WE NOW see that the agriculture, forestry, and fishery sector registered the lowest rate of growth at 5.1 percent. Unfortunately, most Filipinos, particularly the poor, are in this sector. In the meantime, the rate of growth of industry is at 6.6 percent while the service sector is highest at 8.7 percent. Unfortunately, the poor are not necessarily in this sector.

The rate of growth of the subsectors presents a sobering picture. The forestry subsector has a very high growth rate of 12.2 percent, with agriculture lagging far, far behind. This has implications for Goal No. 7 on ensuring environmental sustainability. Global warming and massive flooding are wreaking untold damage in Quezon, the Bicol provinces, Leyte, and Samar.

In the industry sector, the subsector of mining and quarrying registered the all-time highest growth of 25 percent. Which leads to another important question: “What precautions have been taken about the environment?”

The subsector of manufacturing has the lowest rate of growth at 3.3 percent. Ironically, it is this subsector that employs huge numbers of workers. The drop in rate is probably due to the closure of many export-oriented firms across the country, including in the export-dependent province of Cebu.

The attainment of the MDG on poverty cannot be separated from issue of unemployment and underemployment. It is alarming to note that the NCR, which has the densest population in the country, has the lowest employment rate at 89.4 percent. Put in another way, the NCR has the highest unemployment rate at 10.6 percent. Once one realizes that, then it is no longer a surprise that the NCR has high levels of hunger. What the government should keep in mind, though, is that hunger and unemployment form a very dangerous and volatile combination.

Put graft and corruption into that mix and one would have a ticking social bomb. But since the release of the Philippine midterm report on the MDGs, the issue of combating has become even more urgent. The scandal-ridden national broadband network deal alone has shown how billions of pesos can be lost to corruption.

Corruption is no different from a social cancer that eats away at institutions, destroys the credibility of the government, and diverts huge sums of money from public services to the pockets of a few. In the process, it also diverts funds that should have gone into meeting the MDGs.

Corruption is not only rampant in economic development expenditures. It is also prevalent in MDG-related activities. The biggest corruption scandals that have rocked the country are about funds that could have been used for MDGs, particularly poverty reduction. Take the P769-million fertilizer scam that began as an attempt to increase agricultural productivity. Take the P34 billion recovered (and now missing?) Marcos money that could have been used for agrarian reform. Take the series of textbook scandals and the nauseating corruption in drug purchase and distribution. Imagine the number of lives that could have been saved and lifted from poverty had these funds been used properly. A war on corruption is a war for the MDGs.

AS IT is, funds for the MDGs are often lacking, a fact that obviously poses yet another obstacle in achieving the goals. Since 2006, Social Watch Philippines has been coordinating the Alternative Budget Initiative (ABI), which is presently composed of 48 civil-society groups, along with supportive legislators from both Houses of Congress. At present, civil society participation in the budget process is recognized in two House resolutions. During the deliberations for the 2008 budget, the alternative budget was duly presented and discussed by the Appropriations Committee. (Truly, a first in the history of Philippine budgeting!)

The initiative, which was supported by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) through the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), succeeded in increasing allocations for MDGs by P5.3 billion in the 2007 budget and P5.9 billion in the 2008 budget. The latter does not include additional allocations for state colleges and universities, but the extra billions of pesos are still a plus for the MDGs.

Still, hurdles upon hurdles keep appearing on the road toward achieving the MDGs. The capacity of countries to achieve development is constrained by issues related to trade, debt, and new technologies, as well as decent and productive work for youth. Unless firm and decisive action is undertaken, the Philippines will not have enough funds and technology to cope with the threats and challenges to the MDGs, as well as changing needs for these.

The capacity of developing countries like the Philippines to attain the MDGs is also largely dependent on how global partnership develops. Very often, the question is asked: why can’t the MDGs be attained? A great part of the answer lies in Goal No. 8, which is on developing a global partnership for development.

During the early years of implementation of the MDG campaign, a simplistic division of labor was established informally: The first seven goals are the responsibility of the developing countries while the last goal is that of the developed countries. Goal No. 8, however, has neither firm targets nor fixed timetables. How then can progress be tracked in its implementation when there are no benchmarks and measures to go by?

The nebulous nature of Goal No. 8, however, should not be used by the government as an excuse for falling short of the targets for the rest of the MDGs. Indeed, among the most urgent tasks at hand is revisiting the projections and identifying the regions and provinces where poverty, hunger, and malnutrition are most prevalent.

This is no time to be complacent; whatever gains that have been attained in the last seven years can be wiped out by the onslaught of challenges facing the MDGs. It may even well be that instead of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, the government may end up eradicating the extremely poor and the desperately hungry.

Tempus fugit.

Leonor Magtolis Briones was formerly the country’s national treasurer. She is currently a professor at the National College of Public Administration and Governance at the University of the Philippines, Diliman, and co-convenor of Social Watch Philippines, which is part of a global network that monitors the implementation of government commitments to social development.