Posts

I spent PHP100,000 on Grab in one year

/in /by

By JOSE LORENZO LIM

One thing we can all agree on is that the country’s mass transportation is a nightmare. The MRT constantly breaks down. Buses are overcrowded. Taxis take longer routes for you to pay more. It’s a dismay. Thus, ride hailing apps such as Grab were marketed as an alternative to our dismal mass transportation system.

I was lucky enough that my grandmother supported my voluntary work at IBON by offering to provide me with a car instead of taking a jeepney to work. I decided that maintaining a car and fuel costs would be more expensive than just commuting. During my first weeks at IBON, I was taking four connecting jeepney rides just to get to work and another four to get back home. It was grueling. One exhausting day after work, I decided to just take Grab home regardless of the cost. This initial ride was followed by more rides.

Grab was convenient. I used the app when going to the office and coming back home every day. But this convenience came at a price. A huge price. My rides were anywhere between Php200-350. But when Grab’s absurd surge system hits Timog, it can go as high as Php650. Coupled with the rising cost of oil in October last year plus the fuel excise from TRAIN (Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Law), it was the perfect storm to reach a whopping Php98,246 by booking Grab rides every day. My grandmother decided to just give me an allowance for my rising Grab expenses.  But it ended up being more expensive than if she had bought me a car.

Let’s be clear, Grab will never be a solution to our disgusting mass transportation system. While it did provide me with an alternative to taking a bus, jeep or even the MRT, what Grab essentially did was profit from disgruntled commuters at the cost of adding more vehicles to our already crowded roads It further pushed the corporatization and monopoly of a public service.

Let’s not forget that mass transportation is a public service.

And it seems that the government, who should fix our transportation system, is not bent on fixing it.  Government is saying that Build, Build, Build would provide more roads and trains or even a subway. But if you just build infrastructure without planning how these would come together with existing modes of transportation, then it doesn’t make sense. A sustainable mass transportation system should be efficient, reliable, accessible, safe, and environmentally sound.

If government won’t fix the mass transportation system then all the funding goes to big-ticket, big-business infrastructure to build roads. These are not for public vehicles but to accommodate even more private vehicles, which studies say already occupy 70% of Metro Manila traffic.

Government should craft a comprehensive national mass transportation plan in accordance with economic development plans. Or else, the pathetic cycle of building more infrastructure favoring private motorists over a huge pedestrian population will just continue. ###

Bird Feed features the thoughts and views of our staff on socioeconomic and other issues. All staff are encouraged to share their own analysis.

JOSE LORENZO LIM: Researcher at IBON Foundation. His research topics include Build, Build, Build, the oil industry, and social services. Prior to IBON, he served as Editor-in-Chief of the UPLB Perspective for the academic year 2016-2017. When not in the office, Jose Lorenzo enjoys writing with his fountain pens and trying out new ink.

Group to MWSS: Show us the numbers

/in /by

The Water for the People Network (WPN) expressed dismay that the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System – Regulatory Office (MWSS-RO) would not readily reveal the numbers involving water companies’ petitions for tariff increases in public consultations that the MWSS-RO itself convened this week.

The group said that by doing so, the government agency effectively hindered the consumers’ right to know.

Instead of genuinely consulting the people, it seemed to be conditioning the public to blindly accept the impending water rate hikes based on the petitions of the Manila Water Company (Manila Water) and Maynilad Water Services Inc. (Maynilad), said the group.

The WPN is composed of groups and individuals promoting people’s control over water services and resources.

A concession agreement (CA) between government and water concessionaires warrants the rate rebasing process every five years.

The process pertains to the determination of new tariffs based on the Manila Water and Maynilad’s past and future expenses, as well as a rate of return that will allow the firms to recover their investments.

The MWSS-RO has conducted public consultations before and during the past rate rebasing periods purportedly to grasp the public pulse with regard to the implementation of new tariffs.

The private companies’ petitions have historically been approved, resulting in water rates increasing manyfold through the years, except during the 2013 rate rebasing period.

In September 2013, the MWSS prohibited Maynilad and Manila Water to collect their corporate income taxes and company incentives such as recreation and travel expenses through pass-on charges.

The rate rebasing results reflected amounts lower than both companies’ petitioned rates.

Teddy Casiño, WPN spokesperson, said, “Show us the numbers. If water regulators truly prioritize public interest and want consumers involved in the rate rebasing process, they should make information in Maynilad and Manila Water’s petitions readily available to the public. Otherwise, these public consultations are a PR gimmick.”

During this period’s rate rebasing public consultations, water regulators and the consultants they hired to review water concessionaries’ proposals were reluctant to share pertinent details such as the rate increases requested and basis for the rates such as company earnings, expenditures, and future expenses.

They were also hesitant to answer if questionable charges prohibited in the 2013 rate rebasing process were also included.

WPN said that without vital rate rebasing information from the MWSS-RO, water consumers will be left in the dark and made vulnerable to the water companies’ onerous fees.

The group urged water regulators to uphold their mandate to protect public interest and ensure that Maynilad and Manila Water will not pass on unwarranted expenses to already burdened water consumers. #

Stop water rates hikes until onerous fees resolved – WPN

/in /by

Advocacy group Water for the People Network (WPN) is appealing to the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System – Regulatory Office (MWSS-RO) to halt the ongoing rate rebasing process that is expected to raise water rates in Metro Manila and its environs, saying the basis for determining future water rates remains unresolved.

Concessionaires Maynilad and Manila Water continue to contest the MWSS-RO’s 2013 decision to prohibit water companies from passing on their corporate income tax and other questionable expenses to consumers.

Both companies took to international arbitration to protest government’s denial of their petitioned rate hikes, with Maynilad demanding government to pay Php72 billion in lost revenues and Manila Water demanding Php10 billion. Both cases are still pending in the courts.

WPN said that pending resolution of both controversies, any rate rebasing scheme would be conjectural and would burden the public with unjust and unnecessary increases in the midst of soaring prices.

“With continued lack of transparency in the rate rebasing process and petitions, water companies could make another attempt to pass on questionable charges to consumers through their water bills,” said former party list representative Teddy Casiño, a convenor of the WPN.

For the 2018-2022 rate rebasing period, Maynilad is seeking an estimated Php12 per cubic meter increase, while Manila Water is seeking and Php8 per cubic meter increase.

Rate rebasing pertains to the periodic computation of water rates based on government’s review of the concessionaires’ petitioned new tariffs.

The latter supposedly covers the companies’ past and projected expenses and a guaranteed rate of return.

However, due to water consumers and advocates’ clamor during the rate rebasing process in 2013, previous water regulators disallowed corporate income tax and other expenses unrelated to the delivery of water from being computed into the water bill.

Casiño said that since 1997 when water utilities were privatized, basic or average water tariffs have soared by as much as 596 percent under Maynilad and 970 percent under Manila Water, contrary to the promise of affordability.

Studies also showed urban poor families end up shelling out thousands of pesos beyond their means for either fetched water from the community pump or sub-meter water access in the absence of direct water connections.

“WPN hopes that the government will look upon the rate rebasing petitions with public interest foremost in mind,” Casiño said. He added that the network will guard against the inclusion in the bill of the Php82-billion uncollected funds which both private companies have pleaded international arbitration courts to demand from the government.

According to Casiño, government’s accession to the companies’ demands would certainly entail higher user fees. “This will double the burden on poor Filipinos who are already struggling with price hikes due to the new taxes,” he said.

Casiño challenged the government to not allow companies to impose onerous fees for profit. # (ibon.org)