Addressing Policy Reforms for Local Government and Decentralization in the Philippines
By Michael Henry Yusingco LL.M. and Sarah Vernice Sison of the Ateneo Policy Center — Ateneo School of Government
According to the late Sen. Nene Pimentel, the principal author of the Local Government Code (LGC) or R.A. 7160, “In sum, through the integration of local autonomy in our legal and political system, the passage of the LGC may be likened to the splitting of the atom in that it unleashes the forces of development with such a tremendous impact that not only the privileged but the masses as well, may yet get to benefit from the fruits of modernization in this lifetime.”
Moreover, as per Brillantes the five major features of the LGC are the following: 1) the devolution of basic public service delivery to local government units, which includes health, social services, environment, agriculture, public works, education, tourism, telecommunications, and housing; 2) the devolution of regulatory powers to the local government units; 3) to enhance the capacity of civil society organizations in their local government units; 4) to broaden their financial capabilities specifically by widening taxing powers and increase the share of national wealth; and 5) encourage local governments to take on a more business-oriented role.
And lastly, Section 3 (m) of the LGC provides, the national government shall ensure that decentralization contributes to the continuing improvement of the performance of local government units and the quality of community life.
We analyze the following bills guided by these three views of the LGC.
Senate Bill №1579 and Senate Bill №396
Senate Bill №1579 seeks to amend the current composition of the local school board. This change aims to widen representation in the different local school boards within the LGU. The bill also proposes to reallocate the Special Education Fund (SEF).
Senate Bill №396 similarly mandates a reallocation of the SEF, specifically in how it can be utilized by the LGU. The bill adds the following expenditures: libraries, payment of salaries, allowances of teaching and non-teaching personnel competency training, operation of alternative learning systems. The provisions in the LGC only accounts for the “operation and maintenance of public schools, construction, repair of school buildings, facilities and equipment, educational research, purchase of books and periodicals, and sports development as approved by the Local School Board”.
There is already tension between the national government and LGUs when it comes to education, specifically on the utilization of the SEF. The current system mandates that the expenses charged under the SEF should be approved by the Local School Board while being regulated by the Department of Education guidelines. As raised during the hearing, while it sometimes seems that LGUs are in control of the SEF, but in fact, they are strictly constrained by the Department of Education guidelines. The bill aims to correct this pursuant to the decentralization principle, funds must follow function.
Notably, greater representation is also one of the key facets of the bill. While greater representation is a highly favored initiative, it extends far more than having more representatives. Attention must likewise be given to the quality and depth of representation. For example, the bill includes members from the military as one of the representatives. Why is there a place for the military in the local school board? How will this impact the operations of the armed forces? These are just a few questions that need to be resolved by the authors of this bill.
Senate Bill №1094
Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) are often commended as modern-day heroes, for their service to their families and the Filipino people are unparalleled. Senate Bill №1094 aims to require LGUs to create OFW Family Help Desks. Its purpose is to address issues relating to health, livelihood, and other welfare concerns.
The welfare of OFWs and their families fall under the authority of the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration pursuant to R.A. 10801 or the “Overseas Workers Welfare Administration Act”. Similarly, the Philippine Overseas Employees Administration is also mandated to assist OFWs pursuant to R.A. 10022 or the “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995”.
With the OWWA and POEA already exercising responsibility over OFWs and their families, Senate Bill №1094 appears to be a redundancy. Instead of re-imposing this task on the LGU, decentralizing the offices of OWWA and POEA, in partnership with the DILG, maybe a better alternative. Indeed, having overlapping responsibilities and authorities would only be muddling the system and compromise the delivery of this very vital public service.
Senate Bill №1124
With P8.26 million international visitors leading to a 15% growth recorded in 2019, tourism in the Philippines is clearly a vibrant revenue-generating sector. Senate Bill №1124 proposes to appoint a tourism officer in cities and municipalities where tourism is a significant industry, amending Sec. 454 and Sec. 443 of the Local Government Code.
Notably, Section 42 of R.A. 9593 or the Tourism Act of 2009 already prescribes permanent positions for tourism officers at the local level. However, not all LGUs have the budget to hire their own tourism officer. This discrepancy has to be resolved by the authors of this bill.
Senate Bill №844
Senate Bill №844 proposes to enhance inter-LGU cooperation by organizing LGUs as a legal entity that can access credit financing or other debt instruments. It proposes that LGUs group themselves to harmonize their efforts, services, and resources for through mutual agreement or through forming alliances but with a legal personality. Furthermore, it shall create a national registry of alliances shall be formed to register the alliance of LGUs and establish a legal personality.
Inter-LGU cooperation already occurs in the current decentralization system. The health sector has in fact established inter-local health zones (ILHZ) through Executive Order №205, s. 2000. ILHZ bridging the limited capacities of LGUs by forming health districts in cooperation with other LGUs. Through formations like this, LGUs are able to assist each other by providing support for one another when it comes to its programs and in policy implementation.
However, the concept of the cooperating LGUs forming a legal entity has to be clarified by the authors of the bill. Is the joint effort a cooperative or a GOCC? Should this joint effort be sanctioned by an ordinance from each participating LGU? What are the principles and regulations that would govern the dissolution of this joint effort? All these contingencies must be addressed in the bill itself.
Senate Bill №446
The decentralization of the health system is still beset by a host of problems. Nonetheless, the reality is public health has been devolved down to the barangay level through barangay health centers, which are very crucial in delivering basic primary care.
The Department of Health has said that most doctors do not want to work in rural health units due to low pay compared to provincial hospitals. Due to this, there are shortages in doctors to service these areas. Senate Bill №446 proposes to increase incentives for rural health doctors through: 1.) hazard allowance determined by the local health board; 2.) subsistence allowance equivalent to meals that take during their duty; and 3.) scholarships through tuitions and fees.
This bill clearly proffers a laudable reform. Nonetheless, its authors must clarify in the bill itself how and which agency will be responsible for compensating the rural doctors.
Recommendation:
Greater decentralization often leads to greater representation of local interest. The principle behind decentralization is that the government becomes nearer to its people through local authorities representing the state. This allows better articulation of issues and better catering to needs and demands of the communities.
Furthermore, decentralization also leads to better fiscal and administrative accountability especially when there is a clear delineation of tasks among government levels and offices. Fiscal and administrative autonomy, a clear delineation of responsibilities, and being able to take control of taxing and budgeting allows for satisfaction and perception of accountability among constituencies. A harmonious relationship between local and national government is necessary for a decentralized system to work. Accordingly, we offer the following recommendations:
1. Institutionalize IGR mechanisms
This need for coordination and cooperation between different orders of government is not unique to the Philippines. The growing complexity of government mandates, such as those represented in these bills, means that roles and responsibilities between levels of government are no longer clear cut and that mechanisms were required to establish definite policy positions, accountabilities, and administrative protocols between them. Making Intergovernmental Relations or IGR an integral component of good governance, coherent public policymaking, and efficient delivery of public services.
IGR is explained in academic literature as “the processes and institutions through which governments within a political system interact.” IGR mechanisms “seeks the achievement of common goals through alignment and cohesion across all levels of government”. Notably, it is widely acknowledged in the academic literature that IGR mechanisms can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of policymaking by avoiding redundancies, duplication, unreasonable fragmentation, and ineffective amalgamation. While IGR is traditionally associated with federal systems, often being described as the “lifeblood of federalism in practice”, many scholars maintain that IGR mechanisms can and do play a key function in unitary systems with embedded decentralization arrangements such as the Philippines.
The reality is governments are now mutually dependent in many regards. Responsibilities overlap, policy areas interact, and many public issues cut across several governance competencies. Pertinently, these interdependencies have only increased and have become even more complex as perfectly exemplified by the subject bills themselves.
We recommend therefore that these bills incorporate and institutionalize these IGR core elements. The first one is that there should be mutual respect between the different levels of government. There must be an unequivocal recognition of each side’s authority and accountability. Second, there must be an ethos of interdependence. Each side must see the need to cooperate and collaborate to achieve the intended goal. Third, the IGR mechanism must be a platform for civic participation. Hence, there must be space for civil society organizations to engage in the policy-making process as well as in the implementation phase of any development program.
The regular and consistent IGR meetings can create an environment “where the success of policies can be assessed, potential problems can be identified in time and resolved before turning into a crisis.” The constant reference to IGR mechanisms can produce a collegial atmosphere amongst key decision-makers, advisors, and technical experts which can then facilitate the smooth exchanges of information, raise the appeal of consensus-building and conflict resolution and encourage adherence to the deliberative process.
2. Promote deliberative principles
To ensure intergovernmental cooperation and coordination, top-level officials and their staff must possess the competency to implement and manage a deliberative process. According to DeRosa and Regan:
“Deliberative rigor requires that decisions are made thoughtfully, with a full assessment of the widest range of considerations, by persons who are genuinely open to other viewpoints and who make decisions based on the force of the better argument.”
Setting such a high standard makes it possible that even if no consensus is ever reached in the end, people still come out of the discussion with a better and more complete understanding of the subject matter deliberated upon. And people coming out of such public deliberations having an open mind is very important because it makes cooperation still possible. At the very least, it can keep the line of communication within a group of diverse views and interests connected. Thus, there will always be potential for collective action.
Hence, we recommend that in prescribing IGR mechanisms, the bills should also refer to deliberative standards such as “the ideals of high-quality argumentation or rational-critical debate, a focus on the common good, mutual respect, and the concept of a rationally motivated consensus”.
This article is written as a policy brief for the Senate Committee Hearing on Local Government held last June 19, 2020.
Michael Henry Yusingco, LL.M is a Senior Research Fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center of the Ateneo School of Government in Metro Manila and a Fellow of the Institute for Autonomy and Governance in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
Sarah Vernice R. Sison is a Research Assistant at the Ateneo School of Government.
References
Brillantes, Alex. “Decentralized democratic governance under the local government code: a governmental perspective.” Philippine Journal of Public Administration 42, nos. 1 & 2 (January — April 1998): 38–57
Cuenca, Janet S. Health devolution in the Philippines: Lessons and insights. №2018–36. PIDS Discussion Paper Series, 2018. https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1836.pdf
Department of Tourism. “Visitor Arrivals: January — December 2019”. In PDF. http://www.tourism.gov.ph/industry_performance/Dec2019/Visitor_Arrivals_Report_FY2019.pdf
DeRosa, Mary and Milton C. Regan, Jr., “Deliberative Constitutionalism in the National Security Setting” in The Cambridge Handbook of Deliberative Constitutionalism (Ron Levy, Hoi Kong, Graeme Orr & Jeff King eds., Cambridge University Press 2018), pp. 28–43.
De Villiers, B. “Codification of “Intergovernmental Relations” by Way of Legislation: The Experiences of South Africa and Potential Lessons for Young Multitiered Systems.” Heidelberg Journal of International Law 72 no. 4 (2012): 671–694.
Escobar-Lemmon, M., and A. D. Ross. “Does decentralization improve perceptions of accountability.” In Attitudes in response to decentralization in Colombia. In a meeting of the Public Choice Society. 2010.
Phillips, David R. “Primary health care in the Philippines: banking on the barangays?.” Social science & medicine 23, no. 10 (1986): 1105–1117.
