President Duterte’s decision to stop the Land Transportation Office (LTO) from making the motor vehicle inspection system (MVIS) a requisite for car registration is a welcome break from a bureaucratic tendency to impose regulations without regard to the pain it causes everyday people.
There is nothing wrong about making sure that vehicles are roadworthy before they are allowed on the streets, but this should not be taken as a blank check to make car owners pay hefty fees every year for tests they may not need.
Before the MVIS’ suspension as a mandatory requirement for car registration, vehicles had to pass a stringent three-state, 73-point inspection system to be conducted in three stages with the use of state-of-the-art equipment that would send, automatically and in real-time, the results to the LTO’s computer system.
Before the public hue and cry, the LTO authorized private motor vehicle inspection centers (PMVICs) to charge P1,800 for every vehicle inspected, and P900 for re-inspection if the car failed the first test. Motorcycles and tricycles were charged P600 for the initial inspection and P300 for re-inspection.
After the Palace announcement, the Department of Transportation said PMVICs would indefinitely lower their fees to the same rates being offered by emission testing centers, while re-inspection fees would also be suspended for a year.
The Vehicle Inspection Center Operators Association of the Philippines (VICOAP), a group of 80 PMVICs nationwide, said the new fees are now pegged at P600 for light vehicles, P500 for motorcycles and P300 for public utility jeepneys.
In reaction, a Palace spokesman said the PMVICs agreed to “operate at a loss” by lowering their inspection rates and suspending the collection of re-inspection fees for a year.
Trying to put a positive spin on the issue, the spokesman said that now, for same price as the mandatory emission test, vehicle owners can now have their cars go through 73 roadworthy inspection tests.
But the statements from the Palace emphasize the temporary nature of the MVIC suspension—and suggest that the private inspection centers are doing us a huge favor by agreeing to “operate at a loss.”
The question that begs to be asked is, how long can we expect private, for-profit organizations to operate at a loss?
Beyond simply a matter of cost, there are basic policy questions that need to be addressed.
While there is no doubt value in ensuring that all registered vehicles are roadworthy, is the extensive testing required by the MVIS really necessary? When motorists go on a road trip, they normally have the following checked: tires, brakes, battery, fluids and lights. Shouldn’t this be enough? Do we really need a 73-point inspection system that will cost car owners more at any point of failure?
During a congressional inquiry into the MVIS, senators also urged that the system be suspended, saying that the delegation of the inspection to private centers lacked legal basis.
Moreover, it was pointed out that the fees collected were not coursed through the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). As a result, no governing body is monitoring the amount of money that PMVICs charge their customers.
Ultimately, the MVIS makes car owners pay so that private companies can get a guaranteed return on their investment in equipment and manpower. Is this right? Senator Grace Poe hit the nail on the head when she remarked: “A temporary suspension of fees only begs the question: Why do motorists need to shoulder the burden of the new system?” Why indeed
