BANTAY BUILD

There should be no place for fake news and alternative facts in infrastructure spending.

In its first year in office, the Duterte administration launched a very aggressive multibillion-infrastructure investment program that it aptly calls “Build, Build, Build.” The government promised that this will not only be the biggest infrastructure program in recent years but it will also be the most transparent. So far, the practice has not caught up with the rhetoric.

For example, the Regional Airport PPP ( Public- Private Partnership) Projects covering the development of airports in Bohol, Davao, Iloilo, Laguindingan and Bacolod, ready for tender since Day 1 of the new government, was unceremoniously terminated last May without any public hearing or consultation. The reason, according to Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade, was that “doing airports [via direct government procurement] makes the projects cheaper as cost of money is lower, thus, more beneficial to the public, project completion is more efficient and faster, and helps avoid legal surprises that may cause regrettable delays.”

But his answer begs the question, what changed between what policy makers knew when the government approved this project in November last year, when it published newspaper notices initiating the bidding process in January and when it cancelled the project in May? What newly discovered facts between January and May led to the reversal in the Transportation department’s position that PPP was the preferred mode of procurement?

The Transportation Department’s official response is more telling: “This decision was brought about through collegial discussions, including the economic clusters and congressional leaders.” Was this a subtle way for the experts in the bureaucracy to throw shade at congressional leaders for playing politics with a P108-billion infrastructure procurement? This is definitely not the best way to start what was promised to be the most transparent infrastructure program.

In addition, multiple freedom of information requests on the much vaunted FoI (Freedom of Information) portal related to big ticket infrastructure projects have been rejected due to trade secrecy considerations. This is strange considering that these projects will be funded by taxpayer money. For instance, any interested taxpayer should have the right to know the traffic projections and proposed tariff structure and operating subsidy for the Mindanao Railway Project since it is expected to cost more than P35 billion of taxpayer money. It is not very helpful that the official “Build, Build, Build” Web site ( http:// www.

build.gov.ph/) has very little information on key economic and financial metrics of the priority infrastructure projects. Sure, it has nice graphics, but it does not share with the public key details that support the projects’ economic, financial, and technical feasibility, and seldom is it updated.

The inconsistency in government pronouncements and its refusal to disclose key information to the public are even more worrying considering the policy stance favoring unsolicited projects ( i. e. Metro Rail Transit 3, Ninoy Aquino International Airport 3) and Chinese ODA or official development assistance (i.e. Northrail, NBN-ZTE). These two modes have been notorious for their opaqueness and for being prone to corruption.

Take the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) PPP Project.

In its first NEDA Board meeting last September, the new government proudly announced the speedy approval of the NAIA PPP Project involving the financing, design, rehabilitation, expansion and operations and maintenance of all existing terminals of NAIA, and promised procurement to begin in the same month so that a concession agreement would be signed by September this year. But that has since been put on hold with the various unsolicited propos-

als for different airport development projects in Bulacan, Cavite, and Clark, each backed by a major conglomerate.

What criteria will government use to compare these different proposals? Shouldn’t there be a public hearing or consultation on this matter so that the public can be informed on the key issues that government is looking into as it reviews such a major public investment?

On the issue of the selection of contractors for foreign loan agreements, Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno admitted that “the lenders shortlist the contractors for the project.”

Absent competitive bidding processes, how does government plan to ensure that the product of unsolicited proposals and tied foreign loan agreements are the right projects, done by the right contractors, at the right price? What guarantees are being put in place to prevent a repeat of the failed unsolicited projects and tied foreign loan agreements of the past?

Moreover, in the case of foreign loan agreements, how do we make certain that the multiplier effect in the local economy is optimized by tapping into local contractors, expertise, and labor? The last thing we want is our own version of overpriced debt-funded infrastructure built by Chinese firms using Chinese inputs and workers with very little local participation that countries like Kenya, Venezuela, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Laos, Myanmar, and Cambodia are now struggling with.

Given the importance of infrastructure to the economy and its significant share of public spending, it is essential that these projects go through intense public scrutiny especially since the preferred procurement modes — unsolicited and ODA — are not subject to rigorous competitive bidding processes.

Here is where a civil society watchdog that can push for greater inclusiveness and transparency in the process can contribute to the success of government’s infrastructure program and thwart any attempts of rent-seeking interests to hijack this massive spending package. Since government is increasing our taxes, we should also demand that they be more upfront with how they plan to use it. There should be no place for fake news and alternative facts in infrastructure spending. Poor project preparation and selection can result in massive debt and stranded assets that will haunt us for years to come.