The Philippine Local Fiscal Administration in a Decentralized Setup

De primordialization in the Philippines took three forms- devolution, deconcentration and delegation. As Carino affirms, the framers of the 1987 Constitution institutionalise de primordialization with the end-view of realizing democracy and developing especially at the grassroots level. decadence paved way for the transfer of political power from the central establishment to the local anesthetic anesthetic anaesthetic governing body units.This transfer of power and functions was accompanied by the purvey of a higher Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), broader tax theme and a just shargon in the national wealth to pay devolved responsibilities and provision of various trade contemplateablys and services. This was accompanied by deconcentration which is the transfer of administrative powers and functions from central offices of judicature agencies to the field offices at the regional, provincial, and municipal/city level.In consonance with the image that local giving medi cation units are more responsive to the needs of their communities, deconcentration was institutionalize vis-a- vis devolution as a instrument for national brass agencies (NGAs) to house assistance to LGUs by setting standards in the implementation of various programs and monitor the operation and services of the LGUs along the different socio-economic and political dimensions.Contrary to the past practices wherein the central government by the national government agencies (NGAs) exercises a degree of ascertain in the implementation of programs at the LGU level, deconcentration aims to lessen, if not remove, the control from the national government and replace it with supervisory functions. Ideally, through deconcentration, NGAs set standards and supervise LGUs provision of various services to the community (i. e. DOH and LGU health services).Decentralization in the Philippines in each case took the form of delegation, or what other author calls as debureaucratization. Thi s was the result of the surmounting bawl for participatory governance and active citizenship during the ouster of the late President Ferdinand Marcos through the Peoples Power Revolution and even prior to and later the said historic event. The author of the Consitution saw it fit, as a rejoinder to the call of the times, to put greater emphasis on the involvement of non- government organizations, peoples organizations, and the private sector in governance.In this way, democracy and victimisation was believed to be realized when the voices of the marginalized, poor and other people aggrupations are hear and considered in decision-making at the different government level. In contrast to the consider of other countries, decentalisation in the Philippines took a complete form. This may be attributed to the political atmosphere in the 1980s- 1900s conducive to decentralisation and elective form of government. Colombia deconcentrated its state services but placed a see in the del egation and devolution of powers.Same can be said with the run intos of Mexico and Togo. The Philippines likewise has a legal frame behave conducive to democratic decentralization. Decentralization throbs in the Article X of the 1987 Constitution where the Congress is mandated to enact a local anesthetic Government Code which shall allow for for a more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization. Countries like Spain and China lack this legal framework despite real decentralization.This means that decentralization in the Philippines possesses a degree of permanency that would realize the continuity in LGUs exercise of devolved powers and functions. In the words of Katorobo, decentralization in the Philippines has a more stable environment (Katorobo, 2004). The system of decentralization in the state is also more responsive to the needs of the local community. hostile the experiences of India, China and Russia where pow ers and functions were only devolved at the state and regional levels, decentralization in the Philippines reaches down to the basic unit of government, the barangays.Due to our countrys bent towards democracy, the Philippines has a higher form of decentralization as compared to other countries (Ibid. ). The central government has transferred more powers and functions to the local governments and has provided more avenues for civil society engagement in local governance. Role of Local pecuniary Administration in a Decentralized Setup The transfer of powers and functions to local government units (LGUs) necessitates the transfer and redistribution of monetary resources. LGUs need sources and means to finance devolved services.Thus, the Local Government Code of 1991 provided LGUs with an enlarge in the IRA share, broader tax base, and a just share in the national wealth. The redistribution of financial resources is essential for LGUs to realize local development as more responsive services are provided to the community. Local fiscal brass section plays an important role in the achievement of local development as well as in the attainment of national goals. LGUs have to increase powers and functions particularly their taxing powers and other functions in line with revenue contemporaries and resource allocation to hasten development at the local level.A good local fiscal administration is needed to realize inclusive offshoot and poverty reduction as outlined in the Philippine victimization Plan 2011- 2016. Improvements in the different aspects of local fiscal administration- systems, structures, processes, officials and personnel, and policy environment- is a means for the local government to obtain higher income levels to finance local government operations and services intended to uplift living conditions in the communities.As stated in the Handbook of Local Fiscal Administration in the Philippines by Celestino, et. al. , these receiptss may come in t he form of new technology, good staffing patterns, adequate skills of personnel, heightened awareness of LGUs of available credit facilities, enhanced capacity of LGU for development planning, and the presence of political will among others.These contribute to increased LGU revenues and improved spoken language of services to the community. Ultimately, poor living conditions and issues on human development (i. e.health diseases, malnutrition, illiteracy, unemployment, underemployment, environmental degradation, etc. ) are addressed when LGUs are able to provide more than adequate services. Improvements along these areas have an intrinsic value to the society. A healthier and educated population is a way of eradicating poverty. Same is rightful(a) with the provision and generation of jobs at the local level. Same can be said with efforts to protect and preserve ecological balance in any given community. These contribute to the achievement of inclusive growth and eradication of pove rty.Local Fiscal Administration 20 Years after the Codes bit A closer look at the 20- year Philippine experience of decentralization,however, shows that the country has succeeded only to a certain extent in its decentralization efforts. Llanto, in his discussion paper, The Assignment of Functions and Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations in the Philippines xx Years after Decentralization, has observed that consumption responsibilities with benefits confined at heart the territorial jurisdiction of local governments were correctly assigned to LGUs.By these, he means that the Code correctly devolved functions and responsibilities on social demands and concerns that LGUs are in the scoop up positions to respond to. He also mentioned that the Code ensured a clear tax- expenditure assignment. Nonetheless, despite success stories on decentralization particularly on local fiscal autonomy, Llanto observed pressing issues that need to be addressed if the country has to succeed in its decent ralization efforts. These issues are 1. The conduct of regular local public expenditure review 2. The use of poverty index, human development index, or resource indicator instead of the equal sharing criteria. 3. The improvement of local tax administration. 4. The review and updating of local tax codes. 5. The institutionalization of a monitoring and reward system to recognize good local government performance in fiscal administration. 6. The avoidance of the imposition of unfunded mandates by the identification of source of funding apart from the coffers of the local government units 7. The trammel building/ resource pooling among LGUs for activities and services with inter-jurisdictional spillovers.There is still a lot of work to be done in our pursuit of successful decentralization and the attainment of local development. Legislators and other policy makers have to pause and seriously consider the issues which surfaced in our first 20 years of decentralization. I believe that if we are to make any progress, incremental steps have to be taken towards countering these issues and challenges. And there is no importune time than the present to start providing interventions to the multiplex concerns that confront the Philippine decentralization system.