"Recovery efforts should be holistic and comprehensive in scope."
"Recovery efforts should be holistic and comprehensive in scope."
Over the years, the Philippine tourism industry has grown by leaps and bounds. In 2019, the industry posted an all-time high of 8.2 million international visitor arrivals, or one million more than it registered in 2018. The tourist influx last year contributed $9.31 billion or P482.15 billion in visitor receipts, or 20.81 percent higher than the 2018 figure of $7.71 billion.
With the coronavirus outbreak this year, however, the National Tourism Development Plan of the government will have to revise its projection of 12 million international visitor arrivals and 89 million domestic tourists by 2022 as the tourism industry has been one of the most badly affected sectors.
Even before COVID-19, the consistent growth of the tourism industry had its downside: Overcrowding in popular destinations, run-down facilities, and environmental destruction. The case of Boracay is instructive as the government was compelled to close it down for a six-month rehabilitation period in 2018 after the beach had turned into a cesspool due to the failure to build an adequate drainage system and sewage treatment facilities.
With the COVID-19 pandemic expected to persist until a vaccine is developed by the end of this year at the earliest, the House of Representatives deemed it proper to help the ailing tourism industry by allotting P10 billion for tourism infrastructure as part of the proposed Bayanihan to Recover as One Act or the Bayanihan 2 bill.
During the deliberations at the bicam level to reconcile the Senate and the House versions of the bill, Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon supported the position of the Tourism Congress of the Philippines and other major industry stakeholders that priority should be given to direct aid in the form of loans to affected tourism enterprises, rather than to infrastructure which he lumped together as "toilets."
But House members have pointed out that the lawmaker's stand on the issue appears to be a 180-degree turn from his earlier preference for tourism infrastructure in his home province of Iloilo. These include the construction of the Iloilo Convention Center at the cost of P800 million and the Iloilo International Airport at P8.8 billion.
While other provinces have been unable to secure adequate funding to put up sanitation facilities such as clean toilets in tourist sites, they said, the senator managed to secure enough funds from the legislature for major tourism infrastructure in Iloilo. Since the completion of the Iloilo Convention Center in 2015, visitor arrivals in the city have reached 1.24 million in 2018 from only 627,000 in 2013.
On July 27, 2019, the Iloilo River Esplanade, which covers 8.1 km. in length, opened to the public four new sections. Since the project began in 2010, DPWH spent a total of P1.07 billion as part of the Iloilo flood control project. The first phase covering 1.2 km was completed in 2012. Drilon was instrumental in getting the project off the ground.
On January 29, 2020, the Department of Tourism (DOT) announced that TIEZA, or the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority, had allocated P347.5 million for tourism infrastructure in the province of Iloilo. Secretary Berna Romulo-Puyat said the TIEZA Board had approved the allocation of P135 million for the restoration of three landmarks in Iloilo, namely, Arevalo Plaza, Molo Plaza, and La Paz Plaza.
A portion of the TIEZA funding would also be set aside for the rehabilitation of the historical Jaro Belfry, the construction of a Tourism Information Center and Tourist Rest Area (Green Restroom) in Esplanade 3, the improvement of the Iloilo Convention Center, and the development of Sunburst Park.
House members are now wondering why Drilon opposes the funding for tourism infrastructure that would benefit other tourist destinations in the country when he had vigorously pushed for it in his hometown, Iloilo.
Lawmakers are convinced that tourism infrastructure should not be limited to construction of public toilets as it also includes rehabilitating or upgrading existing tourist facilities, boosting digital connectivity, and improving power and water supply, among others.
In short, tourism recovery efforts should be holistic and comprehensive in scope.
Tourism infrastructure projects also translate to jobs for Filipinos at this time when the worldwide threat of the COVID-19 pandemic has yet to diminish.
House lawmakers lament that the Senate appears to have opted to listen to the big industry players rather than to the ordinary tourism workers. Placing the “funds for assistance” under the exclusive control of the DOT, they said, would not guarantee support to tourism enterprises or workers in the informal sector dependent on the tourism sector.