10 years ago, I remember Typhoon Yolanda, which was when a lot of refugees from Tacloban to Cebu. Cebu was hit but didn't get as much damage compared to Tacloban. Years later, Cebu was hit by Typhoon Odette and I'm among the survivors. I think about how storms in the Philippines hit when it's near Christmas. It was also that time when there was some politicking and taking things out of context (like the incident between Manuel A. Roxas Jr. and Alfred Romualdez of Tacloban). Take note that Philippine President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. is a relative of Romualdez. It was also verified that the late Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III and Romualdez both exchanged angry words.
After recovering from Odette, I remember having talks about how I and some people had talks while repairs were going on. I could remember a conversation where we talked, after surviving Odette and being caught rather unprepared in some way, that the people of Tacloban were ill-prepared. Even during the Christmas after Odette (and no Christmas celebration during December but a belated one after electricity came back), we still discussed about Yolanda. Sure, we had devastated homes and we were doing repairs. December got really stressful. However, I felt a sense of relief in January because repairs were ongoing. Ongoing repairs keep my mind at ease.
Aquino III said this during his visit in Tacloban 10 years ago:
BENIGNO AQUINO III, PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT: Sa ibang lugar ho, parang, hindi na lang ako magsasalita dahil bilang Pangulo n’yo bawal ho akong magalit. Maski na gaano ang inis ko, daanin ko na lang sa asim ng sikmura… Eh pag sinabi sa ‘yo, eto, eto ang dadaanan, eh ano pa nga ba ang gagawin mo – imbis na makinig, ‘di ba, ay kumilos? Pero sa akin na lang ho ‘yon.
(Now as for other places, I’d rather not comment, because as your President I’m not supposed to get angry. No matter how frustrated I am, I’ll just stay silent and keep my peace. Now if you’re told that this is the typhoon’s path, what will you do, aside from listen – act, right? But I’ll just keep that to myself.)
This statement by Romualdez does address this issue in part:
ALFRED ROMUALDEZ, TACLOBAN CITY MAYOR: I think it’s about time – this country is always hit by disasters – it’s about time, if they have to set up one battalion of rescuers on standby, they’re needed. We’ve been hit constantly, and we always rely on local rescuers, rescuers here, rescuers there, but we don’t really have yet a template, or a command of people with more than a thousand people, rescuers, equipment, and all that, and they’re experts in this.
Before anybody starts another rampage on the Aquinos or the Romualdezes--the problem is actually more systemic in nature. It's very easy for Yellowtards to talk about how "great" Aquino III was (and the levels of adoring him is very much like how Communists revere their dead leaders), berate this and that, and even call others who disagree with them "tanga" (inattentive). However, I really should address that the Yolanda operation wasn't without its faults. True, Aquino III did some good things but every leader, no matter how good, has his or her faults. Sure, I don't blame the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines for everything wrong in my life. However, I'm blaming the faulty provisions of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines for a lot of things wrong, that are directly related to it. If we've got a president who has no college degree--why not take a look at how difficult it is to become a prime minister in Singapore?
How do I believe a parliamentary system would've addressed the problems both Aquino III and Romualdez stated in their heated exchange?
We have this diagram which ironically presents the colors of Marcos Jr., Sara Duterte-Carpio, Atty. Maria Leonor S. Gerona-Robredo, and Atty. Francis Pangilinan. If I were to really vocalize things, I'd probably tell the Liberal Party of the Philippines that they should be the opposition now. In a parliamentary system, people vote by parties instead of the personalities. I feel that the problem with most presidential elections is how often they base themselves on popularity rather than credibility. Since when was a democracy ever a government only for the majority and when were minorities not part of the people? Mob rule isn't democratic at all since it doesn't respect the rights of minorities!
Let's imagine that the Philippines was a parliamentary system. In this scenario, the late Maria Corazon S. Cojuangco-Aquino was better off as the Head of State or national symbol of unity. The chant "Cory! Cory!" should've been best reserved for someone who should've been a national symbol of unity. Mrs. Aquino hid at a convent in Cebu while being the national symbol of unity. Mrs. Aquino should've remained as such. The way the late Lee Kuan Yew described her in From Third World to First really makes me think, "Cory should've remained symbolic, a president in a parliamentary system."
If the Philippines were a parliamentary system, the Liberal Party of the Philippines would've been the incumbent government if Aquino III were the prime minister. Maybe, one can imagine if he had to face off against Martin Romualdez (or maybe, I'll use Gloria Macagapal-Arroyo) as the Opposition Leader. In the case of Aquino III as prime minister--the Liberal Party will be the reigning party. There will be no such scenario that Aquino III is the prime minister and Jejomar Binay is the deputy prime minister unless the two belong to the same party. Instead, Roxas Jr. would be the deputy prime minister of Aquino III. It would mean that the late Corazon Victoria N. Juliano-Soliman would be designated as the minister of social welfare. On the opposing side,
In my preferred illustration, Aquino III is the prime minister, and Mrs. Arroyo is the opposition leader. Aquino III will have the backing of his whole party and so will Mrs. Arroyo. In short, both are at a balance. Mrs. Arroyo must also set her own cabinet called the Shadow Cabinet. Mrs. Arroyo must appoint her own set of ministers from her party. For every minister that Aquino III has--there's a corresponding equivalent from Mrs. Arroyo. Every week, both Aquino III and Mrs. Arroyo must lead their parties. The debates will be live on television.
Under a parliamentary system, it would require that each and every minister must answer to their shadow minister. Yolanda struck and it hit Tacloban. If Aquino III's statements about Alfred Romualdez are right, the latter must resign for his incompetence. Mrs. Soliman's duty as the minister of social welfare would be to answer to Esperanza Cabral (illustration only) as the shadow minister of social welfare. Every week, there would be the need to discuss and monitor implementation.
Just reading through this overly sensitive article "The Coming Fall of the "Noynoy Project"" (since some people tend to idolize him too much and there may be some mistakes here and there), then maybe this can help highlight the problem of the presidential system:
The same thing has been happening with this recent Yolanda/Haiyan typhoon disaster. TV News coverage – both local and foreign – repeatedly exposes how the national government is too slow to respond to the requests of the local governments of Tacloban and other affected places. There’s essentially no sense of urgency on the part of Noynoy to do anything right or at least temporarily assign someone who is experienced and competent enough to be the overall crisis-coordinator with all the necessary blanket authority to by-pass any bureaucratic processes. When a victim who had been held at gunpoint by looters at some point complained about the anarchy, the looting, and the violence that has spontaneously ensued as a result of desperation, and suggested declaring a limited “martial law” for the affected areas, Noynoy responded by saying “But you did not die, right?” Worse, he even walked out of that meeting!
There will always be disasters and emergencies and leaders will always be called upon to provide true leadership and the ability to organize the country’s resources, armed services, and bureaucracy to do whatever needs to get done. We do not deserve to have leaders who snap at victims who merely suggest certain courses of action based on what they know. We shouldn’t have leaders who totally “lose it” and walk out of meetings just because they can’t handle the stress. Leaders are supposed to handle stress. If Noynoy can’t handle stress, then he has no business being a leader!
Before the Diehard Duterte Supporters (DDS) come in with their close-minded rants, I'd like to point out why walking out happens a lot in the presidential system. There's hardly any real accountability. What if Aquino III was put into weekly scrutiny. He would probably be a lot more careful about walkouts or if he can't handle the stress. Sure, the Philippine economy got better but that doesn't mean Aquino III was the "perfect leader" that his diehard supporters painted him to be. Any leader, not just Aquino III would be more careful, especially with the Opposition. The Opposition would require not just Aquino III but the whole Liberal Party (if it was the Government) to make a weekly report. The Opposition's job is to question the Government and hold it accountable. It would keep any party on their toes and force lousy ones to resign. Sure, it's not perfect but it's going to be better than a severely flawed system of popularity-based politics.
Mrs. Soliman, as the minister of social welfare, should present her findings in front of the whole parliament with her party members. Maybe, Roxas Jr. would've not gone to Tacloban at all, if ever, since he'd be the deputy prime minister, in this illustration. Instead, Aquino III, as prime minister, goes to Tacloban and checks on the local government unit to extend help. Aquino III would be with Mrs. Soliman. Aquino III and Mrs. Soliman would have to present their findings and give solutions. The Opposition would need to offer alternatives. Mrs. Soliman would also need to account weekly on live television on how the DSWD is doing its job. If ever Mrs. Soliman screws up such as having expired relief goods or lack of control--she has the choice to either resign honorably or get voted out by a motion of confidence. The same can happen to Aquino III--he holds the biggest position of responsibility and he can't go around smiling or smirking. Aquino III can be removed if ever he does something that fails to uphold the confidence of the Parliament.
10 years ago, the problem was there, and yet some people will say, "The problem is with the people, not the system, that's common sense (insert insult)." Is the best thing one can do to send me insults? As Socrates says, "Insults the are best tools used by the loser." It's because the system dictates how people will behave. If people are given the worst tools, can you expect a better job? If you give a chef a rusted cleaver then don't complain if rust enters the food that he or she is preparing. They can keep saying ath LKY and Mahathir Mohamad are better because DNA, it's in the blood, blah blah blah, but they fail to see that it's been the system that's been a bigger picture.
Comments
Post a Comment