Local governments key to strong PhL

SOMETIME in the 1990s, politicians who were against the Local Government Code advocated by then-Senate President Aquilino “Nene” Pimentel Jr. would chide him for the behavior of erring barangay officials. This is because the Local Government Code, or Republic Act (RA) 7160, passed in 1991 gave local leaders more powers, authority and resources. At the time, there was the perception that the grant of autonomy to local government units (LGUs) had made their stewards ill-mannered and irresponsible.

Criticisms heaped upon RA 7160 were part of the birth pangs accompanying the implementation of a new law. National government officials had nightmares in implementing decentralization. What used to be the responsibility of the national government, such as health services and agricultural extension, had been transferred to local government units. This was in keeping with the vision of the law to allow local governments to take responsibility for the development of their respective communities.

To carry out their duties and functions under the law, local government units were given a share in the taxes collected by the national government. Apart from this, local governments can also generate their own funds via taxes, charges and fees. If they need to augment their budget to support the delivery of basic services or put up the necessary facilities in their areas, LGUs may negotiate and secure financial grants from local and foreign assistance agencies.

Without a doubt, the Local Government Code was instrumental in helping the national government boost economic growth and reduce poverty incidence especially in urban areas. The elbow room given to LGUs to generate their own resources empowered many cities and municipalities, which no longer solely depend on the national government to implement programs and projects for their constituents. One good example of this is Makati City, which will soon construct its own subway costing $3.5 billion.

However, the rise of new challenges, such as climate change and shrinking natural resources, are threatening to undermine the progress made by cities and municipalities in more than two decades. It’s also not a coincidence that LGUs exacerbated the problem by not fully complying with the provisions of the law that would have prepared them to face challenges caused by changing weather patterns and tweaks in policies, such as the Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 and the rice trade liberalization law.

Part of the duties and responsibilities of local governments is the provision of agricultural support services, including the distribution of planting materials, and the operation of farm produce collection and buying stations. Local governments are also responsible for agricultural extension, and on-site research services and facilities, including the prevention and control of plant and animal pests and diseases. To hasten the expansion of industries, local governments are mandated to provide industrial research and development services.

The vision of Pimentel and other proponents of the Local Government Code was to produce food efficiently, including raw materials that would have supported local industries. Faithful adherence to these provisions would have enabled farmers to supply most of the food requirements of Filipinos and the inputs required by factories. The inability of municipalities to deliver the much needed research and extension services contributed to the failure of farmers to improve their productivity, a sure ticket out of poverty.

The only way for the country to continue producing sufficient food amid changing weather patterns and shrinking natural resources is for local governments to carry out their duties under RA 7160. Compliance with the Local Government Code will also boost efforts of the national government to reduce poverty incidence to less than 20 percent by 2022. A food-secure and strong Philippines, with LGUs leading the way, is the best tribute that Filipinos can give to the Father of the Local Government Code.