By Estanislao Albano, Jr.
In a letter titled “Tapping sense of shame in government infrastructure implementation” which saw print in the Philippine Daily Inquirer January 3, 2018 issue, I supported the proposal of Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III for the creation of a website containing information and drone images of government infrastructure projects with some modifications. I had suggested the following features: the data should remain in the website permanently; the information on the condition of the project should be updated as the need arises until the end of the life span of the project; and most importantly, all the names of the key people involved in the undertaking namely the government engineers, the contractor, the Public Works Secretary and other concerned DPWH officials and also local officials namely the congressman, governor, mayor and barangay captain.
In gist, the intent of the website is to permanently stick the names of the key persons for project implementation with the projects and thus give them personal stakes in the undertaking. The logic is that if they value their good names, they would do everything within their power to ensure that the project is of standard quality, will serve its purpose and would last. If they do not care about their reputations, chances are they have relatives who care about the family name who would then remind them to construct with quality and longevity in mind so the reputation of the family will not suffer.
The inclusion of the names of local officials in the project file is to force them to take a hand in ensuring that the infrastructure projects implemented in the LGU during their watch do not put them and their families to shame. This is to remedy the hands off policy of some local officials regarding DPWH projects and likewise to deter the practice of local officials of trying to make a fast buck from DPWH projects.
I sent a copy of the letter to the DPWH requesting that it be studied for possible incorporation in their project implementation policies. The DPWH pretended they did not understand the point of the proposal. In an email, they claimed that most of the information I have mentioned should be contained in the transparency website are already provided in their website except for the names of local officials since they are not involved in DPWH infrastructure implementation. That is a barefaced lie. While it is true the website contains specific projects with the basic information, contrary to the claim in the letter that the name of the contractor is reflected in the list, what is in the website is the name of the construction firm. My proposal requires the name of contractor himself because of the possibility of changing the name of the construction firm. Neither are there photo or video documentation. And most important of all, the website does not carry the names of the DPWH engineers and officials involved in the project making the project files in their website totally useless in as far as employing shame to improve government infrastructure implementation is concerned.
For the benefit of DPWH officials beginning from Secretary Mark Villar, let me illustrate how the idea works. During typhoon Ompong, the swollen Cabanglasan River wrecked portions of the just completed flood control project in Kayapa, Nueva Vizcaya rendering it practically useless thereby wasting the money spent for the same. With the project not surviving its first storm, what DPWH engineer or officials in his right mind would want to be identified with it now — and for so long as the Internet exists? If the concerned DPWH people were aware that their personal reputations and not just that of their agency will take a hit if the project would be exposed to be inferior and substandard, definitely they would have seen to it that the structure could withstand the worst behaviour of the river.
Too, chances are the infamous P140M-worth flood control project in San Simon, Pampanga would not have collapsed two days before completion and would not have become a monumental embarrassment to the DPWH had the policy been already in place during the implementation of the project because anybody in the world would have learned who were behind the substandard engineering output. This would have been sufficient motive for the DPWH people and the contractor to have seen to it that the structure they were constructing was durable otherwise they would be derided forever.
I would not put it pass the DPWH that the real reason they do not welcome the idea is because there is no intent in the agency and the entire government for that matter to make the implementation of public infrastructure projects corruption-free and competent.
