The always-switched Angelo Reyes leaves the DILG to take over the DENR; erstwhile DENR head Michael Defensor has a new post as presidential chief of staff; Antipolo City Rep. Ronaldo Puno leaves Congress for the DILG, his former turf; Rep. Rolando Andaya, Jr. also leaves Congress for the DBM; and Romulo Neri of DBM goes back to the NEDA.
There's no quarrel, that as Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita needlessly underscored, choosing the Cabinet is solely a presidential prerogative. It's just that GMA's men appear to be so multi-faceted, or perhaps supermen, as to fit into any position at a moment's beck and call
Besides, such executive option affects public interest and welfare which ought to deter this game of musical chairs that spawns instability and a lot of questions...
Firstly, is there a dearth of competent prospects, such that, these Cabinet choices are perforce shifted from one post to the other? Corollarily, if they were that capable in their posts, why pull them out and give them another assignment? Conversely, it can be assumed that their performance was not beyond cavil; otherwise, why shuffle them like a deck of cards?
It's only basic in both public and private governance that able and productive department heads should be respected, rather than kicked out, or kicked up, or moved sidewise. As the street slang goes: Why fix it if it ain't broke?
Secondly, Cabinet positions require plans and programs on longer time span. Cabinet members do not run their departments on day-to-day, or week-to-week, or month-to-month basis. For instance, a Tourism secretary who knows his onions has to project his policy and programs with futuristic thrust. They may include worldwide tourist promotions covering all aspects, such as, hotels and other infrastructures, transport and communication facilities, airport and seaport perks, developing tourist destinations, etc., ad infinitum.
Thirdly, aside from political "loyalty", what special "talents" and capabilities do these recycled Cabinet men possess that put them far up and seemingly indispensable?
Even common sense dictates that a given appointee's academic or EQ background, his training and experience, his IQ, his special qualifications, among others, have to be factored by necessity. For instance, it's awkward and unapt, to say the least, for a non-lawyer as secretary of the DOJ, or a national security adviser with an EQ of Pre-Med, or a DOH secretary who is not a medical doctor, or a secretary of finance whose EQ and experience have nothing to do with economics, or finance, or banking and allied disciplines, or a DILG secretary without experience in LGU governance, or a press secretary who doesn't have the proper EQ or media training and background, or DepEd head who isn't an educator.
To recap, no one is indispensable in government. Conversely, don't give us the crap or that balderdash that anybody can qualify for a Cabinet post just because we are under a democracy which confers everybody that right.
And it's probably because of that, unfortunately, that the halls of both houses of Congress, the judiciary, and also in varied appointive positions in government, are cluttered with mediocres, nincompoops, ignoramuses, or the illiterates, or what have you.