Metropolitan Arrangements - Philippine Institute for Development ...

294 ManagingUrbanizationUnder a DecentralizedGovernanceFramework
in Metro Manila at present of the MMDA's incapability to command
respect and authority over them. The appointment of the MMDA
Chairman should always be given serious thought--the same fervency
as appointing a major cabinet post. The MMDA leadership must be
able to put political and national government leaders together while
making the organization more credible to earn the command and
respect from the LGUs it coordinates.
Second, in the medium-term, the national government has to
seriously examine MMDA's proposed reorganization plan so that it
will be enabled to improve its capacity to fulfill its roles and functions
both from the standpoint of effectiveness and efficiency. Of greatest
importance is the need for the metropolitan body to revitalize the
development planning function that has not been adequately carried
out of late. MMDA should provide the planning leadership in the
pursuit of area-wide functions and in inspiring LGUs to attain a
common vision for the metropolis. Such planning function cannot
be carried out effectively if human resource availability and
professional expertise are not improved.
Third, the review of the performance of the different
metropolitan arrangements in Metro Manila in the past indicates that
a common thread that runs through the various experiments is the
very limited role the metropolitan body has actually played in terms
of actual delivery of metro-wide services. The MMC, MMA and MMDA
have all relied for the most part on national government agencies in
ensuring that metro-wide services are made available to Metro Manila
residents. To a large extent, all three metropolitan bodies have
exercised their coordinative function more than their service delivery
function. While the MMDA appears to have taken on more
responsibilities in the delivery of metro-wide services, a hefty
proportion of metro-wide services still remains with national
government agencies. This development is primarily explained by
the fact_ that although the national government has continuously
provide d subsidies to the metropolitan body, it still allocates a sizable
portion 6fthe budget for metro-wide services to national government
agencies. Thus, funding support for metro-wide services is principally
retained in the budgets of national government agencies. (In contrast,
funding support given to the metropolitan body, whether in terms of
revenue-raising powers or direct budget support, has never been
commensurate with its expenditure assignment.) These agencies,