"Paano mo mapapadali ang pagkuha ng permit kung mabagal ang pag-i-issue nito?" ani ni Ka Kolektor.
"Hwag po kayong mag-alala, ser, kumpare ko yung assistant nung head nung government agency," sabi ni Mang Lalagay.
"Balita ko eh hindi lang mahigpit kundi malupit pang magbantay at matinding magpatupad si Kabesa." "Sigurado ka bang makakalusot ang ating modus operandi?," dugtong ni Ka Kolektor.
"Ayos na po, ser," sabat ni Mang Lalagay. "Ako ang nagbayad sa matrikula nang isa sa mga anak ni kumpareng assistant, na inaanak ko, at pinsan ko yung asawa niya. Saka may conference na dinaluhan yung head nila ngayon sa Kuala Lumpur. Walang pong sagabal, tiyak yon."
"Ganoon ba?" ani ni Ka Kolektor. "Ok. Basta kapag nabuking ha, nasa Batanes ako at may ipina mumudmod na de lata at bigas. Tandaan mo, idi-deny ko ito, Mang Lalagay. Wala dapat akong sabit. Maraming babagsak kapag nadamay at nalabas ang pangalan ko," dagdag na paliwanag ni Ka Kolektor.
"Akong bahala, at wala pong dapat ikabahala, ser," sabi ni Mang Lalagay.
"Ngayon naman, paano naman yung kontrata ko sa Geo extraction projects? Nabasbasan na ba ang contract granting authority (CGA)? May nakapagsabi sa akin na padadaain daw ito sa public bidding. Handa na ba yung round trip paid vacation with allowance para sa CGA et al?," tanong ni Ka Kolektor.
"Sure thing na, Ka Kolektor," ani ni Mr. Behind-the-Scene. "Wala na ring problema sa issue ng Eminent Domain kasi nakita na yung side natin sa benepisyong makukuha nila sa pagpayag na pag-aralan at pag-exploit ng isa sa mga proctected tribal areas nila.
"Good," malumanay na bigkas ni Ka Kolektor. "Hangga't protektado ng Saligang Batas ang domestikong pagmamay-ari ng mahigit anim na pung porsyento ng pag-aari ng anumang kumpanya sa Filipinas," sabi ni Ka Kolektor, "protektado rin tayo sa ating mga ginagawang kalokohan at walang magiging efficiency sa ating ekonomiya dahil ang Saligang Batas, sa madali't sabi, ay patuloy na magiging pinakamalakas na sagabal sa tunay na market competition, at kung gayon innovation, sa ating ekonomiya."
"Kung matututo at masasanay tayong tumayong mag-isa gamit ang sarili nating mga paa, at tatanggalin natin ang natatanging na sagabal na iyon, uusbong, sasagana, at masisiguro natin sa susunod na henerasyon ang pagyabong na makakabuti at makakapagpataas sa GDP per capita income ng bawat Filipino at makapagbibigay ng kakayahan sa mga lokal at pribadong korporasyon dito sa Filipinas na makipagsabayan sa anumang kompetensya sa pandaigdigang kalakalan," dagdag ni Ka kolektor.
"Gayon pa man, hangga't walang masyadong pagbabago, kailangan munang kumita sa anumang pamamaraan," sabi ni Ka Kolektor.
"Ano po, ser?" tanong ni Mang Lalagay.
"Hindi ko na ito ipapaliwanang sa iyo dahil hindi mo ito maiintindihan, Mang Lalagay," ani ni Ka Kolektor.
"Yes, po, ser," walang muwang na tumango si Mang Lalagay.
"Mr. Behind-the-Scene, i-arrange mo ang meeting ko kay kay Rep Rip Off," utos ni Ka Kolektor.
"No problem, Ka Kolektor," sabi ni Mr. Behind-the-Scene. "Nasa payroll na po natin siya."
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Friday, March 7, 2008
It Takes Outsiders to Stir our Bureaucracy
Earlier, the Philipine Air Transportation Office (ATO) was dissolved and was replaced by the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP) because the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) downgraded the Philippines's air rating to category 2.
Now, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is moving to demolish all fishpens in Laguna de Bay in light of a recent study by the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre (SEAFDEC) that warned of an impending ecological catastrophe of Laguna de Bay due to unregulated and dangerous levels of waste dumped into the watershed.
Just as it took a foreign regulatory agency i.e., the FAA to nudge the Philippine national government to act regarding the country's air rating, it also took a stern warning from an interregional governmental body within ASEAN for appropriate national authorities to act in saving the life of Laguna de bay.
It is sad that serious policy shifts seem impossible to take place or hard to enact if incentives or criticisms come from within, and only becomes effective when supported and backed by incentives or criticisms from external sources.
Indeed, it is quite embarassing and disheartening when outside entities (such as the FAA and SEAFDEC) are needed to make genuine socio-political changes for the common good in our country.
Now, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is moving to demolish all fishpens in Laguna de Bay in light of a recent study by the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre (SEAFDEC) that warned of an impending ecological catastrophe of Laguna de Bay due to unregulated and dangerous levels of waste dumped into the watershed.
Just as it took a foreign regulatory agency i.e., the FAA to nudge the Philippine national government to act regarding the country's air rating, it also took a stern warning from an interregional governmental body within ASEAN for appropriate national authorities to act in saving the life of Laguna de bay.
It is sad that serious policy shifts seem impossible to take place or hard to enact if incentives or criticisms come from within, and only becomes effective when supported and backed by incentives or criticisms from external sources.
Indeed, it is quite embarassing and disheartening when outside entities (such as the FAA and SEAFDEC) are needed to make genuine socio-political changes for the common good in our country.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
LLDA: Incompetent and Powerless
Though perhaps no fault of their own, the Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) seems virtually incompetent and powerless to protect Laguna de Bay.
Since Republic Act no. 4850 was passed into law in 1966 and other public acts followed to strengthen the agency's regulatory ability, the efforts of the said agency remains ineffective in halting the degredation of our precious lake and fails to meet the criteria for sustainable development in South East Asia's largest lake.
By its own admittance, the LLDA website itself quoted from Philippine Star that:
"Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza couldn't agree more, [and is] calling LLDA a 'useless agency' that allowed the lake to deteriorate in the last 41 years"
http://www.llda.gov.ph/news/jan4_08_GMA_urged_to_certify_LLDA_reform_bill.html
But why is it so? A January 9, 2008 report from Philippine Star (the web address above) seems to suggest that lack of public participation, as well as minimal local government involvement, diminishes the capability of the lake agency to combat pollution and prevent the destruction of the lake's ecology.
Suppose it is the case that lack of public participation and local government involvement are to blame. But what about the competency of policies made to direct the protection of the lake? Were those policies made by individuals with much needed environment-focused experience or were they just plain bureaucratic decisions?
What is the qualification of its officials? Hopefully, they are not appointees based upon patronage and are experts who are willing to accept some significant criticism from those who are used to actions which is detrimental to the lake environment. If appointees delegated to protect the environment were there just to have employment, out of gratitude, and fails to walk the walk with those who have high stakes in the lake's survival, what is their use?
What actions have the agency taken to inform the public surrounding the lake region regarding the adverse effect of continuing disregard for the lake's well-being? The agency has a website and policies made were given formidable technical names. But did the agency involved fishermen, lake polluting industries, and local municipal officials to reverse the disastrous trend? How did the agency enforced its policies?
Let me use the MMDA as a model agency. This agency enforced the metropolis's traffic laws and promulgated tough policies which, in the beginning, were opposed by formidable jeepney unions and other transport groups. The agency persevered and learned from its mistakes. Motorists and pedestrians benefitted and began to see the positive contribution of the agency. And lo and behold, good things comes to those who perseveres! The agency was able to somehow regulate the chaotic traffic of the metropolis and had credible results. Later on, it received international recognition for its efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, motorists and pedestrians recognize the policies passed by the MMDA, even though it may be to their inconvenience because they believe in the long run, they also would benefit.
Back to the said lake agency, how can it protect the precious lake if in the first place, it does not know how to use the carrot and stick approach or the combination of both towards lake residents and institutions in order to change their habit? What incentives have the agency created in more than forty (40) years of its existence and what policies have they enacted to curtail the negative effects of the growing industrialization of local territorial units in pursuit of economic development? If those policies were at least preventive, such policies would have stopped deterioration, if not make improvements. By being incompetent and powerless, the agency had become part of the problem rather than the solution.
The LLDA ought to learn from its failures, purge unqualified appointees, and act tough. Yes, the public must be involved, more funds may be needed, and new powers delegated. But one cannot convince the public if agency officials do not take the grassroot route. The agency must be reminded that it was created for the purpose of leading the drive towards that goal and so far, it has not only failed to do so in the domestic sense; adding salt to the wound, a regional intergovernmental organization dedicated to studying fisheries in ASEAN has discredited its ability to protect our precious Laguna de bay.
Since Republic Act no. 4850 was passed into law in 1966 and other public acts followed to strengthen the agency's regulatory ability, the efforts of the said agency remains ineffective in halting the degredation of our precious lake and fails to meet the criteria for sustainable development in South East Asia's largest lake.
By its own admittance, the LLDA website itself quoted from Philippine Star that:
"Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza couldn't agree more, [and is] calling LLDA a 'useless agency' that allowed the lake to deteriorate in the last 41 years"
http://www.llda.gov.ph/news/jan4_08_GMA_urged_to_certify_LLDA_reform_bill.html
But why is it so? A January 9, 2008 report from Philippine Star (the web address above) seems to suggest that lack of public participation, as well as minimal local government involvement, diminishes the capability of the lake agency to combat pollution and prevent the destruction of the lake's ecology.
Suppose it is the case that lack of public participation and local government involvement are to blame. But what about the competency of policies made to direct the protection of the lake? Were those policies made by individuals with much needed environment-focused experience or were they just plain bureaucratic decisions?
What is the qualification of its officials? Hopefully, they are not appointees based upon patronage and are experts who are willing to accept some significant criticism from those who are used to actions which is detrimental to the lake environment. If appointees delegated to protect the environment were there just to have employment, out of gratitude, and fails to walk the walk with those who have high stakes in the lake's survival, what is their use?
What actions have the agency taken to inform the public surrounding the lake region regarding the adverse effect of continuing disregard for the lake's well-being? The agency has a website and policies made were given formidable technical names. But did the agency involved fishermen, lake polluting industries, and local municipal officials to reverse the disastrous trend? How did the agency enforced its policies?
Let me use the MMDA as a model agency. This agency enforced the metropolis's traffic laws and promulgated tough policies which, in the beginning, were opposed by formidable jeepney unions and other transport groups. The agency persevered and learned from its mistakes. Motorists and pedestrians benefitted and began to see the positive contribution of the agency. And lo and behold, good things comes to those who perseveres! The agency was able to somehow regulate the chaotic traffic of the metropolis and had credible results. Later on, it received international recognition for its efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, motorists and pedestrians recognize the policies passed by the MMDA, even though it may be to their inconvenience because they believe in the long run, they also would benefit.
Back to the said lake agency, how can it protect the precious lake if in the first place, it does not know how to use the carrot and stick approach or the combination of both towards lake residents and institutions in order to change their habit? What incentives have the agency created in more than forty (40) years of its existence and what policies have they enacted to curtail the negative effects of the growing industrialization of local territorial units in pursuit of economic development? If those policies were at least preventive, such policies would have stopped deterioration, if not make improvements. By being incompetent and powerless, the agency had become part of the problem rather than the solution.
The LLDA ought to learn from its failures, purge unqualified appointees, and act tough. Yes, the public must be involved, more funds may be needed, and new powers delegated. But one cannot convince the public if agency officials do not take the grassroot route. The agency must be reminded that it was created for the purpose of leading the drive towards that goal and so far, it has not only failed to do so in the domestic sense; adding salt to the wound, a regional intergovernmental organization dedicated to studying fisheries in ASEAN has discredited its ability to protect our precious Laguna de bay.
Who and What is trapo?
I must have manners and ought to define what is trapo.
Ergo, here is a simple definition of the word "trapo" in Pihilippine politics.
Trapo (system): 1 traditional politics - a corrupt system of governance
2 A political culture or way of political thinking which emphasize personal relationships, family connections, and patronage systems ABOVE the rule of law.
Trapo (person): 1 traditional politician - a corrupt elected government official
2 Individual or group of individuals that support, and are influenced by traditional politics.
3 Individual or group of individuals whose way of thinking is based upon traditional politics.
What are their characteristics and tendencies?
Trapo Officials
- desire to keep their position or power even if it means circumventing or trampling constitutional limits
- use public position to acquire private gains
- utilize public funds to generate a good public image
- obtain public approval by claiming full credit to public works
- in general, do not adhere to the rule of law
- disregard the law to maintain a good public image
- are committed to the rule of law only if or when it is convenient or consistent with their whims (e.g., nonfeasance)
- lack the courage to challenge and always kowtows to public opinion to preserve political position
- with rare exemptions, usually call for and encourage extra-legal and extra-constitutional means of political action
Trapo Citizens
- question an individual's right to free speech and expression especially if it is critical of corrupt political practices
- use constitutionally protected means of political action and speech to create misinformation and false impression (e.g., journalistic sensationalism)
- threaten individuals with harm because of their opposing opinion
- always use personal arguments (e.g., ad hominem arguments) rather than rational arguments in debating political issues
- use uncorroborated facts and claims it as credible information
- are blind to the faults of officials even if it is based upon credible evidences (e.g., the Marcoses and their cronies in Leyte and Ilocos Sur)
- vote based upon bloodties and debt of gratitude regardless of questionable qualification, NOT ability, credible qualification, integrity, and character
- trade principles for favors
Trapo System
- is a patronage system not securely bound by regulating laws
- abounds with dynasties; politics is family business and profession
- encourages substantial public apathy towards political participation
- makes people rely on and surrender to political leaders the full responsibility of making policy; ergo, the public neither participate in the making of nor even try influencing official policy
- tramples the ideas of the many and support the ideas of the few in power
- enables incumbent politicians to think that they know the ultimate way of governance and only through their own policies will everything improve.
- is where legitimacy is based upon charisma, not the rule of law
- exists when elections are heavily influenced by personal and blood ties to candidates, NOT issues, past policies, and platforms of candidates
- triumphs when government positions are distributed based on personal relationships with influential officials, not on merit
Ergo, here is a simple definition of the word "trapo" in Pihilippine politics.
Trapo (system): 1 traditional politics - a corrupt system of governance
2 A political culture or way of political thinking which emphasize personal relationships, family connections, and patronage systems ABOVE the rule of law.
Trapo (person): 1 traditional politician - a corrupt elected government official
2 Individual or group of individuals that support, and are influenced by traditional politics.
3 Individual or group of individuals whose way of thinking is based upon traditional politics.
What are their characteristics and tendencies?
Trapo Officials
- desire to keep their position or power even if it means circumventing or trampling constitutional limits
- use public position to acquire private gains
- utilize public funds to generate a good public image
- obtain public approval by claiming full credit to public works
- in general, do not adhere to the rule of law
- disregard the law to maintain a good public image
- are committed to the rule of law only if or when it is convenient or consistent with their whims (e.g., nonfeasance)
- lack the courage to challenge and always kowtows to public opinion to preserve political position
- with rare exemptions, usually call for and encourage extra-legal and extra-constitutional means of political action
Trapo Citizens
- question an individual's right to free speech and expression especially if it is critical of corrupt political practices
- use constitutionally protected means of political action and speech to create misinformation and false impression (e.g., journalistic sensationalism)
- threaten individuals with harm because of their opposing opinion
- always use personal arguments (e.g., ad hominem arguments) rather than rational arguments in debating political issues
- use uncorroborated facts and claims it as credible information
- are blind to the faults of officials even if it is based upon credible evidences (e.g., the Marcoses and their cronies in Leyte and Ilocos Sur)
- vote based upon bloodties and debt of gratitude regardless of questionable qualification, NOT ability, credible qualification, integrity, and character
- trade principles for favors
Trapo System
- is a patronage system not securely bound by regulating laws
- abounds with dynasties; politics is family business and profession
- encourages substantial public apathy towards political participation
- makes people rely on and surrender to political leaders the full responsibility of making policy; ergo, the public neither participate in the making of nor even try influencing official policy
- tramples the ideas of the many and support the ideas of the few in power
- enables incumbent politicians to think that they know the ultimate way of governance and only through their own policies will everything improve.
- is where legitimacy is based upon charisma, not the rule of law
- exists when elections are heavily influenced by personal and blood ties to candidates, NOT issues, past policies, and platforms of candidates
- triumphs when government positions are distributed based on personal relationships with influential officials, not on merit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.png)