June 01, 2012


Friendly Observer
By Arthur Keefe

There is more to governance

Recent statements by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank (WB) recognize improvements in the Philippines, but also draw attention to the need for further progress.
The areas they have concentrated on are the high levels of poverty still tolerated here and the issue of governance.
These are connected. They applaud the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) initiative, which for the first time, offers a small degree of income redistribution, but consider it as only first step. For example, it directs small amounts of income to poor children, but does nothing for the elderly, the disabled, or other adults in poverty.

We have suffered the small scale abuse by officials administering the scheme here in San Carlos and as I have commented before, public support for this or any extension of the scheme requires an efficient and crook-free administration. This may have been stopped now, but the lack of consequences or repayment by the official concerned does not bode well for the future. if people are seen to get away with fraud, what is to prevent others from trying similar things in the future?
The World Bank welcomes the campaign to tackle the scourge of corruption in public life but states that good government is much more than this and the almost single minded effort to reduce corruption is diverting attention from other equally important tasks of government.
The very low quality of education at all levels, the falling percentage of college graduates, the absence of universal (even basic) health care, and the failure of so called 'trickle down' economics, whereby the poor and not-so-poor are supposed to benefit from the economic growth which is so obviously benefiting the well-off. All of these represent a failure of government over very many years.
Apologists for the present administration will point to the Kindergaten + 12 years of Basic Education (K12) initiative but they also concede that it is very late and inadequately resourced. They will point to the free Philhealth cards, but acknowledge that they offer very limited benefits and are not yet in the hands of many who need them. As for college graduates, the absence of any strategic planning for manpower requirements, coupled with further fee increases this year, will do nothing to remedy the serious skill shortages in critical areas, such as engineering and technology. Not another year of thousands of unemployable nurses and teachers!
My contention is not that the government is doing nothing, but that it is doing far too little, far too slowly. As long as paying income taxes is seen as optional, with corrupt Bureau of Internal Revenue practices and corrupt businessmen and professionals failing to declare their true income, it is hard to see government having the resources to really make a difference.
Many of those who are most ready to criticize the government are those who cheat the system and the public by refusing to contribute their dues.
The history of so called 'Welfare States' in Europe is not one of unconditional philanthropy by wealthy governments.
Free education in the UK from 1870 was a response to the growing might of Germany and the USA, threatening the British Empire.
Free health care and school meals were responses to the poor health of army recruits needed to fight the Boer War in South Africa in 1900.
Unemployment and sickness benefits (cash payments) were designed in the 1930s to aid the mobility of labor to deal with the Great Depression.
In short, the basis for state welfare was not a moral imperative, but an economic one, and to a degree, a political concession to the emergent labor movement.
Similarly, spreading spending power across the population through redistributive tax and benefits has the effect of promoting economic growth and maintaining social stability. The wide inequality which characterized Victorian England and most of Europe was not sustainable with a universal franchise and an organized working class. Revolutions as occurred in Russia and elsewhere were avoided by economic management in most of Europe.
Economic growth in the Philippines depends on a much wider sharing of the benefits of growth. Social stability and the demise of the armed militants also depend on people feeling they have the opportunity to develop their talents and their standard of living. In short, to feel they have a stake in creating and benefiting from a successful society. 

No comments:

Post a Comment