When fuel prices rise, our government’s instinct is to provide subsidies, fare discounts, temporary relief. Those are important because they buy us time, calm frustration, and absorb the impact for the most vulnerable households. However, they don’t fix the underlying problem.
In March 2026, inflation jumped to 4.1% from 2.4%, driven largely by higher import costs as the peso weakened, making fuel more expensive on top of rising global oil prices linked to tensions in the Middle East. A conflict thousands of kilometers away quickly translated into higher transport costs, more expensive goods, and tighter household budgets.
That speed of impact plainly tells us how highly exposed our country is.
The country imports around 98 percent of its oil requirements, according to energy data from the Department of Energy, making global shocks a built-in risk to our system. So every time oil prices spike, Filipinos feel it almost immediately. And because we pay for fuel in dollars, a weaker peso means we pay more, even before global prices move.
This is why subsidies, while necessary in the short term, are not a real solution. They treat the symptoms, yes, but not the cause. The structural problem remains untouched.
Take transport. When fuel prices go up, jeepney drivers earn less, commuters pay more, and businesses pass on higher logistics costs. It creates a chain reaction across the economy.
But the deeper issue is that the country has no strong alternatives. A limited and fragmented mass transport system forces millions to depend on road-based, fuel-dependent mobility. Without reliable rail networks or efficient public systems, we will always be at the mercy of oil shocks.
There are a few lawmakers who have long pushed to shift the country away from a car-centric transport culture and toward a more efficient, people-focused mass transportation system. Senator Alan Peter Cayetano has consistently argued that the country needs sustained investment in mass transport, such as railways in Mindanao and other parts of Luzon as economic stabilizers. A functioning, interconnected public transport system reduces dependence on oil, lowers commuting costs, and shields households from sudden price swings.
But transport is only half the story. The other half is energy. As long as the Philippines relies heavily on imported fuel, it remains vulnerable.
Both Alan Peter Cayetano and his sister Senator Pia Cayetano have pushed for a more strategic shift toward indigenous and cleaner energy, backed by concrete policy proposals. They have proposed prioritizing locally sourced natural gas like Malampaya in power supply agreements, enforcing fair and competitive market rules so indigenous energy can compete with imported fuel, accelerating renewable energy development to diversify the country’s energy mix, and strengthening transparency and oversight in energy procurement and pricing.
There is also a governance dimension to this whole situation. Periods of crisis often justify rapid spending and emergency interventions. But while these are necessary, they also create opportunities for inefficiency and misuse if transparency and accountability are weak.
So the question is not just how government responds, but how well it manages that response. What this moment shows us is that the Philippines has relied too heavily on short-term fixes, while postponing the harder, structural reforms.
Subsidies can ease the pain but only systems can prevent it from happening again. And that is the choice policymakers face today: to continue managing crises as they come, or to finally build an economy that is less vulnerable to them.
Because the next global shock is not a question of if. It’s a question of when.###