This morning I stood on the street corner for almost an hour waiting for an auto. An auto, for those who don't know, is a three-wheeled scootie-type conveyance, best described in a picture. The best name for it would be "hybrid car" but that phrase has already been co-opted by the environmental lobby.
It was only 86 degrees outside, which is balmy by recent Delhi standards, and there was even a wisp of a breeze. At long last a lone auto pulled up to a curb that's normally a hotspot for catching autos. He was immediately mobbed. I pushed through the crowd, he told me he'd take me to my street for 60 INR, but that I'd have to walk a little bit.
"Why?" I said, confused.
"The strike."
I didn't know anything about this. A strike? By whom, of whom? Was this like the infamous city-wide "bundhs" that used to be called by Mumbai's Shiv Sena government, enforced by hired and armed thugs? I tried to interrogate the driver but was frustrated both by his lack of knowledge and my own spectacular lack of Hindi vocabulary. (A problem in journalistic contexts, not in any other)
He dropped me at the curb, I didn't see anything, I walked to the office without incident. I thought maybe the driver had been playing a trick on me, which is something that Delhi auto drivers are famous for. But everyone in the office was talking about the auto strike!
Apparently 17 auto unions have taken their cars off the roads to protest the government's new crackdown on drivers operating without licenses, permits, or pollution control certificates. The WSJ has an excellent story about it.
"The green-and-yellow-colored auto-rickshaws have emerged as a popular choice among the middle-class professionals who can't afford a car and among women who hesitate to travel in the city's crowded public buses," writes the author. They got me on both counts.
The government's complaint is fair - thousands of accidents occur every year thanks to inept, unlicensed drivers. Personally, I don't know whom to root for. The entire incident illustrates the conflict between regulation and "entrepreneurship" that's making India such a fascinating case study in developing country economics. On the one hand, the auto drivers are independent entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurship drives economic growth. On the other hand, who wants economic growth at the expense of people's lives and the general environment? If one takes the negative externalities into account, how much economic growth is actually occurring? This conflict isn't unique to India, but it's certainly interesting to see it played out in such a public and daily way.
On a final note, the WSJ story has some unexpected humor in it!
"Ashok Gupta, deputy commissioner for auto-rickshaws at the transport department of the government of the national capital territory of Delhi, says the strike will have very little effect, since the commuters have options of other public transportation systems like buses, taxis and metro rail." Mr. Ashok Gupta is either blind, high, or lying. Taxis are exorbitant, buses are dirty and crowded and (for females anyway) potentially unsafe, and the metro serves a very limited route. Having no autos is a massive inconvenience, no matter how good the reasons are.
No comments:
Post a Comment