Cosmetic development

PEOPLE have not forgotten the dolomite beach project of the previous administration.

Almost P400 million was spent to whiten half-a-kilometer of shoreline of Manila Bay.

The published intention was to comply with the continuing mandamus issued by the Supreme Court directing government to rehabilitate Manila Bay.

***

The Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) has blamed the dolomite project for the flooding of Taft Avenue in Manila.

Don Artes chairs the MMDA. He says that three major drainage outfalls were closed and rainwater was rerouted through a sewerage treatment plant when the Manila Baywalk rehabilitation project was implemented.

This artery is grossly inadequate to accommodate heavy rainfall, turning the Remedios-Taft area into a sprawling water basin.

***

Bicol Saro party-list’s Rep. Terry Ridon has called for an investigation of the artificial beach project.

The Duterte administration ignored environmental concerns and requirements purportedly to protect the people’s mental health.

Ridon says the dolomite project “was never envisioned to protect Manila Bay’s coastal resources or to prevent coastal flooding, erosion, or pollution. It is a cosmetic project masquerading as rehabilitation, and has now proven harmful to flood mitigation efforts in Manila.”

***

The protesting groups were ignored at the time. The project was widely labeled as a frivolous and unnecessary waste of public funds, yet the Department of Environment and Natural Resources adamantly refused the snowballing public sentiment against it.

The most important question posed by Ridon’s resolution is why the Duterte government proceeded with the dolomite project despite its admission that it was never a part of the masterplan crafted by the National Economic Development Authority.

In whose mind did this terrible idea germinate?

***

This might be plunder three times over.

Fortunately, the Marcos administration has suspended the periodic replenishment of crushed dolomite in the area.

However, this does not foreclose the investigation and possible prosecution of the malefactors who had insisted on the project under a temporary cloak of invincibility and impunity.

***

We laud this initiative to investigate whether the project “was a necessary government expense to improve the water quality and environmental conditions of Manila Bay in compliance with the Supreme Court’s Mandamus order on Manila Bay.”

A projected expense is taken up in budget deliberations. The merits are presented to Congress which then approves the expense presented by the executive department.

Who presented this expense during the previous administration? Or is this another one of those budgetary insertions that are kept away from the probing eye of the public?

***

Members of Congress themselves may not blame those who keep a healthy skepticism over insertions, or pork barrel, that overshadow and sometimes box out the projects proposed by the regular departments.

The popular impression is that senators and congressmen earn commissions or “kickbacks” from their favorite contractors who get awarded these projects despite the legal requirement to subject them to public bidding.

And we continue to wonder why politicians are willing to spend hundreds of millions of pesos to get elected./PN