The Manila bus ban

It has gained more media mileage because the local mayor who ordered the ban was a former president of the republic.  The fact that it was implemented in the capital city of the country made the issue more prominent.  At face value, it has its own share of merits.  A lot of people I talked to on the matter seem to agree with the drastic action.  They see it as a decisive move to eradicate colorum buses, generally pinpointed as the cause of traffic congestion, not only in Manila but the rest of the metropolis.

But what does it really mean; what does it imply, and what is the ultimate effect?  At the first issuance, it was simply a bus ban - buses which otherwise ply routes into Manila were prevented from entering, their passengers disembarking (and getting stranded) outside the city boundaries.  In many other parts of the country, it would be the other way around.  Especially in the provinces and far-flung areas, cities and municipalities enact ordinances to force buses to pass through as many parts of their areas as possible, usually through twisted circuitous routes, if possible, to cover the entire town.

These are highly debatable issues, and people would be somewhat equally divided on the pros and cons.  The driver of the taxi I was riding in last Monday morning was happy with the ban.  “The traffic improved a lot sir, the roads were very spacious!” he exclaimed.  “What about the bus passengers?” I asked.  “Ah, they can take the jeepneys, sir, or they can ride taxis.”  No wonder he supported the move.  Human nature tells you anything which is good for you or increases your profit, is generally good.  Regardless of who suffers.

It wouldn't be too farfetched to say all the car driving people who go to Manila were elated with the news.  “Too many vehicles on too limited road space,” a news report said about the traffic jams of Manila.  “Yeah, right,” I could imagine Dan Brown reacting.  I remember a news headline on two helicopters which collided which each other in Mindanao, because “they were too near each other.”  So just removing some of the vehicles would be logically right!  And what else should we remove but the buses!  Most of them are “colorum” anyway!

I don't disagree with cracking down on colorum buses (or jeepneys, taxis, etc.).  We should.  But to make it as an excuse to decrease the number of vehicles on the road is not fair, especially if we don't have an idea on who gets, and how many are, affected.  This just emphasizes a basic flaw in mind-set when we look at urban transportation.  There are three entities in urban transport - the road, the vehicles, and the passenger.  We're only equating road space capacity and vehicle volume, and not the passengers into the equation.

Enrique Peñalosa puts it very bluntly, “Are we planning cities for people or for cars?”  In the case of Manila, thousands of bus passengers were stranded in the rain because a few buses were prevented from entering the city.  And “a few” is not exaggeration.  I doubt if the number of buses plying Manila streets would reach 20 percent of the total vehicular volume, maybe not even 10 percent!  But I bet they carry more than half of the riding public there.  So we ban a few buses, make life worse for majority of the poor people taking public transportation, just to prove that the city is not the “gates of hell.”  And I thought the mayor said he's “... para sa mahirap?”

The solution to the “colorum” problem is to cure it, not ban all the buses.  They did revise their ban, saying those with franchises and terminals can enter the city.  And say that commuters should fix their habits.  I don't know.  I believe habits are best influenced by strict enforcement of laws.  Many people who go abroad have the correct habits.  Ask any Filipino who lives in Singapore if they chew gum or smoke anywhere.  But as far as long-term solutions to urban transport woes, these can only be meaningful if we put first things first - the passengers.

For me, the best thing that came out of the Manila bus ban is that it opened a lot of questions and started a flowing discussion on what really is sustainable transport.  Now they're talking about a traffic summit.  I really hope transport specialists will join the public discussions and lend an open but credible hand is coming up with solutions.  It would take both technical expertise and political will to arrive at the best answers.  My only little wish is that the proposed Metro Manila summit will realize that Philippines is not just Manila, and that there are other urban areas in the country which wished for solutions, too.