Bridge Over Troubled Water?

In the Malaysian STAR newspapers of 25Apr2007, the MP for Johor Bahru was reported to have commented that it is a matter of time Singapore would acquiesce to a bridge to replace the Causeway, inter-alia when Singapore has amortized the capital investment in their CIQ infrastructure.

With due respect to one of the wiser and more learned MPs of Malaysia, and speaking from the position of a common citizen who is born and bred in Johor Bahru and also a frequent user of the Causeway, Datuk Shahrir, has missed the point.

The political vision, mission and culture in Singapore vis-a-vis Malaysia is almost in opposition.

Lest we forget, the latest Singapore CIQ was designed and built on the premise of an earlier agreement with Malaysia that the KTM will terminate at Woodlands, Singapore.

Not a single notion was even hinted at having a common Bridge to replace the Causeway.

When Singapore does something, she has to justify her actions with cost and benefit based on purpose, the guidance has always been on the basis of purpose, justification, value, equity, accountability and responsibility.

So what is the whole real purpose of replacing the Causeway?

What is the single most important reason for still having the Causeway when there is already the Second Link Bridge somewhere beyond the yonder from Johor Bahru city itself?

The Causeway is the life-link for hundreds of thousands if not millions of people in Johor Bahru and Malaysia.

Hundreds of thousands of people commute daily on the Causeway, to work, to study, to seek medical treatment, to visit friends and relatives, to shop, to dine, to catch an international flight because our so called international airport in Senai is only international in name! and etc.

To me, I see the whole issue in a very simple paradigm: the purpose of the link be it a bridge or a causeway or even a ferry crossing is communication, transport and logistics.

Therefore, the justification for any changes to the status quo ought to be if the replacement adds value.

What is it in a Bridge (straight or crooked) that can achieve but a Causeway cannot?

Ought not the priority be in the fast and cost effective mass rapid transit of people, goods and services across the Link?

A rethink is needed here.

We need no new bridge, just the will to serve the rakyat better.

Start with a common centralized CIQ processing (common in many European borders), one in JB and one in Singapore where customs, immigration and customs clearance are commonly cleared at a single location.

Another is a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system to transport people traffic from JB to Singapore and vice-versa.

All the infrastructure in Singapore is ready to extend its time tested MRT system to Johor Bahru, but as usual, the business lobby in Malaysia will oppose this to protect their own pockets at the expense of the rakyat.

I can clearly see that if the MRT is extended to Johor Bahru, many motorists would give up their motorbikes and cars and take public transport and coupled with the efficient CIQ processing system, the issue of the Bridge to replace the Causeway would be a thing of the pass.

There will be win-win-win for all, the rakyat wins, governments win and the environment wins in terms of the better energy efficiency and less pollution.

Would wisdom prevail? Not, I guess, unless and until Malaysians are ready to change our mindsets and shift our paradigms.

Until then, Singapore will surge forward while we remain stagnated in our own parochial darkness.