Does horrendous expenditure of a third world tax payer’s money on

an overly fancy BRTS account for a democratic and healthier society?

As the cultural Capital of Pakistan, Lahore exceeds the eleven million population mark putting it
in a well-worth category of a megapolis. A megapolis made from the substantial amount of in-
migration that has occurred for over multiple centuries from rural areas spread across Pakistan.
The rural people who reluctantly were forced to make their way towards Lahore-an inspiring
and promising bustling city, to make a better life for themselves and their families back home.
In the later 19th century Inter-combustion engine increased the pace of in-mmigration during
the modernism era as a hope for those villagers to move up the ladder into a newly formed
middle class.

This is exactly what is visually apparent today. As one drives through the inner areas, one can
witness the majority of inner commercial zone of Lahore pre dominantly taken over by small-
scale commercial and industrial activities. Also what contribute to the already strained
economy are the informal commercial activities, mostly illegal, but this was grown out of need
organically and clearing it away would pose a halt to the areas that are maintained afloat due to
these services. The night time view through those roads reveal a supporting justification as
scenes of recumbent bundles are seen hibernating on footpaths.

Although Lahore is one of the leading contributors towards Pakistan’s economy, its GDP ranking
stands at 109 out of 150 cities globally. Additionally, the economically constrained city bears a
density of 6300 residents per square kilometer putting it on the world ranking at 38 th position.
65 percent population of this density lives with economic and social vulnerability. Furthermore,
the energy crises looming over the already unstable future of many small businesses with rising
taxes poses as the final threat.

Therefore, with these demographics looking gloomy at the moment, the last thing ever needed
would be a poor man’s tax money going into creating a fancy overhead public transportation
system, to say the least. However, the need of the moment is an effective urban transport that
reduces the need of the commuter to use his own vehicle, here lifting some pressure off of the
local businesses economically. This system was also readily preplanned as a VVIP transport
excess instead for emergency vehicles such as ambulances, which by definition is a prerequisite
for a democratic society.
Lahore currently has an operating Metro bus system (MBS) which runs over head for most of
the 28.7 kilometer stretch. The construction of an overhead mass transit restrains it from
reaching the far corners of the city, making it less effective for the residents to commute with
more interchanges making the journey more time consuming. As a result, the passenger would
rather resort to using his own car. Secondly, flyover increases the cost of the construction-
nearly Rs50 billion in 2013, by multiple times of what would be spent if separate road lanes
were allocated for busses on every main route throughout Lahore. Lastly, the construction cost
bore by Traffic engineering and Planning Agency (TEPA), a subsidiary of the Lahore
Development Authority (LDA) which is a clear representation of the tax payer’s money being
spent where it should not have.

Firstly, with Pakistan in the rankings of human development index falling at 149 of the 188
countries worldwide, quality of life index at 93 of the 111 countries, literacy at an all-time low
of 135 out of the 150 countries globally, it is easy to understand that this valuable supply of
money could have been spent on education reaching every child. Furthermore, not
unexpectedly with life expectancy at birth coming to 167 of the 223 countries ranking, and
health expenditures barely making it at 187 of the 192 countries according to the CIA World
Factbook, We could definitely have done with better health care funding. With our hospitals
overcrowded and under equipped with doctors, it’s hard to believe that an elevated bus system
could improve our lives.

Another downside of creating an overly expensive BRTS is it never profits the government.
According to the Lahore Transport Company, the daily ridership of the Metro bus exceeds
180,000 with the peak hourly ridership being 10,000 passengers per hour per direction. Despite
studies claiming that this figure could increase by approximately 200 percent by 2021, yet to
keep the cost affordable for everyone Punjab Government still pays Rs40 as a subsidy on each
Rs20 ticket. This as a result just further increases the financial strain on the city’s management.

Additionally, after all the trouble the main spine of Lahore had to endure during the
construction, displacement of significant commercial buildings and heritage graded buildings
far more than an year, it is a question whether how much burden will these busses be able to
bear. Has it moved some segment of population away from private owned cars to public buses?
The roads shadowed under the elevated BRTS remains as clogged as it used to be before. It
comes into question here whether, feasibility reports were responsibly created and whether it
was wholeheartedly implemented to address the people’s needs.

As if the Metro line wasn’t excessive enough, another line was designed but this time for an
even costlier driverless electric train with elaborate double story elevated stops. The Orange
line- an automated rapid transit system cost 1.6 billion dollars in construction for a mere 27.1
kilometers length. In addition to the concerns regarding an elevated public transportation
system, this line crossed several heritage sites closer than 200 feet away threatening to rob us
of our history and hence identity.

In response to all of these procuring problems, Mr Enrique Panalosa- World renowned

Politician turned Urban Strategist and former Mayor of Bagota (Columbia) has long stressed on
rethinking ‘traditional’ approaches to urban development, emphasizing different priorities and
approaches which factor in the needs of the many against those of the few. Mr Panalosa
transformed Bagota of 7 million inhabitants in 2001 into a living example of sustainability-
building schools and dispensaries, improving transport, increasing public spaces and reducing
crime rates.

Mr Panalosa is most famous for rejecting the proposal by a Japanese International Cooperation
Agency (JICA) to construct a multibillion-dollar rapid mass-transit system and instead
introducing a series of people-friendly urban planning interventions. This was a marked shift
from what is accepted as “development”.

“Development” in today’s perception is globalized city with specialized service industries in high
density, hig-tech high risesfor office space, rapid mass-transit for mobility and ahost of
recreational facilities geared to improve the quality of life. Mr Panalossa argues that our cities
would take a century and a half to reach this sophistication of the west. Our cities are rapidly
changing due to high influx and are set to double or triple by 2050. It is simply impossible,
argues Mr Panalosa, for cities in developing countries to try and compete with the development
in cities in the western world.

What Mr PAnalosa suggests as an alternative is to focus on quality of life and cities as liveable
habitats. He sets a definition of a civilized city as a place where the rich and poor both use
public transport, where a three year old can be safe from cars and traffic and where public
good prevails over private interest. This is true essence of democracy.

Mr PAnalosa when mayor took action against car owners who parked on green belts or
footpaths. He reduced the width of roads in the city centre and in turn increased the width of
sidewalks. He spent a fraction of the cost of elevated BRTS or trains in providing dedicated bus
lanes. He similarly has talked against London subway system that do not provide profit but
rather a burden on the London Counsil who gives incentives to keep it moving. He stopped all
the money being spent on roads for cars and instead spent it on schools, museums, developing
public parks and nearly 300 km of pedestrian and cycle promenades, that makes it possible to
excess these places without being molested by automobile traffic. He passed a law prohibiting
40 percent of the automobiles from the streets of the city during rush hour and passed a law
requiring every citizen of Bagota to use a public transport the first weekend of every February.
He visited Pakistan in 2008 and gave talks in the three major cities with emphasis on issues and
challenges of public transport and mobility, claiming:

“The politicians and bureaucrats in Pakistan haven’t quite grasped this concept yet, nor have
they placed this idea within the larger framework of a globalised world. They are doing us no
favours. The chief minister of Punjab has allocated nearly a quarter of a billion rupees for the
feasibility study of an overhead expressway along Lahore’s Ferozepur Road. The CDA in
Islamabad just launched the Rs2.3 billion Zero Point Interchange Project and the City District
Government of Karachi is also looking at at least two overhead automobile expressways. This is
in the face of the fact that a disproportionately small number of people actually own and drive
cars. The automobile elite has a throttle grip on our urban development agenda.”

According to Mr Penalosa, democracy is not a political process. It embodies itself in the urban
development agenda. If you see billions of rupees being spent on a road that doesn’t have
proper sidewalks, you don’t have democracy: you have an urban automobile elite telling you a
man in a car is more important than a man on bicycle. Isn’t it shocking that there are many
amongst us who know more about the safety of baby whales in the Pacific Ocean than the
millions of children on the streets of our cities? It is no development if, in 2008, we programme
our three-year olds to be terrified of cars and traffic just as we terrified them of the wolf a
hundred years ago. This is not the way cities should be managed. This is not how we should let
our tax money be spent.
References:

a.o.n, Lahore Metro bus, (Wikipedia.org)

a.o.n, Economy, International rankings of Pakistan, (Wikipedia.org)
Faraz Khalid, Lahore metro- pros, cons, perceptions/, (lahore.metblogs.com,2013/02/11)
a.o.n, Orange Line(Lahore Metro), (Wikipedia.org)
Ahmad Rafay Alam, Enrique Penalosa and the civilised city, ( pakteahouse.net, 2008/09/15)