Archive

  • March 2024 (1)
  • December 2022 (1)
  • March 2022 (1)
  • January 2022 (1)
  • November 2021 (1)
  • October 2021 (1)
  • September 2021 (2)
  • August 2021 (4)
  • July 2021 (3)
  • June 2021 (4)
  • May 2021 (5)
  • April 2021 (2)

    If it is about traffic, policy uncertainty can even cause death

    Güven Sak, PhD21 September 2010 - Okunma Sayısı: 1070

     

    While the referendum reduced political uncertainty, policy uncertainty has been increasing due to successive elections ahead. So, nowadays in advance we had better sit down and think how we can reduce the risk of policy uncertainty. I have written about this issue two times last week; so let me continue with this today. Policy uncertainty is not solely related with macroeconomic decisions. It is also about the traffic. Maybe it has escaped your notice: In July on the eve of the referendum, the fee for transporting passengers on foot in minibuses was cut. And then we started to see the results. Do not immediately ask what this has to do with the issue in question. Indeed, it has. Please hear me first.

    I have first heard the following question from Rifat Hisarciklioglu, President of Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges. In a meeting in Anatolia, he asked the audience: "Why do you think lorry drivers, who neatly obey the rules in European highways, stick to the left lane and ignore all the rules after they pass the Kapıkule border gate?" It is correct; when riding abroad I cautiously used the seat belt while I forgot about all of its purpose when I returned to Turkey. Then, I learned. More correctly, I was told by the traffic police after a couple of fines. Dissuasive fines are as critical as the quality of the highway for the traffic. However fines on paper are not enough alone; the rules must also be implemented. And policy uncertainty in an aspect implies the disappearance of rule-domination. If rule domination turns into king's domination, policy uncertainty arises for market actors. Thus, the intervention of the politics to daily decisions basically implies the hegemony of the king.

    Now let us talk about two news stories that will indisputably engrave the issue in out memories. First was featured in the Vatan daily a couple of days ago. It was about a minibus accident in Basaksehir, Istanbul. Due to rain, the road got slippery, a minibus crashed with a water truck causing 13 deaths. The reason for this serious number of deaths was that the minibus carried passengers on foot. The driver had eighteen fine tickets over the last nine years for carrying passengers on foot. And an accident happened in the nineteenth incident pushing up the number of deaths. The second news story is from the Milliyet daily. According to this, the fine imposed for carrying passengers on foot, that was raised in June 2010 was cut back in July 2010 as a result of the strong objections. It was cut from 60 TL per person to 50 TL per minibus.

    Now it is it is quite normal, though highly dangerous and banned, that minibuses carry passengers on foot.  In fact, we all assist the poor minibus drivers for this, do not we? When they say "Can you please kneel down until we pass the control point" we all together tend to be sitting down do not we? But it is dangerous and banned. And it should be banned. It is not "What harm can it make?" simple. But on the eve of the referendum, the politics did not refrain from changing this rule. Is this the rule-domination principle? As the story in Milliyet daily says, between 13 July and 19 July, 526 tickets were given to minibuses for carrying passengers on foot. And Vatan daily says that the minibus driver involved in the accident had eighteen tickets for the same thing over the last nine years. So, what does this mean? This means, what is dangerous for our lives and thus what is banned had turn into a rule. Why? Because the rule does not have any sanction power. Why? Because the politics has another agenda and schedule.

    Economics is related with every aspect of life. And the design of traffic fines is involved in the interests of the economics.  The policy uncertainty in this field would only increase the number of deaths. And this is what we saw, indeed.

    The way to deal with policy uncertainty is to restore rules with strong sanctions and officials with sanctioning authorities. We are in a period where the importance of independent administrative officials intensifies. We are in a period where the importance of officials undoubtedly authorized for economic administration increases. Let us continue to brainstorm.

    A rule without a sanction implies normlessness. An authority without sanctioning power brings policy uncertainty. Turkey needs a nominal anchor in order not to be dragged along in a storm.

    You should first set the anchor and then trust in God.

     

    This commentary was published in Referans daily on 21.09.2010

    Tags:
    Yazdır