The creation of a national transport policy will bring about a well-coordinated and integrated multimodal transport system in the country and prevent the recurrence of another massive port congestion, according to a recent discussion paper by a Lower House think tank.
“The port congestion problem would have been prevented had there been a national transport policy in place that guides and harmonizes the development goals of the national and local governments,” the House of Representatives’ Congressional Policy and Budget Research Department (CPBRD) said in its paper entitled “Learning from the Manila Port Congestion.”
Written by Ricardo Mira, the paper said the national transport policy would “also institutionalize and insulate the country’s national transport development plan from political interventions as (was) the case of the Manila truck ban.”
It pointed out that “one of the major shortcomings of the country’s infrastructure sector is the lack of an integrated national transport plan,” adding this “is even compounded by the absence of a long-term policy framework to support a national transport plan.”
A long-term policy plan is “vital for the transport infrastructure network—i.e. port, airport, roads, rail transport—to be planned as a system to ensure the stability and sustainability of the key industries’ supply chain,” the discussion paper explained.
It noted the plan should support trade and commerce, increase the country’s overall competitiveness, and take into consideration that 40% of Manila traffic is linked to port operations.
“Hence, further expansion at the port will certainly worsen traffic problems in the absence of better road access,” the CPBRD paper said.
“The proposed master plan should aim, for instance, in transforming Manila to a financial and service center—tourism, finance, education, medical, and business process outsourcing (BPOs). This would require moving factories and manufacturing activities to the outskirts of Metro Manila particularly Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga, Batangas and Subic.”
The private sector is already drafting the Philippine Multimodal Transport and Logistics Roadmap, which also espouses the crafting of a national transportation plan.
The National Competitiveness Council, under the Department of Trade and Industry, has asked the Philippine International Seafreight Forwarders Association (PISFA) to craft such a roadmap to be presented to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) when it holds its services meeting in the Philippines by mid-year.
PISFA and the United Portusers Confederation have tapped IDEA, a think tank affiliated with the University of the Philippines, to collate inputs from industry stakeholders and craft the roadmap. PortCalls is assisting in the project.
Upgrade of transport infra
The CPBRD discussion paper espoused the upgrade and modernization of the ransport infrastructure. “Undoubtedly, the root of the congestion problem in the country is the lack of well-planned and efficient infrastructure. The country’s infrastructure is among those identified by multilateral companies as one of the major weaknesses in its growing economy. Notwithstanding the Aquino administration’s commitment to boost infrastructure spending of up to 5% of GDP in 2016, infrastructure development in the country has not kept pace with rapid urbanization and the increasing demand for infrastructure services (World Bank 2015). Indeed, solving the country’s congestion problem requires more investment in infrastructure development.”
The paper said port stakeholders have seen the need for a dedicated elevated expressway connecting Manila ports directly to the North and South Luzon expressways.
“Some have even proposed to revive the railways from POM to Divisoria and Tutuban to Caloocan and connecting them with North and South Luzon… The fast and cost-effective service by rail transport makes it a preferred mode of transporting passengers and cargoes.
“Moreover, amid ongoing efforts to expand the capacity of Manila ports, there were also proposals to construct a “mega port” within or outside Manila to support a growing trade volume in the next five to six years. The country’s remarkable economic growth in recent years as well as the expected gains from the ASEAN Economic Integration are seen to facilitate robust international trade to support a consumption-driven economy and a booming manufacturing industry. Relatedly, the increasing capacity of ships calling at world ports requires port infrastructure that could accommodate post Panamax vessels containing more than 14,000 to 18,000 TEUs from the current 8,000 to 10,000 TEUs.”
Batangas and Subic should also be considered alternative ports, the paper said.
“It is imperative that the government seriously consider gradually shifting international container traffic in Batangas and Subic ports to address the growing congestion problem in Metro Manila as well as catalyze growth in the adjacent regions. The Joint Foreign Chambers (JFC) of the Philippines have suggested that the local government units (LGUs) of Metro Manila could impose higher taxes on factories and warehouses as incentives to move to hubs like Batangas and Subic (JFC 2014).”
The paper likewise cited the JFC proposal to cap volume at Manila ports but cautioned this should be carefully considered for its potential to bring additional costs to shippers.
It said a “study by supply chain stakeholders shows that around 70% of imported raw materials, equipment, supplies, and consumer goods still go to Metro Manila and Northern Cavite, Laguna (18%), Batangas and Quezon (6%), and Pampanga and other areas North of Metro Manila (6%). From this it follows that most of the exports come from Metro Manila and Northern Cavite (73%), while the nearby provinces account for the balance—ie, Laguna (15%), Batangas and Quezon (7%), Pampanga and areas North of Metro Manila (5%).”
Separating the regulatory and operational functions of the Philippine Ports Authority was also pushed. But the paper said this may pose a challenge to the PPA since Subic port – under the jurisdiction of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority – could become a competitor to PPA ports that include the Port of Manila and thus has the potential “to erode PPA’s revenues substantially.” – Roumina Pablo
Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
