As customary, as it has always been, we, Filipinos, in general, are so enamored with things, people or events with entertainment value than those with economic implications. True enough, we spend more time worshipping the exploits of Cong. Manny Pacquiao in the boxing arena than investing time figuring out measures that might ameliorate the poorest of the poor from abject poverty. Worst, we try to hook ourselves hours upon hours with telenovelas and even spend more days discussing the future episodes with "gossip-mates" than projecting ways and means by which we maybe able to contribute something to the country in terms of economic development or even in simple concerns like traffic congestions.
Cebuanos, however, are quite different. Even if something is widely acceptable, they always find a way to present their own. These qualities both have a good side and a bad side. On a positive note, this attitude helped us weather the economic storm decades ago. Through this, we have learned the art of survival. In fact, as history reminds us, when the country was in deep economic turmoil and have resigned to the idea that we arehelplessly sinking, we (through then Gov. Lito Osmeña) rode on the "Cebu-an island in the pacific" tagline to keep our heads above water. On the other hand, however, such qualities have its own downside too. To recall, after years of delays in the expansion project of the Mactan Cebu International Airport, it was awarded but not without attempts to stop it, well, by some Cebuano lawmakers, no less.
Knowingly or unknowingly, these inherent qualities have made us non-conformists. Consequently, we have become a race where, even if some proposals are sound and have far-reaching benefits, we never cease to present other alternatives. Truth to tell, compromise agreement and consensus have become rare commodities for us, Cebuanos.These qualities though have provided checks and balances that other parts of the country truly lack. To some extent, however, it drags some generally beneficial projects or plans that needed immediate implementation. For one, we have been witnesses of this seemingly unending debate on what is the more appropriate mass transport system for us. Proponents and supporters are still at it. While Light Rail Transit proponents pointed out its reach and span for emphasis, Bus Rapid Transit advocates underline its cost and ease of implementation.
Then, gladly, a couple of weeks ago, just as we thought the project will perpetually hibernate, DoTC Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya said "they would request within the month the NEDA board to approve the Cebu Bus Rapid Transit project. This time, with "proof of concept" on hand showing that the Cebu BRT is feasible. Sadly, however, before the euphoria for its imminent implementation dies down, another proposal came along, the LCRT or light centrally-powered rail transit of the Department of Science and Technology.
Knowing fully well that these projects have different proponents or backers (BRT-Former Mayor Tomas Osmeña, LRT-Former Cong. Eddie Gullas, LCRT-Mayor Mike Rama) disagreements will certainly drag to a certain extent and to a heightened animosity that we can't foretell. Certainly, pride will set in. Such pride shall bring to the fore, arrogance, conceit, smugness or self-importance. Due to this predicament, Cebu's mass transport system project will again hit a snag.
Notably though, despite these potential delays, proponents have one significant issue that they both agree. They are one in agreement that a mass transport system is a must for the City and Province of Cebu. Therefore, banking on such agreement, the most logical step to do is to first set aside all biases and be more objective in evaluating these projects not only along line concerns on convenience, safety, efficiency, use of energy and environment but more importantly the set-up cost and the cost of operating them.
Then, soon, as we move on, we will find out that the pros and cons of the significant aspects of these projects are actually almost even. Both projects are also equally beneficial to all. What seems to prevail by then is not the issue of viability but pride and ownership of the projects' inception. What is important, therefore, is for the principal proponents to be more circumspect by setting aside, first and foremost, greed, and their personal and political differences and look into these projects' potentials in addressing our worsening traffic mess. After all, they all agree, that a mass transport system is necessary.
***
For your comments and suggestions, please email to foabalos@yahoo.com.