THE serious damage wrought by recent typhoon Santi on Batangas’s “Bridge of Promise”—a key supply lane for all terminals and oil depots in the area—underscores once more the compelling message that climate change cannot be ignored in the government’s development planning and the crafting of the budget.

The “Bridge of Promise” is used by oil tankers to ferry petroleum products, among other vital commodities of traders, to Metro Manila and nearby provinces from Batangas. Its continued disrepair, therefore,  is alarming authorities who fret that it might result in supply disruptions, at a time when that scenario is already being raised by oil companies opposed to Executive Order 839, freezing oil prices in Luzon to October 15 levels. But that’s another story. The risk of shortage from any prolonged inability to use the established route via the Batangas bridge in Barangay Calumpang is something real, not conjured, and requires attention—not just through the round-the-clock work by the Department of Public Works and Highways, but the timely sourcing of funds needed for the repair.

On a positive note, the problem of the damaged bridge would provide those advocating the mainstreaming of climate-change policy into the national budget, as sought by Sen. Loren Legarda, some ammunition. It should give pause to those in charge of the government’s infrastructure program, to make sure that vital public investments like bridges and roads get enough funding; more important, that they are built well (meaning, corruption doesn’t intrude to jeopardize quality) and with due regard for the environment where they are sited (i.e., rate of soil erosion, risk of slides) in order to mitigate the risk of damage in this age of extreme weather.

While Congress is at it, it should fashion the budget in such a way that it genuinely addresses climate issues, without squandering money on projects that are just good on paper, but simply provide the pseudo experts a platform for grandstanding on what they pretend to know.

For instance, it would be good to heed the warning of alternative-budget activists, who note that the budget of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for 2010 has even been reduced by P2 billion, at a time when its work has become even more difficult.  And yet, mark our words, there will be money set aside for all stripes of presidential advisers spouting rhetoric in various forums here and abroad.

The budget exercise is the best opportunity for bureaucrats to affirm and enforce national priorities, and put the state’s money where its mouth is. There’s still time to make sense of the current one.