by Alex Roldan
The real challenge for the Aquino administration is how to improve the lives of forty percent of the Filipino population who are seen as living below poverty line.
Much attention was given to the statement of P-Noy during his state of the nation address (SONA) that defined the priorities of his government. The reactions were mixed and opinions were diverse, but the persistent question remains: where do we go from here? Are we content with just whacking those who committed grave abuse during the last administration, or do we focus ourselves on the rather difficult but “matuwid na daan”?
I agree that those who have made this country miserable should be made to answer and face the consequences of their actions, as this is important to enhance accountability of public officials. Corrective measures should be implemented to make our bureaucracy more efficient and prevent wastage of the country’s meager resources. However, we should not forget that the bulk of the task is for the country to lift itself from the mess it is currently in.
P-Noy is not a magician who can make things happen in an instant with the mere wave of his wand. Moreover he is not exempt from the pressures on the leadership to which all human beings are heir to. He can make mistakes, just like anybody else. Hence people’s active participation is needed to help him achieve his task. I believe, the key challenge to his leadership at this point in time is how to make people participate in the whole process of nation building, nay, let’s call it “re-building”!
But then again, this requires clear direction and achievable goals where the different sectors of civil society can focus on and come together with their efforts. Technocrats call this Development Agenda which defines the direction and end-points of his government so that everyone in this country, in his/her own capacity, can lend a hand. Or to put it succinctly, a definition of what is the “matuwid na daan”, how to get there, for everyone to trek and follow.
The elemental task of convincing the people to believe and follow P-Noy’s track is critical. In the words of some, governance is 95% perception and 5% actual work. Meaning, all governments in order to become effective and to maintain order in the nation, the leader must have the trust of the majority of the people. This can only be achieved and sustained if the people have a clear understanding of what the leader wants to achieve and they see concrete benefits from the trust and support that they give.
In our case, it is definite to say that the absence of a clear development agenda makes it hard for P’Noy’s government to sustain high trust ratings that he currently enjoys. As euphoria subsides, as always, people expect concrete results. It is here that local government units play a very important role.
LGUs are in direct contact with the people and everything they do would naturally reflect on the nation’s leadership. They represent the government and therefore, their performance is vital to maintain trust and support of the population. But sadly, this was not the case in many past governments which relied mainly on their mouthpieces to assert their value. They forgot that the public’s negative perceptions about governments stem from the weakness of many LGUs to produce good results. No assertion of good performance can be more adequate than the actual condition as seen by those living in different localities.
We are still far from making our LGUs effective catalysts for change. The concept of local governance, sadly, still depends on who can effectively manage the internal revenue allotment to sustain political hold on the interest of the few. It is more about maintaining power through political control than managing the change that are responsive to the people’s pangarap.
I am a firm believer that meaningful change, whatever that may be, can start in P-Noy’s administration if we start changing the face of the local government units. P-Noy’s government must invest in improving the capabilities of the LGUs not only in planning their own matuwid na daan” by defining their local development agenda, but most importantly get the necessary support so that they are able to produce excellent results. LGUs should be capable of planning a sustainable future of their respective communities – not mainly relying on internal revenue allotments, but more importantly from locally generated revenues as a result in the improvement of the local economies.
In short, local executives should operate their jurisdiction in business-like manner. They should invest in projects and services that generate economic dividends or profits as you may call it, such as the re-classification of the actual use of lands, proper collection of local taxes and the like.
On the other hand, the BIR should help local governments improve their available resources for investment by helping collect the proceeds from the development and utilization of national wealth, simplify rules on business tax and accurate computation of VAT shares and other that are due to them. Thus, denying the LGUs the reason why they cannot improve the lives of their constituents.
If we want to fast-track the country’s development, we should start from where it should be – the LGUs.
For comments, e-mail to: roldanalex@yahoo.com
