Ike Señeres
PERHAPS many people would not know the difference between “governance” and “government”, often thinking that these two terms are one and the same. While the definitions of these two terms are subject to interpretation, I would tend to think that “governance” would refer to the act of governing, a process that should involve both the “governors” and the “governed”. In other words, both the government and the citizens should be participating in governance. This concept of public participation is not generally the norm, because more often than not, many citizens would tend to think that government is the work of the officials who are either elected or appointed into office, and the citizens have nothing else to do, except to just let these officials run the government for them.
In theory, it would be correct to say that we should just let these officials do their work of running the government, because they are in effect our “employees”, based on the legal fiction that we are in effect their “bosses”, because we are the ones who are paying them to do their work. As a matter of fact, we are in effect the ones who are “hiring” them, as we either elect them or appoint them into office. That being so, it would also be correct to say that in effect, we the citizens actually “own” the government, and therefore it is also our responsibility to see to it that the government is properly managed or administered, as we want it to be, in much the same way that the stockholders of a company would want it to be properly run by its directors and officers.
By way of a joke, we could actually say that the government is too important to leave to the government officials alone, and we should therefore actively participate in the process of governance as much as we could, so that “good governance” would actually happen as we would want it to happen. Although this notion might sound idealistic and impractical, it could actually happen if we want it to happen, because the legal basis for making it happen actually exists already, except that we are not exercising our prerogatives to make it happen. This is just like saying that the vehicles that could run are ready to run, except that we are not starting the engines yet.
Recently, I was able to talk to a barangay official and he told me that where he resides, the Barangay Assembly (BA) is seldom convened and whenever it is convened, only the Barangay Council (BC) would attend it. It seems that he is not aware that according to the law, the BA should be convened at least twice a year, and what that means is that it could be convened as often as possible, and not just twice a year. It also seems that he does not know that all registered voters within the barangay have the right to attend the BA, and not just the members of the BC. As it is supposed to be, the members of the BC are duty bound to invite all the voters, but they are not doing it, contrary to what the law requires.
As it is supposed to be, there is also supposed to be a separate Barangay Development Council (BDC) that is other than the BC itself. As it is supposed to be, the Non-Government Organizations (NGO) within the barangay are supposed to be invited to the BDC but the invitations never go out, thus the BDC is hardly ever convened, and that is again contrary to what the law requires. Also as it is supposed to be, the resolutions of the BDC are supposed to be elevated to the Municipal Development Council (MDC). Up the ladder, the resolutions of the MDC are supposed to be elevated to the Provincial Development Council (PDC), and the resolutions of the PDC are supposed to be elevated to the Regional Development Council (RDC).
All combined the BDCs, MDCs, PDCs and RDCs are supposed to be the formal and official venues where the voters (acting as the citizens) could actually participate in the active governance of the barangay, municipal, provincial and regional levels. As it is supposed to be, these development councils are supposed to be the venues where development planning is supposed to happen as part of a process that should involve not only the elected and appointed officials, but everyone in all of those levels. Needless to say, bottom up budgeting (BUB) is and should be part of the development planning process, simply because budgeting is really nothing more than budget planning, so to speak.
I registered a new domain www.empowermentofgovernment.com (still under construction). My purpose of registering the domain is to eventually build a website that will mobilize private sector and civil society support for the public service oriented programs of the government. I understand that there are many people who do not like to support the government, but that is the reason why I started with the premise that we “own” the government and that it is not alien to us. To a large extent, it could be said that the empowerment of government would need the engagement of the people, but that is not really new, because democracy after all is a social contract that requires the participation of the governed.
At the risk of making it sound too simplistic, I would still say that the empowerment of government by the people could simply mean participation in the BDC and the BA at the barangay level. But that should not stop there, because the private sector and the civil society should participate in all levels of the Local Development Councils (LDCs). Truth to tell, the government does not always have enough resources to be able to deliver quality public service oriented programs. That is where the private sector and the civil society could come in to help. After all, there are no limits to public and private cooperation in good governance.
E-mail: bantaygobyerno-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
