The story at Son Mua bridge shows a lack of synchronous investment thinking and vision in the implementation of transport infrastructure projects.
According to the design, the entire route is more than 437 meters long, of which the main bridge section is more than 179 meters. Meaning, the bridge is only a part of the overall.
But paradoxically, the "backbone" part is done, and the access road is not yet available.
The consequence is that the entire project cannot operate, becoming a concrete block exposed to rain and sun, losing value every day.
The Son Tay Area Project Management Board - the project investor - believes that the access road is entangled in the planning of the Truong Son Dong route entering the bridgehead, and must be partially adjusted, thus prolonging the progress.
But this detail raises the question of why a traffic infrastructure project is being implemented when fundamental factors such as planning and site clearance have not been thoroughly resolved?
This cannot be blamed on "objectivity" but on errors in investment preparation. The basic principle of project management is to ensure overall feasibility before commencement.
Planning is still stuck, when the ground is not clean, the construction deployment is no different from putting the top first to the bottom.
Not only wasting the budget, the delay also entails a series of arising costs.
Contractors have to stop machinery and equipment waiting, management costs increase every day. If equipment is withdrawn, it will cost more transportation costs. These amounts of money, in the end, are still a social burden.
More notably, the lack of synchronization of the project reflects a familiar disease in public investment, everyone doing their own thing, lack of coordination, lack of continuous supervision.
The issue does not stop at technique or procedures, the core is responsibility. Who decides to implement it when the planning is not completed?
Who is responsible when the progress is prolonged, causing waste of tens of billions of VND?
If these questions are not answered clearly, "bridges without access roads" will continue to occur.
The law on public investment has clearly stipulated the responsibilities of individuals and heads in each stage.
But if the review only stops at drawing experience, discipline will be difficult to establish.
A transportation project that should have opened up development opportunities for the locality, connecting people's lives, and promoting the economy, but when lacking vision and responsibility, it becomes a "symbol" of waste.
Son Mua bridge today is a warning, public investment not only needs money but also seriousness, transparency and a management mindset that does not accept "bottlenecks" right from the starting point.
