To PNoy: The Need for Institutionalization, above all...

So many issues have come out the past few weeks of the administration, the more prominent ones being the latest, involving its failure to resolve the hostage taking incident and the alleged participation of several of PNoy's cabinet members in the Jueteng Payola.

To the President's credit, he's been trying to solve this through the proper means, by creating specific task force groups that will cater to these special concerns. However, one has to wonder, when will the perpetual installment of these agencies stop, considering most of them only duplicate the functions of other agencies.

Governments have been most of the time, in reactive mode, instead of pro-active mode, doing efforts when the damage has already been done, and the effects have become widespread like virus.
Lack of Understanding of Behavior behind Institutions

The directive was set out during the early days of the Aquino administration: stop corruption within the bureaucracy. To his credit, he has instructed the heads of department agencies to review their own ranks to find out their respective needs to fill the necessary scarcities, while his allies in the Senate review the controversies behind GOCC's. To his credit, his Department of Budget and Management Secretary has reverted to a zero based budget management scheme, to review and rationalize the apportionment of funds, based on a logical needs analysis.

But this is merely again reactive, and will just motivate some high ranking government officials to be creative and dynamic in terms of corruption. While it tries to ensure that law captures the rotten acts of these public officials, it only drives cheaters to become artistic in the way they deal with the new laws.

Corruption, if the President knows, is also an issue of behavior. Why does a public official lie, cheat or steal? Many psychologists and analysts could very well come out with well thought explanations, but then again, it falls on the need of the one committing it. We all know that when you work in the public sector, the lifestyle is not that lavish as compared to those working in the private sector. However, a worker in the public sector must not be deprived of his right to a noble and earnest living and to ably provide for his own family. Its just too closed for some to say that since you work in government, you have to work with a scarce salary.

These public officials deserve higher wages, not only because their families need it or to prevent the best practitioners from moving to the private sector, but also because they serve a greater constituency of people, double or triple the amount of clients a private sector official caters to.

If you try to analyze the situation, a marginal increase in the wages of government officials will save us millions or even billions of pesos, compared to the size and magnitude of corruption cases and issues being committed by public officials. Of course, that will not guarantee there will be no corruption, but people generally respond to incentives better than status quo.

Gone out of the window should be the principle that if you do well in public office, that's your job and that's stipulated in the law. Yes, there are performance scorecards I'm sure within each department, but that measure cannot be subjective alone, depending on your boss' personal preference mostly. Performance scorecards should be captured by law, if not by legislation.

The approach has to be carrot and stick, reward for good behavior and certainty of punishment for the bad. The most important thing here is that efforts have to be INSTITUTIONALIZED, not ISOLATED.

Blaming the Institution, but a Mandate Not Delivered

Regarding the President Arroyo corruption issues, it is not the job of the previous administration to pursue its own impeachment, it was the job of the United Opposition. Political Reality is that no group will go against is own. Stop blaming President Arroyo for all those allegations against her administration, President Aquino. Leave it up now to the assigned commissions you have formed to do the prosecution on their own.

Besides, its not Arroyo to be blamed for the bungled Hostage Situation that happened a few weeks back. Its not Arroyo to be blamed for the hasty remarks from the Palace. Its definitely Arroyo to credit for the 7.9% GDP growth during the previous quarter.

It was not Arroyo's vote alone that won her the Presidency in 2004. It was the support of people like you during her Presidential bid in 2004 that made all your present nightmares a reality.

In fact, its not good to disown if you even contributed to the installation of her Presidency. If I even remember it correctly, YOU supported her in the 2004 elections, right? You and your group's failure to ensure accountability to your support and vote then is also your own doing, contributive to the outcome you now oppose.

Regarding your duties then, being in the legislature, without getting any law passed can never be excused by some secondary duty of looking at the budget for checks and balances purposes. The Senatorial and Congressional duties cannot be one dimensional. If you truly were the budget guy in the house and in the Senate, why didn't you file a Fiscal Responsibility Bill at that time?

Your mandate then and now should never be to prosecute President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

"Your mandate is to ensure that we can be a corrupt free country, and if it takes cases to be filed against the former President, we will make sure we will support not the prosecution, but the swift resolution of these cases without my interference from the executive in the process."

You have time to re-assess your previous performance, Mr. President. There's always no harm in looking back, and there's no need for any apology or owing of responsibility

Institutional Efforts must be diversified

There is also a a recently-procured $400 million loan from the World Bank via the ADB to fund the DSWD’s Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program. The program provides cash grants to poor families with the stated intention of helping these families keep their elementary-aged children in school.

I am a strong advocate of the Conditional Cash Transfers Program because it has had a proven track record in terms of improving the education rate in South American countries like Brazil etc., but to spend the entire loan on one strategy to combat poverty is not a wise investment strategy.

You have to look at combating poverty and education on many fronts, that means a diversity of strategies, with the recognition that some may work and some may not pan out well. The intention is good, I must say, but aside from procedural and process questions on the channeling and monitoring of the funds, what if the expansion doesn't work as effectively as the previous one which had a lesser magnitude? We lose the 400 million dollar loan to a very minimal if no return of investment.

What's my point? The $400 million can be spread into a diversity of strategies to combat the problem of poverty, and education being a solution. Some of it can probably go to a Student Loan program, can go to Entrepreneurial Development to capacitate parents to send their children to school, can go to scholarship grants. At least, if one of the many strategies fail, you do not lose that much in terms of monetary investment.

Institutionalization of Reform

Change is such a nice word to hear, such a soundbyte that can capture a large audience and a nice way to begin a new administration, but then again change can only take place if you put institutionalize your efforts.

Institutionalization does not involve one or two strategies alone, but involves multiple strategies that will allow margins of error, and opportunities to minimize its social costs through contingency measures.

At the end of the day, strong Institutions can be the most effective way to bridge the gap between citizens and public officials.

Now that is change in the proper context.

I am Aaron Benedict De Leon, not speaking for Gilbert Teodoro, not for Green Team Pilipinas, neither for Youth Philippines, but for myself...

Political Check: 2 Months into the Aquino Administration

"Nobody controls me. Nobody can influence me much as myself in making personal decisions. I know the consequences of my decisions. I'm ready to face the world regardless if the decisions I make will personally be acceptable to you or not"

Perhaps being outspoken both has its pro's and con's. Some may like what you say, and some may not. At the end of the day, you have to respect their opinion and what you can only do is to provide further clarification on your chosen stand.

Its been 4 months since the Elections, and I must say some are still in election mode. The government is still in election mode, when it comes to delivering the promises to our people. Now is the time we must already be seeing manifestations of the reforms the Aquino campaign vowed to bring to our people. However, it seems that most of the factions in the Aquino administration are busy protecting their own turfs, with several sides trying to outdo themselves in terms of claiming whose got the most power in the current government.

THE MEDIA PRESIDENT

A problem that I see is that PNoy has been trying to impress too much on the media. But while the intent maybe good in terms of transparency, he has submitted himself to his weakness, of being grossly insensitive with such worded statements that are not representative of the rightful diplomacy a President should possess. Quoting him, he mentioned in one of his speeches:

“Our problems now, in two or three years we can say that they are laughable when we recall that they were not that grave.”

This was a statement made a few days after the Hong Kong incident, with the knowledge that the eyes of the international media is still on us, and any move he will be making will be tightly monitored by the foreign press. He maybe taken out of context, just like his occassional smiles during the onslaught of the Hostage taking incident, and others might interpret it that the killing of foreign nationals in 2 to 3 years time will be a laughing stock to all of us.

The President has to make full use of his spokespersons to communicate whatever plans he has, or whatever intentions this government may have on several pressing issues. Knowing his weaknesses, his media people should also protect him from further scrutiny, by not allowing too many ambush interviews which may catch PNoy off-guard.

The President's image has to be protected. He knows he does not speak so promisingly well. He knows his controversial statements would sound bad to the ears of his own supporters and pleasing to the eardrums of the oppositionists. He must act with more wisdom and strategic vision.

THE AQUINO SUPPORTERS

I have nothing against those who campaigned for PNoy during the elections, because that is the kind of freewill that democratic exercise will allow. In fact, it is one way of showing citizen participation, which is crucial in a growing democracy.

What I hate now about these people is their outright disowning of their support, given their demands were not immediately met. Most of the noisy groups have even gone as far as threatening the President of their withdrawal of support once these things are not immediately resolved.

You were the ones responsible in bringing him to the Presidency, and now you disown him because he has not acted right away or does not agree with you on a single or a few issues? This is a classic example of betrayal, and never going to be an act of nationalism or for the country's sake. You rode with him in the wave of popularity, and now leaving him at a time when his administration is going through a tough situation.

I suggest that PNoy supporters take the example of Juana Change, who criticized the President, but made sure her support is still with him. You were the ones who installed him, and now, you have to take the lead in making him accountable utmostly to your votes. Don't try to pass the blame to us who did not vote for him to take the lead, because that is a responsibility that is inherent in your expression of support.

You campaigned for a message of change, and change did not stop in the transition of power. Your role has only begun. The responsibility of changing this country never stopped when Aquino was installed as President, and you know that.

THE AQUINO OPPOSITIONISTS

There has been so much goodwill to this administration, that only a few, and I mean one or two in the senate, are actually in the minority. If you want change too, change the faces of those who represent the alternative of this government. Congresswoman Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is NOT a NEW FACE of CHANGE, and in fact, is being riddled also with issues of corruption on her own. I will agree that the previous President had done so many good things for the country, in terms of managing the economy, but you said it yourselves that you wanted to have change, and change is not best represented by CGMA.

Perhaps, the busiest critiques of the current administration would have to be the Greenies, whose support remain with Gilbert Teodoro. The question is, where is Gibo Teodoro in the midst of all of this? That I will not attempt to answer.

It is but normal to criticize the current administration, but what alternatives do we intend to push forward? Do we rely on the old vanguards whom some of us criticized in the past, to do the job for us?

This Opposition has to be progressive, and while it may have a leeway of criticizing the current administration, it must offer sound alternatives being brought to the fold by more credible people who best represesnt the change oppositionists want for the country. There is no use in bringing back old names if it would create divisiveness amongst our countrymen. We must offer NEW alternatives, not OLD ones.

TO ALL OF US

We all have a country to run, despite our roles in the political system. The President has the mandate to govern over a greater constituency, but that does not mean people in the opposing side will not have a constituency of support from communities it has attracted because of the noble idea it brought to the system.

The Idea of Nation Building is not solely confined in Malacanang, but those in Malacanang must see to it that it serves all colors, whether you're green, orange, red or even yellow. President Aquino, you are no longer President of the Yellow Army, but the President of the Philippines, including the Red, Blue and White. All of your actions do not affect only your supporters, but even all of us who did not support your candidacy. You can never earn our trust by mere projection. Earn it by dealing with our criticism in the most professional, diplomatic way you can.

To the oppositionists, let us not be reduced to name calling or branding, because that gets us nowhere. Yes, we can ventilate, express that, but if the action becomes a habit already, then that is not a practice of responsible democracy. We have a role to play in this society, regardless if we don't have the veneer of a government position to do something. We have to find our niche in society, and play our roles responsibly well. We cannot just be a replicate of the previous opposition that did nothing but destroy the Arroyo administration's image. We must push forward alternatives that would help people, not help those who are willing to take advantage of the situation.

This country is ours to run, may it be through our simple expression of support or criticism, through the responsibility we place tou ourselves for our country, through the fostering and caring of all ethnicities in the country, through the love we display for our communities and families, through the belief we have in ourselves that we can do something for this country. Let us not ruin the country's image because of our disappointment towards the failure of the current administration, and instead, help in the building up of the Philippines, regardless if Government helps us in turn or not.

"This country is our responsibility. Let us be responsible for it."

My name is Aaron Benedict De Leon, not speaking for any other person, but myself.