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...
No comments:
Post a Comment