I fully support replacing the current Causeway with a new bridge even if it is a crooked one. Details of economic and environmental benefits have been well-explained and articulated by many including Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Of course, my preference is a straight bridge without generating ill-will and rancour with our neighbour Singapore. I think the current administration rushed into a decision without giving more time for negotiations to explore an acceptable economic solution centring around the limited sale of sand and access for them to airspace in an emergency.

The previous government, however, was wrong in proceeding with new Customs HQ and crooked bridge without first securing a clear agreement from Singapore. Singapore was very clever and waited for the project to mature and then pounced on Malaysia with quid pro quo demand for airspace and sand in return to agreeing to a straight bridge.

Given the circumstances, we should have faced the reality that Malaysia has been outfoxed and try our best now to negotiate an economic deal without compromising our sovereign rights. Did we evaluate the cost benefits of a straight/crooked bridge versus the demand for limited airspace and sand sales? Is there something that we, the public, have not been made aware of?