Improving Efficiency in Dealing With Construction Permits

Dealing with construction permits is a big let down in Malaysia according to most of the participants of a public consultation session i attended recently. Starting from the pre construction stage which include the land matter, planning permission, earth work approval, building plan approval and infrastructure to the construction stage and finally vacant possession of property will take 161 days in Malaysia compared to 26 days in Singapore and 67 days in Hong Kong. It is because of the 32 times interface required between Government and the project proponents or consultants whereas in Hong Kong it only involves 6 procedures. This has delayed the construction process and increased the cost of doing business. According to the survey done by World Bank on Doing Business 2011, ranking of Malaysia is 113 out of 183 economies, 2 rank lower than the previous year. This is simply unacceptable as the overall ranking of Malaysia in Ease of doing Business is 18, a rank that must have been improved due to other factors such as ease of getting credit, efforts of protecting the investors' interest and other attributes.

Everyone has been argued that delay in getting approval from the authorities for construction permit is the main contributing factor. While the consultants blamed the authorities of sitting on the application and have taken longer time to process or even to make decision, the authorities complained about the level of competency and compliance of the project proponents for their submission. It was commonly acknowledged that many submissions have been done with proposal goes against the provision with the hope that special consideration will be granted during the processing stage. For practicing the good governance in participatory planning, the Local Authorities allow public to have their views on all development projects. Sometime the need to discuss and explain with technicality and common sentiments took longer time for the authorities to decide what to do next. People want to be part of the planning process and would like their views be considered. Due to the ground sentiment and socio-political consideration, development projects application have to be deferred for thorough evaluation, even though the gazetted development plan has clearly stated the permissible intensity and zoning of development. Having said this, blaming on general public for delaying the process is not a good excuse but rather pushing the major factors of delaying a side. We might want to examine why the gazetted development plan and the impact study reports prepared by the professional are not able to convince the general public. I believe although some might have relayed their personal experiences while arguing the negative impact of a proposed development project, many come with technical input and support must have valid reason to do so.

The Discussion Session also proposed some measurements to shorten the time frame, reduce the procedures and hence cost of doing business. One of them is to enable the self-regulation principle to expand further in the construction sector. While reason of waiting for approval is valid, then perhaps to reduce the requirement of obtaining approval whereby the principle submitting person, himself to "self approve, monitor and verify" the process. The interference and need for interface is kept minimum. This can be started off perhaps first to categories the type of projects based on risk of development. For example, if a simple project of renovating small portion of the house, then perhaps it is good for authority to acknowledge without the requirement of approving. Secondly to be build up the capacity and competence level of all stakeholders. For example, the principle submitting person must possess with high code of ethic and professionalism in order to design the plan with full compliance and to monitor the works without fear and favour.

Another measure is to get rid of unnecessary requirements and procedures. For example, Is that a necessary to submit application to a different department for placement of rubbish bin rather than submit it together to the Building Control Department during the stage of building plan approval. Similarly, is that necessary to obtaining approval of Fire Department before the building plan can be approved? How about request the approval be obtained any time but before the Certificate of Completion and Compliance be issued? Can we approve the building plan first of together with the earth work plan, after all for the construction work to begin, the project proponent has to notify the authority through Form B. The Authority can stop the physical commencement of work if earth work plan has not approved. If this can be so, then definitely it will help shortening the time frame required for pre construction approval.

Finally but not least, the relationship between land matter and planning permission was debated but no solution was forthcoming. It is commonly known that obtaining planning permission first does not mean that you are able to continue with development until the land matter has been settled. As it is now, the land application is taking longer time and could jeopardise the whole process of development. The process for these two matters need to be re-synergies, and if possible for major structural change, I presume.