I drove for 50 minutes from Mapusa and just reached Bambolim. It would have taken another 20 min to reach the Dabolim airport.
When I had moved to Goa 30 years ago, it would take me 50 minutes to reach the airport.
To be fair, a year ago, I had again reached the airport in 50 minutes with the new bridges over Mandovi and Zuari rivers and the new expressway from Bambolim to Zuari bridge.
I am also pretty certain that once the elevated highway is completed in Porvorim in a year or two, I will again be able to drive to the airport in 50 minutes.
I suppose that is progress. Here is an example of a regular experience for me and this is 2 and half years AFTER the report and - “We have written to the NHAI about the issues at the junction and steps to be taken to rectify the problem”.
Probably the designers did not include or talk to anyone who stayed in Mapusa or was familiar with it.
Suppose instead, we spent a part of the money spent on improving highway and bridges on public transport, could it have been any worse?
First objection that comes to mind is from the categorization of the expenditure:
- Building roads and bridges is spent on infrastructure - A GOOD thing as it is an investment for the future
- Spending money on public transport is a subsidy - Obviously a BAD thing.
- Why can't we categorize it as a SAVING of money we do not need to spend on infrastructure to have an even better quality of life in the future?
No comments:
Post a Comment