IN THE HEART of the deliberations over Iloilo City’s future water security lies a question that is more than just technical or financial — it is deeply ethical: Should access to water, a basic human right, be governed by private profit?
As the Sangguniang Panlungsod weighs the competing proposals from Aboitiz InfraCapital (AIC) and Metro Pacific Iloilo Water (MPIW), the debate is framed not merely in terms of cost per cubic meter or technical feasibility, but in terms of the public interest. Both firms offer different price points, operational models, and promises of sustainability. But at the core of this corporate tug-of-war is the issue of control — and whose priorities will ultimately dictate the flow of water to Ilonggo households.
Water is not just another commodity; it is a life-sustaining necessity. And while public-private partnerships may offer efficiency and investment that government often struggles to muster, they also carry the inherent risk of subordinating public welfare to profit margins. When water becomes a business, affordability can become negotiable. Equity can become incidental. Sustainability can become secondary to quarterly returns.
Iloilo’s experience is not unique. Across the globe, privatized water systems have come under scrutiny for rate hikes, poor service delivery, and lack of accountability. While the private sector plays a critical role in infrastructure development, its involvement must come with robust safeguards: transparent contracts, enforceable service standards, and real avenues for public oversight.
Metro Pacific argues that introducing Aboitiz as another player adds an unnecessary “middleman” that could inflate prices. Aboitiz, meanwhile, presents its model as a complementary option under a public-private framework. But beyond the pricing dispute, what Ilonggos must ask is: who guarantees that future rate adjustments will be fair? Who ensures that underserved communities will not be sidelined because they are not “profitable”? Who holds private firms accountable when promises go unfulfilled?
The Iloilo City Government has rightly emphasized the need for redundancy in water sources — a recognition that resilience requires more than loyalty to a single provider. But redundancy in supply should be matched with redundancy in oversight. This means strong regulatory frameworks and contracts that put public welfare above profit.
Water governance must prioritize access, affordability, and long-term security over corporate convenience. Let this debate not only be about which company wins the contract — but about how Iloilo protects its people’s right to clean and accessible water in the decades to come.
