Senators on Monday, October 3 expressed their dismay after heads of the Department of Finance (DOF) and the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) were a no-show at the Senate Committee on Ways and Means probe on the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations (POGO) industry.
Senator Sherwin Gatchalian, who heads the ways and means panel, said he would require that NEDA Chief Arsenio Balisacan to appear in the next scheduled hearing so senators can make a correct assessment on the feasibility of maintaining or removing POGOs in the Philippines.
Gatchalian made the manifestation after senators got confused over the figures presented by the NEDA, especially after their virtual presentation was marred by intermittent signal.
According to NEDA Assistant Secretary Sarah Daway-Ducanes, NEDA’s preliminary estimates for 2021, indicate that POGOs contribute about P79.08-billion to the Philippine economy. She also said that based on the 2012 Input Output (IO) table, POGOs have increased the Philippine GDP in 2019 by 0.4 percent.
“Mr. Chairman, can I move that this representatives of NEDA be required to be here physically? Mahirap naman na yung presentation nila ganun. Mahina pa yung signal nila. Pawala wala pa. Paano tayo magkakaroon ng clear na hearing dito? Director ng NBI andito, PNP andito, itong ating mga nasa civilian sector nandito ( It’s hard to understand their presentation. Their signal is weak. How can we have clarity in this hearing? The director of the National Bureau of Investigation, Philippine National Police (PNP) even the civilian sectors are here),” Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa said during the Senate’s inquiry on the government's revenue collection from POGOs.
“Etong mga nasa gobyerno natin, NEDA ayaw magpakita dito. Pano mag kaka klaro, ang resulta ng hearing natin dito eh nagpapasahan pa sila. Di alam kung ano sagot. So maganda siguro kung andito sila Mr. Chairman (Those in government, NEDA is now here. How can we clarify the result of this hearing when they are also pointing fingers? They don’t know the answer. I think it’s best if they are here Mr. Chairman),” Dela Rosa said.
Senate Majority Leader Joel Villanueva supported Dela Rosa’s stance: “We are not requiring the secretary himself to be here, we are not requiring the secretary to be virtually present. We are conducting a very important hearing in this august chamber and it’s so unfortuante. I was so confused with the GDP, the increase in GDP. Visa vis our GDP.”
Gatchalian agreed with his colleagues pointing out that it is critical to get the correct information as it is part of their review to scrutinize the economic contribution of POGOs.
“So NEDA is very important in this discussion. So I’m very disappointed that the people who were sent cannot even answer how they came up with that P79-B and what is the P79-B,” Gatchalian said.
“So we will now, based on the motion of Sen. Bato Dela Rosa, we will require the NEDA to personally come to this hearing, to the next hearing, and we will also require the Secretary (of DOF) to join us next hearing,” he said.
Also during the hearing, executives from the DOF could not provide date regarding the “social costs of POGOs when they were asked by Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero.
Escudero had asked DOF Assistant Secretary Valery Joy Brion to provide the bases for the agency’s position that “the POGOs modest contribution to the economy does not outweigh the social costs of its continued operations.”
“How did you compute social cost?...At what point should we be earning, for example, from POGO for you to say the benefits will overcome the social costs; and how did you come up with the figure on social costs being far weightier than the income or revenue derived by government or the country? Can you put a figure to it?” Escudero asked.
In response, Brion admitted that “we actually don’t have a figure at the moment.”
This prompted Escudero to question the DOF: “where did the decision or conclusion that the social costs outweigh.. saan galing po ‘yun? How did you arrive at that?”
“If it were a mathematical computation or a list of things you considered, what would it be? Ano ba dapat ‘yung income para masabi n’yo na it outweighs the social costs and we should keep it,” asked Escudero.
However, Brion, citing the DOF’s position paper, pointed out that “social costs are inherently difficult to quantify.”
“And it’s something that the DOF does not have any figure at the moment,” she said, adding that the social costs of POGOs “affect investor perception and foreign direct investment decisions.”
“So where is it based? If it’s not based on figures, where is it based? Interviews? Surveys? Perception? Emotion? Fear? What data is it based on that it might affect the impression of foreign businessmen intending to put in foreign direct investments in the country?” Escudero asked Brion.
“Because KFRs (kidnap for ransom) not related to casino or POGO is by far higher. With or without POGOs or casinos there would still be KFRs. So where is it based on, ma’am? Did you conduct a survey? That if POGOs continue it will have a social cost and effect insofar as FDI is concerned? Was a survey conducted?” he further queried.
Brion responded saying that the DOF took into consideration several factors, including reports on the POGO industry as well as its contributions to revenue collections.