Transportation fare hikes are unpopular but they are not immoral per se. Transport operators need to adjust their tariffs to fund improvements and expansion, and make their investments worthwhile and sustainable,
Commuters deserve a better riding experience. The fare hike is designed to improve and modernize transportation facilities. In some cases, they prevent the government from shouldering added operating expenses through a subsidy that could slash state assistance to public education and healthcare.
Disallowing fare adjustment, in addition, will create uncertainties in the regulatory regime and discourage the private sector from taking over other critical mass transportation operations in the country.
These risks were manifested when conglomerate Metro Pacific Investments Corp. (MPIC) declined to pursue a plan to rehabilitate, operate and maintain the Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT 3) in view of government’s reluctance to grant tariff or fare hikes.
The low, unadjusted fares of MRT 3, as a result, are costing the government billions of pesos worth of subsidy. MRT 3’s operations are a burden to the state.
Another troubling trend is the opposition to the LRT-1 fare hike. Commuters clamor for global standard-level public services but balk at fare increases that fund improvements in the rail system.
Such mindset hinders the private sector from building a transit system worthy of Metro Manila’s future.
Put it in another way, the LRT-1 fare hike is about raising funds that will secure the future of the operations, 10 or 20 years from now.
The government earlier approved a fare adjustment for LRT Line 1 and Line 2―the first train systems in the metropolis―consisting of an additional P2.29 boarding fare and P0.21 distance fare per kilometer, from the P11.00 boarding fare and P1.00 distance fare.
Critics claim the fare hike punishes minimum wage earners. But freezing fares amid rising inflation is not a solution―it’s a slow death sentence for public services.
LRT-1 has not raised fares in nearly a decade, while operational costs for electricity, maintenance and personnel have soared. No business or service, public or private, can sustain this imbalance.
Commuting via rail is a faster and more reliable alternative than buses and jeepneys. The commuting time is more predictable and passengers enjoy a relatively safer ride.
Rail commuters, thus, must pay a premium or higher fare than those charged by buses or jeepneys for the conveniences provided by the train system.
Commuters must distinguish between fare equity and fare stagnation. Equity means fair pricing relative to service quality and affordability, not indefinite price freezes. What commuters should advocate for is better service and facilities―not a blanket rejection of any price adjustment.
Critics also wrongly blame privatization as the cause of every fare increase. Public-private partnerships (PPP) like Light Rail Manila Corp. (LRMC) have delivered infrastructure gains that government alone struggled to achieve.
The LRMC consortium is composed of MPIC and Sumitomo Corp.’s Metro Pacific Light Rail Corp. (MPLRC), AC Infrastructure Holdings Corp. of the Ayala Group and Macquarie Infrastructure Holdings (Philippines) Pte. Ltd.
LRMC’s Phase 1 of the Cavite Extension, a project decades in the making, for instance, is finally underway. Station improvements, better train availability and system reliability have all improved since 2015.
Thus, instead of demanding the termination of the LRMC concession agreement, we should push for more transparent fare-setting, performance-based penalties and independent oversight.
There is no such thing as free lunch. Even in countries with zero-fare transit models, the taxpayers pay for the service. State subsidies on transportation produce a budget imbalance. They lead to underfunding education and hospitals.
Moreover, every peso the government spends covering fare gaps is a peso not spent on provincial roads, climate resilience or healthcare.
Commuters will soon realize that the fare hike unlocks a host of benefits that can dramatically improve their daily experience. Better funding ensures that stations are cleaner, safer and more accessible, especially for the elderly, pregnant women and persons with disabilities.
It enables enhanced security systems, updated ticketing technologies and real-time passenger information tools that reduce travel stress and increase commuter confidence.
With better funding, LRT-1 can invest in more energy-efficient trains, greener operations and long-term carbon reduction―an environmental gain that benefits everyone.
The LRT-1 fare adjustment is a recognition that better service requires real investment. We must learn from previous experience. Low, unadjusted fares will eventually force the government to waste billions of pesos worth of subsidy.
E-mail: rayenano@yahoo.com or extrastory2000@gmail.com
Tags:
LRT-1 fare, Light Rail Manila Corp., Metro Pacific Investments Corp., Ayala Group, MRT 3