THE JOHORE CAUSEWAY / TAMBAK JOHOR
By
Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
on June 26, 2009 11:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBacks (0)
Bookmark and Share
(Versi Bahasa Malaysia di akhir rencana ini)
1. I put the document on the financing of the construction of the Johor Causeway because a Minister in Tun Abdullah's Government claimed that it is jointly owned by us and Singapore. Therefore Singapore must agree before anything (demolition) is done to the causeway.
2. There has never been any agreement or treaty to say that the causeway is jointly owned. If at all 2/3rd of the causeway belong to Johore. And the 2/3rd must be the part which ends in Johore Bahru because the border on the Tebrau Straits is the deep water line which runs midway between Singapore and Johore. This must also be the border on the causeway. The northern half of the causeway therefore belong to Malaysia, a sovereign independent nation.
3. The suggestion that we may not touch the causeway without Singapore's permission is not part of any agreement with Singapore. What we do to the part of the causeway which is ours is our sovereign right. Not to exercise our sovereign right is akin to not being independent.
4. Why should we build a bridge to replace the causeway? That part of Johore Bahru where the traffic to and from the causeway meets the traffic going east and west in JB is often jammed. In future as more vehicles go on the roads the jam would certainly get worse.
5. The bridge will join the elevated road to and from the CIQ (Customs, Immigration and Quarantine complex) leaving the traffic east and west to flow freely.
6. Besides the traffic problem, the water in the straits is stagnant. If the causeway is opened up there would be constant flow of water in both direction, thus flushing out the water in the strait.
7. Without the causeway boats and yachts can sail in either direction. Transport of goods and people between Pasir Gudang Port to Tanjung Pelepas Port would be facilitated. This would be good for the growth of both ports - something which perhaps Singapore would not like to see.
8. The free movements of boats along the strait would itself create business. The bridge which would be wider than the causeway would speed up the flow of traffic. The CIQ was designed to handle this increasingly heavier traffic.
9. As to why it was not built during my 22 years, the answer is that the need for a bridge became clear towards the end of my term. In any case I had approved it before I stepped down. The work was started during my time. Had Abdullah not stopped it, the bridge would have been almost complete by now.
10. Since Singapore would only agree to a straight bridge if one billion cubic metre of sand is sold to it; since the people of Johore are against selling sand and allowing Singapore fighter planes to practice over Johore, the option for the Malaysian Government is to revert to building the scenic bridge in our territorial waters. This is the sovereign right of an independent nation.
11. Instead Tun Abdullah decided not only not to build the bridge but to stop negotiating over all the other issues including the refusal of Singapore to release CPF (Central Provident Fund) contribution of Peninsular Malaysians, the railway land, the 3 sen per 1,000 gallons which Singapore pays for raw water (Malacca pays 30 sen per 1,000 gallons).
12. All these issues are in Singapore's favour and not negotiating better terms because Johore people refuse to sell sand is like cutting one's nose to spite one's face. We are the losers. I think it is a very stupid way of punishing Singapore. Or is it the intention to punish Johore people for not agreeing to sell sand (somebody is bound to make a huge amount of money) and rejecting the honour of having Singapore warplanes practicing aerial combat and bombing over Johore.
