Concerns over privatisation of public parking in Selangor

FMT:

Concerns over privatisation of public parking in Selangor


There is no provision that allows local councils to privatise the management of car parks and collection of parking fees

From William Leong

The appointment of concession company Rantaian Mesra Sdn Bhd to take over parking fee collection and enforcement in four Selangor local councils from Aug 1 raises several issues of concern.


The first concern is the legality of the scheme for a private company to manage and enforce the collection of parking fees.

It raises the question of whether the local council has the legal power to give away 50% of the revenue to Rantaian Mesra Sdn Bhd and 10% to Menteri Besar Selangor Incorporated (MBI), leaving the local council with 40%.


It also raises the questions of whether this privatisation scheme was done with the agreement of the transport minister, and whether such privatisation of public car parks is allowed under the Road Transport Act 1987.

The public parking lots are under the jurisdiction of the transport ministry, and the local councils are delegated the functions to manage and collect the parking fees by agreement with the minister under Section 72 of the Road Transport Act 1987.

Section 72(1) states that any appropriate authority or public body may, by order published in the Gazette, provide suitable parking places for vehicles or stands for public service vehicles or goods vehicles in accordance with the Act.

The relevant principal Gazette orders for car parks in respect of the four local councils expressly state that the orders were made pursuant to the powers conferred under Section 72 of the Act, and the relevant local council, with the concurrence of the transport minister, makes the order for the collection and enforcement of public car parking lots in the specified areas within the local council.


There is no provision in the Gazette orders to allow the local council to privatise the car parking management and collection of parking fees.

The relevant principal Gazette orders are:

1. Road Transport (Provision of Parking Places) Petaling Jaya City Council Order 2007 and subsequent amendments;
2. Road Transport (Provision of Parking Places) Selayang Order 2007;
3. Road Transport (Provision of Parking Places) Subang Order 2007; and
4. Road Transport (Provision of Parking Places) Shah Alam Order 2007.

The second concern is the principle of competency and accountability.

The reasons given for the privatisation are the poor collection of 30%, and lax enforcement resulting in double parking.


One would think that the obvious solution to poor performance in collection and enforcement is to improve the competence, skills, and capabilities of the personnel involved and if necessary, to change them for more competent staff.


By pursuing a privatisation scheme, the effect is to acknowledge the incompetency of the present staff as being beyond redemption, but these incompetent staff are rewarded by keeping their jobs and salaries without having to do any work, while the local council loses half of its revenue.

The third concern is the public interest and particularly the interest of the residents within the local council area.

The revenue collected is meant for the well-being of the residents. It is not intended to allow private entities to make profits.

Further, the privatisation of enforcement powers for offences cannot be made a source of income which brings with it the dangers of abuse and corruption.

Both the transport minister and the Selangor government should address these concerns.



William Leong is the Selayang MP.