THE LOCAL Government Code (LGC) clearly defines the functions of the Provincial Development Councils (PDCs) aside from the functions of the Barangay Development Councils (BDCs), the Municipal Development Councils (MDCs) and the Regional Development Councils (RDCs).
In other words, the functions of these councils are already well defined all the way from the bottom to the top, and there is no more need to figure out how to manage local development programs.
Offhand, I would say that the RDCs could not be effective as the other councils, because there is no regional government that could implement council agreements at that level. Nevertheless, I would also say that the RDCs could become effective forums for policy coordination, policy being the higher level in the hierarchy of policies, programs and projects. The idea behind this is that programs should be guided by policies and down the line; projects have to be guided by programs.
Going the other way, along the idea of bottom to top management, the agenda of the BDCs should be elevated to the MDCs, the agenda of the MDCs should be elevated to the PDCs, and the agenda of the PDCs should be elevated to the RDCs. In theory, the buck stops at the RDCs, but would it not be good for the agenda of the RDCs to go up to a higher level, such as the Legislative and Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC)?
For purposes of standardization, I propose that we should use the term “Municipal” to refer to both the towns and cities. After all, the city halls are still referred to as “Municipios” up to now. That way, the term MDC could refer to all municipalities, regardless of whether they are towns or cities.
On another matter, I also propose that all municipalities should join the PDCs, regardless of they are chartered cities or not. I say that because under the LGC, chartered cities are technically no longer under the political jurisdiction of the provinces.
It would be good to adopt the thinking that these Local Development Councils (LDCs) are actually economic forums and therefore are not political bodies so to speak. That way, there would be no more need to address issues about political jurisdictions.
A good reference for this argument is the case of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum. APEC is an economic forum wherein political jurisdictions are not discussed. On the other hand, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a political forum, even if it would also discuss economic and business issues.
In theory, the LDCs are supposed to be the proper venues for the planning of programs and projects that are funded by the Internal Revenue Allocations (IRAs) of all levels of local government, from the barangay level all the way to the provincial level. This is another reason why the RDCs would lack the power to implement anything, because they have no IRAs to plan for. Ideally, the budgets coming from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (also known as the pork barrel) should also be subjected to the planning of the LDCs, even if the LGC does not require it.
As it was originally invented by the American Congress, the pork barrel is intended for all other local development needs that could not be “seen” from the federal level, meaning that is it too parochial for the central government to “see” it. Of course, the invention came with the assumption that the local congressmen would be honest, meaning to say that the funds would go to their projects, and not to their pockets. That was also the intention here, for the funds to go to the projects, but somehow the whole process was corrupted.
Looking at the present situation as it is now, it is now possible to “see” all local development needs from the local level, because all the LDCs are already in place in all levels, at least in theory. Also in theory, there is absolutely nothing that the local levels could not “see”, and that includes everything that the central level could not “see”.
Since the LDCs are supposed to “see” everything, the local congressmen need not “look” anymore for projects, and that is good, because all they have to do now is to pass laws that would make them “look” good.
Since we are now talking in the realm of theories, I would say that in theory, all local development needs could possibly be funded already if the funds from the IRA and the PDAF are combined. Looking at this now from a purely business standpoint, this is all about budgeting, and all about funds sourcing.
Of course, proper budgeting starts with proper planning, and that is where the good policies are needed, because good programs could only come out of good policies, and good projects could only come out of good programs.
Public and Private Partnership (PPP) appears to be a new term, but PPP is actually the idea behind the creation of the LDCs, ever since. For that matter, the chairmanship of the LDCs has always been rotating between the government and the private sector, ever since.
By the way, the local civil society is also represented in the LDC, along with the local industry. Together, these two groups make up the private sector representation in the LDCs.
Mind you, the LDCs were established long before social networking sites and mobile applications were invented. With the introduction of these two new technologies, it is now more possible, more than ever, for the citizens in all local jurisdictions to “see” what problems have to be addressed by policies, programs and projects. For sure, more eyes could see better than what one pair of eyes could “see”./PN
