Say a Prayer for Lahore

From The News, 13 November 2009 (http://www.thenews.com.pk/editorial_detail.asp?id=208278)


The only thing as incredulous as the recent announcement by the Government of Punjab -- it announced its intention to construct a highway through the heart of Lahore -- was the recent statement of the CEO of Fashion Pakistan Week that their glorified display of clothes was a "gesture of defiance towards the Taliban."

Our fashion industry is as much of an industry as the Holy Roman empire was holy, Roman or an empire. Our designers are talented without doubt; but to suggest that parading scantily clad men and women down a runway behind the bunkers and barricades of a five-star hotel in Karachi is an act of defiance is, well, really stretching the limits to which the "security situation" can make a fool out of us. The foreign media took to the sound bite like a starving man to a steak and now, once again, Pakistan is portrayed as two-dimensional: a country teeming with brave designers, fighting Islamic militancy. My friend and critic Faiza S.

Khan said it perfectly in her column at openthemagazine.com:

"One designer lamentably laid claim to being 'a very brave woman' for displaying her clothes on a catwalk at a five-star hotel in a country where women have been known to be murdered, maimed, mutilated and on occasion buried alive, where girls' schools are routinely attacked and where, even at the best of times, women's rights, outside of a tiny income bracket, are limited at best. Another designer called it an act of defiance in the face of the Taliban, glossing over the fact that fashion shows do, in fact, take place with some regularity in Pakistan, and if one must intellectualise this, then it could more honestly be described as a display of affluence in the face of a nation torn apart by the gaping chasm between rich and poor. Why the foreign media can't ask Pakistani designers questions about their work and why they, in turn, yield to the temptation, like Miss Universe, of providing a sound bite on world peace is beyond me."

Over the weekend, the Chief Minister of Punjab announced that he was allocating Rs3.15 billion for a project to widen Lahore's Canal Road.

The decision can only be described, at best, as a reckless adventure and, at worst, a catastrophe waiting to happen.

In 2006, the Traffic Engineering and Planning Agency (TEPA) of Lahore Development Agency (LDA) proposed to widen the Canal Bank Road, purportedly to reduce traffic congestion in the city. Because the project was over Rs50 million, the provisions of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act,

1997 kicked in and TEPA was constrained to engage the National Engineering Services Pakistan (NESPAK) to carry out an environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the project. This was done and the EIA was presented to the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), Punjab, in a public hearing where hundreds of Lahoris gathered to protest against the decision to deprive the city of one of its last surviving environmental heritages: the 14 kilometres of green belt that line the canal and make the street one of the most unique avenues in the world.

The EPA, Punjab approved the EIA but before the project could go any further, the Lahore Bachao Tehreek (an umbrella organisation of dozens of grass-root NGOs as well as WWF-Pakistan) challenged the veracity of the EIA as well as the approval granted to it by the EPA, Punjab. The case remains pending before the Lahore High Court.

The announcement by the mhief minister, giving the go-ahead for the project "after completion of design", raises some important points.

First, it is clear that the project approved by the CM is not the project that the TEPA had originally proposed in 2006. For one thing, the cost of this new project is nearly five times the cost of the original design. Also, according to news reports, the new project is set to incorporate new features along the Canal Road (like "beautifications" which, I must hastily point out, in the context of roads means nothing).

What this means is that the Government of Punjab cannot use the EIA approval granted to the original TEPA project. According to our laws which, the last time I checked still apply to everyone including the government, road projects in excess of Rs50 million must have an EIA carried out and should be approved by the EPA.

But the observance of legal and procedural formalities is not the primary concern that most Lahoris have about the road widening project. It's an open secret that the Government of Punjab is operating on overdraft.

In such a situation, it would seem bizarre that the provincial government would choose to spend Rs3.15 billion -- nearly 10 per cent of the allocations it made last year to the three heads of health, public health and education -- on one road in one city of the province.

Less than 20 per cent of Lahoris have access to cars. For the vast majority of the over eight million people who try and live and work in this city, transport and mobility are dependent on motorcycles, cycles and what is euphemistically referred to as "public transport" (there are less than 1,000 buses that ply the city's streets). Ever since the previous tenure of Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, when the Punjab Road Transport Corporation was shut down, neither this nor the PML-Q government of Chaudhary Pervaiz Elahi have spent a rupee on public transport, which, by the way, is the only way to reduce traffic congestion in a city. Now we are told that a seriously broke government is about to spend billions of rupees it doesn't have on a road it doesn't need for people who don't want or use it. Remarkable indeed.

In a presentation made by NESPAK on August 31 this year, the various options of widening the Canal Road were presented to the CM. According to NESPAK, all the road widening projects would "fail" by 2020 -- meaning thereby that if the government didn't do something to invest in public transport, and soon, the billion-rupee road widening adventure is, at best, a 10-year frolic. Is the Government of Punjab serious? Does the chief minister not know that, according to the Punjab Economic Survey of 2005 carried out by the Planning and Development Department (P&D), over 50 per cent of Punjabis live in slums? Who is this road being widened for?

All too often our politicians harbor the mistaken belief that infrastructure development is the only thing that will make our cities "modern"; that infrastructure is the only thing that will attract the foreign investment necessary to bring economic prosperity to a developing nation. But where are the examples of the success of this model? Our own urban Guru, Arif Hasan, in his brilliant essay "The world class city concept and its repercussion on urban planning in the Asia-Pacific region" demonstrates that our preoccupation with a modern city is also the root of our urban decay. But who in the government reads? Thus, one can only pray for Lahore.

Better roads not to better commuters' lot

Article on the state of public transport in Islamabad. From Dawn e-paper

Better roads not to better commuters’ lot By Rahim A. Khan

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

It's time for Lahore's 4th Critical Mass event

Enrique Penalosa: an urban innovator draws a crowd

The latest from one of my heroes: urbanism pioneer Enrique Penalosa



(Left to Right: Arif Pervaiz of the Clinton Foundation, Enrique Penalosa & Me)


Boston Bicycle Transportation Examiner: Enrique Penalosa: an urban innovator draws a crowd

Posted using ShareThis