
ISSUE
ANALYSIS No. 9
JUNE 13, 2008
Series
of 2008
Crisis
Management, Arroyo Style
By
the Policy Study, Publication and Advocacy (PSPA)
Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)
Long
queues of people wait for their turn to buy NFA rice; gas prices
shoot up every week as the country faces unprecedented high inflation;
parents are uncertain whether they will be able to send their children
to school; the rate of unemployment is highest in decades; and the
number of victims of disease epidemics and calamities is mounting
by the year.
Is
the government in control of the deteriorating situation? Is there
any prospect for the country to weather the economic and political
morass that it is in?
With
the vast executive powers it wields and the financial resources
at its disposal, the Arroyo administration should be able to grapple
with the country’s woes by the horns, so to speak, and navigate
past danger zones. Yet its style of crisis management reveals a
propensity to use, on the one hand, short-term, quick-fix solutions
to problems that cry for comprehensive and responsible response
and, on the other, costly PR strategies to project a president in
control of a ship that is fast sinking.
Mrs.
Gloria M. Arroyo’s knee-jerk response to the food and oil
crises, for instance, is too late. Her damage control tack is to
first make the people believe that it is the result of an unavoidable
global crisis way beyond government’s control when in fact
the fuel and food security problems can be traced to poor priorities
and simple lack of foresight. Thousands of youths won’t be
able to enter school this year due to insurmountable high education
costs while the shortage of teachers and classrooms is at critical
proportions. To all these, the president now styles herself as Merlin
the magician with a wand of subsidies worth P4 billion taken, so
she claims, from E-vat collections. The subsidies are for distribution
to schoolchildren, power consumers, poorest households, farmers,
and the land transportation sector. Is she doing all these as an
accomplishment in her coming state-of-the-nation address (SONA)?
Rehash
Some
of the subsidies are a rehash of previous promises though. Faced
with prolonged budget deficits and unsolved corruption scandals,
Arroyo’s package of “subsidies” comes across as
nothing but stopgap remedies with no promise of long-term effect.
The handout is held with suspect, coming as it is from a president
widely believed to have used government resources for her own political
ends, who authored multi-billion transactions for the greed of her
business cronies and close allies, and definitely a person without
any genuine compassion for the poor except as a cheap publicity
gimmick.
The
president’s resort to “band-aid” solutions and
other incredible prescriptions is exemplified by her full endorsement
of globalization policies as a means of addressing poverty, unemployment,
and other social and economic ills. The costs of this economic paradigm
have been staggering: 28 million individuals rated as poor or an
increase by four million in just three years; four million jobless;
a wide income gap with the net worth of the country’s 10 richest
individuals ($12.4 billion) equivalent to the total annual income
of the poorest 9.8 million families. Arroyo’s personal assets,
in the meantime, went up by at least P11 million in the past year
alone.
As
in past regimes, the management of economic programs has been run
by the president’s economic advisers and academic elite intoxicated
by the bitter pills of international finance institutions such as
the World Bank, IMF, and the Asian Development Bank. The stimulus
for this package has been to increase the taxpayers’ burden,
pay the huge foreign debt and further liberalize the country’s
trade and investment to transnational corporations in tandem with
the local finance oligarchs and Arroyo’s business cronies.
In the course of implementing development projects and budget allocations,
billions of pesos have been lost to corruption.
Economic
governance
Meanwhile,
the constitutionally-enshrined infrastructures of people’s
participation in economic governance have been largely written off
while those who oppose the regime’s indefensible policies
are tagged as de-stabilizers. The president’s subservience
to foreign interests and local finance oligarchs accounts for the
threats to food security, energy requirements, and other socio-economic
costs and exposes Arroyo’s “pro-poor” and “meal
for every table” posturing as an empty rhetoric.
Another
case is Arroyo’s counter-insurgency program. Tagging the armed
Left as a “national security threat,” the president
unleashed Oplan Bantay Laya targeting the “enemy of the state’s”
alleged legal political network. Flaunted as part of the state’s
counter-terrorism measures, the counter-insurgency program enhanced
U.S. military assistance and political support for Arroyo. It was
also used by Arroyo to maintain military loyalty and to promote
hawkish senior AFP officers based on the number of suspected “communist
terrorists” killed or abducted. The costs of Arroyo’s
national security doctrine have been monumental: 903 activists summarily
executed and 193 others victims of enforced disappearance. The peace
process that seeks to address the institutional roots of the armed
struggle has long been abandoned in favor of the short-term militarist
approach.
Like
past administrations, the Arroyo regime has been in a crisis mode
since the very beginning of its reign. Instead of instituting reforms
toward addressing the long-running problems of land dispossession,
low labor wages, and a host of other concerns of the very same people
who catapulted her to power in January 2001, she chose to align
herself with the narrow, elitist interests of her allies and business
cronies. She shielded from investigation her fellow conspirators
in politics, the military, business, and the Commission on Elections
who ensured her presidential power in one of the most fraudulent
elections – the 2004 presidential derby.
Misfortunes
She
blames others like the Left and the electoral opposition for the
misfortunes that are caused by her own mismanagement and a poor
diagnosis fed by her neo-liberal perspective and anti-progressive
biases. Aside from this “wag-the-dog” approach, there
is no transparency of information about the magnitude and roots
of problems thus putting her prescribed solutions under public suspicion
if not rejection. Arrogance is saliently at the core of her management
style: “I’m not bothered by what public surveys say
about my performance because God knows that what I do is for the
good of the people.”
While
according the long-lasting and most-favored-treatment to financial
credit institutions, TNCs and the economic elite through her globalization
policies, she has nothing or, if any, only piecemeal measures for
the vast majority of Filipinos. Her offensives against political
dissent and human rights have strengthened the coercive powers of
the state thereby further weakening the justice system. The same
iron-fist policy is likewise under criticism among the business
sector in her pursuit of, for instance, appropriating power distribution
into the hands of her business cronies under the guise of state
takeover.
Perhaps
the worst component of her crisis management is to take each problem
from the perspective of surviving the presidency. In these critical
times – induced no less by her dangerous policies –
every major economic problem or criticism to her presidential rule
is treated as a threat to her presidential survival. This insecurity
is what drives her to react with quick-fix solutions that are designed
to cushion public reactions, complete with PR cosmetics and threats
to harness her authoritarian powers.
Actually,
the problems faced by multitudes of Filipinos are basically the
same that the people saw in the past and have deep institutional
roots. The only difference is that while in the past such predicaments
were aggravating by the year, today people are hurting by the day.

Home
/ Programs and Projects / About
us / Contact us / Site
map / Partners / Links
Telefax +6329299526 email: cenpeg@cenpeg.org; cenpeg.info@gmail.com;
cenpeg2k4@yahoo.com
Copyright 2005 Center for People Empowewrment in Governance (CenPEG),
Philippines. All rights reserved |