Airport Di Malaysia?

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed today added to concerns over the proposed low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) in Labu, Negeri Sembilan, insisting that the capacity at existing airports is sufficient.

"We have three airports in and around the capital city Kuala Lumpur, one in Sungai Besi, one in Subang and one in Sepang. Sepang was designed for 125 million passengers a year," he said referring to the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA).

Writing in his blog, Dr Mahathir alluded to the idea that news of a new LCCT less than two years after the one at KLIA was opened, was sheer madness by referring to "voices" he had been hearing.

"Right now the voices tell me we are handling only 25 million passengers. So we have capacity for another 100 million passengers more. But the voices said we will be building a new airport at Labu," he stated.

"After thinking up about raising buffalos in Langkawi, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi must be congratulated for yet another great idea," he added to mock his successor.

He was referring to Buffalo Park Langkawi, said to be the current prime minister's brainchild.

The government yesterday gave government-linked company (GLC) Sime Darby the go ahead to develop the LCCT.

Sime Darby and local budget airline AirAsia Bhd had proposed to jointly develop and operate the RM1.6 billion LCCT which will be known as KLIA-East@Labu although this estimate does not include the 3,000-acre tract of land where it would be constructed.

Dr Mahathir sarcastically remarked that "the building of the airport should stimulate the economy. Somebody can make quite a bit selling land.

A GLC will get the job and contract it out to some lucky bloke. There will be a whole lot of other contracts to look forward to. It could even help with the coming recession."

Malaysia's fourth prime minister, whose 22 year administration saw vast development in the country, also made jibes at the location of the project.

Referring to the constant "free flights" promotion by AirAsia and the cost of getting to the airport, he said that "the distance to Kuala Lumpur would be longer but of course it would be nearer than Seremban and other parts in Negri Sembilan. But that's all right as you don't pay any fare for the flights, only for the fares to the airport."

"Maybe the Government can enlighten us why Sepang or even Subang is not suitable. Has the Sepang Formula One circuit taken up all the land so we cannot build any more facility in Sepang?" he said.( Malaysia Insider)

Manakala, di blog MP Wangsa Maju, 18 SOALAN MP PERLU DIJAWAP OLEH KERAJAAN:

1. Why the hurry to rush through the approval to build KLIA East @ Labu? Has it got anything to do with Abdullah Badawi’s term as the prime minister coming to an end in March 2009?

2. Is the construction of KLIA East @ Labu a purported attempt to shore up and safeguard the political future of a young and ambitious politician?

3. Why build KLIA East @ Labu when KLIA is still grossly under-utilised until today? (KLIA was originally designed to handle 125 million passengers a year but is now only handling about 25 million.)

4. Why build KLIA East @ Labu when the government has already built LCCT in Sepang and spent a total of almost RM244 million for the seeming exclusive use of AirAsia? (The sum includes the RM123.9 million used for its extension and upgrade as recently as 2008 last year.)

5. Why build KLIA East @ Labu when it will be a threat to public safety when its location is dangerously close to busy KLIA and LCCT in Sepang with a straight-line distance of only 10 km between them when ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) strictly recommends that the minimum distance between two airports should be at least 40 km?

6. Why build KLIA East @ Labu when it will be at a much further distance away from the Klang valley where far more passengers will hail from?

7. Why build KLIA East @ Labu at such great cost for the exclusive use of one airline - AirAsia?

8. After the construction of KLIA East @ Labu is completed, will LCCT in Sepang be abandoned?

9. What is the synergy between the businesses of Sime Darby (a GLC) and AirAsia (a private company) that makes good sense for both companies to consider coming together to build KLIA East @ Labu and hope to make a success of it?

10. Sime Darby does not own enough land in Negeri Sembilan for building KLIA East @ Labu which will require about 3,000 acres. So from whom will Sime Darby be buying land? Who are the owners of this land? Are they cronies, family members and/or people who are friendly and personally connected with Sime Darby and AirAsia?

11. If KLIA East @ Labu is apparently a joint-venture between Sime Darby and AirAsia, does AirAsia have the fund for this massive RM1.6 billion project when the company has suffered heavy losses for hedging aero fuel price and has to take delivery of 150 Airbus planes at an average of 1 plane per month?

12. Is it too far-fetched to consider that KLIA East @ Labu is perhaps built to help accommodate the parking need of AirAsia’s Airbus planes as they are delivered?

13. AirAsia sells air tickets in advance as far ahead as 1 to 2 years which is equivalent to deposit-taking. What will happen to this money which belongs to the public in the event AirAsia goes under because of its heavy commitment and undertaking in the construction of KLIA East @ Labu?

14. If AirAsia is purportedly doing well and has the fund to build KLIA East @ Labu, what are the reasons then behind all the foreign investors selling off their shares in AirAsia?

15. What is the reason for EPF to be the biggest investor of AirAsia, a JV partner in the construction of KLIA East @ Labu with Sime Darby, and why does EPF continue to buy shares in AirAsia when its share price continues to dip south?

16. Does Sime Darby and AirAsia have the fund to sustain the maintenance of KLIA East @ Labu when it will cost, on average, about RM40 million a year to maintain an airport?

17. Is the reason for EPF to be a major shareholder in AirAsia, which has entered into a JV with Sime Darby to build KLIA East @ Labu at great cost, so that when this massive project needs to be bailed out EPF will be there to do so with the rakyat’s money?

18. Even though the construction of KLIA East @ Labu is claimed to be a Privately Funded Investment venture, should the authority throw caution to the wind and compromise on public safety by giving its approval?

Despite the seemingly beneficial economic development it brings to Negeri Sembilan at first glance, should the authority in all honesty in the name of public safety, public convenience and public interest be conscionable to give its blessing and approval for the building of KLIA East @ Labu for some - if not all - of the questions asked above?

Inilah negaraku...