Island separator built on the roads in metro manila is a classic example of how unconventional it is to break the long time tradition of Filipinos being so hard headed. I am not perfect but life’s experiences have shown enough to prove that majority of Filipino lacks the will power to follow simple rules.
As I have mentioned, Island separator is an example of how necessary it is for other people to make most of us follow simple rules. Before there was metal fence which I saw along some portion of EDSA and Coastal road to prevent pedestrians from crossing the high way and to lead them to the proper crossing area. How shameful. Most of us are highly educated but it has been part of a culture - we love to play dumb.
Whoever the THINK TANKs of MMDA are, I congratulate them to finally come up with the idea or even have the heart to imitate that of most developed countries. I know that a lot of drivers are not very happy about it especially those in the public transport. They say it adds to the traffic jam. Is it really? All I know is they themselves are creating the traffic jam by stopping at inappropriate points to pick up commuters.
Commuters on the other hand play a great role for the most of the shamble on the road by pretending not knowing how to read the signs “LOADING AND UNLOADING AREA”. Kung papara ka ng bus sa hindi tamang lugar, malaking pagsubok ito sa mga driver at karamihan ay handa silang lalabag sa batas dahil sa habol nila ay kumita nga malaki.
This is a cycle and both the commuters and the drivers are wrong.
I’ve been doing some traveling lately and was impressed how complicated are driving rules in Western Europe but drivers are very religious in following them. I would say they are not perfect but they have great regard for other road users. Although pedestrians are given big priority on the road, pedestrians know how to use the road properly without giving inconvenience to the motorists. As an example, the driving guidelines in United Kingdom says the highway code is there to know your legal rights as a driver but teaches drivers to always give way. Aha, that’s what they call defensive driving. In Germany, the roads have complicated road markings (for me) but people follow them pedestrians and drivers alike.
I was observing the traffic around the arch de triumph in Paris. The road circling the arch is wide enough for eight lanes, there are no markings at all but it seemed that drivers are following imaginary lines. As we drive along a Welsh secondary road as most in the UK, the road is separated by paint road markers; most portions say no overtaking with a 30 miles/hr speed limit. What everyone does is follow the car in front. Minsan nakakainis kasi mabagal ang nasa unahan but what can you do that is what the rule says.
If you have access to Google earth you can zoom in to see how roads are separated in different countries in the world. What would you think drivers do in the Philippines when they see EDSA or C5 separated by paint marking? I even rode on taxis and several jeepneys along NAIA road able to use 3 lanes moving in zigzag way. I was told in S Korea most highway don’t allow change of lanes. How true and how bad? What if The MMDA will introduce a BUS LANE?
I think Filipinos still need to be “herded” in order to follow the simplest of traffic rules.
Friday 7 December 2007
Saturday 19 May 2007
BORACAY: THE NOT SO POPULAR SIDE
I live only a few hours drive from the world renowned island paradise but I didn’t have a chance to visit until last March when my wife and I have a break (our wedding anniversary). I have heard awesome stories about the place and even when I travel either domestic or international people would ask me if I’ve been to Boracay. I always reply I didn’t have a chance and they would say “you live near the place; you must go and see it.” What a reputation. Well, that was before. Now it still has a good reputation and still popular to local and foreign tourists but has some negative feedback especially for people who have been there before.
With my sister and cousins who have been there many times since the 80’s, we set for a day trip to the island. We reached Catiklan around 10 o’clock and went to the terminal to secure a boat ticket. I wondered when I saw a sign about environmental tax to non-local residence which means if you are not a local resident you are required to pay a tax which would cover for the environmental damage you caused to the island while you are having your holiday or stay there.
Where else on earth can you see that? For as far as I know in the tourism, revenues are brought in the money holiday makers spend on hotels, food and drinks and other services. My cousin told me to see for myself the application of the environmental tax when we get to the island.
When we reached the so called island paradise I was expecting the boat would land near the resorts as most island resorts are expected to be but I was so disappointed when the boat landed in the boat terminal and the resorts are nowhere to be seen. Instead I saw a developing suburban community with more local people than the tourist. I learned later that the reason why boats are not landing in the resort area is that tourist complained that people from the passing boat are spying on them while they are on the beach maybe half naked. Who cares, are they not meant to be when on the beach? As a matter of fact it’s a public place and people in the appropriate place have no right to demand privacy. I would not deal too much about such stuff since it is insignificant. As I see it, it is just a revenue generating aspect that leads to the establishment of the port there in the island.
We hired a vehicle to go about the island and there was more awful experience and sights to see. First the pollution caused by so many unregulated diesel powered vehicles then the dust from so many constructions and sight of a developing slum-like area with so many people. NOT THE KIND OF IMAGE you see in the TV.
HEY, THEY ARE BUILDING A CITY!!!! But it seems like there is no urban planning of any sort. Streets are so narrow and drainage system I think not designed for the expected urban development. The health facility is not upgraded, no building standards especially for the houses and commercial establishments. Such a place when it represents the tourism image of the country, the business sector and government has a very big stake on it. As for the image of the island is concerned, there should be a BUILDING STANDARD unique to the internationally renowned resort which will regulate the kind of buildings that could be built, not just allow anyone to build a nipa hut here and a do-it-yourself house there. The presence of the “squatter area” I think is not isolated.
The worst thing I could say is that the local authority has allowed almost anyone to migrate to the island. Of course people are searching for a better livelihood but it is not the way forward. The balance is tipping towards the destruction of local ecology which has great impact on the environment; local and global. Besides, the greater the population the more complicated it is to manage and that includes health and crime.
How about the tax? Should the local resident be responsible for environmental levy instead of the holiday makers? I understand the economics of the situation when encouragement of local business means some tax exemptions but this is a different scenario. Business would always be there because of the tourism reputation and encouragement in the form of tax exemptions is not necessary. Yes, they should be charged with environmental tax appropriately since they are the ones who exploit the environment not the holiday makers who only stay there for few days.
I still think it is not a brilliant idea to let the locals get away with the responsibility compensating what they have done to the environment.
With my sister and cousins who have been there many times since the 80’s, we set for a day trip to the island. We reached Catiklan around 10 o’clock and went to the terminal to secure a boat ticket. I wondered when I saw a sign about environmental tax to non-local residence which means if you are not a local resident you are required to pay a tax which would cover for the environmental damage you caused to the island while you are having your holiday or stay there.
Where else on earth can you see that? For as far as I know in the tourism, revenues are brought in the money holiday makers spend on hotels, food and drinks and other services. My cousin told me to see for myself the application of the environmental tax when we get to the island.
When we reached the so called island paradise I was expecting the boat would land near the resorts as most island resorts are expected to be but I was so disappointed when the boat landed in the boat terminal and the resorts are nowhere to be seen. Instead I saw a developing suburban community with more local people than the tourist. I learned later that the reason why boats are not landing in the resort area is that tourist complained that people from the passing boat are spying on them while they are on the beach maybe half naked. Who cares, are they not meant to be when on the beach? As a matter of fact it’s a public place and people in the appropriate place have no right to demand privacy. I would not deal too much about such stuff since it is insignificant. As I see it, it is just a revenue generating aspect that leads to the establishment of the port there in the island.
We hired a vehicle to go about the island and there was more awful experience and sights to see. First the pollution caused by so many unregulated diesel powered vehicles then the dust from so many constructions and sight of a developing slum-like area with so many people. NOT THE KIND OF IMAGE you see in the TV.
HEY, THEY ARE BUILDING A CITY!!!! But it seems like there is no urban planning of any sort. Streets are so narrow and drainage system I think not designed for the expected urban development. The health facility is not upgraded, no building standards especially for the houses and commercial establishments. Such a place when it represents the tourism image of the country, the business sector and government has a very big stake on it. As for the image of the island is concerned, there should be a BUILDING STANDARD unique to the internationally renowned resort which will regulate the kind of buildings that could be built, not just allow anyone to build a nipa hut here and a do-it-yourself house there. The presence of the “squatter area” I think is not isolated.
The worst thing I could say is that the local authority has allowed almost anyone to migrate to the island. Of course people are searching for a better livelihood but it is not the way forward. The balance is tipping towards the destruction of local ecology which has great impact on the environment; local and global. Besides, the greater the population the more complicated it is to manage and that includes health and crime.
How about the tax? Should the local resident be responsible for environmental levy instead of the holiday makers? I understand the economics of the situation when encouragement of local business means some tax exemptions but this is a different scenario. Business would always be there because of the tourism reputation and encouragement in the form of tax exemptions is not necessary. Yes, they should be charged with environmental tax appropriately since they are the ones who exploit the environment not the holiday makers who only stay there for few days.
I still think it is not a brilliant idea to let the locals get away with the responsibility compensating what they have done to the environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
