Yet another jolt

DMRC’s parking fare hike is a double blow for hassled travelers

Just when we were all adjusting to the recent increase in fare of the metro, the allied raising of parking fees by 67 per cent at stations has added to the consumer’s burden. While Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has slammed it as a body blow to the metro system, DMRC has defended its move, saying that it had to balance increasing civic fees and rationalise its input costs. But it still has not been able to answer the question as it did during the fare hike — why can it not build a graded fee structure instead of bulking up its deficit on riders? DMRC should, in that case, build a year-on-year system of evaluation factoring in inflation rather than forcing its riders to make drastic changes in their commute budget. It is all too known now that the two fare hikes last year led to a drop in ridership by about three lakh, commuters bleeding out to using conventional means of transport that worked cheaper and did no good to either the traffic or pollution congestion. Now with the parking fee hike and the last mile connectivity still an unsettled issue along the route network, more riders are expected to stream out to conventional transport systems, including using their own vehicles if it is profitable over average distances. Post fare-hike, the cascading effect resulted in more than 100 per cent hike, even up to 150 per cent, for some travellers. A parking fee hike may reduce number of cars in the lot but put that many more loyalists back on to public roads. Then there is the larger issue of service efficiency. Can the DMRC quell the counter-argument of whether the hike would mean less of overcrowding, route congestion, technical failures and hold-ups?

The metro is the city’s lifeline, connecting all strata of society and geographical extremities besides democratising mindsets and equalising socio-economics. So, like any other mass rapid transport system, it has to look at its larger impact on the productivity of the service class it largely caters to. Then there are students and women who have been empowered in terms of enhancing their HR porential. This larger arc cannot be ignored. Metros around the world have to deal with burgeoning operational costs while keeping it affordable for everybody. Purely profit-making motives have seldom worked as shown by the patchy efficacy of metro systems in Hyderabad and Mumbai. Different countries have different methodologies to keep services viable. Hong Kong adjusts fares according to its consumer price index, Transport for London (TFL) has frozen the maximum amount that commuters have to pay in a day across different modes and the mayor has decided to cap the prices till 2020. In Singapore, a Public Transport Council decides the fare adjustment and has even forked out slabs for lower income households, frozen fares for senior citizens and worked out concessions for persons with disabilities. Metros around the world have had to deal with fare controversies and given its nature as a social enterprise, a reasoned approach is required for long-term viability. Diverting a bit more of Central resources for something that addresses a larger number of people may be a wiser move than allocating funds to milestone projects.