Everyone Loses

Through the eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Everyone Loses

There are significant variations in the role and accountability of politicians here in the Philippines and those in most democracies which are worth considering in the light of local economic condition generally.

Take, for example, the situation revealed last Friday with the revelation by Vice Mayor Duterte over the use of groundwater for the proposed coal fired power plant in Binaguao.

The fact that the Vice Mayor has expressed surprise at the advice from Abolitiz Power that 1500 cubic meters of groundwater will be required daily for the operations of the plant, at what amounts to the 11^th hour of the process, would bring a storm of critical comment in most democratic political environments.

The Press would be quick to react with a series of questions, starting with the most obvious one; why wasn’t this known before approval was given?  Political opponents would be swift to use this information as an example and proof of the council’s inefficiency and possibly worse, corruption.  Interests groups would ask what else wasn’t known and what was yet to be revealed.  And in the process, political support for the incumbent councillors would be damaged, possibly fatally.

The fact that Abolitiz has refused to comment on the decision to defer the land reclassification proposal to the press would be seen as a possible cover up, that by failing to be transparent and give its explanation, it had something to hide.  To suggest that it was a matter which needed to be explained to the Vice Mayor first promotes the view some sort of a deal is in the works and makes the political fallout that much worse.

Now, none of the criticisms need be true, but in politics perceptions are reality.

Except, I don’t sense any of the above dynamics, or at least very little of this, in what I see taking place here.  The press has reported the Vice Mayor’s decision to defer the approval of the reclassification and one sensational headline shouted the Vice Mayor “blinks” over the coal fire power plant.  But the press does not have opposing political opponents to quote and further fuel the critical comment and provide the oxygen to keep the issue alive.  Investigative journalism is not something that features in most broadsheets either so I don’t expect to see much from this perspective.  And I have questions about just how broad the readership of the dailies is and to what extent the public of Davao is aware of the latest controversy.

Having read blogs on the subject there does seem to be a general disinterest in the proposal and for all those who are critical of the decision there are just as many who take the view that it’s time to get on with the plant’s construction.  Most of the opinion appeared to be based on a superficial appreciation of the facts.

It follows that the political fallout for the councillors is not likely to be harmful.  That in turns means that the councillors can skate past the obstacle when in fact the apparent ham-fisted nature of the process should be causing red faces and heavy political criticism for all of them.

I sympathise when politicians have to handle controversial policy issues on which they have little or no expertise.  And let’s be honest, few if any of the councillors have thermodynamics on their resumes so it is perfectly understandable that they are no better equipped that most of the public to assess the technical nature of a proposal to build a coal fired power plant. 

And, that it is exactly why politicians need to get expert advice, to have due diligence done so that they can make informed decisions.  It is no more than a risk assessment, both to inform the politician but also to provide political protection against both reasonable and unfounded criticisms.  If they don’t then criticism is not only appropriate but essential.

That is unless the process is free of close and detailed scrutiny.  If there are no checks and balances in the process, if the councillors are free to make mistakes or fail to carry out due diligence without any political penalty, than sloppy administration of the process is permitted to flourish.  I just don’t see where this type of accountability can come from under the system in place in Davao and I can’t identify where check and balances exist particular if the public by and large do not care.

And here is the irony.  Everyone loses including Abolitiz Power as the process has failed to show the rigour needed to potentially gain the support for the power plant or to demonstrate that the cost benefits are too high to proceed. In the end no one knows with any certainty what the best policy is at this point in time.

The coal fired power plant will in all probability be built.  The suggestion that the process was flawed or corrupt will, however, linger and yet again the thought that the process is one which favours the powerful will be present, whether it is true or not. 

And that is a belief system that is wholly more damaging to the integrity of the political process with all its consequences than any decision to build the plant will ever be.  It is a view that an open and fully independent assessment process of a coal fired power plant would have avoided.

The admission that information is just now being revealed creates the impression that the process is an illusion of good governance, not the real deal.  For some reason most people seem willing to accept that this is way things are done here.

(Comment or contact Andrew at andrewengel.blogspot.com)