With reference to the Jan. 14 editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, may I raise a couple of points.

The first, and most important, is that the poor are people, not percentage points. When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo first came to power in 2001, 62 percent of Filipinos were classified as poor (in self-rated survey series of the poll group Social Weather Stations) versus 52 percent today. But in 2001 that was 62 percent of 78 million Filipinos ? or 48 million Filipinos. Today the 52 percent of a population of 90 million is 47 million ? only a slight improvement from eight years ago.

As to 2007 being a good year, we can?t fully agree. The reported growth of 7.2 percent was not because of a strongly growing economy but because of a numerical oddity. Import growth is subtracted in the equation for the gross domestic product (GDP). In 2007 imports fell by five percent, the double negative meant that this rate of fall was added to GDP ? a double-negative becoming a plus. Had imports grown at their previous more normal rate of around five percent, GDP growth would have been about 4.8 percent, much more in line with anecdotal evidence.

One must ask: How could imports have fallen if the economy was growing strongly; intriguingly how could oil imports fall by some 6.6 percent? The only explanation we can think of is that smuggling must have been up.

We fully agree with the editorial?s recommendations to give bigger IRA (internal revenue allotments) to those most in need; the inequality in the Philippines is one of the worst in Asia.

Time to narrow the gap, the World Bank?s suggestion would help do that.

PETER WALLACE, president, The Wallace Business Forum, 14/F Sagittarius Bldg., HV de la Costa St., Salcedo Village, Makati City