Aquino III officials are all ecstatic over the latest Transparency International (TI) report showing a slight improvement in the Philippines’ corruption perception index (CPI) from 129th last year to 105th out of 176 countries this year. The country is still one of the most corrupt countries in the world - it scored 34 on a scale of zero (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean) and in relative terms moved up from No. 7 out of 10 to No. 5 in Southeast Asia overtaking Indonesia (118th) and Vietnam (124th).
TI’s CPI is based on public perceptions and assessments by experts and not on empirical data or surveys. Clearly, as one reaction would put it, the improved ranking was influenced by the impeachment of former Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona, the filing of charges against former President Gloria M. Arroyo, and the issue on Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) of public officials. Without showing how these specific incidents would have a positive impact on governance, transparency, and accountability these somehow generated perceptions regarding serious efforts by the Aquino III administration on anti-corruption.
Objectively, however, whatever reports went into the making of the CPI on the Philippines overlooked the fact about how pork barrel – a major source of patronage corruption - was not only retained under Aquino III but was increased budget-wise from PhP6.9B in 2010 to PhP22.3B or by 223 percent in 2011. It went up to PhP24.89B in 2012 and was expected to reach PhP30B in 2013. Congressmen reportedly rake in up to 40 percent commissions from the pork barrel or Philippine development assistance fund (PDAF). There were as well recent cases of corruption involving the high and mighty in officialdom. TI’s report as released by its headquarters in Berlin – because it is based on a chosen panel of elite evaluators – neglected the pervasiveness of corruption on the ground and across the country. The 2012 Good Local Governance Survey released by Social Weather Stations (SWS) last October showed corruption is more widespread now than in previous years. Sixty-eight (68) percent of Filipinos said local governments are corrupt – higher than 64 percent recorded in 2011 and 58 percent in 2009. Thirty-three percent of those surveyed said corruption is more widespread now.
Do experts’ opinions have greater weight over people’s direct experiences and exposure to corruption as consolidated through nationwide surveys? If indeed there has been a results-based reform in corruption indicating a reduction, isn’t it about time to test Mr. Aquino’s much-touted campaign creed, i.e., less corruption, less poverty (“kung walang korap, walang mahirap”). Here’s one test:
A recent UN report says the Philippines is years behind in eradicating extreme poverty and will not meet the 2015 Millennium Development Goals (MDG) deadline. The UN report, “Asia Pacific Regional MDG Report: Accelerating Equitable Achievement of the MDGs,” gives the Philippines failing grades not only in poverty reduction but also in education, reducing child mortality, and maternal health.
In a separate report, the Stratbase Research Institute said that the Philippines has the highest income inequality in Southeast Asia. The report (2011), which reveals a huge income disparity between the rich and poor in the country, is backed by similar research by the ADB, WB, UNDP, and the Philippines National Statistics Office and NCSB. The richest 20 percent, says the WB, outspent the poorest 20 percent by more than 8 times.