The latest Pulse Asia survey indicating a decline in the number of Filipinos who believe officials involved in anomalous flood control projects will be punished offers a snapshot of public trust in accountability mechanisms under the current administration.
While 59 percent still believe that erring officials will face consequences, the downward trend itself is significant, as this reflects not confidence but erosion of public faith in the accountability process shaped by the absence of visible outcomes.
The fact that nearly six in 10 Filipinos still expect punishment suggests that trust in formal institutions has not totally collapsed.
Filipinos continue to believe in the capacity of the government, through the Ombudsman, the courts, or executive offices, to act against corruption.
This confidence may be attributed to repeated official pronouncements emphasizing transparency, as well as the symbolic importance of flood control as a public service rather than a routine infrastructure concern.
Flood control failures, after all, are experienced by people in terms of submerged homes, lost livelihoods, and preventable deaths.
That gravity sustains public expectation that wrongdoing in this sector cannot be ignored.
However, the decline in belief is more politically important than the absolute majority figure. Public opinion does not deteriorate in a vacuum.
The drop likely reflects a familiar pattern in Philippine governance: high-profile exposés followed by slow or selective accountability.
Filipinos have seen this before in grand investigations announced, congressional hearings televised, yet few senior officials or politically connected contractors ultimately convicted.
When sanctions do occur, they often target lower-level functionaries, reinforcing the perception that impunity remains intact at the top.
Flood control projects, in particular, have long been associated with systemic vulnerabilities: bloated budgets, repeat funding for ineffective structures, and projects that fail conspicuously during typhoons.
Against this backdrop, skepticism is a totally rational response.
Each subsequent flood that overwhelms supposedly completed projects weakens the credibility of official assurances and fuels the sense that corruption is deeply embedded in government.
The timing of the survey, conducted in Dec. 2025, is also relevant.
By then, public discourse had already witnessed months of allegations, audits, and political sparring, but few concrete resolutions.
In such circumstances, patience wears thin.
Filipinos may still hope for accountability, but hope appears to be really fading, depending on whether the government can demonstrate tangible results rather than procedural optics.
