There is a discord going on in the mainstream and social media on whether there are 33 million or 21 million vehicles on our congested roads.
This misses out on a more critical debate. How best to ease traffic congestion? Much of the answer lies in how we manage our public transport system.
But it ails and fails at the same time. If we need a performance indicator, just look at the traffic congestion at peak hours, twice on weekdays. Make that weekends, too, as it is turning out to be lately.
Critics will say this to be at best a proxy indicator. Well, here is a direct one.
Tally the number of times our trains have broken down. And add to this sheet the number of times the buses have arrived late or didn't turn up at all.
Not to mention the accidents and errant behaviours of the drivers. Sure, our greed for development isn't of any help.
Skyscrapers to the right and left squeeze three-lane roads into two, forcing vehicles to a frequent standstill. The best answer to Malaysia's many malaises is a whole-of-nation approach. From now on, that is. We can't undo all that has been done before. But that is a Leader for another day.
Some blame the traffic congestion on the "cheap" prices of cars. This is only a small part of the problem, though we think Malaysian cars aren't exactly cheap.
But a view of the annual number of vehicles put on the road by the automotive industry is certainly a cause for concern, especially when we don't have a vehicle end-of-life national policy.
Hence the dispute about 33 and 21 million vehicles. A comparison of 2021 and 2022 sales figures put out by the Malaysian Automotive Association do point to a spike too high: 481,651 versus 702,275.
At this rate, we will have a car for every Malaysian, even for little ones in the cradle. We think making cars here as expensive as in Singapore, as some suggest, is putting the cart before the horse.
In Singapore, it was efficient public transport first, then expensive cars.
Transport expert Dr Rosli Khan suggests that those in charge of public transport are not asking the right question.
Here is the right question: What are cities with a high share of public transport ridership doing right, and what are we doing wrong?
Take London, a city that had achieved more than 40 per cent share of public transport a decade ago, though there has been a dip of late in most cities around the world.
Kuala Lumpur has a similar ambition, but it is 50 to 60 per cent in 2040. What is the public transport ridership number today? A mere 24 per cent.
To reach even 50 per cent share is going to be a great leap for the city. Also, the target is part of Malaysia's low-carbon aspiration, not much to do with managing our public transport system.
London has an integrated transport authority, Transport for London (TfL), that runs the day-to-day operation of the city's public transport network and manages its main roads.
TfL is how London puts the horse before the cart. We, too, must have a similar integrated public transport authority, says Rosli. We can't agree more. We even have a name for it: TfKL or Transport for Kuala Lumpur.