‘APEC hosting should have long-term benefits for Philippines’

MANILA, Philippines – President Aquino should make sure Filipino taxpayers will get their money’s worth after the government spent at least P10 billion in hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders’ Summit next week, leaders of the House of Representatives said yesterday.

Reps. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez of Leyte and Sherwin Gatchalian of Valenzuela City said the government must ensure the hosting will lead to some long-term benefits for Filipinos.

They pointed out the P10 billion was funded by taxpayers and the money could have been used to fund expanded access to higher education and other essential social services. 

Romualdez said a significant portion of the APEC expense should have gone to the upgrading of the Clark International Airport that would have led to less or no flight cancellations as well as another tangible and long-term benefit of the hosting.

Apparently, a large chunk of the budget went to cosmetic and face-lifting measures that will not reduce poverty in the country, but only leave the government with more debts, he added.

“P10 billion is too much compared to a zero outcome,” Gatchalian told The STAR.

“President Aquino should ensure the people will get their money’s worth by aggressively pushing for policies which will utilize regional trade to enhance inclusive economic growth here at home,” he said in a separate statement.

He said Aquino should fight for policies which will bolster the competitiveness of the economy in the face of closer regional cooperation and expanded free trade during his meeting with world leaders.

As agreed upon by representatives of the APEC member-economies in December 2014, the summit has focused on four main objectives: enhancing regional economic integration, fostering the participation of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the regional and global economy, investing in human capital development and building sustainable and resilient communities.

our best foot forward’ but rather, we should ask: ‘are we willing to let this opportunity pass?’” he added.