WHAT STIMULUS? | List of projects proves DAP no different from PDAF - Bayan MANILA, Philippines -- The list of projects funded through the Disbursement Acceleration Program released by the Department of Budget and Management confirms that many of these were not designed to stimulate the economy, contrary to the avowed intent of the program, a government critic said Friday. Renato Reyes Jr., secretary general of the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, said DAP functioned in the same way as the Priority Development Assistance Fund, or congressional pork barrel, by allowing lawmakers and local government officials to nominate projects to fund. Both the PDAF and DAP, which critics have described as avenues for corruption, have been struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The administration has filed a motion for reconsideration on the decision on DAP that is still pending in the high court. The list of DAP-funded projects released by the DBM includes both so-called “soft projects” such as financial assistance for road repairs, medical assistance, beautification projects, sports development programs -- including the purchase of trophies and uniforms -- livelihood projects, and so on; and “hard” projects like roads, bridges and multi-purpose buildings. “How can these PDAF-like projects stimulate the economy? (President Benigno) Aquino and (Budget Secretary) Butch Abad have been lying to us,” Reyes said. “They have been misleading the people. These are still pork projects and as such, vulnerable to corruption.” About 52 percent, or P3.14 billion, of the P6.04 billion in DAP funds that went to the senators were soft projects. Only P2.90 billion went to hard projects. On the other hand, soft and hard projects received equal shares of the P6.28 billion that went to members of the House of Representatives. However, of the P2.66 billion in DAP funds to local government units, 85 percent, or P2.25 billion, went to soft projects. Reyes said many of the social services funded through DAP should have been included in the budgets of line agencies such as the Department of Health and the Department of Education. “These are services that government should deliver without the intervention of the politicians. These are services that should be delivered free of patronage politics,” he said. Reyes cited the case of Batanes Representative Henedina Abad, wife of the Budget secretary, as proof that DAP did not stimulate the economy. According to the DBM list, Representative Abad used P30.76 million of her DAP funds for so-called “greening and beautification” projects for the various local government units of Batanes. “Clear as day, the function of DAP for lawmakers and local officials was extra pork. The nature of the projects, majority of which were soft projects, were pork barrel projects used for patronage politics, he said. These are the kind of projects that are intended to boost the political stock of the proponent public officials through so-called services that should have been delivered by government line agencies in the first place,” he added. “Because they are pork, these projects do not result to economic stimulus. Batanes also got additional DAP funds from a congressman of another district. Why should Cavite solon give funds to Batanes? Then Cavite Representative Joseph Emilio Abaya, who headed the House appropriations committee, gave P31 million of his DAP for “various priority projects in Batanes” even if Representative Abad already received P87 million for local projects. “Why does a Cavite congressman have to give extra funds for a district in Batanes? Is there a quid pro quo? Why are district congressmen allowed to allocate DAP for projects outside their district? What are the parameters? What does this have to do with stimulating the economy?” Reyes asked. “In the case of Abaya, he had at least P135.6 million in projects (out of P223 million DAP for June 2012) merely described in the DBM report as delivery of social services for 1st district of Cavite, Reyes noted. In a separate interview, Abad said her province needs many infrastructure projects because it is always visited by typhoons. The money spent for greening projects are meant to boost the eco-tourism potentials of the province, she added. We just give requests. We write letters. DAP is a strategy, its just accelerating savings, she said. The Aquino administration crafted the DAP as a “reform intervention to speed up public spending and to boost economic growth.” The DBM website describes DAP as not a fund, but a “mechanism to support high-impact and priority programs and projects using savings and unprogrammed funds” that also enabled government to introduce greater speed, efficiency, and effectiveness in budget execution. From the inception of DAP in October 2011 to its termination in December 2013, a total of P167.06 billion in programs and projects have been proposed to the Aquino for funding. Of this, P144.38 billion for 116 projects was approved. These included an additional P1.26 billion to fast-track the electrification of 33,000 sitios; P1.6 billion for the Training-for-Work Scholarship Program benefitting a total of 149,530 enrollees; and P4.08 billion to settle unremitted GSIS premium payments of public school teachers since 1997. interaksyon/article/96188/what-stimulus--list-of-projects-proves-dap-no-different-from-pdaf---bayan
Posted on: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 16:48:29 +0000