President Rodrigo Roa Duterte thinks that the drug menace is the biggest threat to the state. He warned that the Philippines could be turned into a “narco-state.” Hence, his all-out war on drugs.

He’s wrong.

Poverty is a bigger threat to society and the state. In his fixation with the war on drugs, he’s forgotten or sacrificed the greater war on poverty.

According to President Duterte, about three million drug dependent Filipinos are at risk. Drugs addle their brains. The next generation may be lost, he claims.

This is true. However, poverty does greater harm to society. People don’t become drug dependent until at least their teens. Addiction is also a matter of choice. On the other hand, poverty, and its accompanying manifestation — malnutrition — affects children from the moment of birth. Nay, even from the moment of conception in their mother’s wombs. Unlike drug addiction, being poor is not a choice.

Furthermore, lack of nutrition and health care in early childhood darkens a child’s future as surely as the sun sets at night. Drug dependents can be rehabilitated. Children deprived of nutrition and health care in their early years cannot, because malnutrition has damaged their brains irreversibly.

There are three million drug dependents, according to the government. However, more than a quarter of the population, or slightly more than 25 million Filipinos, live below the poverty line. Another 25% are considered “near-poor.” So, there are about 50 million plus Filipinos who are suffering from poverty or near poverty versus the 3 million drug dependents.

President Duterte says that drugs rip away families. That may be true, but what about our poor women in the rural areas who are forced to work as maids or sex slaves away from their families or in distant foreign lands where they can be abused? Or the millions of OFWs who have to live far away from their families?

While it’s true that even rich people take illegal drugs, the fact is that poor people, faced with the stresses of poverty, are more prone to resort to shabu and other cheap drugs. They have less access to rehabilitation facilities and are more vulnerable to extrajudicial killings by the police.

Poverty is a bigger threat to democracy than the drug menace. Poverty is what vote buyers prey on. It enables political dynasties to perpetuate their rule unchallenged. Moreover, it provides the fertile soil which breeds terrorists and rebels.

It remains to be seen whether President Duterte will win the war against illegal drugs. Studies after studies have shown that by simply curbing supply without dampening demand, the drug war cannot be won.

However, at this point, judging from the absence of clear policies that promote inclusive growth, what I’m sure of is that President Duterte will lose the greater war on poverty.

So far, what he has unleashed are populist measures that don’t attack the root causes of poverty. There’s the one cavan of rice for each Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) beneficiary. How the administration will give one cavan of rice for each family without wasting a lot of money escapes me. The sheer logistical problem — and even if vouchers were used — would pose high risks of leakage and wastage.

Then there’s the boondoggle of a P21-billion rice program of the Agriculture Department. Essentially, the Landbank will extend support to rice farmers and the government will buy rice at support prices to be given to CCT beneficiaries. Honestly? Those loans will really go to increased production and the local government officials will buy at the right prices? Don’t pull our legs. Agriculture Secretary Piñol’s program is no different from the expensive, but failed, rice self-sufficiency program of former Agriculture Secretary Prospero Alcala.

In addition, the war on poverty must begin by attracting labor-intensive industries on our soil. A quarter of our labor force is unemployed and underemployed. The only way we can make a dent on poverty is to create millions of jobs. (Don’t believe those government statistics that says unemployment is down. The government defines “employment” as having worked just one hour the past week. The more meaningful measure is unemployment plus underemployment.)

Instead of fostering a climate for increasing employment, the administration is poisoning the atmosphere for labor-intensive industries with threats to close down companies which don’t follow their “end endo” (end of contract) policy. It follows that up with threats of a national minimum wage.

The war against endo will surely fail — most companies will just go underground — because it doesn’t tackle the root problem: the grant of permanency or labor security after a mere six months makes it cost prohibitive for companies to fire unproductive workers later on.

Duterte’s Department of Agrarian Reform is also waging its own war against development. It imposed a moratorium of two years on land conversions from agricultural land to other uses. This is an anti-development and anti-poor policy because it prevents land from going to its highest and best use. Unproductive agricultural land cannot be converted into industrial, commercial, and residential uses that generates jobs and incomes. This will also make housing unaffordable to many because developers will be prevented from converting acquired agricultural land into residential estates.

I voted for President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, thinking that he, with no vested interests behind him, will bring change. I can’t say I’m not disappointed.

He has so far failed to tackle the monopolists in strategic industries, which are strangling the rest of the economy.

Moreover, instead of fostering a favorable climate for private investments in agriculture, labor-intensive industries, mining and forestry, which are the job-generators in the countryside, he has fostered a climate of fear and uncertainty.

However, his track record in Davao is one of pragmatism. I’m hoping that he will already declare victory against the war on illegal drugs, make a course correction and really focus on the greater threat to society and the state: widespread poverty.

If he does not, he would not have fulfilled his mandate and will disappoint voters like me. It would be tragic if after six years, the poor will find that their brash, foul-mouthed emperor had no clothes.

Source: www.bworldonline.com