Transport protest vs ‘money-making’ gov’t order set

MANILA, Philippines—Nothing but a “money-making” scheme.

Transport groups long opposed to the government order that steeply raised fines for road and franchise violations are set to stage protest actions in Metro Manila and key urban centers on Monday, despite warnings that they will be penalized if they paralyze traffic.

The group Piston (Pagkakaisa ng Samahan ng Tsuper at Opereytor Nationwide) said its members and those of allied organizations would assemble at six protest centers in the capital as early as 5 a.m. to urge other motorists to join the opposition against Joint Administrative Order (JAO) No. 2014-01.

Issued in June and now being challenged in the Supreme Court for allegedly being unconstitutional, the JAO raised to as much as P1 million the fine for colorum buses or those operating without a franchise; P200,000 for trucks; P50,000 for jeepneys; P 200,000 for vans; P120,000 for sedans, and P6,000 for motorcycles.

Piston national president George San Mateo said protest centers would be set up in Alabang, Muntinlupa City; Monumento, Caloocan City; Novaliches and Cubao in Quezon   City; Pasay City and Parañaque City.

From these points, protest caravans will converge at the main offices of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) and the Land Transportation Office (LTO) on East Avenue, Quezon City, for the main rally start at 11 a.m.

Allied transport groups will have their respective activities at LTFRB-LTO regional offices in the cities of Legazpi, Bacolod, General Santos and Davao, and also in Laguna, Cebu, Surigao del Norte and other northern Mindanao provinces.

The LTFRB earlier warned Piston members that their franchises would be suspended if their protest action leads to scant rides for the public.

Right to express grievances

But San Mateo said they would just be exercising their right to express their grievances. “We will hold a nationally coordinated protest action to call for the immediate suspension and scrapping of the excessive money-making traffic fines imposed by the Aquino government through JAO 2014-01,” he stressed.

He said they were opposing the order in its entirety and not just the provisions on franchise violations.

San Mateo cited the other new penalties: a P5,000 fine plus impoundment for a vehicle with defective accessories; P1,000 for jeepneys cited for obstruction or picking up and dropping off passengers outside authorized terminals; P3,000 each for the jeepney driver and operator if a front-seat passenger is caught not wearing a seatbelt.

Refusal to wear seatbelt

“We asked them (LTFRB and LTO) before: What if the passenger refuses to wear the seatbelt? (They) said we could ask the passenger to get off. But then, we would be liable for refusal to convey passengers,” San Mateo said.

He recalled the “overwhelming” opposition to the JAO when the draft was first presented in April, but the LTFRB, the LTO and the Department of Transportation and Communications went on to issue it in June.

“We want it suspended while undergoing review, and transport groups should be part of that review,” San Mateo said.

In September, the LTFRB held a public consultation for possible revision of the franchise provisions. “That, for us, is an admission that there was a problem in crafting the order,” San Mateo said. “So if they will revise it and it’s not retroactive, it’s unfair to those who paid the stiffer fine.”

Must be based on master plan

While government transport agencies claim that the JAO is meant to go after colorum and out-of-line vehicles, San Mateo said the proper thing to do is rationalize the routes.

“But instead they want to raise the fines and earn from the problem, a problem that they themselves created,” San Mateo said.

He noted that since the 1980s the government had not conducted a survey of how urbanization and relocations had affected passenger demand and franchise routes.

“Many operators have pending applications for a franchise and there is a growing passenger base, but the LTFRB has restricted the issuance of franchise without any masterplan as basis,” San Mateo said.