The government's 350-billion-baht flood prevention and drought mitigation projects look set to go ahead, despite widespread criticism.
Amid protests and threats of litigation by green and civic groups, bidding for the projects will go ahead tomorrow as scheduled.
Deputy Prime Minister Plodprasop Suraswadi, in his capacity as chairman of the Water and Flood Management Commission overseeing the implementation of the projects, appears unperturbed by the flak.
Last week, he and a few commission members defended the projects and countered the criticisms.
Apparently, the commission is not worried about the prospect the Administrative Court may stall the projects temporarily.
As for the floodway project which is estimated to cost 150 billion baht and includes roads running parallel to a man-made canal _ the costliest of all the projects _ Mr Plodprasop said the floodway needs to be a huge channel to help speed up the flow of water being diverted from the Chao Phraya River.
He said the floodway is being built to prevent the return of the devastating floods in 2011 and is not supposed to be used on an annual basis.
Of course, the big flood must not be repeated and proper measures must be put in place to prevent that. But the plan for the huge floodway envisaged by the commission seems to be a case of overkill.
The average flow of water in the Chao Phraya River is between 2,000-2,500 cubic metres per second. If 1,500 cu m/sec of water is to be diverted to the man-made canal or floodway, the level of the water in the river will fall sharply, affecting farmland on both sides of the river, fisheries and navigation.
Above all, the biggest mistake contributing to the severity of the flooding two years ago is the mismanagement of water at the Bhumibol and Sirikit dams when too much water was stored at the dams for future use. It had to be released quickly to save the dams from bursting when large amounts of rain fell.
Had the water been released much earlier and more gradually, the impacts of the flood would have been far less devastating.
Most of the projects lack environmental impact assessment studies, as they were pushed through in a rush. Mr Plodprasop promised the studies would be carried out before the projects were implemented.
But since the terms of reference (TOR) say the project builder is responsible for conducting the EIA study, the big question is: Will a builder come up with an EIA report which goes against its own project and interests? That outcome seems hard to believe.
Questions also arise about the estimated cost of some of the projects, which appear unrealistically inflated. For instance, Module A1 for the construction of 16 reservoirs in the Ping, Yom, Nan, Pasak and Sakaekrang river basins has the total cost put at 50 billion baht.
Based on a calculation that each reservoir will have a capacity to store 80 million cubic metres of water, the amount of land needed would be about 55,000 rai.
Given a land cost of 200,000 baht a rai, the budget needed should be around 11 billion baht, not the 50 billion baht estimated by the commission.
These are just a few examples of the flaws and lack of transparency which can be found in the projects.
That should encourage caution and a slowdown in the implementation of the projects, in which case the Administrative Court seems to be the proper channel to right the wrongs in this scheme for the benefit of the public.