Postpone full devolution of LGUs

PAGBABAGO

In 2018, the Supreme Court granted the petitions of Batangas Gov. Hermilando Mandanas and the late former Bataan Gov. Enrique Garcia, Jr. that the local government units (LGUs) internal allotment or IRA (now called the national tax allotment or NTA) should come from 40 percent of all national taxes – not only from the collections of the Bureau of Internal Revenue but also from the Bureau of Customs’ collections of import duties and other taxies.

Then President Duterte signed Executive Order No. 138 in June 2021 directing the national government to “devolve” or transfer to LGUs the implementation of former national government functions and give them a three-year transition period until 2024.

E.O. 138 would therefore allow the transfer to LGUs of local infrastructure (for education, irrigation and trade), agriculture and natural resource management, environmental services, telecommunication, tourism and housing services functions.

But during the past year, the Local Government Development Institute (LGDI), agreed with LGUs and others, that the three -year transition period is not enough for LGUs to develop the capability needed to carry out the functions of “full devolution.”

This lack of “carrying capacity” or the ability or power to carry out expected functions, or to produce the maximum output and to sustain it up to a certain limit or scope,” was recognized by LGUs themselves. The LGDI and other development experts soon realized that the risk of failure was “high.” That the LGUs were not prepared technically and therefore may not be able to fully utilize the financial resources available. It was clear that they were not ready to deliver the services needed, and if they did, the latter may be deficient or delayed in its implementation. As Jonathan Malaya, LGDI executive director noted, the first phase of the devolution was very challenging, and that therefore, the needed interventions have to be given. The recommendation was to extend the three-year transition period to six years which means that by 2027, they may be ready for a more gradual transfer of programs.

I think we could learn from the experience that we encountered during the past several years when debates on shifting to federalism were ongoing. The proponents argued that it would be the ideal structure for hastening decentralization and devolution of power and services to local government. But its disadvantages soon began to be evident. The lack of enough capable local leaders and therefore the need to undertake massive capacity building; the wide disparities between cities and first-class municipalities with the rest of the 2nd to 5th class municipalities, in their capacities to implement many of the development functions. These were among the arguments for a longer period of transition.

There is no debate on the need to implement the high tribunal ruling on the IRA or NTA, as there is wide support for full devolution of LGUs. And it is wise and prudent to act with caution as this is the only viable path that we can take. The LGDI initiative that would focus on consolidating and harmonizing all interventions especially human resource development is noteworthy. And, while keeping our focus on the competencies needed to succeed in our digital age and community empowerment, let us not forget the socio-cultural values that have enabled us to rise above all odds – our innate kindness, generosity, and bayanihan; and the constraints as well – “crab” mentality, ningas cogon, gerrymandering, political dynasties, and clan conflicts.

My email, Florangel.braid@gmail.com