|
Last
week, the country was shaken by two separate but related
events which had people’s eyes glued to television sets
and their ears to radios. They watched the
“assassination” of former Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. as
one by one, congressmen explained their role in the
“murder” before they stabbed him with their long knives
(shades of Brutus!)
The furor over de Venecia had barely
died down when the country was gripped by even more
exciting news. Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr., president of
Philippine Forest Corp. and technical consultant to the
national broadband network (NBN) had been abducted upon
his arrival from Hong Kong, by a contingent from the
Police Security and Protection Office (PSPO).
Lozada’s abduction sparked such a storm
of media furor and public uproar that his captors were
constrained to deliver him to La Salle-Greenhills and
the protection of La Sallian brothers and nuns.
The rest is history. Last Friday, Jun
Lozada recounted his ordeal to the Senate in a hearing
which was watched on TV and listened to on radio by a
sympathetic public.
Some professionals in government wept.
They saw themselves in Jun Lozada—professionals and
experts who have to give technical justification to
corruption-laden government projects. They saw in Jun
Lozada a professional who was sucked into the dark world
of our “dysfunctional procurement system” where the
choice of projects is driven not by public need but by
the amount of commissions for middlemen and their
powerful principals.
Good
governance as good
business
Like everyone else, businessmen were
also reacting to the Jun Lozada saga even as they
celebrated the Lunar New Year and met for cocktails,
dinners and celebrations. They asked themselves: what
can we do?
What are the implications of the Lozada
revelations for the business of governance?
I have had conversations with friends in
the business sector. There are those who sincerely
admire the President and credit her for growth in the
economy. They are annoyed with the spate of political
noise generated in the Legislative branch of government,
as well as the endless protest activities by
civil-society organizations.
Businessmen worry that political
upheavals will interrupt the rhythm of business
activities and will be bad for the economy.
I have always warned my friends that the
pace of economic growth may not catch up with the pace
at which social development problems are
escalating—poverty, unemployment and deficits in
Millennium Development Goals-related services. I tell
them that I am more scared of spontaneous actions of the
desperate and unorganized which are easily subdued by
the state, but will lead to so much loss in lives.
This time, the storm created by the de
Venecia “assassination” and the Lozada testimony can’t
be ignored. The latter has revealed so many flaws in
governance, which can’t be brushed aside.
It is clear that it is not enough to
declare on television that those who defy the State
should be shot. It is not enough to say that all is well
with the economy and politics/governance be damned.
It is time for business to do something
about governance. After all, as I repeatedly point out,
governance is not about the government only. It is about
transparency, accountability and predictability in
government operations. Most important of all, it is
about citizens’ participation, including the business
sector.
What can business do?
Blow the
whistle
Lozada pinpointed the procurement system
as dysfunctional. If only businessmen will blow the
whistle when they are subjected to outrageous and
illegal demands by fixers and political middlemen! They
can insist on compliance with the provisions of the
procurement law, which is claimed to be more stringent
than the requirements of the World Bank.
Joey de Venecia, Jun Lozada and many
others have already paved the way. There are more honest
and dedicated public officials than we think. The Senate
will surely listen, and our church and educational
institutions will give refuge.
Demand
payback for financial contributions to politicians
It is no secret that businessmen support
political candidates in anticipation of favors. Those
who have contributed much to the electoral campaigns of
incumbent officials have the “k” to demand payback and
advise erring officials not only to moderate their greed
but to back off from bribery and wanton abuse of state
power to cow people into silence.
Performance as criterion for contributions to the 2010
elections
This early, candidates are already
seeking financial contributions. Actual performance
should be the major criterion in financing candidates.
Civil-society organizations are already setting up
criteria for selecting candidates. Business
organizations can do this.
The
businessman as citizen
Last, the businessman is also a Filipino
citizen. He has the right and duty to write, to speak
out and to act. Now. |
