This is the essence of an article in a news paper (23rd sep) written by E.Sreedharan (managing director of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd) to Montek Singh Ahluwalia (Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Government of India).
Already news came (on 30th Aug) in Economic Times that govt is willing to construct all future metro projects through BOT process. If this is true, private companies are the owners. The central Govt is just there to release funds. So there is a chance that they can extend the railway network thereby their properties near the project may increase to 2 to 3 folds.
Govt tries to charge less fares for the prosperity of the society and the private companies are not interested to take up the project unless they get high package amount. this may some times leads to losses for the Govt.
BOT projects are difficult to extend or repairs as each private company has their own way of constructing.
There is a chance of grabbing the valuable Govt lands for the construction. These all can be saved if govt involves, thereby ticket fares can be decreased so that purpose is served. In one Sentence, Govt have to handle large govt lands to private companies in the future if they nod for BOT projects as the private companies are the owners.
Conclusion: Only central & State Govt are the owners of future metro projects as BOT projects leads to more trouble in the future.
Both Central & State Govt s must involve in the metro projects. Only State Govt ownership also doesn't help much as it lacks the uniformity among the states.
This also helps to encourage the manufactures and producers in India.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
ya i too agree the prices will shoot up if it bot. But if govt. operates same then quality of service and efficiency will decrease.... as usual... How is BOT concept success full in Roadways (Ref. L&T Guest lecture)??? we can apply similar concept i.e, from the problems faced in DMRC we can address issues in other metro projects.(similar to the evolving concept of BOT in Road ways which is quite common now).
Yeah Rajesh!! what you said is correct in Road ways...But in metros what the director of DMRC feels that our Government has enough professionals to handle the future metro projects..then why to unnecessarily support BOT projects who may utilize govt properties in future ??
I think that having metro projects for our cities is flawed and illogical. The delhi metro is perceived to be a success, which is really not the case. The question we should be asking is not who owns metro project, but whether we should be having them at all. i am posting my journal here to prove my point.
The Delhi Metro Rail Project (technically the Delhi Mass Rapid Transit System) is perceived to be one of the most successful infrastructure projects in India . The project was dedicated to the nation by a former prime minister of India as a gift on his birthday, in its first phase runs over 68 km, and was built at a cost of US$ 2.4 Billion . The English media has been particularly enthusiastic about the project, and in an opinion poll carried out by CNN-IBN, a popular news channel, E Sreedharan, the managing director of the Delhi Metro, was named the Indian of the year .
Some of this recognition is well deserved. The normal story of infrastructure projects in a developing country like India is about cost over-runs, innumerable delays, faulty planning and corruption. None of this happened with the Delhi Metro. The first line in Phase – 2 of the project was inaugurated 7 months ahead of the deadline, an unheard phenomenon in India. The Delhi metro is also a hit with the public, who like the air-conditioned and clean stations, as well as the comfortable ride. The Metro is considered the beginning of the exercise of making Delhi a ‘World-Class’ city.
However, the success of the Metro has to be evaluated in comparison to its aim. The aim was to reduce congestion on roads, encourage people to use public transport, and ultimately go for sustainable transportation. “The economic justification for the project (when sanctioned eight years ago) was based on an expected ridership of 21.8 lakh per day in 2005. Today the website of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation states that “The expected ridership, in the year 2005, is 15 lakh passenger trips per day”. We are not informed where the 6.8 lakh passenger trips disappeared. Further, all newspaper reports suggest that in late 2006, the ridership of the system is between 4 to 5 lakh passengers per day!”
In an article called Squandering Public Funds for a handful of people, Prof. Dinesh Mohan, Founder of the Transport Research and Injury Prevention Centre at IIT Delhi asks, “According to the Transport Department of Delhi, the total number of trips per day in the city total to about 1.2 crore. This means that Delhi Metro is benefiting only 3 per cent to 4 per cent of the citizens of the city, with no benefit to anyone else in the country. If we take a modest 8 per cent as the cost of interest plus depreciation on the project’s capital expenditure, we get a subsidy of Rs 35,000 per passenger per year. This certainly cannot be justified as a public expenditure in a cash-poor society. The obvious question that arises is, why does a small minority of Delhi’s population deserve such a huge national subsidy?” (Mohan 2006)
On top of that, the project got various subsidies in electricity charges, taxes, etc which alone amount to 1,194 crore. (Mohan 2006) According to Mohan, The tax exemption of Rs 1,194 crore planned for the metro in Delhi would fund a modern 200 km bus rapid transit system with the capability of transporting about 8 lakh passengers a day. Here, the Delhi Metro seems as a machination of politicians to spend public money on a system that does not work, possibly for personal gains that result from awarding contracts.
It is surprising for me to see more Indian Cities wanting to have Metro Systems, despite the failure of the Delhi metro in creating sustainable transportation. Already, cities such as Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad are in various stages of implementing the Metro. Perhaps the reason why Metros are implemented is because of ‘our’ obsession to become world class, forgetting that the Metro requires land-use patterns very different from our own cities.
I think the examples of metro privatizations in Bangkok and Manila, bear out Nagarjuna's point that BOTs rarely work in this sector since ticket prices rise to a point where the metro is no longer inclusive.
Aashish's points are also well taken, but I notice that he quotes exclusively from Dinesh Mohan, who does have a polarized view on this issue - I would be interested in finding an alternate viewpoint.
I feel, metro may serve the desired population in future....because of increase in petrol & diesel charges and congestion in present roads.
Decreasing tariffs (if govt. constructed) also attracts more population...
Post a Comment