‘All returned, no re-investment’

Many experts and business owners know that in order for companies or businesses to grow, the two important points are to have ROI or Return On Investment and to re-invest a reasonable portion of profits back into the business. The latter is very important for continuity and expansion.

In recent decades, government has imposed a policy for government owned or controlled corporations to be self-sustaining, to ensure sustainability and to expand just like private corporations. But unlike the private sector, our government and its laws often require profit center agencies to turn over 100 percent of their earnings every year and in return they are given budgets.

The analogy would be a carabao that does all the hard work, carries all the loads and burdens, all of which translates to thousands of pesos a month. But in return the carabao gets grass! No extra expense on housing, vitamins or veterinary visits. And when he is under the weather, he gets whipped, cursed or kicked or ignored and left on the end of a rope. This is how we and our politicians treat our vital agencies and services!

The first time I heard of the “All returned-No re-investment” policy of government was at the LTO. Time and again I learned that the LTO is NOT POOR and NOT BROKE! The agency makes billions of pesos for the national government from all of their many services related to land transportation documentation and regulation.

If they wanted to, they could easily fund their operations, buy all the equipment to advance for transport regulation and documentation as well as slowly acquire and build offices and facilities all over the country on their own. The problem is: they have NO SAY and NO SHARE in the billions of pesos they earn every year!

Because of the recent flight disruption at the NAIA, I also learned that the same goes for the Ninoy Aquino International Airport and the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines. These government agencies under the DOTr generate and earn anywhere from P6 billion to P11 billion through aviation related services, fees and charges, all of which go back directly to the national government.

If either the NAIA or the CAAP needed or wanted to spend or invest sizeable capital or sums to sustain their operations, the funds have to go through the political hoops of government and Congress. Instead of being run like a private corporation similar to some all over the world, the NAIA and CAAP have to go around with begging bowls to people who have no understanding of the highly specialized and technical services these government offices render.

Late last year, I pointed out to a whiny politician that the NAIA is in the state it is, partly because politicians meddled and whittled down plans, programs and budgets requested by aviation authorities. It is tragic that those who know the least and have least accountability are those who cause the greatest disruption in the professionalism and modernization of services under the DOTr.

According to an aviation expert, if the NAIA was allowed to utilize and re-invest a sizeable portion of its earnings back to proper operations, development, expansion, etc., then there would be NO NEED FOR PRIVATIZATION of airports. The money is there, the business model works, the qualified and informed experts are there. Simply let those profit centers and others like them carry on the way corporations should be run and not politicized or bureaucratized.

If legislators really want to help, then fix the laws, rules and regulations and stop acting like Congress or the Senate is the only place that can properly investigate operational issues and concerns. For instance, lawmakers should refile the bill for the creation of the National Transport Safety Board to investigate transport related issues and incidents independently, not the Senate or Congress.

*      *      *

Last Saturday evening, I received a Viber message inquiring if there was any truth to an alleged PNP memorandum calling all PNP personnel to RED ALERT status “in view of the resignation of all personnel in the Department of National Defense.” It was clearly a hoax but one that had a reference or may be related to the ongoing call of DILG Secretary Benhur Abalos and Chief PNP Rodolfo Azurin for high ranking PNP officials to submit voluntary resignations.

I learned that while the Chief PNP was doing his rounds in Region 3, talk back was also doing the rounds among affected officers. The expressed view was that they were willing to subject themselves to investigations but were unwilling to submit voluntary resignations and be placed at the mercy of whoever was appointed to the 5-man review board to be appointed by Abalos and Azurin.

First of all, those who shared their sentiments pointed out that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A voluntary resignation puts the cart before the horse. The thinking is if one were to resign, you already have one foot out of the PNP. All that would be needed to make it appear fair and square and legal would be the judgement of the review board.

But that in itself does not sit well with officers who are all so familiar with the kampi-kampi or culture of alliances in the PNP. How does one defend himself from a member of the review board who has prejudged them or has history with someone under review? Some are also worried that the resignation and review may be a way of clearing out certain positions and assignments so other more favored can be placed therein.

When I solicited the opinion of a veteran, his suggestion was for the DILG secretary and PNP Chief Azurin to simply place the uncooperative or suspected cops on floating status. That will surely launch a new term: The Salbabida Cops.