SENATE OFFICE, Manila, May 19, 2011-Senator Ralph G. Recto, chairman of the senate ways and means urged the major proponents of the reproductive health (RH) bill to clear a cost analysis in the recent national debate on enacting the measure which is not only an issue of moral or religious one but also on its funding or budgeting.
“How much the proposed law would burden the national government, local government units (LGUs) and even the private sector,” Recto asked, saying that there’s obviously a price tag for this bill. There are costs involved and no one seems to be talking about it.
“Ultimately, before we discuss about the ‘birds and bees’, let’s talk about the fees,” Recto said, adding that to bankroll the RH bill and to ensure its effective implementation once enacted into law, billions of taxpayers’ money would be needed yearly.
“The costs would entail “guaranteeing universal access to medically safe, legal, affordable, effective and quality RH care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information and education,” Recto added.
“Where will the funds be sourced,” he asked, stressing that it is impossible to push for the bill without knowing the costs where he advised to clear the costs first before legislate something on the bill.
Recto said that the preparation and production of politically correct relevant scientific information materials that would be disseminated by the Department of Education, Commission on Higher Education, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Technical Education and Skills Development Authority and Department of Health (DOH) would involve staggering costs not to mention the logistical requirement to deploy them.
“It is possible that contributions of both employers and employees to PhilHealth, Government Service Insurance System and Social Security System would increase as a result of compliance to the soon-to-be passed law,” he asked, noting that the delivery of RH services such as the provision of modern family methods, devices and supplies to poor families would be funded by PhilHealth, national government (NG) and LGUs under the proposed measure.
Recto said that private employers also have to cough up money to support the RH law such as making available health care facilities and services like contraceptives and sexual dysfunction treatment to all their employees.
“So instead of ‘conditional cash transfers (CCT)’, employers from time to time would give out 'conditional condom transfers' or hold “Viagra nights” in exchange for increased productivity?” he asked.
Meanwhile, the LGUs are mandated to pick up the tab along with the national government in the rolling out of RH services like information, care and supplies including medicines aside from hiring midwives to man birthing centers.
Recto eyed another possible cost is the additional pork barrel needed to finance the acquisition of mobile health clinics/vans for each congressional district that would deliver RH supplies and services to their constituents as mandated in the proposed law.
“Where are we going to take the money? Would this mean more pork barrel, higher LGU taxes and higher contributions to PhilHealth, GSIS and SSS?” he asked, saying that the earmarking of the budgets of the DOH for its family planning program and that of the Commission on Population (POPCOM) as initial outlay for the RH law amounted to P3 billion is not enough.
Recto stressed that there are so many unfunded laws and we don’t need another one; nevertheless, he agrees with most of the content of the proposed bill but has strong reservations over the other provisions that should be taken away or be subjected to refinements.
Recto said that no one could argue to the right of women to safeguard their health and safety when they are pregnant and to give birth. (Jason de Asis)
