Cebu’s flood disaster — and the bitter irony of wasted billions

On November 4, 2025, Typhoon Tino unleashed torrential rainfall across Cebu province. Major rivers, such as the Butuanon River and the Mananga River, overflowed. Low-lying subdivisions were submerged, and dozens of lives were lost. PhilNews+3SunStar Publishing Inc.+3Philstar+3 What makes this disaster especially tragic is that, in recent years, thousands of flood-control projects have been rolled out in Cebu — yet the flooding remained as severe as ever.

The Flood-Control Investment

From 2022 to 2025, Cebu had 414 flood control projects worth an estimated ₱26.7 billion. GMA Network+2Philstar+2 Earlier data shows that one region of the province (6th Engineering District) reported ₱7.3 billion on 87 projects from 2022 in its area. Philstar In metro Cebu, the city government recorded that since 2022, the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) listed 104 flood control projects worth ₱3.8 billion in Cebu City — but only 70 were completed. Philstar

Cebu Governor Pamela Baricuatro bluntly posted on Facebook: “₱26 billion of flood control funds for Cebu, yet we are flooded to the max.” GMA Network+1 This begs the question: Where did that money go? And why, despite massive investment, did the infrastructure fail when the storm hit?

Why Corruption Persists

A key part of the story is corruption, misallocation, and weak oversight of those billions in flood-control funds. Some facts highlight this issue:

• The Philippine Finance Secretary disclosed that up to 70% of flood-control project funds may have been lost to corruption, i.e., ghost or substandard projects. The Straits Times+1

• Nationwide, between July 2022 and May 2025, the government implemented 9,855 flood-control projects worth approximately ₱545 billion. SunStar Publishing Inc.+1

• In Cebu specifically, the mismatch is glaring: Cebu ranks second in the number of flood-control projects despite not being among the top ten flood-prone provinces originally. GMA Network+1

• Investigations found “mismatches” between project location/need and the allocation of resources. SunStar Publishing Inc.+1

  
  

The reason officials haven’t been jailed yet comes down to institutional inertia, weak prosecutorial follow-through, and the complexity of proving graft in infrastructure. Evidence is emerging: in Senate hearings, contractors testified about legislators and officials demanding kickbacks. AP News+1 But legal accountability takes time.

Why Crooks Remain Free

Here are some reasons why the crooks remain free (for now):

1. Ghost and substandard projects: Projects completed on paper, but physically non-existent or made with poor materials. The audit trail is messy.

2. Diffused responsibility: Many projects cross local government units (LGUs), national agencies (DPWH), and contractors. Blame gets shifted.

3. Weak sanctions + political protection: Even when anomalies are found, prosecution is slow. Politicians implicated may still have immunity or influence.

4. Technical complexity: Proving that a project failed because of corruption (rather than purely design/maintenance) requires a forensic audit, which is time-consuming.

5. Public invisibility: Infrastructure failures often affect poor communities; media spotlight and public pressure are inconsistent.

   
   

For example, the DPWH has submitted a full list of flood-control projects in Cebu to the independent commission (ICI) for investigation. Philstar But investigations do not always lead to quick arrests or convictions, and the bureaucratic wheels turn slowly.

Why Dikes Alone Are Not Enough

One of the most important technical observations emerging from the latest flood is that structural measures like dikes, revetments, or big concrete floodwalls are insufficient—especially under changing climate conditions and poor upstream management.

Experts from the University of the Philippines (UP) point out key problems:

• Dr. Mahar Lagmay of the UP Resilience Institute/NOAH states, “The dike can only take you so much … when you always build dikes after the fact, you’re already addressing the symptom. We must first invest in science and nature-based solutions.” Philstar+1

• He suggests that instead of defaulting to dikes, we should:

- Restore forest cover in upstream watershed areas.

- Build retention basins and mini-dams for upstream flows.

- Implement rainwater harvesting and pumping stations.

- Only then, if necessary, use dikes as a last resort. GMA Network

• He also warned that many dikes and walls were designed for “once-in-50-year” floods — but now we are experiencing “once-in-100-year” or more frequent extremes. The infrastructure design criteria are out-of-date. Philstar+1

• Another UP scientist, Fernando Siringan, flagged that many flood-control projects proceed without proper Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and may actually worsen flood risks (by constricting natural waterways, creating false confidence). Philippine News Agency

  
  

In other words, the architecture of flood mitigation in the Philippines (and in Cebu) has over-relied on big concrete solutions, which are expensive, slow, vulnerable to design flaws and corruption, and do not address the upstream-downstream connectivity of watersheds and rivers.

As Lagmay put it:

“When you exhaust other measures first, then you add a dike, it will be more effective, cheaper, and more sustainable.” Philstar

What Happened in Cebu & What Should Have Been Done

Here’s how the “perfect storm” of administrative failure, design weakness, and natural hazard played out in Cebu:

• Billions allocated, hundreds of projects implemented—but poor coordination, weak design, and possible corruption resulted in many projects being incomplete or sub-standard. Philstar+2Philstar+2

• Two major rivers (Butuanon & Mananga) bring large upstream flows from mountainous Cebu City down to low-lying cities like Mandaue and Talisay — but the upstream catchment was not properly managed. The DPWH itself admitted that “control of upstream flow” was missing. Philstar

• Dikes and revetments that were built nevertheless failed under such heavy rainfall (the downpour was more than a month’s worth of rain in 24 hours). SunStar Publishing Inc.

• Residents were shocked: “billions spent, yet we are still flooded.” PhilNews

  
  

What Should Be Done

What should Cebu (and other flood-prone areas) do, drawing on UP’s suggestions:

1. Upstream management: Restore forest cover in uplands, reduce erosion and runoff, and use a watershed approach.

2. Retention/Detention basins: Create temporary storage for peak flows (e.g., open land that intentionally floods to spare residential zones).

3. Rainwater harvesting + improved drainage: Rather than just moving water downstream, reduce how much enters the system.

4. Holistic river basin planning: Rather than piecemeal flood walls per barangay, look at the entire river catchment, land use, settlements, and climate change.

5. Transparent project audit & maintenance focus: Ensure that projects completed are actually built, maintained, and functional—rather than a one-time “build and forget.”

6. Community involvement + non-structural measures: Implement early warning systems, land-use zoning, and relocation of informal settlements from flood-prone zones.

   
   

Why Accountability Matters — Lives on the Line

It’s not merely about money being wasted. Every peso mis-spent corresponds to lost protection, lives endangered, and homes lost. In the Guardian’s words:

“She died because of the flood… lives are too.” The Guardian

When flood-control projects become vehicles for kickbacks and shortcuts, the risk is that heavy-duty infrastructure fails at the time of crisis. For Cebu’s residents, the suffering is real: homes destroyed, livelihoods interrupted, and trauma endured.

If billions in public funds cannot protect the community, then the public's trust in governance, infrastructure, and government agencies collapses. Corruption doesn’t only steal money — it steals safety.

Final Thoughts & Call to Action

Cebu’s recent flooding stands as a stark warning: if public investment in flood-control becomes a conduit for corruption and poor design, then even huge expenditures will not protect communities. If the technical paradigm focuses only on dikes and walls, ignoring nature, upstream flows, land use, and watershed health, then we are building defenses for yesterday’s world — not tomorrow’s storms.

What Needs to Happen Now

• Urgent independent investigations into those ₱26 billion + spent in Cebu’s flood-control projects. Why were so many projects in one province? Why did they fail?

• Prosecution and accountability of those responsible for ghost or substandard works: contractors, officials, and politicians.

• Reallocation of future funds to nature-based, upstream, watershed-focused, multi-layered solutions, as recommended by UP experts.

• Transparent public reporting: every flood-control project’s budget, location, contractor, status, and outcome should be publicly accessible and verified by independent auditors.

• Local government units (LGUs), communities, and civil society must demand maintenance, not just new builds. Often built structures fail because they lack upkeep.

• Climate-change aware engineering: expect more frequent and intense rainfall events — design lives must shift from “once in 50 years” to “once in 100 years or more.”

  
  

For the people of Cebu and the Philippines as a whole, this moment can be a turning point. Will we continue to pour money into flashy but flawed infrastructure? Or will we demand smarter, holistic, science-based, transparent flood-risk management? Nakakagalit na.

Severe flooding leads to chaotic scenes with piled-up vehicles and scattered debris, highlighting the aftermath of a storm as locals assess the damage. Photo credits to GMA Network.