This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly on April 6, 2026 - April 12, 2026

IF the job of transport minister comes with a quiet season, Anthony Loke Siew Fook has yet to find it.

The past three years since returning to the role for the second term in December 2022, Loke has operated in a near-constant state of crisis management — from rehabilitating a Road Transport Department (JPJ) that is perceived to be riddled with corruption to making amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987 to tighten drink-driving regulations, and fielding commuter anger over breakdowns, delays and disruptions in the country’s urban transit network.

Never mind that many of these issues predate his tenure, rooted in years of underinvestment and ageing infrastructure. In the public eye, accountability often falls on the incumbent.

This time around, Loke has come prepared.He re-entered office with a clearer grasp of the situation and the ability to hit the ground running with his team. His playbook has been straightforward: Accelerate procurement, unlock stalled projects and demand stricter accountability from operators.

That has meant pushing government-­linked operators such as Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd (KTMB) and Prasarana Malaysia Bhd to fast-track new train acquisitions, as well as reviving long delayed infrastructure developments. Among the headline initiatives are the Penang Light Rail Transit (LRT) system and the RM1.5 billion expansion of Penang International Airport.

But the execution risk remains high.

Take the aerotrain replacement project linking the main terminal building and the satellite terminal at Kuala Lumpur International Airport’s Terminal 1. After years of delays due to political shifts, the system was finally replaced and ready for operations in July 2025, only for a string of disruptions that left the unity government red-faced.

Loke’s response was swift and public: Airport operator Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) and its contractors could face fines of up to RM190,000 for every month that they fail to ensure the aerotrain runs smoothly. Following a two-week maintenance reset, the system has stabilised — at least for now.

Just when Loke thought this issue was off his plate, another one flared up. Recurrent breakdowns on the Kelana Jaya LRT Line have left Klang Valley commuters stranded and fuming, highlighting the fragility of legacy public transport systems operating at full capacity. The problem is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon, as new trains are not expected to arrive for another two years.

Still, in an interview with The Edge, Loke, who turns 49 on April 28, says he is proud of the headway made in a number of infrastructure projects. While he acknowledges that none of these projects were initiated under his watch, he says when building infrastructure, finishing can matter more than starting.

Loke’s next major milestone will be to wrap up the 37.8km Light Rail Transit 3 (LRT3), also known as the Shah Alam Line. Slated to be a key addition to the Klang Valley’s transit network, the project has hit technical snags, with 33 glitches identified during fault-free run tests that began in August 2025. Authorities are still targeting a June 2026 rollout, but the margin for delay is narrowing.

Meanwhile, Loke’s remit extends well beyond transport.

As secretary-general of the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and member of parliament (MP) for Seremban, he is also navigating a complex political landscape, from electoral setbacks in Sabah to internal party tensions involving his predecessor Lim Guan Eng and Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow over Penang land tax revisions. He has also called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into allegations of a “corporate mafia” exploiting enforcement institutions — an issue with potential implications on investor confidence. But Putrajaya appears unresponsive to the proposal.

In addition, a pivotal moment looms. After its wipeout in the recent Sabah polls, DAP has made a six-month reform pledge. On July 12, the party will convene a special congress to decide whether its leaders should resign from government posts while continuing to support the ruling coalition in parliament — a move that could reshape the balance of power within the unity government. DAP has the largest number of MPs serving in the unity government, holding five ministerial and seven deputy ministerial posts, four senatorships, one chief ministership and 21 state executive councillor positions, along with hundreds of local council and village appointments.

For now, Loke is taking it all in his stride.Asked whether the accumulation of operational crises and political crosscurrents weighs on him, he shrugs it off. “Not at all,” he says, with a laugh.

Below are excerpts of his wide-ranging interview with The Edge.

The Edge: What happened to the Royal Commission of Inquiry that DAP has publicly called for on the ‘corporate mafia’ issue?

Anthony Loke Siew Fook: We still think that this is a big issue. It is critical and our position is that we have made it known. We have said it publicly and in the cabinet that an RCI is the right channel and platform to investigate the issue thoroughly. However, the issue is still developing. So we will continue to monitor it. This does not mean that, without an RCI, the investigation has stopped or the issue has died. The issue keeps evolving and we are monitoring developments very closely — there are new revelations every day.

Is the cabinet looking at an RCI, or will it just continue with the special task force to investigate the issue?

The special task force is only looking at the shareholding issue (involving Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki) and it has already submitted its report to the cabinet. The next step is for the Chief Secretary to the Government (KSN) to determine what action should be taken. That is ongoing.

But the corporate mafia is a separate and much larger issue. While the task force has certain findings, we believe there is still a need for an RCI to investigate it thoroughly.

Of course, the cabinet has different views. The current position is that existing investigations should continue before deciding whether to set up an RCI. These include investigations by MACC, the police, the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) and AMLA (Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing).

To be fair, investigations are ongoing and certain actions are being taken. Whether they are sufficient is subjective. At the moment, action is being taken against one of the key individuals named by Bloomberg. He is currently abroad and has been making daily statements disclosing his version of events. Of course, whatever he says may lead to further investigations. As I said, the issue is still developing.

As you said, the issue is developing in different directions. To the public, it may seem that regulators are being accused of wrongdoing while still conducting the investigations, making it hard to understand the process.

The investigations are being carried out by multiple agencies, not a single one. It involves not only MACC but also the SC, the police, the AMLA unit, Bank Negara and others. These are different angles of investigation.

Our position remains that the investigation must be thorough and get to the bottom of the issue. We are not letting this go. Just because the cabinet has not set up an RCI does not mean we have given up on pursuing the truth. We will continue to monitor and push, depending on how the situation develops.

Minister of Digital and DAP national chairman Gobind Singh Deo and you have made this a high-profile issue, calling for an RCI. Some supporters may feel DAP does not command enough influence in the cabinet if there is still no RCI.

It is not accurate to say there has been no response. You have to be fair — there has been a change of tone in Putrajaya, from saying there was nothing to investigate to launching a high-profile investigation. Yes, it is short of an RCI but to say our voice has not been heard is unfair. Even the prime minister has shifted tone on this issue. It does not mean that because there is no RCI today, there never will be one.

Our position is to get to the bottom of the issue. Investigations do not only come from an RCI; they can also come through existing mechanisms. The progress we are seeing is partly the result of public pressure. We have not swept the issue under the carpet — if we had, there would be no investigation today, no action against Victor Chin and no disclosures from him.

I am not saying his claims are true, but his statements are generating new leads. The public should see that our insistence on pursuing the issue has led to ongoing investigations and actions.

Have you been given reasons for why there is still no decision on an RCI?

There are reasons, but they are discussed within the cabinet and cannot be disclosed. The prime minister has said that proper processes must be followed and certain investigations must be completed before deciding on an RCI. We give him the benefit of the doubt and trust his judgement. An RCI is likely the final or last resort if other investigations do not yield satisfactory results.

As cabinet members, we present our views, but the prime minister also has his. The cabinet works collectively — it is not about whether one party gets its way. Otherwise, the prime minister could also be accused of being influenced by DAP. The key point is that the issue is not being swept aside; investigations are ongoing and more leads are emerging.

There are views that Putrajaya may be protecting certain individuals, which is why no RCI has been set up.

As far as we are concerned, we have no interest in protecting anyone. Our priority is to protect the integrity of the government. That is why DAP has taken a firm and public stance, both openly and in the cabinet. These issues take time to resolve — they will continue to develop, and we will pursue them to the end.

Will the special task force report be made public or will DAP push for it?

It is not about the report itself but the actions to be taken. We are dealing with the MACC chief commissioner, so there are processes that must be followed. Only a panel of top civil servants can take action. Ultimately, the actions will be made public, but this will take some time — possibly one to two months.

Given that Azam Baki’s contract ends in May, has the cabinet discussed extending it?

Extensions of key positions are not discussed in the cabinet. These decisions are made by the prime minister, who advises the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on appointments or renewals. I trust the prime minister’s judgement to make the right decision.

Businessman Victor Chin Boon Long, who is under investigation for alleged involvement in the ‘corporate mafia’, has apologised to you over photos of both of you that are being circulated. Any comments?

I happened to be at the same event as him, although I had initially been advised not to attend. I went because the invitation came from my former secretary-general at MoT, Tan Sri Mohd Khairul Adib (Abd Rahman), who was then chairman of MMAG Holdings Bhd (KL:MMAG). He invited me to officiate at a facility at KLIA, and I attended one or two such events.

So I attended because of Adib, not Victor Chin. I do not know Victor Chin and have never spoken to him. When he apologised, I was quite amused. I have not even seen the photo myself and do not know why he felt the need to apologise, as I have never met him outside that event.

It has been more than three years since the DAP joined the unity government. What is your assessment of the party’s performance so far?

As far as we are concerned, we are trying our best. Within each portfolio held by DAP ministers, we have tried to improve the work and the portfolios under us. We aim to bring changes and reforms within our ministries. Of course, it is for the public to judge us, but I think we can confidently say that we have brought changes to our respective ministries.

Whether we have done well or not is for the public to judge. Certainly, we can provide a report card to show what we have accomplished, but we know that the party’s performance in government is not just about our individual ministries — it is about the overall performance of the government.

As we said, this is a multi-coalition government. There are limitations and challenges. We try our best to push for certain things, but we also know that the cabinet is bound by collective responsibility. No single party can push everything it wants, but we try our best to effect change and bring about positive outcomes. At the end of the day, whether we achieve what we want will be evaluated by the people. We have to present our case.

The DAP has decided to submit itself to its party delegates through the national conference in July. The July National Conference will then decide whether we continue to play our role after 2½ years in government.

After the DAP’s heavy defeat in the Sabah elections, you announced a six-month reform pledge. As of today, what is your assessment?

Many things are a work in progress. In the past three months, actions have been taken alongside policy pronouncements. For example, two constitutional amendments were tabled in parliament. None passed, but that is not our fault. This does not mean you will not see the fruit of reform.

The separation of the roles of the attorney general (AG) and the public prosecutor (PP) is being refined and will return to parliament in June. Constitutional amendments are not simple; they require debate, refinement and scrutiny. We pushed hard for the separation of powers between the AG and the PP, but members of parliament requested further refinement, so it was referred to a select committee. We hope to see results by June.

On the prime minister’s term limit of 10 years, DAP also pushed hard. We convinced the prime minister to agree and bring it to parliament, but we fell two votes short. It will be reintroduced in the next session. To say there has been no progress is unfair. Reform is a painful journey; not everything can go smoothly.

On education, DAP has stood firm, such as allowing Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) students into public universities. Policy announcements have been made but mechanisms and processes are still being implemented. The same applies to top SPM students, where matriculation opportunities have been improved. These are ongoing issues.

Economically, tax refunds were a major issue during the Sabah election, with businessmen complaining about unpaid taxes. Major efforts have been made in the past three months to address outstanding taxes. It is a work in progress, with about half resolved.

Service tax on rental services was reduced to 6% from 8%. While modest, it demonstrates the government’s commitment. E-invoicing thresholds were raised and timelines extended to ease implementation. The government is responding to public concerns, and that responsiveness is something the public should appreciate.

The six-month reform pledge implied that if DAP is still dissatisfied, you might consider leaving or withdrawing from the unity government?

The pledge is about accelerating reform. During the Sabah election, one major complaint was that the government’s pace of reform was too slow. That is why we set the six-month deadline. Six months represents pace and spirit, not completion. It measures whether the government responds to public aspirations. That is why we called a national conference on July 12, where delegates will decide whether we continue. We are not saying we will collapse the government.

Our intention is to review our role — whether we continue on the front bench or retreat to backbench positions. If delegates feel we should not be on the front bench, we will resign from those positions.

How would retreating to the backbench help?

It is a collective decision of the party. We are not saying we will definitely withdraw. If the collective decision is to stay and fight, we will stay. There are different views within the party, just like among voters. Some say we should go solo, retreat from the unity government. So we submit to the collective wisdom of 4,000 delegates, listening to public voices before making decisions.

Criticism is inevitable. People may say we are clinging to power, seeking perks over principles. Being in government limits how openly we can criticise, due to collective responsibility. We cannot constantly attack the prime minister while serving in government. That is the dilemma.

People voted for us to serve in government, but supporters expect us to speak up. We cannot be in opposition within the government. After discussion in the cabinet, we cannot publicly oppose every decision. Everyone must understand how the government works. You cannot say we have lost our voice; we cannot play both roles simultaneously. If people want us to criticise constantly, then we become backbenchers.

DAP’s core support comes from the Chinese community. With pig farming issues and soaring pork prices hitting them, how is the party responding?

It’s unfair to pinpoint just one particular issue. I think the evaluation and judgement should be based on the overall picture. For example, on the pig farming issue, we have to acknowledge that it involves environmental concerns.

As far as policy is concerned, there is no policy banning pig farming. Only in Selangor has the Sultan issued a decree disallowing pig farming for the time being. But at the federal level, we are not saying pig farming is not allowed. Pig farming is permitted in Malaysia, but it must comply with certain conditions. Like any other agricultural sector, it must modernise due to environmental and health concerns.

Pig farming has also been affected by various issues — not just hygiene problems, but also outbreaks of African swine fever. These factors have reduced supply, which is why prices have increased. It is essentially a demand and supply issue.

Our position is to facilitate and support pig farmers by providing greater policy certainty. If they want to invest in modern pig farming, there must be a proper framework and clear guidelines from the agriculture ministry — what can be done, what cannot be done, what defines modern pig farming and what requirements must be fulfilled. If these are met, there must also be certainty in land use and licence duration, commensurate with their investment.

All this requires a proper framework, which we are pushing for. At the same time, in Selangor, the decree came from the Sultan, so we must work through proper channels to find solutions, improve guidelines and identify suitable areas for pig farming. These are matters currently being worked on by the Ministry of Agriculture, where DAP has a deputy minister.

The public spat between Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow and DAP adviser Lim Guan Eng seems to have exposed internal tensions within the party. How is the party managing this, and are you concerned it may affect cohesion ahead of elections?

That is my responsibility as the party secretary-general — to ensure the party remains cohesive going into the election. Every party will have differences. You cannot expect everyone to think, act or behave the same way. Any organisation involving people will have internal differences; that is normal.

The challenge for us as a party, and for me as a leader, is how to manage those differences effectively. That is what we are doing now. Of course, public disputes are not a good look. That is why I have advised both parties to resolve their differences through dialogue and face-to-face discussions. My role is to ensure the party remains cohesive and continues to inspire public confidence.

What is your view on the Penang quit rent hikes?

You have to look at it from a balanced perspective. Any state government must consider financial sustainability. A responsible government cannot rely solely on populist measures; it must also ensure long-term fiscal health.

The chief minister likely has this in mind when reviewing quit rent. However, any increase in charges will naturally be unpopular. Some cases clearly require a review — you cannot expect to pay RM10 per acre indefinitely. But there are also cases where increases were too steep or excessive; these should be reassessed.

My view is that while some increase is necessary, it must be reasonable and justifiable. For example, if agricultural land has been converted into commercial use, applying a commercial rate is fair.

The problem arose when the review was applied across the board. In some instances, land that was only partially developed was treated entirely as commercial, leading to disproportionately high increases. These cases require careful, case-by-case assessment.

There are mechanisms for downward revision, and what we need now is to ensure that appeals are handled thoroughly so that any increase is justified.

Is DAP still pushing for state elections and the 16th general election to be held concurrently?

Yes, I maintain that view. The best way forward is to have concurrent elections. Sooner or later, this is necessary.

Given current global challenges, the focus should be on economic resilience, managing costs and controlling inflation. Holding separate elections would increase costs and create confusion about political alignment.

If elections are held concurrently, whether parties in the unity government contest together or separately, at least it is done at the same time. That provides clarity.

When the unity government took over Putrajaya, one key message was the hope that it would last a full term. Do you still aim to govern until December 2027?

Our definition of a full-term government does not necessarily mean a full five years. Completing one parliamentary term — whether elections are called after four or five years — would still be considered a full term.

What we want to avoid is a repeat of the last term, where there was a change of prime minister mid-term. A change of government within the same term is something we do not want.

Our objective is to ensure the government functions throughout the current parliamentary term, whether it ends after five years or earlier, depending on circumstances. For example, if we pursue concurrent elections, we may not be able to wait until the end of the five-year term.

The key is to ensure stability — no change of prime minister during the term — and to fulfil our mandate. After that, it is up to the people to decide the next government.

There has been talk in political circles that you may leave your Seremban constituency to contest in Penang in the next general election. Would you rule that out?

We are managing the situation in Penang. The most important principle is that we remain cohesive going into the next election.

In terms of political and electoral strategy, these are matters we will assess based on circumstances. As of now, no decision has been made. Strategy depends on the situation — as the saying goes, one week in politics is a long time. It is difficult to predict what will happen.

For now, I will continue my role as secretary-general and MP for Seremban. We should not be overly focused on the next election or positions. Our priority is to deliver results and maintain public support. Strategic decisions can only be made closer to the election, typically after parliament is dissolved.

As you enter your fourth year as transport minister, what achievements are you most satisfied with?

It’s difficult to frame it in terms of satisfaction. In infrastructure development and transport, nothing is ever truly ‘complete’. Even after a project is delivered, the real work lies in ensuring it functions reliably and serves its intended purpose. It’s a continuous process.

That said, there are areas where we’ve made meaningful progress. Over the past three years, we’ve ensured that several key infrastructure projects have finally taken off. One of the most significant is the Penang Light Rail Transit project, which had been in limbo before the current government came into office.

The project originated as a state initiative under the Penang Transport Master Plan (conceptualised in 2009), but its viability was long constrained by funding uncertainty. Earlier plans, such as large-scale land reclamation, would have taken decades to materialise. What we have done is provide clarity and commitment. The federal government has now formally adopted the Penang LRT as a national infrastructure priority, and the project is actively progressing. That is something I take considerable satisfaction in.

The second is the expansion of Penang International Airport. Here, too, the key was establishing certainty, particularly around financing. We pushed for the execution of operating agreements (OAs) between the government, through the Ministry of Transport (MoT), and Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd. Under these new OAs, MAHB is able to finance the project independently, without relying on development expenditure in the federal budget. That has allowed the expansion to move forward in a more timely and structured manner.

For Penang, these two projects form a twin engine for the state’s development in the years to come. The LRT will link the island to the mainland, representing a major traffic innovation for Penang. The airport, meanwhile, will double in capacity from 6.5 million passengers per annum (mppa) to 12 mppa. Beyond passenger facilities, we are also expanding the Penang Air Cargo Terminal from three parking bays to six, alongside a logistics park in partnership with the Penang Development Corp.

Beyond Penang, there is the Johor Bahru Rapid Transit System Link, which is nearing completion. We are also strengthening the backbone of Johor’s public transport network by significantly expanding the bus system. Alongside the RTS Link, the aim is to create a more organised and efficient Greater Johor Bahru transit system. The federal government is also reviewing an elevated Autonomous Rapid Transit (ART) project in Johor Bahru, with a decision expected soon under the Public Private Partnership Unit (UKAS) of the Prime Minister’s Department.

Our perspective is national, not just focused on the Klang Valley. Key corridors include Penang in the north, Johor Bahru in the south and the Klang Valley in the centre. We are also overseeing the completion of the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL), connecting the East Coast to Port Klang, and the Gemas-Johor Bahru electrified double-track project, which will allow electric train service (ETS) operations from Johor Bahru all the way to Padang Besar.

While all of these projects are not my personal achievements in the strict sense — they are long-running initiatives — I am proud to oversee their completion. Together, they represent a major advancement in Malaysia’s national transport network.

I do not want to be seen as claiming credit or taking the limelight. These projects were not initiated during my tenure; they began many years ago. Our role has been to push them forward, to ensure they are completed and to make certain they operate smoothly. In that sense, these projects are key pieces of the broader puzzle that is our national transport network.

Another notable achievement under the current government has been the rollout of a comprehensive stage bus system in every state capital. Today, every state capital outside of Kuala Lumpur and Penang operates a stage bus network under the unified BAS.MY stage bus service. This includes cities from Kangar to Johor Bahru, Kota Bharu, Kuala Terengganu, Kuantan, Ipoh, Seremban, Melaka, and extends to Sabah and Sarawak. For the first time, Malaysians in every major city have access to a coordinated, reliable bus network, a milestone in the development of the country’s land transport system.

Is there anything that frustrates you — ­areas not progressing as you would like?

Reliability remains a key concern, particularly for our rail services. There is still significant room for improvement. Take the Kelana Jaya LRT Line. While we saw major improvements in 2025 compared with 2023 and 2024, the first quarter of 2026 has again been marked by recurring issues. These are ongoing challenges.

In infrastructure, progress is rarely linear. Achievements don’t mean problems won’t recur. In the case of the Kelana Jaya LRT Line, the system has reached a stage where midlife refurbishment is overdue. Many of the trains are now approaching 25 years in service. Of the roughly 50 to 60 trains in daily operation, about half are already more than two decades old.

Procurement is underway to replace these ageing assets, but new trains will only arrive in about two years. In the meantime, we must keep the existing fleet running despite the inherent unpredictability. That inevitably leads to teething issues and technical faults, which can be frustrating.

Even newer systems have presented challenges. The Light Rail Transit 3, or Shah Alam Line, is a case in point. It was originally slated for launch last year but has yet to commence operations. The delay has been a frustrating experience, largely due to persistent technical issues.

The project failed to complete its fault-free run (FFR) testing on schedule. What was initially planned as a two-month process ultimately took six months, due to recurring software, system and signalling problems. We are now entering the final phase of trial runs, which will take another one to two months before the line can be opened to the public. LRT3 has been, without question, a challenging experience.

What is the root cause of the LRT3 delay?

The primary cause of the delay lies in system integration. As I mentioned, the FFR testing took six months instead of the planned two, due to recurring issues, mainly involving signalling, software and system performance.

In fact, the physical work has largely been completed. The stations were finished last year, the trains were delivered more than two years ago, and the mechanical and infrastructure components are all in place. The final hurdle is getting the entire system to work seamlessly as one.

For a rail system to operate reliably, every component must be fully integrated ... Even small deviations are unacceptable.

During the FFR testing, some of these elements failed to meet the required standards. So whose fault is it? This is not about assigning blame to any one party. It is a complex systems issue. Different contractors are responsible for different components, and integration across multiple platforms and providers presents inherent challenges. For instance, companies like Siemens are responsible for key elements such as signalling and software, and they have had to continuously refine and update their systems.

Even when systems are designed to be compatible, software bugs are inevitable. These need to be identified and resolved through repeated testing. In the case of LRT3, the system has already undergone multiple software upgrades — now reaching its sixth version.

This is not unusual. These kinds of issues are common in new rail systems globally, which is precisely why extensive testing, including the FFR, is required. Unfortunately, a high number of issues surfaced during testing, prolonging the process. In some cases, response times in addressing these problems were also not as fast as they should have been, further contributing to the delay.

Ultimately, ensuring 100% reliability and safety takes precedence, and that is what has driven the extended timeline.

What is the new timeline for LRT3?

I will announce the revised timeline later. It’s important to note that the LRT cannot be directly compared to KLIA’s aerotrain. The aerotrain covers only two stations, which is why the FFR testing was shorter. You cannot expect it to undergo the same 5,000km testing as a full LRT system.

LRT3, by contrast, spans multiple stations and a much longer distance, so it requires far more extensive testing. The aerotrain’s limited route simply doesn’t warrant the same rigorous testing procedures.

In parliament recently, you said the main contractor for the LRT3 project, Setia Utama LRT 3 Sdn Bhd, faces liquidated and ascertained damages (LAD) of RM474.9 million as at Dec 31, 2025, based on a daily rate of RM2.73 million. How did this figure come about?

The figure is derived directly from the contract. It’s not something arbitrarily determined. The formula and daily rate are stipulated under the contractual agreement and any calculation of LAD follows those terms.

That said, the final amount can only be determined upon completion of the project. At that stage, there will inevitably be disputes over liability. Contractors may argue that certain delays were beyond their control, and they will need to substantiate those claims. So while the headline figure is substantial, whether it ultimately holds as the final sum remains to be seen.

This is a standard feature of large infrastructure projects. There are established dispute resolution mechanisms and contractors will typically contest portions of the claim. It becomes a post-completion exercise that can evolve into a protracted negotiation or legal process.

While the liability formally rests with the main contractor, the reality is more layered. Contractors often pass through portions of the costs to subcontractors, based on their respective agreements. As a result, accountability is distributed across the project’s delivery chain.

My intention in disclosing the figure was twofold: to ensure the public understands there are consequences for contractors and to reinforce accountability across all parties involved.

It has been observed that Malaysia is increasingly using rolling stock from China for its rail projects. Is there a need to diversify our supply?

To give some background, the main reason we are buying more from China is simple: Competitiveness. Previously, our rolling stock came from Alstom SA (a French rail transport and mobility solutions company), but Chinese suppliers offer significantly more competitive pricing. Whether that is due to internal subsidies or economies of scale, I cannot say, but their prices are lower, and their capacity is large.

CRRC Corp Ltd (CRRC) also has the advantage of assembling trains and rolling stock locally. The master units come from China, and all other components are assembled here in Malaysia, which adds flexibility and efficiency.

Additionally, for Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd, we are implementing a 30-year leasing programme. This allows us to expand our rolling stock fleet much faster, whether for KTMB or Prasarana. Ultimately, cost is the main driver — it is not that we are unwilling to diversify. Tendering rules usually require the most competitive bid to be chosen.

This trend is not unique to Malaysia. Even in Singapore, most SMRT Corp Ltd and SBS Transit Ltd trains are from China. For the Johor Bahru-Singapore RTS Link, CRRC won the joint tender because of competitive pricing. Japanese suppliers are largely priced out, while only some European or Korean companies can compete. In fact, many European and Latin American cities are now using Chinese trains.

So while we aim to maintain relationships with other countries and explore diversification, competition and cost-effectiveness remain the main deciding factors.

What’s the progress on the Klang Valley Double Track (KVDT2) ­project?

KVDT2 is still ongoing. We are trying to accelerate construction because the project’s timeline has been extended multiple times. This is actually the third restart of the project ... When it was re-awarded, the contract value remained the same, but the construction period was lengthened to spread out cash flow over seven or eight years. Right now, we are working to shorten the construction period because seven or eight years is too long. Extended construction causes service disruptions, delays and reduced train frequency, which makes passengers unhappy.

Is there a new timeline for completion?

Not yet. We are still working on bringing the construction schedule forward.

With different systems, could integration create new problems? For example, the baggage handling system (BHS) in KLIA’s Terminal 1 (T1) uses a different system from T2, making integration challenging.

Integration doesn’t mean merging the two systems into one. What we mean by ‘integration’ is essentially ensuring interlining between the two terminals. T1 and T2 remain separate systems.

KLIA T1 uses Siemens equipment, following German and European standards. Honestly, many of our agencies still perceive Western systems as superior. But there’s no problem — even if issues arise, we address them directly. Just yesterday, I flagged concerns with Siemens.

When the head of their Asia-Pacific operations visited, they warned me of potential challenges for the Johor Bahru-Singapore RTS Link. I told them plainly: If these problems arise on the day of operation, I would blacklist them from bidding on future Malaysian projects. I made it public as well. Sometimes, you have to be firm to get attention. I learnt that approach from the Germans: Be direct, be clear.

Regarding the BHS, it was initially scheduled as a three-year project, expected to be completed by December last year. But there is still a long way to go before full completion.

Are you satisfied with the MAHB management now, following its successful privatisation under the Gateway Development Alliance Sdn Bhd consortium, which includes Khazanah Nasional Bhd, the Employees Provident Fund, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP)?

I wouldn’t say I’m ‘happy’, but I fully support the restructuring and privatisation of MAHB. It was necessary. Under the previous public-listed structure, operational decisions were frustratingly slow. Every decision had to go through the board, which included independent directors who often lacked the expertise, acted in their own interests or simply obstructed progress.

Take the KLIA aerotrain system, for example. The decision to replace it should have been made well before 2017, given the system’s lifespan of 25 years. Yet the award only came in 2022 — five years lost due to indecision, conflicting interests and a focus on corporate bottom lines rather than national or strategic priorities. The BHS faced similar delays. 

Previously, MAHB treated national infrastructure like a business for short-term returns. Projects like the Penang International Airport expansion were stalled because cash flow was insufficient, particularly during Covid-19. Investments were frozen, regardless of strategic importance.

Privatisation has changed this dynamic. With the new structure, decisions can be made faster, accountability is clearer and the focus shifts towards operational efficiency and long-term planning rather than bureaucratic hurdles. This is a necessary step for Malaysia’s airports to operate as world-class facilities.

Is the cabinet-mandated National Airport Facilitation Committee, which you began chairing as transport minister in January, fulfilling its intended purpose?

Yes, the committee exists primarily to coordinate airport operations. The challenge is that KLIA involves many stakeholders and no single party can direct the others. For instance, MAHB manages the airport, but it has no authority over immigration or customs. In the past, there was no structure to ensure coordination, so the cabinet gave me the mandate to establish this committee.

I chair the committee, not to override anyone’s authority but to ensure all parties communicate effectively. There’s also a working committee that manages operational matters between meetings.

For example, it took months of negotiation just to remove one customs counter at KLIA. Today, passengers don’t have to put their bags through customs before taking the aerotrain. Previously, KLIA had multiple checks: First customs, then immigration, then a gate security check, which is far more than most international airports. These checks were intended to combat money laundering, but in reality, very few cases — only four over the past five years — were detected. Most smuggling attempts would occur via private jets, not commercial flights.

We also strengthened security at the Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport in Subang, Selangor (Subang Airport) for private jets, following recommendations from former Special Branch chief Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador. Now, cars cannot drive up to the aircraft except for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, sultans and certain VIPs. Everyone else must go through an X-ray machine outside.

The structural design of KLIA T1 poses further challenges. Unlike T2, which has centralised security checks, T1 mixes departing and arriving passengers and requires multiple gate-level checks, which is manpower-intensive and inefficient. Implementing a centralised security check at T1 would require a complete redesign of the departure halls, gates and aerobridges — a major structural change that is not easy to implement.

Even VIP lanes at KLIA are largely ineffective. Unlike London Heathrow Airport or Singapore’s Changi Airport, where VIP passengers avoid the public entirely, at KLIA they still mix with regular passengers after passing through immigration. The Bunga Raya Complex is reserved for government jets but other paid VIP services don’t truly provide privacy or segregation from the public.

So yes, the National Airport Facilitation Committee helps coordinate operations, but KLIA’s structural and historical design issues mean we face long-term challenges that cannot be quickly or easily fixed.

When is the airside connectivity between T1 and T2 going to be operational?

We are pushing for it, probably in the second or third quarter this year. The first phase will focus on passengers without check-in baggage, which is straightforward. We’ll ferry them between T1 and T2 using the existing bus system.

The more complex part is handling passengers with check-in baggage, which involves coordinating different airlines and ensuring the baggage transfer system works seamlessly. That will come in the second phase.

The key is managing immigration and security checks efficiently. All airlines have agreed, and the goal is to streamline connectivity while maintaining proper protocol.

Beyond the operational side, we need a broader vision for Malaysian aviation. While airlines compete commercially, they also need to complement one another to strengthen KLIA as a regional hub. Currently, KLIA has strong connectivity within Asean, flying to second- and third-tier cities in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.

However, connectivity to Europe and the US is limited. Right now, only London and Paris are served directly. Strengthening links to these regions is crucial for transit passengers, especially between Europe and Australia, which is a lucrative sector for Malaysia Airlines.

Regionally, domestic routes are largely dominated by AirAsia, while Malaysia Airlines focuses on long-haul routes. This creates a complementary relationship that, if leveraged, benefits all parties. Batik Air, a joint venture between Malaysia and Indonesia, also adds value through its Indonesian connectivity.

Our objective is to harness the strengths of Malaysia Airlines, AirAsia and Batik to make KLIA a stronger international hub. When airlines complement each other, rather than compete destructively, everyone benefits and KLIA’s growth is supported. For low-cost travel, KLIA already functions as a major hub.

Tanco Holdings Bhd (KL:TANCO) is building a new container port in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan. What is your view on this project? They said it has secured key federal and state approvals.

Firstly, Tanco’s proposed container port is a private one and the land is entirely private. They approached us for approval to build a port, and after consideration, we granted them approval in principle. This included going through the National Physical Planning Council for a port in that location.

Right now, they are applying for planning permission (KM) from the state authority. The status of that KM is not known to me. Once they get approval to build the port, they will also need an operating licence from the relevant agencies, primarily the Marine Department. They must also meet all technical conditions before operations can begin.

The process is sequential: first, state approval to build the jetty and port facilities; then, an operating licence from us once all conditions are met.

When you say they are given approval in principle, how do you assess whether to grant it? What requirements does the MoT follow?

The key assessments include a marine risk assessment, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and a Social Impact Assessment (SIA). All conditions must comply with planning requirements.

To be clear, this is private land. Principle approval allows them to proceed with planning and construction, but it does not guarantee an operating licence. They must still meet all technical requirements before they can operate.

Private ports or jetties are not unusual; Pengerang [Johor], Lekir and Lumut [Perak] have them. Our position is: If investors want to take the risk, the government should not stand in their way. 

On the My50 public transport pass programme, it was reported that it faces a funding shortfall of RM100 million.

The My50 travel pass is essentially designed to encourage people to use public transport. Public transport operates on a fixed-cost model — the more passengers you have, the more the costs are spread out. Even with the My50 card and government subsidies, there is still a significant funding gap.

How do we resolve this, and is it sustainable? The gap will always exist. Prasarana is a government-linked company (GLC) and the government guarantees its financial obligations. Any sukuk issuance or debt is backed by the government, so operational shortfalls are effectively covered. In other words, it’s a left-pocket, right-pocket scenario. Even if My50 does not fully cover operational costs, the government steps in.

Financially, this gap is not a cause for major concern, though we do aim to reduce it. Prasarana’s total debt is around RM40 billion, including various projects. Controlling this debt and narrowing the gap is something the government monitors continuously.

At this point, our focus is on increasing ridership and encouraging people to continue using public transport. Prasarana will not go bankrupt; it is government-backed. Unlike a private company, which would shut down if it ran out of cash, Prasarana operates with ongoing support. The funding gap has existed since day one, and the government continues to absorb it, primarily through sukuk financing. This is an ongoing arrangement.

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's App Store and Android's Google Play.