The Christendom’s observation of the Lenten season the past 40 days is over. Capped by a weeklong vacation or family reunions of urban dwellers in their provincial residences or preferred holiday destinations, it ended yesterday, Easter Sunday. It culminated with a rush back home amidst throngs of faithful and vacationers who tried to compete for every available public transport bed or seat just to get a night rest before plunging into the usual regular day routines.
On the other hand, apart from the crowded beaches, those who preferred to remain in the metropolis enjoyed roads totally devoid of traffic jams and illegally parked vehicles. The scarcity, however, of public transport presented a little concern for the faithful who wished to pay homage to the Great One.
Setting aside the week’s religious significance, this brief respite offered facts that may be useful by our economic planners. Just like previous observances, every long vacation reveals that most informal settlers or those living in the slums trace their roots in the provinces. They are here to simply find a living. Though some are fortunate enough to find one, others are frustratingly still agonizing well below hand-to-mouth existence. Left unattended, some of them opted to sniffing rugby, while others dip their hands on others’ pockets to survive. Consequently, the police forces (though trying to figure out crime prevention strategies) are just too preoccupied reactively addressing the problem.
Frankly, a workable rural revitalization program is the best recipe of crime prevention. Creating opportunities in the countryside will serve as the best solution in decongesting the metropolis and reducing crime offenses.
The government is not lacking in programs for the poor. While some are viewed as dole outs or political bribery, others are sincere and realizable. The adoption of Oita prefecture Gov. Hiramatsu’s OVOP (OTOP for us) is one them. The Barangay Micro Business Enterprise (BMBE) Act is the other. These are two complementing programs that are both workable.
There are two requisites, namely, human resources and raw materials for these programs to succeed. Obviously, we have abundance of these two requisites. On top of these, the support from the national government through the Department of Trade and Industry is very intense and encouraging. Needless to say, other national government instrumentalities have joined DTI in making sure these programs succeed.
Notably, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) has also thrown its support to this law by issuing Circular No. 374 on March 11, 2003 which clearly provides that apart from the government financial institutions, private banking and other financial institutions are likewise encouraged to lend to BMBEs. Said circular even went further by advising lending institutions to be just and reasonable with their interest rates. Likewise, amortizations were to be based upon projected cash flows and not on financial institutions’ wishes. Further, same circular emphasized that documentary requirement like submission of income tax returns for income arising from BMBE operations may be waived.
Realizing that the success of this law largely depends on them, the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) also issued memorandum circular no. 2003-69 on April 8, 2003 enjoining all Local Chief Executives to ensure the full implementation of said law by establishing a One-Stop Business Registration Center (OSBRC) in their areas to handle the efficient registration and processing of permits and licenses of BMBEs. In fact, a Standard Registration Form and a Certificate of Authority have been provided by DTI to be utilized for such purposes. Unfortunately, however, this OSBRC never exists in our LGUs.
Its non-existence is a clear defiance of this law. This indifference was already raised by the DTI in 2003. The DTI, being the lead government agency tasked to implement the mandate and objective of the said law, has brought to the attention of the DILG the inaction of some LGUs on the applications for Certificate of Authority as Barangay Micro-Business Enterprises (BMBE) because of the alleged absence of an enabling ordinance implementing the law at the local levels. LGUs indifference was centered on the imposition of fees and charges (either free or a maximum amount of P1,000.00 only) for registration and monitoring of BMBEs.
To clear all doubts, on August 23, 2003, the DILG clarified in its memorandum no. 2003-172 that as far as registration for accreditation is concerned, an enabling ordinance is not a prerequisite before LGUs shall entertain applicants for Certificate of Authority under RA 9178. It further emphasized that consistent with the settled principle that a national law prevails upon a local legislation, local ordinances inconsistent with RA 9178 are amended or modified accordingly.
While the programs are slowly taking off, apprehensively, there are no apparent reasons at all for us to rejoice. History has taught us that successful poverty alleviation programs, like the proliferation of cooperatives in this country, have been private sector initiatives. Same history book will tell us that programs were LGUs are involved are bound to fail.
While we recognize the efforts exerted by the DTI and other national agencies, it can’t be denied that the success of these programs largely depend on the support of the LGUs. Unfortunately, however, these same people tasked in implementing them have remained adamantly defiant allegedly because they’ll miss the opportunity to collect fees.
We can only wonder if their defiance leaned largely on the possibility of their treasury going dry (on missed opportunities to collect fees) or the possibility that because of these programs their constituents may have better lives and fear they will no longer have parasites. Parasites who have helped them (Local Chief Executives) perpetuate their hold in their respective territories.
For your comments and suggestions, please email to foabalos@yahoo.com.