THE House Committee on Metro Manila Development held a hearing on Tuesday, July 25, on transport network companies (TNCs), to consider proposals for their continued operation, one of them being the granting of congressional franchises.

Quezon City Rep. Winston Castelo, committee chairman, said the committee called for the hearing in order to discuss the issues surrounding the ride-hailing platforms or TNCs and their implications on the transportation system in Metro Manila. These issues have been tackled recently in what amounted to a public debate between the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) and TNCs Grab and Uber.

House Committee on Transport Chairman Cesar V. Sarmiento, for his part, cited a pending bill aiming to merge the functions of the Land Transportation Office (LTO) and the LTFRB into a single agency, which is being pushed by House Speaker Pantaleon D. Alvarez.

LTFRB officials at the hearing acknowledged TNCs in helping address commuting problems.

The regulatory body’s chairman, Martin A. Delgra III, for his part described as “absolutely false” the perception that they are against the operations of TNCs and are favoring conventional transportation modes.

Rep. Harry L. Roque, Jr., who also pointed out his availing himself of Uber’s transportation service, said for his part, “If public will benefit, we will allow them to operate.”

Rep. Arnolfo Teves Jr. for his part recommended an order assigning to TNCs the liability for accidents involving transport network vehicles (TNVs).

He asked if the LTFRB can issue such an order. Mr. Delgra said that while his agency is open to that proposal, “We need to understand their model…that’s why we’re engaging all stakeholders,” he said.

He then said such an order can be issued by the end of the year.

Board Member Aileen Lizada, in turn, pointed out there is no active master list of Grab and Uber drivers, which she said makes it difficult for the LTFRB to verify and act accordingly on incidents involving transport network vehicles (TNVs), unlike with cases of public utility vehicles (PUVs).

Grab Philippines country head Brian Cu later told reporters they have submitted a list but are “working on a more detailed list” to submit to the LTFRB.

Ms. Lizada also said Uber has not complied with the order to submit a master list.

Representatives of Grab and Uber for their part also said their drivers and passengers have always been insured.

Mr. Teves inquired if TNCs paid taxes.

Mr. Cu responded that Grab is operating at a loss. Uber Philippines head of policy unit Yves Gonzalez said the company has paid about P35 million in taxes.

Mr. Teves expressed disbelief at Mr. Cu’s statement and later asked that the TNCs submit their financial statements or risk being cited in contempt.

Mr. Cu said they are ready to be cited in contempt if found lying.

“But we are not lying. We are in investment mode. We have made significant investments in this country, not only to the platform but also to drivers and to passengers, and the community can attest to that,” Mr. Cu said.

He added that he is willing to explain to Teves the nature of start-ups and how they are operating at a loss.

For his part, AKO BICOL Party-list Representative Rodel M. Batocabe said ride-hailing platforms are a “new animal” in the transport industry and must be regulated through a congressional franchise.

“Uber and Grab should be subject to a Congressional franchise. They cannot just operate using the apps,” Mr. Batocabe said.

Ms. Lizada also disclosed the LTFRB met yesterday morning regarding the motions of reconsideration filed by Grab and Uber, in response to the July 11 order directing the crackdown of “colorum” (informal term for illegal) vehicles, beginning July 26.

While the motions of reconsideration are being studied, the LTFRB will not be enforcing the said order.

Mr. Cu said he was not aware of the 15,000 vehicles that Ms. Lizada said her agency required as the total number of TNVs allowed for operation.

“I do not recall providing a number. (B)ased on the number of cars we have on the road now, we see that there (are) 20%-30% of people who get cars (who) are unable to do so. The number changes because of demand conditions,” he said. — Patrizia Paola C. Marcelo

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR