This article
is purely opinion by the writer.
In the past 5
years, members of the Romblon Discussion List (RDL), a cyberspace
discussion group had repeatedly expressed discontent of the living
condition in their home province of Romblon. Many listers believe
that: leaders are corrupt; practice of vote buying is rampant; that
poor economic condition is due to neglect by leaders; there is flagrant
disregard for the protection of the environment; there is severely
handicapped medical health system for the poor; lack of enforcement
of zoning laws; lackadaisical attitude on the part of politicians
and government officials; self-interest above public interest by politicians;
lack of province-wide economic and eco-tourism development initiatives;
and etc.
There is abundance
of criticisms against politicians, either personal or issue oriented.
While this could be healthy in airing out issues, it could also be
uncomfortable for many who could be directly or indirectly affected.
It could particularly be disconcerting if contentions are unsupported
and speculative. Romblon is a small province, almost everyone is blood
related to a politician, and it is difficult to be unconnected to
an issue no matter how insignificant.
I personally however
find short of suggestions how to address or improve situations. It
is therefore the intent of this simple analysis to lead a process,
dialogue, and discussions that hopefully could benefit our province.
It is also greatly hoped that this piece finds its way to our local
government leaders.
ARE ASSERTIONS
MADE IN RDL VALID?
It is difficult
to ascertain. There are no evidences presented except hearsays and
conjectures. But do these criticisms, comments, and reports represent
the cross section of the Romblon population? In the strictest statistical
sense, they do not. However, comments are common enough that it could
even be a "baby representation" of what is happening in
the national level.
Members of RDL
are perhaps mostly from the upper crust of the Romblon population.
"Upper crust" is hardly the appropriate term but I am referring
to those who had better opportunity to get higher education and who
had the earlier chance to go abroad or get good jobs in the city.
Comments from these people therefore constitute majority of the pie.
On October 2000,
I talked to a farmer in Tablas. He supports a family of four. He has
a one-hectare farm producing few cavans of rice annually. During off
farming season he yokes his carabao to pull a sledge, goes to a river
and shovels sand or gravel to sell to a nearby road construction project.
He told me, "Ganito na lang ang buhay, nakaka remedyo din
araw-araw. Pag wala itong pradyek ni mayor walang-wala siguro."
(This is how life is, able to scrounge little money every day. If
not for the mayor's project, probably nothing at all). It might be
a very simple and innocent comment, but to me it summarizes a way
of life of a poor and an opinion of the local government. Does it
mean that the farmer is satisfied? Perhaps he is or perhaps not. But
we all can say that his life could have been better if our government
officials were more mindful of the plight of our poor "kasimanwas".
Or maybe it is all the fault of the farmer.
I'm sure there
are thousands of similar comments. Some could even be very critical
of the government. But what it boils down to is that comment like
the one made by the farmer is encompassed in a bigger context discussed
in RDL, which brings us to the next question.
IS THERE A
NEED FOR CHANGE?
Change happens
all the time, every minute, and every second of the day. I am not
talking about changes occurring naturally. Above all, I am not talking
about changing the price from 500 to 1,000 pesos per vote. I am referring
to changing undesirable culture and system.
Is there a need
for change? Definitely.
Most big corporations
throughout the world have undergone major changes or are undergoing
changes. Governments are not exempt. They too need to change. This
includes governments from national level down to the lowest local
structure. The objective is to be efficient, effective, competitive
and to provide best service to the customer, which is the general
public. It is not a fad, it is reality demanded by socio-economic
and political environment.
Some people believe
that change can be effected by changing guard. I strongly believe
that this will not cut the "balinghoy" and change
will only be superficial and limited. To me change has to be done
within the structure. People within the structure have to initiate
and support change.
WHEN IS CHANGE
NECESSARY?
The necessity
for change is characterized by frustration, discontent, lack of trust,
apathy, and "don't care attitude."
Do we see these
signs now? If they are there, and people still can tolerate then change
is not very likely.
If people could
no longer tolerate, change will definitely happen.
WHERE ARE CHANGE
NEEDED?
Let me just touch
on issues mentioned above:
1) Corruption
- This is not a new item. This is something almost inherent in Philippine
politics and government for many years. This is also not isolated
only in the Philippines but common all over the world and more pronounced
in poorer countries. Definitely, there has to be a culture change
in this area, but corruption is so rooted that it is a way of life.
I am not saying that people should give up. I am saying it will take
time.
2) Common practice
of vote buying - This issue has evolved in time. When I was much younger,
it was sufficient to paste campaign poster/banner on walls to show
support or to openly declare what party people were voting for. Then,
this evolved into feeding voters and supporters during elections.
Then on top of the food, politicians added extra incentive by handing
little cash in an envelope. Then ward leaders became empowered and
were delegated to distribute money. Then it became more of a science,
money were allocated according to number of votes a ward leader can
muster.
If left alone,
it might just correct itself because money is finite. Eventually,
voters will demand for more money that politicians could not afford
and the latter will find cheaper ways of getting votes. And there
is also a limit of available money they can steal from the government.
If you see the math here, a politician should be willing only to spend
no more than the money he/she can steal or get from business people;
otherwise, he/she is not a good corrupt politician. I know there is
no such thing as good politician who is corrupt.
However, I see
a new trend developing by providing visible improvements instead of
vote buying. Providing a gym, basketball court, playground, clinic,
or childcare center to a barrio are examples.
3) Poor economic
condition due to neglect by leaders - In my opinion elected officials
can do very little on this. This issue is complicated, can be world
or nationally economy driven. This is more on the private sector.
Some things that government can do are to make economic environment
friendly by providing tax incentives.
4) Flagrant disregard
for the protection of the environment - The word flagrant is a bit
strong. I don't think elected and government officials intentionally
tolerate destruction of the environment. I believe, they don't have
the proper structure and tools to enforce protection of the environment.
I am certain regulations are in place. In fact, some regulations are
so stringent that I don't know how people and industries can comply
with them. The Philippines has this tendency to follow rules adopted
by other countries like the United States. The latter is a powerful
nation and despite that some of the regulations it passes are detriment
to small business. The Philippines should adopt regulations that are
practical to comply with and enforce. In the same token, local governments
should do the same.
5) Severely handicapped
medical health system for the poor - it is common knowledge that if
a sick person has no money, treatment most likely will be denied.
So someone has to intervene, a relative with money, a politician,
or even doctors who could provide pro-bono services as humanitarian
gesture. If the person has no value, no money, or no vote, mind as
well kiss "Amponggo" good-bye.
This happened
very recently. In a eulogy, a speaker praised the good deeds of the
late Dr. Martin Morgado. He said, "Dr. Morgado is the only doctor
that I know that never denies treatment, especially to the poor".
The speaker added, "some doctors, their first question is, do
you have money?" This comment apparently irritated some doctors
in the audience.
6) Lack of enforcement
of zoning laws - There are no available data to determine extent of
the problem. This subject basically is a lasting impression left by
the Petron issue.
7) Lackadaisical
attitude on the part of politicians and government officials - This
issue is rather too general.
8) Self-interest
above public interest by politicians - This issue is also very general.
9) Lack of province-wide
economic and eco-tourism development initiatives - This is probably
not true. There is what is called the Provincial Physical Framework
Plan (PPFP). It might not be comprehensive enough, but at least they
have something go by. Most of the elected and government officials
I've talked to are believers of strong economy. And who would not
want it? I have yet to hear from someone who would say, "I want
the province to remain poor."
SOME CHANGE
STRATEGIES
If change has
to be initiated, urgency has to be established. This is very important.
Without establishing urgency, no one will be compelled to take action
and support change. This strategy is often used in election campaigns.
To be effective, the sense for urgency needs to be explained in detail.
Educate and persuade
people that getting a gym, basketball court, or a clinic is better
than selling votes. The benefit is lasting. Visible projects are commonly
done in the United States. A mayor would prefer to spend money on
a playground rather than on sewer improvements. A park is visible
and a sewer line is not because it is buried. This is vote buying
in a different form. This is one reason why sewer departments in the
United States were mandated by law to have their own funds because
their projects were always last in the priority.
Lawsuits brought
about by third party normally a nonprofit organization could bring
results. This contributed a lot in the United States in environmental
compliance and started in 1972. I already see this happening in the
Philippines but limited in scope. I believe the MERALCO rate rebate
suit was initiated by citizen's group and another group is suing some
power facilities for burning coal and emitting unacceptable level
of pollutants into the atmosphere. I can almost picture Concerned
Citizens of Romblon (CRR) eventually in this role someday. It is a
form of advocacy, and gets faster results.
Don't let up,
keep the momentum going.
Empower people
like the business sector, concerned citizens; include those who wish
to participate, including the expats.
TAP EXPATS
Tapping expats
for their experience and luring them to invest in their home province
have become a trend for most provinces and even the national government.
For example, President Gloria Arroyo just recently signed the absentee
voting bill into law, promoting the Philippines as a retirement place
for expats, with generous incentives in travel, among others.
Whether we like
it or not, this trend will become a commonly accepted practice. Expats
will have more and more role in the province building. Our leaders
have two options, ignore or take a proactive stance and be one of
the first provinces to partner with the expats. Romblon officials
should take advantage of this new trend and be one of the first to
use this resource.
