HOTSPOT
Tonyo Cruz
Fandoms of traditional politicians are at it again: Perpetuating the myth that their political idols should get credit for the inception or completion of public works projects.
Yes, there have been a couple of fact checks about their competing claims. But the biggest fact has so far been left out: Public works are funded by taxpayer money, by loans to be paid by taxpayers, or by a mix of both.
The Marcos regime, known for its “edifice complex,” had sought to con the nation about massive public infrastructure being symbolic of prosperity under tyranny. Not only were many of the public works projects a mere outcome of whim: They came at a huge, lingering cost to taxpayers.
The Marcos “edifice complex” funded largely by onerous foreign loans, caught up with the people of the Philippines when a debt crisis spiraled into an economic crisis in the second half of the 1970s until the early 1980s.
The price tag was huge, as we discovered in 1986. The Marcoses bestowed sovereign guarantees for loans amounting to around $4-billion, and made behest loans reaching P50-billion. All in our name and done before 1986 and yet they keep haunting generations of Filipinos up until the present.
Tragically, the traditional politicians that have led the Philippines in the post-Marcos continued the same mindset. Traditional politicians continue to spread the lie that the public owes them the public works they build using public funds or public debt. They put their initials, campaign slogans or even full names on public works buildings and infrastructure as if the money came from their own pockets.
“Epal” has in the past decade joined “edifice complex” in our lexicon about these traditional politicians. But since it is in the DNA of traditional politicians to deny the public the honor and dignity of sovereignty, many public officials continue to misrepresent public works and other publicly-funded projects and programs as if they were personal and private projects.
Up until today, we still pay for those foreign loans. We have no choice because all post-Marcos administrations have continued both the policy and law on automatic payments not only for debts incurred by Marcos and post-Marcos administrations. Automatic appropriations deny the Filipino people the full benefits of the annual national budgets that could have long gone to expanding direct access to education, health, housing and support for entrepreneurs.
The policy and law on automatic appropriations also embolden both the present administration and its Chinese backers in the massive infrastructure projects. We, the taxpayers of the Philippines, will pay both the principal and interest of the high-interest loans that finance these projects.
For instance, President Duterte signed with China two loan agreements to date: $62.1 million for the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project and $211.2 million for the New Centennial Water Source-Kaliwa Dam. Those are loans he made on behalf of the Filipino people, including the millions who will be adversely affected by the rampage of “development aggression.”
This is not to say that we should be against public works and public loans. We always need public works to enable the people to improve their lives, create massive employment, thrive, and achieve their highest potentials. Public loans could augment meager resources.
On all public works projects, we must give credit where credit is due: Filipino engineers, architects, designers, construction workers and taxpayers who together actually build and finance them.
On all public works projects, we must be strict and merciless on those who hold the public purse and the power to sign loans on our behalf as a nation: What are the terms of the loans? How clean are the loan and construction contracts? Why put your initials, slogans and names there when these belong to our people?
Ultimately, let’s expand our democratic imagination beyond the limits set by self-serving and corrupt traditional politicians. Let the public reclaim the “public” in public works.
Tonyo Cruz
Fandoms of traditional politicians are at it again: Perpetuating the myth that their political idols should get credit for the inception or completion of public works projects.
Yes, there have been a couple of fact checks about their competing claims. But the biggest fact has so far been left out: Public works are funded by taxpayer money, by loans to be paid by taxpayers, or by a mix of both.
The Marcos regime, known for its “edifice complex,” had sought to con the nation about massive public infrastructure being symbolic of prosperity under tyranny. Not only were many of the public works projects a mere outcome of whim: They came at a huge, lingering cost to taxpayers.
The Marcos “edifice complex” funded largely by onerous foreign loans, caught up with the people of the Philippines when a debt crisis spiraled into an economic crisis in the second half of the 1970s until the early 1980s.
The price tag was huge, as we discovered in 1986. The Marcoses bestowed sovereign guarantees for loans amounting to around $4-billion, and made behest loans reaching P50-billion. All in our name and done before 1986 and yet they keep haunting generations of Filipinos up until the present.
Tragically, the traditional politicians that have led the Philippines in the post-Marcos continued the same mindset. Traditional politicians continue to spread the lie that the public owes them the public works they build using public funds or public debt. They put their initials, campaign slogans or even full names on public works buildings and infrastructure as if the money came from their own pockets.
“Epal” has in the past decade joined “edifice complex” in our lexicon about these traditional politicians. But since it is in the DNA of traditional politicians to deny the public the honor and dignity of sovereignty, many public officials continue to misrepresent public works and other publicly-funded projects and programs as if they were personal and private projects.
Up until today, we still pay for those foreign loans. We have no choice because all post-Marcos administrations have continued both the policy and law on automatic payments not only for debts incurred by Marcos and post-Marcos administrations. Automatic appropriations deny the Filipino people the full benefits of the annual national budgets that could have long gone to expanding direct access to education, health, housing and support for entrepreneurs.
The policy and law on automatic appropriations also embolden both the present administration and its Chinese backers in the massive infrastructure projects. We, the taxpayers of the Philippines, will pay both the principal and interest of the high-interest loans that finance these projects.
For instance, President Duterte signed with China two loan agreements to date: $62.1 million for the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project and $211.2 million for the New Centennial Water Source-Kaliwa Dam. Those are loans he made on behalf of the Filipino people, including the millions who will be adversely affected by the rampage of “development aggression.”
This is not to say that we should be against public works and public loans. We always need public works to enable the people to improve their lives, create massive employment, thrive, and achieve their highest potentials. Public loans could augment meager resources.
On all public works projects, we must give credit where credit is due: Filipino engineers, architects, designers, construction workers and taxpayers who together actually build and finance them.
On all public works projects, we must be strict and merciless on those who hold the public purse and the power to sign loans on our behalf as a nation: What are the terms of the loans? How clean are the loan and construction contracts? Why put your initials, slogans and names there when these belong to our people?
Ultimately, let’s expand our democratic imagination beyond the limits set by self-serving and corrupt traditional politicians. Let the public reclaim the “public” in public works.