the tag 2012 sws surveys on corruptioncancham.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/tag-2012-23... ·...

TAG 2012 (23Octrev).pptx/23-Oct-12 /LABUCAY

1

SOCIAL WEATHER STATIONS

The TAG 2012

SWS Surveys on Corruption

Public Presentation of Results

24 October 2012, Cagayan De Oro

25 October 2012, Cebu City

2 TAG 2012: SURVEYS OF ENTERPRISES

ON CORRUPTION

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

A. Survey Design

B. Survey Results

1) PUBLIC SECTOR CORRUPTION

2) SINCERITY IN FIGHTING CORRUPTION

3) GOVERNMENT EFFORTS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION

4) PROSECUTION OF HIGH PROFILE CORRUPTION CASES

5) ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE

6) TRANSACTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT

7) PRIVATE SECTOR CORRUPTION

8) BUSINESS EFFORTS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION

9) HONEST BUSINESS PRACTICES

10) THE BUSINESS CLIMATE

C. Summary of Findings


ON CORRUPTION

a. Are Time Series

• 10 rounds in National Capital Region (2000-09, 2012)

• 7 rounds in Metro Cebu (2004-09, 2012)

• 7 rounds in Metro Davao (2004-09, 2012)

• 5 rounds in Cavite-Laguna-Batangas and Cagayan

de Oro-Iligan (2005-07; 2009, 2012)

• 1 round in Metro Angeles (2012)

• 1 round in Metro Iloilo (2012)

b. Are Stratified by Size

• 2/3 weight: Small & Medium Enterprises

• 1/3 weight: Large Enterprises.

THE SWS SURVEYS OF ENTERPRISES, 2000 TO 2012


ON CORRUPTION

Total Small & Error

Fieldwork Dates TotalArea Sample Large Medium Margin

Aug 14 – Oct 26 2000 NCR 604 204 400 ± 4%

Sep 4 – Dec 4 2001 NCR 505 200 305 ± 4%

Oct 25 – Feb 25 2002/03 NCR 500 214 286 ± 4%

Nov 13 – Jan 28 2003/04 NCR/Ceb/Dav 701 285 416 ± 4%

Jan 21 – Mar 15 2005 NCR/CLB/Ceb/Dav/CDO-I 701 232 469 ± 4%

Feb 18 – Apr 27 2006 NCR/CLB/Ceb/Dav/CDO-I 700 231 469 ± 4%

Mar 4 – May 11 2007 NCR/CLB/Ceb/Dav/CDO-I 703 233 470 ± 4%

Sep 9 – Oct 10 2008 NCR/Ceb/Dav 402 135 267 ± 5%

Nov 3 – Dec 5 2009 NCR/CLB/Ceb/Dav/CDO-I 550 184 366 ± 4%

Jul 16 – Oct 16 2012 7 areas (target 950) 972 326 646 ± 3%

NCR: National Capital Region (target 350) 372 127 245 ± 5%

Ang: Metro Angeles (new) 100 33 67 ±10%

CLB: Cavite-Laguna-Batangas 100 33 67 ±10%

Ilo: Metro Iloilo (new) 100 33 67 ±10%

Ceb: Metro Cebu 100 33 67 ±10%

Dav: Metro Davao 100 33 67 ±10%

CDO-I:Cagayan de Oro/Iligan City 100 33 67 ±10%

THE SWS SURVEYS OF ENTERPRISES, 2000 TO 2012: SURVEY

DATES AND SAMPLE SIZES


ON CORRUPTION

7 Areas 972 246 726

NCR 372 126 246

METRO ANGELES 100 22 78

CALABA 100 27 73

METRO ILOILO 100 15 85

METRO CEBU 100 13 87

METRO DAVAO 100 18 82

CDO-I 100 25 75

THE SWS SURVEYS OF ENTERPRISES, 2012:

Integrity Initiative Signatories in the Sample

Total Total Total

2012 Integrity Initiative non-II

interviews (II) signatories signatories


ON CORRUPTION

Fieldwork Sample Error

Dates Sizes Margins

The SWS May 24-27, 2012 National Survey of Adults

also has corruption items

PHILIPPINES : May 24-27 1,200 ± 3%

Metro Manila : May 24-27 300 ± 6%

Balance Luzon : May 24-27 300 ± 6%

Visayas : May 24-27 300 ± 6%

Mindanao : May 24-27 300 ± 6%


2



ON CORRUPTION

1) PUBLIC SECTOR CORRUPTION


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN THE

PUBLIC SECTOR, 2000 TO 2012

A lot

Some

A little

None

63

77

60 65 66 67

61 64 64

43

25

19

29 26 28 28 33 31

32

44

10 4

10 6 5 5 5 4 3

12

2 1 2 1 1 0.3 1 1 0.2

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SAYING THERE IS “A LOT” OF CORRUPTION IN

THE PUBLIC SECTOR, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012

64 70

63 57

66

56

43

51

27

39

47

33

46 40

All areas NCR ANG CLB ILO CEB DAV CDO-I


ON CORRUPTION


THE PUBLIC SECTOR, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

63

77

60

67

63

58

71

59

66

58

64 67

72

63

71

61 65

62

57 60

45

71

59 55

70

63

57

66

56

51

39

33

46

40

NCR CLB CEB DAV CDO-I

27

47

ANG ILO

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GEN. PUBLIC: EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN

THE PUBLIC SECTOR, 2012

Enterprises Gen. Public

33% 51%

5% 11%

None

A lot Some

A little

44%

43%

0.2%

12%

None

A lot Some

A little


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT WHERE CORRUPTION

HAPPENS, 2009 and 2012

Q32. Among the different levels of government, where do you think corruption happens? Is it at the…? (MULTIPLE

RESPONSE ALLOWED)

Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Public Sector

National

government City/municipal

government

Provincial

government

Barangay government

93

65 67

48

81 78 72

54

2009 2012


3



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT WHERE CORRUPTION

HAPPENS, BY AREA, 2012


80 80 85 84

81 83 80

85

63 64

85

79

64

81

72

66 70

78 74 74 73

61

51

35

69

41 45

58

NCR ANG CLB ILO CEB DAV CDO-I

National City/Municipal Provincial Barangay


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WHERE

CORRUPTION HAPPENS THE MOST, 2012


70%

61%

54%

49%

Middle- level managers

Supervisors

Cabinet-level/top-level

management officials

Rank and file employees


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WHERE

CORRUPTION HAPPENS THE MOST, BY AREA, 2012


Middle-level

managers

Supervisor Cabinet-level Rank and file

employees

71

65 62

66 69

75 75

67

46 47

71

59 62

58

43

56

68

57 59 61 59 55

44

36

58

50 45

40



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PERCEIVED NUMBER OF COMPANIES IN OWN

LINE OF BUSINESS THAT GIVE BRIBES TO WIN

PUBLIC SECTOR CONTRACTS, 2000 TO 2012


Almost all

Most

Few

Hardly any

None

23 15

22 23 21 17 18 15 18 15

32 41

35 34 33 30 30 30

30 26

24 25 23 24 25 27 27 28

29 30

8 8 7 7 7 8 9 11

7 9

11 10 12 11 13 17 14 15 14 17

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SAYING “MOST/ALMOST ALL COMPANIES IN MY LINE OF

BUSINESS GIVE BRIBES TO WIN PUBLIC SECTOR CONTRACTS” ,

BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012


NCR CLB CEB DAV CDO-I ANG ILO

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

55 56 57 57

64

52 52

47

54

58

65

46 47 47 50

38

42

51

56

49

57

49 48

35

50

44 46

49

45

40

33

45 45 44 42 40


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: MEDIAN PERCENTAGE OF CONTRACT ALLOTED

AS BRIBE FOR PUBLIC SECTOR CONTRACT,

2005 TO 2012

Q36. In instances when bribery happens, what percentage of an average contract is allotted for bribes to

win public sector contracts?

2005*** 15%

2006*** 20

2007*** 20

2008** 20

2009*** 20

2012**** 20

Base: Total Who Say Companies in Their Sector Allot a Percentage for Bribes to Win Public Sector Contracts


4



ON CORRUPTION

31 25 25 29 29 23 21

16

16 13 15 12

14 12

9 11

10

13 13

10 10

14 15

14

12 12

14 12

24 27 28

25 27 31

34

03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

ENTERPRISES: LAST TIME ONE HAD PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE

OF PUBLIC SECTOR CORRUPTION IN OWN SECTOR OF

BUSINESS, 2003/04 TO 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Public Sector

Last month

2-3 mos. ago

4-6 mos. ago

6-12 mos. ago

>1 yr ago


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: THE LAST TIME OF PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF

A CORRUPT TRANSACTION WITH GOVERNMENT IN ONE’S

SECTOR OF BUSINESS, BY AREA, 2012

Last month

2-3 mos. ago

4-6 mos. ago

6-12 mos. ago

>1 yr ago

25 20

10 20 22 22 21

14

9

5

13 12 11 14

10

9

9

10 11 11 11

13

13

9

14 15 14 9

29

40

53

33 30 27 34



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER CORRUPTION IS WRONG BECAUSE IT

IS IMMORAL OR BECAUSE IT HURTS THE COUNTRY’S

DEVELOPMENT, 2000 TO 2012

Corruption

hurts the

country’s development

Corruption is immoral

Both [volunteered]

41 32 45 41

50

37

47 49

55 56

49

62

11 19

1 3 1 1

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER CORRUPTION IS WRONG BECAUSE IT IS

IMMORAL OR BECAUSE IT HURTS THE COUNTRY’S DEVELOPMENT,

BY AREA, 2012

Corruption

hurts the

country’s development

Corruption is immoral 43 41

21

37 36 35 34

56 59

77

63 62 64 66



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS GENERAL PUBLIC: WHETHER SOURCES OF

CORRUPTION ARE CITIZENS WHO BRIBE OR GOV’T EMPLOYEES

WHO ASK FOR BRIBES, 2012


28%

67%

5%

DK etc

31%

60%

The citizens who bribe

The gov’t

employees who ask

for bribes

DK etc The citizens who bribe

9%

The gov’t

employees who ask

for bribes


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER SOURCES OF CORRUPTION ARE

CITIZENS WHO BRIBE OR GOV’T EMPLOYEES WHO ASK FOR

BRIBES, BY AREA, 2012

The citizens who bribe

The gov’t

employees

who ask for bribes

64 56

68 62

52 48

61

26 35

21 31 41

40

32



5



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GENERAL PUBLIC:

WHETHER A BUSINESSMAN OR A GOV’T OFFICIAL IS TO BLAME

WHEN CORRUPTION HAPPENS, 2012

The official only

Mostly the businessman

Mostly the official

The businessman only

8 18

20 9

67 64

3 3

1 3

Enterprises Public

Both are equally to blame


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER A BUSINESSMAN OR A GOV’T

OFFICIAL IS TO BLAME WHEN CORRUPTION HAPPENS,

BY AREA, 2012

The official only

Mostly the businessman

Mostly the official

The businessman only

Both are equally to blame

7 7 7 8 9 9 9

24 23 12

21 20 14

19

65 65 76

67 64 74 67

3 3 2 3 4 2 3

0.3 1 3 1 1 2



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER CAREER GOVERNMENT OFFICERS OR

POLITICAL APPOINTEES ARE MORE SINCERE IN IMPLEMENTING

ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICIES, BY AREA, 2012

Political

appointees

are more sincere

Career gov’t

officers are

more sincere 70 63

74 72 80 78

70 72

24 30

20 24 17 17

24 22

All Areas NCR ANG CLB ILO CEB DAV CDO-I


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GENERAL PUBLIC: COMPARING THE

DEGREE OF GRAFT AND CORRUPTION UNDER

PNOY ADMIN VS PGMA ADMIN, 2012

Q37. If you compare the present administration with that of former President Arroyo, would you say that

the degree of graft and corruption is …?

Base: Those who say there is corruption in the public sector


More now

Less now

Same as before

Same as before

More now

Less now

2% 5%

25% 29%

73% 64%


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: COMPARING THE DEGREE OF GRAFT AND

CORRUPTION UNDER PNOY ADMIN VS PGMA ADMIN,

BY AREA, 2012 Base: Those who say there is corruption in the public sector

More now

Same as before

Less now 75

57

72 71 70 71

84

20

39

24 25 27 28

15

3 3 4 1 2 1



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GENERAL PUBLIC:

EXTENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE PNOY ADMIN’S

ANTI-CORRUPTION EFFORTS, 2012

Q38. How much do you know about the current efforts of the government to fight corruption?



None at all Almost no knowledge

Extensive knowledge

5%

14%

62%

Little

knowledge

15% Extensive knowledge

39%

59%

Little

knowledge

Almost no knowledge

3%

None at all

1%


6



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EXTENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE PNOY ADMIN’S

ANTI-CORRUPTION EFFORTS, BY AREA, 2012


None at all

Almost no knowledge

Extensive knowledge

Little

knowledge

35 25

31 38 42 43

47

60

68 64

60 56 53 47

4

4 3 2 2 2 5

1 2 2



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GENERAL PUBLIC: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

STEPS TAKEN BY PNOY ADMIN TO ERADICATE GRAFT AND

CORRUPTION, 2012

Q39. In your opinion, how effective are the steps being taken by the present administration to eradicate

corruption in our country? Are the steps being taken by government…?



Very effective

Somewhat effective

Hardly effective

Not at all effective

66%

19%

3% 13%

Somewhat effective

52%

25%

6% 16%

Very effective Hardly effective

Not at all effective


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STEPS TAKEN BY PNOY

ADMIN TO ERADICATE GRAFT AND CORRUPTION, BY AREA, 2012


Not at all

Hardly effective

Very effective

Somewhat

effective

10 10 13 19

11 16 16

64 67 65

67

68 59 63

20 21 19 10

16 24 18

3 2 2 4 5 3



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: OPINION ON HOW OFTEN THE GOV’T PUNISHES

CORRUPT GOV’T OFFICIALS, BY AREA, 2012


Almost never

Seldom

Almost all

Often

5 3 5 1 6 7 6 8

22

16

23 21

22 29 31 29

61

63

66 69 56

57 52 55

12 17

5 8 15

7 11 8



ON CORRUPTION

2) SINCERITY IN FIGHTING CORRUPTION


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EXCELLENT SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012

+10

-15

-3

-27

-37

+80

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

Office of the

President

+10

+30

+50

+70

-10

-30


7



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF THE

OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012

-37 -45

-53

-16 -21

-49

+80 +83

+70

+81 +81 +76

+87 +78

ANG ILO DAV All areas NCR CLB CEB CDO-I


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: VERY GOOD SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

Dept. of Health Dept. of Trade

and Industry

+10

+30

+50

+70

-10

Dept. of

Education

+40

+11

+26

+3

+32

+54

+10

+30

+42

+7

+37 +38

0

+61 +60

+51


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DOH,

BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


+37 +38 +37 +41

+33

+52

+61 +60

+77

+65

+52 +57 +59 +55


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF THE DTI,


2009 2012


+38

+30 +28

+39

+45

+57 +59 +57 +56

+65

+58 +60 +56

+64


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DEPED,


2009 2012


0

-1

-21

9

0

9

+51

+62 +60

+50

+32

+47

+40 +40


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: GOOD SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

+10

+30

+50

-10

-30

+22

-13 -17

+5

-17

-32

+9

-7

-18

+4

-6

-23

-8

-1

-25

+39 +36

+30

Senate

Office of the

Ombudsman

Dept. of Interior &

Local Government


8



ON CORRUPTION


OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


-8

-33

-15

+22 +21

-15

+39

+45

+27 +29 +32

+42

+35

+46


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF THE SENATE,


2009 2012


-1

-8

0

+14

-3 -4

+36

+28

+44 +46

+29 +30

+41

+53


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DILG,


2009 2012


-25

-38

-47

-10 -10 -6

+30 +36

+16 +23

+31 +25

+28

+36


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: MODERATE SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012 (1/2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

+10

+30

+50

-10

-30

+19

+48

+24

+13

+40

0

+14

+45

+5 +5

+37

-7

+8

+40

-17

+27 +24 +23

Sandiganbayan Supreme Court

Dept. of Budget &

Management


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: MODERATE SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012 (2/2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

+10

+30

+50

-10

-30

Your City/

Municipal

gov’t

Dept. of Trans &

Comm. +27 +22

-22

+26

-13

+35

-27

+35

-30

+21

+10


ON CORRUPTION


SANDIGANBAYAN, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


+8

-2

+0

+20 +21

+8

+27

+23

+29 +28

+17

+35 +33 +32


9



ON CORRUPTION


SUPREME COURT, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


+40

+46

+29

+42 +42

+31

+24 +25

+16 +17

+23

+31

+17

+39


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DBM,


2009 2012


-17 -16

-41

-10 -7

-17

+23

+33

+10 +6

+33

+16 +20

+17


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF

YOUR CITY GOVERNMENT, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


+35

+22 +19

+51

+65

+21 +21

0

+55

+31 +33 +34

+66

-13


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DOTC,


2009 2012


-30

-38

-47

-25

-9

-24

+10 +15

0

+17

+1

+7 +7 +12


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: NEUTRAL SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

-44

-28

-39 -40

-23

-32

-25

-41

-34 -34

+1

-6

+10

-10

-30

-50

Dept. of Env’t &

Nat. Resources

House of

Representatives


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DENR,


2009 2012


-34

-42 -45

-24 -23 -27

+1

-4

+18 +16

+10 +7

-17 -15


10



ON CORRUPTION


HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


-34

-50

-36

-5

-36

-25

-6

-22

+6

+14

-12

0 +3

+16


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: POOR SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012 (1/2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

-59 -59 -58

-36

-49

-27

-56

-8

-57

-13 -20

-10

-30

-50

-70

Commission

on Elections

Bureau of

Internal

Revenue

-42

-36

-23

-18 -17

-12

Philippine

National

Police


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: POOR SINCERITY RATINGS IN 2012 (1/2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

-66

-45

-66

-38

-55

-31

-63

-32

-65

-39

-21 -26

-10

-30

-50

-70

Land

Transportation

Office

Dept. of

Public Works &

Highways


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF THE PNP,


2009 2012


-17

-28

-23

-16

-5

+1

-12

-31

-19

-4 -5

+3

+18

+5


ON CORRUPTION


COMELEC, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012


-8

-4

-16

-2

-16

-11

-13 -12

-24

-18

-1 -2

-11

-24


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF BIR,


2009 2012


-57

-66 -60

-46 -43

-67

-20

-27

-12

0

-19 -13

-24 -30


11



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF DPWH,


2009 2012


-65 -71 -71 -70

-56 -52

-21

-8

-30

-20

-32 -36

-24 -30


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF LTO,


2009 2012


-39 -40

-55

-37

-24

-48

-26 -30

-35

-7

-15

-29 -26

-29


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: BAD SINCERITY RATING IN 2012

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2012

-75 -74

-68 -72

-69

-46

0

-10

-30

-50

-70

Bureau of Customs


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SINCERITY RATING OF THE BOC,


2009 2012


-69 -75 -76

-64

-30

-72

-46

-55

-42 -39

-33

-46 -47 -42


ON CORRUPTION

3) GOVERNMENT EFFORTS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: “THE GOVERNMENT CAN BE RUN WITHOUT

CORRUPTION” OR “CORRUPTION IS PART OF THE WAY THE

GOV’T WORKS”, 2000 TO 2012

The gov’t can

be run

without corruption

Corruption

is part of

the way gov’t works

55 57 56 60 60 56

49 44

50 59

43 42 44 40 40

43 50 56

50 41

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


12



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: “THE GOVERNMENT CAN BE RUN WITHOUT

CORRUPTION” OR “CORRUPTION IS PART OF THE WAY THE

GOV’T WORKS”, BY AREA, 2012

The gov’t can

be run

without corruption

Corruption

is part of

the way gov’t works

61 52

68 64

47 56 59

39 48

32 36

52 44 40



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS GENERAL PUBLIC: “THE GOVERNMENT CAN

BE RUN WITHOUT CORRUPTION” OR “CORRUPTION IS PART OF

THE WAY THE GOV’T WORKS”, 2012


33%

65% 59%

41%

The gov’t can be run without corruption

Corruption is part of the way gov’t works

The gov’t can be run without corruption

Corruption is part of the way gov’t works


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES ON “IT IS NOW EASIER FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS

TO BID ON A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT TO GET INFORMATION

ABOUT THE BIDDING,” 2007 TO 2012

*NET Agreement: % Agree minus % Disagree.

54 57 53 60

21 16 19

22

23 26

26 16

'07*** '08** '09*** '12****

Agree

Undecided

Disagree


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHERE WOULD YOUR COMPANY GET

INFORMATION ABOUT BIDDING FOR GOV’T CONTRACTS,

2012

48

41

27

20

20

12

Newspapers

Internet

Inside information/tip

Television

Word of mouth from family/friends

Radio


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHERE WOULD YOUR COMPANY GET

INFORMATION ABOUT BIDDING FOR GOV’T CONTRACTS,

BY AREA, 2012

Newspaper Internet Inside info. Television Radio Word of mouth

48

41

36

45

51

64

48 45

52

35 38

34

44

36

23

15

24

34 37

39

26

9

37 34

21

12

22

17 16 15

23

29

23 21

19

6

18

9

19

13 14 14



ON CORRUPTION

4) PROSECUTION OF HIGH-PROFILE CORRUPTION CASES


13



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: OPINION ON THE CURRENT PACE OF THE TRIAL

OF SELECTED CORRUPTION CASES IN GOV’T, 2012

Might not succeed, done TOO QUICKLY

Carefully moving at

RIGHT PACE MUCH TOO SLOW

Graft vs PGMA: NBN-ZTE

Graft vs Ben Abalos: NBN-ZTE

Graft vs Mike Arroyo: allegedly anomalous PNP helicopter sale

Malversation of funds vs

ex-PAGCOR Chair Genuino:

Donated rice

Plunder vs Maj. Gen. Garcia

Perjury and Falsification of

Public Docs vs V. Garcillano:

“Hello Garci”

17

15

12

8

8

6

29

29

21

25

11

22

56

56

66

6654

81

71


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: THE ON-GOING TRIALS OF SOME CORRUPTION

CASES ARE CONDUCTED FAIRLY OR UNFAIRLY, 2012

FAIR NEITHER FAIR NOR UNFAIR UNFAIR

Graft vs PGMA: NBN-ZTE

Graft vs Ben Abalos: NBN-ZTE

Graft vs Mike Arroyo: allegedly anomalous PNP helicopter sale

Plunder vs Maj. Gen. Garcia

Perjury and Falsification of

Public Docs vs V. Garcillano:

“Hello Garci”

76

71

71

67

68

67

18

22

23

25

25

24

5

6

6

7

5

10

Malversation of funds vs

ex-PAGCOR Chair Genuino:

Donated rice


ON CORRUPTION

5) ENTEPRISES SOLICITED FOR BRIBE


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR BRIBE, 2012

Getting local gov’t permits/licenses

Assessment/payment of income taxes

Getting national gov’t permits/ licenses

Complying with import regulations incl. payment of

import duties

Supplying gov’t with goods/ services

Collecting receivables from gov’t

Availing of gov’t incentives

Any of seven listed bribes 80

31

27

19

17

14

13

5


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR

ANY OF SEVEN LISTED BRIBES, 2005 TO 2012

68

61 57

61

71

60

50

'03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE:

GETTING LOCAL GOV’T PERMITS/LICENSES, 2000 TO 2012

55 54

50

41

36 33

40

49

32 31

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


14



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: ASSESSMENT/PAYMENT

OF INCOME TAXES, 2000 TO 2012

52 50

43

39

30 29

33

46

40

27

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: GETTING NATIONAL

GOV’T PERMITS/ LICENSES, 2000 TO 2012

42

34 37

28 28 29

37

47

32

19

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: COMPLYING WITH

IMPORT REGULATIONS INCL. PAYMENT OF IMPORT DUTIES, 2000

TO 2012

17

10

18

13

21 22 25

31

27

17

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


SUPPLYING GOV’T WITH GOODS/ SERVICES, 2000 TO 2012

15 14

18 15 16

18

22

29

22

14

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


COLLECTING RECEIVABLES FROM GOV’T, 2000 TO 2012

9 8

13 11

18 16

20

24

20

13

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


AVAILING OF GOV’T INCENTIVES, 2000 TO 2012

6 4

10

5

10 11 13

22

14

5

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


15



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR ANY OF SEVEN LISTED BRIBES,

BY AREA, 2012

58

36

31

47

56

47 50



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: GETTING LOCAL GOV’T

PERMITS/LICENSES, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

55 54

50

46

32

26

45

12

33

39

21

42

20

24

33

19

48

24

37 37

24

60

22

46

29 28

39

19

42

23 25

37

23

32 29

26

ANG ILO NCR CLB CEB DAV CDO-I


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: ASSESSMENT/

PAYMENT OF INCOME TAXES, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


52 50

43 42

38

23

36

19

22 24

37

33

20

24

29

23

34

24

36

32

35

55

18

41

32

28

50

25

37

32

43

33

13

28

22

30


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: GETTING

NATIONAL GOV’T PERMITS/ LICENSES, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012 '00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


42

34

37

32

25

9

33

11

23

30

25

36

21 22

27

22

43

33

39

30

21

59

14

42

27

19

39

20

40

22

25 23

14

20 20

16


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SOLICITED FOR A BRIBE: COMPLYING WITH IMPORT

REGULATIONS INCL. PAYMENT OF IMPORT DUTIES,

BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012 '00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


17

10

18

14 16

2

25

12

24

19

12

28

13

23

16

7

31

17

25

18

13

41

18

27

14 12

40

19

30

14

17

20

9

28

10 9


ON CORRUPTION


SUPPLYING GOV’T WITH GOODS/ SERVICES,

BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


15 14

18

13

18 18

15

3

17

29

19 18

8

13

28

18

22

18

24 24 23

32

6

25

28

11

21

13

30

17

27

15

5

18 21

18


16



ON CORRUPTION


COLLECTING RECEIVABLES FROM GOV’T,

BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


9 8

13

10 12 13

18

7

15

26

23

15

11 13

28

15

19

16

19

30

20

27

10

21 20

16

22

16

22

13

27

14

6

11 14

22


ON CORRUPTION


AVAILING OF GOV’T INCENTIVES,

BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012 '00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


6 4

10

4 6

2

9

3

9

17

11 11 13

9 11

9

13

17

14 14

9

25

5

21

15

2

14

9

18

10

19

5

2

8 7 9


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: REPORTING OF BRIBE-SOLICITATION,

2005 TO 2012 Base: Those Who Were Solicited for a Bribe

8 7 11 14 9 9

92 93 89 86 91 91

'05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

Reported bribe-solicitation

Did not report bribe-solicitation


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: REPORTING OF BRIBE-SOLICITATION,

BY AREA, 2012 Base: Those Who Were Solicited for a Bribe

Reported

bribe-

solicitation

Did not

report

bribe-solicitation

8 14 16

6 5 11

6

92 86 84

94 95 89

94



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: REASONS FOR NOT REPORTING

BRIBE-SOLICITATION, 2012

Base: Those Who Were Solicited for a Bribe But Did Not Report It, 91%

Nothing would be done anyway

Cannot prove anything

Afraid of reprisal

Too small a thing to bother

Do not know how/whom to report

It’s a standard practice not to report

45

39

34

26

25

21

20

13

6

Will spend much

Don’t want to betray anyone

It is embarrassing


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: REASONS FOR NOT REPORTING

BRIBE-SOLICITATION, 2005 TO 2012

Q73. IF DID NOT REPORT: Why did you not report this? (ENCIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY)

Nothing would be done anyway 60% 69% 69% 79% 75% 45%

Cannot prove anything 46 50 45 61 50 39

Afraid of reprisal 43 54 49 55 51 34

It is too small a thing to bother 38 44 47 52 48 26

Do not know how or whom to report 28 34 35 40 44 25

It is standard practice anyway

not to report the incident 43 52 48 57 46 21

Will spend much 32 44 45 59 50 20

Do not want to betray anyone 17 29 27 29 32 13

It is embarrassing 12 19 18 24 23 6

‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘12

Base: Those Who Were Solicited for a Bribe But Did Not Report It


17



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PART OF THE COMPANY THAT IS MOST

VULNERABLE TO BRIBERY, 2012

Q44. In your sector of business, which part of a company is most vulnerable to bribery? Please rank your

answers from the MOST VULNERABLE (1).

Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Private Sector

Rank 1 Rank 6

(Most vulnerable) (Least vulnerable)

50

19

12

10

5

1

15

24

6

18

25

4

10

21

8

18

19

8

7

12

8

20

16

11

5

7

11

12

9

28

5

3

30

3

7

22

Procurement

Sales & marketing

Top management

Finance

Logistics

Human resource mgt


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PART OF THE COMPANY THAT IS MOST

VULNERABLE (% RANK 1) TO BRIBERY, BY AREA, 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Private Sector

Procurement Sales &

marketing

Top mngt. Finance HR mngt Logistics

64

32 29

42

54 53

32

16 17

30 26

15

21 22

8

20

13

18 18

2

20

5

17 20

3

9

14 13

2

10

1 5 4

7 3 0.3 1

3 2 4



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SECTORS THAT ARE MOST VULNERABLE TO

CORRUPTION, 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Private Sector

60

53

42

27

25

21

17

13

9

9

8

3

Construction

Mining & quarrying

Government services

Forestry

Transportation/communications/storage

Trade

Finance

Ownership of dwellings & real estate

Electricity, gas, & water

Manufacturing

Agriculture and fishery

Other private services


ON CORRUPTION

6) TRANSACTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: TRANSPARENCY OF TRANSACTION

PROCEDURES OF THE CITY/MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES,

2009 AND 2012

16 15

58 58

22 23

5 2

'09*** '12****

Definitely Transparent

Somewhat Not Transparent

Somewhat Transparent

Definitely Not Transparent


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WHETHER THE PROCESS OF BUSINESS

PERMITS/LICENSES RENEWALS IS EASIER OR HARDER NOW

THAN 3 YEARS AGO, 2009 AND 2012

Much easier now

Not changed

Somewhat easier now

Somewhat harder now

19 18

38 37

28 32

11 9

4 3

'09*** '12****

Much harder


18



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: THE COMPANY’S EXPERIENCE IN USING AN

INTERMEDIARY IN ITS RENEWAL OF BUSINESS

PERMITS/LICENCES, 2009 AND 2012

Always used

Uses only now

Never used

Used before not now

Uses from time to time

58 64

10 8

25 20

1 2 6 6

'09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WILLINGNESS TO PAY TWICE AS MUCH TO

DOUBLE THE VALIDITY PERIODS OF GOV’T ISSUED

LICENSES/PERMITS, 2012

Q62. How willing are you to pay twice as much to double the validity periods of government issued

licenses/permits?

Very much willing

Somewhat willing

Not much willing

Not willing at all

40%

23%

16%

21%


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WILLINGNESS TO PAY TWICE AS MUCH TO

DOUBLE THE VALIDITY PERIODS OF GOV’T ISSUED

LICENSES/PERMITS, BY AREA, 2012

Very willing

Somewhat willing

Not much willing

Not willing at all

49

21 23

44 52

34 34

20

28 24

26 20

27 21

13

29

18

15 12

17

14

18 22

35

15 15 22

29



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: INTERNET-BASED GOVERNMENT

TRANSACTIONS THE COMPANY HAS DONE, 2012

56

55

53

48

31

26

SSS: Online payment

BIR: eFPS (Electronic Filing & Payment System)

BIR: Online Registration System

PHILHEALTH online services

PhilGEPS: Get info on bidding opportunities

BOC: E2M (electronic to

mobile) Customs

Automated Process


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: HAVE YOU EVER SUBMITTED A BID FOR A

GOVERNMENT CONTRACT? BY AREA, 2012

Submitted bid

Have not

submitted

bid

32 38

16 17

31 36 36

30

68 61

84 83

69 63 63 70



ON CORRUPTION

7) PRIVATE SECTOR CORRUPTION


19



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN THE

PRIVATE SECTOR, 2000 TO 2012

A lot

Some

A little

None

14 9 13 9 10 9 8 8 9 11

39 44

43

34 37 34 34 35 36 37

43 44 41

49 48 53 53 52 48 45

4 3 3 8 5 5 5 5 7 7

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


THE PRIVATE SECTOR, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

14

9

13

10

12

4

11

13

9

8

4

8

13

9

8

11

7

12

10

7

1

9

7 7

8

9

7

14

5

12

8

13

12

10


7

12


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES VS. GEN. PUBLIC: EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN

THE PRIVATE SECTOR, 2012

None

A lot

Some

A little

None A lot

Some A little


45% 37%

11% 7%

37%

38%

7%

16%


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: NUMBER OF COMPANIES IN THE SAME LINE OF

BUSINESS THAT GIVE BRIBES TO WIN PRIVATE SECTOR

CONTRACTS, 2000 TO 2012


6 5 5 6 6 6 5 5 4 555

18 23 25 20 21 16 17 17 19

22

47 48 46

46 46 45 46 45 47

43

20 17 16

18 16 20 20 19 16

19

8 7 7

10 11 14 12 13 12 10

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

Almost all

Most

Few

Hardly any

None


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES SAYING “MOST/ALMOST ALL COMPANIES IN

MY LINE OF BUSINESS GIVE BRIBES TO WIN PRIVATE SECTOR

CONTRACTS”, BY AREA, 2000 TO 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Public Sector

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


38

28

24

28

30

26

30

21

23

29

25

29

38

18

33

21 22

26

18

39

18

27

22 22

27

18

22

24

29

23

20

22

31

22

29

35


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: MEDIAN PERCENTAGE OF CONTRACTS ALLOTED

AS A BRIBE FOR A PRIVATE BUSINESS CONTRACT, 2000 TO 2012

Q43. In instances when bribery happens, what percentage of an average contract is allotted for bribes to

win private business contracts?

2000* 10%

2001* 15

2002/03* 10

2003/04** 10

2005*** 10

2006*** 10

2007*** 10

2008** 10

2009*** 10

2012**** 10

Base: Total Who Say Companies in Their Sector Allot Percentage of Contract for Bribes to Win Private Sector Corruption


20



ON CORRUPTION

8) BUSINESS EFFORTS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES ON: “A PERSON LIKE ME CANNOT DO ANYTHING

TO REDUCE CORRUPTION IN THE GOVERNMENT,” 2007 TO 2012

NET Disagreement computed as % Disagree minus % Agree.

Agree

Undecided

Disagree

29 33 33 27

4 6 5

6

67 61 61 67

'07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES ON: “A PERSON LIKE ME CANNOT DO ANYTHING

TO REDUCE CORRUPTION IN THE GOVERNMENT,” BY AREA,

2012

NET Disagreement computed as % Disagree minus % Agree.

Agree

Undecided

Disagree

20 26 25 26

32 31

45 3

14 6 3

10 7

4

76

60 69 71

58 62 51



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EXPECTED CHANGE IN NET INCOME, IF

CORRUPTION IS REDUCED TO THAT OF SINGAPORE,

2001 TO 2012

Positive change

No change

Negative change

Not aware

53 60 60 57 56 52 50 51 52

32

31 29 27 30 37 41 37 33

1

2 3

5 5 4 3 5

4 13

7 8 11 8 7 5 7 10

'01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: CONTRIBUTION TO PAY TO FUND A PROGRAM

THAT WOULD HALVE PUBLIC-SECTOR CORRUPTION IN 10

YEARS, 2000-2012

% willing to contribute

2000* 61 3%

2001* 70 5

2002/03* 74 5

2003/04** 71 5

2005*** 77 5

2006*** 72 5

2007*** 65 5

2008** 72 5

2009*** 71 5

2012**** 67 5

Among willing to contribute: median % of net income willing

to contribute


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SPENDING IN THE LAST 2 YEARS TO COMBAT

FRAUD AND CORRUPTION IN OWN COMPANY, 2007 TO 2012

1 million ++ 500,000 - 999,000 200,000 - 499,000 100,000 - 199,000

61 61 59 57

9 11 12 12

10 9 11 12

6 5 6 4 4 6 3 4 3 3 3 2 6 5 5 7

2007*** 2008** 2009*** 2012****

Nothing

< 10,000

10,000 - 99,000


21



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: THE COMPANY’S CONTRIBUTION TO ANY

PRIVATE ANTI-CORRUPTION PROGRAM IN THE

LAST 2 YEARS, 2007 TO 2012

Nothing

< 10,000

80 78 81 76

7 10 6 10

5 4 5 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0.3

2 0.4 1 1 2 2 1

2007*** 2008** 2009*** 2012****

1 million ++ 500,000 - 999,000 200,000 - 499,000 100,000 - 199,000


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WAYS FOR BUSINESSES TO REDUCE

CORRUPTION, 2008 TO 2012

Use

honest

business

practices

Never

pay

bribes

Know the

laws/rules

of gov’t

transact.

Join an

anti-

corrupti

on CSO

Report

corruption

to mass

media

Campaign

vs corrupt

political

candidates

2009 2012 2008 84

78

65

22

15 15 11

79 76

62

26

15

22

10

82 81

61

19 17 17 13

Report gov’t

corruption

to the

Ombudsman


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: EFFECTIVENESS OF SOME SUGGESTIONS TO

REDUCE CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT, 2012 Somewhat Not effective Very effective effective at all

83

82

77

73

67

54

52

38

27

16

14

21

23

27

32

39

48

49

2

3

3

4

5

14

9

14

24

Impose stiffer penalties: corrupt gov’t people

Show prominent corrupt persons are put in prison

More transparent gov’t bidding

Impose stiffer penalties: people who bribe

Broadcast/publish where to report corruption

Monitor closely election expenses of candidates

Require fewer signatures on papers

Substantially increase gov’t salaries

Privatize gov’t corporations


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: FREQUENCY OF PUNISHING

CORRUPT EXECUTIVES IN OWN SECTOR OF BUSINESS,

2003/04 TO 2012


Almost always

Often

Seldom

Almost never

29 31 34

27 30 25 33

20 22

20

21 22

20

27

37 28 23

29 27

29

30

13 14 11 12 11 13

9

'03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: WILLINGNESS TO CONTRIBUTE TO AN

EMPOWERMENT FUND, BY AREA, 2012

Q127. The government is setting up an “Empowerment Fund” to support civil society organizations (CSOs) in organizing

citizens and communities to engage with government in the implementation and monitoring of government, participate in

planning and the budget process of government. It is expected that “Empowerment Fund” initiative will help in reducing corruption and enhancing transparency of government transactions. The government plans to tap private sectors, donor

agencies, and even CSOs to contribute and provide counterpart funds to the Empowerment Program. How much is your

company willing to contribute to the Empowerment Fund?

Willing to contribute 27% 28% 13% 29% 28% 27% 38% 23%

Not willing

to contribute 48 48 69 47 49 44 29 46

Don’t know etc. 19 16 15 17 19 22 25 21

7 areas NCR ANG CLB ILO CEB DAV CDO-I


ON CORRUPTION

9) HONEST BUSINESS PRACTICES


22



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: NUMBER OF COMPANIES IN THE LINE OF

BUSINESS THAT DEMAND/ISSUE DEMAND RECEIPTS, KEEP ONE

SET OF ACCOUNTS, AND PAY TAXES HONESTLY, 2012


Demand receipts

for all payments

for expenses

Issue receipts for

all revenues

Keep only one

set of accounts/

books

Pay taxes

honestly

45

31 20 21

44

47

42 41

10 21

32 29

1 1 5 6

0.1 0.3 1 2

Almost all

Most

Few

Hardly any

None


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: ALMOST ALL/MOST COMPANIES IN OWN LINE OF

BUSINESS PAY TAXES HONESTLY, 2003/04 TO 2012


Almost all

Most

16 19 18 18 18 17 20

39 38 40 38 40 42

42

'03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS PAY TAXES HONESTLY, BY AREA, 2012


Almost all

Most

16 23 23 20 23

27 16

44 43 44

41 41 39

35



ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS ISSUE RECEIPTS FOR ALL REVENUES, 2003/04 TO 2012


Almost all

Most

38 34 36 34 37

31 31

47

48 44 45 44

45 47

'03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS ISSUE RECEIPTS FOR ALL REVENUES, BY AREA, 2012


Almost all

Most

31 33 33 24 25

38 30

49

37 39 54 55

42

40



ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS KEEP ONLY ONE SET OF ACCOUNTS, 2003/04 TO 2012


Almost all

Most

23 24 24 22 20 19 21

43 45 39 39 43

40 401

'03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


23



ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS KEEP ONLY ONE SET OF ACCOUNTS, BY AREA, 2012


Almost all

Most

23 15

20 18 26 24

14

45

36

39 43

43 40

25



ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS DEMAND RECEIPTS FOR ALL PAYMENTS,

2005 TO 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Private Sector

Almost all

Most

50 50 49 53

45 45

43 38 37 36

42 44

'05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION


BUSINESS DEMAND RECEIPTS FOR ALL PAYMENTS,

BY AREA, 2012 Base: Total Who Say There Is Corruption in the Private Sector

Almost all

Most

51

37 44 42 42

50 38

44

52 39 43 51 35

45



ON CORRUPTION

10) THE BUSINESS CLIMATE


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SATISFACTION WITH THE NATIONAL

GOVERNMENT IN PROMOTING A GOOD BUSINESS CLIMATE,

2007 TO 2012

53

35 43

69

20

18

19

18

27

47 38

12

'07*** '08** '09*** '12****

Satisfied

Undecided

Dissatisfied


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PERCENT SATISFIED WITH THE

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT IN PROMOTING A GOOD BUSINESS

CLIMATE, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012

30

44

53 54

47

69

58

73 78

74 69 68



24



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: SATISFACTION WITH YOUR CITY GOVERNMENT

IN PROMOTING A GOOD BUSINESS CLIMATE, 2007 TO 2012

Satisfied

Undecided

Dissatisfied

64 64 63 64

16 15 16 17

19 20 21 19

'07*** '08** '09*** '12****


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PERCENT SATISFIED WITH THE

CITY GOVERNMENT IN PROMOTING A GOOD BUSINESS CLIMATE,


2009 2012

54

61

77 76

52 55

67 69 73

76

87

44



ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: BUSINESS EXPECTATIONS IN THE

NEXT 2 YEARS, 2000 TO 2012

1 1 3 3 6 5 9 6 9

16 16

30 26 25

40 41

52

33

46

58

36

44 42 40

40 40

32

43

37

24

34

21 23

21

11 10 5

13 5

3 13

3 6 6

3 3 2 3 1 0.1

'00* '01* '02* '03** '05*** '06*** '07*** '08** '09*** '12****

Very Poor

Poor

Fair

Excellent

Good


ON CORRUPTION

ENTERPRISES: PERCENT EXCELLENT/GOOD BUSINESS

EXPECTATIONS IN THE NEXT 2 YEARS, BY AREA, 2009 AND 2012

2009 2012

49

67 65

53 51

72

80

68 66 72

81 76



ON CORRUPTION

www.sws.org.ph

#52 Malingap Street,

Sikatuna Village, Quezon City

Tels: 926-4308, 924-4456, 924-4458, 924-4465

E-mail: [email protected]


ON CORRUPTION

www.sws.org.ph

THE SWS MISSION IS TO GENERATE DATA –

to help eyes to see – Education

to cause hearts to feel – Conscientization

to help minds to understand – Analysis


25



ON CORRUPTION

www.sws.org.ph

Quot homines tot sententiae

As Many Opinions As There are People

the tag 2012 sws surveys on corruptioncancham.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/tag-2012-23... ·...

Documents