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 IIIs sixth and last State of the Nation Address (SONA), the
Bagong Alyansang Makabayan has but one message: the US-Aquino regimes
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.
Aquinos 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.
Aquinos 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 Presidents
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. Aquinos
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 peoples 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.

Meanwhile, poverty rates remain practically unchanged at 28% despite P178B

poured by Aquino in conditional cash transfers from 2010-2015. In fact, the ranks of
the poor and unemployed continued to swell, increasing by some 2.5 million to reach
25.8 million poor in 2014. Surveys show that there more people consider themselves
poor now than when Aquino first came to power. Aquinos likes to boast that the
Philippines has the highest GDP growth rate in Asia but ignores the fact that on a per
capita basis, Philippine GDP is lower than neighboring Malaysia, Thailand and
Indonesia.
Puppetry to US imperialism
In the guise of countering Chinas expansionist moves, Aquino has allowed the return
of US military bases via the RP-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement
(EDCA). This is a big setback for the cause of Philippine sovereignty, making the
Philippines a pawn in the US pivot to Asia. In the economic sphere, by hosting the
Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit this November, 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.
War and human rights violations
While Aquino trumpets the legacy of his parents who were both victims of the Marcos
dictatorship, his regime proves no less brutal when it comes to its critics and
suspected enemies. From 2010 to 2015, there were 238 victims of extrajudicial
killings and 270 cases of frustrated killings, mostly of activists, media personnel and
suspected rebels. There have been 26 forced disappearances and 110 torture cases.
Under Aquino, schools, medical facilities and churches have been taken over by the
military for use in its counter-insurgency campaign, affecting 169,964 people, mostly
school children and indigenous peoples communities. Of the 527 political prisoners
languishing in jail under the Aquino administration, 17 are consultants to the NDFPGRP peace talks.
Such brazen violation of human rights against those critical of the administration and
the system it represents shows Aquinos duplicity in the peace process, both with the
NDFP and MILF. In fact, the draft Bangsamoro Basic Law, which is being continually
watered down in Congress by Aquinos allies, will most likely end up like the ARMM
Organic Act an instrument for capitulation. As for the NDFP-GRP talks, it never took
a step forward under Aquino, who has continued the brutal military campaigns
against our own people.
Tama na. Tapusin na.
It is in this light that the patriotic and democratic forces under the Bagong Alyansang
Makabayan is calling for an end to Aquinos failed leadership and an end to the
oppressive and anti-people political, economic and socio-cultural system that his
regime represents.

We vow to mobilize thousands tomorrow for the Peoples SONA 2015 nationwide
protest. In the succeeding months, we will continue to organize and mobilize our
people to thwart Aquinos agenda of continuing his failed legacy after 2016.

This years State of the Nation Address (SONA) is President B. S. Aquino

IIIs last. He is expected to deliver a powerful speech replete with his
regimes achievements for the last five years with a summation of the
legacy he will leave behind. Speculation is rife, 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.
But the smoke-and-mirrors presidency that this column described upon its
inauguration in 2010 has run out of magic tricks, especially when it has to
make something big out of basically nothing much. All the catchy, folksy
slogans, in Filipino even, have boomeranged because they have been
unmasked as empty or false, and calculated to deceive and disarm.
The hard sell is that the Aquino presidency is qualitatively different,
especially from the one that preceded it, that of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
Former President Arroyo is the proverbial whipping girl as far as Mr. Aquino
and his coterie are concerned, for all things wrong in government before
Aquino, an erstwhile non-performer in Congress, arrived on the political
scene.
But unlike the Arroyo regime that at least saw the successful prosecution
and conviction for plunder of Mrs. Arroyos predecessor, Joseph Erap
Estrada, the cases against Arroyo have either been set aside, dismissed,
or are languishing in judicial limbo. The student activists have a term for it:
Mr. Aquino has been Noynoying, content with keeping Arroyo under
hospital arrest and somewhat constrained from plotting against him, the
ends of justice be hanged.
In reality, Aquinos campaign for good governance has spared the truly
accountable from among the kabarkada, kaklase, kabarilan: Police
General Alan Purisima, Local Governments Undersecretary Rico Puno,
Agriculture Secretary Proceso Alcala, Land Transportation Office Assistant
Secretary Virginia Torres, Budget Secretary Butch Abad, and Presidential
Peace Adviser Ging Deles.
The Malacaang propaganda line is that the Aquino regime made a real
difference to the hardscrabble lives of the majority of Filipinos. But the
reality is more entrenched poverty and economic backwardness;
unprecedented inequality marked by healthy profit making for
multinational corporations and the local elite; untouched feudal relations
in the countryside; auctioning of the national patrimony; and unabated
environmental destruction. This in the midst of impressive growth rates,
credit-rating upgrades, and high scores in competitiveness by foreign
and local big business and the World Bank. (For a more comprehensive
analysis, seeSONA 2015: A Legacy of a Disconnected Economy)

The illusion that the Aquino regime has been trying to conjure is that it has
championed national sovereignty and defended territorial integrity,
pointing to the governments 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 Aquino governments acquiescence to the lopsided Enhanced Defense
Cooperation Agreement, on top of the obsequious implementation of the
Visiting Forces Agreement and the Mutual Defense Treaty, is covered-up as
a necessary adjunct to building a credible external defense.
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, or worse, an alignment of
national interests. 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; to the economic losses, social degradation, and political costs
of hosting the two biggest US bases outside the US mainland; 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.
The big picture moreover shows the surrender of economic sovereignty to
international financial institutions dominated by the US, the European
Union, and other advanced capitalist countries, to their governments
especially the US, and to the powerful lobby of foreign chambers of
commerce in favor of neoliberal policies and programs. Such policies as
liberalization, deregulation, 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.
Under Aquino, 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. Whats more,
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 lie that Aquino has been peddling is that his bosses are the Filipino
people, especially the poor and disadvantaged. But as he readies his last
SONA, the main thoroughfare leading to the Batasang Pambansa looks like
a war zone fortified with concrete barriers, concertina wire, and container
vans, to be secured by a 6,000-strong police force and standby military
contingent.

Aquinos real bosses have clearly emerged foreign multinational

corporations, the United States, the domestic capitalists, and the big
landlords.
On the human rights front, Aquino will not tire of crowing about the law
passed to compensate human rights victims of the US-backed Marcos
dictatorship, the arrest of the murderous General Jovito Palparan, and the
counterinsurgency program deceptively dubbed Oplan Bayanihan that
pretends to uphold the pursuit of peace, human rights and development
while militarily crushing the insurgents and terrorists.
Aquino however will not admit to supporting efforts to deny compensation
to Marcos victims identified or associated with the local communist-led
revolutionary movement; 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. Military officials
implicated in the torture, disappearance and killings of activists have been
promoted and appointed to sensitive and top positions, to the chagrin of
families of victims and human rights defenders.
Gross violations of human rights are now papered over with references to
human security, whole-of-nation approach, etc., and are even peddled
as the militarys contribution to community development. But the effect on
the communities of indigenous peoples, landless farmers and farm
workers is the same: massive displacement, with entire families
evacuating from their homes to escape militarization; extrajudicial killings
and enforced disappearances; and illegal arrests with prolonged detention
on the basis of trumped-up charges in connection with the ongoing armed
conflict.
Most recently, there is the stepped-up and brazen harassment of activists,
union organizers in the private and public sector, progressive church
people and even health professionals, coupled with the filing of a slew of
baseless criminal charges in the months leading up to Aquinos SONA.
Alarmingly, charges such as human trafficking, illegal detention, and the
violation of childrens 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,
as what happened last week in Davao City.
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.
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.
5

What Aquino actually leaves behind is a bloody human rights record,

peace agreements reneged upon, and promises broken.

read:https://envicluster.wordpress.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 Aquinos social contract
with the Filipino people.
At a press briefing held inQuezon City, groups belonging to the Caucus to Green the MTPDP
expressed apprehension that the key inputs by citizens groups to Green the MTPDP were
omitted.
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, ecological and organic agriculture,
disaster risk reduction and management, improved ecosystem, soil and water management, and
sustainable, off grid, decentralized, community based, efficient and new renewable energy
systems were noticeably absent in the MTPDP that was approved by the Neda Board.
We were particularly distressed that the proposal for a Green Audit that will allow a
continuing review and adjustment of the countrys development plan in terms of its consistency
with environment sustainability was also omitted, Jonathan Ronquillo, environment campaigner
of La Liga, stressed.
The provision for a Green Audit originally formed part of the draft Chapter on Environment
and Natural Resources. It was, however, unilaterally excluded in the final draft MTPDP,
Ronquillo stressed.
Worse, Ronquillo said that disaster risk reduction, mitigation and recovery projects, were also
delisted from the Investment Priorities Plan for 2011 based on short economic returns.
It seems that our pleas for President Aquino to lead the path toward greening the MTPDP, to
break free from the failed development track of the previous administration, was not considered,
or worse, ignored, he said.
We have implored the Aquino administration time and again not to relent in pursuing
conservation, 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.

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

According to Ronquillo, in its relentless pursuit of growth, the previous administration failed to
recognize the already over-stretched carrying capacity of the environment and natural resources.
More than anything, the previous MTPDP failed to consider that the environment is the social
security system of the poor, and without environment sustainability, millions of Filipinos would
be denied the opportunity for sustainable growth, he lamented.
He said: Because of this, poverty has not been curbed, food security has not been achieved, and
our national vulnerability to climate change has increased. Clearly, the last decade was a lost
decade for environment sustainability and sustainable development and more could have been
done towards this end. This is the challenge that President Aquinos MTPDP should address.
Knowing fully that this situation must be reversed, we, 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), Alternative
Budget Initiative-Environment Cluster (ABI-ENVI), Angkan ng Mandirigma UP Diliman
Chapter, Asia Intercontinental Networks of Organic Farmers, Batas Tomasino, UST, Bluewater
Consultancy, Convergence for Community-Centered Area Development, Earthday Network
Phils., EcoWaste Coalition, Education for Life Foundation (ELF), Go Organic! Phils.,
Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Haribon Foundation, Haribon Foundation, Institute for Climate and
Sustainable Cities (ICSC), Institute for Philippine Cooperative and Social Enterprise
Development (IPCSED),Intercontinental Network of Organic Farmers Organizations (INOFO
Philippines), Interface Development Interventions, Inc (IDIS) of Davao, Mindanao, KAAKBAY,
Movement for the Advancement of Sustainable Agriculture (MASA), One Organic Movement
(OOM), Partido Kalikasan (PK), Partnership for Clean Air, Philippine Rural Reconstruction
Movement (PRRM), RESILIENCE, Nurturing Disaster Ready Cities and Communities, Rice
Watch and Action Network (RWAN), Saganang Buhay sa Liga ng Bayan Foundation, Inc., Sagip
Sierra Madre Environmental Society, Inc. (SSMESI), Sibol ng Agham at Technolohiya, Inc.
(SIBAT), Sierra Tourism Consultancy, Social Watch Philippines (SWP), World Wildlife Fund
Philippines and Zero Waste Recycling Movement of the Philippines.
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, 2011
The crafting of the new MTPDP under President Aquinos leadership provided renewed interest
from a broad range of citizens 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 Presidents Social Contract with the Filipino
People.
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. Any plan for the countrys growth
and development will unfortunately be an exercise in futility IF it does not integrate concerted,
8

extraordinary and urgent actions on climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction and on our
strategic transformation to a low-carbon economy. This is the reason why in all the processes, we
have insisted on the need to green the MTPDP, to make the MTPDP climate change
responsive.
We express apprehension that in the recently approved 2011-2016 MTPDP, key inputs of
citizens groups were noticeably absent, particularly in the following arenas: a) food self
sufficiency based on sustainable, ecological and organic agriculture; b) disaster risk reduction &
management; c) improved ecosystem, soil and water management; and, d) sustainable, off grid,
decentralized, community based, efficient and new renewable energy systems.
We are particularly distressed that the proposal for a Green Audit allowing for a continuing
review and adjustment of the countrys 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.
We are alarmed that disaster risk reduction, mitigation and recovery projects were delisted from
the Investment Priorities Plan for 2011 based on short economic returns.
We have humbly urged President Aquino to lead the path towards greening the MTPDP, to
break free from the failed development track of the previous administration.
We have implored the government time and again not to relent in pursuing conservation,
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.
Looking at the situation we face today, it is apparent that the previous MTPDP did not go far
enough. In its relentless pursuit of growth, it failed to recognize the already over stretched
carrying capacity of our environment and natural resources. More than anything, it failed to
consider that the environment is the social security system of the poor, and without environment
sustainability, millions of Filipinos would be denied the opportunity for sustainable growth.
As a result, poverty has not been curbed, food security has not been achieved, and our national
vulnerability to climate change has increased. 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, we, the Caucus to Green the MTPDP ask the
government, 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/

Aquinos development plan, mere rehash of

Arroyos policies
ANNE MARXZE UMIL JULY 5, 2011 1 COMMENT CCT, IBON, NEDA, NOYNOY AQUINO, PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN,

PPP

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. The
critique said this focus on propertied profit-seekers disappointingly glosses over the millions of
landless farmers, underpaid workers and small employees who are countrys principal producers.
The plan also promotes Public-Private Partnership (PPP), according to Africa. This means that the
private sector should be supported and allowed to profit from providing public goods and services,
the critique said.
According to the critique, 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; chapter three says the Philippines will be promoted abroad as
an ideal partner in PPPs, PPPs will be (maximized) as a strategy in industry clustering; the plan
hails PPPs for (intensifying) the culture of competitiveness.
It also added that PPPs will be sought out in a vast range of areas; transport, power, water, sewerage
and sanitation; agro-industries, agro-forestry and fisheries; irrigation, post-harvest services, farm
and fish trading centers; microinsurance; classrooms and subcontracted education services; health
facilities and health insurance; housing development; and disaster risk reduction. Local Government
Units too will enter into PPPs.
Africa also added that the plan promotes a user pays culture, meaning the private sector will
charge for their service. Users pay is escalating and unaffordable pricing for public infrastructure
and social services. However, majority of the people are poor and they cannot afford to pay. If the
poor cant pay, they cant use.
The danger of escalating and unaffordable pricing is particularly hazardous in health, education and
housing which already see expensive health care and high tuition and other fees upon
commercialization, the critique said.
The country is already faced with excessively high water, power, MRT/LRT and highway rates from
past privatization, the critique said. However, the plan pushes for more privatization.
The critique also said, In reality, significant public resources may end up being diverted for private
gain. The sector is not necessarily infallible or efficient and problematic projects can have major cost
overruns or result in poor delivery of services; the worst cases may even involve bailouts. Also, the
expanded privatization effort will even erode the governments technical capacity to regulate public
infrastructure, utilities and services.
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, including the
countrys poorest, Ibon said.
Health, education, housing will be privatized. 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, 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 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, aside from
building classrooms through various procurement modalities under the governments PPP
program.
The plan also seeks to create an investment-friendly environment through PPPs, develop a
financing framework for relocation and resettlement, including workable PPP schemes for socialized
housing development and develop PPPs for onsite upgrading and resettlement.

10

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 plan cannot but acknowledge the adverse impact of
globalization policies even if it says this in a roundabout manner.
The CCT, the critique said, refers to industrial and occupational adjustments and to those at risk
from displacement or facing potential income losses due to industrial restructuring, the globalized
system of production and various international agreements. Instead of correcting this, Ibon said,
the plan merely proposes so-called social protection, particularly CCTs.
There are about 100 million Filipinos in the country, would this so-called social protection respond
to the needs of the majority? asked Africa. He said that the social protection programs will not
respond to the needs of the majority. What the country needs is a progressive economy that will
create jobs, will give enough income and economy that will give social services to the people, Africa
said.
The critique also said, that CCT is unsustainable, expensive to target, and a debt driven relief without
reform. The government even doubled the target beneficiaries of CCT. According to Ibon, from one
million under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyos administration in 2010, the Aquino administration doubled
the target to 2.3 million in 2011 correspondingly increasing the CCT budget from P10 billion ($232
million) in 2010 to P21.2 billion ($488 million) in 2011- with an eventual 4.3 million reached over the
entire plan period.
The plan also plays up a so-called convergence of social protection programs, Ibon said. 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, Ibon said, are very small compared to the grave problems of some 65 million poor Filipinos;
Kalahi-CIDSS have 571, 725 household beneficiaries (2011) and SEA-K with 28,445 families (2016). At
any rate, the impact of these programs are unlikely to be meaningful or sustained given larger
unresolved problems with the economy.
The plan also says a lot about building infrastructure projects. 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.
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.
Ibon said that there is no doubt that building physical infrastructure in transport, water, power and
elsewhere is vital for a strong economy, however, it is important to ask if this will have a desired
effect as in, be broadly developmental in the specific inequitable conditions of the Philippine
economy.
Africa said it is clear how big firms participating in PPPs will benefit from guaranteed profits, and
how export-oriented corporations using the improved infrastructure may reduce their costs of doing
business. Again, the critique stressed, established foreign, corporate and landed elites will then likely
gain.
The plan also has an imbalanced fiscal policy. 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. Hence, it will tighten public spending and reduce outlays for domestic development in
terms of public infrastructure, social investments and welfare spending.
What the country really needs

11

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

12

The danger of escalating and unaffordable pricing is particularly hazardous in health, education and
housing which already see expensive health care and high tuition and other fees upon
commercialization, the critique said.
The country is already faced with excessively high water, power, MRT/LRT and highway rates from
past privatization, the critique said. However, the plan pushes for more privatization.
The critique also said, In reality, significant public resources may end up being diverted for private
gain. The sector is not necessarily infallible or efficient and problematic projects can have major cost
overruns or result in poor delivery of services; the worst cases may even involve bailouts. Also, the
expanded privatization effort will even erode the governments technical capacity to regulate public
infrastructure, utilities and services.
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, including the
countrys poorest, Ibon said.
Health, education, housing will be privatized. 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, 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 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, aside from
building classrooms through various procurement modalities under the governments PPP
program.
The plan also seeks to create an investment-friendly environment through PPPs, develop a
financing framework for relocation and resettlement, including workable PPP schemes for socialized
housing development and develop PPPs for onsite upgrading and resettlement.
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 plan cannot but acknowledge the adverse impact of
globalization policies even if it says this in a roundabout manner.
The CCT, the critique said, refers to industrial and occupational adjustments and to those at risk
from displacement or facing potential income losses due to industrial restructuring, the globalized
system of production and various international agreements. Instead of correcting this, Ibon said,
the plan merely proposes so-called social protection, particularly CCTs.
There are about 100 million Filipinos in the country, would this so-called social protection respond
to the needs of the majority? asked Africa. He said that the social protection programs will not
respond to the needs of the majority. What the country needs is a progressive economy that will
create jobs, will give enough income and economy that will give social services to the people, Africa
said.
The critique also said, that CCT is unsustainable, expensive to target, and a debt driven relief without
reform. The government even doubled the target beneficiaries of CCT. According to Ibon, from one
million under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyos administration in 2010, the Aquino administration doubled
the target to 2.3 million in 2011 correspondingly increasing the CCT budget from P10 billion ($232
million) in 2010 to P21.2 billion ($488 million) in 2011- with an eventual 4.3 million reached over the
entire plan period.

13

The plan also plays up a so-called convergence of social protection programs, Ibon said. 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, Ibon said, are very small compared to the grave problems of some 65 million poor Filipinos;
Kalahi-CIDSS have 571, 725 household beneficiaries (2011) and SEA-K with 28,445 families (2016). At
any rate, the impact of these programs are unlikely to be meaningful or sustained given larger
unresolved problems with the economy.
The plan also says a lot about building infrastructure projects. 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.
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.
Ibon said that there is no doubt that building physical infrastructure in transport, water, power and
elsewhere is vital for a strong economy, however, it is important to ask if this will have a desired
effect as in, be broadly developmental in the specific inequitable conditions of the Philippine
economy.
Africa said it is clear how big firms participating in PPPs will benefit from guaranteed profits, and
how export-oriented corporations using the improved infrastructure may reduce their costs of doing
business. Again, the critique stressed, established foreign, corporate and landed elites will then likely
gain.
The plan also has an imbalanced fiscal policy. 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. Hence, it will tighten public spending and reduce outlays for domestic development in
terms of public infrastructure, social investments and welfare spending.
What the country really needs
According to the critique, the plan will not create jobs for Filipinos, it will keep the Filipinos poor
including those who momentarily received cash dole-outs and the plan will keep inequality in the
country severe.
Africa stressed that free market economics will not result in development for the economy and the
people. The critique also pointed out that that the countrys poor development experience with the
free market underscores the need for a radical overhaul of socioeconomic policies. Thus, the
countrys solution should be nationalist economics, Africa said.
A national economics is about mutual benefits. The country will not close its doors from any foreign
investors that have interests in investing in the Philippines, the only point is if the Philippine
government is going to deal with foreign investors there should be mutual benefits. Such benefits
where the greater majority will gain from, said Africa.
He also added that it is the countrys resources that are being used and the countrys workforce who
are working for foreign investors, hence the Filipino people should also benefit from their profits.
But currently, Ibon said, its the other way around: foreign investors are plundering the countrys
resources and the Filipinos are exploited so that they would rake in big profits.
It is urgent to strengthen the Philippine economy if the lives of Filipinos are to improve, the critique
pointed out. This means building the domestic economy and ensuring that the majority benefit
from the countrys rich agricultural, aquatic, mineral and human resources rather than narrow elite.

14

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

15