Enough with the ‘emergency powers’ already
Credit to Author: BEN KRITZ, TMT| Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:44:50 +0000
BACK on September 5, Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade made what can be assumed to be the administration’s request to Congress for “emergency powers” to be granted to President Rodrigo Duterte in order that he can “solve” the traffic gridlock that has crippled Metro Manila. This is at least the third or fourth time the idea of “emergency powers” has been floated, and though it hardly seems possible, it makes even less sense now than it did before.
It has not been lost on some observers that for the Transportation Secretary to openly admit, during budget hearings for his department no less, that his department is wholly incapable of doing its job is rather extraordinary, but we live in extraordinary times. Transportation infrastructure is literally the bedrock of the Duterte administration’s entire policy direction; if the DoTr is not up to it, some comprehensive changes need to be made, and those immediately.
Looking beyond that, the more practical flaw in the request for “emergency powers” is that it assumes the administration’s one-note orientation is actually the solution to traffic congestion. Tugade’s rationale for allowing the president to bypass law and established procedure is that the lengthy process of procurement and bidding for infrastructure projects is “really slow.” With less than three years left in his term, the DoTr chief explained, Duterte might not have time to implement the projects needed to solve the crisis.
Since Tugade’s appearance earlier this month, the administration has at least come up with a reasonably specific list of what the “emergency powers” would entail. Among the recommendations are: Creation of a “traffic czar” to enforce coordination among different agencies; suspension of local government units’ authority to regulate traffic; limiting the filing of petitions against specific projects or regulations to the Supreme Court; suspending existing laws on procurement and bidding so that project contracts could be approved faster; allowing the government to take over existing private roads (such as through gated subdivisions) for public use; allowing the government to take over existing public utility vehicle franchises to manage the flow of public transportation traffic; and suspending existing laws on right-of-way procurement to remove one chronic delay in the implementation of projects.
Some of these are not actually bad ideas, while some are frankly terrible. All of them, however, tap-dance around the fundamental problem underlying traffic gridlock, as well as many of the other social ills of the metropolis: Metro Manila is overpopulated. There is too much of everything in this relatively small land area – too many people, too many businesses, too many vehicles, and all three growing without restriction. The government can build all the roads and light rail lines and public transit hubs it likes but will never catch up, because the population will continue to grow to fill the new infrastructure to capacity and beyond as soon as it becomes operational.
In that light, “emergency powers,” if they accomplish anything at all, which is doubtful, will be at best another stopgap measure that does not solve the problem of congestion but simply reduces its severity for a short period of time. To solve the issue of congestion, the government needs to look far beyond traffic itself, and impose some measures that will seem draconian, but are really the only means to advance what was President Duterte’s first policy aspiration, diffusing economic benefits across the entire country instead of concentrating them in Metro Manila, in any substantial way before he leaves office.
Here are a few suggestions: First, to directly address the issue of traffic congestion and create a bit of breathing space to implement more sustainable measures, impose some restrictions on private automobiles, which make up about 70 percent of the city’s current traffic load. Ways in which this can be done include passing the “no parking space, no car” law; limiting the number of private vehicles that can be registered to one per household; imposing an access tax; if necessary, imposing a moratorium on registering any private vehicle to an NCR address for a period of time; denying renewal of registration to vehicles above a certain age; and enforcing traffic control schemes such as the number coding system, restricting access to chronically congested roads to high-occupancy vehicles, and so on.
Second, measures that halt the population growth of businesses and people in Metro Manila can be implemented. Suspending the issuance of new business licenses for most businesses – while at the same time, offering incentives for them to locate elsewhere – will help. Likewise, restricting the issuance of building permits, which could be done in a number of ways, will also discourage additional people and business from gravitating toward the NCR.
Once those steps are taken, the government can then take steps to reduce the existing population. “Informal settlements,” as they are euphemistically called, should be eliminated. Some can be replaced with appropriate high-density housing in the same locations, but the residents of most, unless they choose to make their own housing arrangements, should be moved to outlying areas. Of course, this is not a new idea; to make it work, the government must accomplish what every government preceding it has not, creating settlements that offer appropriate infrastructure and services to actually make them attractive, livable neighborhoods.
Along with reducing the residential population, the population of business establishments can be reduced through various means, starting with the ones that have the biggest footprint, older manufacturing facilities. Likewise, removing too huge sources of congestion from the city – the hopelessly outdated airport, which will be replaced in a few years by the new airport in Bulacan, and the container port located at the very heart of the city – will also help to relieve the pressure.
Not that any of that will happen, of course; no government has ever been willing to engage in a large-scale effort with a timeframe measured in years. This one certainly shows no inclination to do so, otherwise it would not be asking for “emergency powers.” And that may be the best reason not to grant them.
ben.kritz@manilatimes.net