PROJECT details are not yet available for the proposed Pasig River Expressway (Parex) because, according to the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB), the final engineering design is still being prepared by the proponent. Until this is available, any economic, social or environmental assessment cannot be completed. This is a problem for both decision-makers and stakeholders who need to understand what the project consists of and how it will affect local residents and the public. For now, what is available is only a project concept that is still subject to modification by the proponent. The TRB's justification for moving ahead without knowing more about the project is that it has an undertaking from the proponent to "adjust, modify or otherwise alter aspects of the project's alignment, design and construction to harmonize and achieve coexistence with other government or government-sponsored projects." The TRB also mentions that the issuance of an environmental compliance certificate and "no objections" from affected local governments will be required before giving the "notice to proceed." TRB procedures allow the agency to endorse a project without knowing much about it, but is this good enough? It is not. Especially in the case of the Parex.

It is a matter of serious concern that a project of this magnitude is proposed for approval by the President without knowing whether it will deliver a positive net benefit to society and without determining whether it might cause significant harm. It is quite possible that the harm from the Parex could exceed the proponent's financial capacity to remedy. Because of its scale and its location on the country's most important waterway, the Parex should, at the minimum, be subject to the same scrutiny (by the multiagency Investment Coordination Committee) that all major public and private transportation infrastructure projects undergo. To push forward without the normal project due diligence places people and valuable public assets at risk. At this stage when various impact evaluations are yet to be conducted, approval of the project's supplemental toll operations agreement (STOA) by the President may give the wrong impression that the project should proceed even if its negative impacts are significant. So that the project can be assessed comprehensively in an objective and unbiased manner, it should not be perceived as having an irrevocable "green light" from the government's top decision-maker. There should be a mechanism for rescinding any prior approval in case the project is found to cause considerable or irreparable harm.

Premium + Digital Edition

Ad-free access


P 80 per month
(billed annually at P 960)
  • Unlimited ad-free access to website articles
  • Limited offer: Subscribe today and get digital edition access for free (accessible with up to 3 devices)

TRY FREE FOR 14 DAYS
See details
See details