[sustran] A bus to nowhere

[Sudhir]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Comments--Analysis/A-bus-to-nowhere/articleshow/4424172.cms

*A bus to nowhere*

20 Apr 2009, 1242 hrs IST,

*K C Sivaramakrishnan *

THE largesse from the JNNURM is in good flow. Since January this year, the
ministry of urban development has sanctioned Rs 4,726 crore for procurement
of 14,240 buses in 59 cities. Out of this 4,494 are standard buses 1,170 are
mini-buses and the rest are low-floor and other variations of urban buses.
The central assistance is Rs 1,630 crore.

This slew of sanctions labelled as Part II of NURM is certainly music for
the ears of the automobile industry. Unlike Part I of NURM which is
contingent upon many organisational and financial reforms as well as
significant changes in the processes of decision-making at the city level,
Part II is a more honest and quicker way of reaching funds to the cities.

However, no money from the government can be free of strings. In this case
also the ministry has issued as many as 30 guidelines. Most of them are
universally advocated prescriptions like priority for public transport,
passenger-friendly buses, better route administration, dedicated
metropolitan transport funds, etc. There is also a set of specifications for
urban buses. The norms and costs may need scrutiny but it is good the
government recognises that benches and a metal roof stuck on a truck chassis
is not to be regarded as a passenger bus.

For the past several years urban transport has been nobody’s baby. Though
the so-called rules of business allocation conferred this subject on the
urban development ministry in 1990, turf questions continued to be agitated
between the railways, transport and urban development ministries. Urban
transport was interpreted as principally railbased systems which only the
ministry of railways would design and build. Buses were dismissed as a state
subject and if PSUs were not doing the needful, privatisation was the
obvious response.

After launching of the Delhi Metro project, the urban development ministry
finally emerged as the guardian of this portfolio. In the past few years, it
has also broadened its perception that mobility, more than technology
choice, is the key. Today in India, city space for mobility has become a
highly contested issue. However cogent and well reasoned the case for public
transport, in real practice it is the private vehicle that has proliferated,
thanks as much to the uncalled for subsidies for automobile production and
use as well as consistent lobbying practices of the auto industry, perfected
over the years in the US and west.

In May 2008, the ministry also sponsored a study on transport policies and
strategies, by the well known transport consultants Wilber Smith and
Associates. The study predicts, in all city categories, a declining share of
public transport from 16% in 2007 to 15% in 2011, 11% in 2021 and 9% in
2031. In the mega cities the decline is even worse from 46% in 2007 to 31%
in 2021. The study also concludes that the average journey speed would
decline from 17 KMPH to nine over the same period. Congestion will be the
order of the day.

The question thus arises, will there be space in our cities for these 14,000
additional buses? Given the congestion, will the buses be able to move
anywhere?

The transport research wing of the ministry of transport informs that as on
March 31, 2004, the total number of cars in the 23 metropolitan cities is
35.68 lakh as compared to 33.29 lakh in the previous year. Two-wheelers went
up from 140 lakh to 149 lakh. In keeping with its high consumption profile
Delhi added 96,241 cars to the previous year’s total of 11.92 lakh and about
1.57 lakh scooters. That translates to about 263 cars and 433 twowheelers
per day. These are figures for 2004.

While the ministry’s guidelines exhort priority for public transport, no
overt action has been suggested for restraining private auto growth, apart
from some suggestions on parking. Besides, projects sanctioned under NURM
for the road sector till now are mainly for expansion of roads, new roads,
flyovers, road over bridges, etc. Mercifully some of the projects, such as
those for Pune, Jaipur, Ahmedabad, etc, include support for BRTS schemes.

Everyone loves a flyover, the contractors and private car drivers in
particular. Unfortunately, the thrill of flying over reality which lasts
only for a few seconds, carries a high cost. Logjams at both ends of many
flyovers is now a part of the daily scene in Delhi, providing ample proof to
a variation of Parkinson’s Law “private vehicle use will increase to fill
all available and additional road space”.

Somewhere in the ministry’s guidelines, there is also the exhortation that
the state government and urban local bodies should waive or reimburse all
its taxes on urban buses. Distortions in motor vehicle taxation abound in
the country. In 10 states taxes on private motor vehicles are a one time
levy. Mercifully this is life time of the vehicle rather than the owner. The
tax rates themselves are absurdly low. After several years, Delhi recently
revised its tax rates to 2% for vehicle costing up to Rs 4 lakh and 4% for
those above. This is not even an apology for a demand management measure. In
Singapore, which incidentally is the Mecca for urban transport planners, but
only for visits and not practice, a licence to purchase a vehicle costs
nearly as much as the vehicle itself.

To add insult to injury, most of the states also levy a tax on passenger
buses. Gujarat rates are Rs 840 per year on buses with more than nine
passengers, Rs 72 for every additional seat and Rs 36 for every standing
passenger. Maharashtra charges Rs 71 per passenger plus 17.5% of the fare
collected. Delhi collects Rs 1,915 up to 18 passengers and Rs 280 for every
additional passenger. The sum total of revenues realised by all the states
through passenger tax is no more than Rs 1,656 crore for the year 2003-04.

Compared to the outlays provided by the government for the transport sector
this is not much. Yet if the incidence of this taxation is calculated on per
passenger per km basis, it is likely that in many cases the incidence on a
bus passenger in a city is more than on a private car passenger. There is a
little for the states to lose by waiving this tax. It will at least end the
travesty of taxing the bus passenger and subsidising the private car user.

It remains to be seen whether the various other guidelines suggested by the
ministry of urban development will be adopted by the states. If the
implementation of the reform agenda of Part I of the NURM is an indication,
the chances are the ministry is fast and generous in making the funds
available but short and shy in ensuring compliance with what has been
agreed. For an outlay of Rs 4,726 crore for 14,000 buses, the average cost
of a bus must be about Rs 32 lakh. Is the candle worth the cost? Perhaps it
is.

With a few thousand buses on many city roads, the citizens will at least
have a visual satisfaction. Stuck as we are in the city’s logjam, stuck we
shall remain. But we will have a choice of being stuck in our brand new bus
on the one hand or on our mobikes, in SUVs, mid-size cars, Marutis or that
latest suitor on the block, the Nanos. Very much more will be needed to make
our new bus move.

Last year’s dispute about the Delhi BRTS was the first serious contestation
in the country for a city’s road space between the bus and the car. The
present additions to the bus fleet will carry this contest to other cities.
Hopefully the majority of the public, dependent on public transport will
become more assertive and demand that a city’s road space cannot be
pre-empted by the car-using elite. Hopefully again, this may prompt the
ministry to give up gradualism and be more assertive.

(The author is a former secretary, urban development and chairman, Centre
for Policy Research)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090421/34fe591b/attachment.html