Execution problem

We have a habit of electing officials who talk big, encourage us to dream big, but fail to deliver. They seem to think that their only obligation is to make feasibility studies. Never mind implementation or execution. That’s why they call their programs, The Dream Plan.

I just came upon a memo dated April 11, 1995 jointly signed by then DTI sec. Rizalino Navarro and then finance secretary Roberto de Ocampo that suggested we should have had a new international airport at Clark 20 years ago. That’s right – two decades ago. That Navarro and de Ocampo memo was approved by FVR May 18, 1995.

It was only recently that the current DOTr Secretary Art Tugade finally came out with an official policy calling for the joint development of NAIA and Clark in a dual international gateway strategy. 

More specifically, the Navarro-de Ocampo memo established the policy as follows: 1) NAIA and Clark Airports would be developed simultaneously and 2) Clark Airport would be the country’s premier international airport in the medium to long terms.

The adoption of the dual airport policy decision was based by FVR Cabinet members on various studies (Mitsui, Aeroport de Paris, PCI, ADC, Changi Airport Services, BAA and ItalThai). Look at that… ka dami palang studies already and the P-Noy administration was ready to spend more money on a new study until their term mercifully ended.

The same memo called for the immediate construction of NAIA T3 and phase down of T1. That is another horrible chapter in this airport saga that I blame on bad execution on the part of FVR.

As we know, FVR lost his sense of purpose in the tailend of his term after he realized he was not going to get a constitutional change to extend his term. He made such bad decisions like awarding the T3 construction to Piatco based on a faulty apples-to-orange comparison of the Swiss challenge proposal of Piatco to that of the taipans.

Back to the Navarro-de Ocampo memo, they called for Clark’s development to start not later than 1996 “with a targeted initial operating date of 1998…” See that… by the time the new Clark terminal opens in 2020 we would have lost over 20 years.

It is interesting to note that the memo pointed out doing Clark is “in line with our overall objective of shifting development from the Metro Manila area and into the countryside…

 “It will also contribute to the decongestion of the NAIA complex and surrounding vehicular traffic. And the proposed relocation site is sufficiently large to accommodate the country’s premier airport in the long term.”

That Navarro-de Ocampo memo really brought my spirits down. If even the best post EDSA administration we had could have this serious execution problem, what hope do we have?

FVR was so far the best president we have had. Not only did he have a vision, he was meticulous and hands on. He exuded a strong political will to get things done. He showed impatience to bring us to developed nation status.

Or maybe FVR was just a good actor, a good propagandist who knew the right things to say and never mind bringing his good ideas to reality. Maybe FVR fooled us and the international community as well because he made us believe he was a leader with the same foresight and drive as Malaysia’s Mahathir.

If a seemingly hands-on chief executive like FVR could fail to bring a project he approved into reality, can a more parochial and a more detached Duterte, who has left everything to his economic managers, do better?  

Maybe what made FVR falter in his waning years can be blamed to politics… he played politics as he tried to gain a term extension. FVR and his successors failed the country in the following cases:

North Rail, for which Spain provided a grant and a go signal given to noted Spanish rail company Ferrocarriles, was f....d up by the then speaker who proposed to divide the contract into two (the other half to his preferred contractor Ital-Thai) for what he called a win-win. That was unrealistic, unfair and senseless but humoring him dragged out the project till the end of the administration without forward progress.

One other bad decision FVR made wasted a lot of big money over the years on an idle Subic container port built with Japanese ODA. Subic would have been fully developed as the region’s key container port by Li Kashing if FVR didn’t side with monopolistic vested interest keen on protecting the obsolete Manila port it holds. Sayang! This decision killed his claim to be a monopoly buster.

Erap seemed more interested in appointing his own people to Clark and Subic (even ousting Gordon). Erap was too preoccupied with self aggrandizement and ended up with scandals like the BW Resources and the alleged jueteng payoffs that caused his impeachment.

GMA was more interested in renaming Clark airport after her father, then proceeded to play footsies with China starting with the North Rail and then the infamous ZTE scam. But at least she began to open Clark up to “international budget flights.”

P-Noy was all talk and no action. He did next to nothing about infrastructure development other than talk about PPP which turned out to be just PowerPoint Presentations. Some speculate he couldn’t countenance having the world land at Macapagal Airport instead of Ninoy Aquino Airport.

Or maybe P-Noy was just incompetent. He called for a market study to do the four-kilometer extension of LRT-2 to Masinag that delayed a go decision. The only market study needed was to visit the area and see the crowd generating the foot traffic that made SM build a mall there.

And P-Noy killed a French study for Clark airport because he found building for eight million passengers too big. He is unaware of the need to build infrastructure for future demand. This same French study is now going to be used by BCDA.

 Execution problem is killing our hopes of catching up with our ASEAN neighbors. We were economically ahead of all the original ASEAN members when the organization was organized 50 years ago. Now we are last, thanks to all our presidents.

I like Build Build Build. I like it that it is starting to break ground. But given the quality of politicians surrounding the President, I worry its lofty ambitions are in danger. Political interference (as what happened in the unbundling of domestic airports due for O and M bidding) shows the problem.

MRT-3

As expected, my friend Rene Santiago, an experienced expert in transport and infra development, reacted sharply to my column last Friday. Here is his comment:

“BRT on MRT-3 tracks is regression, not progression.

“Simple math. With 22 trains (without the Dalian LRVs), MRT-3 has capacity for 22,000 pax/hour/direction. The BRT at one minute headway can deliver 12,000 pphd. At 30-seconds headway, which is very dangerous for buses driven by human beings on a single lane, that would be 24,000 pphd.

“A radical option (and more dramatic) is government expropriation of MRT-3 assets. That would be better than EVBO that DOF is struggling with. Compensation is already stated in the BLT agreement. Besides, more than 50 percent of the assets are already owned by the government since the BLT is more than halfway.

“Expropriation can immediately be followed by a tender for private sector takeover plus $300 million new investments to double MRT-3 capacity (40,000 pphd). Template from LRT-1 extension already on hand.”

Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @boochanco.