Nobody has yet dared to hazard a guess on the total number of Philippine demonstrators, but more important than the numbers is the motivation behind the marches: the anger of educated Filipinos, whose numbers are increasing in size, against ‘pork barrel’.

The Philippines has long endured a system where politicians have the power to decide which public works projects receive government funding based on how many votes can be won for the politician claiming credit for the project. Such projects are in addition to those planned by the National Economic and Development Authority and implemented by the national-level Department of Public Works and Highways.

The immediate trigger for the protest was the disclosure a few days before that the government had funded a number of non-governmental organisations that did not in fact exist. The scam is not surprising to those who are familiar with the system. Unsurprisingly, organisers of the march cited ‘the ventilation of anger’ as one of the main reasons for the demonstration. In reality, the anger of the urban middle class, whose ranks filled out most of the marches, is already well established. The Philippine middle class has long been frustrated by perceived government corruption, where pork barrel is one — but only one — of the most brazen manifestations.

The issue is not that the presidency conducts its own pork barrel — some demonstrators cited figures in the range of 250 million pesos (US$5.5 million), a pittance when set against the country’s infrastructure needs. The issue rather is that pork barrel is the main source of the president’s enormous power.

In the Philippines, appropriations for government expenditure, including public works, are considered and passed by the legislature separately from the revenue that is meant to fund them. In other countries, expenditure and revenue are bundled together in the same piece of legislation. As each member of the Philippine Congress insists on the inclusion of his or her pet vote-getting projects in the general appropriations or public works bill, the amount appropriated is invariably many times over what can possibly be produced by the government’s revenue-raising agencies.

Who, then, decides which projects get funded? The president. Who decides who gets what and how much? Again, the president, through his power of ‘release’. That is, the president instructs the secretary of budget and management, a presidentially appointed member of cabinet, to release or withhold the amount needed to fund a project. No wonder that after each biennial election most members of the House of Representatives gravitate toward supporting the president, regardless of who they supported in the run-up to the election.

The Senate presents a different picture. With only 24 members, each receives votes from a nation-wide constituency. Many senators dream of becoming president at the next election (the Philippine constitution limits the president to only one six-year term) or, if the candidate is young enough, at a later date. Philippine senators therefore place more value on gaining exposure in the mass media or at popular rallies, which attract attention through verbal attacks on the president and his or her administration, rather than attacking practices around public works projects. Thus, the Philippine Senate is usually in ‘opposition’, no matter which ‘party’ the senators ran for.

One of the banners unfurled during the march demanded that the country ‘abolish pork barrel’. How this is to be done has not yet been addressed. Many of the demonstrators asked President Benigno Aquino III to act, and the president promptly responded by promising to make consultations with the law makers in Congress more transparent — but not to do away with the institution and the practice altogether. Knowing all this, is it any wonder that politicians and their families spend so much money to get elected to the Philippine Congress? Would any president give up such power without a commensurate incentive in return? It is not enough to vote for ‘good’ people or to call for the ‘abolition’ of pork barrel. The system must be changed.

Rodolfo C. Severino is a former Philippine diplomat and is currently head of the ASEAN Studies Centre in the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.