I WAS reading a news item published by a national daily last Friday about the country’s statistics agency admitting that the food poverty threshold of P63.87 per person a day is ‘insufficient.’ It further explained that a person is not considered “food poor” or a person who is unable to consume adequate food if he can spend more than P63.87 a day or a measly P21.3 every meal.
The article further talked about having a “menu” that is cost-effective (for everyone’s pockets), and since it will be designed by the country’s nutritionists, thus, it should be healthy.
The menu, according to the article, would look like this, and I quote, “At the national level, this could mean that a breakfast typically includes a scrambled egg, coffee with milk, and rice or a rice-corn mix. Lunch consists of a cup of monggo with malunggay and dried dilis, a banana, and a serving of rice. For dinner, the meal usually features fried fish or boiled pork, a vegetable dish, and boiled rice while the snack could be a pandesal.”
Looking at this set menu, I couldn’t help but smirk. I’m just wondering, how many people (especially those belonging to the C-D bracket) can afford this kind of food ensemble? Of course, it looks healthy, that I can see. But what is bothering me is the fact that the government is busy thinking of how much is spent on food for a person to be called “food-poor” or the kind of menu that people should be eating when these are not the real issues.
Focusing on the wrong things?
The government’s focus on computing the “food poor” threshold and concocting a cost-effective menu for ordinary citizens seemed to me an effort that IS NOT addressing the core issues affecting the nation’s socio-economic landscape.
I believe that the real problems lie in joblessness (or in job creation), poor agriculture priorities, and the negative mindset of people.
Of course, it is essential to understand that the computation of the “food poor” threshold is not an end in itself but a means to an end. I am aware that this threshold serves as a critical benchmark for poverty alleviation strategies. With this, the government can target resources and interventions more effectively by accurately identifying who falls below this line. This approach ensures that aid reaches those who need it most, optimizing the use of public funds and enhancing the impact of social welfare programs. However, they shouldn’t focus too much on it. I’m saying they’re focusing too much on it because I’ve already heard of these two or three years back, and until now, they’re still talking about it. When will they be talking about this? Meanwhile, as they continue to discuss menus and how much a person should be spending for him/her not be considered ‘food-poor,” millions are hungry, don’t have jobs, and risk going abroad.
Yes, I agree that the development of a cost-effective menu is a response to the immediate need for food security. For me though, it is a band-aid solution, and not a crucial step in preventing malnutrition and ensuring that even the poorest of the poor have access to basic nutrition. And yes, this is an interim measure to support the most vulnerable while more sustainable strategies are being implemented, but the question is, when will the sustainable strategies be implemented?
Regarding joblessness, I know that the government has not neglected this critical issue. Creating employment opportunities is a cornerstone of the government’s economic agenda. However, job creation is a complex process that requires a conducive environment for business and investment, infrastructure development, and a skilled workforce. But how could we have a conducive environment for these when good roads are destroyed while problematic roads are being left unattended? And how can we have a skilled workforce, men and women who can compete globally if they (in their student days, as in NOW) have been trained already and have been “brainwashed” to become employees of foreigners? (K-12) or to work abroad? Our young people have not been trained to become entrepreneurs or to become farmers (of their lands).
The concern about poor agriculture priorities is valid but I am not very sure if this has been recognized by the government. The agricultural sector is a significant source of livelihood for many Filipinos and a crucial component of the economy. Efforts to modernize agriculture, improve productivity, and enhance farmers’ access to markets are being undertaken, yes, but not fully well and not aggressively.
The issue of mindset is perhaps the most challenging to address. A negative mindset can hinder progress and development. The government, must and should focus on various programs that will work to instill a culture of resilience, entrepreneurship, and self-reliance among the populace. Education, skills training, and awareness campaigns are key tools in this endeavor.
As written in Genesis 1:29, “Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.”
This means, let us not forget about agriculture. Hopefully, someone is listening.
