If it ain’t broke…

Have the officials of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) ever taken public transport in recent years?

It’s a question that begs to be asked after one LTFRB official explained that the agency’s crackdown on Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) Grab and Uber next week was meant to make them “as safe as other public utility vehicles [PUVs] that have franchises, like taxis, buses and jeepneys.”

Starting July 26, the agency said it will allow on the road only transport network vehicles that have a Provisional Authority (PA) or a Certificate of Public Convenience.

This is on top of the P5 million fine it imposed on Grab and Uber on July 11, and its order to both to deactivate more than 50,000 of their vehicles and drivers.

The LTFRB said that out of 28,000 colorum vehicles from the two TNCs, only 7,200 have the authority to operate from the agency. Seventy-five percent of Grab and Uber vehicles are bound to become idle once the crackdown starts. All in the name of safety for the commuting public.

But “safety” is hardly the word that comes to mind when one reads about taxi drivers overcharging, threatening and shortchanging passengers; buses that race each other on busy roads in pursuit of more passengers and jeepneys counterflowing to evade the traffic and meet the day’s boundary.

Complaints about cab drivers molesting or robbing passengers are nothing new either, nor are instances of drivers being picky about destinations.

Relief for many commuters have come via Uber and Grab, whose mode of operation allows passengers to book their ride conveniently via smartphone, and to get through SMS such details as the exact fare, the driver’s name, plate number, car make and even estimated time of arrival.

That passengers can have their ride tracked by friends and family has been an additional layer of security as well among those wary of criminal elements on city streets.

Little wonder then that both Uber and Grab easily gained a loyal following (up to a 150-percent increase in client-base from July 2016 to the current year, according to Uber).

TNCs have been a boon especially among working parents who often had to choose between keeping their jobs and bringing their young kids to school on time; the frail, elderly and PWDs who cannot compete with the rushing horde on public transport;  young execs still building their businesses and unable to afford their own ride, and the thousands of others who are just tired and frustrated in dealing with capricious PUV drivers.

To be sure, the LTFRB has put forward good reasons to crack the whip:  If both Grab and Uber want to go into the transport business, they should follow the rules like other PUVs and apply for a proper franchise.

Well put — except that since July last year, the agency itself had suspended issuing such franchises, saying that they need to come up with policies to regulate TNCs.

Basically, the agency sat on the thousands of applications and said that there are already too many vehicles on the road.

Simply put, these colorum vehicles want to go legal, but the LTFRB itself closed that road. Does that make sense?

In the meantime, the agency did not offer any alternative to the suspension—nor regulatory policies on TNCs — in the one year it had been in effect.

Judging from CCTV footage on the nightly news, there are enough offending public buses, jeepneys and taxicabs that can be banned on the road to make room for more law-abiding vehicles.

The MMDA campaign to tow vehicles illegally parked on public streets could have been given a boost, again to decongest roads and allow the riding public more options.

But even that reasoning about too many vehicles on the road is flawed, protest some TNC users, who point out that Grab’s and Uber’s ride-sharing service has made carpooling convenient and economical, thus freeing up more vehicle space on the road.

TNC users too are mostly private car owners forced to use their vehicle precisely because of the deplorable PUV situation — that is, until the TNCs gave them the incentive to take public transport once again.

So why deprive the riding public a viable option to the unreliable, corruptible and inconvenient public transport system just because the agency can’t regulate public buses and taxicabs more assiduously? And why punish law-abiding TNC drivers who only want to earn an honest living?

With an aging train system prone to periodic breakdowns, 30-year-old buses still plying the roads and jeepneys and taxicabs that have maniacs on wheels, the commuting public have shown they are willing to pay a bit more for a safe and convenient ride via TNCs.

So why fix something that ain’t broke? Is the agency taking us for a ride?