Social Watch: Yolanda victims suffer; reconstruction poorly managed

MANILA – With the 2016 elections looming, survivors of Super Typhoon Yolanda might just have to compete with other plans and projects for funds meant for the Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan (CRRP) for 2014 to 2016.

This is according to former National Treasurer Leonor Magtolis Briones, who is also the convenor of Social Watch Philippines (SWP), who spoke at a press conference in Quezon City Thursday.

The civil society group just completed a seven-month study sponsored by Christian Aid to track the CRRP funds. SWP reviewed accomplishment and status reports from various government agencies, interviewed national agency and local government officials, and visited 13 municipalities and one city affected by the storm.

According to Briones, there were unclear sources of funds for the P170.9 billion requirement for the rehabilitation of Yolanda-affected areas under the CRRP.

According to law, fund sources should come from the National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Fund, regular budget, and foreign donations only.

But, SWP found that according to data from the Department of Budget and Management, some funds were from the 2012, 2013, and 2014 budgets. Particularly problematic was the unprogrammed funds as a source, which meant that the money would come only from extra government revenue, which was an “insecure” source.

Yolanda funds could even be mixed with those allocated for other disasters. In fact, when the DBM announced that it had been able to release P84 billion out of the P70.9 billion in June this year, the data it presented included appropriations for areas affected by other disasters such as the Bohol earthquake in 2013 and other typhoons.

(See related story: http://www.interaksyon.com/article/111821/p78-1b-released-for-rehab-of-areas-ravaged-by-yolanda-other-disasters)

Yolanda survivors would have to compete with other priorities for funding, Briones said.

“Napaka-insecure ng funding niyan kasi umaasa ka sa awa kung maaalaala ka ng humahawak ng pondo. Umaasa ka na malakas ang political pressure mo na mabibigyan ka ng atensyon dahil ang daming nagcocompete sa mga pondong ito (Funding for Yolanda is very insecure because you are banking on the mercy of those who hold the funds. You are banking on strong political pressure to draw attention to yourself because there are many others who are competing for these funds),” she explained.

In times of disaster, Filipinos who had relatives abroad were lucky because they could receive boxes of aid. Those who had foreign text-mates and friends on social networks could also expect parcels from their pen pals. The religious could rely on help from their churches, as well.

But so many others have no one else to depend on, Briones said. They had only the government to turn to, and their fellow Filipinos who paid their taxes. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy was ill-equipped to take over the task of caring for disaster survivors, as this involved hundreds of millions of pesos.

“Dali-dali, magpabinyag na kayo (Quick, have yourselves baptized),” Briones joked. “Pakasal ka na lang ng 80 years old para padalhan ka ng parcels of food (Or marry someone who’s 80 years old so they can send you parcels of food).”

President Benigno Aquino III approved CRRP in October last year, with the biggest estimate of funding requirements for resettlement, at P75 billion, followed by infrastructure (P35 billion), livelihood (P33 billion), and social services (P26 billion).

The National Housing Authority had the biggest funding requirement at P72 billion, followed by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (P25 billion), Department of Agriculture (P10 billion), Philippine Coconut Authority (P10 billion), and Department of Education (P9 billion).

At P39 billion, Leyte had the biggest funding requirement among the local government units, since it had also sustained the greatest damage and had the most number of affected people. It was followed by Iloilo (P22 billion), Tacloban (P15 billion), Northern Cebu (P14 billion), and Capiz (P13 billion).

But after all the plans and estimates, how much was released? Briones cited Budget Secretary Florencio Abad as saying P51.98 billion had been released in October 2014. Of this, P47.12 billion was for rehabilitation and recovery, and P4.86 billion was for relief operations. The latter was not merely for Yolanda reconstruction.

Of the P51.98 billion, only P34.77 billion was identified as going to the government agencies below. The other funds were unspecified.

NHA – P2.44 billion
DSWD – P6.06 billion
DA – P2.77 billion
PCA – P2.87 billion
DEPED – P4.96 billion
DPWH – P3.11 billion
DILG – P4.48 billion
NEA – P3.93 billion
DOTC – P2.15 billion
DOF/BTr – P2 billion

To complete the P170.9 billion CRRP, Briones said Abad promised to release P80.31 billion in 2015 for projects, programs, and activities; and P38.9 billion in 2016 for the same.

By June this year, Abad said that the DBM had released a total of P84 billion. Of this, an additional P43.28 billion had been identified, on top of the P34.77 billion identified in October 2014.

NHA – P19 billion
DSWD – P22.76 billion
DPWH – P1.35 billion
DOTC – P0.16 billion

According to SWP project coordinator Luz Anigan, the group had been requesting for information on the unidentified funds from the DBM.

Of the P84 billion total funds released, only P78.05 billion were specified.

Back in June, Briones also questioned whether the P84 billion referred to actual money releases covered by Notices of Cash Allocation, or merely Special Allotment Release Orders, which she explained were not immediately funded.

“It is now 2015, and we haven’t even reached half of the actual release of funds. Nor do we know what is happening to victims on the ground,” she lamented at the press conference.

According to SWP, the significant delay in the releases of funds from the DBM to the implementing agencies and local government units was aggravated by poor coordination between and among the different agencies. This was caused by lack of competencies and appropriate mechanisms to hasten the delivery of services.

Faith groups and survivors’ relatives acted faster in comparison, Briones said. For the part of the LGUs, it was understandable that they could not handle the provision of aid since their employees were hit by the storm themselves.

Documentary requirements were another issue. For example, a donor who might want to donate land might find that it had no title. Prices of construction materials had also risen since the CRRP was first planned.

Depending on who the candidates for next year’s elections wanted to woo, funding could be hastened in 2016. Local candidates in areas that weren’t affected by the typhoon, however, were likely to prioritize their areas’ needs, instead.

Another problem, said Briones, was that there was no clear central authority to implement, oversee, coordinate, and have a strong mandate to monitor all reconstruction and recovery initiatives.

In Tacloban City, for example, SWP saw that residents were recovering, but not necessarily because of the national government. When they visited in June, and talked to LGU officials Wednesday, they were under the impression that the money did not reach the local officials.

National agencies acted at their own pace. While they meant to help, they had their own day-to-day tasks as well. Thus, it was business as usual without anyone forcing them to act urgently.

“Isa itong napakatinding problema: ang kabagalan ng burokrasya (The lethargy of bureaucracy is a massive problem),” Briones said.

Thus, SWP was pushing for the creation of a central agency that could ensure the implementation of the CRRP, as well as take the lead for other disasters in the future.

SWP also recommended that the implementation of key projects, programs, and activities be fast tracked.

The government should also clarify where the P80.31 billion CRRP funding requirement for 2015 would be released, and where it would come from.

The remaining P38.93 billion funding requirement Abad promised would be released in 2016 for the projects, programs, and activities should be directly allocated in the 2016 General Appropriations Act, Briones added.

Data access and transparency was an issue, as well. Briones said it was arduous work tracking the funds.

“Dapat todo ka charming (You have to be extra charming),” she said, referring to the way she dealt with government agencies in asking for data. She added that if they did agree to give information, they asked that it be kept confidential.

Briones said that transparency and public accountability must be ensured by all agencies involved in the rehabilitation.

They also found that there was a lack in citizen participation, whether in planning, implementation, monitoring, or evaluation. –Tricia Aquino, InterAksyon.com