Doleouts do not solve poverty – NAPC

5

National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) chairperson Liza Maza on Thursday backed calls for the gradual phase out of the conditional cash transfer (CCT) program, saying it does not address poverty.

Advertisements

National Anti-Poverty Commission head Liza Maza.

The CCT, also called the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or 4Ps, was the centerpiece anti-poverty program of the administration of former President Benigno Aquino 3rd. Under the program, poor families are given a monthly stipend on several conditions – that parents will send their children to school and have them checked regularly in barangay health centers.

But Maza said the CCT does not ease poverty.

“By its very concept, I believe that CCT will not address poverty. I don’t think it will ever, ever address poverty,” Maza said in a news briefing in Malacañanang.

“In the past, poverty alleviation is seen to be market-centered. There are programs such as the CCT that’s focused on such platform. And if you ask us if the CCT is helping the poor, we can say that no, it does not,” she added.

At least 4.4 million households benefit from the CCT program. Beneficiaries are also required to attend family development sessions and must train to operate their preferred livelihood projects.

But for the NAPC head, solving poverty should be viewed in a more comprehensive perspective.

“To end poverty, we must address its roots in underdevelopment and inequality. That is why we have decided to focus our efforts on policy advocacy since many of the things that we need to end poverty require new policy or fundamental changes in existing policy,” Maza said.

“To be able to uplift the country from poverty, we need an anti-poverty plan, an anti-poverty program,” she added.

The former lawmaker expressed optimism that the Duterte administration will reduce poverty.

“The NAPC is pushing for measures on genuine agrarian reform and rural development such as House Bill 555 and National Industrialization,” Maza said, referring to the measures being advocated by her allies in Congress.

“I think that if we institute these reforms we can attain poverty reduction from 9 to 15 percent. If you are going to institute genuine agrarian reform, if we start to develop our national industry which will spur the economic development,” she added.

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

5 Comments

  1. Im with Maza on doleouts. Its counter productive. It gives people a sense of entitlement which is dangerous and it makes them lazy. But she is dead wrong with genuine agrarian reform. It has not worked in our country even though millions of hectares of agri lands have been transferred since 1972; we are now the world’s top importer of rice and half of our agri needs are being imported. And the fact that it has brought disastrous impact to the countries it was previously implemented in (Mao’s China -45 million dead, Russia – 10 million dead, Zimbabwe – turning their food basket into a basket case etc). Why so? Simple…the transfer of land doesnt transfer entrepreneurship. If you do not have the entrepreneurial skills to run it as a business not only will you not make money, you will incur debt etc. Its why farmers and their children are leaving their plots and seeking opportunities in the urban areas raising the national average age of farmers to 57 years old. In the next few years we wont have an agri sector to speak of. But why does Maza and the communists want genuine agrarian reform? Simple. Land is just another form of property. If land is allowed to be confiscated from its citizens, why can’t the government confiscate other forms of property like our houses, factories, cars, etc.?. In short, agreeing to this idiotic idea is to agree to our transformation from a democrazy into a communistic society. Do we really want to be another North Korea? If China, Vietnam etc., rejected the idea and embraced the free market system and prospered because of it, shouldn’t we?.

    • Sir Pedro. I beg to disagree. The failure does not depend on the giving of the dole out. It depends on the resolve of the person receiving the dole out.

      Remember the parable of the talent. There were three persons who received their respective talent. Each person was given a certain amount of talent and we may call it a “dole out of talent” by The Lord.
      The first received five talents , the second one received two talents and the third one received one talent.
      The time came for them to reckon with the master. The first one who received the five talents has gained five more talents ; the second one who received two talents has gained two more , and the last one who received the one talent has nothing to show to the master for he buried the talent that he had received.

      Read the whole story in the bible.
      This last man was reprimanded for his laziness.
      Therefore , the dole out should not be faulted—it depends on the character of the receiver.

  2. But Maza said the CCT does not ease poverty.

    “By its very concept, I believe that CCT will not address poverty. I don’t think it will ever, ever address poverty,” Maza said in a news briefing in Malacañanang.

    “In the past, poverty alleviation is seen to be market-centered. There are programs such as the CCT that’s focused on such platform. And if you ask us if the CCT is helping the poor, we can say that no, it does not,” she added.

    But for the NAPC head, solving poverty should be viewed in a more comprehensive perspective.

    “To end poverty, we must address its roots in underdevelopment and inequality. That is why we have decided to focus our efforts on policy advocacy since many of the things that we need to end poverty require new policy or fundamental changes in existing policy,” Maza said.

    “To be able to uplift the country from poverty, we need an anti-poverty plan, an anti-poverty program,” she added.********

    Please , do not ask yourself if CCT is helping the poor—ask the poor people if it does not help them in any way. They know better than you.

    I think the president is more truthful and practical in his approach as I heard him once in one of his speeches that he was increasing the doleout from P1400 to P2000.

    But you are taking a different route—your extravagant rhetorics about alleviating poverty have been heard countless times from the sugary mouth of unscrupulous politicians in times past but nothing happened , nothing really happened. Like a seasoned politician , you are fond of using terminology that does not make any sense to the poorest of the poor!

    Time and again , it is very sickening to hear those rhetoric that appear good only on paper! The lady who was known as pro-poor suddenly turns into an anti-poor. You want to destroy Duterte? That is the closest thing to happen if you succeed on phasing out the project. These poor people will definitely hate the president!

    You very much speaks in the language of Satan. You know , the father of lies speaks like that , instead of taking the shortest route , he love to take everybody for a ride—to bring his victim to a faraway land , and ambush him there.

    Why not increase the doleout just like what the president would like to do? If you hate the poor , do not kill them outright by phasing out the project. You want these people to hate the President!

    Bear in mind that poor people live on a hand-to-mouth existence. They cannot afford to wait for eternity to pass before they could benefit from your long term approach.

    By the time you commence embarking on your grandiose project —before you know it , it is already the END OF THE WORLD!

    So why not help them NOW. Even Christ does not speak like that. His approach is very simple and straightforward.

    Matthew 19:21-22 (KJV)

    21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

    22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

    Ma’am Liza , if you are unwilling to give to the poor even half of your possessions—you have no moral ascendancy to phase out what is not yours!