RECENTLY, the Kedah and Penang governments issued conflicting statements on the construction of a new airport in Kedah, namely Kulim International Airport. It is also said there is a proposal for an airport in Seberang Prai, which, if true, makes the two proposed airports just 20km apart, and adding a second airport for Penang and a third for Kedah. With the one in Ipoh, it would make for six airports – with at least four international ones – serving northern Peninsular Malaysia.

Understandably, both Kedah and Penang would be vying for the convenience, infrastructure, increased trade and tourism, and development that an airport would bring. This isn’t the first time this sort of competition led to airports being located close to one another – like Malacca’s airport being maintained despite Kuala Lumpur International Airport being close by, or Ipoh’s expansion plan around the same time KLIA was being conceptualised, and its present upgrade plans.

Due to high maintenance and peripheral infrastructure costs, and the relative convenience for airlines to move their hubs to cheaper or more profitable locations, airports are a very expensive investment. The spillover effect on the economy is also highly dependent on the actual number of flights that come in. Overoptimism to undergo expensive upgrades with just one or two flights coming in weekly would lead to the cost eventually going into the passenger service charge, or used to cross-subsidise airport usage between the busier airports and less-used ones.

A proper strategy would allow for the consolidation of infrastructure and rightsizing – the ability to build less and obtain more returns on investment. The transfer of expertise, and retention of that expertise, becomes easier with larger investments and competitor companies setting up base in close proximity to one another. Competition, too, generally drives up quality and salaries, and makes growing an industry easier and more organic, and less stressful to maintain, without needing constant government intervention or capital injections.

Overinvestment could result in white elephants like Sri Lanka’s Colombo International Airport or sporadic investments, resulting in a typical European situation, such as Italy’s 130 airports serving 61 million people, or France’s 170, serving 66 million. Compared to Europe, our situation is hampered by a lower currency exchange rate, lack of infrastructure, higher competitiveness between airlines and higher proliferation of low-cost carriers.

A proper synchronisation of efforts would allow Malaysia to anticipate and respond better, with less internal competition, to economic threats from our neighbours, the most obvious being Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia, but also the aggressively emerging Cambodia and Vietnam.

Hence, the politicisation of infrastructure, and competition for it, as difficult as it is, should be minimised. States should remain focused on continuing with what they are good at, and be given assistance and support for it, and get better at it, and win globally for it, rather than venturing into something because it’s a buzzword with some perceived political value, like “Industry 4.0” or “food security”.

This rationalisation applies to related industries – ports, transport and logistics, rail, and even between those industries. The government should have learnt from the mistakes of the previous administration relating to the need to really listen to industry players and what they need to succeed against regional competitors. Their success directly translates into Malaysia’s.

The sharing of strategic resources between states, such as water or even land, should not only be allowed, but encouraged.

Apart from political barriers, laws barring it should be relooked. If things like national security and electricity could be streamlined, larger states should encourage states with land constraints to come in and invest in them, or develop infrastructure for water together, or other projects, with political concerns taking a back seat.

It is time that Malaysia really competes as a unified, cohesive, economic unit. – June 12, 2019.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.