Shifting to the Parliamentary System is Better than Banning Political Dynasties

-

Some Filipinos who are totally against charter change (or constitutional reform) always use political dynasties as an excuse. It's not enough that some of them should keep saying that economic charter change will mean "selling the Philippines to foreigners". Please, if they realize it, developed countries allow 100% FDI ownership--allowing foreigners to own 100% of their business. Back on the topic, I would like to discuss political dynasties and why they're not necessarily bad. Some people keep talking about the anti-political dynasty law--that is one per family. It might be because they still think the first Marcos Administration was a parliamentary system. Please, evidence has been gathered that it was never a parliamentary system, to begin with (read here)! 

It's easy to talk about political dynasties. Some people were citing President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. as a member of a political dynasty. Some people also cite the Dutertes. I even raised it up that what if the Robredo daughters should all run for office if they're qualified. It's effortless to try and shoot down the argument. Some have the slippery slope that the Philippines shifting to either a parliamentary system or federalism, would mean that political dynasties will erupt like crazy. It's like, "Are you crazy? We're already having political dynasties erupt left and right! Do you want to shift to the parliamentary system? We must remove political dynasties, not shift to the parliamentary system!"

However, we need to look at how politics works in the Philippines 

Inquirer

The presidential system relies on name recalls--as a result of the presidential system. If one person becomes a politician, people are bound to say, "Oh he or she must be great, because he or she belongs to this clan." Take the candidacies of the Aquinos, the Marcoses, and the Dutertes, as three examples of name recalls. The late Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III was urged to run for president. It was presumably because his mother Mrs. Maria Corazon S. Cojuangco-Aquino passed away. Speaking of which, we have the trend of necropolitics along with grieving widows. Mrs. Aquino was made to run as president (and honestly, she should've remained a symbolic Head of State in a parliamentary system) because of her husband Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr.'s assassination. It was easy to pin Ninoy's assassination on the first Marcos Administration, even if it may not be the fault of Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. (read here). Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" Gerona-Robredo may have run only because her husband Jesse Robredo passed away on August 18, 2012. 

How can one expect the anti-political dynasty law to work in a name-recall system? I'm not even surprised that Atty. Mel Sta. Maria dares to say that Kristina Bernadette "Kris" C. Aquino is capable of running. I even ran across a post on Facebook that said "Get well soon!" to Kris. Not because so Kris can still have more time with her children. It's so Kris can run for senator. How can one talk against political dynasties while wishing Kris would one presumably because of her deceased only brother and her deceased parents? I even feel Bongbong's and Vice President Sarah Z. Duterte-Carpio's victories are due to name recall. The Dutertes are strong in Davao. The Aquinos are strong in Tarlac. The Marcoses are strong in Ilocos. Whether it's an Aquino, a Duterte, or Marcos who sits--it's most likely due to name recall. Never mind the well-documented Marcos Wealth and that the Tallano Gold is most likely just a fable. If Kris should get better and become a Senator--it's still another name recall. If the Robredo daughters may win a seat--it may still be because of name recall. 

What becomes more hypocritical is when the loyalists are the ones raising the issue. Does it ban political dynasties except for their favored family? It seems to be. There's really no consistency in calling to end political dynasties. One can shout, "No to political dynasty!" at one moment then be shouting for the candidacy of their idolized politician's relative. It's like one can badmouth businessman Paolo Benigno "Bam" A. Aquino because he's an Aquino but supports Rep. Ferdinand Alexander "Sandro" A. Marcos III. After all, he's a grandson of Marcos. One can badmouth a possible candidacy of Kris' eldest son Joshua Aquino but support Sandro for being a Marcos. Where's the consistency in all of that?

This reminds me of meeting a certain clueless woman on Facebook. She says that she's not in favor of charter change, as long as certain families are still in power. I tried to argue with her the problem has been the system. However, she's been using Mrs. Robredo as an excuse not to change the system. They think system change equals regime change. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way at all!

Why political dynasties in a parliamentary aren't much of an issue?


However, I was reading From Third World to First, and it was a good thing that the late Lee Kuan Yew wrote about his son, the former prime minister Lee Hsien Loong. If one must know this, LSH served as a member in parliament during the time when LKY was still the prime minister. That's still a political dynasty but LSH had to prove himself. Instead of riding on a name recall because of his great father (and some fathers overshadow their sons), LSH had to crawl out of his father's rather huge shadow and prove he was capable of running Singapore. Just because the father is a great man, doesn't always translate the son will follow. Reading a history of kings will show that some good fathers do sire bad sons too!

From pages 679-680 of From Third World to First, this can be read showing why political dynasties aren't necessarily bad if you've got the right system:

When Loong was still unsettled after his bereavement, Goh Chok Tong, then the minister of defense and assistant secretary-general of the PAP, invited him to stand for Parliament in the December 1984 general election. At that time Loong was a colonel on the general staff and the joint staff in the SAF. Chok Tong as his minister, had a high assessment of Loong's potential in politics. Loong was concerned, that as a widower with two young children, he would find it difficult to manage the family as he would have to be absent much of the time on political work. He discussed it with Choo and me. I told him that if he missed the coming election, he would have to wait for four to five years before he would have another chance. With every passing year, he would find it more difficult to change and adjust to political life, especially learning to work with people in the constituencies and the unions. Most of all, he had to feel deeply for people, be able to communicate his feelings for them. At the age of 32, Loong left the SAF and contested the elections in December. He won one of the highest majorities of any candidate in the election. 

I appointed Loong, a junior minister in the ministry of trade and industry. His minister immediately put him in charge of a private sector committee to review the economy just as we entered a severe recession in 1985. The committee's proposals that the government take strong steps to reduce business costs and strengthen competitiveness were a major political test for Loong and the other ministers. In November 1990, when I resigned as prime minister, Loong was appointed deputy prime minister, Loong was appointed deputy prime minister by Prime Minister Goh Cok tong. 

Many of my critics thought this smacked of nepotism, that he was unduly favored because he was my son. On the contrary, as I told the party conference in 1989, the year before I resigned, it would not be good for Singapore or for Loong to have him succeed me. He would be seen as having inherited the office from me when he should deserve the position on his own merit. He was still young and it was better that someone else succeed me as prime minister. Then were Loong to make the grade later, it would be clear that he made it on his own merit. 

For several years, Chok Tong had to endure the jeers of foreign critics that he was a seat warmer for Loong. But after Chok Tong won his second general election in 1997 and consolidated his position as his own man, the jeering stopped. As Chok Tong's deputy, Loong has established his standing as a political leader in his own right--determined, fast, and versatile in ranging over the whole field of government. Almost every difficult or taxing problem in any ministry had his attention. Ministers, MPs, and senior civil servants knew this. I could have stayed on a few years longer and allowed him to gather support to be the leader. I did not do so.

This reminds me that maybe anger towards Bongbong's invitation to Singapore, may also be because of sentimentalism towards the late Flor Contemplacion. Anyway, if we look into the picture, the difference is Loong was qualified and not because he was the son of LKY. Instead, we look at Loong, he was someone who had to prove himself when his father gave him the position of trade minister. However, Loong was already in a position at the SAF as a colonel. Loong graduated from Trinity College Cambridge and Harvard University. Do you think LKY could've bribed the universities to give him those honors? Besides, becoming prime minister in Singapore, isn't a walk in the park either! If the Philippines had a parliamentary system--I doublt Bongbong would be prime minister at all!

Even the first step to becoming prime minister, is obviously difficult:

Step 1 

In order to become the prime minister, one needs to be an elected Member of Parliament (MP) and a member of the majority party. Considering that the PAP has formed the government, and has won every election since 1959, this article is going to assume that it is easier to rise to power with the PAP. 

But before even entering politics, certain factors increase the probability of success for someone with ministerial aspirations. A recent study of Singapore’s current ministers and their educational background found out that a typical minister is one who has:

  • Studied at an Independent or SAP secondary school
  • Went to Raffles, National JC or Hwa Chong for their tertiary studies
  • Read business or economics as an undergraduate
  • Gained a postgraduate degree, most commonly at the Harvard Kennedy School

Hence, candidates that follow this route seem to have a statistical advantage. 

In addition to this, the government’s dominant status and its access to the Public Service Commission – which gives out Singapore’s most prestigious scholarships – allows it to recruit scholars into politics. Mr. Lee Kuan Yew conceded as much, saying that “a person who has done well in Singapore’s scholarship system will eventually be spotted and headhunters from the party will look for him”. This focus on educational attainment seems to be grounded in the belief of Singaporean vulnerability. In other words, for a country where prosperity is “a result of a continuing act of will” the PAP believes that educated and capable leaders are able to come up with plans and measures to cope with a unique set of problems. An article in the Economist also contends that the PAP avoids the types of corruption seen in other one-party dominant states precisely because it constantly recruits, and in the process turfs out established figures “ruthlessly”.

As we look straight into it, Loong had to do a lot of steps before he could even sit in power. Did it matter if he was the son of LKY or not? What mattered was that Loong could prove himself. What's true is that Singapore's parliamentary worked because it was a real parliamentary. It's not because LKY wasn't corrupt, unlike Marcos, that made the parliamentary system work in Singapore but not in the Philippines. Again, when will stubborn boomers ever stop spreading the lie of the "parliamentary system" under Marcos? It never existed! As Ninoy called it, "We had a parliamentary form of government without a parliament."

Since the parliamentary doesn't rely on role calls--it doesn't matter if political dynasties will happen again. First, they wouldn't be so plenty because name recall is almost non-existent. That means members of the political families need to prove themselves. Sandro may have lost the confidence of the parliament, if he was a member of the Philippine parliament, regarding his statement on the Philippine peso being weak because the US dollar, is strong. If the Robredo daughters are all qualified then why not? If Manuel A. Roxas Jr.'s son, Paolo Gerardo Z. Roxas, is qualified, why not? If Bam can prove himself then why not? If James Carlos "Bimby" A. Yap can prove himself as a member of parliament, then why not? It wouldn't matter anymore if they belonged to a political dynasty or not. What matters is if the political dynasty is built on credibility instead of name recall. 

Popular posts from this blog

Was Cesar Virata's Position as "Prime Minister" the Best Proof That a Parliamentary System Won't Work in the Philippines?

-
Image
Kahimyang Project It's often said by some of the now-old folks that the Philippines was once under a parliamentary system. I had some insults from a close-minded political scientist, some former dancer of an OFW, and others whenever I said, "We must shift to the parliamentary system!" They would say, "Look stupid! We already had a parliamentary system back in the Marcos Years!" I ask for the proof and they keep using Cesar Virata. By using insults, they start to make me doubt their credibility. It's because insults and other forms of Ad Hominem attacks are often the favorite tools of sore losers .  I would like to give this an example. One of their best sources is Cesar Virata. At first, it sounds like, "Okay, we had a parliamentary system." However, we must take note that not every country that has a prime minister, is under a parliamentary system. Some of them are still presidential in nature with parliamentary features . I wonder if Mrs. Raissa
Read more

REAL TALK: The Liberal Party of the Philippines Can ONLY Become The Genuine Opposition Under A Genuine Parliamentary Constitution

-
Image
PhilStar It's difficult to talk with people who are still comfortable with what they already know, right? However, the term Dilawan need not be drowned in negativity, but it can be drowned in negativity if the brand gets marred in a popularity-based political system. The Philippines currently uses the presidential system. If we were in a parliamentary system right now--chances are Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. wouldn't be prime minister due to the difficulty involved as explained in  " How to Become Singapore's Prime Minister, Explained in 7 Steps ". That means all candidates would need to do the following: Study and specialize Wait for the call Tea sessions and panels Take a test Perform well as an MP Win the trust of your peers Prepare for office The Dilawans can call themselves the genuine opposition, march in their proud yellow t-shirts, and more. However, under a presidential system, there's no real opposition, and the platform of any party
Read more

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

-
Image
People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal .  Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir
Read more

Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohamad: Just a Matter of Strong Leadership Without a Good System?

-
Image
Jakarta Globe It's very easy to talk about how we need character change only, not a charter change. I say that having a charter change (better termed constitutional reform ) will lead to character change. The old saying of some boomers goes, "It's common sense that nothing is wrong with the system, just the people running the system." However, when I ask something like, "If that's so then why do other nations have better leaders? What about Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew?" Their answer is, "Well, that's proof that the system isn't defective, it's just the leader." This can also come from people who believe what Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that there's nothing wrong with the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, that it's the "best in the world". The arguments are clearly illogical at best . Some say that the parliamentary system worked in Malaysia and Singapore because those heading it aren't corrupt. T
Read more

The Vizconde Massacre and Trial by "Trust Me Bro"?

-
Image
As Christmas approaches, another case worth revisiting for history vs. gossip is the Vizconde Massacre. I watched Crime Investigation Asia uploaded on YouTube. I wrote about the documentary Give Up Tomorrow -- a documentary that explores the irregularities while pursuing justice for the late Chiong sisters, Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong and Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. I feel compelled to write about the Vizconde Massacre. For more than 10 years, I used to believe that Hubert Jeffry Pagaspas Webb, son of Freddie Webb, was guilty. It turns out that according to Crime Investigation Asia --it was really a trial by gossip . In my case, I want to call it a trial of Trust Me Bro.  I still read comments about how footage of Hubert in the States could've been "easily tampered". Yet, those who comment haven't presented the evidence. I guess if I asked for their evidence, they'll just say, "Trust me bro!" Granted, photo editing was still in its infancy back then so how cou
Read more

Was the Late John Regala Interviewed by the Directors of "Give Up Tomorrow"?

-
Image
The passing away of John Regala hit today. I remembered a film called Animal (2004) in  which the original title was originally Butakal meaning male pig. Regala starred as Jaco Lozano--an obvious caricature of Juan Francisco Gonzales Larrañaga aka Paco. Strangely enough, neither the Larrañagas nor the Osmeñas were heard to have ever filed a case against the late director Toto Natividad. Instead, it was the Chiong family that filed a lawsuit against Natividad. I did write about  whether or not Natividad himself was interviewed by the directors of Give Up Tomorrow . As mentioned, there was over 400 hours worth of footage and over 100 interviews done . Both Marty Syjuco and Michael Collins may have interviewed not only Natividad, the late Tony Calvento but also Regala himself since he played the film's main antagonist . In 2018, we had an incident when Niño Muhlach apologized to Paco for the portrayal in The Calvento Files . Apparently, Niño himself wasn't interviewed but was prob
Read more

Trust Me Bro: The 1987 Constitution is the Best in the World!

-
I may be no lawyer or constitutionalist but it's time to use common sense . I'm afraid common sense is hardly taught or even encouraged in schools. Right now, I want to do this provocative entry to ask, "Fact or gossip: Is the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines the best in the world?" Yes, you read that right. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that last 2018 and I'm still laughing at it. I've decided to write this common-sense post to actually contest the idea that, "The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is the best in the world."  I'm laughing at some things Davide Jr. had said such as, "It' is the only institution in the world where the public office is a public trust." However, this man is terribly wrong because, around the world, we see the doctrine where public office is a public trust. Thomas Jefferson also said that public office is public trust -- way before Davide Jr. was born into the world! I really laughed at their claim o
Read more

Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan and Discovering More About One's Common Austronesian Roots

-
Image
I was doing some research on Taiwan finding out that the natives are indeed Austronesians . It seems that Indonesians and Malaysians may have also settled in Taiwan aside from the Philippines. A look at Mt. Alishan and Banaue Rice Terraces have a similarity. Taiwan has its famous tea terraces. Banaue has its famous rice terraces. Both are cultural heritages that must be preserved! I soon found an article which Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan. Not surprisingly, these Ifugao OFWs can point out several things that are pretty similar. An article called " A Gotad Picnic With Ifugaos Living in Taiwan " would tell of Armand Camhol, an Ifugao OFW, who met with other Ifugaos in Taiwan. Gotad is a thanksgiving festival for the Ifugaos. The News Lens International Edition What was noted by Armand at the end of the article is: The people of Ifugao value hospitality, and as a symbol of friendship, they shared their holiday with their invited guests, who, in return, sang, joined the dances, and made
Read more

Can Anti-Reformists Prove to the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy That the Marcos Regime was a Real Parliamentary?

-
Image
The previous comparison of the CoRRECT Movement was between the late businessman John Gokongwei Jr. and Hilario Davide Jr., a public policy expert. The comparison is pretty much apples and oranges which is why Kishore Mahbubani, founder and former dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) would make more sense. It's not enough to say something. If the source is just merely Merkado CTTO (read here ) then I have every right to doubt it. I tried asking for empirical evidence  they have that the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was a parliamentary government. The only evidence they have was that there was a prime minister and his name was Cesar Virata. However, further details reveal that Virata was a non-starter and a no leader. From Third World to First , Virata was even considered a candidate to replace the late Ferdinand E. Marcos, a president with powers . A challenge that I want to pose to people who still insist that the Marcos Years were indeed under a parli
Read more