Ibon 2022

bird
talk
Economic and Political Briefing
Yearstarter 2022:
Out with the old, seeking the new
IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 1

04 February 2022
114 Timog Avenue
Quezon City 1103
Philippines
Tel. nos: +632 8927-7060 to 61
Fax: +632 8929-2496
www.ibon.org
T
he next administration will not only have to pick up the pieces in the aftermath
of the Duterte administration’s COVID-19 response. It will also have to fix many
things going wrong with the economy even before the pandemic hit.
We look at the economy the Duterte government leaves behind as it exits mid-
2022. It has degraded further from policy missteps since 2016 and especially upon
COVID-19. Then we look at the economic platforms of the presidential candidates
– on the premise that every serious aspirant should have one and be informing
the public about this by now. We conclude with some thoughts on the economy’s
prospects in 2022 and beyond.

Duterte’s economic legacy
The end goal of economic policy is ensuring the best possible quality of life for every Filipino. To
achieve this, two things have to be done: 1) develop domestic agriculture and industrialization
to increase productivity, create jobs and raise incomes in an environmentally sustainable
manner; and 2) ensure that economic gains are distributed equitably so as to raise the people’s
living standards, especially of the poorest.
The Duterte administration has had a tight grip on economy policymaking for over 5½ years.
Supported by a compliant Congress and fueled by unprecedented borrowings, it claims to
have gone far in implementing its 10-point economic agenda. The economic managers see
brightening prospects on the back of what they call “game-changing” efforts. But what kind of
economy is the administration really leaving behind?
Pres. Rodrigo Duterte’s economic team released its 10-point economic agenda even before
taking office in June 2016. This was to assure big business interests that the incoming
president’s socialist rhetoric was just that. The agenda was appropriately conventional and
hence fundamentally flawed.
Its main thrust was clear – continue current macroeconomic policies and attract foreign
investment by easing doing business and making it more profitable with infrastructure and
tax reforms. This was embellished with token mention of rural development, science and
technology, creative arts, and some social measures (i.e., social protection, reproductive
health, responsible parenthood).
The 10-point agenda was heedless of the long-term decline of agriculture and manufacturing.
It prevented development by continuing policies that prematurely opened up the economy
and were ideologically opposed to protecting and supporting domestic farms, fisheries and
industrial firms.
This erroneous approach has resulted in arguably the weakest economy in the country’s history
in terms of productive capacity, which is so essential for national economic development.
Agriculture further declined and fell to its smallest ever share of the economy in 2019 at just
9.2% of gross domestic product (GDP), albeit increasing slightly to 9.6% in 2021. (See Chart
1) The country became a service economy more than a producing economy in the late 1990s.
The year 2021 also marks the first time that the agriculture sector became a smaller share of
GDP than public utilities combined (i.e., electricity, gas and water, transportation and storage,
communication).1
Agricultural sector growth averaging just 1.2% annually in 2017-2021 is less than one-third
the historical average of 3.8% since the end of the Second World War. (See Table 1) The
Duterte government is complicit not just for keeping past policies but also for cutting the
1 Yet while agriculture is smaller as a share of the economy, the 11.2 million employed in the sector as of November 2021 is over three times the
3.5 million employed in utilities combined.
4 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

Chart 1. Gross Domestic Product by industry, 1946-2021* (in %)
80
Services
60
62.0 Production**
54.1 Manufacturing
40
Agriculture
Fishery and
% of GDP
31.2 36.2 Forestry
20 27.6 Mining and

23.5 19.2 Quarrying
9.7 Public utilities***

- 6.8
9.6
1.5 0.8
1946 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2021
* Data for 1946-1997 were computed using GDP at constant 1985 prices, 1998-1999 at constant 2000, and 2000 onwards at constant 2018.
** Production includes the Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry; Manufacturing; Mining and Quarrying; and Construction sectors
*** Public utilities includes Electirity, Gas and Water; Transport and Storage; and Information and Communication
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority National Accounts of the Philippines
already small share of agriculture in the national government budget and for liberalizing rice
imports.2
Manufacturing meanwhile dropped to its smallest share of GDP since 1950 at 18.6% in 2020,
although increasing slightly to 19.2% of GDP in 2021 following the lockdown-driven collapse of
so many service sectors. (See Chart 1) The sector did not shrink just because of the pandemic
disrupting global supply chains. Manufacturing growth was already falling rapidly from 8% in
2017 to 5.1% (2018) and 3.8% (2019), before contracting by 9.8% in 2020. (See Table 1) The
sector’s share in the economy correspondingly fell from 19.3% in 2017 to 18.7% in 2019 even
before the pandemic.
The only way to increase the share of manufacturing in the economy and make industries take
root is with a thorough program for national industrialization. Taking root means building dense
and productive linkages across different sectors.
The last four decades of globalization worldwide have clearly shown that industrialization
cannot happen with a liberal approach to foreign direct investment (FDI) and trade. There has
not been a single breakout industrializing economy anywhere in the world in all this time. On
the contrary, deindustrialization such as in the Philippines is common.
2 Agriculture and agrarian reform’s 3.72% (obligation-based) share in the 2016 national budget fell to 3.39% (2017, obligation-based), 3.46%
(2018, obligation-based), and 3.64% (2019), momentarily increased to 4.17% (2020), but then went down again to 3.18% (2021) and barely 3%
in 2022.

Table 1. Gross Domestic Product by industry, Growth rates, 2016-2021 (at constant 2018 prices; in %)
Industry group 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
1. Agriculture, Hunting, Forestry and Fishing (1.0) 4.2 1.1 1.2 (0.2) (0.3)
2. Industry Sector 8.2 7.0 7.3 5.5 (13.2) 8.2
a. Mining and Quarrying 5.5 2.1 2.0 3.4 (18.9) 2.6
b. Manufacturing 6.8 8.0 5.1 3.8 (9.8) 8.6
c. Electricity, steam, water and waste
management 9.1 4.5 6.5 6.2 (0.4) 4.5
d. Construction 12.0 6.1 14.3 9.7 (25.7) 9.8
3. Service Sector 8.2 7.4 6.7 7.2 (9.2) 5.3
a. Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor
vehicles and motorcycles 7.1 6.9 5.9 7.8 (6.0) 4.3
b. Transportation and storage 10.3 7.3 7.7 6.4 (30.9) 6.3
c. Accommodation and food service activities 11.9 11.6 8.6 5.6 (45.4) 7.8
d. Information and communication 6.0 4.5 6.7 8.0 5.0 9.1
e. Financial and insurance activities 8.8 8.4 8.4 11.9 5.5 4.5
f. Real estate and ownership of dwellings 4.5 5.7 5.4 4.1 (17.0) 2.2
g. Professional and business services 15.5 10.4 3.8 2.0 (10.0) 6.2
h. Public administration and defense;
compulsory social activities 7.5 9.1 15.2 13.5 4.6 5.2
i. Education 6.4 7.1 8.9 4.7 (10.8) 8.0
j. Human health and social work activities 7.4 6.6 (0.3) 4.9 (3.8) 15.0
k. Other services 7.1 2.2 4.5 6.7 (41.1) 2.1
Gross Domestic Product 7.1 6.9 6.3 6.1 (9.6) 5.6

Gross National Income 6.8 6.8 5.9 5.4 (11.4) 1.6
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority National Accounts of the Philippines
As with past administrations, the economic managers dogmatically refuse to even consider
identifying key industries and then nurturing Filipino capacity here with judicious protection and
support. Instead, low value-added foreign manufacturers in export enclaves are misconstrued as
domestic industrial development.
There was visible expansion in real estate and construction, retail and utilities, and export
enclaves that helped sustain an illusion of progress and prosperity. However, these were just
pockets of employment, income and wealth that could not be engines for the economy in the
same way that dynamic agriculture and industry would be.

Social crises
Table 2. Selected labor force statistics, 2019-2020 (population in '000; rate in %) The crisis of
joblessness is
O cial release IBON estimates
muted by a change
Indicator 2019 2020 2019 2020
in the definition of
Total 15 years old and over 72,931 73,732 72,931 73,732 unemployment that
Labor Force 44,693 43,878 47,100 47,600 stopped counting
Employed 42,429 39,378 42,429 39,378 millions of jobless
Underemployed 5,933 6,395 5,933 6,395 Filipinos, and by a
Unemployed 2,263 4,500 4,710 8,235 liberal definition of
Not in the Labor Force 28,239 29,854 25,832 26,132 employment that
Participation Rate 61.3 59.5 64.6 64.6 includes huge and
Employment Rate 94.9 89.7 90.1 82.7 rising amounts of
Underemployment Rate 14.0 16.2 14.0 16.2 informal and irregular
Unemployment Rate 5.1 10.3 10.0 17.3 pseudo-work.
The first year of the

Note: The o cial methodology for estimating unemployment rate was changed in 2005. Additional
criteria to count as unemployed were added, which reduced the o cially reported number of
pandemic saw 4.5
unemployed and the unemployment rate. IBON generates annual unemployment data from
million unemployed
the PSA's microdata on the LFS using the old de nition to make comparisons with previous
periods possible.
with a 10.3%
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority Labor Force Survey unemployment rate,
based on official labor force survey reports. (See Table 2) However, reverting to the earlier
unemployment definition for comparability with historical trends, IBON computes the true
number of unemployed at 8.2 million with a 17.3% unemployment rate.3
By this measure, the number of unemployed Filipinos has steadily increased throughout the
Duterte administration to a historic high even before the pandemic. (See Chart 2) It is also
important to stress how the true unemployment rate has stayed high at around its 10.4%
average over the last four decades of globalization since 1980. (See Chart 3)
Officially reported unemployment moderated to 3.2 million as of November 2021, but the true
number of unemployed is certainly higher at around 5.7 million or more. This is from adding
another 2.5 million, which is the annual average that the government has not been counting in
the official figures over the 2016-2020 period.4
High unemployment is aggravated by poor quality of work with an increase of informal and
pseudo-work among those employed since the administration took power.
3 The government changed the methodology for counting unemployment in April 2005 where jobless Filipinos who did not look for work in the
past six months and those unable to immediately take up new work were no longer counted as unemployed (as they had been previously); they
are instead dropped from the labor force entirely. Since then, this has had the effect of reducing the magnitude and rate of unemployment as
well the size of the labor force. IBON recomputes unemployment according to the original definition for the better comparability over a longer
time period which is important for assessing economic policy measures and trends.
4 Average discrepancy over 2016-2020 is used because microdata is not yet available to compute for 2021 or the its monthly rounds.

Chart 2. Number of unemployed persons*, 1979-2020 (in millions)
10
8.2
8
Unemployed (millions)
4.5
4
-
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Unemployed, old de nition Unemployed

(in millions) (in millions)
* - 2005-2019 show data based on the old unemployment criteria to make comparisons with previous periods. These estimates
are based on PSA's microdata sets on the LFS rounds for the said period. The low estimates for 2014-2015 are due to the
exclusion of Region VIII and Leyte for certain rounds (post-Yolanda).
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) Labor Force Survey (LFS)
Chart 3. Unemployment rate*, 1979-2020 (in %)

20
17.3
15
Unemployment rate (%)
10 10.3
-
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Unemployment rate, Unemployment rate (%)

old de nition (%)
* - 2005-2019 show data based on the old unemployment criteria to make comparisons with previous periods. These estimates
are based on PSA's microdata sets on the LFS rounds for the said period. The low estimates for 2014-2015 are due to the
exclusion of Region VIII and Leyte for certain rounds (post-Yolanda).
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) Labor Force Survey (LFS)

Table 3. Employed persons by number of hours worked and by Employment increased by
class of worker, 2016, January 2020 and November 2021 (in '000) 4.5 million between 2016
Jan Nov and November 2021. (See
Indicator 2016 2020 2021 p Table 3) But this is driven
Employed 40,998 42,543 45,477 most by the increase in part-
By number of hours worked time work, which accounts
Worked less than 40 hours 13,361 13,443 16,563 for 3.2 million or 71% of the
40 Hours and over 27,239 28,768 28,380 net employment increase;
With a job, not at work 398 332 535 only 1.1 million (26%) of the
By class of worker balance is in full-time work.
Wage and salary workers 25,240 27,757 28,156
Worked for private household 2,096 1,851 2,121 The share of part-time
Worked for private establishment 19,694 21,894 21,437 work in employment
Worked for government or correspondingly rose from
3,317 3,895 4,391
government corporation 32.6% in 2016 to 36.4% by
Worked with pay in own-family
132 117 207 November 2021.
operated farm or business
Self-employed without any paid
employee
11,097 11,135 Out of a reported 45.5 million
12,620
Employer in own family-operated employed in November 2021:

1,376 1,002 1,046
farm or business by hours worked, 17.1 million
Worked without pay in own family- (37.6%) are in part-time work
operated farm or business (Unpaid 3,285 2,649 3,656 (36.4%) or considered not at
family worker)
work (1.2%); and by class of
p
- preliminary worker, 17.5 million (38.5%)
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority Labor Force Survey
are either self-employed
(27.8%) or in family-operated farms or businesses (10.8%), aside from perhaps another 12.8
million wage and salary workers in informal establishments.5
Such informality implies low and irregular incomes without benefits and job security for millions.
But salaried employees do not necessarily have it better. Even before the pandemic hit, the
Duterte administration was giving the least number of wage hikes and the smallest increases in
the post-Marcos era. (See Table 4)
In the National Capital Region (NCR), for instance, there have only been two wage hikes since
the start of the Duterte administration, which increased the nominal wage by just 9.4% to
Php537. But inflation eroded the real value of the minimum wage and this actually fell by 9.7%
between July 2016 and December 2021.
The last time any president gave a wage increase in the months running up to national elections
was nearly 25 years ago in February 1998. The lockdowns and their aftermath will just give the
government further reason to not give any meaningful wage hikes. As it is, this administration will
be the first one in the post-Marcos era where real wages fell over its term.
5 IBON computations on data from the PSA’s November 2021 LFS. Employment in informal establishments is estimated by subtracting
employment reported by the PSA’s 2021 ULE from reported wage and salary workers in private establishments.

Table 4. Selected wage indicators by administration
Number Nominal wage (Php) Real wage* (Php)
of wage Ending/ % Ending/ %
Administration hikes Starting To date increase Starting To date increase
Aquino 6 37 118 218.9 136 209 54.4

Ramos 7 118 198 67.8 209 215 2.8
Estrada 2 198 250 26.3 369 399 8.2
Arroyo 7 250 382 52.8 399 410 2.7
Aquino 6 382 491 28.5 410 468 14.2
Duterte 2 491 537 9.4 468 423 (9.7)
* - real wage estimates per administration are based on the following base years: Aquino and Ramos 2000=100; and
Estrada to Duterte 2012=100.
Sources: National Wages and Productivity Commission, and Philippine Statistics Authority
Low informal sector earnings and salaries have also been significantly eroded by inflation in the
last two-and-a-half years. Inflation that fell to as low as 0.8% in October 2019 has generally been
on an uptrend until peaking at 4.9% by August 2021. Although moderating in succeeding months,
prices have not gone down even if the rate at which they are increasing has slowed.
The Duterte administration often cites the reported reduction in official poverty between 2015
and 2018 as one of its successes. To begin with, this is according to a very low poverty threshold
averaging only Php71 per person per day in 2018. But the decline is in a sense also artificial
in being largely due to a considerable increase in Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps)
conditional cash transfers (CCTs) to the poorest 4.3 million families and not by the poorest finding
livelihoods. (See Chart 4)
Giving cash transfers to millions of poor Filipinos improves their welfare, but after so many years,
the question is why this continues to be needed at such a scale for so long. The most sustainable
source of poverty reduction remains structurally increasing the availability of decent work and
regular incomes for the poorest Filipinos – which can only be achieved on the base of robust
agriculture and industry.
In any case, poverty increased again in the first semester of 2021 with an additional 700,000
poor families (to 4.7 million or 18% family poverty incidence) or additional 3.9 million poor
Filipinos (to 26.1 million or 23.7% population poverty incidence). (See Table 5) Yet, this only
reflects those under the still unreasonably low official poverty line averaging Php79 per person
per day.
Taking a wider view, the number of poor and vulnerable families has bloated to around 18-21
million, or some seven to eight out of 10 Filipino families.6
6 IBON computes the low end estimate as the proportion of households without savings according to the BSP’s CES Fourth Quarter 2021 and
the high end estimate as the number of families reporting themselves as poor or borderline poor according to the Social Weather Stations (SWS)
September 2021 self-rated poverty survey.

Chart 4. Budget for 4Ps vs. poverty incidence among population, 2009-2018
100 50
89.4
80 40
62.3
Poverty incidence (%)

Value (Php billion) 60 30
26.3
25.2 23.5
39.4
40 16.7 20
20 10
5.0
- -
2009 2012 2015 2018
4Ps budget (Php billion) Poverty incidence (%)
4Ps - Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program
Sources: Department of Budget and Management, and Philippine Statistics Authority
Table 5. Poverty indicators, 2015 and 2018, and 1st semester 2018-2021
2018 2021
Indicator 2015 2018 1st sem 1st sem
Poverty Threshold
Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold (in Php) 22,747 25,813 12,638 14,498
For a family of 5 per month 9,478 10,756 10,532 12,082
Per capita per day 62 71 70 79
Poverty incidence (in %)
Family 18.0 12.1 16.2 18.0
Population 23.5 16.7 21.1 23.7
Magnitude of poor (in million)
Family 4.1 3.0 4.0 4.7
Population 23.7 17.7 22.3 26.1
Food Threshold
Annual Per Capita Food Threshold (in Php) 15,887 18,126 8,849 10,071
For a family of 5 per month 6,620 7,553 7,374 8,393
Per capita per day 44 50 49 56
Subsistence incidence (in %)
Family 6.5 3.4 6.2 7.1
Population 9.1 5.2 8.5 9.9
Magnitude of subsistence poor (in million)
Family 1.5 0.8 1.5 1.9
Population 9.2 5.5 9.0 10.9
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority

Debt burdens
The Duterte government’s borrowings are unprecedented. Government debt ballooned to
keep financing the administration’s mispriorities – big business-oriented and corruption-ridden
infrastructure projects, militarist counterinsurgency and political repression, and pork barrel.
The administration had gross borrowings of Php5.81 trillion between July 2016-2020, with another
Php2.78 trillion so far in the first 11 months of 2021. This means borrowing an average of Php132.1
billion monthly, which is over four times the average of Php30.2 billion monthly under all previous
post-Marcos administrations.
The Php5.95 trillion in outstanding national government (NG) debt the previous Aquino
government left behind is projected to reach Php13.41 trillion by the end of 2022. (See Chart 5)
This is the biggest nominal debt increase under any government in the country’s history.
Chart 5. National government outstanding debt, 1990-2022* (as % of GDP; value in Php trillion)
150 15
13.4
11.7
% of GDP
100 10
Value (Php trillion)

6.1
50 5
- -
1990 2000 2010 2020 2022
in Php trillion as % of GDP
GDP - gross domestic product
* - 2021 and 2022 data are based on projections as per DBM and 180th DBCC Meeting
Sources: Bureau of the Treasury, Philippine Statistics Authority National Accounts of the Philippines, Department of Budget and Management
(DBM) Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing , and Development Budget Coordination Committee (DBCC)
To put this into perspective, the first Php20 million loan of the First Philippine Republic approved by
the Malolos Congress in 1898 took 118 years to reach Php5.95 trillion in June 2016 – the Duterte
administration is taking just six years to more than double this to Php13.41 trillion by 2022.
The Duterte administration’s regressive tax reforms mean that repayment of this debt is increasingly borne
by ordinary Filipinos. The Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) and Corporate Recovery
and Tax Incentives for Enterprises (CREATE) laws exemplify the elite-bias of its economic policies. Indirect
consumption taxes on poor and middle-class Filipinos were increased, while direct income and estate taxes
on wealthy families and the corporate income tax on large corporations was reduced.

Shallow gains
The government will use the pandemic to hide an inconvenient truth – the economy was
actually failing even before the lockdown-driven collapse in 2020.
GDP growth was already slowing for three consecutive years even before the pandemic –
from 7.1% in 2016 to 6.9% (2017), 6.3% (2018), and 6.1% (2019). (See Table 1) Despite much
administration hype, the economy was not really developing any long-term growth drivers and
had reached the limits of its debt-driven growth episode.
Annual average job creation of 313,338 in 2017-2019, again before the pandemic, was also
the weakest in 35 years or among all post-Marcos administrations. (See Chart 6) The slowing
growth was not as such the main reason for markedly worsening job creation. As the economic
managers are so fond of pointing out, growth was still historically high.
Chart 6. Annual average net employment creation by administration, 1987-2019 and 2020*
(in '000)
1,000 810 858 827

489 411 313
-
Aquino Ramos Estrada Arroyo Aquino Duterte Duterte
1987-1992 1993-1998 1999-2000 2001-2010 2011-2016 2017-2019 2020
('000)
(1,000)
(2,000)
(2,560)
(3,000)
* - 2020 is presented separately because employment contracted by 2.6 million due to exceptional pandemic circumstances
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority Labor Force Survey
The main problem is the poor quality of that growth because of unresolved structural problems.
In the absence of a more diversified agricultural and industrial base, the growth impulse was
restricted to a few shallow subsectors that moreover were import-dependent – e.g., real estate
and construction, retail and utilities, and export enclaves.
The Duterte administration particularly over-relied on public infrastructure spending and its
Build, Build, Build (BBB) program. This spurred growth and employment by much less than what
was promised.
The infrastructure budget almost doubled from Php590 billion in 2016 to Php1.02 trillion in
2019 (though momentarily dipping to Php870 billion in 2020 with funds realigned to pandemic

response). This increased infrastructure spending as a share of GDP from 3.9% in 2016 to 5.4% in
2019 – yet GDP growth was still slowing over that period.
Employment gains are also exaggerated. Between 2016 and 2019, public infrastructure spending
increased by Php460 billion or 78% to Php1.02 trillion. Construction employment on the other
hand only grew by 775,000 or 23% to 4.2 million over that time; most of these are even just short-
term and low-paying jobs.7
The proportionately lower increase in employment is consistent with the heavily import-
dependent and capital-intensive nature of construction projects, especially the more
technologically-intensive big-ticket ones.
The administration also has yet to explain the so-called multiplier effects its infrastructure projects
are supposed to have. Requests for information to all the agencies involved have not been
productive. With the government’s lack of openness and a concrete explanation, the veracity
of its multiplier claims is suspect – more so since the pandemic has adversely impacted project
feasibility and resulted in more urgent and priority uses for finite government funds.
The insistence on BBB even amid changed conditions may make more sense from another
perspective though. Among the biggest beneficiaries of infrastructure projects are real estate and
logistics businesses of Filipino tycoons and foreign capital operating in special economic zones.
Public road, bridge and rail projects make the real estate values of private commercial properties
soar. They also make travel and the transport of goods to and from ports and economic zones
easier, boosting profits of port operators and foreign locators.
The appointment of a public works secretary whose family has major real estate interests is for
instance particularly suspicious. Other close Duterte allies also have their own real estate projects
and port terminals, aside from stakes in construction firms with public contracts. From this
perspective, the BBB program is in effect a public subsidy for private profits with its own internal
logic.
The administration had some populist social measures. Aside from the CCTs, there was supposedly
free irrigation, free tertiary education, and universal health care. In practice, the benefits were
much less and for much fewer than hyped. Corruption meanwhile is still ingrained across all levels
of government, arguably even up to the presidency and his inner circle.
The Duterte administration’s basic economic thrusts are short-sighted and not geared to
strengthening the domestic economy. Although often hyped as “game-changing” its policy
measures are far from being radical or progressive. For all their acclaimed benefits, they aggravate
the economy’s long-term trajectory of economic backwardness and structural decline. The
benefits moreover accrue mainly to a few.
7 This refers to public and private construction employment. The labor force survey is unfortunately not able to disaggregate between the two.
Nonetheless, the general trend of disproportionate employment growth is clear regardless of the actual distribution between private and public
hires.

Pandemic problems
The mismanaged COVID-19 response since 2020 aggravated these trends. The Duterte
administration over-relied on protracted lockdowns and waiting for vaccinations to contain
the pandemic. Misplaced fiscal conservatism and the credit ratings fetish meant insufficient
government spending on urgent public health measures, cash assistance for families, and
support for informal and smaller enterprises.
This approach caused the biggest economic collapse in Philippine history and has been causing
millions of families greater difficulties for some two years now. The peak of suffering was in
2020 with 12.9 million unemployed in April, almost 19 million families facing income losses
without savings in the third quarter, and 15.5 million families going hungry.8
Some 138,843 establishments (mainly micro, small and medium enterprises or MSMEs)
employing 565,446 people permanently closed down in the last two years, aside from 56,971
establishments which were forced to cut back on their operations.9
The economy has reopened but significant economic scars linger in the form of joblessness,
collapsed family incomes and savings, and small enterprise closures. This lingering economic
distress will weigh down on recovery even if understated by official figures.
Yet amid socioeconomic distress for the many, the wealth of oligarchs and political elites further
grew – and with this their influence over the country including its politics and the upcoming
elections. The 40 richest Filipinos increased their collective wealth by Php842.6 billion or 29%
since 2020 to Php3.8 trillion in 2021, according to Forbes and converting to pesos at prevailing
exchange rates. This goes far in explaining how the country’s wealthiest elites have been complicit
in the Duterte administration’s populist demagoguery, authoritarianism, and political repression.
In particular, reputedly close allies of Pres. Duterte have seen the biggest increases in wealth
under his administration. Among the 10 richest Filipinos this includes Manuel Villar whose
wealth tripled, Enrique Razon, Jr. whose wealth almost doubled, and Ramon Ang whose wealth
doubled. (See Table 6) Dennis Uy, who joined the top ranks only under the Duterte watch, also
saw his wealth at least triple.
The agriculture sector could have been a lifeline for the economy if chronic neglect and the low budget
for this were corrected. Manufacturing meanwhile continued its downward slide especially from over-
dependence on foreign investor-dominated global supply chains that the pandemic disrupted.
The six years of the Duterte administration has made the country even less democratic, the economy
more backward and exclusionary, and the class divide even greater. Whoever takes office will have to
deal with the old trajectory, slowing growth even before COVID-19, and increasing uncertainty in the
global economy.
8 IBON true unemployment computations on data from the PSA’s Labor Force Survey (LFS) 2020, household savings data from the BSP’s
Consumer Expectations Survey (CES) Fourth Quarter 2020, and hunger data from the DOST-FNRI’s Rapid Nutrition Assessment Survey (RNAS)
November-December 2020.
9 Data from the PSA’s 2021 Updating of the List of Establishments (ULE), Preliminary Results

Table 6. Net worth of selected richest Filipinos, 2016 and 2019-2021*
(Php billions)
Richest Filipinos 2016 2019 2020 2021
Sy siblings 650.6 890.9 689.8 811.0

Manuel Villar 85.5 341.9 248.1 327.3
Enrique Razon, Jr. 166.2 264.2 213.4 283.4
Lance Gokongwei & siblings 322.9 274.5 203.5 195.4
Jaime Zobel de Ayala 194.7 191.6 178.6 161.2
Tony Tan Caktiong & family 204.2 155.4 94.3 131.9
Andrew Tan 142.5 132.1 114.1 127.0
Ramon Ang 57.0 145.0 99.2 112.4
Ty siblings 218.5 134.7 69.5 107.5
Lucio Tan 232.7 186.5 109.2 92.8
Dennis Uy (starting 2019) 10.7** 34.2 32.3 34.7

* - Ranked from top 1 to 10 according to reported net worth in 2021, but excluding new Top 10
entrants: Dennis Anthony & Marie Grace Uy (Php139.2 billion) and Hartono Kweefanus (Php96.9
billion)
** - Wealth of 50th richest Filipino in 2016, hence assumed maximum possible wealth of Dennis Uy
Source: Forbes Lists of Philippines' Richest, 2016-2021
Singular neglect
Confronted by the serious problems in the last two years, the administration often falls back on
lamenting that the pandemic hit everyone and that every country has done just as badly. This is
inaccurate and the problems in the Philippines are uniquely due to the particular inadequacies of
the government’s COVID-19 response.
The Philippines’s performance compared to its 10 neighbors in the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN), many of whom are more or less at the country’s same level of development, is
revealing.
Philippine GDP growth in 2021 will likely make it among the fastest growing economies in
ASEAN, perhaps second only to Singapore which is projected to grow 7.2 percent. (See Table
7) Nonetheless, the economy has already lost two years of economic output because of the
lockdowns and is still 4.5% smaller than in 2019.
But even that growth comes from a very low base – the Philippines suffered the biggest economic
contraction (and biggest fall in GDP per capita) in the region in 2020. (See Table 7)
It also had the worst performing manufacturing sector. The sector’s share in GDP fell in only two
countries – the Philippines and Thailand. The relative decline was bigger in the Philippines (18.5%
to 17.7%) than Thailand (25.6% to 25.2%). (See Table 7)
The Philippines suffered the biggest unemployment increase in 2020, leaping by a huge 5.3

Table 7. Selected ASEAN economic indicators Change in
manufacturing's share
in GDP, 2020
GDP growth, 2021 (%) GDP growth, 2020 (%) (percentage point)
Singapore 7.2 (annual*) Myanmar 3.3 Myanmar nda
Philippines 5.6 annual Vietnam 2.9 Brunei 2.2
Indonesia 3.2 (1 -3 qtr)
st rd Brunei 1.1 Singapore 1.1
Malaysia 3.0 (1st-3rd qtr) Lao PDR 0.5 Malaysia 0.9
Vietnam 2.6 (annual*) Indonesia (2.1) Vietnam 0.2
Brunei 1.6 (annual*) Cambodia (3.1) Indonesia 0.2
Thailand 1.2 (annual*) Singapore (5.4) Cambodia 0.2
Cambodia nda Malaysia (5.6) Lao PDR 0.1
Lao PDR nda Thailand (6.1) Thailand (0.4)
Myanmar nda Philippines (9.6) Philippines (0.8)
Change in unemployment
Unemployment rate, 2021 (%) rate, 2020 (percentage point)
Philippines 6.5 (Nov) Philippines 5.3
Indonesia 6.5 (Aug) Indonesia 1.9
Malaysia 4.3 (Nov) Malaysia 1.3
Viet Nam 3.2 (annual*) Viet Nam 1.1
Singapore 3.2 (Nov) Singapore 0.8
Thailand 2.3 (3rd qtr) Thailand 1.0
Brunei nda Brunei nda
Cambodia nda Cambodia nda
Lao PDR nda Lao PDR nda
Myanmar nda Myanmar nda
Increase in net worth

In ation rate, 2021 (%) of 50 richest, 2021 (%)
Philippines 4.5 (annual) Philippines 30.5
Singapore 2.3 (annual) Singapore 24.6
Malaysia 3.2 (Dec) Indonesia 21.8
Indonesia 1.9 (annual) Thailand 21.2
Brunei 1.8 (Oct) Malaysia 13.9
Viet Nam 1.8 (annual) Brunei nda
Thailand 1.2 (annual*) Cambodia nda
Cambodia nda Lao PDR nda
Lao PDR nda Myanmar nda
Myanmar nda Viet Nam nda
* - forecast GDP - gross domestic product
Sources: Asian Development Bank Asian Development Outlook April 2021; Brunei Darussalam Department of Economic Planning and
Statistics; Forbes Richest Lists; Indonesia Central Bureau of Statistics; International Monetary Fund World Economic Indicators Oct 2021;
Malaysia Department of Statistics; Philippine Statistics Authority; Singapore Department of Statistics; Thailand National Economic and
Social Development Council; Vietnam General Statistics Office; World Bank World Development Indicators

percentage points. (See Table 7) It also still has the highest reported unemployment in 2021 to
date (officially 6.5%).
The implicit fall in household incomes is aggravated by the highest inflation in the region, at 4.5%
in 2021. (See Table 7)
Meanwhile, the Philippines’ super-rich recovered the fastest and saw their wealth grow the
most. The wealth of the country’s 50 richest increased by 31% increase from US$60.6B in 2020 to
US$79.1B in 2021. (See Table 7)
The longest and harshest lockdown in the region – and among the most stringent in the world –
wreaked havoc on government finances. The lockdown-driven collapse in revenues resulted in the
second largest government deficit (7.6% of GDP) and fourth largest government debt-to-GDP ratio
(54.6%) in 2020.
The administration claims to have spent hundreds of billions in pesos for COVID-19 response. The
latest Our World in Data (OWID) statistics however show the Philippines having the second most
daily new confirmed cases per capita (after Singapore), the fifth most cumulative cases per capita
(after Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and Thailand), and third most cumulative deaths per capita
(after Malaysia and Indonesia).
The country also only ranks eighth in terms of the share of the fully vaccinated population (53%,
over Indonesia and Myanmar).
Looking forward
Even a basic familiarity with economic history shows no single path to economic development.
Countries have different internal political and economic conditions and different external contexts
depending on their specific histories and the timing of their take-off.
In current Philippine conditions, and learning from the weaknesses of the outgoing Duterte
administration, two overall points of reference can be used to assess the presidential candidates
aspiring to steer the nation for the next six years.
The first is on having a strategic view of economic development for the country. This has to
recognize that long-standing problems and broad underdevelopment trends are rooted in the
neoliberal premises that have defined economic policy for over four decades since the last years of
the Marcos dictatorship.
Our persistently negative experience after so long confirms that market forces and profit-seeking,
left to their own devices, will not develop the country. The mono-causal approach that simply
opening up the economy to the market leads to development is simple-minded, has no historical
basis, and needs to be discarded.
Likewise with the fallacious notion that micro anti-poverty and livelihood efforts outside of a
broader economic strategy will create employment and improve lives on an economy-wide scale.

Targeted community projects and social interventions are not going to be enough.
The State has to intervene on a wide scale to strengthen domestic agriculture and industry, ensure
equity and provide social services, and promote environmental sustainability. The constant,
calibrated and comprehensive economic reforms over many years will need to take the long and
broad development view over short-sighted and narrow profitability.
The country can make great leaps forward with expanded public health, education and housing
sectors. So too with a social protection system ensuring that every Filipino always has access to
essential consumption goods and social services.
But a national industrialization policy to build high productivity Filipino firms is particularly
overdue. The arsenal of fiscal, financial, trade and investment policies can be retooled to correct
the over-reliance on market forces according to a comprehensive plan for industrialization, as well
as development of domestic agriculture.
Fiscal resources have to be mobilized with a more progressive tax system. Indirect consumption
taxes like VAT and excise taxes should be reduced. Revenues should instead be raised from
higher income, estate and donor’s taxes on the wealthiest Filipinos, from a billionaire tax on
their accumulated wealth, and from higher income taxes on large corporations.
These measures can vastly increase the social and economic services the government can provide.
It also greatly reduces the reliance on debt that often becomes a strong direct and indirect
influence on policymaking.
The second is on ensuring democratic governance. Development and modernization are disruptive
and require considerable political will and social consensus. This must be achieved democratically.
Governance includes mobilizing key sectors. On the production side, this means promoting
efficient rural producers as well as a dynamic entrepreneurial class for national industrialization.
Economic values have to be created beyond the shallow services-, labor export-, and foreign capital-
dependent sectors today.
The importance of broad public support cannot be overemphasized. Participation is most

obvious within enterprises. But people’s involvement also needs to be secured in organized rural
communities, in urban poor areas with their disparate concerns, and even among the middle class
and intellectuals.
Progressive political leadership also needs to sustain reformist impulses across all branches and
levels of government against resistance from elites of the status quo. Competent state institutions
to implement the complex reforms needed have to be created.
Properly built up, these democratic forces will be a source of momentum for positive change
ensuring that reforms are not derailed even by periodic changes in political leadership from
elections.

Platforms expected
Only a few months remain until the next administration. The national elections are on May 9,
2022. The president-elect will be known a few days later, sworn in on June 30, and will address the
nation when Congress opens on July 25.
The Philippine presidency is the most powerful position in the country for defining the shape,
direction and pace of the economy. Surveys always show that socioeconomic issues are among the
most urgent concerns of Filipinos – work and incomes, affordable prices, health and education,
and their homes. The basic needs of millions of families have been either unmet or inadequate for
many decades now.
Having declared their respective candidacies, it is reasonable to expect the presidential

aspirants to already have the necessary reforms in mind in case he or she wins in the May 2022
elections. Years into long-running problems, less than four months until the elections, and
less than six months until the new administration, every presidential candidate worth electing
should have a well-developed program by now.
It is also reasonable to expect that a commitment to democratic processes includes starting

to build public consensus for these as early as possible – which begins with promoting one’s
platform. This is particularly important if reforms involve disrupting the inequitable status quo.
Conversely, silence on economic issues and not discussing policy options will only tend to reinforce
the status quo.
In putting together the economic platforms of the presidential candidates, we operated on the
premise that each candidate entered the electoral race fully prepared.10 (See Annex) This means
being fully aware of short-term and long-term problems, assessing current policies for their
positive and negative aspects, and articulating clear economic reforms.
There is no expectation of a comprehensive and detailed program spanning all relevant policy
areas; this is rightly a function of official development planning and only possible with the
resources available to the government. However, if the scale of the problem is accepted, the
expectation is at least of comprehensiveness and sketching general directions in the most
important economic policy areas.
We prioritized platforms formally expressed and promoted by the candidates, especially on their
official websites; their offices were also contacted. We also checked if their political parties had
economic platforms. Absent formal platforms, we compiled positions from each candidates’
official campaign websites, social media postings, interviews, presentations, and media coverage.
Relevant pronouncements were also added even if they were not found in formally released
platforms. The compilation will be updated as new information arises.
10 The candidates’ positions on economic issues were organized according to the six inter-linked pillars of People Economics advocated by IBON:
developing the countryside; building Filipino industries; protecting the environment; upholding people’s rights and welfare; financing develop-
ment; and striving for sovereignty and independence. Further detail on these pillars can be found here.

We also looked at their track record on economic issues. Seeing how presidential aspirants
exercised their powers and responsibilities on economic matters as public officials can be
revealing. The positions taken as active private citizens are however also relevant.
Data-gathering was alert for candidates announcing members of their likely economic
team. Choosing the team early confirms that candidates have a defined economic program,
indicates their seriousness in pushing this, and will reflect the depth of their policy network for
implementing reforms. None of the candidates have revealed these yet.
In looking at the platforms, we look for insight into how the prospective president will: 1) fix the
economic scarring from the protracted lockdowns; 2) strengthen agriculture and industrialize
the country; and 3) give the right attention to social development, equity and the environment.
With so many economic concerns already running for so long, we ask who among the
presidential candidates are genuinely prepared to hit the ground running on June 30, 2022.
Platforms absent
To date, only three candidates have made the effort to produce and publicize a reasonably serious
economic platform – Vice-President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo, Manila Mayor Francisco “Isko”
Moreno Domagoso and unionist Leodegario “Leody” de Guzman. The other candidates have taken
public positions on specific economic issues but only in a fragmented manner.
At the very least this indicates which candidates want thorough platforms to matter when voters
make their choice. There could be any of a number of reasons why the others do not have well-
formed platforms.
Some may feel that a proper platform is irrelevant for getting elected. This would have basis
in recent history – Pres. Rodrigo Duterte won the 2016 elections with nothing more than an
appealing anti-drugs, -crime and -corruption message and soundbites on scattered issues.
Others may not have a wide or deep enough understanding of the economy’s problems to come
up with one. Some may even be of the view that confounding voters with too much information
may be electorally counterproductive.
In any case, the collective failure of the candidates to make their respective economic proposals
more prominent in the campaign period prevents serious discussion of policy alternatives that
will carry on through the incoming administration – until the same cycle begins again in the next
national elections.
All the candidates emphasize job creation and reducing poverty. They all also make statements
on pandemic response, health care, MSMEs, agriculture or food security, and infrastructure.
This virtually unanimous attention to reviving the economy and strengthening the health
system responds to how these concerns are high on the public mind and seen to remain so until
election day.
The candidates however differ widely in giving concrete or detailed proposals.

At any rate, most of the candidates’ expressed positions on economic matters are largely
continuous with current policies notwithstanding occasional differences on a few specific issues.
This already indicates considerable inertia in economic policymaking and extremely remote
prospects for substantial positive changes on economic fundamentals.
Only one candidate, unionist Leody de Guzman, has an economic platform breaking from the
dominant overly market-oriented economic framework.
That homogeneity of economic frameworks is also reflected in the substantial overlap among
the senatorial slates of the traditional political parties. These slates are not built around
programs but rather motivated by pragmatic politics – of marshaling resources and votes to get
elected – and are the result of negotiations on how political positions will be divided in the next
administration.
Presidential candidates’ platforms

Curiously, the Marcos dictatorship can be used to frame the ideological spectrum of the
candidates. At one end is Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. as the son of the dictator,
Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson who was part of the dreaded Metrocom and Philippine Constabulary
enforcing Martial Law, and Mayor Moreno who expressed admiration for the dictator Ferdinand
Marcos.
Vice-President Robredo has hailed Ninoy Aquino’s sacrifice and her Liberal Party opposed the
Marcos dictatorship. Unionist de Guzman meanwhile was part of the anti-dictatorship struggle
from the streets. Sen. Emmanuel “Manny” Pacquiao is perhaps best located in the middle from
at least recently speaking out against Martial Law atrocities and calling for the return of ill-
gotten wealth.
The candidates’ positions on economic issues run roughly parallel to this and they can be lined
up on a continuum from orthodox to heterodox economic policies.
Bongbong Marcos
Former senator Marcos, Jr. has the longest record as an elected official spanning 24 years as vice-
governor (3 years), governor (12 years), representative (3 years), and senator (6 years). He also
comes from having the most dynastic family among the candidates, distantly followed only by Sen.
Manny Pacquiao.
Marcos, Jr. does not have a thorough or coherent economic platform. He makes general
statements about agricultural modernization and food security, lowering power costs, promoting
renewable energy, protecting the environment, and supporting MSMEs. There are platitudes
about investing in agricultural support services, fiscal incentives and financial support for MSMEs,
and increased spending on education and health – oftentimes recalling programs during the
Marcos dictatorship.

He recently made a popular appeal to increasing local vaccine manufacturing capacity but does
not really have a notion of industrialization. Like most other candidates, he buys into BBB hype
of infrastructure as a magic bullet for development and, again, frequently recalls his father’s own
infrastructure offensive as part of his Marcos era myth-making.
Marcos, Jr. does not have record of concern for important economic issues in his long stint in
public office. While he takes credit for authoring, co-authoring, sponsoring, or co-sponsoring
54 laws, the majority (36 laws) are local and even trivial in scope with only 18 having national
coverage. None of them is of significant economic character.
In any case, the lack of platform is perhaps not the biggest problem with Marcos, Jr.’s candidacy.
Even if there were, this would still be suspect and lack credibility from an electoral campaign
notable for the most systematic and widespread disinformation in the country’s history. This is a
capacity for ambiguousness and dishonesty that will carry over into a Marcos administration.
Furthermore, above all the presidential aspirants, Marcos, Jr.’s candidacy embodies the worst
retrograde aspects of Philippine politics. His is a dynastic family spawned by a dictatorship,
financed by world-class corruption, and bolstered by opportunistic political alliances. Their
methodical 21st century digital disinformation and populist manipulation of the public comes on
top of this.
Another Marcos presidency bodes intensified enrichment of cronies amid accelerated corrosion
of the country’s already beleaguered fledgling democracy. This is also the most likely to be
demobilizing and intolerant of critical and activist sectors so essential to pushing democratic
reforms and change.
Ping Lacson
Senator Lacson has 18 years of experience on national issues in the Senate, which comes after
nearly three decades in the police including under the Marcos dictatorship.
Lacson does not have a thorough or coherent economic platform, even if he sketches an
“Economic Roadmap” in a speech posted on his website. His Partido Reporma party does not
have one either although its vision statement talks of building “strong economic foundation” with
policies “conducive to businesses, investments and employment [which] shall be distributed to the
provinces and peripheries”.
Despite nearly two decades in the Senate with its national perspective, he does not have a record
of systematically taking up economic issues, much less taking off from a well-formed strategic
view. Like most legislators, he has a conventional neoliberal view of economic development.
Sen. Lacson’s framework is further limited by persistently seeing issues from the narrow lens of
corruption as if this is the binding constraint preventing otherwise sound policies from having positive
effects. As he says it: “Our economic ills are largely hinged on the tradition of political corruption.”

Correspondingly, his “Economic Roadmap” is conspicuously replete with anti-corruption
measures to improve implementation of current economic policies. This includes addressing
PhilHealth corruption and increasing funding for Universal Health Care, addressing corruption
in tax administration by cross-referencing data between revenue collection agencies and other
relevant agencies, addressing corruption by digitizing government processes, and addressing
corruption in the budget department.
Budget reforms include zero-based budget planning and increasing the allocation for LGUs. Social
safety nets are also proposed – “reinventing” the 4Ps conditional cash transfer program, cash-for
work schemes, and paid internship programs for youth. Farmers and fisherfolk will be given technical
assistance and marketing support, and 100% irrigation of irrigable lands. MSMEs will be given fiscal
stimulus packages, eviction and foreclosure moratoriums, and employee-retention tax credits.
The senator has elsewhere spoken of prioritizing key infrastructure projects on transportation
(especially inter-island connectivity), regional food terminals, and health facilities. In the Senate,
he authored the Free Irrigation Law, issued resolutions addressing trade concerns of local pork
producers, and proposed budget increases for agrarian reform and disaster response.
Isko Moreno
Manila Mayor Moreno enters the 2022 elections with what appears to be the longest continuous
stint in government, more or less, albeit mostly as a local government official. In the last 24 years
he has been Manila councilor (9 years), vice-mayor (9 years), mayor (3 years), and appointed
official in the social welfare department and NorthRail (approximately 2 years).
Moreno promoted an economic platform as the campaign period was set to start. The “Bilis Kilos
10-point Agenda” on his official website covers: housing; education; labor and employment;
health; tourism and the creative industry; infrastructures; digital transformation and industry
4.0; agriculture; good governance (EDI: equality, diversity and inclusivity); and smart governance.
Reflecting his long stint as a government official in Manila, the agenda is well-developed on social
services (which local government units provide) but weak on agriculture (Manila being an urban
city) and industrialization (which can only be addressed at the national level).
There are quantifiable commitments – spend 1.3% of GDP on housing annually, one million units
for 4.5 million Filipinos in six years, spend 4.3% of GDP on education (but trimming history and
social studies in curriculums), reach 107,000 hospital beds in the first 1,000 days (although not
saying if these are both public or private beds), and 10,000 medical scholarships annually. Moreno
appears to support health privatization though and highlights appointing financial experts to
“better manage” PhilHealth.
While promising food security, the agenda only mentions giving farmers risk-free capital,
improving irrigation, connecting farmers to markets, and the adoption of new technologies.
He will also create a Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. Moreno has elsewhere
made the usual promises to increase the budget for agriculture and invest in rural
infrastructure; he has also spoken about restricting rice imports and imposing a 3-year

moratorium on agricultural land conversion.
The agenda conceives industrial development as involving “digital transformation” and the
adoption of “Industry 4.0” technologies – specifically prioritizing artificial intelligence, robotics
and automation, and additive manufacturing. The commitment to increase government research
and development (R&D) spending to 2% (presumably of GDP) is potentially important and unique
among the candidates. Industrial policy however goes far beyond this and, notwithstanding the
aura of modernity from mentioning technology, there is no real industrialization program.
This inadequacy is reflected elsewhere in the agenda. MSMEs are apparently seen as merely
small-scale livelihood projects to give credit and training support rather than vehicles for national
industrial development. There is also a disproportionate focus on “tourism and the creative
industry” while there is no mention of, for instance, developing Filipino manufacturing capacity.
Taken together with a recent statement that he supports changing the charter to allow 100%
foreign ownership of enterprises, it is safe to presume that he aligns with the neoliberal view that
Filipino industrial capacity does not have a preeminent role in national development and should
not be given primacy over foreign firms.
Moreno frequently invokes his own experience growing up as part of the urban poor to speak
most passionately about providing socialized housing, various kinds of education support, and
health services for his poor constituencies. Among his proposals in earlier interviews is to continue
the BBB program but give greater emphasis on public housing, hospitals and schools. The 10-point
agenda promoted however stresses transport, power (although not specifying renewable energy
which he has mentioned elsewhere), and water and sanitation infrastructure. He is also among
politicians who spoke about cutting taxes on oil products and electricity to help consumers.
Manny Pacquiao
Senator Pacquiao technically has 12 years in elected office as representative (6 years) and senator
(6 years). He is however vulnerable to criticisms of pursuing his boxing career during this time and
absenteeism, albeit leading to his being hailed as one of the greatest professional boxers in history.
Pacquiao does not have a thorough or coherent economic platform nor, it seems, even a campaign
website.11 The senator is not the political novice among the presidential aspirants but is likely the
economic policy novice despite years already in public office.
Even before declaring his candidacy, he released a “22 Rounds Agenda ni Pacquiao sa 2022” covering:
stop corruption; economic growth and development; employment; free housing; sustainable
livelihood; improvement of healthcare services; education; agricultural development; infrastructure
development; judicial reform; increase salary standardization for private and public; war on drugs;
empowering sports development; strengthen international treaty agreement; improve and develop
all tourism areas; defend our territorial rights; automation of all government agencies; additional
power supply; internet signal improvement; lowering individual and corporate taxes; renewable
energy development; and empowering youth development. These are not elaborated however.
11 His official site is a commercial site prominently selling his brand’s merchandise.

Sen. Pacquiao projects an earnestness of helping poor Filipinos and tackling corruption in
government. This appears to underpin repeated promises of a government that provides free
housing, free education, and free hospitalization (for senior citizens) and cracking down hard
on corruption and holding erring officials accountable. His sympathy for workers has extended
into supporting substantially higher wage hikes and a national minimum wage as well as ending
contractualization; for farmers he supports repealing the Rice Tariffication Law. He has also already
developed a reputation for building homes and liberally giving outright cash handouts.
Notwithstanding relatively progressive positions on some aspects of social and labor policy,
the senator appears to default to the conventional view of economic development. The usual
increased support to agriculture and fisheries is promised. There is however no sign of an
industrialization focus with only the standard stress on attracting foreign investment, improving
transport, power and internet infrastructure, and supporting MSMEs. He does not support
100% foreign ownership of enterprises though and sees that more emphasis should be given to
infrastructure projects in Visayas and Mindanao.
There is also a contradiction between his promises to expand social services and lower
government debt, on one hand, while proposing to lower personal and corporate income taxes
(the latter to a flat rate of 15%) which will lower revenues, on the other. The basis of the senator’s
proposal that higher non-tax revenue income will compensate for tax revenue losses is not clear.
Leni Robredo
Vice-President Robredo has the shortest record in government among the candidates who have
been elected or appointed. She brings with her three (3) years of experience as a representative
and six (6) years as vice-president. She previously worked as an economics professor, in the Public
Attorney’s Office, and with an NGO providing legal services for farmers and workers.
Robredo stands out among the other traditional politicians running for her “Kalayaan sa COVID”
and “Hanapbuhay para sa lahat” platforms. The expansive and relatively detailed proposals
indicate a sincere effort to come up with a thorough program. These also appear to have been
consulted with not just the business sector but also civil society groups and networks. They are
posted prominently on her official campaign website.
“Kalayaan sa COVID” covers being free from: the fear of getting sick; hunger; and lack of education.
“Hanapbuhay para sa lahat” covers: recovering trust in government; awakening the strength of
industries; ending discrimination at work; supporting small businesses; and providing safety nets
for those who lost their jobs. Her platform gives strong emphasis on “good governance.” While
this is unarguable in itself, as with many similar mono-causal explanations of underdevelopment,
the ultimate economic benefits are grossly overstated.
The vice president’s platform has the clearest measures for containing the pandemic, expanding
health services, and addressing the collapse in incomes and livelihoods after the protracted
lockdowns. These appear to be scaled-up versions of the Office of the Vice-President’s COVID-19
Response and Angat Buhay programs. There is also a large stimulus package for MSMEs.

The promise to develop sustainable agriculture has a quantifiable measure – the share of
agriculture in the national budget will be doubled from 1.7% to 3.4% by 2028 for investments
in fisheries, high-value crops, livestock, corn and rice. There is no similar amount in support of
the Manufacturing Resurgence Program. Even assuming that regulatory and other measures will
also be used, the lack of budget does not give confidence of seriousness.
A number of specific sectors are mentioned – electronics, machineries, food manufacturing,

maritime and shipbuilding, information technology-knowledge process outsourcing, climate-
friendly transport, and so-called fourth industrial revolution technologies. However, not
specifying the intent to develop Filipino capacity in these indicates that foreign locators might
well be the biggest beneficiaries of any industrial policy efforts. This will unfortunately not
amount to industrialization and a flawed keenness to attract foreign investment still evidently
underlies the platform.
The attention to building green infrastructure (including for transport) and shift to renewable
energy sources are positive from an environmental standpoint. The explicit criticism of the BBB
program for being overly urban-centered, transport-oriented, and car-centric is also welcome
and may signify a shift to more relevant projects.
Measurable commitments in health (double health spending from current Php113 billion or
0.6% of GDP; expand health facilities and services), education (increase education spending
from 3% to 6% of GDP), Public Employment Program (1.8 million jobs), and National
Unemployment Insurance (providing 80% of salary for three months) may provide tangible
benefits for poor Filipinos. The proposal to further health privatization is undesirable though
and will have long-term ramifications.
Discussions with the Leftist Makabayan bloc have also resulted in commitments to give a Special
Risk Allowance for health workers, review agrarian reform laws and rice tariffication, stop and
reverse agricultural land conversion, review and revise mining policies to ensure protection of
communities and the environment, review the minimum wage to bring this closer to the living
wage, and give on-site and in-city housing for urban poor.
The vice president’s emphasis on human rights and on transparent and accountable governance
are particularly important especially after significant regressions in these areas under the
Duterte presidency. Among all the viable candidates, a Robredo administration appears to
create the most space for wider civic participation on policy issues.
Leody de Guzman
Labor leader de Guzman is the only presidential candidate without any government experience.
However, he arguably has the longest and most consistent record of advocacy on social and
economic issues. This spans nearly four decades since becoming a trade unionist in 1984 and
then an activist working closely with social movements until today.

De Guzman’s expansive economic platform “Bagong Pulitika, Bagong Ekonomiya” is boldly
declared as “A Democratic Socialist Electoral Platform for the 2022 Elections.” This appears to
have been packaged as a relatively concise platform drawing from the wide range of advocacies
of labor center Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP), which he chairs, and other activist
networks he engages with.
His platform has the most progressive and development-friendly spirit among all the
presidential aspirants by far. It is unique for directly criticizing the profit- and export-oriented
orientation of economic policy at the expense of production for domestic needs and for
upholding more democratic control of the economy by workers and farmers.
While not made explicit, the platform recognizes the importance of rational State intervention
and regulation of the market economy. This is also apparently with a view towards change
in a more socialist direction, which reminds that this alternative endures and is incipient in
the country’s political economic landscape. The proposal to establish unions and workers’
committees parallel to corporate boards is, for instance, a measure in this direction.
The platform clearly comes from an activist perspective of the country’s fundamental structural
problems – i.e., economic backwardness, inequity, and environmental destruction. The
document itself however does not provide much detail in terms of reviving agriculture and
manufacturing (especially the latter) leaving those interested to refer to other sources coming
from this activist perspective.
The most fleshed-out or specific proposals are for: massive multi-hundred-billion peso
healthcare workers, public jobs, unemployment insurance, and universal food and health
subsidy programs; wealth taxes; and debt audits and cancellation. The general thrusts of
providing free health care, free education, free decent housing for the homeless, free internet
in public places, and achieving gender rights are also mentioned. Likewise with pursuing just
transition to a low-carbon economy and democratically-owned, renewable and clean energy
systems, and upholding climate justice.
He has the strongest grounding in the country’s social movements, and for this, is most able to
push for progressive policies even against the preferences and influence of traditional economic
elites. The unlikely viability of his candidacy is unfortunate although certainly reassuring for
elite class forces who do not have to confront the prospect of radical reforms in the next
administration.

Prospects for 2022: No big changes
Despite initial surveys showing voter preferences, there is still no certainty about which
candidate will eventually prevail as anything can still happen during the official campaign
period.
Neoliberal globalization policies however clearly still exert a powerful influence on all the main
survey frontrunners from whom the next president is likely to come. Whatever the final election
results, the market-, big business- and foreign investor-friendly agenda will stay in place at the
expense of real and broad-based development.
The comprehensive reforms needed to correct structural problems from four decades of
globalization will be absent from the next administration’s policy agenda. This absence of major
changes in the trajectory of economic policymaking is not unexpected. The country does not
yet have the political conditions for elections or other political transitions to produce radical
economic breaks from the past.
None of the leading candidates have said anything about breaking the neoliberal inertia in
economic policymaking – for instance, about a large fiscal stimulus to spur recovery, or new
ideas for addressing persistent agricultural and industrial backwardness, or meaningfully
addressing structural income and wealth inequalities.
The basic attitude is to implement the same neoliberal policies only with greater competence,
more efficiency, and less corruption. These are secondary however and the bigger problem lies
in the policies themselves implemented since the late 1970s which have not worked as claimed.
It goes without saying that further opening up of the economy such as through Charter change
is a further step in the wrong direction.
The Philippines until the late 1970s was a poorly diversified economy with high unemployment,
mostly low-productivity, low-paid or low-earning jobs, and mainly low value-added primary and
labor-intensive goods exports.
After four long decades of neoliberal reforms, the Philippines is still a poorly diversified
economy with high unemployment (but now also an over-reliance on overseas work), still
mostly low-productivity, low-paid or low-earning jobs, and still mainly low value-added primary
and labor-intensive goods exports (even if adding labor-intensive business process outsourcing
services). The expansion of foreign investor-dominated special economic zones (SEZs)
disconnected from the domestic economy has not changed any of this.
Which is not to say that there aren’t important differences between the candidates. A Marcos,
Jr. presidency is particularly troublesome for exemplifying the most retrograde aspects of
Philippine politics. It will worsen political dysfunction. It also has the greatest risk of closing
the political space within the government and in civil society for more democratic and
transformative economic policies.

On the other hand, and though steeped in neoliberalism, a Robredo presidency which professes
to uphold civic and political freedoms at least creates space for debates and discussions
on policy alternatives. Even a Pacquiao presidency that is not thoroughly indoctrinated in
conventional mainstream economic policies and may have a bias for marginalized sectors can
have openings for more progressive measures.
Prospects for 2022: Some small changes

Changes in some aspects of economic policymaking may yet nudge the country in better rather
than worse directions. It is possible to see bounded improvements in specific sectors or subsets
of economic policy.
The next administration takes office over two years into the pandemic, but even with COVID-19
threats receding, the health system and health workers are urgently in need of attention. All the
candidates speak of improving pay, benefits and support for health frontliners and most speak
of improving how the pandemic is contained.
Taking the platforms at face value, there should be improvements in the country’s health and
education systems. Every candidate speaks of increased public spending in these areas although
the benefits promised vary from improving quality and facilities to providing these for free as
essential social services that the government is primarily responsible for. Only two candidates
emphasize socialized or free housing.
Unfortunately, only half the candidates articulate cash assistance (whether as various
emergency subsidies or unemployment insurance) or substantial wage increases. These are vital
mechanisms for social protection and income redistribution.
All the candidates speak of supporting MSMEs with various fiscal, financial and technical
assistance. They all however speak of MSMEs in the abstract without distinguishing between
service-oriented firms (ex. trade, accommodation and food service, etc.) and manufacturing,
technology, and related MSMEs that actually promote industrialization.
Every candidate speaks of supporting agriculture, fisheries or food security and the next
administration may yet be the one that really gives the sector the attention it deserves. Yet
while candidates have historically always lamented government neglect of agriculture and make
promises around election time, it’s conspicuous how successive administrations do not deliver
on these.
Conversely, none of the candidates speak of national industrialization. Yet while critically
important for national development, this has not really been discussed at the national
policy level for at least five or six decades. Industrialization is a major agent of economic
transformation and a disruption of accustomed social and political arrangements – as befitting a
real process of social change and modernization. If potential presidents cannot even speak of it
then it is unlikely to be planned for and happen.

Relatedly, none of the platforms assert that foreign investment needs to be regulated to ensure
long-term benefits for the country. If anything, most of the candidates mechanically treat
foreign capital as an end in itself and over-design economic policy to attract them. Most of the
candidates have expressed support for 100% foreign ownership of enterprises.
All the candidates have expressed one concern or the other for environmental concerns. The
common denominator among most of them is promoting renewable energy, so at least some
progress should be expected in this area, even as there may be some reservations if this is
pursued along traditional market-driven lines.
Most of the candidates speak of a continued emphasis on infrastructure investments. Their

attitude however varies widely from unquestioning support of the current administration’s BBB
program to a more critical view of reorienting towards green transport, digital communications,
social services, and rural development.
Only a few candidates have spoken of tax changes or major tax reforms – two on suspending or
cutting oil or electricity taxes, one on lowering personal and corporate income taxes, and just
one on a wealth tax. Few speak about the national debt and only one proposes decisive options
such as debt cancellation.
This lack of discussion on tax measures is a critical concern. With so many competing budget
priorities, every candidate’s expansive promises of increased social and economic spending will
flounder if they do not also have any bold proposals to raise tax revenues. Realigning budget
items including from debt service can only go so far.
Undemocratic change
The platforms and positions on economic issues of most of the candidates are starkly similar
and taken collectively constitute a conservative market-friendly agenda. This reflects how the
country’s oligarchs and big capitalists still over-determine economic policy and are a strong
influence in every administration. There may be a reapportioning of contracts, franchises and
other opportunities depending on the eventual elected president – and the occasional irksome
tycoon harassed – but the overall contours of economic policy stay unchanged.
This elite-biased policymaking is reinforced by the worsening intersection between big business
and national politics. As it is, three of the country’s 10 wealthiest multi-billionaire tycoons are
also behind three of the country’s five biggest political parties – and are an ever-present fixture
in presidential candidacies and governance.
But there is actually an even deeper problem. The economy’s neoliberal trajectory has been
uninterrupted for over four decades despite seemingly wide variations not just in ruling factions
but also in political regimes – dictatorship in the 1970s, “democratic restoration” after 1986,
growing political repression in the 2000s, and populist authoritarianism since 2016.

This shows how capital is indifferent to political arrangements as long as its profits and wealth
are preserved. It also points to how real reforms can only come from leaders not just outside
the political oligarchy but also independent of ruling economic elites.
The economy will likely end 2022 just at where it was in 2019 – which is to say, as if the
economy had been completely stagnant for three long years. Economic output will be at 2019
levels and GDP per capita probably not even back to that yet.
What is different from that time though is that unemployment and informality are higher,
household incomes and savings are lower, and there are more firms struggling to reopen and
stay afloat. Adverse developments in the pandemic also cannot be completely ruled out with
global vaccination so uneven and the coronavirus still in circulation and possibly mutating
further. The global economy is also seen to slow, even as various geopolitical flashpoints may
yet flare up.
In all, the May 2022 elections will determine how the country navigates not just this situation
but also the unfinished business of development in the years to come. Unfortunately,
notwithstanding the vicissitudes and volatility in the country’s electoral politics, its essential
reactionary nature remains clear.
The most stable political foundations for addressing the country’s chronic poverty, inequality
and underdevelopment still lie in the country’s enduring mass movements for social change.

ANNEX
Annex. Economic platforms of 2022 presidential candidates
BONGBONG Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
MARCOS overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL NO PLATFORM at Takes credit for 54 laws

bongbongmarcos.com authored, co-authored,
sponsored, or co-sponsored.
PARTIDO FEDERAL NG Majority (36) are local in
PILIPINAS (PFP) does not scope (establishing cityhood
appear to have articulated of a town; reapportioning
an economic platform. legislative districts, declaring
local holidays); only 18 are
national in scope (some of
which are postponing SK
elections, Student Athletes
Protection, Children’s
Emergency Relief and
Protection, Expanded Senior
Citizens, PAGASA
Modernization).
No laws of significant
economic character.
DEVELOP THE Food security, reduce Claims to have modernized

COUNTRYSIDE reliance on imports, buy Ilocos Norte agriculture and
local tourism
Agricultural modernization Promote organic agriculture
with better roadmap
Invest in research &

development, technical &
loan assistance, irrigation,
post-harvest facilities, and
farm-to-market roads
Build modern bagsakan-

bulungan trading posts with
cold storage facilities;
upgrade public wet markets
Local production of
fertilizers; strengthen coops
with seed money & training
NFA to stabilize prices &

maintain rice buffer stocks
BUILD Re: industries Make PH major logistics hub;

FILIPINO port automation, AI;
INDUSTRIES
Increase pharma manufacturing
capacity (oral vaccine)
Re: infrastructure Continue BBB infra program; Modernize Pasig River ferry
modernize seaports, airports, system (public management)
railways; accelerate digital
infra for faster internet Make free EDSA Carousel Bus
rides permanent
Lower power costs Co-authored House bill

creating DOE
Support MSMEs (NB: in Support MSMEs Give MSMEs tax amnesties,

general, not necessarily lower taxes; allocate portion
industrial MSMEs) of IRA for MSMEs

BONGBONG Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
MARCOS overall objectives directions measures record
PROTECT THE Revive and achieve a Undertake massive

ENVIRONMENT healthier environment reforestation/conservation;
improve urban planning
Advocates renewable energy Shift to renewables with Review rehabilitation of Falsely takes credit for Ilocos
(solar, wind, rain, waves, PPPs; stop use of fossil fuels Bataan Nuclear Power Plant Norte wind farms
geothermal)
Re: mining Continue mining but strictly

implement regulations; says
he is wary of open-pit
mining
UPHOLD Stable jobs and financial

PEOPLE’S security for every Filipino
RIGHTS AND
WELFARE Re: health Support medical research vs. Health workers – increased National Health Insurance
pandemics (RITM, BIOTECH) salaries and benefits, free Act proponent; Voted for
RT-PCR, medicines, vitamins Reproductive Health Law
Re: education Increase education budget Build more State universities Co-authored House bill that
and colleges (SUCs), with an created National Youth
SUC in every province Commission
Expand school feeding National education portal (IT

programs hub for teachers and
students)
Re: other social measures Co-authored Expanded
Senior Citizens Act of 2010
FINANCE Re: revenues and taxes Minimize/mitigate corruption Suspend oil excise tax
DEVELOPMENT to generate more revenue
UPHOLD Re: West Philippine Sea Continue to engage China; Bilateral agreements are only
SOVEREIGNTY & will set aside 2016 arbitral practical option
INDEPENDENCE ruling and negotiate directly
with China
Compiled by IBON Foundation from candidates’ official websites, video presentations and interviews, official social media posts, and news items – as of Jan 31, 2022.

PING Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
LACSON overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL NO PLATFORM at Has speech on an “Economic Roadmap” whose main points

pinglacson.net include:
PARTIDO REPORMA does Comprehensive health agenda: 1) testing, contact tracing,

not appear to have treatment and vaccination; and 2) healthcare coverage to all
articulated an economic Filipinos
platform.
Reboot our economy: 1) fiscal stimulus packages for MSMEs; 2)
PARTIDO REPORMA expansion of opportunities for farmers and fisherfolk; and 3)
recognizes that its vision social safety net
cannot be realized without
first building a strong Improve tax administration: 1) Cross-reference data of
economic foundation. With relevant agencies
this in mind, the party shall
pursue policies which are Reinvent government: 1) eliminate corruption; 2) zero-based
conducive to businesses, budget planning; 3) meaningful devolution to LGUs; 4)
investments, and digitalization of processes; and 5) business sector as partners in
employment. All of these progress
shall be distributed to the
provinces and peripheries. It
will also empower localities
to pursue their respective
comparative and
competitive advantages so
that strong local economies
will be the bedrock of a
strong national economy.
DEVELOP THE Prioritize expansion of National and local govt Effective and sustainable Author of Free Irrigation Law
COUNTRYSIDE opportunities for local support for technical irrigation systems to 100% of (17th Congress)
farmers and fisherfolk assistance and marketing of our irrigable lands
local farmers’ produce Issued Senate resolutions
addressing trade concerns of
Veer away from the Will prioritize key local pork producers
import-dependent mentality infrastructure projects
especially on transportation, During 2021 budget
inter-island connectivity deliberations, proposed
Php965-million budget
increase of DAR
BUILD Re: industries Overregulation, beyond our

FILIPINO competition policy, has no
INDUSTRIES place in modern and
civilized society especially at
a time when we need to
encourage foreign
investments and attract
more capital inflow in the
Philippines
Re: infrastructure Will prioritize key

infrastructure projects
especially regional food
terminals
Support MSMEs (NB: in Comprehensive and
general, not necessarily targeted fiscal stimulus
industrial MSMEs) packages, eviction and
foreclosure moratoriums,
and employee-retention tax
credits to aid reopening and
staying afloat

PROTECT THE PARTIDO REPORMA “Responsible” mining Authored Senate Bill No.
ENVIRONMENT supports the policy of addressing environmental 1239 (proposed Philippine
sustainable development by issues Building Act of 2019) to
promoting environment strengthen existing National
friendly socio-economic Building Code and ensure
activities, and subscribes to that overall policy on
the policy that each buildings and structures are
generation recognizes its in line with disaster
obligation of stewardship preparedness
over natural resources and
ecosystems for and on In 2019, pioneered increase
behalf of future generations of Php2.352 million for
DENR-EMB to fund
monitoring and inventory of
greenhouse gases of
Pollution Laboratories in
Visayas and Mindanao.
For the 2021 budget,

championed funding for the
“Disaster Rehabilitation and
Reconstruction Assistance
Program for LGUs” under the
2021 budget of the
DILG-OSEC
UPHOLD Re: health Will prioritize key Containment strategies such

PEOPLE’S infrastructure projects as contact tracing, testing,
RIGHTS AND especially health facilities and treatment be
WELFARE institutionalized and
Ensuring that Universal normalized and free; free
Healthcare Act gives and robust vaccination
healthcare coverage to all campaigns especially in
Filipinos without any hard-to-reach and high-risk
financial burden from populations
out-of-pocket medical
expenses Fund “high-cost”
requirement of UHC to cover
all barangays, provide
subsidies for all indirect
contributory populations,
ensure optimal benefits for
healthcare workers, and
achieve the target of 1
hospital bed per 800
population
Re: education Paid internship program for
college graduates and
undergraduates in
government offices, as well
as in private corporations
and businesses
Provide a social safety net Bolster and reinvent 4Ps/CCT Create jobs with
with overarching principle Cash-for-Work mechanisms
that every Filipino should
bridge the poverty line with
a sustainable livelihood or
employment opportunities

FINANCE Re: revenues and taxes Stop corruption to generate Cross-reference data Authored and sponsored RA
DEVELOPMENT more revenue; improve tax between major revenue 10351 (Sin Tax Reform Law),
administration to pump up collecting agencies and RA 9485 (Anti-Red Tape Act
revenue collection other relevant government of 2007), RA 9160 (as
agencies like LTO, LRA, SEC amended by RA 9194,
and DTI to plug tax Anti-Money Laundering Act
collection leakages of 2001)
Boost digitalization of
government processes to
minimize or eliminate
corruption
Re-allocate national budget

to provide LGUs with fair
share of budgetary resources
commensurate with
mandated functions;
capacity building to make
them competitive (Budget
Reform Advocacy for Village
Empowerment [BRAVE])
Re: national budget Zero-based budget planning
Re: foreign investment Not in favor of 100% foreign

ownership of enterprises
UPHOLD Re: West Philippine Sea Wants “balance of power”;

SOVEREIGNTY & supports joint oil and gas
INDEPENDENCE exploration with China in
West Philippine Sea if
adhering to 60:40
Constitutional provision

ISKO Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
MORENO overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL PLATFORM at Bilis Kilos 10-point Agenda covers: 1) Housing; 2) Education; 3)

tayosiisko.com Labor and employment; 4) Health; 5) Tourism and creative
industries; 6) Infrastructures; 7) Digital transformation and
AKSYON does not Industry 4.0; 8) Agriculture; 9) Good governance (EDI); and 10)
appear to have articulated Smart governance.
an economic platform.
DEVELOP THE Agriculture (#8: Lupang Invest in irrigation, silos & 5-10 year Food Production
COUNTRYSIDE bumubuhay at nagbibigay ng dryers; put up cold-storage Strategic Plan
sapat na pagkain [land for facilities in all provinces on
sustenance and food security]) NFA land
Reduced reliance on imports Physically and digitally Increase agriculture budget

connect farmers to markets according to 5-10 year plan
Farmers adopting Risk-free capital for farmers

technology can increase
GDP by Php380 billion Rice price “floor” and
subsidies for farmers
Lessen rice imports by

imposing higher quality
standards; crackdown on
illegal rice importation; govt
only imports enough for
30-day rice reserve for
calamities, disasters
3-year moratorium on
agricultural land conversion
Pass National Land Use Act

(NLUA) to ensure food
security
Re: fisheries Create Department of

Fisheries and Aquatic
Resources
Agro-tourism
Agro-industry
BUILD Digital transformation and Prioritize artificial Increase government

FILIPINO Industry 4.0 (#7: Inobasyon, intelligence, robotics and research and development
INDUSTRIES Inobasyon, Inobasyon) automation, and additive spending to 2%
manufacturing
Create a unicorn “1 billion Provide seed-money and

dollar” by supporting capability-building to
start-up communities enterprises adopting
Industry 4.0 technologies
Implement National Artificial
Intelligence Roadmap
Tourism and creative Promote culture of Double tourists from 8

industries (#5: Sustainable na sustainable tourism; million (2019) to 16 million
paglago [growth]) promote event-based (2028)
tourism
Develop tourism
circuits/highways
Cushion impact of pandemic

on tourism; create a National
Creative Economy Strategy

BUILD Infrastructures (#6: Kalye, Accelerate infrastructure Lower feed-in tariff (FIT)
FILIPINO kuryente, tubig at internet building – strengthen allowance
INDUSTRIES para sa lahat [roads, physical, economic and
electricity, water and digital linkages; prioritize 100% access to safe water
internet for all]) equitable growth and sanitation by 2026
Improve physical connectivity Zero water pollution by 2028

with LuzViMinda trimodal
transport systems Everyone has access to
1Mbps internet
Make electricity affordable
and stable – connect
LuzViMinda grids, more
power plants
Improve access to internet
Continue BBB infra program

(more public housing,
hospitals, and schools)
Labor, employment (#3: Wasto, Create jobs by simplifying Give low interest loans;
sapat at marangal [appropriate, processes for enterprises to increase loan pool for
sufficient and decent]) improve competitiveness MSMEs (Php1.5 billion to
Php30 billion)
Support MSMEs (NB: in Government agencies
general, not necessarily (especially DTI, DOST, DICT)
industrial MSMEs) to work more closely with
MSMEs; give trainings and
workshops
Partnering LGUs with NGAs

(ex. DTI, DA) and GFIs (ex.
LBP, DBP) to draw up plan to
help MSMEs re-start their
business
Create more special

agro-economic zones
PROTECT THE Advocates renewable energy Construction of solar,

ENVIRONMENT hydroelectric, and
geothermal energy infra
Re: mining Strengthen mining to

generate foreign investment,
jobs and incomes; develop
responsible and modern
(non-“backyard”) mining;
domestic mineral processing
Green, inclusive, Redeveloped Arroceros

self-sufficient and livable urban forest park
cities
Promised solar panels and
rainwater collection system
on rooftops of public schools
Pro-jeepney modernization
Supports DENR’s dolomite

dumping in Manila Bay

UPHOLD Health (#4: Kalusugan at Build more and better health 107,000 hospital beds in first Expansion of medical
PEOPLE’S pagamutang abot-kaya facilities 1,000 days capacities of Ospital ng
RIGHTS AND [affordable health facilities]) Maynila underway;
WELFARE Address malnutrition and 1 doctor: 1,000 Filipinos construction of COVID-19
mental health issues field hospital, establishment
10,000 medical scholars of molecular testing
Rollout clear pandemic annually laboratory and coronavirus
response map vaccine storage facility in
Give Special Risk Allowances Sta. Ana Hospital; free
(SRA) to nurses and health antigen testing and free
workers Remdisivir and Tocilizumab
for COVID patients
Appoint financial experts to
better manage PhilHealth
Education (#2: Inclusive, Invest in early childhood Education budget to 4.3% of 3 new campuses have
innovative and Industry education and development GDP; be in 50th quartile broken ground, including
4.0-ready) globally technology-based Manila
Widen accessibility to quality Science High School
basic education Free tablets, bandwidth,
school supplies and COVID
Continuous upscaling of hygiene kits for public
teacher competence school students; free tablets
and bandwidth for public
Revise academic and school teachers
tech-voc curriculum to be
future-ready; train workforce
for jobs of the future – focus
on STEM, make history and
social studies more concise
Improve tech-voc courses to

include adoption of fourth
industrial revolution tech (ex.
robotics, automation, AI)
Improve student-teacher
ratio
Housing (#1: Bahay na Natural hazard-resistant and 1.3% of GDP allotted to 4 mass housing projects
matibay, inaalagaan ang climate-resilient vertical housing annually launched in Tondo, Baseco
buhay [stable housing, housing within cities and Binondo (3 more in the
securing life]) 1 million units for 4.5 million pipeline)
Well-planned zoning to Filipinos in 6 years
ensure safety and
accessibility of essential Prioritize National Land Use
basic needs Act (NLUA) for better zoning
Socialized housing as new

focus of BBB program
Re: other social measures Continue giving ayuda to Signed ordinances giving
families affected by the allowances to students of
COVID-19 pandemic Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng
Maynila and Universidad de
Manila, senior citizens, PWD,
and single parents; signed
city ordinance protecting
LGBTQ+ from discrimination,
abuse but is against same
sex marriage

FINANCE Re: foreign investment Encourage foreign

DEVELOPMENT investments “[even if] we
need to cut some corners to
generate and attract”
Favors 100% foreign

Re: revenues and taxes Lower taxes Cut taxes on oil products
and electricity by 50%
UPHOLD Re: West Philippine Sea Will enforce Hague ruling and Use 50% of the country’s
SOVEREIGNTY & negotiate with China to allow share of oil for Navy and
INDEPENDENCE Filipinos to fish in the WPS; Coast Guard and remaining
open to deal between 50% to lower electricity costs
Filipino and Chinese private
firms for exploration and
possible extraction of oil and
natural gas in WPS
Wants alliance with US to

focus on beefing up Navy
and coast guard

MANNY Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
PACQUIAO overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL NO PLATFORM at mp8.ph Perfunctory 22 Rounds Agenda ni Pacquiao sa 2022 covers: 1) No laws of significant
(commercial/merch site) Stop corruption; 2) Economic growth and development; 3) economic character.
Employment; 4) Free housing (in 4-5 years esp. informal settlers
PROMDI does not appear to in NCR); 5) Sustainable livelihood; 6) Improvement of healthcare
have articulated an services; 7) Education; 8) Agricultural development; 9)
economic platform. Infrastructure development; 10) Judicial reform; 11) Increase
salary standardization for private and public; 12) War on drugs;
13) Empowering sports development; 14) Strengthen
International Treaty Agreement; 15) Improve and develop all
tourism areas; 16) Defend our territorial rights; 17) Automation
of all government agencies; 18) Additional power supply; 19)
Internet signal improvement; 20) Lowering taxes (individual and
corporate tax); 21) Renewable energy development; and 22)
Empowering youth development.
DEVELOP THE Agricultural development Should not import basic Repeal Rice Tariffication Law
COUNTRYSIDE (#8) commodities like rice
Support and strengthen

agriculture and fisheries
BUILD Infrastructure development Continue BBB infra program Additional skyway, subway
FILIPINO (#9) (but with less debt, and system, bullet train from
INDUSTRIES more for Visayas and North to South
Mindanao)
Internet signal improvement

(#19)
Additional power supply

(#18)
Support MSMEs (NB: in “Wage a war” on red tape, by Interest-free loans for MSMEs
general, not necessarily strengthening
industrial MSMEs) implementation of Ease of
Doing Business Act to ensure
that all business permits are
processed in not more than
three days
PROTECT THE Renewable energy

ENVIRONMENT development (#21)
PROMDI pushed for an all

zero-carbon technology for
energy generation
Re: mining “Responsible” mining

addressing environmental
issues

MANNY Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
PACQUIAO overall objectives directions measures record
UPHOLD Improvement of healthcare Minimum Php50,000 salary

PEOPLE’S services (#6) for nurses, medical
RIGHTS AND technologists, pharmacists
WELFARE and other health
professionals
Free hospitalization for

senior citizens
Education (#7); Empowering Free education up to college
youth development (#22) level (with government
service in exchange)
Re: housing #4 Free housing (in 4-5 years Constructed 300 homes in 3
especially informal settlers in locations (250 homes of
Metro Manila); free housing which in Saranggani
for all informal settlers Province)
Re: labor Increase salary National Minimum Wage
standardization for private
and public (#11)
FINANCE Re: foreign investment Ensure a favorable business

DEVELOPMENT climate to attract domestic
and foreign investors; use his
global fame to attract
foreign capital
Foreign investors can create

hundreds of thousands of
jobs especially for college
graduates
Not in favor of 100% foreign

Re: revenue and taxes Stop corruption to generate Lower individual and
more revenue; jail corrupt corporate taxes (#20); lower
officials CIT to flat 15%
Non-tax revenue income

should be strengthened so
the country’s taxes can be
lowered
Reduce government debt
UPHOLD Defend our territorial rights Philippines and China must

SOVEREIGNTY & (#16) meet first to discuss any
INDEPENDENCE issues on diplomatic ties
Filipino fishermen must be

protected and allowed to fish
freely in WPS

LENI Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
ROBREDO overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL PLATFORM at “Kalayaan sa COVID” plan covers:1) freedom from fear of Framed after OVP’s
lenirobredo.com getting sick; 2) freedom from hunger; and 3) freedom from lack COVID-19 response
of education.
Running as independent but
remains chairperson of “Hanapbuhay para sa lahat” platform covers: 1) Restore trust Framed after OVP’s Angat
LIBERAL PARTY (LP) which in the government; 2) Awaken the strength of Filipino industries; Buhay program
does not appear to have 3) End discrimination at work; 4) Support small businesses; and
articulated an economic 5) Safety nets for those who lost work.
platform.
DEVELOP THE Change priorities from Promote sustainable (green) Double agriculture budget Omasenso sa Kabuhayan
COUNTRYSIDE importation to and modern agricultural from 1.7% of natl budget to program made farmers
strengthening local practices 3.4% by 2028 (for fisheries, agri-entrepreneurs selling to
production; work towards high-value crops, livestock, local hotels and restaurants
self-sufficiency and food Continue BBB program; corn and rice); farm-to-
security; move from direct to rural development market roads; cold storage Nine farming communities
subsistence farming to facilities; solar dryers; fish in Bicol that are directly
producing on an industrial Invest in “climate smart” cages; fund climate-friendly selling their products to
scale agricultural infrastructure crops commercial establishments
Invest in aquaculture Allocate Php116 billion for Worked with farmers in Bicol
agriculture under Sentro ng
Establish a “farmer’s bank” to Alternatibong Lingap na
finance small scale farmers Pass the National Food Legal (SALIGAN)
Security Bill
Equip LGUs to implement
agricultural programs
Re: agrarian reform Review CARP/CARPER

towards just land
redistribution for farmers
Re: land conversion Take steps to stop and
reverse arbitrary and
widespread conversion of
agricultural land; review Rice
Tariffication Law
BUILD Revive the Manufacturing Focus on electronics,

FILIPINO Resurgence Program; machineries and food
INDUSTRIES industry roadmaps linking manufacturing
upstream and downstream
industries in the country
Develop the maritime and Establish a national cargo

shipbuilding industry – shipping line – more effective
modern and integrated maritime administration as
infrastructure, modernize strategic enabler, ease
wharves and docks, registration of ships
integrated intermodal
national logistics system Include maritime course in
SHS curriculum, CHED to
rationalize curricula of
merchant marine schools
Develop the tech industry –

invest in expanding internet
access and national
digitization
National and local

government to invest in
schools and independent
research centers; public and
private sector collaboration

BUILD Upskill IT-BPO sector to

FILIPINO move up value chain to
INDUSTRIES IT-KPO industries: animation
& game devt; information &
knowledge management;
robotics; cloud technology;
and software development
Attract hi-tech Fourth

Industrial Revolution
companies: microelectronics,
AI, cloud services, genetics
and regenerative medicine,
aeronautics, advanced
materials, advanced
shipbuilding, and green
technology
Develop climate-friendly
transport industry –
manufacturing, sales and
maintenance
Level playing field for Implement the Ease of Doing
business Business Act, and the
mandate of the Anti-Red
Tape Authority
Revive the National

Competitiveness Council
under the DTI; apply the
Citizen’s Charter concept on
industries with a public
service component (ex.
electricity, communications,
water, housing, etc.)
Pass the Public Services Act
Strengthen Philippine
Competition Commission
against monopolies and
unfair business practices
Re: infrastructure Continue BBB program but

shift from urban-centered
transport-oriented
infrastructure and invest in
digitization, logistics,
lower-priced and sustainable
energy
Support MSMEs (NB: in Prioritize MSMEs, farmers At least Php100 billion Launched “Bayanihan Mart”
general, not necessarily and social enterprises in stimulus package for MSMEs for small businesses in
industrial MSMEs) government procurement; (conditional on worker partnership with
amend government retention) iskaparte.com under
procurement law Bayanihanapbuhay
Link up MSMEs with industry

value chains
Make doing business easier

with modern digital systems
and cutting red tape
(business permits, tax
payments, etc.)

BUILD Support MSMEs (NB: in Support innovative

FILIPINO general, not necessarily industries and ensure
INDUSTRIES industrial MSMEs) business incubators
nationwide
Conditional low-interest
loans and access to credit
from state-owned banks;
extended grace periods;
guarantee programs
PROTECT THE Make Philippines the “Center Build green and resilient
ENVIRONMENT of the Climate Industry” infrastructure
Promote sustainable (green)

and modern agricultural
practices
Promote green transport – Php14 billion to build bike

e-jeeps, e-tricycles, and lanes nationwide
other sustainable transport;
continue BBB program but Jeepney phaseout and
shift from car-centric infra to replace them with
more bus rapid transit, “climate-friendly ones”;
protected bike lanes, and support PUV drivers losing
railways; support just due to jeepney
transition modernization
Shift to service contracting

system for a fixed monthly
income
Shift to renewable energy Craft transition framework Opposed government-

sources for clean energy that also backed plan to establish
creates green jobs coal-fired power plants in
Palawan when she was then
Technical support for LGUs the Camarines Sur
to make green development Representative.
a pillar of their local
development plans Provided solar equipment to
communities in Ifugao
province, Valencia,
Bukidnon, and in Basilan
Re: mining Continue mining but make Land Use Bill to identify
sure that community mining and no-mining zones
benefits; ensure that voices
of stakeholders and
environmental advocates are
heard; rationalize relevant
agencies to make
accountabilities clear
Review and revise mining

laws and policies to ensure
strict protection of the
environment, communities,
and rights of indigenous
peoples, farmers and
fisherfolk

UPHOLD Support health frontliners Immediately give all Magna Free dormitory for health
PEOPLE’S Carta for Health Workers workers; free shuttle service
RIGHTS AND benefits (inc. hazard pay); for health workers; free
WELFARE expand benefits (ex. free mobile antigen testing
testing, COVID sick leave, program “Swab Cab”; Vaccine
medical insurance, food & Express; Bayanihan
transport allowance); give E-konsulta
Special Risk Allowance
Regularize health workers;

exempt from salary cap
Free and accessible health COVID-19 response (health) Php50 billion for ayuda in
care natl budget; granular and
street-level lockdowns with
automatic mass testing
(free), tracing and ayuda
Make testing more

accessible to within 5%
positivity rate; free mobile
testing for communities with
many cases; 2 weeks ayuda
for all positives
Contact tracing with

centralization, connectivity,
and uniformity; isolation
area in every barangay
Stockpile COVID treatment

medicines; increase budget
and staff of Food and Drug
Association and Health
Technology Assessment
Council
Ensure Php50 billion in

programmed funds in GAA
for vaccines; strengthen
vaccination capacity of rural
and barangay health units
(RHU/BHUs); ensure national
vaccine distribution network
E-Konsulta telemed services

covering entire country in 2
years; every barangay has a
device for this
Implement Universal Health Double health spending

Care from current Php113 billion
or 0.6% of GDP
Enroll every Filipino within 3

months; create Health
Information System (every
barangay to conduct health
assessment)
Address delays in PhilHealth

claims

UPHOLD Increase hospital/health Ensure tertiary hospitals in

PEOPLE’S facility capacity every region and province;
RIGHTS AND ensure 1:800 hospital bed to
WELFARE population ratio in every
region (with field hospitals)
Build 2,400 RHUs and rural

health centers (RHCs) by
2025
A nurse in all of 42,046

barangays; every BHU fully
equipped to give health
services according to Manual
of Standards for primary
Care Facilities
Pass Professionalizing
Barangay Health Workers
(BHWs) bill
Public-Private Partnerships
(PPPs) for lab exams,
emergency services, and
health infrastructure (design,
build and operate)
Re: education COVID response (education) Open schools in low

prevalence areas, ensure
Raise budget for education; devices for all students in
reform education system high prevalence areas and
partner with ISPs/telecom
Improve quality of primary firms for internet access;
and secondary education; scale up and fully equip (e.g.
strengthen STEM curriculum; internet, computer, printer)
improve tech-voc education community learning hubs
to cover new technologies
Php68 billion education
Strengthen links between assistance budget (Php300/
academe and industry; student/month for 22 million
strategic support to SUCs to students)
link up with private sector;
expand paid training Regular testing for teachers;
programs; implement TVET teacher training for distance
properly learning
Increase education spending

from 3% to 6% of GDP
Re: housing On-site and in-city housing

program for urban poor
Re: social protection Safety nets for those who Retraining and
lost work skills-matching program
Create a Public Employment

Program for 1.8 million
unemployed Filipinos –
building and staffing
schools, day-care centers,
libraries, medical facilities,
roads, and recreational
facilities

UPHOLD Re: social protection Safety nets for those who Create a National
PEOPLE’S lost work Unemployment Insurance
RIGHTS AND Program integrating and
WELFARE expanding SSS and GSIS
benefits (providing 80% of
salary for 3 months)
Re: labor Re: contractualization and Pass Security of Tenure Bill;

wages review minimum wage to
bring closer to living wage
End discrimination at work Pass Anti-Discrimination Bill
Implement Anti-Age
Discrimination Act;
Public-Private Partnership
programs for the elderly
Re: women Increase women’s

participation in the economy
– encourage taking STEM;
implement gender policies
in workplaces; expand and
professionalize day-care
centers, incorporate
nutrition programs, increase
pay
Re: other social measures Hasten digital transition for

cheaper, more efficient, and
less corrupt government
processes
FINANCE Re: foreign investment Attract FDI with lower power

DEVELOPMENT rates, better
communications, better
facilities, and eliminating
corruption
Favors 100% foreign

Strengthen antitrust bodies
Government free from COA gives OVP “unqualified

corruption and cronyism opinion”
UPHOLD Inclusive and independent Cooperate with China on Made statements to uphold
SOVEREIGNTY & foreign policy trade and investment but not the arbitral ruling on WPS
INDEPENDENCE on WPS unless China first
recognizes 2016 arbitral
tribunal ruling
Strengthen diplomatic
relations with PH’s allied
countries (e.g., USA, UK, and
Australia) and regional
organizations (e.g., ASEAN
and EU)

LEODY Stated motherhoods/ Concrete thrusts/ Specific programs/ Track
DE GUZMAN overall objectives directions measures record
OVERALL PLATFORM at lnm.ph “Bagong Politika, Bagong Ekonomiya (New Politics, New
Economy)” platform centers on growing the Philippine
Laban ng Masa (LNM) has economy, reforming the political system, and fostering social
an expansive economic development.
program, as does Bukluran
ng Manggagawang Economic: 1) Re-orient the economy towards production for
Pilipino (BMP) which De meeting domestic needs rather than production for profits and
Guzman chairs for exports; 2) Uphold the principle of workers’ control; 3)
Institute small farmers’ control of agriculture and ensure food
sovereignty; 4) To address inequality, impose a Wealth Tax on
the net worth of individuals of above PhP100 million; 5) Free the
country from the recurring and oppressive debt burden by
cancelling debt repayments for five years; 6) Pursue the recovery
and return to the public domain of the remaining stolen wealth
of the Marcoses
Political: 1) Institute direct democracy and popular

participation in decision-making at all levels of government; 2)
Demilitarize society, uphold human rights, and punish
mass-murderers and plunderers; 3) Uphold the right to
self-determination of non-majoritarian ethnic communities; 4)
Formulate a truly independent and internationalist foreign policy
Social development: 1) Promote universal transformative social

protection as a human right and as a core indicator of national
progress and social development; 2) Uphold climate justice by
demanding reparations from rich countries for their historical
responsibility for the climate crisis; pursue just transition to a
low carbon economy and democratically-owned, renewable
and clean energy systems; 3) Institute measures to fully achieve
gender equality and strengthen gender rights.
DEVELOP THE Revive agriculture; discard Institute small farmers’ Distribute for free all
COUNTRYSIDE economic growth-oriented, control of agriculture and remaining lands under the
trickle-down, and ensure food sovereignty agrarian reform
environmentally destructive
model of development in Prevent land conversions
favor of a people-centered, especially by large property
ecologically viable model firms
Freeze compliance with all

World Trade Organization
directives
Repeal the 2019 Rice

Tariffication Law
BUILD Revive manufacturing;

FILIPINO discard economic
INDUSTRIES growth-oriented, trickle-
down, and environmentally
destructive model of
development in favor of a
people-centered,
ecologically viable model

PROTECT THE Pursue just transition to a Uphold climate justice by Repeal the Mining Act
ENVIRONMENT low carbon economy and demanding reparations from
democratically-owned, rich countries for their Phase out all
renewable and clean energy historical responsibility for fossil fuel-based power
systems the climate crisis plants
Ecologically restore land,

forests, all bodies of water
Stop all environmentally

destructive infrastructure
projects
Promote transport justice
Initiate a program of
ecologically sustainable
reindustrialization
UPHOLD Re: social spending Raise social expenditures to

PEOPLE’S largest share of national
RIGHTS AND budget; reverse privatization
WELFARE of public services
Re: health frontliners Immediate salary hike for

healthcare and other
COVID-19 frontliners
Php250 billion annual

budget to ensure better
compensation for healthcare
workers
Re: health Prioritize public health based
on primary health care;
guarantee free quality health
care; re-fund and build more
and better public hospitals
Re: education Guarantee free quality

formal and non-formal
education up to the college
level; re-fund and build more
and better public schools
Re: housing Guarantee free decent Ban all slum evictions

housing for the homeless;
repair and upgrade social
housing stock
Prioritize building new stock

of decommodified and truly
affordable public housing
Promote universal Unemployment insurance

transformative social program with yearly budget
protection of Php90 billion (provides
Php500 daily allowance to
1.3 million involuntarily
unemployed workers for six
months)
Php2,000 monthly food

subsidy and Php3,000
monthly health subsidy for all

UPHOLD Re: job creation Php475 billion public jobs

PEOPLE’S program in 2022 to generate
RIGHTS AND 2.45 million jobs for:
WELFARE 200K BHWs;
50K forest rangers and
biodiversity caretakers;
300K teaching assistants and
school personnel;
500K agriculture workers;
200K construction workers
assigned to NHA;
200K public works workers
Earmark Php500 billion per

year starting 2023 to employ
2 million workers annually at
Php750 daily wage (funded
by recurring wealth tax)
Re: labor Ban contractualization in all

its forms through complete
prohibition on trilateral
arrangements;
Abolish regional wage

boards; guarantee that all
workers receive Php750
minimum daily wage across
the country
Uphold the principle of Ensure that workers are Establish unions and
workers’ control consulted in all industries workers’ committees parallel
and economic sectors to corporate boards for
policy and daily operations
Dissolve all holding

companies
Impose price controls on oil,

electricity, internet, water,
farm inputs, and other basic
commodities
Re: gender Institute measures to fully Pass a divorce law;
achieve gender equality and decriminalize abortion; pass
strengthen gender rights; new legislation to address
end violence against gender wage gap;
women; strengthen legalize the LGBTQIA+
reproductive rights; protect gender category
women from all discrimina-
tion; recognize and
compensate reproductive
and care work; uphold
marriage equality and
support alternative forms of
family arrangements
Re: other social measures Re-fund and build more and

better parks, libraries,
day-care centers, evacuation
centers, and other social-
assistance centers
Provide high-speed free

internet hotspots in all
public places

FINANCE Re: revenues and taxes Put more progressive tax One-time 20% wealth tax on
DEVELOPMENT system in place richest 500 families to fuel
recovery in 2022. Php1
trillion tax collection going
to health stimulus (Php400
billion), public jobs program
creating 2.45 million jobs
(Php475 billion), MSME
assistance (Php125 billion)
Wealth tax on individuals

with net worth above
Php100 million – collecting
Php316 billion (at 1% rate),
Php633 billion (at 2%), and
Php1 trillion (at 3%) from
richest 250-300 Filipinos
(combined Php31.66 trillion
net worth)
Repeal all regressive and

consumption-based tax laws
Reverse CREATE Law for

additional annual corporate
income tax to fund
unemployment insurance
program
Re: debt Free country from recurring Cancel debt repayments for
and oppressive debt five years
Repeal Automatic Debt

Appropriation law
Review and audit all existing

debts
Re: ill-gotten wealth Recover Php126 billion Together with proceeds from
stolen Marcos wealth wealth tax and debt
cancellation, use to respond
to COVID pandemic (provide
ayuda, vaccines, and
protection for everyone;
increase salaries of
healthcare workers and
other frontliners; fund mass
government employment
program to deploy more
contact tracers, health
facility personnel down to
barangay level, primary care
assistants, etc.)
UPHOLD BMP policy of “genuine BMP has called for a

SOVEREIGNTY & cooperation” among nations, demilitarization process in
INDEPENDENCE in contrast to the dogma of the contested territories. This
neoliberal economics, which involves both US and China,
greatly favors multinational while working toward joint
monopolies. The BMP has development of the area into
been at the forefront of the a “Shared Regional Area of
struggle against the Economic Commons,”
“unbridled competition” of especially among the
globalization since 1996 concerned littoral states.

Ibon 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ibon 2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ibon 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

bird

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 1

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 3

4 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

31.2 36.2 Forestry

20 27.6 Mining and

9.7 Public utilities***

1946 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2021

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 5

Industry group 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Gross Domestic Product 7.1 6.9 6.3 6.1 (9.6) 5.6

Source: Philippine Statistics Authority National Accounts of the Philippines

6 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

The first year of the

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 7

Unemployed, old de nition Unemployed

Chart 3. Unemployment rate*, 1979-2020 (in %)

Unemployment rate, Unemployment rate (%)

8 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

Employer in own family-operated employed in November 2021:

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 9

Aquino 6 37 118 218.9 136 209 54.4

10 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

Poverty incidence (%)

Source: Philippine Statistics Authority

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 11

Value (Php trillion)

12 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

1,000 810 858 827

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 13

14 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 15

Richest Filipinos 2016 2019 2020 2021

Sy siblings 650.6 890.9 689.8 811.0

Dennis Uy (starting 2019) 10.7** 34.2 32.3 34.7

16 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

Increase in net worth

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 17

18 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

The importance of broad public support cannot be overemphasized. Participation is most

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 19

Having declared their respective candidacies, it is reasonable to expect the presidential

It is also reasonable to expect that a commitment to democratic processes includes starting

20 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

The candidates however differ widely in giving concrete or detailed proposals.

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 21

Presidential candidates’ platforms

22 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 23

24 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 25

26 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

A number of specific sectors are mentioned – electronics, machineries, food manufacturing,

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 27

28 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 29

Prospects for 2022: Some small changes

30 IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022

Most of the candidates speak of a continued emphasis on infrastructure investments. Their

IBON Economic and Political Briefing l 04 February 2022 31