implementing congestion pricing, it is essential to simplify car-free access and navigation to and within the city.
Our transport minister should broaden his perspective to include walking and cycling as other viable transportation modes, alongside motor vehicles and public transport. His ministry should work closely with Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) to ensure that infrastructure is safe and convenient for these alternatives.
Partnerships with bus companies should focus on rapidly increasing the number of buses, while strict enforcement of dedicated bus lanes by DBKL and the police can improve reliability. Together, these efforts would offer viable alternatives to driving.
If train congestion is a concern, why not take advantage of the newly implemented bus lanes that can accommodate more passengers than car lanes? Or cycle to work on the newly developed, green cycling networks? By expanding the scope of urban mobility, KL can offer a truly versatile and efficient transport system.
We should embrace congestion pricing as a strategic tool to gradually shift commuting behaviours. In Malaysia, many people live in sprawling suburbs far from city centres, where public transport is limited or inconvenient. This lack of accessible alternatives makes driving the most practical choice for daily commutes, worsening traffic congestion as more drivers flood the roads.
Congestion pricing makes driving into the city more costly and challenging, encouraging people to explore alternative transportation and housing options. For example, higher driving costs might prompt those in car-dependent suburbs to move closer to public transport. This supports the public policy goal of driving societal change instead of sustaining detrimental habits.
To reduce long commutes and make KL more liveable, we must focus on better urban living conditions. This includes expanding walking and cycling infrastructure, building high-quality affordable housing near public transport hubs, and increasing green spaces.
Additionally, revenue from congestion pricing can be reinvested into these improvements, creating a positive feedback loop that enhances the city’s liveability and efficiency.
In conclusion, Loke’s claim that we’re not ready for congestion pricing falls short. While he has been a vocal advocate for public transport, his accommodating stance towards drivers hinders meaningful progress.
Enhancing public transport is an ongoing effort, but countless daily commuters who walk, cycle, or use public transit in central KL have already proven that navigating the city without a car is entirely feasible.
It’s time for the transport minister to reconsider the notion that car usage is a right. A city built for cars is a city destined for gridlock.
By implementing congestion pricing that reflects the true societal cost of driving, while prioritising walking, cycling, and public transport, we can create a KL where future generations are free from relentless traffic and dangerous streets. - FMT
Boo Jia Cher is an FMT reader.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

---