Tuesday, January 29, 2008 Malig: Terminal blues By Jun A. Malig Cognition
EVEN some of the employees of Sun.Star Pampanga are complaining about the new no-loading-and-unloading policy of City Hall. Let me repeat and rephrase it: The employees complain against the new policy of the San Fernando City Government that prohibit jeepneys and buses from loading and unloading passengers along major thoroughfares, particularly the stretch of Jose Abad Santos Avenue (GSO Road).
There are times when public utility vehicles, except tricycles, refuse to pick them up or let them get off in front of Tita's Building II where this paper's office is located. Drivers only pull over to load and unload passengers when there were no traffic enforcers or policemen to accost them for refusing to make the lives of hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of commuters more inconvenient and expensive.
The editorial of Sun.Star Pampanga last January 21 was correct in pointing out that it was easy for some folk, mostly the unaffected ones, of course, to dismiss the new city terminal-related loading/unloading rule as a part of "change" that would eventually be accepted by everyone. It's pretty easy to say this, especially for people who do not have to commute daily to and from work along the "no loading/no unloading" zones of the capital city. But those who spend extra time, energy, and money just to go to and from school and work have an entirely different point of view.
Let's have a clearer perspective on the issue. The affected individuals and businessmen are not against the new central terminal per se. What they have been complaining about is the new loading/unloading rule. Yes, the entrance/exit point of the terminal sometimes serves as a traffic bottleneck due to the entering and exiting jeepneys and buses. But they don't really care about that.
Such is the concern of motorists, the ones who have cars, SUVs, AUVs, and jeeps.
Some observers, mostly unaffected ones, say that people will eventually accept the "change." Some even cite the Mabalacat terminal in Barangay Dau or the ones in areas outside Pampanga as examples. Let me stress this point again: The commuters who have to spend more time, energy, and money each day in the City of San Fernando are not against the central terminal. They are against the new "no unloading/loading" rule.
In Mabalacat, for instance, students, workers, and other commuters do not have to go to the terminal and spend extra money before they reach their destinations. Public utility jeepneys can still pick up or unload passengers in front or near their daily destinations. It is not really about the terminal per se, which is a pro-active project. It's about the rule that impose additional burden to the already burdened commuters.
Of course there may be other side issues -- from "serious" to "trivial." But the main issue here is the new rule's effect to the hundreds of students and workers in the capital city. It is simply hard to accept something that is burdensome.
In Mabalacat, only the rival camps of Mayor Boking Morales actually expressed opposition against the Dau terminal. What Mabalaqueños complained about was the "terminal-to-terminal" rule imposed some years ago by the Angeles City Government for passenger jeepneys plying "outside city limits." But the townsfolk were helpless against the rule, as it was imposed not by their elected officials but by officials of Angeles City.
Angeles City officials had imposed the rule as a solution to the worsening traffic situation in the highly urbanized city. They thought that by limiting the number of passenger jeepneys entering the city proper, the problem would be remedied. But what they failed to foresee or control was the giving out of more franchises for "within city limit" passenger jeepneys. But that is a different story.
I don't think that the CSF central terminal was a bad idea. I believe that every urbanized locality must have one. But it is just hard to ignore the complaints and laments of the affected individuals.
