07 November 2013
Relating my take on
President Noynoy’s October 30 primetime TV message in last Tuesday’s column
(PJ, November 5), I mentioned that I felt he did right in directly addressing
to the citizens his views regarding the Pork Barrel and DAP issues, now being
muddled in the ongoing public debate.
Identifying the opposing
sides as the government together with his kababayans
versus the officials allegedly involved in the Pork Barrel Scam, the
President stressed that the real issue is that of the “crime of stealing” which
those who are accused are trying hard to divert from the public’s
attention. And since they would have difficulty
justifying their repeated use of the same fake NGOs, and not checking even once
whether the funds served the proper beneficiaries, they resorted to throwing
counter charges to muddle the issue, and get the public to view the
administration as of the same kind as them.
I expressed the view that
even if the President did not verbalize it, he was referring to the privileged
speech of a senator who insinuated that “senator judges” were bribed with P50
million during the trial of the convicted former justice. The same senator
later on, during interpellation, said that the P50 million was not a bribe.
The “bribe” issue however snowballed,
prompting the DBM to explain and counter the accusation and in the process
cited the DAP as the mechanism used in speeding up the capital project expenses
to improve the GDP growth which nosedived in 2011. This explanation however was
not acceptable to certain sectors who questioned the DAP’s legality as well as
the real intention of the administration in adopting such mechanism.
President Noynoy, in his TV
message strongly rebuffed the claim of the accused scammers that they and the
administration are of the same kind, and categorically stated that he and his
team are not thieves, and instead are the ones going after thieves. He also
continued to state that the DAP is not a Pork Barrel, and it is not stealing
because the Constitution allows the use of such a process in spending funds wherein
the government is enabled to spend savings, as well as new and additional revenues.
Such savings used for the DAP came from the
successful efforts made in some agencies to curb “connivance of some in bidding
for contracts, in padding cost, overpricing and kickbacks…proper spending of …
[the] budget…[and] … from good governance now seen in … [the] GOCCs.”
Digressing a bit from the President’s message,
the effort to eliminate leaks was already strongly emphasized through various
controls, even in the very first budget – for 2011 - the Aquino administration
submitted to Congress (see http://www.dbm .gov.ph/?page_id=632). And although these controls enabled
some agencies (e.g. DPWH, DepEd, etc.) to achieve a certain level of success in
generating savings, they also disrupted the rate at which the government’s
capital projects spending (already reduced by 5.7% in 2011 vs. 2010) was
implemented, and this – together with
the unrealized expectations from PPP - dampened the country’s GDP growth.
This GDP downturn was felt
during the first two quarters of 2011 (4.9% and 3.4% respectively for the 1st and 2nd quarters
vs. 7.6% for 2010), and this alerted the government to take action and implement
remedial measures that would accelerate capital project spending and arrest the
GDP’s downward slide. Such measure, I surmise, was found in Article VI, Section
25, Sub-section (5) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, made operational by
Sections 39 and 49,
Book VI of E.O. No. 292,
Administrative Code of 1987, and implemented as the DAP starting with the last semester
of 2011. I say this because the quarterly GDP growth swung upwards to 3.6% and
3.7% during the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2011
(http://www.focus-economics.com/en/economy/charts/Philippines/GDP), and
“according to the World Bank, DAP contributed 1.3 percentage points to our GDP
growth in the fourth quarter of 2011.”
The
government learned a lesson from 2011, so in their 2012 budget (presented to
congress in July 26, 2011 – see http://www.gov.ph/2011/07/26/president-aquinos-2012-budget-message/) they increased the year’s Capital Outlay
allocation by 25.4 %, and “In particular, Infrastructure and Other Capital
Outlays by 33.1%” versus 2011. At the same time, provisions for the “…reduction
of leakage, inducement of efficiencies and better selection of project
priorities” were intensified.
Among
these provisions are the use of zero based budgeting which would minimize “lump
sum budgeting”, as well as check “over
budgeting” or the allocation of excessive funds by agencies which could end up
unused, thereby generating savings, which can then be an item for the much
abused practice of “conversion.” Also strengthened is the DBM’s oversight function
on the realignment of funds across allotment classes within capital outlays,
and over the agencies’ use of funds.
Going back
to the President’s message, he emphasized that DAP funds were allocated only to
“…projects that were within the proposed budget and [those] that had a clear
benefit to the country.” Dormant funds of implementing government agencies
(because of slow paced or unimplemented projects) are tapped and (together with
funds from other sources) channeled to projects/programs of agencies that have
been proven to be fast and efficient in their implementation.
Among the projects
funded through the DAP were the DOST’s “Nationwide Operational Assessment of
Hazards” which gives accurate and timely warnings during calamities, the
“Training for Work Scholarship” of TESDA which provided vocational/technical
education to 150,000 Filipinos (enabling 90,000 of them to get employed),
projects that benefited the Air Force and the Police, construction of
infrastructure for Mindanao and other parts of the country, restoring the GSIS
benefits of the DepEd employees.
Another
beneficial effect of the DAP, the President explained, is it’s being
instrumental in the growth of the economy (in 2012 and continued to do so
during the 1st semester of 2013) because through it the government
was able to accelerate spending for essential capital projects.
And why is this so? Well, my small research
indicated that the 4th major component of GDP (which is the internationally
recognized measure of the size of a country’s economy and indicator of its
economic health), aside from “the country’s entire consumer spending”, “the sum
of all the country’s business spending on capital”, and “the country’s total
net exports” is the “sum of government spending.” So the increase in government
spending, particularly on infrastructure
and capital projects, automatically increases GDP.
The
improved GDP, thanks to DAP, helped our country earn new respect from the
international financial community which no longer regard it as the “Sick Man of
Asia” and has instead been afforded us with new labels such as “Asia’s Fastest
Growing Economy”, “Rising Tiger”, and “Brightest Spark.” The improved GDP,
thanks to DAP, also served as a major factor in our country being granted an
investment grade rating by the 3 most reputable investment rating agencies in
the world, which to my mind is an excellent indicator that the DAP funds have
been used diligently by those who were tasked to administer it.
No comments:
Post a Comment