Think-tank says gov’t courting major disaster

MANILA, Philippines—A “gaping disconnect” between government claims and reality on the ground is putting disaster preparedness in the Philippines on the brink of disaster, a multinational risk consultancy firm said in a recent report.

In a weekly report submitted to its clients, Pacific Strategies and Assessments (PSA) said it found no basis for President Benigno Aquino III to proclaim success in the government’s handling of emergency and relief operations prompted by Supertyphoon “Juan” (international name: Megi).

Shortly after Juan struck Isabela, Cagayan and other parts of northern Luzon, Mr. Aquino was quoted as saying he was “happy to report to the public that everyone has delivered.”

“The thorough preparations of all concerned agencies are in marked contrast to the official helplessness of the past, and at present, we haven’t had to ask the public to contribute outside resources,” the President was quoted as saying shortly after the supertyphoon struck and the government started making an inventory of the damage that it left.

Misleading

The President’s statement, the Nov. 1 report said, was “terribly misleading.”

“In fact, there is absolutely no logical explanation or justification for the … President’s unwarranted backslapping,” said the PSA, a US-led firm that supplies intelligence information and risk-assessment reports to some of the world’s top corporations and foreign embassies in Manila, including the United States.

Pete Troilo, a PSA director, told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in a phone interview that painting a rosy picture of disaster preparedness could lull people into complacency, or worse, throw them into deep frustration over the young Aquino administration if the state of preparedness turned out to be just an illusion.

“As the report said,” according to Troilo, “this is simply no time for accolades or backslapping.”

While the devastation left by Juan was minimal compared with previous storms like “Ondoy” (Ketsana) and “Pepeng” (Parma), the PSA said the administration could not take credit for it because not enough was being done to prepare for disasters deadlier than previous ones and which loom large on the horizon because of climate change.

While new laws were enacted to deal with climate change and the disasters that it brings, these were just “modest legislative window-dressing improvements in disaster management.”

Change in name

One of the first acts of the Aquino administration on disaster management was to change the name of the agency that supervises emergency and relief work during calamities from National Disaster Coordinating Council to National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council.

Two new laws offer a glimpse of how government is handling disaster preparedness more through words than action, according to the PSA report.

One law, which took effect in October 2009, sought to incorporate strategies and programs on climate change in every government policy.

The other measure, enacted in May, created yet another agency for handling emergencies, the Emergency Management Agency.

The government also completed a National Framework Strategy on Climate Change in August to obtain international funding for climate change programs.

A geo-hazard map identifying areas not recommended for habitation was also put online.

“Yet … there is a gaping disconnect between what is being proclaimed by politicians and bureaucrats as progress and ground truth realism,” the PSA report said.

The Philippines, it said, “is one of the most disaster-prone places on the planet.”

Ill-prepared, ill-equipped

“The reality remains that, despite government pretentiousness, the country remains ill-prepared and ill-equipped to deal with the majority of disasters or crisis situations,” the report said.

It said recommendations made by the World Bank, in a study it made on the Philippines following Storms Pepeng and Ondoy, remained largely unheeded.

Among other things, the PSA quoted the World Bank as saying in the study, titled “Post Disaster Needs Assessment,” that preventing massive loss of lives in the Philippines during calamities would require changes in land use planning, housing, water management and environmental protection.

“Any credible and impartial assessment would support the fact that there has been no observable or significant headway in any of these areas,” the PSA report said.

Lack of coordination

“Despite international technical assistance programs that have gained considerable momentum over the course of the last several years,” the report continued, “there is still a blatant lack of government resources and coordination between national and local disaster management authorities to properly exploit international assistance.”

During Juan, the report said, many disaster management units in northern Luzon were “forced to fend for themselves” simply because communication between local and national officials relied only on cellular towers that were toppled at the height of the storm.

Manila most vulnerable

The danger of proclaiming success in disaster management without basis, PSA director Troilo said, could lead not to wrong weather forecasts peeving the President but to deadlier consequences like the government not knowing what to do when a major disaster, like an earthquake or 200 kph storm, strike the most vulnerable part of the Philippines—Metro Manila.

“Few, if any, objective expert or knowledgeable observer believe that the Philippine government is capable of handling or mitigating any major disaster that impacts the NCR (National Capital Region),” the PSA report said.

The projections are frightening, according to the PSA. It quoted a two-year research project by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and World Bank (WB) as saying bigger floods were expected to hit Metro Manila as a result of climate change and the lack of correct responses to its deadly effects.

Some of the recommended course of actions by the ADB-JICA-WB study, titled “Climate Risks and Adaptation in Asian Coastal Megacities,” were investing in the embankment of the Pasig-Marikina river basin, construction of the Marikina Dam and improving the capacity of two major pumping stations in Metro Manila—those in Manggahan and Camanava (Caloocan, Malabon, Navotas and Valenzuela).

“These investments have not been made to a noticeable degree,” the PSA report said.

Troilo said he hoped the wake-up call for the government would not come in the form of a major disaster.

But like climate change, he said, “we shouldn’t wait for rapid deterioration of the environment before we act because changes in the climate don’t destroy everything in one fell swoop.” –Tony Bergonia, Philippine Daily Inquirer