The idea of charging private vehicles a fee to use EDSA during rush hour is gaining traction as a possible solution to Metro Manila’s relentless traffic congestion.

The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) has confirmed that the proposal was discussed with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., though the president himself noted that it is not yet the right time for such a move. The consensus? Any congestion fee must come hand in hand with an efficient and reliable public transport system.

MMDA chairman Romando Artes explained that the fee would work similarly to a toll charge, aiming to limit private-vehicle use on EDSA. However, he emphasized that implementing it should only be considered if public transportation options—particularly the MRT and bus systems—can efficiently accommodate displaced motorists. This is where the real challenge lies. As it stands, the MRT is plagued by overcrowding and technical issues, while the fate of the EDSA Bus Carousel remains uncertain, with authorities still toying with the idea of phasing it out.

The congestion-fee proposal has drawn mixed reactions from policymakers. Senator Grace Poe, a longtime advocate of better transport solutions, stressed that before any fees are imposed on motorists, the government must first improve EDSA’s condition. She argued that public transportation should be seamless and comfortable enough to encourage car owners to leave their vehicles at home. Additionally, she pointed out that secondary roads should be cleared and optimized as alternative routes to ensure that the fee does not simply push congestion elsewhere.

Senator Joel Villanueva, meanwhile, proposed a different approach. Instead of charging motorists, he advocated for the full implementation of the Work from Home Law, which he authored. Villanueva believes that promoting remote-work arrangements would naturally reduce the number of vehicles on EDSA without burdening commuters or motorists with additional costs. He also pointed out that sustainable and people-centered policies should be prioritized over restrictive measures.

Despite these concerns, the concept of congestion pricing is not new, nor is it without merit. Cities like London, Singapore, and most recently New York have successfully used road pricing to control traffic and encourage the use of public transport. The key difference is that these cities invested heavily in alternative transport options before implementing such measures. Metro Manila, on the other hand, continues to lag behind in building a truly efficient transit system.

The congestion fee could be a step in the right direction if done correctly. However, without a reliable mass transport system in place, it risks becoming just another financial burden on commuters. The government must ensure that improved bus routes, seamless train connections, and viable work-from-home policies are all in place before considering such a drastic measure. If not, Metro Manila risks yet another traffic experiment that punishes the public without providing a real solution.