IN 2010, I received an e-mail from a colleague asking me what kind of economic advice I can give to then incoming President Noynoy Aquino. I suggested that one of the priority activities that the new government should do is to review all the laws that have been passed.
The review of the laws would enable the government to know which are no longer relevant, which are not funded, and which can be updated and improved. From such inventory, the government can respond to the legislative gaps and help develop the capacity of the executive to update itself and respond to the emerging needs of society. My idea then is for Congress not to pass any new laws in their first year and use the different committees to review their sectoral status. Of course, this idea is easier said than done. But it would be a rational way of addressing and modernizing the governance structure required in the age of big data and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
Fast-forward to 2019, we have recently experienced a number of game-changing laws being passed in a matter of weeks. As we have discussed some of them last week, we are unable to go into the details of all of them considering their different sectoral implications and agency focus. What is clear as we go back to 2010 and even further back is that these laws are essential and they are responding to the changing times. My challenge is not the logic of these laws and their expected benefits, but on how these laws are to be implemented. Based on experience, the challenge arises at the level of execution, for instance, at the local government levels. Many laws on social protection for children, women and elderly, among others, are easily implementable in big cities having full staff complements and having enough resources to hire more. Translating that in municipalities and far-flung communities may mean that the implementation of different laws will fall into the hands of the same person—the municipal social welfare officer. Hence, the efficient implementation of the different laws is hampered by personnel capacity and at times by financial limitations due to differing structures and capacities.
How do we then address the challenge of meeting the requirements of new laws? Recent laws already have in them a mechanism for review a few years after initial implementation. The crafting of the implementing rules and regulations is also crucial. Nonetheless, it may again be important to look into my original proposal, especially as we are entering a Congressional elections this May. The new Congress may want to first review before embarking on changing and passing new laws immediately. The same can be done by the city and municipal councilors in relation to their ordinances. In my view, the current government capacity is facing what I call a “governance deficit.” This is evidenced by the number of coordination issues that are observable in the delivery of government services. In the Global Competitiveness Index 2018, inefficient government bureaucracy is cited as the most problematic factor in doing business in the country. Creating new laws without analyzing current capacities and systems will only overburden it and lead to ineffective and inefficient delivery of public services. We understand that there has been a continuing rationalization program of the government. However, rationalization of the government work force needs to be done not in relation to number of workers, but in relation to the task and system requirements, which may not be available as part of current government capacity. Adding new teachers, policemen and health workers should not be based on ratios but on actual needs and capacities to deliver. Hence, apart from reviewing existing laws, the executive may also want to update and review current governance effectiveness and efficiency, especially in addressing day- to-day challenges faced by ordinary citizens. This cannot be done on a piecemeal basis and will be more effective if considered under an overall system review and analysis. We want to avoid just adding new laws to what may be an overwhelmed system. The result of which may lead to inability of the new laws to deliver or that the benefits expected are delivered at an efficient way and thereby leading to wastage of resources.
In the coming days as the mid-term election campaign heats up, it might be critical for voters to bring in the question of implementation and execution of laws, not just their passage. Instead of just asking what new laws will need to be passed, we as voters should also be asking what laws are no longer useful and what needs to be improved. Candidates who have long gone through the legislative processes should know very well how this can be done and that addressing the governance challenge right now is more important than proposing bills and making them laws.