The Charter change, or cha-cha, discourse boils down to who can be trusted more — the politicians who claim that tinkering with the Constitution is of paramount importance or most of the nation who believe the effort is a waste of time and energy.

Economic experts say the proposed amendments that seek to relax foreign ownership limits on mass media, advertising, education and the foreign practice of professions will not matter much in terms of economic rewards since these are sectors that have specific labor participation.

Former Socioeconomic Planning secretary and now University of the Philippines professor Solita Monsod said the ultimate objective of the controversial People’s Initiative, or PI, to specify a joint voting as a unicameral Congress in a constitutional assembly was too obvious.

“Once a con-ass is in place, nobody can stop members of Congress from overhauling the Constitution, nobody,” Monsod said.

The view reflects the crisis of integrity afflicting those pushing for a so-called economic cha-cha.

Monsod cited studies that indicate cha-cha is not a necessary condition for a country to grow its economy. 

She said: “Amending the Constitution is neither necessary nor a sufficient condition to attract FDI (foreign direct investments) and it may entail burdensome costs.”

There are other constraints foreign investors said should be addressed such as “infrastructure, governance, corruption, and ease of doing business,” Monsod pointed out in a television interview.

“For instance, how will investors flock to the Philippines if we have a looming power crisis that can derail production in years to come? Or if there is no level playing field, and corruption authorities are hard put to reduce the market power of certain monopolies or oligopolies? Or if corruption and red tape are rife? Or if the rule of law is broken, and the application of the law depends on your income or connections?” she said.

Another economist, Bernardo Villegas, who was a member of the Constitution Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution, said he supports amending the economic provisions but not at this time when the focus of legislators on ending the blight of poverty should not be distracted.

“Right now, we should have a single-minded focus on the scandal that 21 percent of our population are living in demonizing poverty,” Villegas stressed.

He contrasted our country to our regional neighbors who had managed to reduce their poverty levels to single digits.

“It is a scandal and how do we approach this problem?” he said.

Villegas said cha-cha could be done without rewriting the Charter.

Even if you have a Constitution that provides for 100-percent foreign ownership in all sectors, without a nice, stable business environment to thrive in, we can’t expect foreign investors to suddenly flock in in droves, both economists agreed.

On the contrary, House leaders claimed, cha-cha would be confined to amending the investment limitations as embodied in Resolution of Both Houses 6.

They claimed that the push is meant to address the urgent need for removing ownership restrictions, as cited by foreign trade chambers, that keep the Philippines behind its neighbors in terms of attracting investments.

House leaders said that while the PI push was halted, the chamber remains firm on pushing amendments to the economic provisions through RBH 6.

The resolution is moving quickly even in the Senate which has shelved the House con-ass proposal.

It took an appeal from President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to Senate President Migz Zubiri to unfreeze RBH 6.

“Have some shame for abusing the Filipinos’ trust,” Monsod told both the Senate and the House, which is a statement that echoes strongly among citizens scandalized by the brazen cha-cha maneuvers.