Gargantuan metro traffic; exasperated and stranded passengers; Metro Rail Transit riders being loaded off to walk to the nearest station because of train breakdowns; abusive and undisciplined legal and colorum-bus drivers weaving in and out of traffic with no regard to traffic laws and the safety of their passengers, and taxi drivers refusing to accept commuters even in emergency situations.
These are the same issues—aside from the illegal-drugs problem—which then-presidential candidate Duterte latched on in depicting the inefficiency of the Aquino administration and which he promised to eradicate in three to six months once elected.
More than a year after he won, these are the same issues which now define his administration. Why, he even admitted that the drug war he so fetishes about could not be won. He says: “We can’t control it…no country had the resources to control ubiquitous drugs. Others can’t do it. How can we?”
The question now is: Why is he still in power? Didn’t he say that he’ll resign if he couldn’t solve all these problems? Somehow, the private sector found a novel solution to at least alleviate our fiendish traffic problem. Through ride-hailing companies Uber and Grab, commuters now have a reliable and comfortable means of travel.
With Uber and Grab, you don’t have to stand at sweltering road sides to get a ride. They’ll pick you up at the comfort of your home, offices or wherever you are. You’d be travelling inside clean, sweet-smelling cars (mostly brand new) with courteous drivers.
These app-based modes of travel have generated a substantial consumer base—so popular, indeed, that they have become the target of taxi operators and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).
Although they connect paying passengers and drivers through a mobile app, Grab and Uber provide transport much like a taxi service. But they’re not taxi companies, and taxi operators want them banned. Initially, the LTFRB wanted them out too, if not for the outpouring opposition by those who clamor for a decent ride to and from their respective destinations.
On Monday the LTFRB suspended for a month Uber’s operations after it allegedly disobeyed the board’s order, which disallowed all transportation network companies (TNCs) to stop accrediting drivers into their systems starting July 26. The directive should have taken effect on Tuesday, August 15, which would have stopped the operation of some 66,000 Uber drivers who ply the roads for a living. Uber complied with the ruling, and went offline starting 6 a.m. on Tuesday.
But the riding public would have none of it. Through social media outlets, commuters expressed their indignation, and some even signed and endorsed petitions calling for the immediate restoration of Uber’s operations. Heeding their customers’ pleas, Uber instantly filed a motion for reconsideration and immediately restored their service. The Uber app’s booking function was online again before noon on Tuesday. Operations “will continue until the motion is resolved”, Uber says, with its appeal pending for the LTFRB to lift or shorten the one-month suspension.
LTFRB Board Member Aileen Lizada, however, insists the suspension order against Uber “stands”. Her instruction to the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority is: “Uber is online again. Let us apprehend them.”
It is no secret that lawyer and former Quezon City councilor Bong Suntay, president of the Philippine National Taxi Operators Association and owner of the Basic Taxi Fleet, has mounted a strong lobby against Uber and Grab. He is perceived by some quarters to have a foot inside the inner circles of the LTFRB.
What I cannot comprehend is how the LTFRB can turn a blind eye to various infractions almost committed daily by colorum buses and taxis; and how the operators of these public vehicles have been negligent in upgrading their services to benefit the riding public. Most of their fleets have become decrepit and unroadworthy, with many of these vehicles manned by uncouth drivers. One of my readers commented that the chances of being killed by gangrene inside taxis are greater than being hit by a speeding cab. He said most of the side doors in most taxis are chipped by rust that a mere lesion when grazed by this could be a cause for great concern.
I believe that laws are made not to oppress but to benefit the citizenry. The reasons are obvious why commuters are gravitated toward these TNCs despite the relatively higher fare they have to shell out. They have grown tired of having to haggle with disrespectful taxi drivers operating a Jurassic vehicle. If the LTFRB doesn’t get this, then it is not up to the task.
The LTFRB reasons that Uber’s actions were “not about pushing innovation in the context of fair regulation but it is about unduly challenging the limit of fair regulation to continue to engage in business in this country, thereby compromising sound business practices”.
What? How does operating dilapidated vehicles driven by doubtful characters, as in the case of most taxis, equate to sound business practices?
Sen. Grace Poe, a prominent advocate for improving the Philippines’s notoriously shoddy transport services, said the regulator’s order was “cruel and absurd”.
She laments that the imposition of a “blanket suspension” against Uber would affect close to 200,000 riders a day. “Our people deserve to have options when it comes to choosing convenient, safe and reliable transportation services to brave the daily punishing traffic jam,” she said, adding that the suspension order, was in “defiance of the LTFRB officials’ commitment to provide a solution to the issues surrounding TNVS [transport network vehicle service] operations that would benefit the riding public…. I was wrong to think that the LTFRB was on the same page with the committee on how to come up with remedial rules pending the crafting of pertinent legislation”.
Maybe Poe suffers from severe cold for her not to smell the stink wafting from the LTFRB’s offices.
For comments and suggestions, e-mail me at mvala.v@gmail.com.