Arguments for a_new_province

  • 487 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
487
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. ARGUMENTS FOR A NEW PROVINCE H.B. 4820 An Act Creating Nueva Camarines BY: Professor Benjamin E. Diokno UP School of Economics Former Secretary Department of Budget and Management
  • 2. The creation of the new province has complied with legal requirements• The proposed new province, Nueva Cam Sur Nueva Camarines Camarines, would have Particulars Requirements Districts Districts 1,2 &3 complied with the 4 &5 statutory requirements on average Average P20.0M P283.5M P223.4M Income income, population, and land area, as certified by BLGF(DOF), National Population 250,000 892,203 801,618 Statistics Office, and Land Management Land area 2,000 2531.6 2,970.4 (sq. km.) Bureau, respectively
  • 3. Camarines Sur is poorly governed -- compared to its regional peers and the entire country• Compared to the 79 provinces in the Philippines, Camarines Sur is ranked 78 in good governance in 2008, down by two ranks compared to 2006• Compared to its regional peers, Cam Sur is the worst-run province in the entire Bicol region. Good Governance Index(GGI) Region V 2005 2008 Bicol Region Score Rank Score Rank Albay 93.46 70 105.86 61 Cam Norte 93.12 71 99.83 70 Cam Sur 79.95 76 87.14 78 Catanduanes 125.53 22 132.56 25 Masbate 96.85 65 92.44 76 Sorsogon 99.89 57 104.67 63
  • 4. Poverty incidence and the number of poor people increased in Cam Sur --at rates higher than the national average• In 2009, poverty incidence in Cam Sur was 47.0%, higher than the national average of 26.5% and regional average of 45.1%. Except for Masbate, its other provincial peers in the Bicol region had addressed poverty much better.• From 2006 to 2009, the number of poor people in Cam Sur increased by 4.5% or by 34,102. Catanduanes (a province carved out of Albay), Masbate ( a province carved out of Sorsogon) and Albay did much better than Cam Sur in addressing poverty. This is a strong argument against the view that breaking up a province will necessarily result to loss of people‟s welfare. Poverty Incidence Magnitude of Poor People 2006 2009 2006 2009 %change Change Philippines 26.4 26.5 22,173,190 23,142,481 4.4 969,291 Region V 45.2 45.1 2,335,684 2,422,267 3.7 86,583 Albay 42.8 43.6 512,762 512,079 -0.1 -683 Cam Norte 41.5 42.3 215,911 232,685 7.8 16,774 Cam Sur 44.9 47.0 760,730 794,832 4.5 34,102 Catanduanes 44.3 28.5 99,457 66,801 -32.8 -32,656 Masbate 52 54.2 425,966 441,688 3.7 15,722 Sorsogon 44.9 41.3 320,858 374,183 16.6 53,325
  • 5. “CAMARINES SUR RANKS 3RD WITH THE BIGGESTSHARE IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF POOR FAMILIES!”
  • 6. Per capita IRA share of Cam Sur residents will increase with the creation of Nueva Camarines• Out of the total internal revenue allotment (IRA), provinces get 23%, of which 25% are distributed based on equal sharing. With 2 rather than 1 Cam Sur provinces, Cam Sur residents will get two shares rather than one. Really? Do the math. The creation of Nueva Camarines will increase, rather than decrease, the welfare of every Cam Sur resident. IRA Provinces 23% Population 50% Share Cities 23% Land Area 25% per LGU Municipalities 34% Equal Sharing 25% Barangays 20%
  • 7. Economic Arguments• Citizens should have the right to choose where they want to reside based on their own appreciation of the tax and expenditure mix offered by local governments (province, municipality and barangay).• The body of evidence is that Camarines Sur is not governed well and it has not addressed the welfare of its constituents. The dissatisfaction with the present state of affairs explains the clamor for an alternative province (Nueva Camarines). This bill will give those who are against the present state of affairs the right to „vote with their feet‟ [a phrase coined by Charles M. Tiebout in his seminal article “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures,” Journal of Political Economy 64(October 1956), pp. 416- 4240].
  • 8. Economic Arguments cont‟d• Efficiency is achieved if citizens are given the opportunity to express their desire through a referendum on the creation of Nueva Camarines. If voted down, the issue is closed. If ratified, citizens may then choose which of the two Camarines Sur provinces they want to reside in.• That‟s the key issue here: give the people of Camarines Sur the right to choose their own destiny. Let them decide what‟s good for them, not the politicians.
  • 9. Comparative Data Small/Big Provinces CLUSTER BASED ON LAND NSCB NSCB 2009 % 2009 AREA I.R.A. 2008 PER CAPITA POVERTY (SQ. IN PHP GGI POVERTY INCIDENCE PROVINCES KM.) 2007 POP MILLION RANK INCIDENCE POP SMALL CAMIGUIN 238 81,293 190.61 1 44.6% 2 SIQUIJOR 337 87,293 203.59 2 38.0% 2 KALINGA 3,231 182,326 354.95 3 25.9% 3 BENGUET 2,769 372,533 399.73 4 5.2% 5 BATANES 219 15,974 167.10 5 5 LAGUNA 1,824 2,473,530 1,123.63 6 8.0% 5 MT. PROV 2,157 148,661 296.40 7 45.7% 2 IFUGAO 2,628 180,711 328.18 8 28.9% 3 APAYAO 4,351 103,633 346.18 9 43.2% 2 COMPOS VAL 4,480 637,366 533.71 10 36.7% 2 RIZAL 1,176 2,284,046 995.01 11 9.5% 5 ILOCOS SUR 2,596 632,255 506.35 12 17.0% 4 BIG MASBATE 4,152 768,939 594.05 76 54.2% 1 LEYTE 5,901 1,544,251 974.78 77 34.3% 3 CAM SUR 5,381 1,533,305 905.46 78 47.0% 1 MAGNDANAO 3,670 642,259 495.61 79 53.7% 1
  • 10. Analysis• POVERTY INCIDENCE – CAM SUR – 47% (2009), AN ALARAMING RATE OF INCREASE• FROM 44.9% (2006) HIGHER THAN THE NATIONAL AVE. OF 26.5 %• 2009 NSCB (PUBLISHED FEBRUARY 2011) DATA SHOWS CAM. SUR IS NO.3 IN THE BIGGEST SHARE IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF POOR FAMILIES
  • 11. Non sequitur: “the division of Cam Sur is a disaster waiting to happen”• On the contrary, provinces Cam Sur compared with some Divided Provinces which have decided to Provinces Land Area Pop (2007) GGI (2008) Poverty (2009) divide in the past have Cam Sur 5,502 1,693,821 78 47.0 Ilocos Norte 3,504 547,284 24 12.4 done much better in terms Ilocos Sur 2,596 232,255 12 17 of good governance and Aurora 3,147 187,802 17 24.2 poverty alleviation. Almost Quezon 8,846 1,646,510 74 32.5 Occ Mindoro 5,866 421,952 54 36.3 all, except one, has done Or Mindoro 4,238 735,769 31 32.8 much better than Cam Sur Negros Occ 7,803 2,370,269 51 32.2 in governing their Negros Or 5,386 1,231,904 53 41.9 economic, political and Leyte 5,901 1,544,251 77 34.3 Southern Leyte 1,797 390,847 56 43.3 administrative affairs. Misamis Occ 2,055 531,680 40 45.7• The state of poverty in Misamis Or Davao del Norte 3,103 3,427 748,791 847,440 42 32 30.3 33.9 divided provinces was Compostela V 4,480 637,366 10 36.7 much better than in Cam Davao del Sur 4,223 822,406 16 24.6 Sur.