The Philippines is also the country that proportionately spends the most on Christmas food, according to a 2023 worldwide survey of 23 countries by WorldRemit. The survey classified Christmas spending according to three categories: food, decorations and gifts. A Filipino household on the average spends 60% of its Christmas budget on food, 33% on gifts, and 7% on decorations. Average total spending is US$614, or P34,872 at the time of the survey.

In comparison, an American household’s Christmas spending is the reverse. Americans spend the most on gifts (69%), next on decorations (19%) and least on food (12%).

In the same vein, according to a 2016 report by the World Economic Forum (WEF), Filipinos spend on food 41.9%, or about  P42 for every P100 that the household earns. In comparison, Americans spend only 6.4% of their household income on food, and Singaporeans spend just 6.7%.

More recently, a 2018 Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas report said: “Food consumption accounted for the largest share in the total (Filipino) household expenditure (72.1%).”

Whatever the percentage may be now, it is safe to assume that a large portion of Filipino household income still goes to food. This being so, it can also be safely presumed that among our greatest preoccupations is working for, preparing, and consuming food.  

Whichever way one looks at it, that definitely makes us “Isang kahig, isang tuka.” Meaning we are a subsistence economy, with not much disposable income beyond meeting our most basic needs. 

We now have the unenviable distinction of being the world’s No. 1 rice importer. Despite the presence of the world-renowned International Rice Research Institute in Los Baños, Laguna, where many of the world’s rice scientists and technicians have innovated and trained, and despite various programs from agrarian reform to irrigation, infrastructure and postharvest facilities, even the provision of online farming guides and databases, our agricultural productivity has remained abysmally low. So much so that, in an effort to turn things around, the President himself acted until recently as agriculture secretary, and billions of pesos in debt of agrarian reform beneficiaries have been written off to remove the debt burden on them and hopefully motivate and fund greater productivity. Yet, year in and year out our agriculture and fisheries sector is among the poorest performers.

Anyone citing the reasons for low agricultural productivity trots out the usual suspects, from devastating typhoons to lack of affordable credit to inadequate postharvest facilities to not having enough young farmers. And yet, and yet, and yet…

There is something more fundamentally wrong. No matter how much money you throw at the problem and whatever program you devise, agricultural productivity will remain low. Maybe a profit motive or the opportunity for profit is lacking. Maybe we were not meant to be farmers. Consider: We are among the world’s best seafarers, the world’s most caring nurses, the world’s most hardworking domestics, the world’s most wonderful singers—but we are the world’s worst farmers. The Israelis can make the desert bloom and their agricultural technicians are in great demand, but I have not heard of a single Filipino farmer being recruited to work abroad, unless one counts the utterly menial job of a fruit picker in some California or Hawaii plantation.

Or maybe the system is wrong. It is the large agribusiness corporations and the large property developers that prosper, and farmers just sell their land and become seafarers, nurses, domestics and singers instead.

“Generally speaking,” the WEF observed, “the more developed a country is, the smaller the percentage of household income it spends on food.” It further indicated that income disparity within a country correlates with the proportion of income spent on food: “Over the past 25 years, the poorest 20% of households in the US spent between 28.8% and 42.6% on food, compared with 6.5% to 9.2% spent by the wealthiest 20% of households.”

There clearly is a relationship between the level of development and the percentage of household income spent on food. The bigger the income, the smaller the proportion of the food expense, and of course, the smaller the income, the bigger the proportion spent on basic sustenance. 

One can make other interesting observations as well. For example, the United States proportionately spends the least on food and yet obesity among Americans is of epidemic proportions. We spend the most on food and yet malnutrition is widespread. According to the World Food Programme, 27% (or almost 1 out of 3) of Filipino children under 5 years old suffer from stunting.

Thus, more than anything, it is economic disparity and the structures that perpetuate it that must be addressed. Our import-oriented, service-focused, consumer-driven economic mindset will always stunt agricultural production.

Nevertheless, it is Christmas. And whether rich or poor, eating and eating well are among life’s greatest pleasures. Whether by yourself or in the company of others. Preferably in the company of others, especially loved ones, and especially during Christmas. A pleasure shared, a journey shared. 

Thus, the market, the kitchen and the dining table are the happiest places on earth. Our gut is our second brain, it is said. And what a smart one it is. No wonder happiness surveys always show Filipinos as among the happiest people on earth. We know what’s important: food. And the kinship it brings, especially during the season of blessed abundance and rebirth.

Read more: 5 Christmas parties while exploring for mines in 3 countries

The post Christmas food and agricultural productivity appeared first on CoverStory.

For the President, it is the song “I Did It My Way.” The 2024 budget stands at ₱5.768 trillion, which is equivalent to what he proposed to Congress in June. This amount is ₱1.5 trillion higher than the revenues that the government expects to collect in 2024. This means that the government will have to finance ₱1.5 trillion through loans. The forecast revenues for 2024 are a bit ambitious and assume that the government will collect ₱544 billion more next year—almost a 15% increase in the collections of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Bureau of Customs.  

Our song for the coming year is “Good Luck, Good Health, God Bless You.”

The Vice President’s song must be “Missing You.” The public outcry against the proposed confidential funds for the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education was vehemently loud. It is a no-brainer that funding for learning programs to pull our students from being second from the bottom in the latest examination of the Program for International Student Assessment is of greater priority than the perception that students are being recruited by the communist New People’s Army. The greatest antidote to the rise of terrorism is giving our students equal access to quality education. 

We heartily join the chorus of carolers singing “A Million Thanks to You,” especially to the Senate committee on finance chaired by Sen. Sonny Angara, who even disallowed the use of the contingency fund to finance intelligence funds. We were informed that the intelligence fund is now exclusively allowed to the Office of the President.

The budget is a most important public finance tool. Without financing, the government’s promises for a better life for its citizens become empty. Our dreams for better health services, modern airports, concrete roads, faster internet, and good schools can only be realized with an efficient budget. The budget is the instrument where the nation’s wealth purportedly coming from the wealthy is redistributed to the poor.

Since our resources are limited, trade-offs are inevitable, and the theme from the movie “Sophie’s Choice” is an apt musical score. Departments that were noted to be receiving lower resources compared to their 2023 budget are those of Agriculture, of Health, of Energy, and of Education. Luck smiled on the state universities and colleges and on the Departments of National Defense, of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), of Tourism, of Trade and Industry, of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), of Justice, and of Environment and Natural Resources because Congress increased their budget compared to what was proposed by the Executive. 

The departments/offices that suffered reduction in their budgets compared to what was proposed include those of Labor and Employment and of Migrant Workers, the Commission on Higher Education, and PhilHealth (Philippine Health Insurance Corp.) 

We can only surmise the lawmakers’ reasons for the hefty increases of the favored departments. Were these departments performing well, or do they have greater potential for stimulating growth compared to the others?  We cannot also explain why the greatest bounty went to Congress, whose budget increased to ₱43.5 billion compared to ₱28.4 billion that was proposed by the Executive. Is there a song entitled “What are We in Power For?”  

Congress’ decision-making process in allocating the budget is purportedly rich in debates and assessment. But the reality is, it is probably richer in lobbying and horse-trading. The budget is an instrument of legislative control. Deliberating on it is a time for legislators to demand favors from offices in the Executive.  

During my time in government, budgetary hearings were devoted to airing complaints regarding personnel appointments and requests that were not granted.  The Executive had no choice but to kowtow to legislators whom it had offended. What a wasted opportunity! Budgetary deliberations could have been the platform for Congress to exact accountability from Cabinet secretaries who have not attained their targets or who used their budgets inefficiently.  

On the brighter side, we are hopeful that the increased appropriation for the Armed Forces of the Philippines (up by ₱7.65 billion compared to what was proposed) would give greater credence and strength to our presence in the West Philippine Sea. The hefty increase in the budget of the DPWH (up by ₱173.9 billion from what was proposed) would result in better highways and infrastructure. And the ₱48-billion increase in the DSWD budget compared to its allocation in 2023 would make the poor a bit happier and less hungry.

We join Celine Dion and Andrea Bocelli in their song “The Prayer” so that every peso in the 2024 budget would be spent with no taint of corruption and inefficiency.  We all deserve a Happy Christmas and a Brighter New Year.

Milwida Guevara served as undersecretary of finance in the Ramos administration. —Ed.

The post Music and lyrics from the 2024 budget appeared first on CoverStory.

The use of confidential funds (CF) by the Office of Vice President Sara Duterte, concurrently the secretary of education, continues to be in the news and in social media posts. While most of the comments dwell on the P125 million in confidential funds supposedly spent in an 11-day period in December 2022, among the other questions asked is: Are confidential funds secret and not subject to the inspection of the Commission on Audit (COA)?

As the term suggests, secrecy is involved in the use of confidential funds. They appear in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) as lump sums, and they are not subject to the COA’s regular auditing requirements. But an accountable officer and a special designated officer (SDO) are to be named in agencies with CF. The SDO takes charge of making disbursement reports to be submitted to the Intelligence and Confidential Fund Audit Unit (Icfau) under the office of the COA chair. 

The reporting requirements and audit procedures as well as the templates of reports to be made are stated in the joint circular issued in January 2015 during the administration of President Benigno Aquino III (since deceased). The circular was signed by the heads of five agencies: Maria Gracia Pulido Tan, then COA chair; Florencio Abad, then budget secretary; Cesar Villanueva, then chair of the Governance Commission for GOCCs; Mar Roxas, then interior and local government secretary; and Voltaire Gazmin, then defense secretary.

Sen. Francis Escudero referred to the joint circular when he said during the hearing of the Senate committee on finance last Sept. 5  that he wanted to “disabuse the thoughts of the people that the confidential fund is a secret fund.”

He said the education secretary could not just use the confidential fund as she wished: “Hindi naman ito pwedeng gastusin sa gusto lang gastusin ng DepEd secretary.” He added: “There are specific rules as to where this can be spent, how this can be spent. What is secret is the reporting of the disbursement.” 

The senator was referring to the physical and financial plan for confidential and intelligence funds, to be submitted to support the request for funding. According to the joint circular, the plan is to state the estimated amount for the project, activity and program using the CF. 

Here are some notes from the joint circular titled “Guidelines on the Entitlement, Release, Use, Reporting and Audit of the Confidential and/or Intelligence Funds”:

Agencies entitled to have CF. The Office of the President and the Office of the Vice President are not the only agencies that can have such funds. All other national agencies as well as government-owned and -controlled corporations and local government units can also have CF.

Definition. The term “confidential funds” refers to the lump-sum amount provided as such in the GAA. Expenses are confidential if they are related to the surveillance activities of civilian government agencies conducted to support their mandate or operation. 

It differs from intelligence funds (IF), which are for the use of uniformed and military personnel. Intelligence expenses are the costs incurred in gathering intelligence and information that have direct impact on national security.

CF can only be used for the: 

• Purchase of information needed to formulate and implement programs, projects and activities relevant to national security and peace and order.

• Rental of transport vehicles related to confidential activities; rental and other expenses to maintain safe houses. 

• Purchase or rental of supplies, materials or equipment for confidential activities that can be purchased through regular procedures.

• Payment of rewards for informers.

• Payment to uncover or prevent illegal activities that pose clear and present danger to the agency, its personnel or facilities; other activities specified by the GAA or special laws.

In no case can the CF and the IF be used in the: 

• Salaries, wages, overtime, additional compensation, allowances and other fringe benefits of the agency’s officials and employees, and employees hired by the government or elected officials, except when authorized by law. 

• Consultancy fees, entertainment.

• Construction or acquisition of building or housing structures.

Disbursement report and audit. The report on disbursements from the CF, with documentary evidence, is to be signed by the SDO and submitted in a sealed envelope to the Icfau. The cash disbursement record shall be kept in the safe or steel cabinet of the SDO. It may be taken out of his/her custody only by the Icfau or by someone duly authorized by it, or by the head of the agency, or the representative who is to issue the necessary receipt.

On the other hand, the record disbursements from the IF shall be kept at all times in a vault in the SDO’s office.  It may be inspected by the Icfau or officers/personnel duly authorized in writing by the COA chair if circumstances so demand.

In the COA news release on Jan. 8, 2015, when the joint circular was signed, then Budget Secretary Abad said the document “comes at a time when our people are demanding greater public accountability in the use of funds and ensures that activities funded by the CIF are legitimate ones.”

In July 2019, then Sen. Leila de Lima filed Senate Bill No. 377, or the proposed Intelligence Oversight Act of 2019, which seeks to ensure accountability on the use of intelligence and confidential funds and to establish a joint congressional intelligence committee to strengthen Congress’ oversight powers to monitor the funds. Two months later, the bill was referred to the committee on national defense, security, peace, unification and reconciliation. 

Last Sept. 25, Marikina Rep. Stella Quimbo, senior vice chair of the committee on appropriations, proposed the creation of a special oversight committee “to increase transparency in the use of intelligence and confidential funds.”

The post What to Know: Are confidential funds secret funds not subject to audit? appeared first on CoverStory.