Trusting institutions or finding a connection
At a recent forum on leadership, I listened intently as a group of young, reform-minded local government executives shared their experiences of the hard work of governance reform. Their recurring problem, in essence, was how to get people to trust institutions instead of always looking for a connection to bring their needs to the attention of government.
This is the root of patronage and dependence, a problem as old as our political system. What was refreshing was to hear it named by public officials themselves. It made me think about what it means for people to trust their institutions.
I don’t believe this is achieved by assurances that they no longer need a connection, a patron, or a fixer to get government’s attention. For, more often than not, people look for connections not so much to gain an advantage or evade the rules, but to defend themselves against those who do.
What they seek, in short, is insurance against being ignored, or being overtaken by someone who knows someone inside. Such a habit does not fade because people are told it is no longer needed. It fades only with the repeated experience of being served without anybody’s intercession. That experience need not be your own. Sometimes it is enough that someone you know tells you the process is actually so painless and predictable that no personal favor is needed to get your transaction done.
I have seen this happen in chat groups, where someone posts an innocent inquiry: May kakilala ba tayo sa DFA (Department of Foreign Affairs) para mag-renew ng passport? Increasingly, the replies come not as a name or a number to call, but as a calm assurance that you don’t need anyone’s help for such a simple thing. You can now renew your passport at many DFA sites located in malls. Someone may add: the lines may sometimes be long, but they move. That’s how old reflexes die and new habits form.
But bottlenecks remain everywhere in government. Some are kept alive by politicians who thrive on dispensing favors in exchange for personal loyalty. Others are just the product of badly crafted laws and complex implementing rules that no one has bothered to review.
An example of the first is the practice of securing referral and guarantee letters from legislators and local executives for financially strapped patients seeking admission to government hospitals. Needy patients once had to find out for themselves which officials had discretionary funds parked at which state hospital. The Malasakit centers have simplified this by telling people where assistance can be found. But the patronage element remains.
In some provinces, a desk near the mayor’s or governor’s office issues slips of paper endorsing requests for medical assistance. These are not guarantees of payment. Whether they make any difference, no one can tell: the only test is to go without one, and few will take that chance with a sick relative. So when the patient is promptly attended to, the credit goes to the governor’s endorsement. Patronage survives here not because it works, but because it cannot be shown not to work.
The second kind of bottleneck is harder to dislodge. It arises where the law requires a permit for something people assume is their own business, like cutting a tree in one’s own yard because a typhoon has left it leaning dangerously, or to make room for an extension to the house. Ask about this in the chat group, a member might say: call this person. It will still be useful to know someone.
A 2021 Department of Environment and Natural Resources order meant to simplify the process still requires, for a naturally grown tree, an endorsement from the barangay captain, or the mayor, or the governor, depending on how many jurisdictions are involved. It requires an authenticated copy of the land title, a forester’s count of every tree to be cut, and approval by the regional executive director. In one regional charter, the City Environment and Natural Resources Office stage alone takes about 20 days. And for every naturally grown tree cut, a hundred seedlings must be planted.
Here, seeking a connection is not a superfluous habit but a reasonable response. Where people cannot manage a procedure on their own, they approach people who can facilitate.
So the young executives’ question has a practical answer. People are not weaned from the habit of finding a connection by being told to trust institutions. They are weaned from it by a government that no longer requires one. Naga City has long shown how: its citizen’s charter names the person responsible for each step and the time each step should take. In towns run by young executives, I have seen public assistance desks at the entrance of the municipal hall, staffed by people who offer to guide you through any process, and point you to the right office. That desk, in effect, serves as a friend available to everyone.
—————-
