Transparency on BRT, LRT

CAPILLAS

The demand for transparency on the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project by Presidential Assistant to the Visayas Michael Dino goes both ways especially in relation to his proposed Cebu Light Rail Transit (LRT) subway project.

Regardless of whether or not the debate between BRT and LRT will be confined solely on social media between Dino’s camp and Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña or be taken to the level of a town hall meeting, the point is trying to derail the BRT at this point would be counterproductive for Cebu’s commuters.

There is a BRT project management office headed by lawyer Rafael Yap that is more than willing and qualified enough to answer Dino’s “10 questions” on the BRT, but Dino is targeting the mayor who would rather take it to a public debate.

But since Dino is demanding for transparency on the BRT, maybe Metro Cebu commuters should also demand that he discloses the identities of his proposed investors on the LRT subway project.

I’ve read social media posts of an MRT/LRT project being proposed for Metro Cebu, and I don’t know if this is related to Dino’s project. But anyway, let the debate rage on while groundwork for the BRT continues.

* * *

IT will be quite arduous and trying, but credit should be given to the national government for trying to accommodate both transport-hailing app companies Uber and Grab into the country’s mass transport mix.

This despite the fact that Congress found out that Uber and Grab didn’t disclose accurate figures on the number of their members throughout the country that count in the thousands, making regulation all the more difficult and quite challenging.

It would not only be interesting but important to monitor the debates in Congress to create a separate system for transport-hailing app companies like Uber and Grab, and I join the others in asking the public to become active participants in giving constructive inputs in this issue since it impacts directly on their mobility as either commuter or motorist.

So with thousands of member-drivers of these Uber, Grab and other transport-hailing service app firms catering to hundreds of thousands of these commuters plus the existing taxi operators, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) has its hands full trying to regulate their numbers and how it would eventually impact on the country’s aging and limited road infrastructure.

We’re not even talking about the habal-habal (motorcycle-for-hire) operators and the passenger jeepney drivers who continue to hog the roads with their ill-timed and misplaced loading and unloading of passengers that’s detrimental to smooth traffic flow for both commuters and motorists alike.

By employing technology that would allow commuters to hire motorists in lieu of taxi drivers who can get picky and predatory in their selection of passengers, Uber and Grab gave back and empowered commuters to make their own choices of transport at their fingertips.

So when the country’s transport agencies suspended anew the operation of both Uber and Grab and apprehended member-motorists for servicing commuters on the basis that they were operating as “colorum drivers,” it caused quite the stir among the riding public who sees both Uber and Grab as the balm to their daily Calvary in securing a convenient, comfortable ride to and from work, school and home.

That said, it’s quite a different story to let these firms operate without some form of regulation. There are issues that Uber and Grab and other transport-hailing app firms need to address such as commuter safety and welfare.

Otherwise, it would be a free-for-all in terms of competing for the commuter’s attention which, while advantageous and somewhat comforting to us who cannot afford a car, would nevertheless affect longstanding taxi operators and public utility vehicles (PUVs) who had invested resources and time into their units to ensure their income and employ drivers.

And the lines are blurred between traditional taxi operators and Uber and Grab drivers, some of whom are supposedly hiring others to drive their units similar to that done by taxi operators. In essence, Uber and Grab allows motorists or maybe, if it turns counter to their policies, to run their own units like taxis without having to secure a franchise as required by government under the law.

Should our government then employ a separate system and consequently different rules for Uber, Grab and similar companies to enable them to coexist with taxi operators and existing public utility vehicle (PUV) operators?

That’s something our elected and appointed government officials need to figure out hopefully within the year or before the year closes especially as the holidays creep in and with it, the monster traffic congestion that we all know and hate.