The Year That Was

By Rolo B. Cena
The Gulf Files
Dumaguete Star Informer
24 July 2011

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia – After one year from being sworn to office, President Aquino delivered his second State of the Nation Address (SONA) in a joint session at the House of Representatives last Monday. As in most State-of-the-Nation Addresses, that was by far a high profile presentation of figures and statistics vis-à-vis reality that were suggestive of, to say it conversely, achievements of the administration to date.

Philosophically, allow me set my own parameters in assessing his performance: Good governance, public finance and economy, graft and corruption, education, environment, peace and order, and health. To put things in proper perspective, let us objectively tackle each parameter in order to get through the assessment vividly:

Undoubtedly, the President is an example of honesty, pure and good intentions. While the world feasted on his purchase of a “second hand luxury car” early this year, no one from his detractors realized that his intention was pure and simple: Transparency. His overall drive to eliminate these malignant species from the public service is alone an indicator of good governance. Unconsciously, however, he failed to anticipate the negative behavioral responses of the Arroyo people in the service against the young Aquino administration’s reform programs. When he created the Truth Commission, no truth ever came out because he wasn’t able to contain the Supreme Court, a government body majority ruled by Arroyo appointees.

The P11B savings the government announced in the last quarter last year was achieved because his administration spent lower than the budgeted plan. It was an example of sort but truly insufficient to use as key performance indicator. These savings resulted from a narrowed public spending as his commitment to the people. Moreover, business programs like public-private partnership was a copy-pasted, Adobe edited version of the build-operate transfer program of the previous administration.

Holistically, Aquino’s stern drive against graft and corruption became his selling point from day one. Given 10 being the highest, I could’ve rated him 9. However, the rating gradually declined to below median when the questionable appointment of friends, classmates, drinking and shooting buddies became the qualification of appointing officials to sensitive posts.

Along this line, what is new? Aquino’s predecessors did the same: Arroyo appointed a classmate of her husband to the Ombudsman to protect and preserve her greed; Estrada appointed drinking buddies and gambling mates; Ramos appointed relatives, allies, and friends; Cory appointed political supporters and friends in her journey to the Palace; Marcos appointed his allies, relatives and friends to complete his political sojourn. What else is new in the Philippine political system?

This is cronyism expressed in different tone; it is the same dog with different collar.

In addition, Aquino appointed Human Rights lawyer and advocate Leila de Lima to the Department of Justice. The feisty De Lima commenced her works with full support from the President. However, shortly thereafter, Aquino had for several times weakened or reversed de Lima’s recommendations particularly in cases where friends or political allies are severely involved.

Department of Education’s K1 + 1 scheme could have been fairly a good indicator for an improvement. However, the lack of consultations from all stakeholders not only drew negative criticisms from the academic and public sectors; it at the same time thwarted the program’s implementation. More to this, the reduction in the budget for all state colleges and universities added fuel to the fire. These drastic moves caused his rating to decline in this critical area.

In the area of environment, nothing’s changed: No new environmental-friendly preservation programs and initiatives are instituted. Categorically, the same programs are in place since the time Aquino was installed to power.

The peace and order situation of the country has moderately changed from good to bad. Not to mention the situation in the South brought about the Abu Sayaff phenomenon, in August last year, the world witnessed how senior police officer hijacked a tourist bus and killed at least eight Chinese tourists. Sans his demand for reinstatement, the failure of the government to abort the merciless killing affected the peace and order situation of the country. It even sent us to travel ban advisories from various countries. Categorically, the President failed to correct and address this stigma the world associated with us.

Nothing is significant in the area of health yet. The Reproductive Health Bill could have been an indicator, but eventually, this will only address the growing population concern of the country. Health issues have to be addressed accordingly. What fails him in this respect is the absence of a short-term plan to address the rising protests led by the “Pajero-troubled” Catholic Church.

If I may opine, the President’s overall rating is barely passing. Personal biases that governed my judgment may have ruled my process but the reason is obvious: In most areas, he consistently mismanaged to outwit his “path to righteousness.”

Just expressing my eighth wonder: How does Aquino differ from Arroyo, Estrada, Ramos, and (Cory) Aquino from day one of service? How do you rate the President then?