The Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs last week affirmed that it was preparing to conduct a feasibility study on the construction of new airports in the southeast and on Jeju Island. Ministry officials said the study is part of the work to draw up a five-year airports development plan for 2016-2020 and has nothing to do with recent voices raised by politicians in support of new airports.

The public, however, seems hardly persuaded by their explanation, which marked a sharp turnaround from their previous position that it would be more economically efficient to expand existing airports than build new ones.

A group of experts named by the ministry gave failing marks last year to two candidate sites for the planned southeastern airport, citing lack of economic viability and environmental damage. After the assessment, President Lee Myung-bak apologized to the people for scrapping the project, which was one of his pledges during the 2007 election campaign.

The ministry finished expansion work on the Jeju Airport last month at a cost of 340 billion won ($299 million) last month.

Experts say there is no urgent need to construct new airports as each of the existing airports in the southeastern area and on the island is now capable of accommodating an additional 8 million passengers per year.

It seems only natural for the public to suspect that the Land Ministry is flip-flopping on the issue of new airports against economic practicality to curry favor with key presidential contenders promising to build them.

During her visit to Daegu in July, Rep. Park Geun-hye, the presidential nominee of the ruling Saenuri Party, reaffirmed she would push to build a new airport in the southeastern region as one of her election pledges. Rep. Moon Jae-in, the leading presidential hopeful of the main opposition Democratic United Party, has also vowed to revive the plan for the new southeastern airport.

Sohn Hak-kyu, another DUP presidential contender, said during his visit to Jeju last month that he would place top priority on constructing a new airport there. Other presidential runners have made similar pledges.

None of them, however, have put forward specifics on how to fund and implement the airport projects. They have also fallen short of suggesting concrete and reliable measures to carry out other campaign pledges that would cost large amounts of money.

As shown in the past, irresponsible pledges for large-scale infrastructure projects lead to fiscal troubles and social conflicts after election. Presidential candidates should no longer be allowed to feel free to repeat such practices.

A system should be introduced to verify the feasibility of all high-cost campaign pledges. It can be an effective check against candidates to oblige them to submit details on implementing projects promised by them, including funding and work schedules, and have a neutral agency scrutinize them and publicize results before voters go to the polls.