WITH LESS than 30 days away until Filipino voters choose their next
president, many Filipinos are still considering who the wisest choice
for president may be.
PMC Reports presents an analysis -- from a people’s perspective
-- of the five presidential candidates’ platforms and their stand
on important people’s issues.
On Fiscal Policy
All of the presidential candidates call for the need for a balanced
budget. They also propose various measures to increase the tax base
by taxing different consumer products (Arroyo is pushing for a tax
on automobiles and higher taxes on cigarettes and liquor products).
They also propose ways to improve tax collection and discourage tax
evasion. However, these proposals favor rich Filipinos while punishing
poorer ones. The poor majority will shoulder the burden of increased
taxes as businesses will merely pass these on to consumers.
All candidates also recognize the need for restructuring the country’s
foreign debt. FPJ calls for stretching the amortization period of
debts. Villanueva says, “Many of our foreign loans were shoved
down our throats; the creditor is as much to blame as the debtor,
but we will honor our commitments.” Roco has stated that the
government should demand for at least one year of debt relief.
FPJ states that he will prioritize budget spending on the delivery
of basic social services, while Arroyo’s proposed 2004 budget
places social spending third behind debt servicing and defense. In
2003 almost P6 out of every P10 that the government spent went to
interest and principal payments, leaving almost nothing for social
services.
On Graft and Corruption
All candidates call for transparency in government and promise to
implement different measures to curb and prevent corruption. Examples
given were the implementation of computerized and electronic procurement
systems and the formation of an Independent Commission Against Corruption
patterned after the Hong Kong model. Arroyo vows to continue lifestyle
checks and push for reforms in tax administration. Bro. Eddie Villanueva
suggests preventive measures such as commensurate salaries and benefits
for workers, teachers, judges, military and police to prevent corruption.
He also proposes a massive reeducation program for government centering
on moral values.
However, many candidates themselves have been accused of corruption
– Arroyo (PIATCO, Macapagal Boulevard, Jose Pidal), Lacson (Kuratong
Baleleng case), and Roco (for printing posters during his stint as
DepEd secretary.) Arroyo has also been criticized for her lax treatment
of former President Joseph Estrada who is on trial for plunder. Ten
disqualification cases were also filed against her before the COMELEC
with accusations ranging from violations of TV campaign advertising
regulations to diverting government funds to finance her campaign.
The weakness of most proposals such as lifestyle checks is that they
target the small fry and not the top government officials who are
often the most corrupt.
On Globalization
All of the five candidates claim globalization is an inevitable reality.
None among them speaks out strongly against globalization or membership
in the WTO. They instead call for reforms. Arroyo calls for “liberalized
but fair trade,” FPJ claims that he will “re-orient the
policy on globalization to expand markets and to protect the economy
from unfair competition.” Lacson promises to, “re-think
the government position and strategy in order to protect Philippine
interests”. Roco avers that he will work for “fair free
trade”.
FPJ, Lacson, and Arroyo promise to institute safety nets for the
agriculture sector. Roco claims he will institute safety nets for
displaced workers. All candidates call for adjustments in tariff rates
and subsidies. Yet none point out that there is no such thing as “fair
free trade” since policies under the WTO often favor rich nations
over poorer ones.
The candidates’ all-out support for globalization contradicts
the negative experience of the majority of Filipinos and the world’s
poor who have been reeling from the impact of liberalization, deregulation
and privatization. The current local and international movement against
globalization claims that these policies have brought more misery
and poverty to farmers, workers and other sectors. They have been
calling for a pull out from WTO membership.
On Labor and Employment
While all of the candidates promise to create jobs and support worker
training, not one among them calls for an increase in the minimum
wage. Even Villanueva, a former trade union organizer claims that
“an increase in the minimum wage is not always beneficial to
workers because it triggers increases in prices of basic goods and
services.”
Throughout her three-year term Arroyo refused to listen to the legitimate
demand of workers for a P125 across the board increase in the minimum
wage. Yet she still boasts of granting a 29.2 % increase in the Emergency
Cost of Living Allowance, which amounted to a measly PhP 30.
Arroyo also boasts of creating over three million jobs during her
term, most of which were in the agricultural and informal sector and
not permanent or stable. Currently four out of 10 Filipinos are still
considered extremely poor.
None of the candidates sees the need for national industrialization
as the solution to massive unemployment.
On Agriculture
All of the candidates call for modernization of agriculture and for
the speeding up of the implementation of Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP). Roco and Villanueva say that “the land should
belong to the tillers”. In addition, Roco calls for a study on
the effects of CARP.
Arroyo is aggressively pushing for conversion to planting of hybrid
rice and greater access of farmers to credit, such as through the
proposed, “farm as collateral” bill. The bill was part of
her administration’s priority legislative agenda. Critics however
claim that these programs will hit hard small farmers.
None of the candidates elaborates on the need for genuine land reform
and a break to the feudal exploitation of peasants by landlords.
On Social Services
Education
All candidates promise to improve the quality of and access to education.
Villanueva and Roco promise free elementary and secondary education
and, “study now and pay later” programs. FPJ and Lacson
promise to increase the budget for teacher training and development.
Lacson and Arroyo push for the use of English as the medium of instruction.
FPJ promises to promote public-private sector partnership.
However, under Roco’s term as education secretary, teachers
complained that they did not experience any salary increase. He was
not also able to solve the chronic problem of delays in the payment
of teachers’ benefits such as loyalty pay and step increment.
Under Arroyo, the drastic shortage in teachers and textbooks was
not solved since the budget for education was not given priority.
She also implemented the Revised Basic Education Curriculum (BEC)
and pushed for the use of English as medium of instruction, which
according to critics do not solve the problem of the low standard
of education in public schools.
None of the candidates question the colonial nature of the Philippine
education system which does not promote critical thinking or pro-people
values.
Housing
All the candidates promise to support social housing. Lacson says
government social housing should be pursued without expected return.
Arroyo boasts of spending P53.15 billion for housing. Reports however
reveal that in 2002 alone 41 urban poor families in Metro Manila were
physically displaced from their homes everyday.
Only Lacson proposes to deal with agriculture issues in rural areas
to address the roots of urban migration.
Health
All candidates promise to expand Phil Health’s coverage. Arroyo
and Villanueva vow to continue the cheap importation of drugs from
India. Roco proposes to support the export of health workers. Villanueva
bats for a policy that will encourage the urban poor to plant vegetable
plots. Lacson wants to promote birth control and FPJ proposes the
privatization of major government hospitals.
None of the candidates however addresses the dismal state of our
health care system, which is virtually inaccessible to the poor and
those in remote areas due to lack of funding. They also do not recognize
the need to improve the working conditions and salaries of medical
workers to discourage them from going abroad so that their skills
and knowledge can be used where they are most badly needed, here in
the Philippines.
On Prices of Oil, Water and Electricity
Besides Lacson and Arroyo who co-authored the EPIRA, candidates FPJ
and Villanueva call for a review of contracts with Independent Power
Producers (IPPs) with the aim of protecting consumers and bringing
down electricity rates. Yet none of the candidates’ platforms
contains concrete action to reverse the various onerous charges of
Meralco, Maynilad and major oil companies.
Overall, the promises to improve the access and quality of social
services will remain empty unless they are coupled with measures to
dramatically reform budget spending to prioritize social services.
On Charter Change
Arroyo and Lacson openly support the proposal for charter change
to a parliamentary system of government in order to achieve “greater
economic prosperity.” Villanueva says he is supportive of a parliamentary
form of government but calls for public consultations on the issue.
FPJ and Roco also call for public consultations while Roco qualifies
that it should not be an issue to decide during the elections.
Not one among them condemns the proposal for charter change, which
the U.S. is pushing for since it proposes to allow 100% foreign ownership
of land and local industries.
On National Security and Peace Issues
All candidates vow to deal with the nation’s peace and order
situation by launching anti-crime and anti-terror initiatives in the
country. Lacson and Arroyo have proven through practice and promise
to deal with these problems with a heavy hand. Both have been pushing
for the enactment of the Anti-Terrorism Bill and for a National Identification
System. Indeed, Lacson (who was head of the Presidential Anti-Crime
Commission accused of rubbing out suspected kidnappers in the Kuratong
Baleleng case) and Arroyo (whose record on human rights abuses from
2001 to 2003 numbered 2, 961 according to Karapatan) leave Filipinos
wary of what they can expect under their administration’s rule.
Arroyo has also been a vocal supporter of the U.S. led “war on
terrorism.”
Roco is the only candidate vocally against the Anti-Terrorism Bill
and National ID System. He says the bills may lead to more violations
of human rights.
On the issue of peace negotiations with the Moro Islamic Front (MILF)
and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), all candidates
call for a continuation of the formal peace process.
Arroyo, after calling off the talks in 2002 and pushing for an omnibus
Final Peace Agreement, in total disregard of previous agreements entered
into between the GRP and the NDFP, suddenly resumed interest in pursuing
the peace talks with the NDFP late last year. (This mysteriously coincided
with her announcement that she would run in the 2004 elections.)
Formal talks took place last October and March in Oslo, Norway. Agreements
were reached to release 32 political prisoners and taking measures
to resolve the issue of the U.S., E.U, Australian and Canadian labeling
the CPP-NPA and of NDFP chief political consultant Prof. Jose Maria
Sison as “foreign terrorists.” The CPP and NDFP however
questioned Arroyo’s sincerity in pursuing the peace talks with
the recent call of National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales for
the disqualification of party-lists namely, Bayan Muna, Anakpawis,
Gabriela Women’s Party, Anak ng Bayan, Migrante, and the Suara
Bangmasa Moro Party on the unsubstantiated accusations that these
are communist fronts.
Lacson while calling for peace talks says the CPP-NPA leadership
should be isolated from its mass base.
FPJ proposes to accelerate the peace process. He promises to, “reach
out to anti-government armed groups and engage in genuine dialogue
to hear their concerns and issues and come up with mutually acceptable
arrangements for them to return to the fold of the law.” (This
essentially translates into surrender.) He also vows to, “invigorate
the country’s participation in the global campaign versus terrorism,”
a statement which if left open-ended could be threatening to democratic
rights.
Villanueva, who claims to be a former Marxist turned born-again Christian
says that credible leadership can resolve the insurgency and that
one needs to address and uproot poverty and injustice as a means to
peace.
Roco is the only candidate vocally against U.S. intervention in the
Philippines. As a senator Roco was also against US military bases
and the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).
He is also the only candidate who condemns the U.S. and other nations’
terrorist tagging of the CPP-NPA.
“It is good for our American friends not to condemn any part
of the political opposition in the country as terrorists,” Roco
was quoted by media outlets as having said at a press conference last
February in Iloilo City.
“The CPP-NPA, in many people's view, does not represent the
terrorism of mindless attacks on innocent people,” Roco said
in a statement to the media.
Conclusion
A closer study of the five presidential candidates’ platforms
shows that they are fundamentally no different from one another. The
question also remains whether these are realistic and whether they
will have the political will and sincerity to implement the positive
aspects of their platforms.
Because the candidates are so desperately trying to win “pogi
points” by pleasing all sides, generally they choose to play
safe. Thus their platforms remain ambiguous and lack any significant
weight. One can then expect that once the new president is elected,
he or she will still represent and maintain the interest of the elite
over those of the majority.
One can also conclude from an analysis of the state of the nation
under three years of the Arroyo administration is that she is far
from, “still the last best hope.” Those who are looking
for a change may take a closer look at the progressive aspects of
the platforms of Roco, Villanueva and FPJ.
In the end, the Filipino people may still push for progressive reforms
through the electoral process. Yet they also know that it is only
their collective action (inside and outside of the electoral process)
that will result in any substantial and genuine change.
Sources:
1. de Castro Jr., Isagani, “Da King’s Campaign Generals,”
Newsbreak magazine, Feb. 16, 2004
2. Booma Cruz , “The Actor is the Message,” Newsbreak magazine,
Feb. 2, 2004
3. Website of Bangon Pilipinas political party: http://www.bangonpilipnas.org
4. Website of Fernando Poe Jr.: http://www.fpj2004.com.ph/
5. Website of Ping Lacson: http://www.pinglacson.ph/
6. Website of Raul Roco: http://www.raulroco.com/
7. Website of the Senate of the Philippines: http://www.senate.gov.ph/
8. Website of Ping Lacson: http://www.888.ph/
9. Rivera, Blanche, “Bro. Eddie: From activist to preacher to
president?,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, Dec. 21, 2003
10. Villanueva, Eduardo, “Responses to questions from PMC,”
Feb. 25, 2004
11. Lacson, Ping, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Feb.22,2004
12. Villanueva, Eduardo, Philippine Daily Inquirer
13. Poe, Fernando Jr., Philippine Daily Inquirer
14. Businessworld, March 29, 2004, pg. 2
15. Reuters, AFP and Carina I. Roncesvalles, “Government, communist
rebels agree on release of 32 prisoners,” Businessworld, Monday,
April 5, 2004, pg. 12
16. Presidential Management Staff, “Briefing paper for IBON
Facts and Figures,” March 2004
17. “Roco wants CPP-NPA removed from terror list,” INQ.7,
Feb. 24, 2004
18. “Notes on the P864.8-billion national budget for 2004,”
Compiled by the office of Bayan Muna Rep. Satur Ocampo, Nov. 21, 2003
19. Remollino, Alexander Martin, “Election 2004: Prospects for
the People,” PMC Reports, December, 2003
20. “Walang Ilusyon sa Eleksyon: Praymer sa Eleksyon ng Mayo
2004,” Manila: Institute of Political Economy, February 2004
21. INQ.7net election pages
