Corruption: Graft rots fabric of the nation

Everyone takes a slice, from ministers to junior-level staff

Corruption is hurting the construction industry and the country badly with state officials at every level looking every way to funnel funds into their own pockets. The Thai Engineering Institute yesterday revealed accounts of corrupt practices which suggested that every step-from figuring out the costs to checking whether construction was shoddy-is about making money.

Documents distributed at a seminar on corruption, based on surveys of contractors, showed officials, including department chiefs and ministers, could make millions of baht in illicit earnings.

An agency chief was paid 15% of project costs in tea money for setting a budget 30%-50% higher than actual prices.

Ministers, department chiefs and university rectors received 7%-30% if they succeeded in helping cronies win construction bidding.

Junior to middle-level officials usually demanded 2% to 10% of project costs or monthly bribes of 5,000-40,000 baht for helping hide bidding information from competitors, selecting as winners firms which paid them, designing specifications of materials to benefit certain suppliers only and approving sub-standard work.

Getting paid was no easy task, either. Contractors had to pay 20,000 baht to treasurers every time they picked up their cheques.

Extra money had to be spared when officials came to inspect the construction. Food, accommodation, and prostitutes are put on, the latter costing 5,000-10,000 baht.

Units under the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration responsible for construction affairs charged one to two million baht for quick issue of a construction licence.

The institute, however, said not every agency had practised corruption.

Institute chairman Kraiwut Kiatkomol said state officials, politicians, engineers, architects and some consultancy firms were making an easy 20 to 30 billion baht per year from construction projects at the expense of taxpayers.

In his speech, former senate speaker Meechai Ruchupan said information disclosed was "shocking and painful".

Mr Meechai said there seemed to be nowhere on the Thai soil now that corruption did not exist. Methods of cheating were being developed to escape detection.

He cited another finding compiled by academics which revealed the Customs Department was the biggest corrupt agency where 60 billion baht disappeared into the pockets of its staff annually.

Next came poor, inefficient hiring and procurement systems, with 29 billion baht siphoned out of state coffers yearly, and in third place was the Revenue Department, with 19 billion baht.

Mr Meechai said a way to prevent officials from laying their hands on the money was to revamp regulations on ordering of supplies and to hire private sector companies to work for state agencies.

He said public and private agencies as well as non-governmental organisations should help write new regulations, to be made public six to 12 months before enforcement.

Transparency must be required at every step, he said.

Niphon Puapongsakorn, from the Thailand Development Research Institute, said corruption began when a project was still on the drawing board, not when it was being implemented.

Some businessmen had told him that almost all projects with budgets set aside were "occupied" by cronies of state officials, Mr Niphon said.

Newcomers would find it hard to win a project as officials would make every effort to block their entry.

Locating evidence of bribery was also difficult as businesses were now paying officials through brokers, he said.

Mr Niphon said civic organisations could be the crusaders against corruption and called on them to help keep close surveillance on malpractice.

Senator Kaewsan Atipho said the institute and three other organisers of the seminar, the Thai Contractors Association, Association of Thai Engineering Consultants and Association of Siamese Architects, should push for amendments to the Fair Contracts Act to enable them to appoint representatives to the investigation process where irregularities were involved.

Mr Kaewsan said the law was unfair to operators because it gave the state absolute power in designing a project and specifications of materials as well as in revoking contracts.