Fact-finding inquiry into the status of the project: “Rehabilitation of Capitol Park”

Sponsorship Statement of Board of Member MINANDRO “BOY” Q. TIOPES
November 9, 2006

Good Morning Mr. Chairman, Madame Majority Floor Leader, and my Colleagues.

Please bear with me again, as I have to rise as a matter of privilege, to initiate appropriate action to correct some misappreciation of facts relative to the implementation of the now “not-on-going anymore” project which is the “Rehabilitation of the Capitol Park”, the same Park fronting this Capitol Building where we incidentally hold our regular session.

Mr. Chairman, it is incumbent upon this representation to put the record straight to dispel rumors that the said project has already exhausted its fund, yet said project is obviously not yet 100% accomplished. If my memory serves me right, not very long ago, radio commentators and even on print media, made mention that an alleged offer to share the cost of the “rehabilitation of the Capitol Park” from no less than the Honorable Congressman Catalino V. Figueroa from his Country-Side Development Fund (CDF) was rejected by the Local Chief Executive. For what reason? I do not wish to venture a guess. But, should the offer been accepted, Mr. Chairman, I think the same rehabilitation works would have been completed already… not probably because of the additional funding, but because proper monitoring and evaluation of the supposed activities involved would have been put in-place. Perhaps, the reason why there was an alleged outright rejection of the offer to share the cost, precisely, was to avoid the monitoring process.

Mr. Chairman, please allow me to go back to the issue of exhaustion of fund for the project I mentioned this because I have been receiving text messages coming from unknown sources inquiring into what happened to the “how much” fund allotted to the said project, considering the lapse of several months after the rehabilitation works have been prosecuted. At the early implementation stage of the project, the Capitol Park area was enclosed throughout its perimeter, as if to conceal what was being undertaken inside the enclosure. That was alright, then, because the works was still going-on. But now, that the enclosure is gone, persistent queries are pouring-in as to the real score of the project because it is no longer on-going.

Mr. Chairman, my Colleagues, please allow me to re-fresh your memory. Our Provincial Budget for the year 2005 included an amount of P5.0 Million allotted for the “rehabilitation of Capitol Park, Phase I”. And on June 23, 2005, per request of the Honorable Governor, we have approved an additional appropriation of P5.0 Million, for Phase II. So, all in all, the total amount appropriated for the said project, Phase I & Phase II is P10.0 Million, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, there are allegations and insinuations that the “true Contractor” of the subject project as in other big and small provincial projects are somebody, Big Fishes in the provincial government itself using a borrowed PCAB License and a Dummy to shield the true identity of the “Real Contractor”, and the real implementor of the projects. However, Mr. Chairman, despite claims to the contrary, I would like to believe that these allegations are inaccurate and not correct. However, again, considering that the implementation of the subject project is put under a cloud of doubt, we have the moral obligation, as a Body, to clear the air of doubting opinions and instead legislate measures to correct the deficiency committed in the procurement processes. To me, Mr. Chairman, I would propose an inquiry into the status of the subject project, so that once and for all, the truth shall be known and questions be answered with acceptable details and figures, after all, what was spent for this abandoned project is “Juan dela Cruz’s money.

Mr. Chairman, in aide of our legislative works and because of the seemingly abandonment of the subject project, it is again, incumbent upon this Body to inquire and put forward the following questions to the individual or office concerned and some requirements to submit for the next Sangguniang Panlalawigan Session, to wit:

1. The Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) c/o The Chairman - to submit certified true copies of complete set of contract documents.

2. The Provincial Accountant - to submit certified true copies of vouchers and/or proof of payment documents including attachments.

3. The Provincial Engineering Office - to submit certified true copies of Approved Program of Work.

4. Is the implementation of the project: Rehabilitation of Capitol Park undertaken by “Contract” or by “Administration”?

5. If the answer to number 4 is By Contract, Who is the Contractor?

6. During the implementation period, who was the representing the Contractor?

7. Again, during the implementation period, who was the Project In-Charge or Project Engineer/Architect assigned by the Provincial Government to oversee the rehabilitation works?

8. What was the latest percentage of accomplishment paid?

Mr. Chairman, My Colleagues, again, in view of the above circumstances and in pursuit of good governance and to promote transparency in the implementation of programs and projects of the Provincial Government of Samar, I would like to move for the suspension of the house rules on referral and move further for the adoption of a resolution to conduct a “FACT-FINDING INQUIRY INTO THE STATUS OF THE PROJECT: REHABILITATION OF CAPITOL PARK”, accordingly, therefore, I would like to move for the creation of a Committee of the Whole to be chaired by the presiding officer to conduct the said fact-finding inquiry on November 23, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. after the SP regular session. The contractor of the subject project shall likewise be invited to be present during the said session.