Traffic congestion is no longer a joke. There are times during the day when the whole stretch of White Plains Avenue is like a parking lot. This was not the case last year. December traffic will be the norm sooner than we think. No one is exempt from the menace of traffic jam. Traffic congestion is a great equalizer.
In an article published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Rene Santiago also blames “population, motor vehicles and economic activities in a compact area.” This nightmare is also attributed to lack of infrastructure, a saturated road network and sparse development of railway system. He also points out that road projects in the pipeline are “buffeted by right-of-way issues and prevalence of NIMBYs [not-in-my-backyard] resistance.”
What has to be done? Is it hopeless? Should we immigrate? Should we just stay home, rally, sue government, wait for the next President, and fault the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, local governments, the Philippine National Police and public-utility vehicles (PUVs)?
Is there a plan to solve traffic congestion? Yes, there is one. The Roadmap has been prepared. It proposes to shift away from road-based to rail-based transport, clear backlogs on unimplemented road projects, rationalize operations of buses and jeepneys, and install a more intelligent traffic-management system.
The problem with this Roadmap is, we do not know if this is the plan. Assuming this plan was approved by the Neda Board, we are not certain if the next administration will respect this plan. Assuming this Roadmap went through consultations, we are not certain if all stakeholders—all government agencies, all affected local governments, private businesses, operators and drivers of PUVs, civil-society organizations (CSOs) and ordinary citizens, like you and I—know there is such a plan, comprehend the impact of such plan on our lives and will embrace the plan.
What can be done to implement the plan? public-private partnerships (PPPs) has been identified as a key strategy to make the Roadmap a reality. Under the Transport Investment Program, the development strategies are to “ramp up tendering” for infrastructure and computerization projects; execute major transport projects under a PPP approach; and “tap official development assistance for quick and targeted planning.”
I fully support the “strong-bias-for-PPP” approach. But we must be cautious not to put PPPs in a pedestal, adopt PPP as if it is a panacea and exclude other strategies. PPP is an approach, vehicle, means and strategy, and not the be-all and end-all to solve a problem like traffic.
In order for PPP to be a viable solution in addressing traffic congestion, which is both a cause and effect, PPP should not be viewed as project-specific, transaction-focused or contract-based. PPP must be appreciated and pursued as a change-for-a-better-quality-of-life initiative.
To “future-proof “ this kind of PPP amid threats of successor risk or change-in-administration risk, innovation, participation, accountability, organizational readiness, trust and leadership are needed.
These elements were not or could not be covered by a vision document like the Roadmap.
Yes to mass-rail transit PPPs. The government cannot do this on its own. The private sector can provide the funding, operate the system and innovate. We have private-sector proponents that can make this happen. Scarcity of funds, fiscal-space creation, innovation and risk allocation are key value drivers to justify the adoption of this development strategy. We have enough laws to support this.
Yes to bundling. To be viable, mass-transit projects must be integrated or “bundled” with other activities like land development.
I hope to see in the not-so-distant future systems, like those in Hong Kong and Japan.
Also, to be successful, the shift to mass-rail transit through PPPs must be coupled and synergized with other infrastructure and transport projects. PPPs on airports, seaports and bridges must also be prioritized.
Yes to LGU-initiated PPPs. To complement transport projects which cut across several territories, local governments units (LGUs) must be allowed to implement their own traffic-decongestion PPPs. Intra- and inter-LGU monorail systems could present benefits to the riding public. These projects too must form part of the bigger whole.
Yes to extra Metro Manila PPPs. Development through PPPs should not be confined to Metro Manila. To unclog the region, people must feel and believe they can be prosperous elsewhere. National government and LGUs must establish PPP projects on infrastructure and social services outside the metropolis. PPPs should be decentralized.
Yes to constructive engagement. The government does not have the monopoly of solutions and brilliant ideas. CSOs do not also have an exclusive claim to righteousness. PPP involves partnerships not just between those who will implement a project. Nonsignatories to PPP contracts, that is, you and I, must be part of the process, the planning and project regulation.
Yes to informed and purposive sacrifice. Whether we are part of the solution, we will have to bear the “pain” of PPP and government projects. Transport projects will not be cost-free. If we want to live in Metro Manila, or in any urban city for that matter, we will have to pay for the projects, either as end-users or taxpayers.
To ease traffic jam, there will be worse traffic congestion. During the construction of projects, there will be dislocation, discomfort and inconvenience. We have to “sacrifice,” believing that the general welfare will be served by PPP. Again, PPP is not the objective.
Yes to leadership. Enough with “we have good plans” and “we have too many laws.” It is time to act. We need leaders and citizens who can adapt, trust, build on the gains of the past, empathize, be ethical, be accountable, accept mistakes, listen, empower organizations, foster learning, and bite the bullet.
The menace of traffic congestion calls us to action. We all have a stake. Let us start our engagement by reading the “Dream Plan.” It is downloadable from the Internet.
PPP Learn No. 8 ‘Dream Plan’ Projects
The Roadmap prepared by Almec Corp. lists the major projects under the “Dream Plan” which can be undertaken through PPPs. These are: