The overcrowding, failure to queue up, the misuse of facilities, and the littering were blamed on the lack of civic sense. Some even suggested training and awareness programmes before letting the public enter the area. What should be done? Redesign our people?
The MBS was billed as a project for the people. A large sum of public money has been spent for the sake of the ordinary people.
I am not getting into the debate on cost, as there is no reliable information to judge between the official and nonofficial claims ranging wildly between Rs 30-70 billion.
Here, one has to wait for the revised budget. Nor will I go into the question of whether some alternatives would have made better economic sense.
I am not even questioning the distorted concept of mass transit implied in the MBS. Even the decision to act at the fag end of the government can be defended.
Spending such a large sum on a single project before the new National Finance Commission Award would have been impossible. The size of Punjab’s development budget in 2010-11 was Rs 107 billion. In the current year, it is Rs 250 billion.
My problem is that people never figured in the planning and execution of the project. It is built on the assumption that our people do not deserve better. They are used to overcrowding. So, be it. Otherwise, the service would have been started with an adequate number of buses. Rules would have been framed, and courteously enforced, about the number of passengers to be accommodated in a bus. By banning all other public transport on the route, overcrowding was only to be expected. Some junglas could also be added to encourage queues.
Affordability is the most important consideration in public transport. But it is wrong to assume that the people do not want to pay for good service. Over six per cent of monthly consumption expenditure of an urban household in Punjab is on transport. For the distance covered by the Metro, the ordinary buses charged around Rs80. Public transport involves some subsidy everywhere. In Ahmedabad, India, the bus rapid transit has actually been able to balance revenues and expenditures. However, keeping the fare as low as Rs20 per person is an incentive for overcrowding. It also means that a service started in the name of the people will either close down sooner than later, or the purpose is eventually to restrict it to the middle classes. The chief minister’s dream that the Metro will witness workers and employers travelling together echoed what the mayor of Bogota famously said: “A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” This dream is unlikely to be realised in our lifetime at least. What is, however, not impossible is to put in place systems to enable the poor to get to their workplace in dignity. Not necessarily a seat for all, but a standing space at least. Construction of the MBS was the easy part. There was money available and it was spent rapidly. Managing it in the interest of the people is where the real action lies. In a similar situation, a landmark judgment of the Delhi High Court brought out the class structure of the Indian society, where the rich and the powerful claim a divine right over public resources. Transport infrastructure, the court ruled, is for moving people, not vehicles.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 8th, 2013.
COMMENTS (3)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Mr Pervez Tahir says that he will not get into "the debate on cost" of the jangla bus with "official and nonofficial claims ranging wildly between Rs 30-70 billion" and would "wait for the revised budget". The costs of all roadworks may not have been charged to the jangla scheme, particularly at Kalma Chowk, re-engineered three times, and where the flyover was a separate and earlier venture; and similarly perhaps Muslim Town flyover and Qartaba Chowk. So the budget figures may only provide what is considered convenient to be charged to the jangla scheme, and not the full cost of the "dream".
Dear Dr.Tahir fantastic.Its well written article but tribune should allow more space to the writers so that complete idea can be conveyed properly. Only way to make public transport viable is to make cars on roads a costly process. Anyone using a car is contributing to some sort of traffic congestion and roughly 3 cars at a signal almost occupies space equal to one bus which means 3 cars having 3 to 6 people occupies place for 60 people on road. So one bus roughly covers around 30-50 cars commuters. Therefore, there is need to tax cars on busy roads and people traveling in cars will demand better public transport and hopefully it will materialize since they are the ones who have some say in power corridors. So issue is whether to approach people commuting from demand side or supply side. While most of our current economists at the higher rungs pursue all policies from demand perspective then why not transport. Making underpasses, widening roads (as green belts have been removed from Islamabad ) will in no way lead to reduction in traffic. Parking and road use must be taxed for all car users. Parking space outside shopping plazas makes markets costly and discourage entrepreneurship and again a person coming to market on foot has to contribute to the cost of parking which is for car owners. Free parking making our roads and markets unprofitable.
Pakistani cities need buses after every 2 minutes, not flyovers and underpasses either for private cars or the Metro Buses. The main investment on the Metro Bus project (whether 300 million or 700 million) is on building underpasses and flyovers which is totally unnecessary. Public transport in Pakistan should make a profit rather than getting a subsidy. In Pakistan, everyone know that if you own one rickshaw/van/bus, then you will make it 4 in 4 years. It is unfortunate that govt always give subsidy to public transport.