Walking home dry

I remember a UP classmate who was always late for class. He said he had to wade through brown floodwater on his way to school, holding his bag high above his head like a silly little offering to the rain gods. That was decades ago, on a street that still floods today.

Same street, different decade. When I hear legislators and government officials arguing about flood control, it’s not policy that I hear. I hear my classmate sloshing his way to school.

During a recent budget hearing, a senator asked plainly if there were ghost projects in Taguig City. Public Works Secretary Vince Dizon did not dodge the question: “Wala po. Sa aming imbestigasyon, wala po.”

None, according to their investigation. It was short, direct, with no theatrics. Undersecretary Rico Bernabe III added that 107 projects in Taguig had been verified and all had accomplishment reports.

We have learned that lesson the hard way, too many times — that a denial is not proof. But something else is worth noticing. The projects were put on the table. The senator said anyone was free to inspect them. He wanted to know about his own area, especially after the flood control mess made everyone suspicious of everything.

It’s the right instinct not to ask people to just take your word for it — show them. Transparency is the bare minimum where public money is involved.

Ordinary Filipinos have run out of patience for “trust us.” We have been told everything is fine, only to find out later that the budget went somewhere and the water still rises. Every denial now has to come with documents, photos, maps, and names.

With so many confident press statements making the rounds, people have every reason to be skeptical. Cynicism happens when promises are repeatedly presented as proof but are not backed by results.

Flooding is not a “pour more concrete and hope for the best” problem. Rather, it’s a whole mess of rapid urbanization, clogged waterways, covered creeks, garbage, questionable building permits, and ignored no-build zones — all tangled together.

Dizon agreed that enforcing building restrictions along waterways and dealing with unchecked urbanization can’t be pushed down the road forever.

This is where the conversation should have led all along. Flood control is not a construction problem alone. It’s a land use, waste, planning, and discipline problem.

We don’t simply need more flood control projects. We need projects that actually work — properly located, well-designed, and maintained long after the ribbon-cutting. They also need to be part of a bigger plan that recognizes how our cities have grown, often badly, without enough thought about where the water would go once the open spaces disappear.

Taguig came up as an example. Dizon said he had inspected the city’s lakeshore development several times and called it a model, even dubbing it the most developed lakeshore management among others.

If something works, study it, replicate it, and improve it. Disagreements over specific projects don’t have to stop us from learning from good ones. Sharing good practices is not a betrayal of one’s own city. It should be a gift to every other city.

Same with the Lower Bicutan-Muntinlupa road, a DPWH-led project, where Taguig’s role was in suggesting improvements like a bike lane and a linear park. Dizon said the DPWH adjusted the exit ramp over traffic concerns. Small details, maybe, but they matter.

Let’s judge infrastructure by whether it truly makes life better for the people who depend on it — a student, for example, walking to school who doesn’t have to hold his bag over his head to keep it dry.

People in flood-prone barangays don’t have the luxury of debating this abstractly. They need to know the money went to something that prevents flooding through clear waterways and well-built, well-maintained structures. They want plain-language explanations over speeches.

Let us not be taken for a ride and get swept away by another round of promises. Every project should be put under the microscope — documented, checked on the ground, measured against its purpose, and fixed when it falls short. As taxpayers, can’t we demand flood control that works, not projects that look good on paper?

Hold accountable all those, not a selected few, who violated the rules and enriched themselves. And don’t hold back the good projects because of unresolved noise. If a project is good, defend it with evidence. If it is bad, say so and fix it.

Ultimately, we Filipinos need a flood control system we can count on. We all like to walk home dry. That is not too much to ask.

The stakes couldn’t be higher when it comes to people’s homes, their livelihoods, and their lives.

When the next flood comes, excuses won’t keep the water out — only projects that work will.