SOCIAL Welfare and Development Secretary Rex Gatchalian is defending the DSWD’s Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situation (AICS) and Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP) against accusations they are being used for political purposes, including vote buying.
Gatchalian said that all the DSWD field offices across the country “serve people in need,” whether they go to the DSWD by themselves or were referred by local government officials or members of Congress, and that the agency applies a “stringent” verification and validation process.
Gatchalian stressed that all funds for the two programs are lodged with the department under the General Appropriations Act and not a single peso goes to any LGU or legislator’s office or district. But the agency “coordinates” with local officials for distribution to beneficiaries—and, without doubt, the offices of senators and House members. And even that of the Vice President. Didn’t VP Sara Duterte complain that her endorsements of supposed beneficiaries were being ignored by DSWD, saying that’s how the programs are being politicized? But that is not how the program is politicized because it is politicized from the start.
“Referrals from legislators and local executives are entertained pursuant to existing DSWD guidelines,” explained Gatchalian, stressing that there is no fund in the GAA lodged with the DSWD for the benefit of any congressional district or LGU.
But that, Secretary Gatchalian, is exactly how patronage politics is woven into nearly every government program—particularly those that provide aid, assistance, ayuda, safety net or whatever name you call them, 4Ps, AKAP, TUPAD, whatever. A rose by any other name is still a rose. Such programs are designed and meant exactly that.
In fairness to Gatchalian, he is probably unaware that this is the system that has been ingrained in our nation’s entire political life. It is rooted in the more-than-half-a-millennium system of government that the Spanish conquistadores institutionalized—passed on from one generation to the next and cultivated and made even stronger by local successors to all our past foreign rulers.
This is a system that dates back to the days of the encomienda, where Spanish colonists were given by the Spanish government vast tracts of lands (that erstwhile belonged to the natives) and vested them with the power to administer, manage, and control not only the lands but the native population as well.
The encomenderos became the tax (tribute) collectors, slave drivers, local executives, and economic czars. And as their power and influence grew, they graduated into hacienderos.
Not only that, they became the cabeza de barangay, alcalde ordinario (councilman), alcalde mayor. Under the setup, the natives had to go to them for all their needs. They held both governmental and economic power—and dispensed political, social and economic goods to their “constituents (a.k.a. slaves). (In post-Spanish Philippines, the same encomenderos would become provincial governors, congressmen, senators, secretaries, judges and justices, vice presidents, presidents.)
And since government was mixed with religion, the system of patronage became intrinsically ingrained in the psyche and the cultural, political and socio-economic life of the natives (eventually called Filipinos).
The Church instituted baptism and required that certain individuals in the communities stood as “sponsors” or “godparents” to a child so that they could be welcomed into the Catholic fold. And more often than not, the encomendero, haciendero, cabeza, alcalde and their kind became the first ninongs and kumpadres. The natives needed someone in the power chain to stand as their sponsors so they could curry favors. Not much different from invoking the intercession of priests or friars or “patron saints” to seek help or blessing from God.
And so long after independence from Spain (the United States and Japan) the system of patronage remained ingrained in the Filipino psyche. And until now it is. And made worse by our concept of “utang na loob” or debt of gratitude. So today, almost every voter has utang na loob to every politician or to any person in government who has even the littlest power or control over certain funds.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with utang na loob except when it is exploited to exact political loyalty, obedience and control.
This is why every politician who seeks public office has only one campaign—and it has nothing to do with governance or making government better. It’s paano tutulungan (how to give aid or comfort or ease the personal suffering) of their constituents. Their constituents, on the other hand, expect nothing more than such mundane things as anything that will help them get through a hard day—a free kilo of rice or fish, canned goods, medicines, etc.—which are not free anyway because anything that any politician or government office (local or national) gives to the people is actually paid beforehand by taxes from the people themselves.
So, what we have is actually a vicious cycle of patronage, dependency and deceit.
But governance and government are a million light years away from all these ayuda, and favors, and help, and aid, and safety nets, etc.
Governance and government are all about establishing order in society—where rules are fair for all and obeyed by everyone, where no single person or group of persons or sector of society enjoys any unfair advantage over the rest. It is about creating opportunities for people to grow and advance and develop. It is about making sure those opportunities are open to all, not just a few. It is about harnessing the resources of the country to create wealth for all, not just a few. It is about promoting and safeguarding the welfare of all, not just the privileged few.
But until our officials and workers in government, elected or appointed, and our people shed the view that government is nothing more than the central warehouse of goodies to be dispensed at will, there is little we can do about reforming our state of affairs.
