The Bayelsa State Ministry of Transport’s decision to relocate all motor parks in Yenagoa to the newly established Igbogene transport terminal has sparked widespread dissatisfaction among commuters and transport unions. Many residents, particularly those traveling during the festive season, have expressed frustration over the additional stress and increased transportation costs resulting from the directive.
Commuters argue that the sudden enforcement, led by security operatives, was poorly planned and implemented without sufficient consultation with stakeholders, including transport unions and the public. Mr. Douye Wikimor, a commuter, criticized the move, stating it forces individuals to pay double fares, significantly increasing their financial burden. He called on the state government to reconsider the policy, considering its adverse effects on the public.
Student bodies have also voiced their concerns, with Comrade Azubike Ekene, President of the Federal University Otuoke Student Union, warning that the relocation would impose hardships on students and could lead to protests. He acknowledged the potential benefits of the policy, such as decongesting the city, but emphasized that its timing and execution were problematic.
Similarly, Tekena Kio, another commuter, highlighted the policy’s potential to disrupt private businesses and lead to job losses, which could, in turn, heighten insecurity. Kio argued that the government’s decision to force private operators, like Agofure Transport, to relocate infringes on their constitutional rights to conduct legitimate business activities.
The Secretary of the Bayelsa branch of the Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria (RTEAN), Comrade Anengima Jonah, expressed concern that the new terminal was designed for executive transport schemes and does not cater to the needs of union-operated vehicles. He urged the government to engage transport unions in meaningful dialogue to resolve the issue amicably.
Critics argue that while the policy aims to streamline transportation and improve urban planning, its hasty implementation has caused significant disruptions to commuters, businesses, and the state’s internally generated revenue. Many stakeholders are calling for a reconsideration of the policy or adjustments to accommodate the needs of affected parties.