The Economy
On a Temporary Downturn?
While President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo may claim the economic problems did not begin with her
administration, she cannot escape the fact that she is presiding over an
economy that is not on a mere temporary downturn, as government claims,
but in an ever worsening state.
By Benjie Oliveros
Bulatlat
Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Augusto Santos announced Dec. 12 that the
economy is on a temporary downturn. Santos said in a statement that the
economy is probably not at the take-off stage “but neither is it, by any
stretch of imagination, on the road to a meltdown,”
which implies a sustained decline.
He
blamed the poor performance in agriculture, record high oil prices, lower
government spending, decline in private sector construction activity, and
the political turmoil for the slowdown during the third quarter.
But the slack was
taken up by record-high remittances from overseas Filipinos pushing the
gross national product to a 6.5 percent growth. Remittances have reached
$8.8 billion by October. The government expects it to reach $10.3 billion
by the end of the year.
GDP growth is at 4.7
percent for the six months till June and 4.6 percent for the first nine
months of 2005. Below is Table 1 indicating the growth rates for 2005.
Table 1 – GDP and GNP growth rate for
2005 |
|
1st quarter |
2nd quarter |
3rd quarter |
Real GDP |
4.6 |
4.8 |
4.1 |
Real GNP |
4.7 |
4.7 |
6.5 |
The government later
reported that merchandise exports had slipped 3.2 percent in October due
to weak global demand for electronics, which account for nearly 70 percent
of overseas shipments.
Consistent with the
report are the press releases of the National Statistical Coordination
Board (NSCB) that cited
higher oil and
consumer prices, sluggish exports and reduced imports, and the decline in
output from the farm and mining sectors as the factors that dampened
economic growth from the first to the third quarter of the year.
Comparative Growth
Rates
The growth rates for
2005 are consistent with that of previous years. (Please refer to the
following table.
Table 2 1999-2004 GDP/GNP growth |
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005
3 Qrtrs
|
GDP |
3.4 |
4.4 |
3.0 |
4.4 |
4.7 |
6.1 |
4.6 |
GNP |
3.7 |
4.8 |
3.4 |
5.2 |
5.6 |
6.1 |
5.3 |
Except for 2004, GDP
growth rates ranged from 3 to 4.7 percent. GNP growth is at a much higher
percentage mainly powered by Net Factor Income from Abroad, comprised
mainly by the income of overseas Filipino workers (OFW). But the GNP
growth rate for 2005 is still within the average range.
The exceptional
growth in 2004, by Philippine standards, may be explained by the increase
in economic activity caused by increased spending during elections. It is
public knowledge that money flows during elections. If the numerous
accusations regarding the use of government funds for the 2004 election
campaign, such as the suspicious release of fertilizer funds, the
production and mass distribution of PhilHealth cards, among others, were
proven true then indeed a substantial amount of money flowed in 2004.
The trend of slow
economic growth therefore, is not caused mainly by external factors such
as international oil prices or by the political turmoil as the Arroyo
administration is wont to declare. The problem is the weak fundamentals of
the economy.
And the Arroyo
administration is as guilty as previous administrations for not altering
the direction and priorities of the economy. Worse, it is now one of the
leading implementers of the policies of liberalization, deregulation and
privatization. The Philippines in fact has one of the lowest tariff
structures in Asia.
Wrong direction
and priorities
Instead of working
for national industrialization to enable the country to provide for the
needs of the domestic market, the economy is geared towards the export of
raw materials, minerals, and low value added semi-manufactures such as
semiconductors and computer chips. It is dependent on imports for steel,
basic chemicals, petroleum, fuel, machines, consumer durables, processed
raw materials and intermediate goods.
Both the traditional
and non-traditional exports of the country are vulnerable to the monopoly
pricing and operations, and manipulations of capitalist countries and
their multinational corporations. Worse, these are in oversupply. Garments
and electronics from the Philippines compete with those from China as well
as those from Vietnam, Thailand, Korea, Central and South America, and
other export-oriented, import dependent economies.
The result is that
payments for imports always exceed income from exports leading to chronic
trade deficits. The Philippines incurred a deficit in its trade with the
U.S., its main ally and trading partner, in the amount of $2.071 billion
from January-October 2005. In 2004, the country’s trade deficit with the
U.S. amounted to $2.071 billion. Statistics of trade with the U.S. from
2000 reveal a consistent trend reaching as high as $5.135.5 billion. The
overall trade deficit of the Philippines in September 2005 amounted to
$516 million.
The big players in
the export sector, especially electronics, which comprise the bulk of
Philippine exports, are not even Filipino-owned but are multinational
corporations and their subsidiaries. These multinational corporations are
given tax holidays; allowed to repatriate their profits and capital
anytime; and able to siphon out their profits through the local
subsidiaries’ “payment” to their mother companies.
These multinational
corporations contribute to the economy in terms of GDP growth without
really adding to the accumulation of domestic wealth and capital. The only
benefit the country derives from direct foreign investments is employment.
Foreign direct
investments constitute merely 30 percent of foreign investments. The bulk
comes from portfolio investments. In the eight months of 2005, foreign
direct investments were valued at $929 million. Portfolio investments for
the past 11 months amounted to $2 billion. Portfolio investments have no
real contribution to the economy except the temporary infusion of dollars.
But as soon as profit-taking opportunities are better abroad, it can be
pulled out anytime. The massive outflow of portfolio investments is the
immediate cause of the Asian financial crisis of 1997.
With no real earnings
in trade and in local industry, the economy is heavily dependent on
remittances from overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to increase the
country’s income from abroad and its much-needed dollar reserves, push
consumer spending and stimulate growth. The export of labor, originally
intended to be a temporary measure to stave the increasing unemployment in
the ‘70s, has now become an important vehicle for the economy. The
government anticipates an inflow of $10.3 billion in remittances this
year. Thus, the Philippine government delegation raised hell when a
proposal to limit the movement of migrant labor was raised during the
recent WTO Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong.
The services sector
accounts for 47 percent of the economy’s output in 2004 and around 48
percent of the GDP during the first three quarters of 2005. Within the
services sector, the drivers of growth are telecommunications, business
process outsourcing, and tourism. Business process outsourcing and other
IT investments in the service sector include call centers, medical
transcriptions, digital animation, and software development.
Business process
outsourcing companies such as call centers and medical transcription
companies have become major contributors to the economy’s output as well
as an employment opportunity for graduates of top level exclusive schools.
The Philippines has thus become a major source of cheap labor for
factories and companies locally and internationally.
Tourism is another
non-productive activity in the economy. Worse, according to a study
commissioned by the United Nations Children’s Fund entitled “Child
Pornography in the Philippines” released in August 2005, prostitution has
become a multi-million dollar industry and the fourth largest source for
the country’s GNP.
Worsening poverty
The backward and
agricultural state of the economy as well as its unequal foreign and trade
relations with industrialized countries, especially the U.S., is pushing
the Filipino deeper into poverty.
The NSCB put the
poverty incidence at 24.3 percent. But this is based on a very low P33.60
($.60) per day poverty level, which everybody knows is not even enough to
provide a person with three meals a day. Around 90 percent of the
population lives on around $3 dollars a day. The poverty threshold for a
family of six is at P479.06 ($9.05). And yet the minimum wage is pegged at
P250 ($4.71) per day and the government refuses the demand for a P125
across-the-board increase to provide immediate relief to workers and
employees.
Inflation is at 7.1
percent. The purchasing power of the peso has dropped to P.56 ($.01) based
on 1994 prices.
Since
the privatization and deregulation of public utilities in the 1990s, the
price of oil products has increased on average by 160 percent;
electricity, 175 percent; and water services, 450 percent.
Unemployment and
underemployment is at 7.4 percent and 21.2 percent representing 2.6
million and 7 million workers respectively. This is expected to worsen as
the liberalized and deregulated regime and the impending retrenchment of
government employees continue to be implemented.
Surveys reveal that
more Filipinos think their situation will not change and even worsen next
year. No wonder why personal consumption is muted even as Christmas is
approaching. The Christmas season is the traditional peak season for the
manufacturing and retail sectors.
Economic gains?
Even as the
Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI) gave the Arroyo
administration a passing mark in economic management, the it cannot claim
any substantial contribution to improving the economy.
The strengthening of
the peso is mainly due to record increases in dollar remittances. It is
not a result of improvements in the economy in general, and trade in
particular.
The same is true with
the Balance of Payments (BOP) surplus of $2.16 billion for the 11-month
period of 2005. This was caused by foreign exchange build up this year.
The government attributes this to strong remittances from OFWs, foreign
investment inflows, improved balance of trade, higher government external
borrowings, and improved investment income. With the balance of trade at a
deficit and considering the mobility of portfolio investments, the surplus
can be mainly attributed to additional loans and remittances.
The country’s heavy
reliance on OFW remittances, loans, foreign investments especially
portfolio investments, tourism, and the promotion of business process
outsourcing for investments and employment reveal the sorry state of the
economy.
It cannot claim any
gain but in increasing the national government debt to P4.02 trillion of
which P 1.87 trillion or 47 percent are owed to foreign creditors while
P2.15 trillion or 53 percent from domestic lenders.
Meanwhile, the Arroyo
government reduced tariffs on imports at an average of 20 percent every
year, including the agricultural tariff that went down from an average of
17.94 percent in 1996 to 6.81 percent in 2002. This deprives the
government of annual revenues of P100 billion and allows the influx of
imported goods and produce. The latter has caused the bankruptcy of local
capitalists and producers and worsened the trade deficit.
In addition, the
government provided fiscal and tax incentives and exemptions to foreign
investors and lost annual revenues of around P170.8 billion.
To compensate for the
revenue loss, it raised the tax burden of the people by implementing the
expanded value-added tax (EVAT). The government declares the enactment of
the EVAT as its centerpiece fiscal reform program. But the EVAT will
amount to nothing but improve the credit rating of the debt-ridden
government to enable it to contract more loans.
While President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo may claim that the problems of the economy did not
begin with her administration, she cannot escape the fact that she is
presiding over the economy that is not merely on a temporary downturn but
in a worsening state. The low growth rates do not even reflect the extent
of the problems of the economy. Bulatlat
BACK TO
TOP ■
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION ■
COMMENT
© 2005 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided
its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.