By Takura Zhangazha*
The Ministry of Transport has announced that it intends to
phase out our most ubiquitous form of public transport , the commuter omnibus (kombis) in favour of buses. The main reason it wants to do so seems to be because it
has a business proposition for the acquisition of a fleet of ‘Metro buses’ by a consortium of local transport operators. The plan, if implemented, would require that
either the commuter omnibus is forcibly removed from most urban transport
routes or alternatively that it is allowed to compete with the new bus
services.
Given the media reports on the issue, it is likely that
there will be an attempt at the physical banning of kombis, particularly from specific routes.
This move will however most likely falter based on the fact that public transport
via kombis has become a industry (and even transport culture) in itself and
employs a good number of young people who would find one way or the other of
keeping their businesses running.
The major challenge with this recent major policy announcement by government is perhaps it's ‘knee-jerk’ response
to symptoms of bigger underlying transport problems.
This is also not the first time that such plans to introduce buses to
replace omnibuses has occurred. Over three years ago, the City of Harare was in
talks with a private company to de-congest the central business district through
banning kombis and introducing buses. All with the support of central government. For
some still unexplained reason that policy intention was shelved, but that may
have been a good thing.
The primary challenge about the intentions of central government to re-introduce buses has been that they always appear badly planned. Or at least intuitive to a fault.
While the National Transport Policy (2012-2016) emphasizes Public
Private Partnerships in seeking investment in the transport sector, it appears that government is willing to have
any investor come up with a proposal and play it up in the media as though that
in and of itself is progress.
It is fairly evident that what is required in the public
transport system in urban areas is an expansion of the transport infrastructure
before one expands the number of users on it.
Given the fact that government liberalised transport services provision,
it’s primary task, even with an investor is to look initially at the railway
networks as they link with the road and come up with a much more holistic plan
for the two sectors’ development. Especially if it is concentrating
specifically on urban public transportation systems. To introduce buses while banning already existing
modes of public transport is not going to solve the problem of either
congestion or road safety.
The Ministry of Transport would therefore need to be more
circumspect in its pandering to Private Public Partnerships as it has outlined
in its national transport policy. It
must initially provide a holistic national transport framework that emphasizes the linkages between railway
and road infrastructure in the provision of public transport.
That is to say, should it require an investor for public transport
infrastructural development, such said investors cannot come without a partner
in one of the two, rail or road.
Furthermore, for urban public transport, the participation
of local governments must be a priority in relation to not only the planning
but also the shouldering of responsibility for its further development. This would entail developing local blueprints
for public transport development that are endorsed and accept by local councils
as well as local residents. Where
possible these would integrate railway stations with road stations, buses and kombis.
Where it comes to rural and peri-urban public
transportation, the same formula should apply, but with contextual circumstances
also being taken into account. For example,
mining towns would have greater investment from the major mining
company, but the standard must remain as people centred and as integrated as elsewhere.
As it is, the proposed buses for most of the major urban
centres will not bring relief to either the existent road infrastructure, nor
the lack of reliability of public transport. They will, as has been the case in
the past, cause friction between private transport operators, congest roads further and lead to reductions
in the employment of young people.
What is more pragmatic is a holistic approach to the problem
that takes into account how rail and road have always been integrated,
particularly in the major towns and cities.
The holistic phasing of public transport development with the development of local
level road and rail infrastructure, even if appearing complex, is a better way
forward. While Public Private
partnerships are already part of government economic policy, it is the manner
in which they are implemented that would determine their success. In the case
of phasing out kombis in favour of private buses, the Ministry of Transport and
its stakeholders are putting the cart before the horse.
No comments:
Post a Comment