|
There must be another way by which the government may
obtain its own national backbone network to save on its
communication costs and assure communication security. The
hullabaloo surrounding the deal with China’s ZTE has made it
necessary to cancel the present perception generated by the project.
The NBN rhubarb can
take a leaf from the experience of the construction of the Ninoy
Aquino International Airport Terminal 3 (NAIA 3). Involved in that
scandal were also high-ranking officials of the Department of
Transportation and Communications. The controversy has dragged on
for a decade through three different government administrations.
Here’s a little
background on that deal: On July 12, 1997, the government, under the
administration of President Fidel V. Ramos and the Philippine
International Air Terminals Co., Inc. (Piatco) signed a concessional
agreement for Piatco to construct the NAIA Terminal 3.
In 1998, under the
administration of President Joseph Estrada, four amendments were
made to the contract. First an Amendment and Restated Concessions
Agreement (ARCA) was signed on Nov. 26, 1998. Then on Aug. 27, 1999,
a First Supplement to ARCA was agreed upon followed by a Second
Supplement on Sept. 4, 2000, and a Third Supplement on June 22,
2001.
These supplements,
styled as contract amendments, drew the attention of the public and
questions were raised over them. And bit-by-bit the onerous
arrangements surfaced under the glare of publicity. A key item in
the exposé was a provision that requires the government to assume
Piatco’s financial obligations to foreign financial institutions
in case of default. Another was the creation of the Philippine
Airport and Ground Services, an affiliate of Piatco, with exclusive
control of Terminal 3 operations, to the exclusion of present
airport contractors.
Piatco was also
given the right to unilaterally adjust the dues, rentals, charges,
fees or assessments for use of the Terminal 3 complex and to
indefinitely retain the Terminal 3 until liquidated damages due it
from the government are fully paid.
But the crowning
discovery were demolition contracts amounting to more than P300
million that were awarded to a company owned by DOTC Secretary
Pantaleon Alvarez which had a paid up capital of only P625,000. The
company had no record on demolition projects.
A Senate
investigation found that several government officials and private
individuals had financially gained from the contract over three
administrations. In the words of Sen. Serge Osmeña, it was the “worst
contract ever.”
After conducting her
own investigation, President Gloria Arroyo found there were seven
onerous provisions in the contract and Gloria Tan Climaco,
Presidential Adviser on Strategic Projects, identified at least 28
items in the contracts that needed revision. No wonder the Supreme
Court nullified the contracts.
Litigations continue
to hamper efforts to get Terminal 3 into service. In the meantime
new technology is moving into place in modern air terminals. It is
possible that equipment installed at Terminal 3 could become
obsolescent by the time it gets into operation.
One of the offers
rejected for the NBN project sounds similar to the cancelled Piatco
deal. All these multimillion peso scams however should numb our
sensitivities to those of the garden varieties. For example, it is
still shocking to learn that a cancer victim seeking help from a
government charity office be made a virtual cat’s paw to what
looks like a syndicate preying on charity recipients. The victim in
questions was given a P460,000 check by the Philippine Charity
Sweepstakes Office. But an officer in the Office of the Presidential
Adviser on Economic Affairs which made the arrangement for the
donation, took the money from her after the check was cashed and
gave her only P5,000, keeping the P445,000 of the proceeds.
We can learn to
accept that millions are being bandied about in pork barrel
operations, for example, but to capitalize on the pain and poverty
of others really takes the cake in our insensitivity derby. Stealing
by or from the rich and famous, may be assuaged by a Robin Hood
mentality. But stealing from the sick or using the sick to steal?
Don’t we draw a
line anymore?
|
