Governance test: poverty focus

Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Arsenio Balisacan recently revealed a roadmap for poverty reduction under the government’s updated medium-term development plan (“Gov’t unveils suite of poverty reduction measures,” Business, 2/17/14).

For a long while, it was thought that the planning function of the National Economic and Development Authority had been dropped. That function merely meant waiting for “signals” emanating from Washington or from international lending and funding agencies, like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization and some United Nations arms, prescribing directions as to where the country’s economy should go.

Some governments take these generic policy guidelines in take-it-or-leave-it fashion. Our government, however, waits, genuflects and then implements them, with little regard as to whether they respond to the

real needs, priorities and long-term interests of our country and our people. It is unfortunate indeed that the culture of dependency has permeated our government’s decision-making. In the past, there had been programs designed to alleviate poverty, but they were pursued halfheartedly or were insufficiently funded. And because some of these projects were packaged to qualify for loans or grants and followed requirements set by the financial sponsors, social acceptance by the targeted sectors was lukewarm. This explains their low-level of success or even resounding failure. They just served to exacerbate our foreign debt.

To be fair to the Neda work force, I personally witnessed how hard they worked, conducting stakeholder consultations and workshops to gather bottom-up data. But when their findings and recommendations were elevated to top-level decision-makers, these were either realigned, shelved or scuttled, depending on political considerations and interests.

It is fervently hoped that implemented in a serious and decisive manner, Neda’s recent, better-late-than-never initiative will not suffer the fate of its predecessors. It is time this practice of using poverty interventions for political propaganda is stopped. In my long interaction with the grassroots, I have yet to encounter someone who prefers doles to jobs. Most of them have self-esteem, too.

Although details of these

antipoverty measures have yet to surface, the structural plan seems to hit the nail where it fits. With determined pursuit, it should bring about concrete and qualitative transformation in the lives of the people, particularly the poor. This is the test of responsive governance. Otherwise, in light of the perceived helplessness of government in the face of crucial issues, let us just privatize all government institutions, including Malacañang. After all, privatization seems to be the favored trend in the mindset of today’s economic managers.

—EVA M. INCIONG,

BF Homes, Quezon City