GMA’s speech on the debt-for-equity proposal before the 60th UN General Assembly in New York was a good start to make the developed nations aware of the developing countries’ perennial problem. Joe de V – who was part of the official delegation – proceeded to Washington, D.C. to take the matter up with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Heritage Foundation, including US Intelligence Chief John Negroponte. In behalf of the 100 most heavily-indebted developing countries, Joe de V called for the conversion of half of their $2.3-Trillion debt into equity for various projects like mass housing, microfinance, and reforestation. This is in accordance with the UN’s Millennium Development Goal of cutting world poverty down to 50 percent by 2015. This proposal could drastically contribute to poverty alleviation for half of the world’s poorest population.
With the controversy over lobbying contracts, perhaps it is time for us to adopt a focused advocacy. If our main objective is the success of the debt-for-equity proposal, we definitely have to get at least two good lobbying firms to strategize and help us get the results we want. There is no doubt that lobbying in Washington, D.C. is necessary if you want to get results. You cannot depend on your embassies to do the work alone. Washington, D.C. is a vicious town where over 180 countries scramble over finite resources and attention for each country’s infinite interests. Countries routinely use lobby groups to influence and have an impact on Washington’s policy regarding trade, investment promotions, and military assistance, among others. Lobbyists understand how Washington’s labyrinthine process works so they help foreign governments master the process and take advantage of it.
In fact, even small countries like Mauritius and Sri Lanka have lobbyists in D.C. Smart countries like Malaysia and Thailand have invested in PR and lobbying resulting in millions from tourist income and investments. The Philippines has always hired lobby firms looking at it as if it’s such a big deal secret espionage operation. I don’t understand the big hullabaloo over lobby firms when contracts can easily be accessed at the US Department of Justice website. While we investigate lobby groups, Malaysia and Thailand have surged ahead with more trade concessions from Washington. Lobbying is effective for both marketing and foreign policy objectives. Ultimately, a country’s level of success in Washington is directly proportional to the kind of work done by lobby firms. We spend a measly $1 Million to $2 Million while South Korea, for instance, spent $25.2 Million on the first half of 2002 alone. Japan spent $22.4 Million on 51 firms for the same period. Taiwan and Israel are the biggest spenders in lobbying efforts with an annual average of $120 Million each.
At the end of the day, if we lobby and do it right we will get more concessions with the debt-for-equity proposal. Quid pro quo is the operative word because there’s no such thing as a free lunch. A country like the Philippines can offer investments in energy, eco-tourism, irrigation, land reclamation, infrastructure and other wealth-creating projects. We can even leverage the conservation of our natural resources in exchange for development funds through the UN debt-for-nature swap. For instance, the reforestation of thousands of hectares or the preservation of rain forests would mean debt forgiveness. Just think, not only will we be physically healthier we will also be financially healthier. We have made a good start at the UN Summit. Now we need to start lobbying so we can sustain the effort to get the approval of lending institutions like the IMF and the World Bank.
Of the country’s P700-Billion revenues, P300 Billion goes to debt servicing, P250 Billion goes to local government funds, and P150 Billion goes to salaries. So we end up with a vicious cycle of borrowing more or keep on raising taxes. The sad part is the latest survey by the SWS disclosed that more Filipinos are getting hungrier – 2.6 million families and this number could get higher. Clearly, we have to adopt measures that would create jobs to feed the growing number of poor and hungry Filipinos. The proposed projects under the debt-for-equity proposal and debt-for-nature swap would definitely generate jobs particularly in the area of tourism and infrastructure.
Let’s face it, Joe De V’s creative solutions to the country’s problems and his survival instincts are admirable. That’s why I call him "Survivor Joe." Time and again, he has shown the resilience and the strength to bounce back from adversity. He has weathered defeat in the 1998 presidential elections and the loss of his favorite daughter KC last December. Being the consummate politician that he is, Joe helped FVR’s presidency by shepherding congressmen to pass vital bills that sparked the economic boom during that time. Come to think of it, Joe may have turned out to be a fairly good president if he had won. And by the way, he will be the guest speaker tomorrow night at the Manila Overseas Press Club’s (MOPC) Congress Night at the Intercon where he will report on his Washington, D.C. mission. Debt relief may not be a swallow away but we must start focusing on the debt-for-equity proposal and make it a reality. If it succeeds, it will be the greatest relief for the Filipino.