MAPping the Future

Campaign season in the Philippines is always fraught with discussions, debates, and disagreements not just between candidates but also among voters. Yet somehow, the lead-up to the 2022 national elections felt much more volatile than usual.

 

Though we tried to keep a level head as we finalized our voting decisions, it was difficult to find clarity amid the confusion. Checking the news and social media has become a source of stress. Election anxiety has been real for many Filipinos because there always seems to be another controversial election-related event that just unfolded, another fractious statement issued by one camp or another. Since the last national elections, it has become the norm to find fake reports and propaganda mixed in with legitimate news, and our divisive political climate compels us to be more critical of the information we consume and from where and whom we get them.

 

As the country prepares to welcome a new administration while simultaneously working to recover from the ravages of the pandemic, nowhere has this exercise in critical thinking been more important than in analyzing how our presidential candidates’ platforms could affect our future.

 

With economic stability as everyone’s biggest concern, scrutinizing their platforms is a project that the consultancy and communications firm EON Group undertook in the past month to help clients and stakeholders in the business sector prepare for the massive changes that the election results will inevitably bring. This involved mapping out possible scenarios should either of the two candidates who consistently ranked the highest in surveys become the 17th President of the Republic of the Philippines: Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. and Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo.

 

Similar urgent concerns

 

Despite the intense opposition between both candidates’ camps, their platforms highlight the issues the country urgently needs to resolve.

 

Economic recovery and growth are at the forefront of their respective plans, specifically investing in agriculture, infrastructure, and MSMEs. Both candidates want to modernize the agriculture sector, which is crucial to the country’s food production and supply, and is also a source of employment and livelihood. Both want to continue the Duterte Administration’s Build Build Build program to strengthen various industries as well as further develop the nation’s digital infrastructure to better serve the needs of Filipinos. Both recognize the role that MSMEs play in key industries and thus pledge to provide them with the necessary support. And with many Filipinos experiencing job instability due to the pandemic, job creation and retention also feature prominently in their plans, with both promising to protect workers’ rights against unfair labor practices.

 

Public health, disaster risk reduction, and climate change mitigation are other urgent concerns that Marcos and Robredo want to address. They each promise to strengthen our weakened healthcare system, make local government units be more proactive in preparing for natural calamities, and invest in the country’s eventual transition to the use of renewable energy not only to protect the environment but also to lower electricity costs for consumers.

 

Given the number of similar goals they promise in their platforms, their different perspectives in approaching these issues become crucial indicators of each candidate’s kind of leadership.

 

Different solutions and approaches

 

A long-time politician, Marcos has often referred to the programs that his late father, former President Ferdinand Marcos, Sr., had implemented. He presents plans modeled after these programs with the promise of leading the country to its economic revival and increased standing among its neighbors. Indeed, the overarching theme of unity that marked his presidential campaign is the idea of a return to a glorious past: “Sama-sama tayong babangon muli.” Of course, history is a contentious topic when it comes to the discussion of his family, with historians, civic groups, and Martial Law survivors condemning their corruption and human rights violations on one side and loyalists reminiscing about the Marcos dictatorship’s “golden years” on the other.

 

Robredo, meanwhile, is a lawyer and economist on top of being the 14th Vice President of the country. Thus, it’s no surprise to see the legislative perspective she brings to many issues. Her platform mentions bills and laws that the public has limited awareness of, and she promises their enforcement to guarantee proper systems in place. This is in line with her campaign promise of good governance, as reflected in the slogan “Gobyernong tapat, angat buhay lahat.”

 

The more inclusive proposals in Robredo’s platform also demonstrate her experience in working with different sectors of society. An example is her goal to even the playing field in the business sector by strengthening the government agency assigned to dismantle monopolies and bust unethical practices. She also envisions infrastructure projects to be in service of rural development so rural communities could have more access to social services. The six years she spent working as a Vice President who responded to the public’s needs during calamities and throughout the pandemic also shows through in her very detailed plans for improving healthcare services down to the barangay level.

 

Marcos’s platform, on the other hand, tends to rely on motherhood statements. For plans that are not based on his father’s policies or recommendations from different government agencies, their details vary from micromanagement—such as enhancing the Department of Tourism’s digital marketing capabilities—to not being comprehensive enough. An example would be holding more government-funded job fairs to “bridge the gap between job seekers and employers.” While helpful, most of Marcos’s proposed solutions are just components of what needs to be more extensive programs, raising the question of how well he understands what Filipinos urgently need.

 

 

 

The power is with the people

 

These observations, however, are based only on publicly available information. Mapping out possible scenarios is never easy and circumstances can always change at the drop of a hat. But Marcos being selective in his media appearances during the campaign season has made this exercise more difficult for those who don’t trust him blindly. How could the public gauge his conviction in his plans if he hardly clarified, substantiated, or defended them from criticism? How can he foster unity in the country if he didn’t exert effort to even try and convince those who distrust him?

 

Robredo isn’t exempt from doubts either, and not just from those who’ve long opposed her. Consistently diplomatic in the face of the Duterte Administration’s criticisms and efforts to curb her vice-presidential duties, she has nurtured an image of a listening and responsive public official. These are qualities needed in a public servant but when it comes to leading a politically divided country, critics question if Robredo would know to draw the line when needed. With her platform about serving those in the “laylayan,” would she be firm enough to stand with them even when their welfare runs counter to the interests of more powerful forces?

 

By the time this piece is printed, we’ve probably already declared a new President. But no matter our post-election circumstances, we shouldn’t forget that we citizens have the power to hold our leaders accountable for their campaign promises. Regardless of what the future holds, we must maintain our belief in democracy. It gave us the power to effect necessary changes in the past. It can do so again if and when we need to.

 

(This article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP).  The author is Chair of the MAP Health Committee, Vice Chair of the MAP CEO Conference Committee, and Chair and CEO of The EON Group. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <junie.delmundo@eon.com.ph>.