THE controversy over the proposed billion-peso Laiban dam project in Tanay could have been avoided if the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System had been as transparent as water. Instead, the agency has raised suspicions through conduct and speech that have been as clear as mud.

An elusive MWSS Administrator Diosdado Jose M. Allado surfaced long enough to issue a press statement describing allegations of impropriety in the handling of the project as ?baseless, imprudent and reckless.? He also added, ?It is a pro-active government initiative that seeks to address the water supply demand of Metro Manila in 2015, and to prepare for the inevitable deterioration of the only source of water for Metro Manila, the 41-year-old Angat Dam reservoir.?

Lost in his appeal to emotion (?inevitable deterioration,? ?41-year-old,? ?only source?) is the startling claim that the project was, in redundant bureaucratic jargon, ?a proactive ... initiative? of the government?s. How can this be true, when San Miguel Bulk Water Co., a subsidiary of San Miguel Corp., the food and beverage giant diversifying into utilities, made an unsolicited proposal for the Laiban dam project?

The MWSS response to this February 2009 proposal included issuing this month what is known as a Swiss challenge. An Inquirer report defined the challenge in easy-to-understand terms. ?Under the Swiss challenge form of public procurement, a government agency which has received an unsolicited bid for a public project or services to be provided to government, [is mandated] to publish the bid and invite third parties to match or exceed the unsolicited proposal.?

In other words, the MWSS? own announcement seeking potential bidders under a Swiss challenge proves that an unsolicited proposal was behind the project, not a ?proactive government initiative.?

But there are other, muddy mysteries.

The Swiss challenge itself gave prospective bidders only five days in which to express interest, and only 30 days in which to submit a competing proposal. The timetable defies belief; the project, the biggest in MWSS history, could well top $1 billion. A senior official of the agency said the timetable was reasonable because it was targeted at ?only [those] companies with expertise.? But large concerns develop their business and technical expertise precisely because they follow the highest standards. San Miguel Bulk Water Co. certainly had more than 30 days in which to think through an immense engineering project with a multibillion-peso price tag; why doesn?t MWSS, a government agency dedicated to the public interest, extend the same courtesy to other, prospective bidders?

A Swiss challenge is not designed merely to legitimize an unsolicited bid.

More worrying, the San Miguel Bulk Water Co. proposal reportedly carries a ?take or pay? provision, similar to those in contracts the government entered into with independent power producers in the early 1990s. The reported provision obliges the government to pay even for unused water. We say ?reported,? because not even the National Economic and Development Authority has seen a copy of the proposal.

Former Sen. Ralph Recto, NEDA director general, warns that this provision was tantamount to ?guaranteeing the market risks of the private proponent.? Exactly like the IPPs, except that in the early 1990s the government was under the gun, because of the severe power outages. Why the MWSS would entertain a provision that assumes a government held hostage to similarly dire circumstances is another mystery.

Last week, Recto contrasted what he knew of the Laiban dam project with a ?successful? joint venture between the Philippine Tourism Authority and Manila Water involving the water system on Boracay Island. ?The difference between the two projects is transparency,? he said.

As other mega-scandals in the Arroyo era have shown us, an unfair process and undue haste add to the lack of transparency. The outcome, too, is all-too-familiar: the deliberate blurring of the details of a multibillion-peso contract hides a multitude of sins.