The battle of cities

During the last week, the performance of three major political parties in the capitals of the three provinces ruled by them dominated the news media. As the PML-N patted itself on the back for shining Lahore, the PPP was forced to defend itself for failing to clear garbage in Karachi and over its decision to hand over the largest park of the metropolis to a private real-estate company.

The PTI, in the meanwhile, got flak for taking another U-turn and deciding to build a Bus Rapid Transit Bus System (called metro bus in Pakistan) in Peshawar at a cost that may well exceed other similar projects in Punjab and Islamabad.

It is a flawed battle, being fought on the terms of the PML-N. There may be a difference in scale, but all three parties have failed remarkably in managing cities in their respective provinces. The PPP’s failure in managing Karachi efficiently has become a millstone around its neck that is enough to scare voters in other provinces. However, the other two parties are not faring any better.

After consistently spending more than 60 percent of the development budget of Pakistan’s largest province, the PML-N claims that it can do similar wonders to the rest of the country. It is hard to see how this kind of money can be just be taken away from the provincial budgets for hundreds of cities in the country.

During the current budget, the Punjab government has allocated Rs134 billion for 445 schemes of Lahore out of a total district-based allocation of Rs229 billion. The second highest allocation for development schemes went to southern Punjab’s Multan which gets three percent share with Rs8.2 billion for such projects.

Karachi is a much bigger city than Lahore. It is expanding at a scale that would make it very hard to manage even for a developed country. It is ethnically diverse and this diversity, represented by ethnic political parties, has proved a huge problem and has resulted in conflict and violence. Karachi receives one million new citizens every year, mainly from Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and thus its problems emanate from the whole country and Sindh alone cannot be held responsible for them.

As a mega city, Karachi requires a system of management that has to be very different from the rest of Sindh. No mega city can be managed on the lines of a rural district and Karachi is no exception. However, the PPP has become a hostage in the hands of the Sindhi nationalists who believe that managing Karachi differently from Mirpur Khas amounts to division of Sindh.

Unfortunately, the PPP has nothing to show in the rest of Sindh either. The smaller districts in Sindh are in a worse situation, sinking under their own garbage and failing to provide basic facilities to their citizens.

Peshawar looks great in images photoshopped by the PTI Twitter brigade, but it does not look very pretty in brick and mortar. The PTI too has largely followed the Punjab model of development by spending most resources on developed areas of KP at the expense of the least developed areas of the province.

After denigrating Metro Bus projects for four years, the PTI government has decided to go for Bus Rapid Transit in Peshawar. It can be a good decision if the PTI learns from the mistakes made by the Punjab government. Unfortunately, the party may not be able to complete it by the next elections.

Public transport in Pakistan is an instrument of humiliation and social control. It is a means to keep low income people in their place and give the car-owning middle class and the rich a sense of satisfaction and achievement. Successive governments in Pakistan have poured billions of dollars down the bottomless pit of the so-called national airline while refusing to spare small change for the public transport needed by each and every citizen.

Rapid Bus Service, named Metro Bus Service in Pakistan, is a breath of fresh air that reverses the trend – though on a small scale – by prioritising the majority over the minority and creating a great leveller that forces citizens from diverse economic backgrounds to share a public service. However, there are some serious issues that must be raised and debated.

Metro projects are built like monuments that serve a section of population while leaving most commuters to their own devices. This is because the government has built them without planning for the larger issue of public transport. The Punjab government has also overspent on some elements of the project, compromising the project’s sustainability. For example, there was no need to construct dozens of high-tech glass castles as terminals that are energy guzzlers while the majority of commuters are deprived of rudimentary facilities. Such terminals have not been built in Istanbul or Bangkok, for example.

Similarly, there was no need to build extra infrastructure in Islamabad where the roads are wide enough to accommodate the service. The government should have helped local transporters to operate buses by providing them subsidies rather than making it a state-operated operation with the help of a foreign company. Finally, the subsidy should be targeted at those commuters who deserve it while other commuters must pay the normal fare – ie the fare they pay on private public transport on other routes. These steps would have helped the Punjab government save some money to deal with the larger problem of public transport on other routes and in other cities.

The name most associated with Bus Rapid Transport is that of Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bagota, Colombia who led in the creation of the city’s TransMilenio from 1998-2001. In an interview, he stated:

“In general, especially in developing countries, people who walk are lower income citizens. They are more vulnerable citizens. There are children and the elderly. A civilised city should, before anything else, protect its most vulnerable citizens.

“When I was mayor 18 years ago, we created a network of more than 250 kilometers of bikeways. Then, there were no bikeways in New York or in Paris or in Madrid….. It’s like new citizenship as they call it.”

Now compare this with our cities, where Metro Bus lanes have created Berlin walls for pedestrians and bikers while bike lanes are non-existent though the roads have been widened to accommodate more cars.

According to Mayor Peñalosa, “For 5,000 years, we designed cities for people without cars. When cars appeared, we should have begun to design totally different cities. We did not. We just made bigger roads.”

What we are missing in the debate is the voice from these cities. The three parties have left no stone unturned in denying democracy to their own cities, though cities have been at the heart of democracy ever since the idea of democracy was invented. These three cities are supposed to have elected assemblies and mayors who have the mandate to plan development in their cities and speak on the behalf of their citizens.

Cities should be managed by mayors, not chief ministers. Those chief ministers who are ambitious to become mayors should not become chief ministers only to steal the funds of a whole province.

The writer is an anthropologist and development professional.

Email: zaighamkhan@yahoo.com

Twitter: @zaighamkhan