Discretionary power over public funds: How much pork does a Philippine president really need?

The raging controversy surrounding pork barrel thievery in Congress and Malacañang highlights just how weak a state the Philippines is. It is weak because its people rely on “strong leadership” as a proxy to what should be a grassroots bottom-up approach to applying what, by now, should be a deeply-ingrained sense of civic duty. Instead of the latter approach, Filipinos have sought a patronal comfort from their wretchedness in the arms of their politicians who, with all gusto, stepped up to the godfatherly role that has come to be expected of them by their constituents and used this to justify their sense of entitlement to the pork barrel.

This is why the notion that a whole portfolio of supposedly “altruistic” initiatives — “scholarships”, “community-building” projects, and local small-scale “civil” works (read: waiting sheds and “welcome” arches) — will be put in jeopardy if pork is withheld and the National Budget eventually purged of it has become a strong selling point for pork apologists. It is because Filipinos have forgotten a simple tenet of the proudly self-reliant; that money is earned, not begged for. This simple but powerful principle is made more resonant when expressed in the vernacular:

Ang pera ay kinikita, hindi hinihingi.

Can President BS Aquino be entrusted with discretionary power over public funds?
Can President BS Aquino be entrusted with discretionary power over public funds?
Unfortunately for the true but rare Reformati (with a big “R”) who champion self-reliance as the only real path to sustainable development (as opposed to the profoundly-ingrained sense of self-entitlement in primitive societies), this is the Philippines where populist arguments resonate strongly among the ill-informed and the fatally-misguided. This is a society that has produced an electorate that see their candidates as their future Santa Clauses and check the boxes on their ballots on the basis of that expectation.

So for whatever merit one would find in a Philippine president having access to discretionary funds (whether it be for stimulating an ailing economy or dispatching emergency resources in times of calamity) can only be evaluated in the context of the reality of the weak character of the Philippine nation — that we are a people made mendicant by our being beholden to Robin Hood figures and a society hobbled by a low level of collective trust. Think then of the level of discretionary power we might give to a President as something that can be controlled by a lever. The more collectively trustworthy and self-reliant a people are, the more you can push the lever towards applying a higher level of discretionary power to a sitting president. The less collectively trustworthy and self-reliant a people are, the more you will have to pull that lever down to lend less discretionary power to a president.

This isn’t too different to the idea of a supervisor giving less latitude to an unreliable employee and more autonomy to a mature and results-driven high-performing employee. The risk of abuse is high among 16-year-olds and low among middle-aged experienced professionals. Perhaps someday, we will see a society where, for the most part, Filipinos can trust one another to do the right thing. For now, this is something we can consider to be all but beyond our wildest dreams. As such, controls need to be in place to mitigate a high risk of theft. It should start from the top. The president, if he is sincere about guiding a clearly immature democratic society down a “straight path” should set an example by pulling the lever of discretionary power his own office enjoys over public funds down to its lowest level until such time that there is evidence of a proper and respectful regard among all government officials for money entrusted to them by the Filipino people.

It’s been said many times: to enjoy the privilege of wielding a lot of power, a leader must possess good character. The reason democracy came into being is that powerful people who are, at the same time, good are a scarce resource. Indeed, clearly a lot of the world’s problems are the result of the actions of leaders with bad character enjoying a lot of power. The Philippines enjoys no shortage of such powerful people. The results are self-evident.

Admittedly, there are disadvantages to implementing draconian controls that may potentially hobble effective governance. Jaime Licauco in an Inquirer article dated 22 May 2001 went as far as saying that: “A nation whose policies and rules are based on the assumption that everybody is a cheat and liar unless proven otherwise cannot long endure. Take a close look at our bureaucracy and its rules. It is burdened by elaborate and often unnecessary checks and balances so that nothing ever gets done in the process.”

The solution is obvious: Our best approach to combating corruption lies in creating an environment where mutual trust can take root. And a good starting point is to create fair, simple, and transparent governance frameworks where accountability rules; not controls.

And so it really is quite simple. Legislators’ access to discretionary funds should be cut clean if we want a strong Executive branch that is better-equipped, better-constituted, and better-entrusted to be at liberty to govern effectively. In such a way, members of Congress will be more strongly motivated to perform around what they were supposed to be focusing on to begin with, crafting laws, complemented by an Executive branch unequivocally accountable for delivering results. Only then can we consider the Philippines to be squarely barreling down the “straight path” to prosperity.

print

Post Author: benign0

benign0 is the Webmaster of GetRealPhilippines.com.

Leave a Reply

10 Comments on "Discretionary power over public funds: How much pork does a Philippine president really need?"

Notify of
avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Hyden Toro
Guest

A good example of patronage politics is Erap Estrada. He used also Pork Barrel discretionary spending. In time of election. He goes to the slum areas to distribute: tuyo, rice, noodles, etc. People thought the money came from him. He was only giving a small portion of the money he had stolen thru Pork Barrel.

Gogs
Member

Nothing original but Noynoy’s pork is there to make up for his lack of convincing power in causes that are of questionable mutual benefit. He is a wimp and always was a wimp .

Gerry
Guest

Yes, but he has big back up. there is more to his power than the mighty filippine military.

Gogs
Member

Sorry my “nothing original” refers to my reaction not this piece . Things you realize after you commit to a post.

Thomas Jefferson
Guest
Mr. Joker Arroyo said it all… BS Aquino’s rule is now a fascist dictatorship. From our recent experiences, the godfather of the pork barrel BS Aquino will need a lot more pork. This is to ensure absolute control over his senators and representatives. The rule is whoever controls the pork controls the politics of power. The great power of the peso means expanding impunity with control over the government. BSA now controls the legislature and is still trying to control the Judiciary, machinery and instruments of State. Shall we sit idly by while he divides, rules and conquers the State… Read more »
Thomas Jefferson
Guest
Jim Arndt
Guest

A better analogy is a fireman. If the President has the power to use the funds will he be a fireman and put out the emergencies or will he just water the plants.

Hyden Toro
Guest

Comparison of Aquino as a fireman is not right. He is destroying the Republic.

Gerry
Guest

destroying? Ha, he is just merely continuing what has been going on since 1948. in one political form or another, and that form doesn’t matter. there is nothing special or even different about the guy or what he is doing. it’s merely business as usual in a banana republic in South East Asia. the country doesn’t have a prayer, BUT it never has.
I wish I were wrong about the above statement, but it is true. if there has been an administration since the countries ‘independence’ that has not been rampantly corrupt, which one was it?

Thomas Jefferson
Guest

More fiscal dictatorship to come! From the Daily Tribune:

http://www.tribune.net.ph/commentary/editorial/item/20168-fiscal-autocracy

wpDiscuz