The Philippine House of Representatives has approved on third and final reading a bill that seeks to establish a 30-year infrastructure masterplan to guide government spending and coordinate development projects across the country.

House Bill No. 11597, the proposed Masterplan for Infrastructure and National Development Act, passed on Monday with 284 votes in favor, eight against and one abstention. Approval on third reading completes the House's floor action on the measure.

The measure directs the formulation of a Comprehensive Infrastructure Development Masterplan covering transportation, logistics, energy, water resources, telecommunications, social infrastructure, agriculture, fisheries and the maintenance of existing assets. The 30-year blueprint is intended to steer infrastructure investment, budget priorities and land development in coordination with the Philippine Development Plan and the national budget. Spanning three decades, the framework would extend beyond several six-year presidential terms. Sectors named in the plan, such as power, water, transport and telecommunications, provide services that households and businesses rely on daily.

Under the proposal, a Masterplan for Infrastructure and National Development Council would formulate, review and oversee implementation of the plan. The President would head the council, with the secretary of the Department of Economy, Planning and Development serving as vice-chairman. Its members would include government department heads, representatives of local government leagues and eight industry stakeholders.

The bill also requires infrastructure planning to incorporate transit-oriented development, land-value capture mechanisms and shared corridors for compatible utilities. Transit-oriented development concentrates housing and commercial activity around transit hubs, while land-value capture allows the government to recover part of the increase in land values that public works generate. These corridors would allow facilities such as power lines, mass transit systems and telecommunications infrastructure to occupy designated areas, potentially reducing duplication and improving land use.

A Joint Congressional Oversight Committee on Infrastructure Planning and Development would monitor implementation, identify deficiencies and conduct quarterly reviews. The panel would have six members each from the Senate and the House of Representatives, supported by a subcommittee responsible for long-term planning and anticipating future development needs. The quarterly review schedule would give Congress a recurring checkpoint for flagging deficiencies as the plan is carried out.

Initial implementation costs would be funded through existing appropriations of the Department of Economy, Planning and Development, with subsequent expenses included in annual national budgets.

Party-list Rep. Renee Louise M. Co opposed the measure, arguing that the proposed infrastructure plan lacked a broader long-term economic development strategy. "It builds a 30-year infrastructure castle in the air without a genuine long-term national development blueprint to anchor it," she told the House plenary.

Ms. Co said the proposal failed to adequately connect infrastructure priorities with economic development needs, including those of the manufacturing sector. She warned that the framework could encourage private companies to treat infrastructure development primarily as a profit-making activity rather than a means of meeting public needs.

The lawmaker also raised concerns that the proposed council could concentrate influence over infrastructure spending among government officials and major businesses. She questioned whether the measure provided sufficient public oversight of construction material costs and land valuations, and criticized the proposed consultation process, warning that communities directly affected by infrastructure projects might have limited opportunities to influence planning decisions.

The bill needs a counterpart Senate bill and a reconciled version before it can be submitted to President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. for signing into law.

— Pexcel John Bacon, Business. Source: BusinessWorld