Who identifies the need—and who benefits?

Before arguing, ask: Who identified the need, and did the project help?

Barangay chairpersons from Laoag City and other barangays in Ilocos Norte’s First District have told me that their councils identified local needs and sent requests or resolutions to the congressional office or the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). That is their account.

Barangays can raise needs directly. Congressmen, whoever they are, may also identify needs and propose projects through barangays by consulting officials or receiving requests. A proposal is only a starting point; it does not show who selected it for funding or why.

Requests addressed to congressional offices, regardless of which Congressman or Congresswoman receives them, may also be endorsed or forwarded to the appropriate National Government Agencies (NGAs) responsible for evaluating, funding, or implementing the proposed projects.

For example, if a barangay requests a health facility, the congressional office may endorse the request to the Department of Health (DoH). The DoH evaluates the proposal and may coordinate with the DPWH when the latter is designated to implement the infrastructure project. The arrangement depends on the project’s funding source and implementing agency.

The Local Government Code assigns planning and monitoring roles to barangay development councils; agencies and lawmakers should explain funding decisions.

Not every request is funded, nor do congressmen decide alone. Projects undergo review, budgeting, and implementation. The public should be able to trace each one from barangay request to completion, including its cost and responsible offices.

Community consultation and public accountability belong together. Residents should help identify needs, and officials should explain why proposals are approved, revised, delayed, or declined. Keep those decisions and records accessible online for public review.

Consider the multipurpose building, or MPB. According to DPWH project descriptions, some MPBs are built as evacuation centers or covered courts; the DPWH also classifies public health facilities separately. An MPB is a flexible community space for meetings, training, sports, events, and public programs. When suitable, it may also serve as an evacuation shelter.

An MPB is not automatically a school, hospital, clinic, or rural health unit. Those are dedicated facilities with distinct requirements. Hosting a class or medical mission does not make an MPB a school or clinic. Its label should match its design, equipment, staffing, and actual use.

MPBs provide shared spaces for community activities and services. But “multipurpose” does not prove a building is necessary or well-planned. Residents should ask who requested it, what needs it meets, what alternatives exist, whether its cost fits, and how it will be maintained.

Apply the same standard nationwide. The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism reported DPWH civil-works funding for the Davao Region at about P19.97 billion in 2016, P43.77 billion in 2017, and P56 billion in 2018. These are regional totals; the PCIJ noted 2016 was passed under Aquino and 2017 was Duterte’s first budget.

A separate figure concerns Davao City’s First District. At a 2025 House hearing, DPWH Undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral cited about P51 billion in infrastructure allocations there from 2020 to 2022, when Paolo Duterte represented the district and Rodrigo Duterte was president.

The district DPWH project book listed 710 projects worth P49.8 billion, including the Coastal Road, Ma-a Flyover, Ulas Viaduct, and Davao City Bypass. DPWH officials said the total covered infrastructure, not only flood control. These figures cover different areas and periods, cannot be directly compared, and alone prove neither favoritism nor wrongdoing, nor do they identify who directed allocations.

Apply that scrutiny to Ilocos Norte. If Sandro Marcos, the President’s son, represents a district receiving large allocations, people may ask how projects were selected and whether political access played a role. Such questions merit answers, but kinship or allocation figures alone prove no favoritism. Project records can clarify.

Davao should not shield Ilocos Norte, nor should Ilocos Norte dismiss questions about Davao. Ask how priorities were set and whether communities received value; describe comparisons accurately.

Both places have seen projects improve lives. Acknowledge that without treating it as a politician’s defense; benefits and decisions both deserve scrutiny.

One gift of this generation is that information is within reach. The internet and AI give us new ways to investigate, compare records, and learn for ourselves. Yet access means little if political beliefs decide what we are willing to see. Let us use these tools to examine claims from every side, not just confirm what we already believe.

Political views have divided us as Filipinos. Let us stop being blinded. We must look at what happened, who benefited, and what needs explaining.

That is parallax: Projects look different from each vantage point. Look past politicians to residents, and ask whether public money served them fairly.