The need to push unpopular but beneficial measures

“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” – Spock (Star Trek)

Last week, the City Government of Baguio announced a proposal submitted by Metro Pacific Tollway Corp. (MPTC) to implement a congestion fee system in certain parts of the city. Under the scheme, owners of private cars entering the central business of Baguio will be charged a congestion fee of PHP250 or more. The proposal aims to discourage private car owners from entering the said area, thereby, lessening the perennial traffic problem in downtown Baguio.

Immediately after the said announcement, the internet was ablaze with negative comments. Suddenly, everyone became traffic experts and blasted the government of Baguio for even considering the proposal. In response, the Baguio City government stated that it was just a proposal subject for discussion.

Unfortunately, the problem is real and getting worse.

Traffic congestion in the central area of Baguio has been the subject of many complaints. The number of vehicles using the roads in this area has far outstripped their capacity. The need to take drastic measures to alleviate this problem is undeniable. The congestion fee proposal is a good way to start addressing the said problem.

Perhaps, the best version of the proposed measure was the proposal that residents would be entitled to a rebate and that public and government vehicles with a valid travel order would be exempted from the said congestion fee. With the rebate, the effects of the fee on residents would be eliminated or removed. By exempting public transport from the fee, then the riding public would also be spared.

If the residents of Baguio City are not affected by the fee, then voter backlash can be controlled or mitigated. As long as voters are not angry, then, local government can implement any measure it deems beneficial to the city. All local government units operate on the principle of general welfare. As long as its activities and measures promote the general welfare of its constituents, then these actions are both legal and practical. It is practical because, at the end of the day, it is the voters in a local government that matters for the local government executive.

I am always amused when non-residents or non-voters start live protest actions or online petitions or movements to stop measures unpopular to them. About the proposed congestion fee, there were several non-residents or non-voters who were ranting online about the proposed measure without realizing that these were exercises in futility. Although no one will say it aloud, local government executives have the luxury of ignoring non-voters. Even if the congestion fee is applied to residents/voters with cars that will only comprise approximately 6% of the said residents/voters. If the measure’s benefits are seen and felt by the majority, then LGU execs can gamble taking a hit from the said 6%.

What about tourists? Tourists in the upper bracket of society will not mind the congestion fee. Tourists who ride the bus to Baguio will not be affected. These tourists who will mind the congestion fee will just park outside the congestion fee zones. Baguio will always be a destination for tourists and the congestion fee will not affect that.

If the city government can determine that the measure has merit, then it should not backpedal because of the backlash. Lessening the traffic in downtown Baguio will benefit the environment, promote public transport, and reduce time wasted on traffic. For those who believe in the utilitarian philosophy of governance, then measures that “ promote the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people” despite the objection of some should, at the very least, be tried.

This is my oblique observation.

Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in the foregoing article are solely the author’s and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the Philippine News Agency (PNA) or any other office under the Presidential Communications Office.