Among the many public services that are so lacking in this country, public transport is one that has seldom been addressed to and on the rare occasions when civic authorities have shown some interest, the initiative has often been wrangled out of their hands by private transporters who fear the loss of their monopoly.
Public transport is a government concern. The provision of an efficient and affordable service is government responsibility. Growing populations mean growing cities in which mass mobility is a need no government can overlook if the economic life of the country is to run smoothly. The transport situation in the twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad is in total disarray and the common man who must use public transport to go about the daily business of life is at the mer cy of a sloppy private service run by unscrupulous greedy operators in connivance with a corrupt traffic police.
The whole approach of the government, if it has any, is skewed. It believes the broadening of roads and placing of more policemen on cross roads to control traffic can provide the common people with a rapid transport system. In fact it is just a ruse. What is in reality intended is to make the roads broader and smoother for the rich people to drive through in their expensive cars without having to stop at traffic signals. The broadening of roads and building of overhead and under passes is not going to solve the traffic muddle for the common man. He needs an efficient road transport that touches all points of the city, runs on time, and is economical and comfortable. Only such a system will dissuade people from having private cars and burning expensive fuel on commuting to work and back, taking children to school and going shopping. Once such a system is in place the need to broaden roads and change the map of the city will automatically end.
The plight of the people who have to travel daily between Pindi and Islamabad cannot be described in words.When after hours of torturous waiting the bus shows its face it is an ordeal to climb it and find a seat for oneself. When the days work is done the rush at bus stops makes the goal of reaching home an uncertain possibility. Buses, vans and coasters run past the stands. It is an undignified sight to watch aged gentlemen chasing them to hop into as soon as the driver makes a sudden stop a furlong ahead of the regular stand. This is the daily routine of the commuter. Incompetence it surely is but it is also heartless of the government and a pity it calls itself representative and elected.
There were some efforts by the previous government. The ‘Varan’ bus service was a welcome introduction but could not g o beyond that. Its operation was throttled. First it was the private transporters who protested against it telling the government it had made life easier for the common citizen. Government agreed it was not its purpose to ease the burden of life on the common man.Then Varan itself found it difficult to ply an uneconomical service on hostile roads and was forced out of operations in the city. A rail service between the two cities was also proposed (the government is never in short supply of good ideas) but it never saw the light of the day. We are back to square one of course and all those who huddle at bus stops waiting for hope to appear in the shape of a bus have all the time in the world.
How difficult would it be? To introduce a government run mass transit system? Not so hard I think but this is more a ‘will’ than a ‘way’ argument. As mentioned above, public transport slashes the number of cars on the roads and as a lesson in causality such a means would have countless benefits. Fewer cars on the roads mean lower consumption of fuel. That means less pollution. For people it means less spending on cars maintenance as well as the fuel. For the government it means less public works costs (more cars = more wear & tear on roads) and a new source of revenue from their own transport system. But again that ‘will’ I speak of is not there.
But there is something at the heart of this that regardless of the lack of facilities is the biggest obstacle. As a people we are so class conscious that if seen using public transport we think it is the ultimate shame we can bring to our families. Owning a car is a status symbol. If not seen in one’s chariot, eyebrows are raised. Walking, they say is only good for exercise. Agreed, the present services aren’t fit for anyone but if one day they were, would the wealthier among us use them? In far more developed and richer countries, public transport is used by everyone. The Mayor of New York rides the subway everyday to office even though it is infested by rats aplenty. MP’s and Cabinet Ministers are often seen stepping out of cabs to go to Parliament or 10 Downing Street in Britain. I think our middle and upper class would be beggars in comparison to the well to do in the West, yet we pose as if we are better. It may seem fanciful to philosophize something so ordinary, but does not the idea of some bigwig using public transport have an egalitarianizing feel to it? As if it is the office and not the man that we must respect? It would be a different, better country if we saw those who ruled us at our level, that of the street.
The writer is a freelance contributor and may be reached at: ides_of_march@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment