The forced shifting of airlines from the old Subang Airport to the grossly underused Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) is a classic example of the pitiful lack of rational thinking that characterises the Barisan Nasional government.

Subang Airport is a large-scale airport, equipped with modern facilities, and its third Terminal Building was only completed while KLIA was still under construction several years ago. It had served as Malaysias international gateway since 1960s until KLIA opened in 1998, and its role as the domestic hub continues until today. Due to its proximity to the city of Kuala Lumpur, it is the natural choice as the airport for domestic traffic.

In fact, its present role cannot be replaced by KLIA, as the latter is eminently ill-suited for domestic traffic considering its distance from KL and the relatively small geographical size of Peninsular Malaysia, thus making transit time and transit costs to and from KL disproportionately high and prohibitive.

KLIAs glaring handicap as a domestic airport is clear as the flight to Johor Bahru or Penang from there is about the same as by road from KL. The taxi fare to KLIA is so expensive that it is almost as much as some of the air fares. So, why should anyone choose to fly to these destinations from KLIA?

The closure of Subang Airport to all commercial jet flights will almost definitely kill second-tier airlines such as Air Asia, which now struggles to survive by plying lesser routes, consisting of mainly domestic destinations. Of greater significance, is the denial of domestic air travel to large sections of Malaysians.

This latest decision by the Malaysian cabinet to shut off Subang Airport defies rationale. Why should Malaysian taxpayers who have spent a huge fortune to build up the massive and modern facilities in Subang be denied the right to enjoy the fruits of their money?

Is it right for the BN government to kill off second-tier airlines in this country, now serving the needs of domestic travellers that could not otherwise be provided by the national airline MAS? Is it right to deny Malaysians the right to an economical or alternative air travel?

While the Cabinet has not justified its decision since its announcement, another source has provided the answers. Under the heading KLIA on track for regional hub status, The Star carried an interview with the executive director of Malaysian Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB), the operator of KLIA. That interview provides the thinking that motivated the closure of Subang Airport.

Simply put, it is to rescue KLIA from failure due to underutilisation.

According to MAHBs presentations, by shutting down Subang Airport, 231 flights will be shifted to KLIA to help boost its passenger flow from the present 14.6 million to the magical 18 million, the critical mass needed to transform KLIA into a regional hub.

Before going too deeply into the issue, let us dispense with a few preliminary fallacies.

First, it is wishful thinking that all the 231 flights diverted from Subang will end up in KLIA, because many will simply disappear due to lack of economic viability for the passengers as described above.

Second, the deciding factor for passenger numbers for KLIA is not how attractive KLIA is, but how attractive Malaysia is as a country for tourism and business. And that, to a large extent, is shaped by Malaysias politics and economics. Artificially boosting passenger figures through shutting down alternative airports will not increase KLIAs international traffic.

In fact, it is the height of folly that a big, modern airport should be shut down to the detriment of domestic air industry and the deprivation of domestic air travels to local travellers, purely for the purpose of boosting the passenger numbers of another airport, no matter how prestigious or grand it is.

The inevitable setback to the economy and the consequential inconvenience inflicted on the public arising from the closure of Subang Airport begets the question: Was KLIA created to serve the public, or was it the reverse, that public interests should be sacrificed to serve KLIA?

That the prime minister and his Cabinet are constantly embarrassed by the continuing white elephant status of KLIA since its opening four years ago is understandable. But is it right to cover up one folly by committing another?

The nation has already paid dearly to quench the PMs thirst for grandiosity in the premature construction of KLIA, shouldnt the Cabinet have some mercy now on the people by sparing Subang Airport, the closure of which constitutes a painful loss to the people?

The above example illustrates how an economically unviable grandiose project can boomerang to make the people suffer. Unlike false political propaganda, which can be executed without being detected, an economically unjustifiable mega-project will reveal its true colours when it inevitably inflicts its toll on the economic well-being of the country.

Much to the misfortune of Malaysia, KLIA is but one of many of PMs mega-follies. Together with the failed Perwaja Steel (RM10 billion), KLIA (RM12 billion, including its express links to KL) has come to the fore due to the glaring visibility of their failures.

Other mega-follies rated lower on the white elephant scale are the Petronas Twin Towers (more than RM2 billion), Putrajaya (more than RM20 billion, on-going project), Bakun Dam (RM9 billion, initial stage) and new Johor bridge to Singapore with the associated complex (in the pipeline).

One dreads to ponder the cumulative damage to the economy when all these projects mature and bury us deeper in debts.

And the saddest part of all is — all PMs mega-follies are unstoppable. There is simply no built-in mechanism left in our present political system to prevent such follies, our original democratic system established by our founding fathers having been thoroughly corroded by the two decades of Mahathirism.