OPENING:
Good day, respected opponents, Engr., and everyone present.
I am the affirmative support speaker, and I strongly support our team’s position that when a
project is economically unviable but structurally sound, an engineer must still uphold the highest
safety standard rather than prioritize cost-cutting to save jobs.
Our team has already explained that the main duty of an engineer is to protect the public. My
role is to strengthen that point by showing why safety must always come first.
POINT 1:
First, according to the Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers (PICE), the Professional Regulation
Commission, and the American Society of Civil Engineers Code of Ethics, public safety must
always be the highest priority. Engineers are entrusted to design and maintain structures that
people rely on every day. Because of this responsibility, their primary duty is not profit, but the
safety, health, and welfare of the public. If an engineer lowers safety standards just to reduce
costs, they violate the fundamental principles of their profession. Safety is not optional—it must
always come first.
POINT 2:
Second, as emphasized by the World Bank and supported by engineering standards from the
American Society of Civil Engineers, cost-cutting may provide short-term benefits but can lead
to serious long-term consequences. A project may appear acceptable initially, but reduced
safety standards increase the risk of failure over time. Using lower-quality materials, minimizing
inspections, or weakening safeguards can result in accidents, costly repairs, legal issues, or
even project failure. This shows that prioritizing safety is not only ethical but also the most
practical long-term decision.
POINT 3:
Third, in line with the principles of the Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers (PICE) and global
guidance from the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, human life and public trust
must always outweigh temporary economic relief. While job preservation is important, it should
never come at the expense of safety. Infrastructure like roads, buildings, and bridges directly
affect people’s lives every day. Compromising safety can lead to severe or even fatal
consequences. Once public trust is lost, it is difficult to rebuild. Engineers must always uphold
their duty to protect lives above all else.
CLOSING STATEMENT:
Now, the opposition may say that because the project is already structurally sound, some
cost-cutting is acceptable. But that argument is weak.
A project being structurally sound today does not mean it will remain safe if standards are
lowered tomorrow. Many failures happen not because the original design was bad, but because
corners were cut later. Structural soundness is not an excuse to reduce safety.
In conclusion, the affirmative side firmly believes that engineers must uphold the highest safety
standard, even when a project is economically unviable.
Engineering ethics demands it, long-term consequences prove it, and human life depends on it.
CLOSING LINE
“Money can be earned again, but a lost life can never be brought back.”
Thank you.
Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers. (n.d.). Code of ethics for civil engineers.
• PICE Code of Ethics
•States that engineers must “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.”
[Link]
American Society of Civil Engineers. (2020). Code of ethics.
•ASCE Code of Ethics (Official Page)
•Engineers must “protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public.”
[Link]
American Society of Civil Engineers. (2020). Code of ethics (PDF version).
•International Federation of Consulting Engineers. (2015). FIDIC code of ethics.
Emphasizes responsibility to society and maintaining professional integrity.
[Link]