LONG-TERM GOVERNANCE: NOT THE SOLUTION TO PH PLIGHT

 

“Ombudsman wants COA memos out of public eye” (Inquirer)

“’Significant decliner’ Philippine ranks 116^th in the global corruption index” (Philstar)

What do the two headlines above tell us?

Plagued by corruption for decades, the Philippines, according to the 2022 Corruption Perception Index, got a dismal score of 33 out of 100, ranked 116^th among the 180 countries, and has remained one of the “significant decliners” among the Asia-Pacific countries.

One seeming corruption expediter is the controversial ombudsman, Samuel Martires. Wanting to keep the COA reports out of the public eye on government agencies for probable corruption, he drew flak lately from activist groups which asked why the supposed country’s “top graft buster” would advocate “greater opaqueness rather than transparency”.

Three years ago, the same ombudsman restricted access to SALNs – a mechanism for transparency and accountability for public officials. “Doing away with it is like [giving] carte blanche to unscrupulous government officials in using the people’s money,” said House Deputy Minority Leader Rep. France Castro. The filing of SALNs is required under Republic Act No. 6713 with the Ombudsman considered the custodian of such documents.

These two headlines tell us about the sorry state of our country where corruption is rampant and pervasive, and where public trust and confidence are eroded and undermined. They also raise some crucial questions: Is there hope for our country to eradicate corruption in our lifetime? Is long-term governance the answer to our plight?

LONG-TERM GOVERNANCE

Dealing with multiple political, social, and economic problems, such as corruption, poverty, inequality, and natural disasters, among others, the Philippines has lagged behind its ASEAN neighbors in terms of economic growth. Some observers have attributed this to the instability and inefficiency of the Philippine democracy characterized by frequent elections, weak institutions, fragmented parties, and polarized politics. They have suggested that our country may benefit from a system of long-term governance – the same leader or ruling party stays in power for a long period without regular or competitive elections.

Long-term governance can take various forms, such as dictatorship, absolute monarchy, or one-party state. Some examples are China, Singapore, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Cambodia. But is long-term governance the answer to our country’s plight? What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of this system? How feasible and desirable is it for our country to adopt it?

ADVANTAGES

Long-term governance can provide stability and continuity in policies and institutions which may foster economic growth and social development. A long-term leader or ruling party can implement consistent and coherent policies that can address long-term problems and goals. They can avoid policy reversals or disruptions that may result from frequent changes in leadership or government.

For example, Singapore has been led by the same dominant party, the People’s Action Party, since 1959, and has transformed from a poor and underdeveloped colony to a prosperous and modern city-state.

Long-term governance can reduce political conflicts and violence, as there is no need for power struggles or opposition movements. A long-term leader or ruling party can maintain order and security in the country by eliminating or suppressing any threats or challenges to their authority. They can also prevent or resolve any disputes or tensions among different groups or regions in the country. For example, Vietnam has been ruled by the same Communist Party since 1975 and has achieved political stability and national unity after decades of war and division.

Long-term governance can allow for quick and decisive actions in times of crisis or emergency, as the leader or ruling party does not have to consult with other branches of government or the public. A long-term leader or ruling party can mobilize resources and implement measures that can address the urgent needs and demands of the country. They can also adapt to changing circumstances and realities by adjusting their policies and strategies accordingly. For example, China has been ruled by the same Chinese Communist Party since 1949 and has shown remarkable resilience and agility in dealing with various challenges such as the Sino-American split, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the environmental crisis.

Long-term governance can promote innovation and modernization, as the leader or ruling party can pursue long-term visions and ambitious projects without fear of losing popularity or support. A long-term leader or ruling party can foster a culture of creativity and excellence in the country by investing in research and development, encouraging entrepreneurship, and supporting cultural diversity. For example, India has been governed by Narendra Modi since 2014 and has emerged as a major power in terms of economy, diplomacy, and innovation.

DISADVANTAGES

Long-term governance can lead to corruption and abuse of power, as the long-term leader or ruling party faces little or no accountability or checks and balances from other institutions or the public. A long-term leader or ruling party can amass a huge personal fortune, manipulate the constitution and the electoral system, appoint their family and cronies to key positions, and use the military and the police to suppress dissent. For example, under 14 years of Martial Law from 1972 to 1986, which was a period of dictatorship, repression, and corruption, Marcos Sr. amassed a huge personal fortune. Here are excerpts from The Guardian article: The $10bn question: what happened to the Marcos millions?

“In the early hours of a February morning in 1986, Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos flew into exile…The Marcoses had seen the crisis coming and been able to prepare their escape, so when they landed that morning at the Hickam USAF base in Hawaii, they brought plenty of possessions with them.

“The official US Customs record runs to 23 pages. In the two C-141 transport planes that carried them, they had packed: 23 wooden crates, 12 suitcases and bags, and various boxes, whose content included enough clothes to fill 67 racks; 413 pieces of jewelry, including 70 pairs of jewel-studded cufflinks… and more than 27m Philippine pesos in freshly-printed notes. The total value was $15m.

“The reality…was that Ferdinand Marcos [Sr.] had amassed a fortune up to 650 times greater… he had accumulated up to $10 billion while in office.”

Long-term governance can violate human rights and civil liberties, as the leader or ruling party may suppress dissent and criticism, censor information and media, and control education and culture. A long-term leader or ruling party can impose their ideology or agenda on the country by restricting or manipulating the freedom of expression, association, and assembly. For example, Cambodia has been ruled by Samdech Hun Sen since 1985 and has experienced political repression and human rights violations. Hun Sen has banned the main opposition party, jailed its leader, and cracked down on civil society and media. He has also controlled or influenced the education and culture of the country by promoting his version of history and nationalism.

Long-term governance can create resentment and resistance among the people, especially if they are dissatisfied with the performance or policies of the leader or ruling party, or if they aspire for more democracy and participation. A long-term leader or ruling party can face opposition or challenges from various sectors of society, such as ethnic minorities, religious groups, regional movements, civil society organizations, and pro-democracy activists, among others. For example, Indonesia has been governed by Joko Widodo since 2014 and has faced various challenges and controversies in his administration, opposition, and criticism from various groups.

Long-term governance can hinder adaptation and reform, as the leader or ruling party may become rigid and dogmatic, resistant to change and feedback, and isolated from reality. A long-term leader or ruling party may fail to address the changing needs and demands of the country and the world and may stick to outdated or ineffective policies and strategies. They may ignore or reject any suggestions or criticisms from other actors or institutions and may isolate themselves from the global community and trends. For example, North Korea has been ruled by the Kim family since 1948 and has become one of the most isolated and repressive countries in the world.

A FISH OUT OF WATER

Like a fish out of water, long-term governance is not the answer to the Philippine plight. While long-term governance may have some benefits, such as stability, continuity, and decisiveness, it also has many drawbacks, such as corruption, abuse of power, violation of human rights, resentment, and resistance. Moreover, long-term governance is not feasible or desirable for our country, given our colonial legacy, democratic tradition, constitutional system, civil society activism, and ethnic diversity.

Our country should focus on strengthening its democracy and institutions, improving its governance and accountability, enhancing its economic and social development, and promoting its national and regional interests.

This is the best way to address the Philippine plight and achieve a better future for our country.

PARTING SHOT

Ombudsman Martires: "I don’t think a receipt is important."

Dale Carnegie: "Applause is a receipt."

The Ombudsman doesn’t deserve a “receipt.”

Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered co-pilot

Head collage photos courtesy of inquirerdotnet, Radio Free Asia, & Global Times

Still photos courtesy of Tenor & Keep Calm

Video clips courtesy of YouTube

A TALE OF TWO PUBLIC SERVANTS: A YES MAN AND A MAVERICK

Have you ever thought what it would be like to say yes to everything? To never say no to any request, challenge, or opportunity that comes your way?

Well, that’s exactly what Jim Carrey’s character does in the comedy movie “Yes Man”. He goes from being a bored and lonely bank employee to a spontaneous and adventurous thrill-seeker, just by saying yes to everything.

Sounds fun.

But what if saying yes to everything is not just a personal choice, but a professional obligation? What if you work for someone who expects you to agree with and support everything they say or do, regardless of the consequences? That’s the situation that many people faced under the presidency of Donald Trump. Trump surrounded himself with people who agreed with him and praised him. He did not like people who disagreed with him or criticized him. He wanted people who were loyal to him. He wanted people who were “Yes Men”.

And he got rid of people who were not.

Sounds familiar.

Here and now, “Yes Men” in the government service, regardless of their views, always agree with and support the higher-ups. A “few good men” do not follow conventions, but act independently or innovatively – the “Mavericks”. Let’s examine two public servants, a “Yes Man” and a “Maverick” from the Department of Finance – their roles, actions, and consequences.

THE “YES MAN”- BENJAMIN DIOKNO

Diokno is the Secretary of Finance and the head of the economic team under President Bongbong Marcos (PBBM) administration. He is responsible for policy formulation, revenue generation, resource mobilization, debt management, and financial market development of the government. He is also expected to advise and guide PBBM on economic matters, and to coordinate with other agencies and stakeholders on economic development.

However, Diokno has served as a typical example of a “Yes Man” put on display by his recent support for the price cap on rice amid the rice crisis. He revealed that he was shocked when he heard about the price cap on rice. As expected, being an economist himself, he had understood the basic idea that price caps would have negative effects on the market forces of supply and demand. He said:

“[U]nder ideal market conditions, price controls don’t really work…It had adverse effects if allowed to linger for a longer period.”

Yet, despite having been aware of the consequences, Diokno still supported PBBM’s decision to impose the price cap on rice. He said:

“We agree with the President that implementing a price cap on rice is the most prudent course of action at the moment…”

Another example of Diokno’s “Yes Man” predisposition was his failure to pull the plug on the doubling of salaries for the military and uniformed personnel (MUP) under the Duterte administration as Joel Ruiz Butuyan asserted in his Inquirer column, Pensions that violates the Constitutions:

“The pension and retirement benefits of MUPs have ballooned to humongous amounts because former president Duterte doubled the base pay of active MUPs, to reportedly endear himself with military and police personnel, and despite opposition from his economic team" [headed then by Diokno].

Diokno had a grasp then of the serious implications of the MUP’s humongous pension for fiscal stability. He asserted:

“[The current MUP pension system] is not sustainable and if it goes on, there will be a fiscal collapse. They have to cooperate with the rest of society otherwise, our fiscal deficit will just continue to balloon.”

The consequences and implications of Diokno’s “Yes Man” predisposition for the nation are:

·         Distorting the market forces of supply and demand, creating shortages, hoarding, smuggling, and inflation;

·         Threatening the fiscal stability and sustainability of the government treasury due to the ballooning MUP pension;

·         Undermining the credibility and reputation of the Department of Finance as an independent and professional institution;

Neglecting his duty as the chief economic adviser of the government, as well as his accountability to the public.

THE “MAVERICK” – CIELO MAGNO

Department of Finance Undersecretary Cielo Magno, was responsible for overseeing the Fiscal Policy and Monitoring Group which recommends fiscal policies, formulates tax reform proposals, as well as forecasts and programs the national government revenues.

Magno has been a “Maverick” who has shown her courage and integrity, her willingness to speak her mind and stand up for her principles. She spelled out her opposition to the price cap on rice through a cryptic Facebook post showing a supply-demand graph with the caption “I miss teaching…” It was a subtle way of expressing her disagreement with the price cap – implying it would create a shortage of rice, as shown by the gap between the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied at the price cap.

As a consequence, Magno lost her job. She posted on X:

“I knew when I posted the supply and demand graph that my boss (Finance Secretary Benjamin Diokno) would receive a call from Malacañang to remove me, but I did it anyway. With how things were going, I knew it was time to go.”

Magno’s dilemma reminds me of one fearless whistleblower, Bunny Greenhouse, who helped bring accountability and transparency to a giant government agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Featured in the book Your America: Democracy’s Local Heroes, her heroic story triggers this opening thorny paragraph:

“Let’s say you work for a gigantic institution – a corporation, or a branch of the U.S. government. Bit by bit you advance in your career. You make a comfortable salary, and you’re building a retirement nest egg. Then comes the day that you discover something terribly wrong is going on. Do you make a big stink and endanger your job? Or do you just look the other way, knowing that the organization will resist any change and that if you speak out, you’ll likely end up as road-kill?”

The following statement of the Executive Secretary has affirmed the grim reality that “if you speak out” like Magno did, you’ll likely end up as “road-kill”: “The termination of [Cielo Magno’s] appointment could only be expected as she clearly does not support the administration and its program for nation-building.”

While Bunny Greenhouse succeeded, did Cielo Magno fail? If so, at least she failed “while daring greatly.” Magno’s place, as Theodore Roosevelt said, “shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Now I have questions for you: Are you a “Yes Man” or a “Maverick” in your work? How do you balance between saying yes and no? How do you cope with the challenges or benefits of being either one?

Finally, is the following statement uttered by a “Yes Man” or a “Maverick”?

“I think we are not in a rice emergency, so to speak.” (DTI Secretary Alfredo Pascual)

Or does it belong to another category?

Interestingly, Collins Dictionary states, “You use ‘so to speak’ to draw attention to the fact that you are describing or referring to something in a way that may be amusing or unusual rather than completely accurate.”

Juicy government job, anyone?

Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered co-pilot

Head collage photos courtesy of cartoonstockdotcom

Video clips courtesy of YouTube

A CLASSROOM WITH A VIEW: BRAINSTORMING THE RICE CRISIS

 

PROF JAY

Good morning! Today, we will do role-play to explore a realistic situation by interacting with your classmates. We are now a crisis management team and I am your crisis manager. Our task is to resolve the present rice crisis buffeting our nation. Let’s start the ball rolling by assessing the situation. Anyone who wants to break the ice? Yes, Matt, may we hear from you?

MATT

I think we all know that the rice crisis is a complex and multifaceted issue that has various causes and consequences. Some of the main factors that contribute to the crisis are climate change, population growth, trade policies, infrastructure and logistics, and socio-economic factors. These factors affect the production, distribution, and consumption of rice in different ways and levels.

PROF JAY

How do the factors that Matt mentioned affect the rice crisis? Yes, Pete.

PETE

Climate change can damage rice crops and reduce yields. Population growth can increase the demand for rice. Trade policies can affect the quantity, price, and quality of imported rice. Infrastructure and logistics can affect the efficiency and quality of the rice value chain. Socio-economic factors can affect the food security and nutrition of millions of Filipinos who depend on rice as their staple food.

PROF JAY

Matt, and Pete, that’s a comprehensive overview. I agree that these are some of the main factors that we need to consider in our crisis management plan. Any other comments or questions on this? Yes, Tom, please go ahead.

TOM

Sir, how do we measure the impact of these factors on the rice crisis? Are there data or statistics that can support that analysis?

PROF JAY

Yes, Simon. Your thoughts, please.

SIMON

The climate change impacts on agriculture are expected to cause an annual GDP loss of up to 2.2 percent by 2100 according to the US Agency for International Development. The Philippines has one of the fastest-growing populations in the world, with over 117 million people in 2023. The US Department of Agriculture has estimated that the Philippine rice consumption will increase to 16.5 million metric tons for the 2023-2024 period. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, the average Filipino consumes about 119 kilos of rice per year.

PROF JAY

That being the case, the domestic production of rice is not enough to meet such demand leading to a supply gap and dependence on imports. That’s very impressive and informative, Simon. I think we have a good understanding of the situation now. Let’s move on to the next step: defining our objectives. What are we trying to achieve with our crisis management plan? What are our desired outcomes and impacts? Any suggestions or ideas? Yes, Mary, please share your thoughts.

MARY

I think one of our main objectives is to ensure food security and nutrition for all Filipinos. We want to make sure that everyone has access to sufficient, safe, nutritious, and affordable food at all times. We also want to protect and support the local rice farmers who are vital to our food system and economy. We want to help them increase their income and productivity by providing them with adequate resources and services.

PROF JAY

That’s insightful, Mary. Yes, John.

JOHN

One objective is to stabilize and lower rice prices by increasing the supply and reducing the demand for rice. We want to make rice more affordable for consumers and less costly for traders and retailers. We also want to reduce our dependence on rice imports by increasing the domestic production. We want to enhance self-reliance and resilience in terms of food security.

PROF JAY

That’s incisive, John. Yes, Beth.

BETH

Another objective is to promote sustainable and resilient rice farming by adopting environmentally friendly practices and technologies that can mitigate and adapt to climate change. We want to conserve our natural resources and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions from rice cultivation.

PROF JAY

Thank you, Beth. That puts the finishing touch on defining our objectives. I agree that these are some of the main objectives of our crisis management plan. They are clear and realistic, as well as aligned with our national goals and priorities, along with the needs and expectations of our stakeholders. Any other comments or questions? Yes, James.

JAMES

I think our objectives are comprehensive and relevant, but they are too broad and general. How do we evaluate our progress or success in achieving these objectives? Do we have any indicators or criteria to help us track our performance or impact?

PROF JAY

James has a valid point. We do need to have some indicators or criteria that can help us measure or evaluate our objectives. Any answer to James’ questions? Yes, Ann.

ANN

One possible indicator is the number or percentage of people who are food secure or food insecure.

PHIL

The number or percentage of rice farmers who are supported or protected.

TED

The average price of rice per kilogram.

PAUL

The amount or percentage of water, soil, and energy that are saved or reduced by rice farming.

PROF JAY

That’s a bunch of enlightening answers, guys. I think we have a good definition of our objectives now. Let’s move on to the next step: developing our strategies. How do we achieve our objectives? What are the best ways or methods to solve our problems and seize our opportunities? Any proposals or solutions? Yes, Mark.

MARK

I propose to implement a rice subsidy program for qualified beneficiaries that can provide them with rice coupons or vouchers that can be redeemed at designated outlets or stores. This can help us ensure food security and nutrition for all Filipinos, especially the poor and vulnerable groups who cannot afford high prices.

PROF JAY

Mark, that’s empathetic. Yes, Dave.

DAVE

I propose to allocate a sufficient budget for Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund that can support various programs and projects that can enhance the competitiveness and productivity of the local farmers. This can help us support and protect the local rice farmers by providing them with inputs, equipment, technology, training, credit, and insurance, among others.

PROF JAY

Dave, that’s productive. Yes, Luke.

LUKE

I propose to review and revise the Rice Tariffication Law and other trade policies that affect the rice sector, taking into account the interests and concerns of different stakeholders. This can help us increase the supply and reduce the cost of rice by improving the efficiency and quality of the rice value chain.

PROF JAY

Luke, that’s analytical. Yes, James.

JAMES

I propose to improve the infrastructure and logistics for rice production and distribution by investing in irrigation systems, storage facilities, milling plants, transport networks, and market access. This can help us increase the supply and reduce the cost of rice by improving the efficiency and quality of the rice value chain.

PROF JAY

James, that’s pivotal. Yes, Matt.

MATT

I propose to promote the diversification of food sources and preferences among Filipinos by encouraging them to consume more local and nutritious foods, such as fruits, vegetables, fish, meat, and eggs, among others. This can help us reduce the demand and dependence on rice by enhancing our food security and sustainability.

PROF JAY

Matt, that’s life-changing. Thank you everyone for all your brilliant ideas. We got through the three steps of crisis management – assessing the situation, defining the objectives, and developing the strategies. The remaining two steps – implementing and evaluating – that will be your homework.

We’ve been too serious during the whole period. Let’s wrap up our class today with three jokes. Anyone?

PETE

What’s the difference between a crisis and a catastrophe?

CLASS

What?

PETE

A crisis is when the government messes up; a catastrophe, when they try to fix it.

PAUL

How do you solve a government crisis?

CLASS

How?

PAUL

You don’t; you just create a new one.

MARY

What’s the difference between a P20 per kilo rice promise and a pizza?

CLASS

What?

MARY

A pizza can feed a family of four.

PROF JAY

Thank you. They all jazz me up. Good day!

(The school buzzer sounds.)

 

Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered co-pilot

Head photos courtesy of Getty Images & freepikdotcom

SARA DUTERTE: THE MOST PROTECTED VICE PRESIDENT IN HISTORY

 

Karen Davila: Why would anyone need 433 security personnel?

Rep Edcel Lagman: That amount of security personnel is really inordinate and excessive. Some do not even have any security personnel.

433 SECURITY ESCORTS

How many security personnel does a vice president need? This is a question that many Filipinos have been asking since an audit report on the office of Vice President Sara Duterte showed [a battalion of] 433 security escorts served the Office of the Vice President (OVP) in its first year. That’s a 455% spike in security personnel hired during the final year of her predecessor, former Vice president Leni Robredo, who had 78 security personnel in 2021.

This number is astonishingly high compared to other prominent leaders in the world, such as Queen Elizabeth II, who had then 185 security officers in her Royal Protection Squad, Pope Francis, who has 125 soldiers in his Pontifical Swiss Guard, Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has 60 bodyguards, Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who had 20 security personnel then, and US Vice President Kamala Harris, whose security details are not publicly disclosed, but are estimated to be much lower than Sara Duterte’s.

Why does Sara Duterte need so many security personnel? Is she facing more threats and risks than other vice presidents or heads of state? Is she being paranoid or wasteful? Or is she simply following the protocol and assessment of the security agencies?

Rep Edcel Lagman, a critic of Sara Duterte, argued that the amount of security personnel she has is “inordinate and excessive”. He asserted that since 1987 when he was in Congress, he has not availed himself of any security escort implying that Sara Duterte is being wasteful or paranoid. Her critics have also questioned the source and legality of the funds used to pay for the security personnel, and whether they comply with the audit rules and regulations.

VP Sara Duterte’s defenders argued that the deployment of security personnel depends on the assessment of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP), which are responsible for providing security to government officials. They also cited the threats and risks that Sara Duterte faces as a reason for her need for security personnel.

Both sides have valid points, but I think the number of Sara Duterte’s security personnel is indeed excessive and disproportionate to her role and functions as vice president. She should reduce her security personnel to a reasonable level that is consistent with her predecessors and peers. She should be more transparent and accountable about how she uses her funds for security purposes.

CONFIDENTIAL AND INTELLIGENCE FUNDS

Another controversy that Sara Duterte has faced is the issue of her confidential and intelligence funds. Let’s go through some excerpts of Senator Risa Hontiveros’ scrutiny of VP Sara Duterte’s P500-million confidential fund -- the essence of which is encapsulated by this question: Is the OVP an intelligence gathering agency?

SENATOR RISA HONTIVEROS (SRH): Since confidential funds refer to those agencies related to surveillance activities undertaken by civilian government agencies, ibig po bang sabihin yong opisina ninyo will be gathering intelligence on certain subjects or entities in support sa inyong mga mandates or operations?

VP SARA DUTERTE (VPSD): That is correct. As an example, we did the surveillance of complaints from constituents in Bulacan with regard to the selling of OVP assistance and the selling of Tupad projects in Bulacan and there was a surveillance operation that was ran by the Vice-Presidential Security and Protection Group (VPSPG) for about a month and we were able to apprehend the person and we were able to successfully prosecute the case, and that person went to jail for 6 months. So that is an example of the surveillance activity that is conducted by the VPSPG for the projects and activities of the Office of the Vice President in Bulacan.

SRH: I asked this because the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA) was established to direct, coordinate, and integrate national intelligence activities and this includes the collation of intelligence gathered from various sources. So, we’d like more information as to the intelligence operations of the OVP. Sa aling mga sources mag-ga-gather ng information yong OVP. Kukuha ba kayo ng intelligence mula sa ating mga existing intelligence services tulad ng NICA, o tulad ng DND o PNP?

VPSD: No. Intelligence starts with the communities and the stakeholders, and then if there are complaints, and then it is built up, through intelligence and surveillance services, and then a dossier report is started, and then it goes through levels through the OVP and the VPSPG. So, we do not seek intelligence reports from other government agencies, but the intelligence report starts from the ground in the communities that are engaged by the OVP.

SRH: Mayron pong established na intelligence cycle at mayron pong established na chain of command for the intelligence activities ng ating gobyerno at ating republika. At sa pagkaalam ko po walang hiwalay na chain of command for Intel ang OVP. How can your honorable office, paano nyo pong ma-aasure mga miyembro nitong committee na yong collation ng Intel ng inyong opisina hindi magreresulta sa redundancy or duplication of effort?

VPSD: There is no redundancy and duplication of effort because we have different mandates from the other government agencies.

SRH: We should leave intelligence to the experts just as we leave education to the DepEd and we leave the mandates of the OVP to the OVP.

At this point, without going on further with the interpellation, Senator Hontiveros’ use of the word redundancy or duplication, with no need for rocket science, hits the bull’s eye.

P125 MILLION “SECRET” FUND

On top of that, Kabataan Party List Rep Raoul Manuel’s narrative has appeared hard to swallow but woefully true.

“Ang nakapagtataka din po lalo sa OVP… kung maala-ala po natin sa taong 2022 nag-start po yan sa term ni former VP Leni Robredo, wala pong naaprubahan sa national budget na may confidential fund ang OVP. Kaya po nagtataka tayo kung bakit sa huling mga araw ng December 2022, bigla po nagkaroon ng P125 million na confidential funds sa OVP. Kahit wala pong batas na nag-enable dyan. Pag ganon po ibig sabihin pwede pala na mag-magic ano mag-produce lang ng labas sa national budget ng ganong pondo para sa kahit sinong opisyal lalo na’t malakas at malapit sa Malakanyang ang isang opisyal.”

Amid that seeming improbity -- Sara Duterte being the most protected (military and parliamentary-wise) VP in history – came through with flying colors as her budget passed the scrutiny of Congress as bannered by the following headline:

“OVP’s proposed P2.3B budget for 2024 OK’d by Senate panel, keeps P500M CIF” (Inquirer)

“Enjoy” could be the befitting word of the day for VP Sara and her backers.

Looking back, here’s the headline with the word “enjoy”: “VP Sara to ACT solon: Enjoy thought of my impeachment” (Daily Tribune). Indeed, being the most protected VP in history, such thought is just like a “suntok sa buwan.”

Head photo and video clips courtesy of YouTube

PRICE CONTROL ON RICE: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

 

“I eat the same foods almost every day. I have my favorites like Filipino beef broth, chicken soup with lots and lots of rice.” - Manny Pacquiao

Manny’s words reflect the deep attachment of Filipinos to rice. Rice is not just a staple food, but also a symbol of culture, identity, and history. Rice is not just a commodity, but also a right, a value, and a responsibility. Rice is not just something we eat, but also something we cherish, respect, and fight for.

To illustrate this point, let me share with you a hypothetical story of Juan, which could be yours too, a typical Filipino farmer who lives in a small village in Nueva Ecija. Juan’s family has been growing rice for generations. They have a small plot of land where they plant rice twice a year. They also raise some chickens and pigs for food. They are poor, but they are proud of their work and their heritage.

Juan and his family eat rice every day, three times a day. They eat it with fish, vegetables, meat, or eggs. They season it with salt, soy sauce, vinegar, or chili. They use their hands, spoons, or forks to eat it. They cook it plain, fried, boiled, or steamed. They have it in different shapes, sizes, and colors. They prepare it in different dishes, such as arroz caldo, lugaw, or champorado. They enjoy it on different occasions, such as birthdays, weddings, or fiestas. They consume it in different ways, such as sharing, thanking, or offering.

Juan and his family cherish rice as a gift from God and nature. They respect rice as a precious and sacred resource. They fight for rice as a right and a value. They fight for rice against the forces that threaten to take it away from them: the climate change that causes droughts or floods; the population growth that increases the demand or consumption; the land conversion that reduces the supply or availability; the corruption and mismanagement that affect the policies or programs; the price control that distorts the market or creates problems.

This story shows how important rice is for Filipinos like Juan and his family. However, rice is also a scarce and volatile resource that is subject to various challenges and crises. The rice crisis has affected the availability, affordability, and quality of rice in the country, as well as the welfare and living standards of the people.

PRICE CONTROL

To address the rice crisis, the government has implemented various policies and interventions like importing rice. One of the most controversial and complex interventions is price control.

Recently, President Bongbong Marcos, through Executive Order 39, approved the recommendation to set price ceilings nationwide on rice – P41 for regular milled and P45 for well-milled rice. This move has sparked mixed reactions from various stakeholders, such as consumers, producers, traders, economists, lawyers, politicians, and activists. Some have praised the price control as a positive and necessary measure to stabilize the economy and society. Others have criticized the price control as a harmful measure.

Let me present the good, the bad, and the ugly consequences of price control on rice prices amid the rice crisis in our country.

THE GOOD

Prevents Inflation

Price control can stabilize the general level of prices in the economy by preventing excessive increases in prices. It will maintain the purchasing power of money and avoid fluctuations in economic activity.

Ensures Rice Affordability and Accessibility

Price control can make rice more affordable and accessible for low-income consumers who spend a large portion of their income on food. This will improve their food security and nutrition.

Reduces income inequality

Price control can reduce income inequality by redistributing income from producers or traders to consumers or workers. This can improve the welfare and living standards of the people.

THE BAD

Creates Shortages.

Price control – a price ceiling below the free-market price -- causes buyers to demand more than they wanted at the free-market price and sellers to sell less than they wanted to sell at the free-market price. The result – a shortage.

Distorts Market Signals and Incentives.

Prices are an indicator of underlying economic phenomena – supply and demand. Prices are determined by supply, which reflects costs of production, and demand, which reflects buyers’ preferences and incomes.

Reduces Profitability and Competitiveness of Local Farmers and Traders

Price control will hurt small local traders who are at the receiving end of rice and farmgate prices due to costlier production inputs. It will lead to the influx of imported rice detrimental to the local farmers.

Increases Government Spending and Intervention

Price control can increase government spending by subsidizing the producers or importers of rice to compensate for their losses or costs due to price control. On top of that, price control can also increase government intervention by enforcing or regulating compliance with price control through inspections, sanctions, or rules.

THE UGLY

Creates Black Markets or Illegal Activities

Price control can create a black market or Illegal activities in the economy by encouraging corruption, crime, and tax evasion among consumers, producers, traders, or officials.

Interferes with Other Markets or Policies

Price control can interfere with other markets or policies that are related to rice or food security by creating distortions, inefficiencies, or conflicts among them. This can affect the coherence and effectiveness of the government’s overall economic strategy and vision.

Long-term or Irreversible Impacts Outweigh Short-term Benefits

Price control can have long-term or irreversible impacts that may outweigh its short-term benefits and damage or deplete the natural, human, and social capital of the economy and society.

Generate Public Resistance or Dissatisfaction

Price control can spark off public resistance or dissatisfaction by provoking protests, riots, or violence among consumers, producers, traders, or activists.

This can threaten the peace and stability in the country.

ALARM BELL

The following is an excerpt from Nick V. Quijano’s column “Surging rice prices” in the Daily Tribune, which sounds the alarm about the political implications of the rice crisis:

“Rising rice prices and shortages are about to bite this administration in the ass. No alarmist embellishment here. In fact, a very ugly political picture is right here before us.

“In our part of the world, rice is a critical political commodity and there is but one simple political rule: Make sure the masses have enough rice to eat if a country wants to maintain its social and political stability.”

Quijano’s warning echoes the main argument of a study by Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman titled “How Modern Dictators Survive: An Informational Theory of the New Authoritarianism”. The study claims that “incompetent dictators can survive” by investing in state propaganda that portrays them as competent, co-opting the elite and the media, and endearing themselves with the military to avoid coups, “as long as economic shocks (like ‘surging rice prices’) are not too large.”

In other words, the economic shocks must not be too large to be tolerated by our people, otherwise, they might result in our leader suffering the same fate as Marie Antoinette, who famously said, “Let them eat cake” when she learned that the peasants had no bread. This phrase reflects the princess’ indifference and contempt for the starving peasants’ plight.

Let me conclude this article with a story snippet reported by Rappler about the indigenous people who look at toxic yams as rice prices continue to soar. “Kayos,” a toxic wild yam, serves as a lifesaver and last-resort staple when food is scarce in some highland communities in Sarangani.

“If only copra can be eaten…With copra so cheap, it is difficult for us to afford rice… Perhaps what was promised to go down was the copra price, not that of rice” [at P20/kilo, has turned out to be a joke], they said. “Worse comes to worst, there is wild yam and it is free.”

The story of the indigenous people who are resorting to toxic yams due to soaring rice prices is a heartbreaking and alarming example of how the rice crisis affects the most vulnerable and marginalized sectors of society.

Price control on rice prices is not a magic bullet that can fix the problem. It is a double-edged sword that can cut both ways. It is a matter of choice that we have to make wisely.

Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered co-pilot

Head photo courtesy of Philippine Star

Video clips courtesy of YouTube