Dubious intentions

It is just a matter of time before motorcycle taxis are legalized as a mode of public transportation.

For years, motorcycle taxis have been operating informally as habal habal because the current law does not recognize them as a form of public transportation.  Republic Act 4136 or the Land Transportation and Traffic Code specifically provides that “private motorcycles, scooters or motor wheel attachments…shall not be used to solicit, accept, or be used to transport passengers or freight for pay.” It explicitly excluded motorcycles from its definition of passenger automobiles.

It was only in 2019 that they were first allowed to operate but under what is known as a pilot study that will determine the viability of motorcycles as a mode of public transport. There are three MC taxi providers qualified under this program – Angkas, Move It and JoyRide.  The study covers only app-based hailing platforms and excludes informal motorcycle transport services such as habal habal that are common in the provinces.

The pilot study has been expanded to include recently Grab Bike which was given 2000 slots although the service is not yet available in the Grab booking app.

There is now a serious push to finally pass legislation that would legalize this mode of transportation. The push came from the President himself who pointed out that more transport options will benefit commuters, drivers and even micro and small and medium enterprises or MSMEs.

At the same time, House Speaker Martin Romualdez has asked the congressmen to fast track the measure that would allow the operation of MC taxis, saying it is imperative to adapt the laws to the evolving transportation landscape to ensure the well-being and convenience of Filipinos.

He added that legalization of MC taxis and the relaxation of transport network vehicle service (TNVS) regulations align with their goal to provide more choices for passengers, drivers, and businesses, particularly MSMEs.

A study conducted by the Center for Research and Communication of the University of Asia & the Pacific revealed the huge contribution of transport network companies (TNCs) to the economy. Consumer patronage of one of the country’s largest TNCs accounted for 0.07 to 0.3 percent of the national gross domestic product. From 2019 to 2021, the TNC’s estimated total economic contribution ranged from P37 billion to P165.6 billion, reinforcing its position as a key contributor to the national economy.

The same study showed that for every peso spent on the said TNC’s platform, an additional P3.42 is injected into the national economy. With a hypothetical P100 ride, an additional P342 is generated for the economy and this multiplier effect outpaces even heavy industries like mining, CRC noted.

Meanwhile, the household income multiplier of 0.44 suggests that every additional peso spent on the said TNC’s services stimulates an increase of P0.44 in the national household income, meaning that an extra peso spent on the company’s services contributes an additional 44 centavos to household incomes for laborers in the ride-hailing and on-demand delivery industry nationwide, the study pointed out. With this multiplier value for household income, the said TNC contributed 0.1 to 0.17 percent to the total family income from 2019 to 2021, equivalent to between P23.8 and P40.3 billion.

And of course, when Filipinos spend less time on traffic, imagine the increased productivity as well as quality of life that they experience.

The House committee on transportation is currently deliberating on a substitute bill that would pave the way for the legalization of MC taxis. And according to committee chair Rep. Romeo Acop, it would be unwise to set caps on the number of MC taxi franchises and units in the proposed MC taxi law since this would be addressed anyway by competition among industry players.

House Bill 3412 or the proposed Motorcycles for Hire Act amending RA 4136 is still pending at the committee levels in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. The bill seeks to keep up with the development of application-driven TNCs which have highlighted the necessity for updated regulations that keep pace with technological advancements and evolving public needs.

And while the House transport committee is deliberating on the proposed bill, the House committee on Metro Manila Development (CMMD) is conducting parallel hearings on the same topic which is actually a waste of time and public resources better spent on other pressing matters. They are also wasting the time of government agency personnel such as those of the LTFRB and LTO who have to attend several redundant House hearings.

The House CMMD is even singing a tune different from everyone else. It wants a moratorium on increasing the number of players in the Department of Transportation led-MC taxi pilot study. Why? Is it because traditional public transport providers such as jeepneys and tricycles are worried about the inroads MC taxis have made? Or is it to protect existing players from added competition?

Not everybody can afford to take a cab, or book a four-wheeled vehicle ride from an app, or spend hours waiting for the next train to arrive, or ride a jeepney or bus and waste hours in traffic. For many, MC taxis provide the cheapest and fastest way to go to and from their place of work. Would it make sense to limit the number of industry players and the number of MC taxis plying the roads when the current number is obviously not enough to meet rising demand?

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]