Confidence
A full year after President Aquino took his oath of office, two important sets of numbers seem to tell a story of decline. The surveys show an erosion in his popularity; GDP figures indicate a slowing down in economic growth. But in fact the same numbers demonstrate the strength of both the support for the President’s electoral mandate and of developments in the economy which began last year. We should not allow the expectedly contentious cast of public discourse in the immediate post-Arroyo years to desensitize us to the nuances of achievement.
To be sure, no one will argue that the second Aquino administration satisfied the high expectations that surrounded its rise to power and responsibility (or much less, surpassed them). In the last 12 months, the record of governance has been decidedly mixed. A long-overdue overhaul of the massive bureaucracy of government-owned and -controlled corporations has begun, but the perception that unsuccessful appointments to key positions continue to be tolerated has deepened. An obstructionist ombudsman was finally removed from office, but the Truth Commission has been stuck in limbo, unable even to probe the truth, never mind speak it. Reform is slowly taking root in several departments, and the republican ideal of greater transparency in government affairs is becoming the norm rather than the exception, but the new administration’s sudden coyness on such initiatives as the proposed Freedom of Information Act is disconcerting, and deeply disappointing.
We note that the tedious but essential task of unearthing proof of corruption committed in the last decade – the rot in the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office being only the latest discovery – continues without letup, but at a much slower rate than anyone expected; the plodding pace is a cause of popular frustration or even cynicism. We recognize the sterling work of several highly placed officials; in fact, we acknowledge that very many men and women of good will and proven competence have joined government, at all levels, inspired by last year’s watershed elections and the people’s call for reform; the unmistakable factionalism at the center of the Aquino administration, however, puts all that work in jeopardy. When even senators joke openly about the so-called Balay and Samar factions, it is well to remind ourselves that strong factions ultimately mean weak government.
But given that the first year is necessarily a time of transition, of learning the proverbial ropes and building working political coalitions, and given the political divisiveness of the decade that helped create the anti-corruption mandate of the 2010 vote, it would be irresponsible to equate the mixed record and thus the shortcomings of the current administration with those of the Arroyo years.
This kind of false equivalence would not only be illogical but rankly immoral, as though the institution-wrecking, morale-sapping, value-distorting scandals of the previous administration can be excused by the missteps of the Aquino administration in its first year. To see no difference between, say, the Arroyo administration’s misguided counter-insurgency policy that resulted in the death of hundreds of activists, and Undersecretary Rico Puno’s terrible mishandling of the Aug. 23 hostage-taking incident, where nine lives were lost, is to accept that politics is really just “weather-weather lang” – a cynical game of musical chairs.
But in fact, a year into its term, the Aquino administration has begun to put an end to the culture of impunity, of non-accountability, of calamitous corruption, that we had come to identify with the previous regime. Its first achievement, in other words, is to inaugurate, slowly, perhaps not too steadily, but also surely, the post-Arroyo era.
One of the best proofs that things have changed lies in the kind of data that businessmen like to pore over. Economic trends of the last four quarters tell us that local business confidence in the new dispensation has grown dramatically. (It is a sentiment that parallels survey reality: Ratings are still high, both in themselves and historically.) As former Socio-economic Planning Secretary Cielito Habito noted in his column last week, “Over the past four quarters, growth in private domestic investment has been consistently surging.” This vigorous growth comes in spite of the drop in foreign direct investments and the drop in government construction spending.
What does this mean? It means that, after years of low levels of domestic investment under the previous administration, business enterprises in the Philippines are again putting their money where their mouth is.
