THE VIEW FROM RIZAL

Once again, the issue of the relevance of the iconic Philippines jeepney grabbed headlines and was trending in social media last week as organizations of jeepney drivers and operators called for a “Tigil Pasada.” This appeared to have been fueled by what one jeepney organization head referred to as “yabang” or arrogance on the part of government transport officials. By most indications – and based on observations by media and police authorities – the threat to paralyze mass transportation in urban centers failed to materialize. Many jeepney drivers plied their routes, perhaps thinking that “ego” may not be a good basis for making decisions that affect one’s income and ability to put food on the family dinner table. This is a tricky issue. There were observations that there seems to be a campaign to portray the modernization program as “anti-poor” and based on nothing more than a business and profit agenda on the part of certain interested parties. The threat of a strike resurrected discussions on the cultural aspects of the jeepney and why it has been one of the symbols of the Filipinos and life in the Philippines. It also led us to review and attempt to understand the history of the jeepney. Looking back, we hope that our transportation officials would find another basis for the next government move regarding this mode of transportation. Here’s a fact based on history: before the advent of the jeepney, the government had already seen the need for “modern,” efficient and suitable means of mass transportation for Metro Manila. That was as early as the late 1800s when the country was still governed by Spanish colonial authorities. According to history, in 1875, the King of Spain ordered that a masterplan for mass transportation be put together for the Philippines. That masterplan envisioned rail transportation as the centerpiece of the country’s mass transportation system, including the transportation requirement of Manila – which was then one of the most “modern” cities in the Far East. For Manila, the colonial government and its private sector partners envisioned a “tramway system.” A “tram” was a streetcar which looked like the cable cars of San Francisco. It traveled on rail systems around the streets of Manila with Intramuros as the hub. The point is this: early on, the plan was for the country’s most important urban center to have a well-planned, efficient mass transport system and the preference at that time was railways – both heavy and light. When the Americans came, they built on and further improved the original plan of the Spanish authorities. Under the Spaniards, the trams were pulled along the railway by horses, which the Americans replaced with streetcars powered by steam and electricity. Those streetcars were known as the “Tranvia.” There are still pictures of this efficient means of transportation on social media. It transported well-dressed Manilans as well as consumer goods to as far as Malabon. Then came World War II. Towards the end of the war, Manila was heavily bombed. The Battle of Manila in 1945 totally damaged the urban rail system. That marked the end of the Tranvia. In what appeared to be a stop-gap measure, the “jeepney” was born. It was made out of the “jeep” – a wartime vehicle used by USAFFE forces in the country. Ingenious manufacturers turned these remnants of the War into colorful vehicles which transported commuters along the narrow streets of Manila and its suburbs. The “jeepney” was colorful, but it did not attain the level of efficiency which the Tranvia had. The stop-gap contraption later became “King of the Road.” It became a permanent fixture and became one of the major means of transportation in the country. Today, there are some 158,000 jeepneys plying various routes all over the country, according to the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB). About 55,000 of these are in Metro Manila and surrounding urban centers. The numbers show that jeepneys are the dominant means of land transportation in the country today. Buses are at a distant second at 13,000-plus with 5,000 of them plying the thoroughfares of Metro Manila. There are compelling reasons to replace the traditional jeepney with a modern version: economic, social and environmental. One other reason to consider is that this primary mode of land transportation was never planned – it was a mere stop-gap measure. Filipinos were supposed to make do with it until a replacement for the efficient pre-war rail-based transportation system was built. The only major objection appears to be the financial cost of replacing the units owned by drivers and operators. “Burdensome,” they say. We are confident that the issue of affordability can be addressed by the government. It should not be allowed to prevent the country from graduating from decades-old stop-gap means of transportation into one that is modern, economically-wise and environment friendly. \*For feedback, please email it to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) or send it to Block 6 Lot 10 Sta. Barbara 1 cor. Bradley St., Mission Hills Subd., Brgy. San Roque, Antipolo City, Rizal.