One discriminatory directive by the LTO

IT’S NICE to hear that finally the provincial government of Davao del

Norte and the management of Tagum Agricultural Development Company

(TADECO) have finally come up with an agreement to have at least three roads traversing the massive banana plantation opened to public use subject to certain restrictions.

Yes, opening the access roads will greatly ease travel of people from the barangays of Braulio Dujali, part of Panabo City, and Sto. Tomas. They can now use the private roads of the massive plantation to get to the main public highways.

We understand that some well-meaning people brokered the agreement and one of them is MINDA Secretary Manny Piñol. That is one cap on his head. Hope the agreement will hold for long.

One thing is certain here though. That is, politics is temporarily set aside by warring politicians for the benefit of the people in the involved communities.

Our congratulations go to all concerned TADECO executives and the officials of the provincial government of Davao del Norte for humbling themselves so as to give the residents easy and faster access to wherever their destinations are.

We would however, strongly recommend the road users to abide by whatever restrictions agreed upon by the parties so that the agreement will last. Public cooperation is of utmost importance in situations like the one in the TADECO plantation area.

The company is a leading exporter of bananas worldwide. Any diminution in the quality of its products could result to the loss of its markets.

And bananas are highly vulnerable to foot-borne agricultural diseases.

**********************

We strongly support the resolution initiated by Davao third district councilor Conrado Baluran to have the directive of the national office of the Land Transportation Office (LTO) mandating the apprehension of multi-cabs carrying passengers on its open back portion reviewed.

The LTO directive councilor Baluran is referring to was issued by the LTO national office last September 18, 2019. And it covers motor vehicles like pick-up trucks and its smaller version, the multi-cabs.

The reason cited by the LTO in its directive is that the open space at the back is intended for cargo and not human passengers. It indicated that any person riding on the open space is over and above the maximum allowable passengers.

If this is so, we have to take it to mean that in the case of single cab pick-up truck and multi-cabs, the only allowable passenger is one person – the one seated beside the driver. In the case of double cab pick-up the total allowable passengers including the driver is 5 persons, the driver and one other at the front seat, and the three others at the back cab. Supposedly, only cargoes are allowed to be loaded on the back space.

We really do not have any idea if what the LTO is prescribing as the purpose of such vehicles as pick-ups and multi-cabs is exactly the same as the intention of the manufacturers of the concerned vehicles.

Of course there is no need to argue if the subject vehicle is a dump truck, or close van, or wing van, or even the so-called Bongo. Its manufacturers are clear with the purpose of the production – for cargo transport.

But for multi-cabs and pick-up trucks, the vehicles’ names and makes are suggestive. That is, for as long as there is space left and seats are made available taking into consideration personal safety, these vehicles may allow passengers for as long as they do not exceed the weight-carrying capacity and the driver or owner does not collect fares.

Yes, if the vehicles controverted herein are really restrained from carrying human passengers on its back space then it should have been made clear by its manufacturers and subsequently the dealers. And the buyers should have been forewarned of the restrictions instead of being misled that the pick-up or multi-cabs and other units with open