You are on page 1of 15

Dev Adm

2. PNOY GOVT: now that the term of pnoy is about to end, come up with a critical analysis of his
medium-term devt plan (tuwid na daan). strengthen with facts and figures. e.g., education, political
system, cultural development. use SONA and inaugural speech as basis
read:http://www.arkibongbayan.org/2015/2015-07July27-SONA2015/sona1.htm
On Pres. Benigno Aquino III’s sixth and last State of the Nation Address (SONA), the
Bagong Alyansang Makabayan has but one message: the US-Aquino regime’s
corrupt, incompetent, pro-elite and repressive rule must end.
In his valedictory SONA, Aquino is expected to bequeath to his successor his legacy
of the “Tuwid na Daan” leading to inclusive growth and peace. But Aquino has no
legacy to be proud of.
Aquino’s brand of bureaucrat capitalism
The so-called Tuwid na Daan has turned out to be a flooded, pot-hole filled path to
nowhere. That until now Aquino cannot even fulfill his campaign promise to enact the
freedom of information act shows the pretentiousness and hypocrisy that has
characterized his presidency.
Aquino’s defense and continued use of the pork barrel system even after it was
declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court is a testament to the large-scale,
systemic corruption that goes on. The 2015 budget has P27.39B worth of
congressional pork tucked in the budgets of various departments, subject to the
lawmakers’ referrals and recommendations. Lump-sum funds under the President’s
discretion is at a whopping P958B, including the notorious Assistance to LGUs of
P33.1B and Grassroots Participatory Budgeting of P20.9B which are under DILG
Secretary and presumptive LP standard bearer Mar Roxas.
The selective prosecution of corrupt officials belonging to the political opposition is in
stark contrast to the spirited defense by Aquino himself of his inept and corrupt close
friends and associates, showing how crooked the path has become. Aquino’s
bungling, fraternity-type presidency was most apparent in the Mamasapano incident
where 44 PNP SAF personnel died due to his criminal negligence, gross incompetence
and blatant violation of the PNP chain of command. If not for the people’s vigilance,
presidential best friend Allan Purisima would still be PNP Chief.
Growth for oligarchs and foreign investors
Instead of inclusive growth, the bogus Tuwid na Daan has spawned a bonanza for the
exclusive set of oligarchs and foreign monopoly capitalists favored by Aquino. Some
P364B worth of juicy government contracts have been awarded to the Ayala,
Pangilinan, Cojuangco-Ang, Sy, Consunji, Aboitiz, and Tan groups of companies,
giving them the opportunity to rake in billions more in user fees, toll fees and rentals
at the expense of the public for the next 25-30 years.

1

the draft Bangsamoro Basic Law.5 million to reach 25. Philippine GDP is lower than neighboring Malaysia. economic and socio-cultural system that his regime represents. This is a big setback for the cause of Philippine sovereignty. Of the 527 political prisoners languishing in jail under the Aquino administration. As for the NDFP-GRP talks. media personnel and suspected rebels. In the economic sphere. Aquino has allowed the return of US military bases via the RP-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). In fact. Tapusin na. his regime proves no less brutal when it comes to its critics and suspected enemies.964 people. schools. 2 . Aquino’s likes to boast that the Philippines has the highest GDP growth rate in Asia but ignores the fact that on a per capita basis. the ranks of the poor and unemployed continued to swell. making the Philippines a pawn in the US’ pivot to Asia. Tama na. affecting 169.8 million poor in 2014. Such brazen violation of human rights against those critical of the administration and the system it represents shows Aquino’s duplicity in the peace process. Surveys show that there more people consider themselves poor now than when Aquino first came to power. medical facilities and churches have been taken over by the military for use in its counter-insurgency campaign. From 2010 to 2015. Thailand and Indonesia. mostly school children and indigenous people’s communities. who has continued the brutal military campaigns against our own people. the Aquino regime becomes the US’ number one cheerleader in its push to further open the markets of the emerging economics to imperialist domination and plunder. which is being continually watered down in Congress by Aquino’s allies. 17 are consultants to the NDFPGRP peace talks.Meanwhile. There have been 26 forced disappearances and 110 torture cases. it never took a step forward under Aquino. will most likely end up like the ARMM Organic Act – an instrument for capitulation. War and human rights violations While Aquino trumpets the legacy of his parents who were both victims of the Marcos dictatorship. both with the NDFP and MILF. In fact. there were 238 victims of extrajudicial killings and 270 cases of frustrated killings. Under Aquino. by hosting the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit this November. Puppetry to US imperialism In the guise of countering China’s expansionist moves. poverty rates remain practically unchanged at 28% despite P178B poured by Aquino in conditional cash transfers from 2010-2015. It is in this light that the patriotic and democratic forces under the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan is calling for an end to Aquino’s failed leadership and an end to the oppressive and anti-people political. increasing by some 2. mostly of activists.

and calculated to deceive and disarm.We vow to mobilize thousands tomorrow for the People’s SONA 2015 nationwide protest. This year’s State of the Nation Address (SONA) is President B. The hard sell is that the Aquino presidency is qualitatively different. unprecedented inequality marked by healthy profit making for multinational corporations and the local elite. auctioning of the national patrimony. kaklase. we will continue to organize and mobilize our people to thwart Aquino’s agenda of continuing his failed legacy after 2016. Aquino III’s last. This in the midst of impressive growth rates. The Malacañang propaganda line is that the Aquino regime made a real difference to the hardscrabble lives of the majority of Filipinos. (For a more comprehensive analysis.” content with keeping Arroyo under hospital arrest and somewhat constrained from plotting against him. dismissed. But the reality is more entrenched poverty and economic backwardness. In reality. But unlike the Arroyo regime that at least saw the successful prosecution and conviction for plunder of Mrs. He is expected to deliver a powerful speech replete with his regime’s achievements for the last five years with a summation of the legacy he will leave behind. Agriculture Secretary Proceso Alcala. see“SONA 2015: A Legacy of a Disconnected Economy”) 3 . The student activists have a term for it: Mr. and unabated environmental destruction. especially from the one that preceded it. an erstwhile non-performer in Congress. Joseph “Erap” Estrada. Aquino has been “Noynoying. and high scores in “competitiveness” by foreign and local big business and the World Bank.” But the smoke-and-mirrors presidency that this column described upon its inauguration in 2010 has run out of magic tricks. in Filipino even. that of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Arroyo’s predecessor. Former President Arroyo is the proverbial whipping girl as far as Mr. Budget Secretary Butch Abad. the ends of justice be hanged. kabarilan”: Police General Alan Purisima. All the catchy. for all things wrong in government before Aquino. arrived on the political scene. or are languishing in judicial limbo. In the succeeding months. Aquino and his coterie are concerned. Land Transportation Office Assistant Secretary Virginia Torres. especially when it has to make something big out of basically nothing much. Local Governments Undersecretary Rico Puno. have boomeranged because they have been unmasked as empty or false. Aquino’s campaign for good governance has spared the truly accountable from among the “kabarkada. untouched feudal relations in the countryside. folksy slogans. and Presidential Peace Adviser Ging Deles. credit-rating upgrades. Speculation is rife. the cases against Arroyo have either been set aside. S. less than a year before the 2016 presidential elections (no doubt stoked by the “yellow” media to dispel the fact of a lame-duck President with not much political capital remaining) about who will be his “anointed” to “continue the legacy.

the main thoroughfare leading to the Batasang Pambansa looks like a war zone fortified with concrete barriers. pointing to the government’s filing of a case in a United Nations tribunal and appeals for support in other international venues with regard to the heated West Philippine Sea dispute with China. The abject lack of an independent foreign policy — in the process placing the country in the crosshairs of the actual and potential enemies of the lone superpower — is passed off as pragmatism. The lie that Aquino has been peddling is that his “bosses” are the Filipino people. deregulation. What’s more. on top of the obsequious implementation of the Visiting Forces Agreement and the Mutual Defense Treaty. an alignment of national interests. to be secured by a 6. social degradation. and to the decrepit and weak state of the Armed Forces of the Philippines under US tutelage — with its long-standing orientation toward counterinsurgency rather than national defense and its hand-me-down equipment purchased at supposed discounts according to the terms of lopsided military assistance pacts. and container vans. and political costs of hosting the two biggest US bases outside the US mainland. Such policies as liberalization. to the economic losses. or worse. The latter has historically been proven as false: from the devastation of World War II brought on by being the lone US colony in the region. The Aquino government’s acquiescence to the lopsided Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. is covered-up as a necessary adjunct to building a “credible external defense”. the European Union. But as he readies his last SONA. the Philippine economy and people are further squeezed to favor monopoly capitalist impositions like never before — regulatory risk guarantees for foreign investors in public-private partnerships that go even further than sovereign guarantees for foreign loans. concertina wire. the refusal of the Aquino regime to support domestic agriculture and build a genuinely Filipino industrial base — the true “sound fundamentals” of a self-reliant economy — is consistent with its subservient economic policies. The big picture moreover shows the surrender of economic sovereignty to international financial institutions dominated by the US. 4 .000-strong police force and standby military contingent.The illusion that the Aquino regime has been trying to conjure is that it has championed national sovereignty and defended territorial integrity. Under Aquino. to their governments especially the US. and other advanced capitalist countries. privatization and denationalization akin to the punishing conditions that Greece has recently been placed under have actually been implemented continuously since the late Seventies by Philippine governments. and to the powerful lobby of foreign chambers of commerce in favor of neoliberal policies and programs. especially the poor and disadvantaged.

and illegal arrests with prolonged detention on the basis of trumped-up charges in connection with the ongoing armed conflict.Aquino’s real bosses have clearly emerged — foreign multinational corporations. and the violation of children’s rights in connection with the sanctuary and support given to Lumad evacuees fleeing military and paramilitary violence are being used to justify violent assaults on church institutions and personnel. and the big landlords. etc. there is the stepped-up and brazen harassment of activists. charges such as human trafficking. extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. illegal detention. But the effect on the communities of indigenous peoples. Most recently. On the human rights front. He is also trying to pass off as his peace program what in truth is his program to defeat the communist movement militarily — with a huge dose of psychological warfare and the targeting of noncombatants for “neutralization. landless farmers and farm workers is the same: massive displacement. Gross violations of human rights are now papered over with references to “human security. union organizers in the private and public sector. as what happened last week in Davao City. with entire families evacuating from their homes to escape militarization.” Aquino however will not admit to supporting efforts to deny compensation to Marcos victims identified or associated with the local communist-led revolutionary movement. Aquino will not tire of crowing about the law passed to compensate human rights victims of the US-backed Marcos dictatorship.” “whole-of-nation” approach. the arrest of the murderous General Jovito Palparan. disappearance and killings of activists have been promoted and appointed to sensitive and top positions. Military officials implicated in the torture. Aquino is trying mightily to salvage the peace negotiations in the South (after the Mamasapano fiasco) by pushing for the passage of a version of the Bangsamoro Basic Law that has little resemblance to the terms of political settlement already reached and hold little promise for achieving the aspirations of the Bangsamoro for self-determination. the coddling of Palparan by the military establishment before and even after his arrest. and the climate of impunity that cloaks human rights violators then and now. the domestic capitalists. coupled with the filing of a slew of baseless criminal charges in the months leading up to Aquino’s SONA. and are even peddled as the military’s contribution to community development. progressive church people and even health professionals. human rights and development while militarily crushing the “insurgents” and “terrorists. Alarmingly. the United States. to the chagrin of families of victims and human rights defenders. and the counterinsurgency program deceptively dubbed “Oplan Bayanihan” that pretends to uphold the pursuit of peace..” 5 .

ecological and organic agriculture. protection and rehabilitation of our environment and natural resources as it is the best socio-economic safety net for our largely ecologically-dependent and highly vulnerable communities. read:https://envicluster.” Jonathan Ronquillo. soil and water management. stressed.What Aquino actually leaves behind is a bloody human rights record. Ronquillo said that disaster risk reduction. At a press briefing held inQuezon City. and promises broken. Worse. “We were particularly distressed that the proposal for a ‘Green Audit’ that will allow a continuing review and adjustment of the country’s development plan in terms of its consistency with environment sustainability was also omitted. was not considered. efficient and new renewable energy systems were noticeably absent in the MTPDP that was approved by the Neda Board. It was. however. “We have implored the Aquino administration time and again not to relent in pursuing conservation. disaster risk reduction and management. or worse. and sustainable. Ronquillo stressed. off grid.com/tag/medium-term-philippine-developmentplan/ MTPDP omitted provisions on ecological protection By Ayen Infante 03/31/2011 Environmental groups assailed the recently approved Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2011-2016 released by the National Economic Development Authority (Neda) the other day for supposedly lacking provisions to concretize President Aquino’s social contract with the Filipino people. were also delisted from the Investment Priorities Plan for 2011 based on short economic returns. The provision for a “Green Audit” originally formed part of the draft Chapter on Environment and Natural Resources.wordpress. ignored. “It seems that our pleas for President Aquino to lead the path toward ‘greening’ the MTPDP. groups belonging to the Caucus to Green the MTPDP expressed apprehension that the key inputs by citizens’ groups to “Green the MTPDP” were omitted. peace agreements reneged upon. unilaterally excluded in the final draft MTPDP. improved ecosystem. 6 . decentralized. environment campaigner of La Liga. community based. Led by the private think tank La Liga Policy Institute (La Liga) they said citizens’ groups inputs in the areas of food self-sufficiency based on sustainable. mitigation and recovery projects. to break free from the failed development track of the previous administration.” he said.

This is the challenge that President Aquino’s MTPDP should address. protection and rehabilitation of our environment and natural resources as it is the best socio-economic safety net for our largely ecologically-dependent and highly vulnerable communities. the previous MTPDP failed to consider that the environment is the social security system of the poor. “We were particularly distressed that the proposal for a “Green Audit” that will allow for a continuing review and adjustment of the country’s development plan in terms of its consistency with environment sustainability was also omitted. At a press briefing held in Quezon City a day after the approval of the MTPDP. however. (3) improved ecosystem. the Caucus to Green the MTPDP expressed apprehension that the key inputs by citizens’ groups to ‘Green the MTPDP’ were mysteriously omitted. the groups added. Clearly. The provision for a “Green Audit” originally formed part of the draft Chapter on Environment and Natural Resources. to break free from the failed development track of the previous administration. GREEN groups belonging to the Caucus to Green the MTPDP expressed alarm that the recently approved Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2011-2016 by the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) lacks the principles of sustainability and reforms to concretize President Aquino’s Social Contract with the Filipino People. the last decade was a lost decade for environment sustainability and sustainable development and more could have been done towards this end. poverty has not been curbed. “It seems that our pleas for Pres.” he said. Worse. were also delisted from the Investment Priorities Plan for 2011 based on short economic returns. and without environment sustainability. community based. Aquino to lead the path towards “greening” the MTPDP. Ronquillo stressed. mitigation and recovery projects. food security has not been achieved. It was. the previous administration failed to recognize the already over-stretched carrying capacity of the environment and natural resources.” he lamented. environment campaigner of La Liga stressed. “More than anything. or worst. (2) disaster risk reduction and management. “We have implored President Aquino’s administration time and again not to relent in pursuing conservation. decentralized. in its relentless pursuit of growth. off grid. Ronquillo said that disaster risk reduction. soil and water management. unilaterally excluded in the final draft MTPDP. ecological and organic agriculture. was not considered. Led by the private think tank La Liga Policy Institute (La Liga) they said citizens’ groups inputs in (1) the areas of food self sufficiency based on sustainable.” Jonathan Ronquillo. He said because of this. millions of Filipinos would be denied the opportunity for sustainable growth. and (4) sustainable. efficient and new renewable energy systems were noticeably absent in the MTPDP that was approved by the NEDA Board. and our national vulnerability to climate change has increased. 7 . ignored.According to Ronquillo.

Social Watch Philippines (SWP). Batas Tomasino. poverty has not been curbed. Institute for Philippine Cooperative and Social Enterprise Development (IPCSED). Go Organic! Phils. Haribon Foundation. Any plan for the country’s growth and development will unfortunately be an exercise in futility IF it does not integrate concerted. Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities (ICSC). Haribon Foundation. the Caucus to Green the MTPDP ask the government: Where are the principles of sustainability and reforms in the 2011-2016 MTPDP?” ———————————————————– The “Caucus to Green the MTPDP” includes Action for Economic Reforms (AER). KAAKBAY. He said: Because of this. food security has not been achieved. Sierra Tourism Consultancy. Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM). One Organic Movement (OOM). 8 . Sagip Sierra Madre Environmental Society. Convergence for Community-Centered Area Development. Bluewater Consultancy. Nurturing Disaster Ready Cities and Communities. Inc.Intercontinental Network of Organic Farmers Organizations (INOFO Philippines). Mindanao. the previous administration failed to recognize the already over-stretched carrying capacity of the environment and natural resources. Inc. Clearly. in its relentless pursuit of growth. World Wildlife Fund Philippines and Zero Waste Recycling Movement of the Philippines.According to Ronquillo. the last decade was a lost decade for environment sustainability and sustainable development and more could have been done towards this end. we. Saganang Buhay sa Liga ng Bayan Foundation. RESILIENCE. Education for Life Foundation (ELF). UST. Greenpeace Southeast Asia. and our national vulnerability to climate change has increased. Inc.. Interface Development Interventions. We are concerned over the ever-increasing vulnerability of our country to climate change and disasters even as we are already experiencing its ill effects. Alternative Budget Initiative-Environment Cluster (ABI-ENVI).. Rice Watch and Action Network (RWAN). the previous MTPDP failed to consider that the environment is the social security system of the poor. (SSMESI). This is the challenge that President Aquino’s MTPDP should address. Inc (IDIS) of Davao. Angkan ng Mandirigma UP Diliman Chapter. Partido Kalikasan (PK). Sibol ng Agham at Technolohiya. Asia Intercontinental Networks of Organic Farmers. EcoWaste Coalition. Movement for the Advancement of Sustainable Agriculture (MASA).” he lamented. millions of Filipinos would be denied the opportunity for sustainable growth. and without environment sustainability. Where are the Principles of Sustainability and Reforms in the 2011-2016 MTPDP that was recently “approved in principle” by President Aquino? Statement of the Caucus to Green the MTPDP on the approval of the 2011-2016 Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) March 30. Earthday Network Phils. 2011 The crafting of the new MTPDP under President Aquino’s leadership provided renewed interest from a broad range of citizen’s groups and other stakeholders such as the Caucus to Green the MTPDP to meaningfully participate in both formal and parallel processes with the aim of pursuing and concretizing reforms contained in the President’s Social Contract with the Filipino People. “More than anything. (SIBAT).. Partnership for Clean Air. Knowing fully that this situation must be reversed.

Where are the Principles of Sustainability and Reforms in the 2011-2016 MTPDP? http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/07/05/aquino%e2%80%99s-development-plan-mererehash-of-arroyo%e2%80%99s-policies/2/ Aquino’s development plan. food security has not been achieved. efficient and new renewable energy systems. We express apprehension that in the recently approved 2011-2016 MTPDP. soil and water management. Clearly. the last decade was a lost decade for environment sustainability and sustainable development and more could have been done towards this end. Knowing fully that this situation must be reversed. d) sustainable. to break free from the failed development track of the previous administration. particularly in the following arenas: a) food self sufficiency based on sustainable. Looking at the situation we face today. off grid. 2011 1 COMMENT CCT. IBON. and. disaster risk reduction and on our strategic transformation to a low-carbon economy. community based. we have insisted on the need to “green” the MTPDP. NEDA. protection and rehabilitation of our environment and natural resources as it is the best socioeconomic safety net for our largely ecologically-dependent and highly vulnerable communities. ecological and organic agriculture. NOYNOY AQUINO. We have humbly urged President Aquino to lead the path towards “greening” the MTPDP.extraordinary and urgent actions on climate change adaptation. the Caucus to Green the MTPDP ask the government. mere rehash of Arroyo’s policies ANNE MARXZE UMIL JULY 5. millions of Filipinos would be denied the opportunity for sustainable growth. decentralized. b) disaster risk reduction & management. PPP 9 . PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. it is apparent that the previous MTPDP did not go far enough. we. it failed to consider that the environment is the social security system of the poor. poverty has not been curbed. More than anything. and without environment sustainability. key inputs of citizen’s groups were noticeably absent. mitigation and recovery projects were delisted from the Investment Priorities Plan for 2011 based on short economic returns. and our national vulnerability to climate change has increased. In its relentless pursuit of growth. We are alarmed that disaster risk reduction. to make the MTPDP climate change responsive. We are particularly distressed that the proposal for a “Green Audit” allowing for a continuing review and adjustment of the country’s development plan in terms of its consistency with environment sustainability that originally formed part of the draft Chapter on Environment and Natural Resources were unilaterally excluded in the final MTPDP. c) improved ecosystem. We have implored the government time and again not to relent in pursuing conservation. it failed to recognize the already over stretched carrying capacity of our environment and natural resources. As a result. This is the reason why in all the processes.

the worst cases may even involve bailouts. chapter two says debt management will include seeking financing for PPP initiatives.Ibon also noted how the plan acclaims “private actors” – from the smallest self-employed entrepreneurs to the largest conglomerates – (for creating) productive jobs and incomes. power. education. Local Government Units too will enter into PPPs. microinsurance. post-harvest services. classrooms and subcontracted education services. chapter one says there will be transparent and responsive governance to ensure the success of big ticket PPP projects. housing will be privatized. including the country’s poorest. farm and fish trading centers. power. irrigation. the plan pushes for more privatization. “This means that the private sector should be supported and allowed to profit from providing public goods and services. It also added that PPPs will be sought out in a vast range of areas. according to Africa.” “The PPP shall also be encouraged in addressing critical and basic educational inputs including the outsourced delivery of basic education services by qualified private service providers.” the critique said. According to the critique. However. aside from building classrooms through various procurement modalities under the government’s PPP program. underpaid workers and small employees who are country’s principal producers. Also. utilities and services.” The plan also promotes Public-Private Partnership (PPP). water.” The government is systematically turning vital social services into opportunities for private profitmaking rather than directly providing these so that it will be accessible to everyone. significant public resources may end up being diverted for private gain.” “The danger of escalating and unaffordable pricing is particularly hazardous in health. Africa also added that the plan promotes “a user pays culture. chapter three says the Philippines will be promoted abroad as an “ideal partner” in PPPs. health facilities and health insurance. the critique said. If the poor can’t pay. education and housing – which already see expensive health care and high tuition and other fees upon commercialization. agro-industries.” the critique said. The critique said “this focus on propertied profit-seekers disappointingly glosses over the millions of landless farmers. PPPs will be “(maximized) as a strategy in industry clustering. and disaster risk reduction. Ibon said. transport.” 10 . they can’t use. The country is already faced with excessively high water.” meaning the private sector will charge for their service. “The plan is explicit about seeking to use “national health budgets and subsidies to promote PPP for health” including “providing direct incentives for private sector participation. ”the plan hails PPPs for (intensifying) the culture of competitiveness. “Users pay is escalating and unaffordable pricing for public infrastructure and social services. the expanded privatization effort will even erode the government’s technical capacity to regulate public infrastructure. including workable PPP schemes for socialized housing development and develop PPPs for onsite upgrading and resettlement. sewerage and sanitation. However. The critique also said. housing development. develop a financing framework for relocation and resettlement. agro-forestry and fisheries. “In reality.” “The plan also seeks to create an investment-friendly environment through PPPs. Health.” which will further promote PPPs in the health sector “ranging from investments for tertiary care to involving private practice midwives in the delivery of primary services. The sector is not necessarily infallible or efficient and problematic projects can have major cost overruns or result in poor delivery of services. majority of the people are poor and they cannot afford to pay. MRT/LRT and highway rates from past privatization.

3 million in 2011 – correspondingly increasing the CCT budget from P10 billion ($232 million) in 2010 to P21. Ibon said.” Ibon said that there is no doubt that building physical infrastructure in transport. Africa said it is clear how big firms participating in PPPs will benefit from guaranteed profits. particularly CCTs. Ibon said. The critique said that the plan asserts that “inadequate infrastructure is a major constraint” so “massive investment in physical infrastructure” is a key strategy to make growth inclusive and to reduce poverty. Ibon said. 725 household beneficiaries (2011) and SEA-K with 28. corporate and landed elites will then likely gain. “The plan cannot but acknowledge the adverse impact of globalization policies even if it says this in a roundabout manner. it is important to ask if this will have a desired effect – as in. that CCT is unsustainable. are very small compared to the grave problems of some 65 million poor Filipinos. the plan merely proposes so-called social protection. “The plan argues that the government faces deficit problems. Africa said. The critique said the plan seeks to increase taxes paid by the poor while avoiding taxing the rich. power and elsewhere is vital for a strong economy.3 million reached over the entire plan period.with an eventual 4. social investments and welfare spending. He said that the social protection programs will not respond to the needs of the majority. and a debt driven relief without reform. Kalahi-CIDSS have 571. The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) of CCTs is the backbone complemented by Kalahi-CIDSS (Kapit Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan-Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services) community projects and SEA-K (Self-employment Assistance-Kaunlaran) livelihood support. The targets. refers to “industrial and occupational adjustments” and to those at “risk from displacement or facing potential income losses” due to “industrial restructuring. be broadly developmental – in the specific inequitable conditions of the Philippine economy.” Instead of correcting this.” The CCT. from one million under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration in 2010. will give enough income and economy that will give social services to the people. would this so-called social protection respond to the needs of the majority?” asked Africa. What the country needs is a progressive economy that will create jobs. But Africa asked. the critique said.” The plan also says a lot about building infrastructure projects. the critique stressed. “Infrastructure for what? Aquino said that there is a big problem on infrastructure but it is not true that it will solve the problem. Hence. “There are about 100 million Filipinos in the country. expensive to target. it will tighten public spending and reduce outlays for domestic development in terms of public infrastructure. established foreign. According to Ibon.Window-dressing poverty Africa said that the inclusion of the CCT in the plan is an acceptance of the fact that many Filipinos did not benefit from globalization. The critique also said. “At any rate.445 families (2016).2 billion ($488 million) in 2011. the Aquino administration doubled the target to 2. however.” What the country really needs 11 . the impact of these programs are unlikely to be meaningful or sustained given larger unresolved problems with the economy. and how export-oriented corporations using the improved infrastructure may reduce their costs of doing business. water. The plan also has an imbalanced fiscal policy. the globalized system of production and various international agreements. Again. The plan also plays up a so-called convergence of social protection programs. The government even doubled the target beneficiaries of CCT.

Africa said. the only point is if the Philippine government is going to deal with foreign investors there should be mutual benefits. Ibon also noted how the plan acclaims “private actors” – from the smallest self-employed entrepreneurs to the largest conglomerates – (for creating) productive jobs and incomes. Such benefits where the greater majority will gain from. he said it again in his inauguration. microinsurance. The critique also pointed out that that the country’s poor development experience with the free market underscores the need for a radical overhaul of socioeconomic policies. But currently. and disaster risk reduction. Thus. agro-forestry and fisheries. According to the critique. However.” The plan also promotes Public-Private Partnership (PPP).” meaning the private sector will charge for their service. they can’t use. underpaid workers and small employees who are country’s principal producers. he also said that in his first State of the Nation Address. Ibon said. It is urgent to strengthen the Philippine economy if the lives of Filipinos are to improve. sewerage and sanitation. majority of the people are poor and they cannot afford to pay.” However. He also added that it is the country’s resources that are being used and the country’s workforce who are working for foreign investors. the critique pointed out. agro-industries. power. farm and fish trading centers. hence the Filipino people should also benefit from their profits. irrigation. classrooms and subcontracted education services. housing development. it will keep the Filipinos poor including those who momentarily received cash dole-outs and the plan will keep inequality in the country severe.” 12 . Africa stressed that free market economics will not result in development for the economy and the people. PPPs will be “(maximized) as a strategy in industry clustering. It also added that PPPs will be sought out in a vast range of areas. mineral and human resources rather than narrow elite. “A national economics is about mutual benefits. If the poor can’t pay. “This means building the domestic economy and ensuring that the majority benefit from the country’s rich agricultural. backwardness and underdevelopment.” said Africa. transport. chapter one says there will be transparent and responsive governance to ensure the success of big ticket PPP projects. chapter two says debt management will include seeking financing for PPP initiatives. according to Africa. it’s the other way around: foreign investors are plundering the country’s resources and the Filipinos are exploited so that they would rake in big profits.According to the critique. It has low ambitions and over simplifies the problems of the country. health facilities and health insurance. “Users pay is escalating and unaffordable pricing for public infrastructure and social services. post-harvest services. aquatic.” Africa said that Aquino’s PDP is his last chance to prove that he wants genuine change for the country.” the critique said. The country will not close its doors from any foreign investors that have interests in investing in the Philippines. “It’s all about old and problematic ways of managing the economy. chapter three says the Philippines will be promoted abroad as an “ideal partner” in PPPs. “It is his campaign promise. the plan will not create jobs for Filipinos. Africa added that Aquino’s PDP is just disappointing. ”the plan hails PPPs for (intensifying) the culture of competitiveness. “This means that the private sector should be supported and allowed to profit from providing public goods and services. Local Government Units too will enter into PPPs. the country’s solution should be nationalist economics. water. Africa also added that the plan promotes “a user pays culture.” Ibon’s critique also says that the plan is not decisive in addressing the country’s poverty. The critique said “this focus on propertied profit-seekers disappointingly glosses over the millions of landless farmers.

” The CCT. The government even doubled the target beneficiaries of CCT. aside from building classrooms through various procurement modalities under the government’s PPP program. the globalized system of production and various international agreements. The critique also said.“The danger of escalating and unaffordable pricing is particularly hazardous in health. the critique said.3 million in 2011 – correspondingly increasing the CCT budget from P10 billion ($232 million) in 2010 to P21. He said that the social protection programs will not respond to the needs of the majority. housing will be privatized. that CCT is unsustainable. including the country’s poorest. including workable PPP schemes for socialized housing development and develop PPPs for onsite upgrading and resettlement.” which will further promote PPPs in the health sector “ranging from investments for tertiary care to involving private practice midwives in the delivery of primary services. MRT/LRT and highway rates from past privatization. power.” The government is systematically turning vital social services into opportunities for private profitmaking rather than directly providing these so that it will be accessible to everyone. the expanded privatization effort will even erode the government’s technical capacity to regulate public infrastructure. develop a financing framework for relocation and resettlement.with an eventual 4. “The plan cannot but acknowledge the adverse impact of globalization policies even if it says this in a roundabout manner. expensive to target. utilities and services. and a debt driven relief without reform. According to Ibon.” “The PPP shall also be encouraged in addressing critical and basic educational inputs including the outsourced delivery of basic education services by qualified private service providers. Ibon said.” Window-dressing poverty Africa said that the inclusion of the CCT in the plan is an acceptance of the fact that many Filipinos did not benefit from globalization. “In reality. “The plan is explicit about seeking to use “national health budgets and subsidies to promote PPP for health” including “providing direct incentives for private sector participation. the Aquino administration doubled the target to 2. What the country needs is a progressive economy that will create jobs. Africa said. education.” “The plan also seeks to create an investment-friendly environment through PPPs. 13 .” the critique said. Health. the plan merely proposes so-called social protection. The sector is not necessarily infallible or efficient and problematic projects can have major cost overruns or result in poor delivery of services. would this so-called social protection respond to the needs of the majority?” asked Africa. the plan pushes for more privatization. However. The country is already faced with excessively high water. Ibon said. refers to “industrial and occupational adjustments” and to those at “risk from displacement or facing potential income losses” due to “industrial restructuring. Also. will give enough income and economy that will give social services to the people.3 million reached over the entire plan period.” Instead of correcting this. particularly CCTs. the critique said. “There are about 100 million Filipinos in the country. the worst cases may even involve bailouts. from one million under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration in 2010. significant public resources may end up being diverted for private gain. education and housing – which already see expensive health care and high tuition and other fees upon commercialization. The critique also said.2 billion ($488 million) in 2011.

corporate and landed elites will then likely gain. “This means building the domestic economy and ensuring that the majority benefit from the country’s rich agricultural.445 families (2016). and how export-oriented corporations using the improved infrastructure may reduce their costs of doing business. He also added that it is the country’s resources that are being used and the country’s workforce who are working for foreign investors. Such benefits where the greater majority will gain from. Again. the critique stressed. mineral and human resources rather than narrow elite. Kalahi-CIDSS have 571. social investments and welfare spending. 725 household beneficiaries (2011) and SEA-K with 28.” said Africa. It is urgent to strengthen the Philippine economy if the lives of Filipinos are to improve. The critique said that the plan asserts that “inadequate infrastructure is a major constraint” so “massive investment in physical infrastructure” is a key strategy to make growth inclusive and to reduce poverty. Ibon said. Thus. Ibon said. are very small compared to the grave problems of some 65 million poor Filipinos. the only point is if the Philippine government is going to deal with foreign investors there should be mutual benefits. Africa stressed that free market economics will not result in development for the economy and the people. established foreign. Africa said it is clear how big firms participating in PPPs will benefit from guaranteed profits.The plan also plays up a so-called convergence of social protection programs. Africa said. the country’s solution should be nationalist economics. The country will not close its doors from any foreign investors that have interests in investing in the Philippines. the critique pointed out. the impact of these programs are unlikely to be meaningful or sustained given larger unresolved problems with the economy. The critique said the plan seeks to increase taxes paid by the poor while avoiding taxing the rich. “The plan argues that the government faces deficit problems. The targets. The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) of CCTs is the backbone complemented by Kalahi-CIDSS (Kapit Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan-Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services) community projects and SEA-K (Self-employment Assistance-Kaunlaran) livelihood support. Ibon said. it is important to ask if this will have a desired effect – as in. it will keep the Filipinos poor including those who momentarily received cash dole-outs and the plan will keep inequality in the country severe. power and elsewhere is vital for a strong economy. it’s the other way around: foreign investors are plundering the country’s resources and the Filipinos are exploited so that they would rake in big profits. But Africa asked. “Infrastructure for what? Aquino said that there is a big problem on infrastructure but it is not true that it will solve the problem. aquatic. The plan also has an imbalanced fiscal policy.” Ibon said that there is no doubt that building physical infrastructure in transport. it will tighten public spending and reduce outlays for domestic development in terms of public infrastructure. Hence. “At any rate. be broadly developmental – in the specific inequitable conditions of the Philippine economy. hence the Filipino people should also benefit from their profits.” 14 . the plan will not create jobs for Filipinos. But currently.” What the country really needs According to the critique. “A national economics is about mutual benefits. however. water.” The plan also says a lot about building infrastructure projects. The critique also pointed out that that the country’s poor development experience with the free market underscores the need for a radical overhaul of socioeconomic policies.

“It is his campaign promise. “It’s all about old and problematic ways of managing the economy. he also said that in his first State of the Nation Address. he said it again in his inauguration.” Ibon’s critique also says that the plan is not decisive in addressing the country’s poverty. Africa added that Aquino’s PDP is just disappointing.” However. backwardness and underdevelopment 15 . It has low ambitions and over simplifies the problems of the country.Africa said that Aquino’s PDP is his last chance to prove that he wants genuine change for the country.