Yes OR No to Nano...?

The world’s cheapest car is making news in Bhutan. Not because it is affordable to the low-income Bhutanese who can finally fulfill their dream of owning a car. But for few bureaucrats who probably drive a dashing new Prado costing Nu 2 million fear that they will not find parking space for their ‘little’ prizes and increase the risk of accidents.

The talk of banning the import of Tata Nano defies all logic. It makes a mockery of the policy of equity and justice.

The ostensible reasons are that our roads and urban infrastructure cannot carry the large influx of Nanos. But have we thought that two Nanos can probably be parked in the space for one Prado? Isn’t the car that gives a mileage of 20 plus kilometres to a litre more fuel efficient and less polluting than heavier diesel vehicles? Isn’t democracy all about the freedom of choice? Shouldn’t our people be given the chance to own the People’s Car?

The import ban on Nano will violate the spirit of free trade with India. It would tantamount to imposing a non-tariff barrier unless Nano is unsafe and mechanically unfit for Bhutanese road conditions.

I am not against the idea of controlling the vehicle population in Bhutan that has reached about 41,000 out of which 24,000 or 59 percent are light vehicles or passenger motor cars. The average annual growth rate of all types of vehicles between 2006 and 2008 is 11 percent. The rate for light vehicles is higher at 15 percent and it is likely to shoot up with the import of Nano.

I believe that we should find other means to control the numbers, reduce the import of fuel and cut down the emission level rather than banning a specific model. The more powerful the vehicle, more fuel it will consume and more pollution it will discharge. The government should hence link the rate of duties and taxes on light vehicles to engine capacity and fuel efficiency, and raise registration, insurance and other charges with a commensurate increase of taxes on tyres and spares for such vehicles. The idea is to make it more costly to own and maintain a vehicle with higher engine capacity so that people are induced to switch to smaller ones. If someone wants a luxurious vehicle, he will have to pay more for it. Thus, affordability becomes the main criterion of buying a vehicle without the feeling of being denied to own any type. At the same time, the government will earn more revenue.

The government should also abolish the quota system and pool vehicles which in turn will reduce vehicle population. The quota might have been justified in the past but not any more. It is heavily misused today. It is also against the policy of equity and justice. The pool vehicles are equally misused by officers and staff defying government rules. The drivers’ ingenuity for siphoning of fuel and stealing spare parts can never be controlled. It would be cheaper for the government to hire vehicles from private dealers who should be encouraged to maintain good quality vehicles. The private sector will welcome this move.

The new policy should also lead to the improvement and expansion of surface transport in the country and introduction of buses in urban centres to give people an alternative.

We must improve the safety of our roads by adding clearly readable signboards, paying more attention to remove obstacles from roadsides and highways, widening stretches for overtaking, increasing public education on road safety and by enforcing traffic rules and speed limits more strictly. These measures will surely result in smoother, safer and pleasant conditions for driving.

These are the changes required to address problems of over-population of vehicles. Let us not therefore make Nano a scapegoat for our policy failure on light vehicles!

By Achyut Bhandari
source:bhutanobserver.bt