"This is a good time to stop the smear job and let the work begin," said Virgilio M. Ilagan, executive director of Protect Filipino Movement (Profil).
The House committee, after a probe on the controversies surrounding the airport construction, had issued a statement upholding the contract "because it is consistent with official government policy."
Ilagan said that the country "cannot afford to waste precious time in the completion of the airport."
The current passenger traffic at the NAIA Terminal 1 has long exceeded its capacity of roughly five million passengers a year.
"NAIA 1 is also suffering from dilapidated exteriors and deteriorating facilities," Ilagan said.
Ilagan pointed out that the Philippines has become a laggard among its Southeast Asian counterparts. Airports in Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Taiwan have served as beckoning landmarks to their country’s trade and tourism sectors.
"It is unfortunate that in spite of the clear necessity for a new terminal, many groups are trying to stall NAIA 3’s construction with their protests," Ilagan said.
"That is tantamount to getting in the way of progress and development."
A similar investigation on the NAIA 3 contract is also being conducted by the House committee on good government. While a conclusion has yet to be made, the committee is expected to issue a statement similar to that of the transport and communications group.
Earlier, the transport committee of the previous Congress had likewise issued support for the contract.
"The bottom line is, we badly need a new airport terminal, and previous governments have entered into valid agreements with the group which will build it for us," Ilagan said. "I do not understand why anyone would want to muddle up such a simple, sensible idea."