What the government seems to be incapable of realizing is that the law of supply and demand has taken over our energy woes. The days of cheap energy are but a lingering memory. Oil will hover at the US$100 per barrel level then break it later. That is a certainty given that global refining capacity is not catching up with the increasing demand of developing countries like China and India with their booming economies.

According to Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes, the purpose of the summit is to come up with "an action plan that will be implemented" to mitigate the impact of rising fuel prices but what kind of action plan will work if we continue to be dependent on imported fuels? The only substantial reductions in energy costs possible for now are those coming out of government’s pockets. Something that the Palace is very vehemently unwilling to do.

Suspending the collection of the 12 percent expanded value added tax (EVAT) on petroleum products, for example, will cut costs by about P4 per liter but reduce government revenues by an estimated P52 billion. That’s P52 billion more that businessmen can spend to becoming more competitive and ordinary people to buy the necessities of life, whose prices are going sky high. In short, it will benefit everybody even those living in and sponging off Malacañang right now.

But the government is already warning that this will only cause our budget deficit to balloon and deprive the country of some vital basic services. Thus, we would be better off if the government keeps the money for itself. In other words, what this administration is saying is that it knows better how to spend the amount involved for the good of everybody. If that is the case, why call for an energy summit in the first place?

If we are talking of the entire trillion-peso national budget, what is P52 billion, after all? It is a lot of money but it is less than 5 percent of the entire national budget. We can all agree that we lose a lot more of that to graft and corruption. And, there was a time when petroleum products were exempt from the EVAT.

As if to pacify the calls for scrapping or suspending the EVAT on petroleum products, we were instead given a 1 percent reduction in the tariff, which is doubly insulting. First, the reduction is a far cry from the potential benefits of deleting the EVAT imposition altogether. Second, the President is fully empowered by the Oil Industry Deregulation Law to scrap the entire 3-percent tariff but she chose not to. The show of generosity is nothing more than a five billion-peso public relations move.

There are, of course, other things that can be done. For one, the national government can lower or scrap royalties on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). And, if there is one thing we have plenty of, it is LPG. Encouraging LPG substitution for gasoline and coal use whenever possible makes sense since it reduces dependence on imported fuels. Cutting government royalties in the Malampaya project, for instance, will translate into a more than one-peso per kilowatt-hour reduction in the electric bills within the service area of the Manila Electric Co. But again, government is unwilling to cut its share of the royalties because that translates into more money problems for the national government.

The bottom line is that this administration will be willing to do anything for us as long as it does not cut into its revenues. That is the kind of caring, sharing and morally upright administration we find ourselves with. I think we will be better off being governed someplace else.