Consumers Domain
'Anti-poverty, job-creating' or 'poverty-creating, anti-job'
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. "
--George Orwell
House Speaker Jose de Venecia blamed the Senate for the non-passage of the 2006 national budget. JDV, according to news reports, said that because of this the Senate is responsible for wiping out the funds for "the government's anti-poverty program aimed at creating jobs and activating rural entrepreneurship".
Several years passed under Gloria Arroyo and every year the budget they submit to Congress is always dubbed as "anti-poverty" and "job-creating". But look at where the country is now. Look at where the economy is now. Look at the lives of the ordinary Filipino families now.
The reality is that the economy is simply buoyed by OFW remittances as more and more Filipinos scamper abroad to look for jobs to feed their families. And that increase in remittances is in fact an evidence of the growing scarcity of jobs in the country. Who said the budget is "job-creating"?
Another reality is our economy is highly dependent in the acquisition of new foreign and domestic debts, the issuance of government bonds and treasury bills. Sadly, we are in a debt trap cycle where we also end up spending most of the country's resources to the payment of maturing debts, both interest and principal.
Deducting the allocation for debt servicing to our annual budget, we are left with a measly amount that could not even make a dent in providing for the needs of the population. Annually our government only spend a trickle of the budget to health, education, housing and other social and economic services. Now who said the budget is "anti-poverty"?
"Job-creating", "anti-poverty" -- these are plain bull! I can't help wonder maybe this is sort of a mix up of words. Maybe they actually meant "poverty-creating" and "anti-job"!
* * * * *
(Due to its timeliness and relevance, I would like to feature a statement of FDC signed by Ana Maria R. Nemenzo, its National President. The statement below was issued after Arroyo threatened to invoke her veto power to the cuts made by the Senate on the 2006 proposed budget.)
Let Mrs. Arroyo use her veto power, and add insult to our injury. Let Gloria show us all how her government prioritizes her political survival and the country's credit rating instead of the most basic needs of our people like education and health. And, why not? Lest we forget, among the four post-Marcos regimes, the Arroyo government has borrowed the most but spent the least on basic social services.
The total borrowing of the Arroyo regime has reached P 2.44 trillion. This is more than the combined borrowings of Aquino, Ramos and Estrada administrations, which total P 1.5 trillion. However, as percentage of the national budget this year, the government will be spending a measly 1.3 percent on health and 13.9 percent on education, compared to 32 percent for debt interest payments. Clearly, this government has other priorities in mind. This is the track record of a pretend president dangling to us her veto powers.
This year alone, the government will only be spending 2.4 percent of the target GDP on education and 0.27 percent on health. This is way below the average government spending of countries within the medium human development bracket as stated by the recent UN Human Development Report.
And yet, instead of immediately addressing this depressing situation with the current 2006 budget, Gloria's cohorts in the Bicameral conference are stubbornly pushing for the restoration of cuts made by the Senate on obvious GMA pork funds like the Kilos Asenso and Barangay Kalayaan fund.
The voice of the people is clear. What we want is a national budget that truly addresses people's basic needs for health and education, food and livelihood instead of one that caters to the whims and demands of traditional politicians and creditor banks. We do not want a creditor budget out to appease international lending institutions.
We do not want a trapo budget that abets political freeloaders and corrupt officials. We do not want a national budget loaded with GMA pork funds out to advance the ChaCha train. We do not want a budget teeming with intelligence funds out to stifle legitimate dissent. We need a budget for genuine development not a budget for the political survival of an illegitimate president.
(Send your comments and reactions to: for text messages to 0919-348-6337; for e-mails to ianseruelo@yahoo.com; and for blogs to http://consumersdomain.blogspot.com.)