As we get closer to President Aquino’s State of the Nation Address (Sona) at the end of this month, the key question on many people’s minds is whether his commendable reforms can be sustained.
One significant benefit we must cite is P-Noy’s strengthening of government institutions that were severely weakened during the previous administration. The good news is that if these institutions were strong, then a change of leadership will not necessarily mean the end of good governance. This is because these institutions will be able to continue its good governance momentum into the next administration.
We discuss here a noteworthy institutional reform case that benefits farmers, fisherfolk, and their children who have migrated to the cities.
While 70 percent of our poor are in the rural areas, the remaining 30 percent are mostly from agricultural families who go to the urban centers to seek a better life, somehow fail, and become even poorer.
A government institution that benefited from P-Noy’s reforms is the Philippine Charity and Sweepstakes Office (PCSO).
PCSO Accomplishments
Item 2010 2013
Revenue 3 Billion 16.6 Billion
Cost 7 Billion 1 Billion
Net Cash -4 Billion +15.6 Billion
Analysis
Because of P-Noy’s “matuwid na daan” mantra, the PCSO results are truly impressive. In only three years, revenues increased by more than five times, the costs decreased by seven times, and the P4-billion loss in 2010 was transformed into a P15.6-billion gain in 2013.
Some other achievements during this period are the following:
1) The processing time for PCSO guarantee letters to help the poor was improved 10-fold: from 10 to 90 days to only 1 to 9 days.
2) PCSO not only paid P2.6 billion in unpaid financial obligations, but also remitted P1.7 billion in back taxes it inherited from the previous administration. In addition, it contributed P10.5 billion to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) for the last three years.
3) It stopped the co-mingling of PCSO funds which was the source of much corruption. For the first time, it formulated a PCSO-committed vision and mission.
It also conducted strategic planning sessions that were done by previous PCSO administrations.
4) It showed a clear preference for the poor in the distribution of ambulances. Whereas in the past, municipalities got these ambulances regardless of their status, PCSO subsidized only 60 percent of ambulance expenses for the 1st to 3rd class municipalities. The savings from this allowed more money to go to the 4th to 6th class municipalities, which received full subsidies.
All these were done under the able leadership of the PCSO Board headed by Chair Margarita Juico and Vice Chair/General Manager Jose Ferdinand Rojas II.
Three significant initiatives that controlled corruption were:
“Having a central clearing mechanism to review funding proposals to provide quality management and control;
“Mandating that all such proposals are reviewed by the PCSO Board, thus ensuring transparency and accountability; and
“Giving full support to the independent Commission on Audit (COA) by studying its findings and implementing all its recommendations which support PCSO’s vision and mission.
Future
Last May 9, 2014, Chair Juico unfortunately resigned from PCSO. However, we believe that the Board, under the guidance of Vice Chair Rojas, will continue the PCSO reforms. This will surely benefit the poor, most of whom have agricultural roots.
Regardless of who the next Chair may be, and even if new management will be put in by the incoming 2016 government, the PCSO institutional reforms started by P-Noy will continue into the future.
With two years to go, we recommend that all government institutions follow the PCSO reform model. If this happens due to strengthened government institutions,
P-Noy’s reforms will be sustained. This is a very significant legacy P-Noy can identify during his coming State of the Nation Address (Sona).
(The author is chair of Agriwatch, former Secretary for Presidential Flagship Programs and Projects, and former Undersecretary for Agriculture, Trade and Industry. For inquiries and suggestions, e-mail agriwatch_phil@yahoo.com or telefax (02) 8522112).