Checkmate on corrupt projects

W e cando the SCAN same things and achieve different results. Today, the Philippine scenario is a "perfect crime" scene for government contracts.

- ZOILO P. DEJARESCO III

Right from the start, the development councils hardly matter. It's the influential politicians and their executive agency cohorts who determine the National Expenditure Budget. This is followed by the infamous insertions and abuse of the "Unprogrammed Funds"— a pork barrel in disguise. Our country now faces at least a trillion-peso loss from graftfrittered flood control projects alone over the last 15 years.

This "loss" begins even at the concept stage. For instance, hazard maps and risks are often exaggerated, leading to bloated costs. The cruel "use it or lose it" principle encourages proponents to add unnecessary work to justify the inflated budget. Bidding is 100 percent rigged, with the supposed "losers" agreeing to a small cut of the syndicated bid.

The base cost for government work is typically 30-100 percent higher than private estimates. Try using the Construction Cost Guidebook published by Quantity Solutions Inc. (QSI), an award-winning quantity surveying company, to find out the price differentials. A copy was given to the Independent Commission for Infrastructure, through its former adviser, Baguio City Mayor Benjie Magalong, by QSI CEO Engr. Rynor Jamandre. Local Government Units (LGUs) tracking well-funded projects should have a similar copy of the book.

The reality is that private companies cut costs to maximize profit, a virtue not found in government practice. The DPWH, on the other hand, uses the "Bill of Materials" method—an "operational document"—which is inferior to the globally recognized good the "Bill of Quantities" method. The latter is a "contractual document" signed off by licensed Quality Surveyors (QS).