MOVING FORWARD: BOLD AND STRATEGIC STEPS BEING TAKEN TO IMPROVE THE MRT-3

The Department of Transportation (DOTr) is taking bold and strategic steps to solve the problems that have been plaguing the MRT-3 for years.

A Four-Point Strategy is already being implemented, which involves:

- promoting accountability (termination of BURI);
- ensuring continued service delivery (establishment of the Maintenance Transition Team);
- contracting a qualified maintenance and rehabilitation service provider (Sumitomo-Mitsubishi Heavy); 
- putting in place a long-term, single-point-of-responsibility, operator and maintenance provider for MRT-3 (O&M Unsolicited Proposal).

Point 1: Promoting Accountability

Last Nov. 6, DOTr terminated BURI’s maintenance service contract due to, among others, BURI’s non-performance of its obligations under the contract.

BURI failed to perform its maintenance obligations, both due to its inability to meet the performance indicators in the contract (e.g. number of trains running) and its failure to procure spare parts.

BURI also failed to perform its obligation to overhaul MRT-3’s train cars, pursuant to a schedule that was proposed by BURI itself. As of 21 November 2017, only 2 out of 43 train cars have been overhauled by BURI.

These failures led to the many passenger unloading and train removal incidents during the 22 months that BURI was maintaining MRT-3.

BURI’s termination is intended to promote accountability, and to ensure that taxpayers’ money (PhP54 million a month for maintenance and PhP907 million for the overhaul) is not spent on a non-performing service provider.

Point 2: Continued Service Delivery

The DOTr prepared for the take over of the maintenance of MRT-3 by creating a Maintenance Transition Team (MTT), which will maintain the system for 3-6 months while procuring a new and qualified maintenance service provider.

The MTT ensured that it has the necessary human resources, by directly hiring more than 450 former BURI employees. After months of delayed and partial salaries, the MTT has paid the direct hires their salaries in full and on time, which has boosted their morale.

The LRTA and PNR have also thrown in their support to the MTT, by sharing highly qualified and experienced railway engineers to the MTT.

The condition of MRT-3’s spare parts inventory at take over further demonstrated BURI’s failure to purchase and maintain a sufficient level of spare parts. To address this, the DOTr created a special Bids and Award Committee (BAC), which, together with the MTT, is regularly convening to expeditiously procure the spare parts that BURI failed to purchase.

Point 3: Maintenance and Rehabilitation Service Provider

High-level discussions with the Government of Japan are ongoing to pave the way for DOTr’s direct engagement of Sumitomo Corporation and its technical partner Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, under a Government to Government (G2G) Official Development Assistance (ODA) platform. A G2G agreement is scheduled to be signed before year-end.

Sumitomo and Mitsubishi Heavy designed, built, and maintained the MRT-3 in its first 12 years of operations.

The maintenance and rehabilitation contract is intended to have a term of 3 years, and will include the rehabilitation and restoration of the system to its original performance standards.

Point 4: Long-Term, Single-Point-of-Responsibility, O&M Provider

Many of MRT-3’s problems in recent years resulted from successive short-term and fragmented maintenance contracts, and from finger-pointing due to having different entities maintaining and operating MRT-3.

DOTr is addressing this by pursuing an Unsolicited Proposal for the 30-year operation and maintenance (O&M) of MRT-3. Original proponent status has been given to the proponent, Metro Pacific Light Rail Corporation (MPLRC), and the proposal will soon be endorsed to NEDA for further evaluation.

Other Efforts

The DOTr is already coordinating with the LTFRB and MMDA in expanding the P2P bus fleet that will complement the MRT-3.

Also, an independent safety audit by an ISO-certified and IFIA member certifier (International Federation of Inspection Agencies) will commence soon for the entire MRT-3 system, which is intended to give DOTr additional inputs on the interventions needed to rehabilitate and restore the system’s reliability.

With the bump in ridership expected as we approach the holidays, the public can be assured that the DOTr is pursuing all avenues to restore the MRT-3’s reliability and to continue ensuring the safety of its 500,000 daily riders.

Will Martin Nievera dare to sing Iran's national anthem his way?

Outside of Americans and Filipinos, can you recall other nationals who sang their national anthems during a public event in a way that deviated from the traditional beat?

It’s not surprising that the disrespectful practice was popularized by showbiz personalities who are always trying to be different or just simply trying to be noticed. They justify it as the freedom of artistic expression.

Many Filipinos are the ‘monkey see, monkey do’ types when something is started by Americans. Now, we have this recent controversy of pop singer Martin Nievera after he sang our national anthem (before the Pacman-Hitman Las Vegas fight) to a different beat.

Martin Nievera was first called to task by Ambeth Ocampo of the National Historical Institute for violating Section 37, Chapter II of Republic Act 8491, or the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines. The law provides penalties – a jail term and fine – for violations. Nievera did not only violate a revered tradition but he also broke the law.

Representative Teddy Casiño also reacted and proposed a Congressional investigation to clarify once and for all the protocol on the singing or playing of the National Anthem.

In the STAR May 6 front page story penned by Jess Diaz, Casiño cited Nievera in House Resolution 1137 for singing the Lupang Hinirang “in a manner not in keeping with the original arrangement of its composer Julian Felipe.”

Lupang Hinirang should be sung in a marching-type tempo, within the range of 100 to 120 metronome, in 4/4 beat and 2/4 beat when played.

The NHI, in coordination with the proper government agency, shall disseminate an official music score sheet that reflects the manner in which the national anthem should be played or sung.
Individuals whose faith prohibit them from singing Lupang Hinirang must still show full respect.

The national anthem, however, would not be allowed to be played and sung preceding "events of recreation, amusement, or entertainment purposes."

But the anthem may be played during the following: international competitions where the Philippines is the host or has a representative; national and local sports competitions, during the "signing off" and "signing on" of radio broadcasting and television stations, before the initial and last screening of films and before the opening of theater performances; Provided, that the owners and management of the establishments shall be mandated to enforce proper decorum and implement the pertinent provisions of this act; and other occasions as may be allowed by the NHI.

The Oath of Patriotism (Panatang Makabayan) must be recited after the singing of the national anthem in basic education institutions. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Philippine Flag (Panunumpa ng Katapatan sa Watawat ng Pilipinas) may be recited as well, though the law did not specify who is required to do so.

Julian Felipe composed the national anthem to capture the spirit of the Philippine Revolution against Spain – hence the martial beat. Casiño commented that Nievera sang the national anthem as if it were a ballad.

“Mr. Nievera is not the first artist who sang the national anthem in a different style and tempo. As in the past, such non-traditional renditions elicit much debate among policymakers and the public at large as to the proper way of singing the Lupang Hinirang and whether artists have the license to deviate from tradition,” Casiño added.

Casiño named Charice Pempengco and Jennifer Bautista (there were more actually) as entertainers who have deviated from the traditional rendition while Karylle, Kyla and Ciara Sotto sang it in the traditional manner.

Nievera found support from Cabinet Secretary Silvestre “Bebot” Bello III and Leah Navarro of the Black and White Movement. Bello said Nievera sang it in ‘good faith’ which makes us wonder if stealing in ‘good faith’ clears a plunderer. Navarro said a mouthful.

Per Navarro, “I do not care how people sing it, whether it’s rap or out of tune, for as long as they know how to sing it. That is, has sense of self.” Navarro justified the mangling of the beat of the national anthem so long as the lyrics are “sung from the heart.”

The next plunderer that Navarro and her group will denounce should then just respond to them that the mega theft was committed with the sincerest prodding of his heart.

Nievera also found support from Manny Pacquiao who even offered to sing the national anthem the next time. But then, outside of boxing, what does Pacquiao really know?

It was reported that Ryan Cayabyab warned Nievera before the fight not to change the beat. Yet, when informed of the controversy that his rendition of the national anthem spawned at home, Nievera said to ABS-CBN that he did nothing wrong.

Outside of the legal issue, we must wonder if Nievera ever considered the historical and traditional aspects of the national anthem that should compel anyone tasked to sing it in an international event to follow its set guidelines. Respect for a national tradition should prevail over an ego trip for being different.

If Nievera sang and misrepresented the national anthem of Iran like he misrepresented the Philippine national anthem, he will find comradeship with Salman Rushdie who has been dodging for two decades now the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s fatwa (execution order) for writing The Satanic Verses.

On different occasions, Luciano Pavarotti, Placido Domingo, and Jose Carreras – the famous three tenors – all sang La Donna en mobile and Nessun dorma. Do you recall any of them mangling the beat of these opera classics?

Never! And that is because they know better not to even think of doing that. They know that some things in this world are not to be altered. They had too great a respect for the artist who created the musical composition.

But then, the late Luciano Pavarotti and the surviving two tenors are genuine artists who have earned the recognition of the world of art and culture. Over here many of us easily elevate mere entertainers to the exalted level of artists without even knowing what differentiates the two.

Without as much as a law to mandate how they ought to sing La Donna en mobile and Nessun dorma and all those other opera classics – Pavarotti, Domingo and Carreras respected the original compositions.

So, who are these Martin Nieveras, Charice Pempengcos and Jennifer Bautistas – who are mere entertainers and have not even earned the right to claim to be genuine artists – to sing our national anthem differently?

The embodiment of the history and aspirations of our nation in a song, without even a law to define how it must be sung – freedom of artistic expression cannot justify singing the national anthem differently.