Constitutional change has pros, cons — economists, biz groups

Divisive and unclear benefits, says opponents while others say changing certain economic provisions in the charter could make the country an attractive operations center for foreign firms

Economists and business groups deem proposals for Constitutional change on economic provisions as an unnecessarily slow way to attract foreign investors, although some of them stress it is not entirely useless.

“This should not be a come-on for investors. It takes time and we don’t know when the constitutional changes will take effect,” Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry president George Barcelon told the DAILY TRIBUNE over a phone call.

Instead, Barcelon said the government should maximize its existing resources and policies to boost foreign investments.

These include the Public Service Act which allows full foreign ownership of telecommunications, energy and transportation services.

Others are the Retail Trade Liberalization Act which lowers the minimum paid-up capital of foreign firms and allows more foreign employees into their staff, and Ease of Doing Business which streamlines business processes for companies.

Debate on RBH No. 6 and 7

These statements came amid the debate among senators and members of the House of Representatives on Resolution of Both Houses No. 6 and No. 7 which aim to remove restrictions on foreign ownership of educational facilities, advertising industry and other public utilities.

“Vietnam also has restrictions but foreign investors prefer it because of the cheap, stable and widespread supply of energy,” Barcelon said.

Emmanuel Leyco, chief economist of Credit Rating and Investors Services Philippines Inc., said the government should also deploy existing resources efficiently to boost agricultural production.

“The Marcos administration, instead, should focus on mustering local resources to enhance the capability of the agricultural sector and promote the competitiveness of Philippine industries,” he said.

Present strong arguments

Leyco added that the proponents of constitutional change still need to present strong arguments that it will greatly impact positively.

“I don’t think that it should be a priority of the Marcos administration as it is very divisive and the benefits are not clear,” he said.

Professor Filomeno Sta. Ana III, co-founder and coordinator of Action for Economic Reforms, said amending the Constitution also creates “uncertainty” and, thus, undermines investors’ confidence.”

Sta. Ana added some lawmakers might be intending to tweak non-economic terms in the Constitution for self-interests.

“These are a smokescreen for something more sinister: Consolidation and prolongation of political power of certain interests,” he said.

Some support

Barcelon, however, is not fully pessimistic, as he said Constitutional amendments could lead to some advantages to the economy.

“The most important is job generation for Filipinos which could stem from foreign businesses that will expand here,” he explained.

Chris Nelson, chairman of British Chamber of Commerce-Philippines, said changes to certain economic provisions in the Philippine Constitution will allow the UK to share its expertise in various sectors with Filipinos.

This, he said, should then make the Philippines an attractive operations center for other foreign firms.