{"id":20765,"date":"2014-08-05T11:23:24","date_gmt":"2014-08-05T03:23:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=20765"},"modified":"2014-08-05T11:23:24","modified_gmt":"2014-08-05T03:23:24","slug":"ltfrb-memos-contradict-e-o-67-establishing-integrated-transport-system-santiago","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/08\/05\/ltfrb-memos-contradict-e-o-67-establishing-integrated-transport-system-santiago\/","title":{"rendered":"LTFRB memos contradict E.O. 67 establishing integrated transport system — Santiago"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Miriam<\/a>
Miriam Defensor-Santiago \/ Wikipedia Photo<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA -\u2013 Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago on Monday questioned the legality of two Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) Memorandum Circulars, adding it directly contradict the 2011-2016 Philippine Development Plan and Executive Order No. 67 establishing efficient, reliable, seamless and transport system.<\/p>\n

Santiago said the LTFRB memorandum circular Nos. 2014-009 and 2014-010 and Board Resolution No. 05 are \u201clegally flawed\u201d and have caused current traffic gridlocks in Katipunan Ave. and parts of C-5 road.<\/p>\n

With this, the lady lawmaker filed a resolution calling for Senate inquiry, in aid of legislation, on the issuances by the LTFRB.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m calling for a Senate investigation on these LTFRB issuances because they prejudice public transport safety to benefit only a few. It seems that these issuances violate the Aquino administration\u2019s policies for economic development,\u201d Santiago said.<\/p>\n

The lady legislator identified these LTFRB issuances as Memorandum Circular Numbers 2014-009, suspending operations against colorum buses and out-of-line operations; and 2014-010, which allowed public utility buses (PUBs) to modify their routes and pass through major thoroughfares, such as EDSA, from June 19, 2014 to October 17, 2014.<\/p>\n

Colorum buses are public utility vehicles operating without a permit or are out-of-line public utility vehicles that operate outside their approved routes or area.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe suspension of operations against the out-of-line buses would only legalize and spur the proliferation of unauthorized vehicles, which is inimical to the country\u2019s economic development,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The senator also said that these issuances completely disregard numerous studies which say that the country is losing P153 billion a year because of traffic congestion.<\/p>\n

Santiago added that the legalization of out-of-line routes not only violate existing laws in land transportation.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese issuances also defeat the purpose of the establishment of the Integrated Transport System to decongest traffic in Metro Manila and to restrict provincial buses and other unauthorized public utility vehicles from entering EDSA,\u201d she said in her resolution.<\/p>\n

Santiago also hit LTFRB\u2019s Board Resolution No. 5, which extended the \u201cNo Apprehension Policy\u201d of trucks-for-hire (TH) freight services with green plates from July 29 to August 29.<\/p>\n

She said the Board Resolution caused more traffic congestions in main thoroughfares in the metropolis.<\/p>\n

Santiago also questioned the reason behind the resolution that \u201cafter consultation with other government agencies, representatives of the business sectors, and with TH Freight Owners; and considering the number of applicants nationwide which will stop their operations that might affect the trade and commerce of our country, (the extension was necessary) to give ample time to prospective applicants to file their corresponding applications\u201d for trucks-for-hire services.<\/p>\n

\u201cLTFRB\u2019s logic escapes me. Allowing these trucks to ply our roads when they are still securing the necessary paperwork in the name of trade and commerce is a flimsy excuse. This is LTFRB failing in their basic regulatory functions,\u201d Santiago said.<\/p>\n

\u201cFurthermore, it appears in the LTFRB resolution that the LTFRB only consulted with the business sector and the trucking companies. Had they consulted with motorists and commuters, the Metro Manila traffic situation could have been different,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n

According to news reports, Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Chairman Francis Tolentino was not consulted about the LTFRB issuance.<\/p>\n

The senator cited studies that the LTFRB\u2019s \u201cno apprehension policy\u201d increased travel time and decreased travel speed in both lanes in the Commonwealth Ave.-South Superhighway route. In the southbound lane, the route\u2019s travel time suffered a 73.6 percent increase, while the travel speed slowed to down 41 percent.<\/p>\n

The studies also found that, compared with data from June 2013, the LTFRB\u2019s \u201cno apprehension policy\u201d increased truck volume in Katipunan Avenue by 80.67 percent, C5-Bagong Ilog by 60.52 percent, and C5-McKinley Hills by 33.07 percent.<\/p>\n

\u201cTogether with the LTFRB\u2019s memorandum circulars, this board resolution is wreaking havoc on the daily lives of commuters and motorists,\u201d Santiago said.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA -\u2013 Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago on Monday questioned the legality of two Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":13540,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[95],"tags":[7098,2934,7097,7065],"class_list":["post-20765","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ph","tag-contradict-e-o-67","tag-ltfrb","tag-memos","tag-santiago","mauthors-philippines-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20765","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20765"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20765\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13540"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20765"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20765"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20765"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}