Climate change, a lame excuse
We cannot control the rain. But, surely, after decades of watching the floodwaters reclaim the same communities, we can control how much damage it does.
Text size
We cannot control the rain. But, surely, after decades of watching the floodwaters reclaim the same communities, we can control how much damage it does.
The little fruit and vegetable garden that grew in my parents’ backyard in Albay was wiped out by Typhoon “Reming” in 2006. Somehow, over the following years, the flourishing green reappeared and covered the brown, muddy soil that had covered the ground where plants easily grew.
But it was never the same again.
The flood had swept away something that could never be brought back to the way it was, and I am certain everyone who has ever experienced similar destruction feels the same.
In Hagonoy, there are places that residents now describe as “almost a ghost town.” People have left, and homes that were once beautiful are now grimy reminders of the shock and sorrow of being swept under unforgiving waters.
Bulacan has suffered much from the recent rains. The pictures tell us that something failed. Maybe the flood control plans? It is easy to think so, although we are told we cannot put the blame on the anomalous projects alone.
There is something deeply unsettling about being surprised by a disaster that had happened before.
Pampanga is underwater. Again.
The images are familiar: homes swallowed up by brown water, families in evacuation centers, roads rendered impassable, government officials arriving with relief goods and promises of long-term solutions.
Then comes the explanation: The rains were extraordinary. Climate change has made the weather more extreme. Existing flood control systems were overwhelmed.
Sure, all of that may be true. But there is another question we should be asking: If we already know Pampanga floods, why are we still surprised by the flooding?
We cannot control the rain. But, surely, after decades of watching the floodwaters reclaim the same communities, we can control how much damage it does.
The flooding, research shows, is a product of rainfall, geography, watershed flows, infrastructure, upstream conditions and the multiple levels of government. Current reports say more than one million Pampanga residents were affected, with 253 barangays still under water as of 24 August.
Pampanga Gov. Lilia Pineda, who has held many local posts, has asked President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to fast-track long-delayed flood control projects and pointed out that water was also flowing in from Nueva Ecija, Tarlac and Bulacan.
Pampanga is not an unsuspecting victim of geography. It is a low-lying province with a long history of flooding. So when enormous volumes of rain arrive and communities disappear under water, climate change is certainly relevant, but it cannot become a convenient explanation for every failure of preparation.
Climate change may explain why the water is coming. It does not explain why we were not ready for it.
What exactly is the government supposed to do with the information it already has?
In August 2024, President Marcos inaugurated a P7.57-billion flood-mitigation project covering several low-lying Pampanga towns, expressing optimism that it would improve disaster resilience.
Supported by the government of South Korea, the Integrated Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation Measures in Low-Lying Areas of Pampanga Bay — Stage I cost P7.57 billion.
Now, two years later, the province is again asking the national government to fast-track additional flood mitigation measures.
While that does not automatically mean the earlier project failed, it absolutely justifies asking whether our flood control strategy is adequate, properly designed, coordinated and maintained.
We should stop measuring the government by how quickly it responds after disaster strikes. The better measure is whether it had the foresight to make the next disaster less devastating.
Because when the same disaster keeps recurring, perhaps the real failure is not that we couldn’t stop the rain. It is that we failed to learn from the water.
After all, why have all the levels of government failed to make living with water a long-term planning strategy rather than a recurring emergency?
Relief is compassion. Prevention is governance.
