Professor Emeritus Leonor Magtolis Briones Former National Treasurer Lead Convenor, Social Watch Philippines

Importance of the Budget in National Development

The Philippines is facing many challenges, the most serious of which are poverty, climate change, health and education, and unemployment. The budget is the most powerful instrument of the government in responding to these problems. It can be an instrument for the redistribution of income groups to fund services and create jobs for the poor. The budget can be used to provide education and health services, as well as training and capacity building and fund projects to create employment. The budget can be used to stabilize the economy and control inflation.

Importance of the Role of the Congress in the Budget

The need to ask questions on the analysis of the government on the performance of the economy, its policies, thrusts and priorities The need to ask questions on what is explicitly stated, and also the more implicit or what is not there The need to engage the executive on longstanding issues on citizens participation, special purpose funds, etc. The need to demand accountability from the government

Importance of the Role of the Congress in the Budget

The Budget is an instrument of fiscal policy which includes policies on revenues, expenditures and borrowing The Budget as part of fiscal policy has three functions:

Allocation function Distribution function Stabilization function To these three functions, I add the Development function

Macroeconomic Assumptions
PARAMETERS 2012 Actual 2013 Adjusted 2014 Projected

Real GNI Growth % Real GDP Growth % Inflation % 364-Day T-bill Rate % FOREX (P/US $) Unemployment Rate %

6.5 6.8 3.2 2.0 42.25 7.0

5.9 6.9 6.0 7.0 3.0 5.0 1.0 3.0 41.0 - 43.0 6.8

6.2-7.2 6.5 7.5 3.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 41.0 43.0 6.7

If attainable, will projected GDP and GNI growth rates beget job creation?
Source: DBM BESF based on BSP, NEDA, NSCB data

Economic Performance (2012 & Q1 2013)

Sector Q1 Q2
2012 (Actual) 2013

Q3

Q4

FY

Q1

Supply side

Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry

Industry Services

1.1

0.6

4.4

4.9

2.8

3.3

5.3 8.4 6.9 21.3 -31.3 -1.9 9.8 6.5 5.7

5.8 7.7 6.6 7.2 3.6 8.3 10.8 6.3 6.5

7.1 8.0 6.7 12.3 6.2 7.0 6.2 7.3 7.3

8.9 6.5 6.2 9.5 9.5 8.0 8.6 7.1 6.4

6.8 7.6 6.6 12.2 -3.2 5.3 8.9 6.8 6.5

10.9 7.0 5.1 13.2 47.7 1.6 -7.0 7.8 7.1

Demand side

Household Consumption Government Consumption Capital Formation Imports Exports

Gross Domestic Product Gross National Income

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB)

Agriculture, Hunting, Forestry & Fishing (Growth rates in %)

2012 Q1 AHFF 1.1 Q4 4.9 Annual 2011 2.6 2012 2.8 2013 Q1 3.3

Palay
Corn Coconut/copra

-1.1
5.4 5.7

10.2
1.6 1.5

5.9
9.5 -1.7

8.0
6.3 3.9

4.5
11.4 0.3

Sugarcane Banana

-6.5 2.0

18.4 -3.0

59.7 0.7

-8.7 0.7

3.1 -6.2

Mango
Pineapple Coffee Cassava

-6.0
5.9 8.9 -2.7

3.4
11.2 -3.1 -0.3

-4.9
3.2 -5.7 5.1 7.5

-1.6
7.1 -0.8 -0.7 4.6

4.4
5.8 -10.8 0.1 -0.2

Rubber 7.7 0.5 Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Agriculture, Hunting, Forestry & Fishing (Growth rates in %)

2012 Q1 AHFF Other crops Livestock Poultry Agri. activities Forestry Fishing 1.1 1.7 3.1 7.1 1.6 42.6 -3.8 Q4 4.9 2.4 1.7 4.3 4.0 11.4 3.4 Annual 2011 2.6 -3.9 2.0 4.4 3.2 58.3 -4.3 2012 2.8 1.5 1.1 4.6 2.0 -6.4 -0.4 2013 Q1 3.3 4.1 0.3 2.8 2.9 11.9 5.5

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Industry (Growth rates in %)

2012
Q1 Industry Mining and Quarrying Manufacturing Construction 5.3 -1.7 6.0 1.5 Q4 8.9 2.8 5.5 29.9

Annual
2011 2012 1.8 7.0 4.7 -9.8 6.8 2.2 5.4 15.7

2013
Q1 10.9 -17.0 9.7 32.5

Electric Gas & Water Supply

8.5

3.4

0.6

5.1

0.1

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Services (Growth rates in %)

2012 Q1 Services Transport, Storage and Communication Trade Financial Intermediation Real Estate, Renting and Business Activities Public Administration, Defense and Social Security 8.4 9.7 Q4 6.5 4.4 Annual 2011 4.9 4.3 2012 7.6 8.1 2013 Q1 7.0 3.5

7.8 8.7 7.8

6.6 8.8 6.5

3.3 5.2 8.4

7.5 8.2 7.5

5.6 13.9 6.3

4.5

8.2

1.9

6.1

8.0

Other Services

10.4

5.8

5.6

7.7

7.6

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Expenditure (Growth rates in %)

2012 Q1 Q4 Annual 2011 2012 2013 Q1

Household CFE
Govt CFE Construction Durable Equipment Breeding Stock & Orchard Dev't Intellectual Property Products Exports of Goods Exports of Services Imports of Goods Imports of Services

6.9
21.3 -1.2 4.5 1.3 31.7

6.2
9.5 30.4 14.1 1.0 31.4

6.3
1.0 -6.2 5.2 -0.3 11.8

6.1
11.8 13.7 5.7 1.4 16.9

5.1
13.2 33.7 9.4 2.0 10.4

9.9 9.1 -5.9 16.7

11.9 -0.6 6.8 12.0

-6.0 4.0 0.4 -0.7

8.4 9.8 2.6 11.1

-8.4 -2.1 -0.9 11.1

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Construction (Growth rates in %)

2012
Q1 Construction Public Private -1.2 60.9 -9.7 Q4 30.4 16.2 35.2

Annual
2011 -6.2 -31.8 4.5 2012 13.7 32.4 8.6

2013
Q1 33.7 45.6 30.7

Source: National Accounts of the Philippines, NSCB

Implications for the 2014 Budget

If we want the national budget to tackle problems of poverty, hunger and unemployment, it has to focus on the sectors where the poorest are and where unemployment is highest. While the GDP for the first quarter of the year is impressive and well within the macroeconomic assumptions, the distribution of such GDP deserves a closer look. The 2014 budget should address the gaps and distributional issues of the GDP to ensure that economic growth is enjoyed by all.

Poverty

SWS: On average, 5 out of 10 Filipinos consider themselves as poor (Q2 2013) NSCB: 2 out of 10 (22%) Filipino families are poor (NSCB Refined Poverty, 2012)
Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on August 5, 2013

Poverty remained practically unchanged

Source: 2012 Poverty Statistics, National Statistical Coordination Board

Hunger

Number of Filipinos suffering from hunger is on the rise despite robust growth
Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on August 18, 2013

Unemployment

Unemployment slightly increases in Q1 2013, and how about underemployment?

Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on May 7, 2013

Age Distribution of Unemployment

Most of the unemployed persons are youth!

Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on April 24, 2013

Gender Distribution of Unemployment

Most of the unemployed persons are women!

Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on April 24, 2013

Higher underemployment rate

Source: Labor Force Survey, National Statistics Office

Income Distribution: Income Inequality Persists

INCOME DECILE 1st Sem 2006 10.3 1st Sem 2009 11.1 2.7 3.8 4.6 28.8 1st Sem 2012 10.9 2.7 3.8 4.5 28.9 PERCENTAGE POINT CHANGE 1st Sem 2006-2009 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 1st Sem 2009-2012 (0.2) 0.0 (0.1) (0.1) 0.1

1ST TO 3RD FIRST SECOND THIRD 4TH TO 7TH

6%

2.5 3.5 4.3 28.5

FOURTH
FIFTH SIXTH SEVENTH 8TH TO 10TH EIGHTH NINTH TENTH

5.2
6.2 7.6 9.5 61.4 12.1

5.4
6.3 7.7 9.4 60.4 11.9 16.1 32.4

5.4
6.4 7.7 9.4 60.0 12.0 16.0 32.0

0.2
0.1 0.1 (0.1) (1.0) (0.2) (0.4) (0.3)

0.0
0.1 0.0 0.0 (0.3) 0.2 (0.1) (0.4)

50%

16.6 32.7

Source: 2012 Poverty Statistics, National Statistical Coordination Board

Total income of Top 20% is approx 8 times of total income of Bottom 20%
INCOME DECILE 1st Sem 2006 1st Sem 2009 1st Sem 2012 PERCENTAGE POINT CHANGE 1st Sem 2006-2009 1st Sem 2009-2012

Ratio of Top 30% over Bottom 30%

5.97

5.45

5.50

(0.52)

0.05

Ratio of Top 20% over Bottom 20%

Ratio of Top 10% over Bottom 10%

8.21

7.44

7.50

(0.77)

0.06

8 times
13.12 12.06 12.07 (1.05) 0.01

Source: 2012 Poverty Statistics, National Statistical Coordination Board

The Macroeconomic Picture and the 2014 Budget

While growth is expected in 2013 and 2014, risks and challenges remain. Social picture gives much cause for concern. Poverty, hunger and unemployment remain intractable problems. The national budget is a powerful tool to address these problems. Government and expenditure policies, if used to finance appropriate programs and projects to address these economic and social threats, can be a powerful tool for improving peoples lives.

Fiscal Program
PARTICULARS
Levels in Billion Pesos Revenues Disbursements Surplus/(Deficit) Obligation Budget Per cent of GDP Revenues Disbursements Surplus/(Deficit) Obligation Budget

2012 Actual
1,534.9 1,777.8 (242.8) 1,816.0 14.5 16.8 (2.3) 17.0 12.9 14.1 (19.0) 14.9 10,673.9 14.0** 86.0** 50.2***

2013 Adjusted
1,745.9 1,983.9 (238.0) 2,005.9 14.7 16.7 (2.0) 16.9 13.7 11.6 (1.1) 10.5 11,899.3 14.0 86.0 48.0

2014 Proposed
2,018.1 2,284.3 (266.2) 2,268.0 16.1 18.1 (2.0) 17.0 15.6 15.1 (11.9) 13.1 13,307.3 19.0 81.0 46.2

Growth Rate Revenues Disbursements Surplus/(Deficit)* Obligation Budget

GDP (DBCC-Approved as of Feb. 15) Deficit Financing Mix (%) Foreign Domestic Debt to GDP Ratio (%)

Notes: *A positive growth rate indicates an improvement in the fiscal balance **Actual as of Nov 2012 ***Actual as of Oct 2012 Source: DBM NBM116 & BESF 2014 based on DBM, DOF, and NEDA data

Revenue Program
Sources of Revenue
Amount (in million pesos) 2012 Tax Revenues Non-tax Revenues Privatization Total 1,361,073 165,511 8,348 1,534,932 2013 1,607,870 135,987 2,000 1,745,857 2014 1,879,918 136,133 2,000 2,018,051 Growth rate (%) 2012-2013 18.13 (17.84) (76.04) 13.74 2013-2014 16.92 0.11 0.0 15.59

Sources of Tax Revenues, FY 2014 Amount (in million pesos)

Net Income Taxes Tax on Property Taxes on Domestic Goods and Services Taxes in International Trade and Transactions Total
*Includes new measure for BIR Sin Tax Reforms 2012 Source: FY 2014 BESF, primarily from the Department of Finance

853,200 5,291 613,331 408,096 1,879,918

National Government Financing FY 2012 to FY 2014 (in million pesos)

Particulars GROSS FOREIGN BORROWINGS Net Foreign Borrowings GROSS DOMESTIC BORROWINGS Net Domestic Borrowings NET FINANCING TOTAL NET FINANCING REQUIREMENT 2012
a/

2013 104,340 (3,442) 630,691 303,288 299,846 238,028

2014 95,030 5,036 620,011 269,074 274,110 266,247

154,621 70,046 798,527 468,126 538,172 242,827

a/ Based on actual data reported in the Cash Operations Report (COR) Source: FY 2014 BESF, primarily from the Bureau of the Treasury

Debt trap. While government is planning to borrow a total of P715.041 Billion, it will only receive P274.110 Billion for both peso and foreign borrowings due to costs of borrowing and other charges.

Debt Servicing in the P2.268 T budget does not reflect Principal Amortization
NG Debt Service Expenditures (in million pesos) Interest Payments Domestic Foreign Principal Amortization 2012 312,800 201,215 115,585 416,974 2013 332,209 227,613 104,597 435,185 2014 352,652 248,396 104,256 440,931

Domestic
Foreign GRAND TOTAL

330,401
86,573 729,774

327,403
107,782 767,394

350,937
89,994 793,583

Source: FY 2014 BESF, primarily from the Bureau of the Treasury

Expenditure Program
Comparative Figures of 2012 and 2013 General Appropriations and the 2014 proposed budget (in Billion pesos)*

* Section 1 of the draft General Appropriations Act clearly appropriates only PhP1,471,970,825,000 and does not include the PhP139,903,759 unprogrammed funds. Which is the correct number for the "New General Appropriations"? PhP1.612 trillion as claimed by NEP or PhP1.472 trillion as provided for in the draft General Appropriations Act?
Sources: General Appropriations Act 2012 & 2013; National Expenditure Program (NEP): DBM, 2014; and BESF: DBM, 2014

Allocation by Sector

Note: Net Lending amounts to PhP27.42B in 2012, PhP26.5B in 2013 and PhP24.95B for 2014. This is equivalent to percentage distribution of 1.5%, 1.32% and 1.1% in expenditure program by sector respectively. Source: Budget of Expenditure and Sources of Financing: DBM, 20112-2014

Allocation By General Expense Class

*Are Personal Services understated?

Source: Budget of Expenditure and Sources of Financing: DBM, 2012-2014

(In Billions of Pesos)

Allocation by Region

Source: Budget of Expenditure and Sources of Financing: DBM, 2012-2014

Where are the poor? The 16 poorest provinces

Lanao del Sur - 68.9% Apayao - 59.8% Eastern Samar 59.4% Maguindanao - 57.8% Zamboanga del Norte - 50.3% Davao Oriental - 48% Ifugao - 47.5% Sarangani - 46.5% Negros Oriental 45.3%

Masbate - 44.2% North Cotabato - 43.9% Northern Samar 43.7% Bukidnon - 43.3% Lanao del Norte 42.5% Sultan Kudarat - 41.6% Cotabato City - 41.5%

*10 of the 16 poorest provinces are situated in Mindanao

Source: 2012 Poverty Statistics, National Statistical Coordination Board

Where are the poor?

Luzon getting the biggest share in the regionalized portion of the national budget has long been a debate, questioning government intervention in addressing poverty especially in Visayas and Mindanao.
Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on April 27 & August 5, 2013

Most Dramatic Rise in Poverty Levels

Province Apayao Bukidnon Cotabato City Eastern Samar Ifugao Lanao del Sur Manguindanao North Cotabato

2009 43.9 38.8 24.5 46.7 28.7 51.4 37.6 24.4

2012 59.8 43.3 41.5 59.4 47.5 68.9 57.8 43.9

Source: 2012 Poverty Statistics, National Statistical Coordination Board

Where are the hungry?

While the chart shows that the hungry are in Balanced Luzon & NCR for the second quarter, the highest incidence of hunger for the first semester still points to Mindanao with 23.1%. Mindanao has averaged 26.3% hunger incidence the previous year, has peaked 30.3% during the third quarter of 2012 and holds the highest average hunger of 16.8% for the past 15 years.
Source: Social Weather Stations, accessed at <http://www.sws.org.ph> on August 18, 2013

Top 12 Agencies, FY 2012-2014

Dept. FY 2012 GAA (000) DepEd DPWH DILG DND DOH DSWD DA 201,821,472 109,833,405 92,879,820 106,905,022 42,769,378 48,722,175 52,932,023 R a n k 1 2 4 3 7 6 5 FY 2013 GAA (000) 232,595,221 155,517,533 91,164,442 80,420,311 51,074,586 56,333,858 64,474,099 R a n k 1 2 3 4 7 6 5 FY 2014 Proposed (000) 281,751,791 200,265,553 99,595,064 82,195,121 80,807,312 78,876,694 69,473,867 R a n k 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

DOTC
SUCs DENR DAR DFA

33,242,378
22,097,645

8
9

34,185,121
32,770,703

8
9

45,161,306
34,650,625

8
9

16,990,968 11 17,903,222 10 10,912,081 13

23,135,850 10 21,038,824 11 11,613,793 13

23,359,611 10 20,002,768 11 12,113,738 12

Source: GAA, 2012-2013; NEP: DBM, 2014

Comparison of Agency Budget, SPFs, Unprogrammed Funds and Automatic Appropriations

Budgets for Departments/Agencies account for around one-half of the budget. Source: GAA 2012 & 2013; NEP & BESF: DBM, 2014

Proposed Special Purpose Funds for 2014

SPECIAL PURPOSE FUNDS GAA 2012 GAA 2013 2014 Proposed

Budgetary Support to Government Corporations Allocation to Local Government Units Calamity Fund Contingent Fund DepEd School Building Program E-Government Fund

21,576,603,000 18,303,490,000 7,500,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,000,000,000

44,664,500,000 17,529,452,000 7,500,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,000,000,000

46,696,697,000 19,705,022,000 7,500,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,000,000,000 2,478,900,000

International Commitments Fund

Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund Pension and Gratuity Fund (formerly Retirement Benefits Fund)

2,683,248,000
109,296,738,000 34,437,891,000

2,636,723,000
69,089,206,000 98,715,143,000

4,815,644,000
80,713,614,000 120,495,952,000

Source: GAA 2012 & 2013; National Expenditure Program: DBM, 2014

Proposed Special Purpose Funds for 2014

SPECIAL PURPOSE FUNDS GAA 2012 GAA 2013 2014 Proposed

Priority Development Assistance Fund

PAMANA Fund Priority Social and Economic Projects Fund1 Feasibility Studies Fund

24,890,000,000

24,790,000,000

25,240,000,000

1,764,300,000

400,000,000

Tax Expenditures Fund2

TOTAL
1

223,452,270,000

267,925,024,000

310,047,901,0003

The PhP22.4 Billion Priority Social and Economic Projects Fund proposed in the 2013 National Expenditure Program was later realigned to concerned agencies as a result of the campaign of ABI for the 2013 Budget. 2 Tax Expenditures Fund of PhP26.9 Billion was NOT a budget item appropriated in the 2013 GAA but placed under the SPFs for 2013. However, this was only indicated in the 2014 Proposed Budget. 3 Inclusive of PhP2.072 Million Retirement and Life Insurance Premium Source: GAA 2012 & 2013; National Expenditure Program: DBM, 2014

Proposed Unprogrammed Funds for 2014

UNPROGRAMMED FUNDS GAA 2012 GAA 2013 2014 Proposed

Budgetary Support to GOCCs (Recording of Relent Loans in the 2014 NEP)

Support to ForeignAssisted Projects General Fund Adjustments

25,214,549,000

16,826,406,000

36,268,000

1,224,790,000 1,000,000,000

2,226,655,000 1,000,000,000

16,124,491,000 1,000,000,000

Support for Infrastructure Projects and Social Programs

Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Debt Management Program

26,000,000,000

23,000,000,000

56,349,000,000

14,200,000,000 85,182,506,000

60,363,130,000

25,000,000,000

Source: GAA 2012 & 2013; National Expenditure Program: DBM, 2014

Proposed Unprogrammed Funds for 2014

UNPROGRAMMED FUNDS AFP Modernization Program Risk Management Program Payment of Total Administrative Disability Pension Peoples Survival Fund TOTAL GAA 2012 GAA 2013 2014 Proposed

10,632,180,000

10,894,000,000

30,000,000,000

3,000,000,000

152,821,845,000

500,000,000 117,548,371,000

500,000,000 139,903,759,000*

Details of the proposed amount for Unprogrammed Fund (UF) are not completely disclosed in 2014 National Expenditure Program. Special provisions would only identify Debt Management Program, Recording of Relent Loans and Risk Management Program. The complete listing of line items are instead indicated in the Details of Selected Programs/Projects for 2014.
*

Source: GAA 2012 & 2013; National Expenditure Program: DBM, 2014

Issues on Special Purpose Funds, Automatic Appropriations and Unprogrammed Funds

Lump sum appropriations have always been problematic

since these are not as detailed as regular appropriations, they tend to be vulnerable to abuse. accountability is sometimes difficult to establish and documentation difficult in the Philippines, lump sum appropriations include special purpose funds, overall savings and unprogrammed funds

2009 COA Report on the SPFs

In August 12, 2009 Audit Briefing for the Office of the House Speaker, COA reported that:
a. the DBM failed to submit to COA authority from the Executive to transfer regular appropriation to Special Purpose Fund b. allotments exceeded appropriations for some Special Purpose Funds

c. pooled savings for 2007- Ph106.11 billion (net of transfer from one agency to another and from one Special Purpose Fund to another cannot be verified due to lack of supporting documents

2009 COA Report (cont.)

d. SAROs issued to DPWH chargeable to PDAF, a special purpose fund, contain appropriation code for regular programs/projects e. regular appropriations of Ph554.06 million of the Department of Agriculture were transferred to Fisheries Modernization Program Fund but DBM did not submit the authority of the Executive to make such a transfer f. allotments in 2008 exceeded appropriations in some SPF by Ph2.61 billion

2010 COA Report

In its 2010 Annual Audit Report of the Department of Budget and Management, the Commission on Audit recommended that:

DBM refrain from transferring one lumpsum fund/special purpose fund (SPF) to another, or utilizing the appropriation of one Fund for purposes of another Fund, otherwise, the intentions of the appropriation law would be circumvented.

Issues on Lump Sum Appropriations

the issues raised on lump sum appropriations, specially special purpose funds remain the same these lump sum appropriations are more vulnerable considering the huge amounts involved the practices identified in 2008 have not changed at all

More Transparency!
There is a need for the public to scrutinize the other side of the budget: the Special Purpose Funds and Unprogrammed Funds.

Some Findings on CCT Impact Assessment

Commissioned by DSWD and with support from the World Bank and AusAid No overall increase in per capita consumption among HH beneficiaries. The estimated per capita consumption per day was P46 in both program and non-program barangays Contrary to the design of the program in which the maximum benefit amount beneficiary HHs could receive is 23% of poor HHs per capita income, in reality the beneficiaries are receiving considerably smaller amounts (an average of P1,740 for the last bimonthly payment). Although Pantawid areas seemed to have higher estimated per capita incomes and lower poverty rates in 2011 compared to non-Pantawid areas, these differences were not significant . No significant evidence of lowered poverty rates among HH beneficiaries 51

Local Impacts of CCT

On the increased levels of spending for the conditional cash transfers (CCT):
An Oxford PhD dissertation study have shown the
large positive impact of the CCT program to incumbent vote shares risks associated with strict poverty targeting.

Two worlds in a planet

There seems to be two worlds existing in the planet Philippines:

1.

The first world boasting of a 7.8 % GDP growth and considered the fastest growing economy in Asia

2.

and the other world suffering from disasters, serious problems of hunger and rising criminality, etc.

We in public administration are challenged to bridge the gap between these two worlds by using the budget as an instrumentality for reforms and not for partisan political gain.