Some politicians dismiss it as a petty gimmick, but President Aquino’s ban on putting images and names of public officials on markers for state-funded projects and services and on goods for distribution to the public strikes at the heart of patronage politics in this country.
In countries where citizens are vigilant about the way their taxes are spent, public officials would think twice before claiming credit for a state-funded project, or passing off relief goods as their own by putting their images or names on the items.
In this country, these have all been SOP for as long as we can remember. These practices contribute to making the congressional pork barrel so invaluable to lawmakers with an eye to re-election, higher office, or the perpetuation of a political dynasty. The same goes for local government executives.
Some Cabinet members and agency heads have also used their positions as springboards for political office by using public funds, or publicly funded projects and programs, for self-promotion.
The ban ordered by President Aquino does not seem frivolous when you consider the ongoing investigation of allegations that 300,000 metric tons of rice donated by a Japanese company to the government for typhoon relief through the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) ended up being used for the failed campaign for mayor of Erwin Genuino, son of former Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. chief Ephraim. The 10,000 sacks of rice bore Erwin’s name and image.
The former PAGCOR chief claimed that the rice was a donation to him personally by his friend who was an executive in the Japanese company, and that he simply graciously turned over the bulk to the DSWD. This was belied by DSWD officials and records of the rice shipment.
P-Noy’s ban also does not seem frivolous when you remember that the backhoe notoriously used to dig mass graves for many of the 57 victims in last year’s massacre in Maguindanao (plus several of their vehicles) bore the name of the former provincial governor, Andal Ampatuan Sr.
When state-owned equipment like an expensive backhoe carries your name in prominent letters, you tend to believe it is your private property, for use as you please. If the backhoe is used for a project benefiting a community, then the community owes you one.
Putting one’s name and picture on billboards marking state-funded projects, or on relief packs or medical kits for the needy, allows politicians to dole out patronage – and court votes – without spending a single cent of their own money.
Now P-Noy wants them to say goodbye to all that?
* * *
Several politicians have been overheard grousing that P-Noy doesn’t need to put his face or name on billboards and relief items for name recall because even if he didn’t become the nation’s highest official and therefore the most widely covered by mass media, he also happens to be the only son of two of the nation’s most renowned figures, and the brother of a show biz superstar to boot.
Barred from seeking re-election, P-Noy has also given no indication at this time that he intends to follow his predecessor’s lead and seek lower elective office once his six-year term is over.
Politicians do have a point when they say that putting their names and images on billboards can show that they are doing their job. In the case of lawmakers, they are informing the public about the way the pork barrel is being utilized.
But if transparency in pork barrel utilization is the objective, lawmakers should submit to the Commission on Audit individual reports listing the projects they have identified for funding with their pork, including the names of the contractors and suppliers plus the items procured and the amounts involved. These reports must be open to the public.
For name recall, politicians can attend groundbreaking or opening ceremonies for their pet projects, making sure their role will be duly noted by the beneficiaries.
If it’s transparency they want, why are some of them also opposing the inclusion in project billboards of the name of the contractor plus the project cost? Those are details that taxpayers want to see in projects undertaken using tax money.
Some minority lawmakers have threatened to defy P-Noy’s ban by putting up their own billboards claiming credit for the projects. There are many words in the English language, but none captures the essence of that attitude better than the Tagalog word whose literal translation is “thick-faced.”
The bigger beef of the minority, according to reports, was P-Noy’s withdrawal of an additional P10.6-billion pork, approved earlier this year by the administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Palace officials have explained that the withdrawal was due largely to the depletion of funds, and it’s just the third quarter.
As retaliation, some petulant lawmakers have warned that they would give P-Noy’s appointees a hard time in the Commission on Appointments.
* * *
How should the administration respond to that threat? P-Noy can take a leaf out of his predecessor’s book. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo simply ignored the CA and repeatedly reappointed bypassed Cabinet members.
P-Noy can also use his immense power over fund releases to in turn give his opponents a hard time in utilizing their pork barrel.
His appointees can use their personal charm to do their own lobbying for CA approval.
Or he can show that he doesn’t live in another planet and is willing to settle for change in small increments. Politics, after all, is supposed to be the art of compromise.
The billboards, for example, can still include the name of the lawmaker or local government official who initiated the project, but only as a statement of fact, with the name no different from or bigger than the rest of the project details.
But the pictures have to go. As for relief items, the only entities or individuals who may be entitled, under special circumstances, to put their names and images on the goods are those who personally pay for them.
It’s time to draw a clear line between private and public funds.