Does P-Noy care to listen to his Cabinet?

The dire consequences of lack of full Cabinet discussions of vital national policy matters have once again reared an ugly head. More than 500 days into office, President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III still insists on this kind of management style that frowns upon the conduct of regular weekly full Cabinet meeting at Malacañang Palace.

Instead, the Chief Executive prefers to meet only with Cabinet clusters on need basis per specific subject matter. While he may not be holding weekly face-to-face meeting with his entire Cabinet, P-Noy is reportedly very accessible to each and every one of them by telephone or mobile phone and even through text messages only.

Department of Social Welfare and Development Secretary Dinky Soliman, during her recent visit to The STAR editorial office, confirmed this. In fact, the DSWD chief disclosed, she gets frequent text messages even at the oddest hour of the day from P-Noy wherever he may be, whether he’s here or abroad. If that’s the case, Soliman has no problem reaching the Chief Executive. But how about some Cabinet members who are not that close with P-Noy?

Some other Cabinet members find ingenious ways to get audience with P-Noy. I heard Trade and Industry Secretary Gregorio Domingo told a radio interview he does some “ambush” meetings with the President. He tries to catch up with P-Noy in his engagements in and outside Malacañang Palace. Former Tourism Secretary Alberto Lim also did the same thing. He told this to us a few weeks before he resigned from the Aquino Cabinet.

Each President has every right to conduct his own style of managing the affairs of State. For a 24-7 job like the presidency, P-Noy does not see any urgency neither the importance to include a full Cabinet meeting of three hours at the most to conduct one, at least once a week, or even once a month.   

What would be the most compelling reason for P-Noy to convene a meeting of his entire Cabinet? There may not be any reason at all. But would not it be reasonable for the President to at least meet with all the members of the official family to brainstorm about State policies and matters of national import with his entire Cabinet before implementing them?

This lack of brainstorming and full Cabinet discussion, especially of new administration policies, appear to be the culprit of discordant and disconnect of government decisions and actions. The latest evidence of this is the government recall of the ban on the deployment of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to 41 countries earlier declared “unsafe” for migrant workers.

Pursuant to Republic Act (RA) 10022, also known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 that took effect in March 2010, OFWs will only be deployed to countries that can guarantee the protection of their rights. In implementing the law, the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) issued on Oct. 28 a partial list of 41 countries that failed to protect the rights of Filipino workers.

RA 10022 mandated that the POEA must come up with this list following consultation process with other concerned government agencies, such as the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA). The DFA issued a negative certification to 41 countries that have not passed domestic laws or signed international treaties ensuring the protection of foreign workers. The POEA then issued an order implementing a deployment ban of OFWs in 41 countries given the negative certification.

The 41 countries in the list include: Afghanistan, Antigua, Barbuda, Barbados, Cambodia, Cayman Islands, Chad, Croatia, Cuba, North Korea, Dominica, Timor Leste, Eritrea, Haiti, India, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Palestine, Serbia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Sudan, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turks and Caicos, Tuvalu, US Virgin Islands, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe.

This Philippine law requires that a receiving country “has existing labor and social laws protecting the rights of workers, including migrant workers; is a signatory to and/or a ratifier of multilateral conventions, declarations or resolutions relating to the protection of workers, including migrant workers; and has concluded a bilateral agreement or arrangement with the government on the protection of the rights of overseas Filipino workers.”

In a statement, the Palace deputy presidential spokesperson, Abigail Valte immediately allayed fears of massive effect of this deployment ban on the country’s economy, saying the number of OFWs that will be affected by the suspension of deployment is very minimal. This was in consideration of the foreign exchange remittances of our OFWs that have buoyed the Philippine economy and kept it afloat all these times of global economic crisis.

That’s why when the POEA came out with the implementing rules for this deployment ban, there was the usual hue and cry for the government’s lack of consultation with OFWs themselves as the affected sector, at least through their representative groups. Worse, it turned out the DFA was not consulted given the diplomatic implications of such ban. 

“However, the Department of Foreign Affairs believes that there are compelling reasons to defer further action on the list,” Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario said in a press statement. The DFA chief underscored the need for the Philippine government to first be given ample opportunity to dialogue with these countries and to review its negative certification.

POEA chief Carlos Cao gave in to the DFA request for a 90-day suspension of the deployment ban so it could work on possible new bilateral agreements and enable the affected countries to comply with the amended Migrant Workers Act.

This brings me back to my earlier premise on the need for the Aquino administration to get its act together. And one way to effectively do this is for the Chief Executive to sit down with his entire Cabinet to get the brightest and comprehensive discussion of such policy issues with deep and wide implications before implementing any decision or action.

Such utter lack of full Cabinet discussions of State policies produces this kind of ill-conceived decisions and actions of the government. It does not speak well of the leadership of P-Noy. Or does he even care to listen at all to a healthy debate among his Cabinet?