Commuters deserve better

Public commuting in the Philippines is so bad that it has been described as dehumanizing. The daily struggle of the Filipino commuter consists mainly of hours of waiting for a ride and getting stuck in traffic snarls that reflect a serious transport supply shortage, exacerbated by an inefficient and unintegrated public transport network.

It is especially worse in Metro Manila, where millions of commuters pass through every day to get to work or school. Long queues at train stations, passengers waiting by the roadside, congested public transports, and hours wasted in transit have characterized commuting in the metropolitan area that is served by a rail network consisting of the 52-year-old PNR Metro Commuter Line, the 38-year-old Manila Light Rail Transit (LRT), and the 22-year-old Manila Metro Rail Transit System (MRT).

Now comes the government’s plan to privatize the MRT Line 3 when its build-lease-transfer agreement with the Metro Rail Transit Corp. expires in 2025. The plan has been met with skepticism by a public so wary of corrupt politicians and a track record of privatized services that have not met expectations.

The Department of Transportation is considering several options, including privatization of operations and maintenance. But a transport expert has warned that this is the worst kind of privatization and is not much different from the current arrangement. Commuter group The Passenger Forum (TPF) fears this may result in a fare hike, which the ordinary Filipino cannot afford especially at this time when prices of basic commodities have also gone up. Even worse, TPF convenor Primo Morillo said, commuters may end up paying higher fares for subpar services. “Filipinos have a lot of experiences on privatization and it always tends to work against ordinary folks’ interests … The government wants to serve MRT-3 on a silver platter while commuters suffer,” Morillo added. At least one lawmaker, Sen. Grace Poe, supports the move, referencing Japan’s sophisticated train network that is operated by either the state or private companies, and world-renowned for its efficiency. Poe further noted that the LRT line is also privately run and is more efficient compared to the MRT.

Aside from Japan, other countries that have private rail networks include the United Kingdom, Canada, Sweden, and in Asia, Thailand, whose Bangkok Mass Transit System popularly known as the BTS Skytrain is as old as MRT-3. BTS Skytrain is operated by a private company under a concession agreement with the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration. The difference between BTS and MRT-3, however, couldn’t be any starker. BTS’ trains are well-maintained, and since its launch in 1999 has expanded into three lines and 62 stations, and serves more than 747,000 commuters daily; while MRT-3 only has one line and 13 stations, and has a daily ridership of 300,000, not to mention old, poorly maintained railcars.

MRT-3 has also been hounded by controversy: In 2016, Chinese firm CRRC Dalian Co. delivered 48 railcars that were later found to be incompatible with the system’s rail capacity. Dalian has agreed to cover the repair and adjustment costs and, after sitting in the depot for years, the trains were initially deployed for test runs in 2018. In the meantime, the government has been operating MRT-3 at a loss: Based on government data, it spends almost P9 billion annually to operate and maintain the line, but has collected only an average P1.72 billion in fares.

The ones who bear the brunt of these problems are the commuters. The rail system still has limited coverage, the old railcars are prone to breakdowns, and the long queues during rush hour have become social-media notorious. Then when commuters finally get to their station, they have to navigate the government’s poor excuse of sidewalks to reach their destination or catch their next ride.

An insensitive public official once advised commuters to leave early to avoid traffic, which in fact most have been doing—they leave their homes early in the morning to make it to their appointments on time, and return home late in the evening with only a few hours to rest and spend time with family before they repeat the exhausting cycle again. A study by the Boston Consulting Group said Filipinos spend an average of 16 days a year stuck in traffic, costing them about P100,000 annually in lost income. The inefficient transport network, lack of connectivity, and the horrendous traffic also cost the country P3.5 billion a day in lost productivity, according to the Japan International Cooperation Agency.

The government has tried to ease the commuters’ plight such as offering free rides, but such solutions only show how out of touch those in charge are. It is ironic that these privileged government officials can take public transport overseas and praise their efficiency, but are unable to bring the same technology and efficiency home. Whatever option they choose for MRT-3, the commuting public deserves better, and their clamor for safe, efficient, and affordable transport should come first.