Business, Economics and Consulting

With barely a month to go before the May 2010 election and more than a couple of months before the President leaves Malacanang, people have started to cast their own individual judgment on the performance of her administration for the past 9 years.

Year in and year out since she assumed the Presidency in 2001, the government always presented facts and figures on her accomplishments. The yearly State of the Nation Address (SONA) had been delivered highlighting the administration’s achievements and with much hopefulness on what the government could further do to improve the plight of every Filipino.

Late last year and early this year, the government run a series of paid advertisement in national dailies presenting several marco economic, social and physical development indicators and comparing such with figures registered during the incumbency of past presidents (Aquino, Ramos and Estrada). Judging from these figures, her administration – and the whole country – fared better than any of the three preceding regimes!

In 2004, right after she got her new mandate from the people, she adopted an overarching strategy to eradicate poverty, which is the BEAT THE ODDS, an acronyms to represent her 10 most significant commitments for the next 6 years. Since then, her critics had used these 10-point agenda to assess her performance. Last year, Professor Winnie Monsod presented a three-part assessment using the 10-point agenda or the BEAT THE ODDS, and gave the President a dismal overall rating of 47 out of 100. Specifically, Professor Monsod gave the President a grade of 100 for the “B” or balanced budget in recognition of how the President managed to put the budget deficit almost close to zero in 2007. Among the areas where the President did not do well are “T” or the terminating NPA/MILF hostilities and “H” or healing the EDSA wounds where Professor Monsod gave a sordid rating of 6 out of 100!. Another area where the President failed, but many from the government think otherwise, was in “E” or education for all.

An interesting item is “T” which stands for transport and digital infrastructure. The President also got a low mark on this because of the ZTE-related scandal. But then, there are other aspects that need to be considered for this item such as the roads, bridges, ports and airports that were built and constructed; likewise, the BPOs which have gained ground in our national economy in the most recent years.

If the assessment is done now, probably the ratings would change significantly. Of course, the “termination of NPA/MILF hostilities” would remain to take a low rating together with the “healing of EDSA wounds”. If the “A” or automated election would successfully push through, it could boost up the rating of the President; the indicator could easily get a 100 score. At this time though, it’s a 50-50 deal.

A contentious item is “O” or opportunities to create 10 million jobs by 2010. The January 2010 employment report reveals that there had been 14.2 million jobs created so far, way above the target. Yet I said contentious because these are mere numbers and they do not necessarily and unavoidably present the quality and the corresponding tenure for some of these jobs created.

Using the targets for the BEAT THE ODDS is one of the many ways to assess the performance of the President and her administration. In this method, her own targets (or more apt, her commitments) are used to gauge her own competence.

With the remaining time of the President, would she be able to meet her promises and commitments? Maybe yes, maybe no! It all depends on our own individual perspectives and social mindsets.

Whether or not we really had a successful journey for the last 9 years, daunting realities remain. When her term ends in June 2010 (hopefully!), nobody would continue to care about the BEAT THE ODDS, but many would still linger in poverty, economic misery and social helplessness.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.