Old problems

THERE IS no denying that the economy posted unprecedented growth rates during the past six years of the Aquino administration. Foreign multilateral financial institutions are all praises for the Philippines’ economic performance, which was capped by the first-ever investment-grade credit rating given by international debt watchers.

But we all know the downside: Economic growth has failed to trickle down to those sectors that need uplift the most. Decades-old problems linger and are seemingly unsolvable, the most pressing being poverty and lack of infrastructure. The sad fact in all this is that past and present leaders knew the solutions, as evidenced by their campaign promises—promises that get forgotten once they are elected.

The private sector has time and again reminded those in office, as well as those seeking the highest elective posts, what the economy needs to grow and how to make such growth benefit the low-income classes. Last week, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), one of the oldest and biggest organizations in the country, announced that it would propose—yet again—to the next president an aggressive economic and governance reform roadmap summed up by the acronym “GIANT STEPS.” The objective is to sustain the economic momentum and, more importantly, create more jobs to address the poverty problem.

Creating jobs will be a major challenge to the next administration. The lack of opportunities at home has led millions of Filipinos to seek work abroad. In 2015, 6,092 new workers were deployed overseas each day, rising from a little more than 5,000 in 2013-2014 and from over 4,000 in 2010-2012.

The proposed roadmap, according to the PCCI, sums up what is needed to provide more jobs to Filipinos. GIANT STEPS stands for good governance, infrastructure, agriculture, new era of manufacturing, tourism, science, technology, education, people and skills.

Infrastructure—or the severe lack of it—will again be the foremost issue to be faced by the next administration. President Aquino was off to a good start in 2010 when he announced his flagship economic program—the public-private partnership (PPP) scheme. It was welcomed by the local and international community as it had the potential to meet the country’s growing need for new airports, roads, ports, telecommunications, schools and irrigation facilities. Alas, after six years the PPP is saddled by delay after delay, and many of the more important projects have yet to be bid out.

Agriculture, the sector that employs about a third of the population and where poverty incidence is highest, is another sector that has been neglected by both the present and past administrations. From a self-sufficient producer of rice, for instance, the Philippines has become one of the world’s biggest importers of the staple.

Manufacturing’s share in the economy also shrank in the past 30 years with the rise of cheap-labor countries like China. A classic example is the demise of the garments and textile industry, which was among the top dollar earners in the 1970s and early 1980s. Tourism has also long been touted as a low-hanging fruit (which means there is little effort needed to promote this to attract visitors), yet there seems to be no overall blueprint on how to boost it.

“Good governance” has likewise been the common campaign slogan of candidates for the presidency. But good governance should not only be about stamping out graft and corruption; it is as much about reducing bureaucracy and red tape, providing consistent rules and regulations (remember how policies are changed in the middle of the game, or how the courts interfere in purely business deals?) and reforming the tax system to make it competitive with our neighbors.

PCCI president George Barcelon observed, correctly, that all the presidentiables had the interest of the country at heart. But it will take more than this to uplift an entire country and not just the few sectors that remain protected by law to the detriment of consumers. In 2003, or before the national elections the following year, the PCCI noted that many politicians, despite knowing the reforms needed to jump-start the economy, dared not bite the bullet because doing so would be politically unpalatable. It said then that the country needed someone with tremendous political will, not just a mandate from the people, and that he or she must not be beholden to anyone but the people.

This remains true today.