Hopes for the New Year

President Benigno S. Aquino III begins his seventh month in office on January 1 with his approval ratings comfortably high and broad public support for the major initiatives of his administration. It adds a hopeful note for the New Year that this support – as well as from foreign governments and international business - could be major factors in the success of the President’s major initiatives – particularly those relating to revving up the economy, turning around the culture of corruption, forging greater security and peace across the entire archipelago.

None of this should becloud perceptions of the administration’s shortcomings during the last six months – for these have been also all too real and palpable.

There has been considerable sobering in what was once a triumphalist posture of the administration. After a succession of setbacks – notably in the hostage-taking crisis in August last year, the defeat of his signature executive order creating a Truth Commission, and the chorus of criticism of the administration’s legal acumen and the poor quality of paper work pouring out of Malacañan — the administration speaks more softly now. There is now a clearer appreciation of limits to power, and hopefully more willingness to acknowledge mistakes when they are made.

Within the country, if public opinion polls can be believed, President Aquino has lost none of the popularity that he enjoyed upon his accession to office. There has only been a bracing realization by the public that running a country of 94 million people and with a long history of fractious government is not going to be a cakewalk for the new government.

The general belief here and abroad is that with President Aquino at the helm, the Philippines has its best chance of succeeding in a full-scale program of reform. And it is more important than ever for President Aquino to stay the course of reform, and not veer away from his road map. If the reform effort remains in place, we should be able to raise all the money needed to modernize national infrastructure, revive industry and agriculture and to take the economy to high growth, tiger status levels.

But it’s a big IF. Beyond the horrid lapses in decision-making and managerial competence, there has been a lack of coordination/communication among the various agencies of the executive branch. Teamwork has been sorely missing as rivalries have divided the key figures in the administration, and so-called groups have competed for the president’s trust and support. Much of this is due to the poor vetting and hiring of ineffective and inexperienced team members, some of whom are totally unaware of the nuances of governance. And there is still a huge gap in administration arising from the failure to fill thousands of posts in the bureaucracy, which cannot be deferred further without sapping administrative effectiveness.

In our foreign relations, which are so vital to national success in this day and age, initiatives have been scattershot and lacked focus on priorities. Handling of the Nobel Prize issue was inept, unwittingly showing our government as both craven and unprincipled. To date, no road map for foreign policy has been set, only planned trips. There has been too much temporizing on appointments, highlighted by the rumors about who will be the next foreign secretary. The DFA is totally demoralized from being in suspended animation. Ambassadorial appointments have been slow, and worse only political ambassadors have been appointed so far.

The nation has been luckier in the constitution of the economic team. Purisima at finance and Domingo at DTI have raised confidence within the business community. The performance of the Central Bank under Gov Tetangco has provided a good backbone for the economy to move forward. One multinational banker and CEO has told me repeatedly that Messrs Tetangco and Purisima have made the Philippine economy credible. This makes the internal intramurals to discredit Purisima all the more regrettable. The administration and the country need people like him.

Problem of message or substance?

From what I’m hearing in business and academic circles, the primary question as we enter the New Year is this: Are the fumbles and deficiencies of the past six months a problem of message or substance? Do they underline a weakness that could derail presidential initiatives in coming years?

Administration supporters say that the fumbles are just the result of failing to explain effectively what the Administration is doing and to gather the members of the administration into one cohesive force. As a result, the much-maligned Communications Group is taking much of the heat. 

But the idea that this is only a problem of public relations does not wash. There are those who believe that the problem is something more – it has to do with management, even the basics of Organization 101.

Fleshing out the administration has been trying and more difficult than the election victors had anticipated. The quality of public management could be significantly improved if the administration could persuade more able managers in the private sector to join the government.

The problem, if not resolved soon, raises a question of administrative effectiveness — whether the executive branch, as presently constituted, can effectively deliver on the president’s agenda and election promises.

Relations with Congress and Judiciary

To the credit of the President, he has been successful in his relations with Congress and in managing the politics of his office. Both houses of Congress elected leaderships that are sympathetic to his agenda and respectful of his mandate. The legislature approved the first Aquino budget in fairly record time, and with most of the administration’ spending priorities intact. And some of his Cabinet appointments have received confirmation from the Commission on Appointments after some initially testy skirmishes.

Remarkably, however, the President and his Cabinet has not pushed before this Congress a full-scale legislative agenda, whose approval it considers essential to its success. No Administration-certified bills have yet been filed. The most that it has publicly endorsed is the Reproductive Health Bill, which ironically is principally authored by the House Minority Leader.

Administration-certified bills are a telltale sign of a government’s agenda and philosophy of governance. We have not seen this yet.

This hole in the presidential record stemmed from the early decision by Malacanang to pursue initiatives mainly through executive orders, not through legislation. This is how it faltered in its anticorruption initiative – it created the Truth Commission by executive order, instead of turning to Congress for a law or by going after the previous administration through the Department of Justice and its various agencies.

The fact that the executive orders have been poorly researched and not well-grounded on law has contributed to the confusion and failure. Members of Congress and pundits have roasted this lack of legal acumen to penetrating effect.

The souring of relations with the Supreme Court and judiciary is another major shortcoming, which one hopes can be surmounted soon. Publicly castigating the high court as an “Arroyo court” – out to protect the former president — looks hopelessly amateurish and puerile. According to some legal friends and acquaintances, the administration is weak on the facts and the law on this issue. It is no win.

The Way Forward

All this underscores the need for the Executive to get back on track in its agenda of reform. The obvious way forward is through effective policy making and decision-making and not populist slogans. It is not on the campaign trail anymore.

AS both Filipinos and international observers have observed, the pluses of the Aquino reform agenda rest on four pillars and initiatives.

First, the fight against corruption, and changing the culture that abets it.

Second, the search for peace and an end to the Communist insurgency and the Muslim secessionist rebellion in the South.

Third, the alleviation of mass poverty through the dynamic development of the national economy and the more equitable sharing of the fruits of economic growth. It is time for growth to spread to all levels of society.

Fourth, the protection and promotion of human rights and the rule of law.

These overarching goals cannot be advanced by mere proclamations and motherhood statements. They can only be realized through effective policy making and policy implementation. The department and agencies of government must be adequately led and properly manned to do the job. Absent that, the high-minded reform agenda will wither in the vine. President Aquino will not be able to deliver on his campaign promises.

It would help a lot if the President could create a coordinating mechanism or mechanisms for shaping policy responses and actions on the key fronts: the economy, security and peace, foreign affairs, and social development. Perhaps, Indonesia’s coordinating minister set-up might be looked into as a solution. This way, knee-jerk reactions to problems and issues can be avoided. Problems can be thoroughly studied. And the counsel and input of experts can be tapped.

Such a coordinating system can serve to keep the administration’s eye always on the ball: REFORM.

Cautionary Tale of Reform

 There’s a cautionary tale from the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that can be instructive and enlightening on how the Aquino Administration should move forward. FDR also came into conflict with the US Supreme Court over the pursuit of his New Deal reform agenda. The high court struck down many of his administration’s initiatives. And FDR sought to change the composition of the court so it would be more supportive of his program. His campaign to pack the court with more friendly justices proved a failure. Eventually, the American public sided with the Supreme Court instead of with FDR, even though the president was enjoying high popularity. They put more weight in checks and balances rather than in giving a carte blanche to a popular and well-meaning President.

But this is not the end of our story. Eventually, while he did not get the carte blanche he desired, FDR became one of the most effective U.S. Presidents and the New Deal, as we know, became one of the most successful and dynamic reform programs in history.

The lesson, I think, is plain. In a constitutional democracy, you can’t make reform in one go, or by bulldozing everything around you. Reform is step by step, and not instant gratification. It takes dedicated and hard-nosed administration.