|
ON
Tuesday the President signed into law the General
Appropriations Act of 2008, dashing fears the period of
operating under a reenacted budget might be extended,
with all its attendant complications.
That it
took this long—nearly the end of the first quarter, thus
wiping out a fourth of the opportunity period for
marshalling the additional resources for human
development that civil-society groups and concerned
lawmakers so patiently pitched for—should be one
important lesson learned in the budget process. Let’s
hope the deliberations later this year for the 2009
appropriations will be completed, and the law signed, in
December, as it should be—although this early some
pundits aren’t betting on that happening because 2009 is
the eve of an election year, and we all know from recent
years’ experience that budgets for these periods are
often marred by excessive politicking. Anyway, hope
springs eternal, and the experience with the 2008 budget
should provide some cause for optimism that with enough
political will by lawmakers and the Executive, and the
determination of activists to engage them, we could be
on the road to using the budget as a better tool for
governance.
That
aside, what is there about this year’s budget that gives
occasion for hope? For one thing, passage of the
P1.23-trillion national budget was marked by vigorous
people’s participation, mainly through the Alternative
Budget Initiative (ABI) convened by Social Watch
Philippines, which has been at this for the past two
years.
The 2008
budget contains P5-billion additional allocations
advocated by ABI. These additional allocations, in the
view of Social Watch convenor Leonor Briones, is a high
mark in the campaign to make people play a bigger role
in crafting the budget, as they are, after all, the
rightful holders of the power of the purse, a power
exercised through Congress.
To be
sure, the additional allocations for development, versus
the P600 billion for debt service, are still nowhere
near the P94-billion additional resources estimated to
be needed to meet the Millennium Development Goal
requirements for 2008, according to Briones.
That
being the case, it becomes even more crucial for
citizens to make sure the scarce resources are not
reduced further by wastage to either corruption or
incompetence. In short, the work is not even half done.
As the
still-playing NBN-ZTE telenovela shows, implementation
of reforms can make or break even the best intentions.
Reforms in the vetting of loan-funded programs and
projects, so painstakingly built through the years by
reformists, have apparently been set aside in the haste
to ram through projects such as the national broadband
network. And even before this, we continue to pay for
certain ill-conceived loan-funded projects that were
originated from the Marcos regime, then by its four
successor administrations.
In
short, as the former national treasurer keeps reminding
people, the budget can only be a tool for good
governance if people safeguard the use of resources
every step of the way.
“Only
continued vigilance will end, and not just moderate, the
corruption that is prevalent in these present times,”
Briones told a forum on Wednesday.
Which
brings us to the next part of the problem: fighting the
bane of corruption. On Tuesday, after signing the
budget, President Arroyo prodded Congress to help craft
a comprehensive anticorruption framework, apparently a
reaction to the tag of “most corrupt” Asian country
earlier given by a Hong Kong-based think tank. She said
all government officials have been alerted to the PTG
initiative, which allows a full disclosure of all
documents related to vital projects.
Expectedly, Mrs. Arroyo’s call to Congress to craft an
anticorruption framework was quickly belittled by Sen.
Panfilo Lacson, who described the call as “already as
good as sunk, no thanks to her tolerance and continued
cover-up of corruption-laden practices in government.”
In
short, a “grand case of lip service.” Seeing the long
list of still-festering corruption issues to which this
administration has failed to put closure to, either by
its genius at stonewalling, misleading or hiding
documents or witnesses, one is not surprised at Lacson’s
reaction. He also accuses her of “passing the buck to
Congress,” which reinforces the perception of her lack
of political will to address corruption.
The
senator is sore at the recent use by Malacañang “of
funds and resources of the Philippine Charity
Sweepstakes Office and of government-run and
government-sequestered television networks to air
prime-time smear jobs” against him.
He
thinks the smear jobs, aired before the lotto draws to
ensure high visibility, were apparently part of the
effort to cover up for the $329.48-million NBN mess,
asserts the senator.
The
President, he stressed, cannot keep spouting rhetoric
about fighting corruption but fail to lead by example;
that example being not only in her own conduct, but in
her ability to rein in anyone close to or working below
her who might be involved in shenanigans.
As
things stand now, she has displayed some political
will—in the view of House appropriations panel chief
Edcel Lagman—in not subjecting to a direct item veto the
augmentations Congress provided for basic social
services, like education and health, as well as for
infrastructure development, from the P25.9-B cut from
debt-service payments.
But her
efforts are set back, he thinks, by her veto on another
matter: of the special provision prohibiting interest
payments for tainted, fraudulent and useless loans
pending their renegotiation or condonation.
It is
this tendency to keep taking two, three, five steps
backward each time she takes one step forward that could
keep dragging the Executive away from any decisive
initiative to reform the government. Which is truly a
pity, because, unlike her predecessors, she has been one
lucky leader (we disdain using Joey Salceda’s colorful
tag) who may end up squandering some of her own best
initiatives by a lack of will to confront the evils of
greed and corruption. |
