Emergency powers not the solution to traffic woes
Credit to Author: The Manila Times| Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:04:41 +0000
TRANSPORTATION Secretary Arthur Tugade has joined the chorus of those calling for “emergency powers” to be given to President Rodrigo Duterte so he can “solve” Metro Manila’s crippling traffic congestion. It is no more an appropriate approach to the problem for his having said it than it was any of the other multiple times it was proposed by Congress or other well-meaning parties.
In budget hearings at the House of Representatives on Thursday, Tugade made the pitch for “emergency powers,” citing the short time left in the President’s term and the lengthy process of procurement and bidding, which is “really slow.”
To prevent corruption and waste, which are obvious risks to bypassing processes that are precisely designed to prevent that, Tugade suggested Congress could convene an oversight body to review the projects that would be launched by executive fiat.
There are a couple of aspects of the advocacy for “emergency powers,” whether the call is being made by Secretary Tugade or anyone else, that are disturbing.
First, in all the discussions about solving traffic congestion, there has not been a concise definition of its causes. There is in fact a great deal of disagreement on that point, which is why hardly any of the multitude of solutions tried by the Metro Manila Development Authority has had any positive results.
Second, the scope of the extraordinary authority that would be given the President has not been defined, either; he will have “emergency powers” to do what, exactly? Secretary Tugade seemed to imply that the emergency powers would enable the President to “build something,” but he had no suggestions as to what that might be, or how it would specifically address the traffic crisis.
As Tugade’s remarks to Congress suggested that dealing with traffic congestion was an immediate concern, rushing the start of more infrastructure projects might be counterproductive. A significant part of the current traffic problem is being caused by the ongoing construction of large-scale projects such as the Skyway Stage 3 and the MRT Line 7. Those will eventually be completed and should have at least some positive impact on traffic, but in the meantime they are an aggravating factor and will be for some time to come.
Third, the suggestion that the time-consuming procurement and bidding process should be replaced by a different process involving post facto congressional oversight is illogical. The procurement and bidding process is intended to vet projects and contractors for regularity and cost effectiveness before they start; oversight, once the projects are under way or are finished, is less efficient, and makes any problems discovered in contracts and budgets harder, if not impossible, to solve.
If the reason the government is unable to effectively reduce traffic congestion is that it takes too long to implement infrastructure projects, as Tugade asserted before Congress, then the evident course of action is to carefully examine the process and find ways to make it faster and more efficient.
That, however, is only part of the solution. There is no question that traffic congestion — which is costing the economy some P3 billion a day, according to some estimates — must be addressed as soon as possible. And it is very likely that the personal attention of the President on the matter can help find and implement solutions quickly. Where the President’s authority can be most beneficial is in coordinating the various stakeholders and responsible parties so that partial solutions proposed by one party do not conflict with iniatives proposed by others. Solving the traffic problem requires a holistic approach, beginning with clearly identifying — and getting all concerned to agree on — its causes. Managing that effort is something the President already has the power to do.