Fwd: [jnnurm] Metro gives Larsen & Toubro monopoly over city transport
Sujit Patwardhan
From: Vinay Baindur <yani...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:43 PM
Subject: [jnnurm] Metro gives Larsen & Toubro monopoly over city transport
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Metro-gives-Larsen-Toubro-monopoly-over-city-transport/articleshow/12888108.cms
Metro gives Larsen & Toubro monopoly over city transport
B V Shiv Shankar, TNN | Apr 27, 2012, 03.14AM IST
HYDERABAD: While Hyderabad metro rail is expected to be the panacea to the growing traffic congestion in the city, the urban rail services can sound the death knell to other public transport systems already in place in the city due to a monopoly clause granted by the state to Larsen & Toubro, the private partner, through the concession agreement.
The clause in the concession agreement restricts the government from developing or improving the public transport system along the stretch of the three corridors- Miyapur to LB Nagar (corridor-I), Jubilee Bus Station to Falaknuma (corridor-II) and Nagole to Shiplaramam (corridor-III) - where the metro rail is taking shape. This would mean that there would be no scope for the improvement of the city bus service or MMTS (Multi-Model Transport System) that has emerged as a popular mode of urban rail transport.
The concession agreement says: "The government shall not construct any rail or road transport system between, inter alia, the three metro corridors" for a period of 35 years from the date the metro rail becomes operational. Further, L&T is entitled to an additional concession period of another 35 years. That means that the state government cannot develop any other public transport system for over 70 years without the consent of the private engineering company.
More startlingly, the concession agreement even restricts the government from revising the fare for the public transport or extending discounts or reductions in the fare and in the event of breach of these provisions, the government is liable to pay compensation to L&T under the latter's terms.
This clause can go against the state government and can end up acting against the interests of the commuter for whose benefit the metro rail has been conceived. This is because at a delay of Rs 5 crore per day in the construction of the project, keeping in mind the factors of the prevailing rate of inflation, insurance, currency fluctuation and rate of interest on the escalated project cost, the basic fare of the metro rail is expected to be around Rs 14 as of April 1, 2016. This would mean that the commuter would have to pay a high price for travelling on the metro rail even as the state would be helpless in improving the other modes of transport.
Charging that these provisions of the concession agreement are in violation of the Competition Act 2002, members of civil society, who have already petitioned the AP High Court against Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited (HMRL) on the charges of changing the alignment unilaterally, are now mulling moving the Competition Commission. "The provisions made in the concession agreement are monopolistic and are in defiance of the Competition Act. We are planning to complain to the Competition Commission," said Prof C Ramachandriah, who is spearheading the agitation against metro rail project.
While citing a similarity of the Hyderabad metro rail case with that of the Bangalore International Airport (BIA) that is facing a case under the Monopolistic Trade Practice Act after it insisted upon the closure of the government-run HAL airport in the city, Ramachandriah said curtailing the growth of public sector companies to suit the needs of private companies was unfair. A petition filed by Vivek Kulkarni, a former IAS officer, against BIA, is pending in the Karnataka high court.
However, authorities in HMRL said the metro rail service would only supplement the existing public transport system, and, hence, would not violate the Competition Act. "We are making use of the city buses as the feeder service for the metro rail. There is no question of treating it as our competitor," said a senior officer in the HMRL. An e-mail query to the L&T did not elicit reply.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sujit Patwardhan
patwardh...@gmail.com
su...@parisar.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India
Tel: +91 20 25537955
Cell: +91 98220 26627
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://motif.posterous.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sujit Patwardhan
I am not sure that the Metro would not be executed well. From past performance of DMRC, it is more likely that it will.I am sure that I do not want to live with Pune BRTS, what ever pattern it is called. I am sure that without Metro, this BRTS will not improve. There have been terrible private interests in the execution of Pilot, Phase I and CYG BRTS.I would like to give a try to Metro and from what I have seen in Delhi, where people have gone crazy on Metro, I have every belief that it would succeed in Pune too.I would not trash the entire Hyderabad model, it certainly needs discussion. Private interests are in every single aspect of our lives presently in current polity. I guess there will only be a difference in quality only if the government changes. Quantity would remain the same or increase. Removing any kind of partisanship is not within the domain of public transportation. It is a larger issue for which we need a change in leadership, reforms in administration, police and judiciary. And importantly political will.Sudhir Jatar
On 28 April 2012 13:25, Sujit Patwardhan <patwardh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Those of us who are rooting for the Metro should understand that Metro is not going to be a magic solution to Pune's traffic problems, even if executed well and efficiently (which is itself doubtful). Even with a well running Metro we will need an efficient road based public transport for meeting the mobility and access needs of the citizens.
But do read this article to see the kind of manipulation that is going on in Hyderabad Metro to ensure that the "private" partner is allowed a free hand while the cheaper, simpler forms of public transport - such as the bus is being decimated.
Meanwhile the city continues to build flyovers and wide roads and parking lots that become hidden subsidies to the personal auto vehicle user. Instead of discouraging personal vehicles the city is encouraging their greater use.Such policies will not only damage the environment and livability of our city but will also pose growing threat to those who walk, cycle or use public transport.Is this what we want?--Sujit
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vinay Baindur <yani...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:43 PM
Subject: [jnnurm] Metro gives Larsen & Toubro monopoly over city transport
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Metro-gives-Larsen-Toubro-monopoly-over-city-transport/articleshow/12888108.cms
Metro gives Larsen & Toubro monopoly over city transport
B V Shiv Shankar, TNN | Apr 27, 2012, 03.14AM IST
HYDERABAD: While Hyderabad metro rail is expected to be the panacea to the growing traffic congestion in the city, the urban rail services can sound the death knell to other public transport systems already in place in the city due to a monopoly clause granted by the state to Larsen & Toubro, the private partner, through the concession agreement.
The clause in the concession agreement restricts the government from developing or improving the public transport system along the stretch of the three corridors- Miyapur to LB Nagar (corridor-I), Jubilee Bus Station to Falaknuma (corridor-II) and Nagole to Shiplaramam (corridor-III) - where the metro rail is taking shape. This would mean that there would be no scope for the improvement of the city bus service or MMTS (Multi-Model Transport System) that has emerged as a popular mode of urban rail transport.
The concession agreement says: "The government shall not construct any rail or road transport system between, inter alia, the three metro corridors" for a period of 35 years from the date the metro rail becomes operational. Further, L&T is entitled to an additional concession period of another 35 years. That means that the state government cannot develop any other public transport system for over 70 years without the consent of the private engineering company.
More startlingly, the concession agreement even restricts the government from revising the fare for the public transport or extending discounts or reductions in the fare and in the event of breach of these provisions, the government is liable to pay compensation to L&T under the latter's terms.
This clause can go against the state government and can end up acting against the interests of the commuter for whose benefit the metro rail has been conceived. This is because at a delay of Rs 5 crore per day in the construction of the project, keeping in mind the factors of the prevailing rate of inflation, insurance, currency fluctuation and rate of interest on the escalated project cost, the basic fare of the metro rail is expected to be around Rs 14 as of April 1, 2016. This would mean that the commuter would have to pay a high price for travelling on the metro rail even as the state would be helpless in improving the other modes of transport.
Charging that these provisions of the concession agreement are in violation of the Competition Act 2002, members of civil society, who have already petitioned the AP High Court against Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited (HMRL) on the charges of changing the alignment unilaterally, are now mulling moving the Competition Commission. "The provisions made in the concession agreement are monopolistic and are in defiance of the Competition Act. We are planning to complain to the Competition Commission," said Prof C Ramachandriah, who is spearheading the agitation against metro rail project.
While citing a similarity of the Hyderabad metro rail case with that of the Bangalore International Airport (BIA) that is facing a case under the Monopolistic Trade Practice Act after it insisted upon the closure of the government-run HAL airport in the city, Ramachandriah said curtailing the growth of public sector companies to suit the needs of private companies was unfair. A petition filed by Vivek Kulkarni, a former IAS officer, against BIA, is pending in the Karnataka high court.
However, authorities in HMRL said the metro rail service would only supplement the existing public transport system, and, hence, would not violate the Competition Act. "We are making use of the city buses as the feeder service for the metro rail. There is no question of treating it as our competitor," said a senior officer in the HMRL. An e-mail query to the L&T did not elicit reply.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.- J. Krishnamurti