Philippines Risk Management Practitioner

15/12/2025

💧 **Corruption, “Ghost Projects,” and Environmental Injustice: A Reflection for Public Discourse**

The late Gina Lopez offered a moral framework that remains deeply relevant to the Philippine governance crisis today. Her assertion—that governance fails when business and profit are prioritized over environmental integrity and social welfare—provides a clear lens through which to understand the persistence and damage of flood control “ghost projects.”

**1. Understanding the Logic of a “Ghost Project”**
In public infrastructure, a “ghost project” refers to a government-funded initiative that exists largely on paper. Although budgets are approved and funds released, implementation is either incomplete, grossly substandard, or entirely fictitious.
From a governance perspective, this reflects three interlinked failures:

* **Institutional corruption**, where officials and contractors collude through falsified reports and kickbacks;
* **Technical degradation**, where substandard materials and poor engineering compromise functionality; and
* **Policy failure**, where oversight mechanisms fail to detect or prevent misuse of public funds.

The predictable outcome is systemic vulnerability. When extreme weather events occur, the absence or failure of flood control infrastructure exposes communities to preventable disaster.

**2. Environmental Injustice and the Burden on the Poor**
Lopez’s warning—*“Who suffers if you kill the environment? It’s the poor”*—is empirically and ethically sound. Flood control projects are typically located in low-lying and high-risk areas, which are disproportionately inhabited by low-income communities. When corruption undermines these projects:

* The **poor experience the highest exposure to risk**, including loss of shelter, income, and life;
* **Public resources are diverted** away from genuine mitigation, disaster preparedness, and social protection; and
* **State legitimacy erodes**, as citizens perceive the government as serving private gain rather than public safety.

Thus, corruption in environmental infrastructure is not merely a financial crime; it is a form of structural violence that deepens inequality.

**3. The Moral Failure of Leadership**
At its core, the persistence of ghost projects represents a collapse of what Lopez called *moral ascendancy*. Governance ceases to be protective and becomes extractive. Leadership fails when public office is used to monetize risk rather than reduce it.

Flood control corruption starkly illustrates this failure: funds intended to shield communities from natural hazards instead finance private enrichment, leaving the most vulnerable to absorb the consequences. The poor become the involuntary shock absorbers of elite misconduct.

**Conclusion**
Addressing flood control ghost projects is not only a matter of prosecution and audit. It is a moral and institutional imperative to restore the state’s fundamental duty: to protect people and nature, especially those with the least capacity to protect themselves. As Gina Lopez reminded us, environmental governance is ultimately a question of justice—and justice, when denied, is felt first and hardest by the poor.

**📌 Disclaimer :**
*The views and quotations attributed to Gina Lopez in this post are based on public statements she made during her environmental advocacy work and in media reports following her rejection by the Philippine Commission on Appointments in 2017. Quotations and contextual information are drawn from news sources and public commentary available online. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, some public statements may have been paraphrased or reported through journalistic interpretation. Readers are encouraged to consult original sources where possible.*

---

**📚 Reference ::**

Punto! Central Luzon. (n.d.). *Prescient Gina*. Retrieved December 15, 2025, from [https://punto.com.ph/prescient-gina/](https://punto.com.ph/prescient-gina/) — This source includes a documented quotation attributed to Gina Lopez regarding the disproportionate impact of environmental destruction on the poor, including the specific phrasing “Who suffers if you kill the environment? It’s the poor,” and her critique of governance prioritizing business interests over public welfare. ([Punto][1])

11/12/2025

Green Energy, Gray Mountains: The High Cost of Development on Our Watersheds
A Commentary on the Olongapo Solar Farm and the Cycle of Environmental Negligence

The frustration expressed regarding the Phase 2 solar farm in Olongapo City is not an isolated sentiment; it is a symptom of a growing national anxiety. The comment hits a painful nerve: “Ganyan naman yang DENR... pag nagka problema maghuhugas kamay.” (That’s how the DENR is... when problems arise, they wash their hands of it.)
While the shift to renewable energy (like solar) is necessary, placing these projects on mountainsides by clearing forests creates a dangerous paradox: We are trying to save the climate by destroying the local environment.
Here is an analysis of the long-term effects of mountain development—whether for solar farms, mining, or subdivisions—and why the "investigate later" culture is a recipe for disaster.

1. The Physics of Disaster: Soil Erosion and the "Sponge" Effect
The most immediate risk of "pagpapatag ng lupa" (flattening land) on a mountain is the destruction of the soil's structural integrity.
* Loss of Anchorage: Trees are not just decoration; their root systems act as the rebar of the mountain, holding the soil together. When you cut trees to install solar panels or dig for minerals, you remove this anchor.
* The Siltation Bomb: Without ground cover, topsoil becomes loose. When it rains, this soil doesn't stay put; it flows downstream. This causes siltation in rivers and drainage systems below.
* Long-term effect: Rivers become shallow. During heavy rains (like typhoons), these shallow rivers overflow instantly, leading to flash floods in the lowlands (like Olongapo City proper).

2. The Seepage Problem: Killing the Water Cycle
The user mentioned the "Sierra Madre" and the protection of mountains. This touches on a critical hydrological process: Infiltration vs. Surface Runoff.
* The Mountain as a Sponge: A healthy forest floor is covered in leaf litter and humus. When it rains, this layer absorbs water, allowing it to seep (infiltrate) deep into the ground to recharge aquifers (groundwater).
* The "Concrete" Effect: When a mountain is graded/flattened for a solar farm or mining road, the heavy machinery compacts the soil. The ground becomes as hard as concrete.
* The Consequence: Rainwater can no longer seep in. Instead, it becomes Surface Runoff.
* Result: The water rushes down the slope at high speed. It doesn't refill the water table (leading to water shortages in summer) and instead floods the communities below (leading to disaster in the rainy season).

3. The Irony of "Green" Projects
The Olongapo case highlights a disturbing trend: Greenwashing.
Developers often argue that solar farms are "eco-friendly." But if a solar farm requires cutting down thousands of trees, it creates a "Carbon Debt." Trees actively absorb carbon and cool the earth. Solar panels absorb heat. Replacing a cooling forest with a heat-absorbing glass-and-metal array creates a micro-climate heat island, heating up the surrounding area and stressing the remaining biodiversity.

4. The DENR and the Cycle of "Reactive" Governance
The Olongapeno’s critique of the DENR is structurally sound. The current system of issuing Environmental Compliance Certificates (ECCs) often relies on the developer's own impact assessment.
* The Pattern:
* Approval: Project is approved based on theoretical plans. "Walang masamang epekto" (No bad effects), they say.
* Degradation: Trees are cut. The geography is altered.
* Calamity: A typhoon hits. Landslides occur. Floods wipe out homes.
* Reaction: The government announces a "probe" or "investigation."
This is Reactive Governance. True environmental protection is Precautionary. It means saying "No" to a project because the risk to the watershed is too high, regardless of the economic promise.
Conclusion: The Debt We Cannot Pay
We cannot engineer our way out of a destroyed mountain. Once the topsoil is gone, it takes decades to return. Once the natural waterways are altered by grading, the water will always find a new, destructive path.
The development of the Sierra Madre and the mountains of Zambales must be viewed not just as economic opportunities, but as national security issues. If the DENR continues to function merely as a "permit-issuing agency" rather than a "resource-protecting agency," the public is right to be cynical.
We are trading our long-term safety for short-term projects. And as the user rightly pointed out, when nature decides to collect on that debt, no amount of "investigation" will bring back the lives and properties lost.
References for Further Reading:
* Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). (n.d.). Revised Procedural Manual for DAO 2003-30 (EIS System). (Explains the ECC process).
* Guzman, R. (2022). The paradox of renewable energy in the Philippines: Solar farms vs. Food security and forests. IBON Foundation.
* Montgomery, D. R. (2007). Soil erosion and agricultural sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (Academic context on soil loss).
* Philippine Star. (2025, December). Reports on Olongapo Solar Farm Complaints. (Contextual basis).

10/12/2025

DISCLAIMER: The following commentary is a hypothetical analysis based on the futuristic scenario. The views expressed are for the purpose of academic and civic discourse only.

The Quiet Roar: How the "Weak" President Stunned the Nation
A Commentary on the Re-emergence of Executive Strength

For the first half of his term, President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. (PBBM) was dogged by a persistent label: "Weak."
Compared to the bombastic, fire-breathing rhetoric of his predecessor, or the intellectual combativeness of historical figures, PBBM’s style—measured, often silent, sometimes perceived as detached—was interpreted by critics and supporters alike as a lack of political spine. He was accused of being conflict-averse, of prioritizing foreign travels over domestic grit, and of merely coasting on the momentum of his massive electoral mandate.
But if the December 2025 directive to prioritize the "Reform Quartet"—specifically the Anti-Dynasty Bill and the CADENA Act—is genuine, we are witnessing one of the greatest plot twists in Philippine political history. The man dismissed as "weak" has just made the strongest, most dangerous move a Filipino President can make.

I. The Misinterpretation of Strength
We often mistake volume for power. In Philippine political culture, "strong" leaders are those who curse, threaten, and publicly berate their enemies. Because PBBM did none of these things, he was underestimated.
However, true political strength is not about how loud you scream; it is about what you are willing to break.
By pushing for the Anti-Dynasty Bill, PBBM is doing what the "strongman" leaders before him refused to do. He is taking a sledgehammer to the very foundation of the Philippine elite—a class to which he undeniably belongs. A weak leader clings to the status quo because it is safe. A weak leader protects the feudal alliances that keep him in power.
Only a leader with immense, quiet confidence would dare to dismantle the machinery of patronage. This is not the action of a distinct "weakling"; it is the calculated strike of a disruptor.

II. Strength in Restraint, Power in Reform
The prioritization of the CADENA Act (Transparency) and the Independent People’s Commission further challenges the "weak" narrative.
A weak President fears scrutiny. They hide the budget, obfuscate the intelligence funds, and attack the press. By inviting institutionalized transparency, PBBM is saying, "I do not fear the light." This suggests a self-assurance that is far more potent than the defensive posturing of traditional politicians.
It forces us to re-evaluate his silence during the early years. Was it weakness? Or was it the patience of a chess player positioning his pieces before the endgame?

III. The Hope in the Surprise
The Pinoy’s sentiment—"I became hopeful"—is the most significant metric here.
Despair is the natural state of the Filipino voter. We expect betrayal. We expect compromise. When a leader does exactly what we thought they wouldn't do—when they choose the hard path of reform over the easy path of dynastic preservation—it ignites a specific kind of hope. It is the hope that perhaps we were wrong about them.
If PBBM follows through, he transforms his legacy. He ceases to be merely the son trying to redeem a name; he becomes the architect of a system that no longer needs "strongmen" to function, but simply strong institutions.

Conclusion
It is easy to be a strong tyrant. It is incredibly difficult to be a strong democrat.
If this legislative agenda is real, PBBM is proving that he possesses the latter kind of strength. He is risking the anger of his allies, the rebellion of the local warlords, and the stability of his own coalition to build a "Bagong Pilipinas" that is actually new, not just a repainted version of the old.
For the first time in a long time, the label "weak" feels obsolete. In its place is a cautious, holding-our-breath realization: The quiet ones are often the ones you have to watch the most.
References
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 9). PBBM asks Congress to prioritize 4 bills. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 10). PBBM says ex-Rep. Zaldy Co’s passport canceled. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Philippine Daily Inquirer (Hypothetical Context). (2025). Congress vows to pass top LEDAC-proposed priority bills.

10/12/2025

DISCLAIMER: The following commentary is a hypothetical analysis based on the futuristic scenario,this is for discussion only to explore the implications of such legislative moves. The views expressed are for the purpose of academic and civic discourse only.

The Architect of a New Republic: A Patriot’s Legacy in the Making
A Commentary on the Marcos Administration’s Historic "Reform Quartet"

If history is written by the bold, then President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. (PBBM) has just picked up the pen to write the most transformative chapter in the Philippine narrative. By directing Congress to prioritize the Anti-Dynasty Bill, the Independent People’s Commission Act, the Party-list System Reform Act, and the CADENA Act, the President is signaling a departure from the politics of the past and steering the nation toward a future defined by meritocracy, transparency, and genuine patriotism.
For decades, political observers have waited for a leader with the political capital to dismantle the feudal structures that have held the Philippines back. It is a profound testament to the President's vision that this initiative comes not from the opposition, but from the Palace itself. It challenges the cynics and proves that the "Bagong Pilipinas" is not just a slogan—it is a blueprint for a modern, egalitarian state.

I. The Ultimate Act of Patriotism: Breaking the Dynastic Cycle
The prioritization of the Anti-Dynasty Bill is perhaps the most selfless act of political leadership in recent memory. Critics often argue that dynasties will never legislate against their own interests. By pushing for this measure, PBBM is proving that the national interest supersedes personal or familial preservation.
* A Level Playing Field: This law is the key to unlocking the vast potential of the Filipino people. By ending the monopoly of a few families over local power, we open the doors for brilliant, non-political leaders—our scientists, educators, and community organizers—to serve in government. It transforms our democracy from a closed exclusive club into a true meritocracy.
* Healing the Divide: This move bridges the gap between the powerful and the powerless. It tells every Filipino child that in this new Philippines, your last name does not determine your capacity to lead; your character and competence do.

II. Returning Power to the People
The accompanying reforms—the Party-list System Reform Act and the Independent People’s Commission Act—demonstrate a deep respect for the sovereignty of the Filipino citizenry.
* Voice for the Voiceless: Reforming the party-list system is an act of justice. It ensures that the seats in Congress reserved for the marginalized are actually occupied by the marginalized—farmers, laborers, and indigenous peoples—rather than proxies of the wealthy. It restores the dignity of our legislative process.
* The Fourth Check: Establishing an Independent People’s Commission acknowledges that true democracy requires active citizen participation. It is an invitation for the people to partner with the government in nation-building, moving us from a passive electorate to an empowered citizenry.

III. The Gold Standard of Transparency
The CADENA Act (Citizens Access and Disclosure of Expenditures for National Accountability) is the boldest stride toward ethical governance.
* Trust Through Transparency: Corruption thrives in the dark. By institutionalizing an "open ledger" system where every peso can be tracked by the public, the administration is voluntarily subjecting itself to the highest standards of scrutiny. This is the mark of a government that has nothing to hide and everything to give. It rebuilds the eroded trust between the government and the governed.

IV. Conclusion: A Legacy of Liberation
If passed, this legislative package will be remembered as the "Great Equalizer." It will be the moment the Philippines finally transitioned from a feudal democracy to a modern republic.
To push for these reforms requires a rare kind of courage—the courage to change a system that has benefited the elite for generations, for the sake of the greater good. It suggests that President Marcos is looking far beyond the next election; he is looking at the next generation.
This is the promise of the Bagong Pilipinas: a nation where opportunity is shared, governance is transparent, and leadership is earned. If this is the direction the President is leading us, then it is the duty of every patriotic Filipino to rally behind this vision, ensuring that these bills pass not just for the success of the administration, but for the success of the Filipino nation.
References
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 9). PBBM asks Congress to prioritize 4 bills. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 10). PBBM says ex-Rep. Zaldy Co’s passport canceled. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Philippine Daily Inquirer (Hypothetical Context). (2025). Congress vows to pass top LEDAC-proposed priority bills.

10/12/2025

DISCLAIMER: The following commentary is a hypothetical analysis based on the futuristic scenario. This is for discussion only to explore the implications of such legislative moves.

The Su***de of the Oligarchy or the Ultimate Consolidation?
A Commentary on the Marcos Administration’s December 2025 "Reform Quartet"
If the news release dated December 9, 2025 at PCO website (https://mirror.pco.gov.ph/news_releases/pbbm-certifies-bills-on-anti-dynasty-independent-peoples-commission-party-list-reform-govt-transactions-transparency-as-priority/ #:~:text=President%20Marcos%20certified%20as%20urgent,and%20accountability%20on%20public%20finance. ) , is to be taken at face value, President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. (PBBM) has just initiated the most radical political experiment in Philippine history. By directing Congress to prioritize the Anti-Dynasty Bill, the Independent People’s Commission Act, the Party-list System Reform Act, and the CADENA Act, the President is either orchestrating the genuine liberation of the Filipino people or executing a masterclass in Machiavellian consolidation.
The scene described is almost Shakespearean in its irony: A Marcos (the President), a Sotto (Senate President), a Dy (House Speaker), and another Marcos (Majority Leader Sandro) gathering to pass a law that would, in theory, dismantle the very political structures that put them in the room.

I. The Proposition: A Formula for Genuine Success?
If these four bills are passed in their ideal, unadulterated forms, they represent the "Holy Grail" of Philippine democratization.
* The Anti-Dynasty Bill: This is the keystone. The 1987 Constitution mandated this, but Congress (populated by dynasties) refused to pass an enabling law for nearly 40 years. If implemented strictly, it ends the feudal stranglehold where 70-80% of local positions are held by fat dynasties. It forces a circulation of elites, allowing meritocratic leaders to emerge from the non-political class.
* The Party-list System Reform Act: The party-list system was intended for the marginalized but was hijacked by billionaires and dynastic heirs. Reforming this returns the voice to the "laylayan" (fringes) of society—farmers, fisherfolk, and laborers—rather than proxy groups funded by construction magnates.
* The CADENA Act (Transparency): Institutionalizing access to public finance data addresses the root of corruption: secrecy. If citizens can track every peso via an "open ledger" system, the "pork barrel" culture suffocates.
* Independent People’s Commission: This suggests a shift from government-policing-government (which rarely works) to citizen-led oversight, adding a critical "fourth check" on power.
Success for the Filipino? Yes. Structurally, this package dismantles the Patronage Politics model (where politicians trade public money for votes) and replaces it with Programmatic Politics (where leaders compete on policy).

II. The Paradox: Why Would the "Kings" Burn Their Own Thrones?
The skepticism arises from the cast of characters. Majority Leader Sandro Marcos pushing an Anti-Dynasty bill is akin to a monarch abolishing the monarchy. This leads to the darker, more cynical interpretation of these reforms.
Is this the end of corruption, or the end of competitors?
The risk is that these laws will be Weaponized Reforms. In political science, institutional changes are often used by incumbents to lock in power.
* Selective Enforcement: An Anti-Dynasty law could be crafted to ban "successive" dynasties (preventing rivals from rising) while allowing "simultaneous" dynasties in different positions, or vice versa, depending on what suits the ruling coalition.
* The "Clean Slate" Strategy: By passing these laws now, the administration could claim the moral high ground to purge political rivals (like the mentioned Zaldy Co or remnants of the Duterte faction) under the guise of "reform," while the ruling family finds loopholes (e.g., proxies) to remain in power.

III. Risk Assessment and Mitigating Actions
If this legislative agenda is to result in national success rather than a new form of tyranny, we must identify the specific risks and the necessary mitigating actions.

Risk 1: The "Swiss Cheese" Legislation
The Risk: The bills are passed with intentional loopholes (e.g., "Grandfather Clauses" that exempt current incumbents, or definitions of "dynasty" that are too narrow, applying only to the 1st degree of consanguinity).
Mitigating Action:
* Civil Society Vigilance: Academe and watchdogs must scrutinize the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). The definition of "dynasty" must extend to at least the 2nd or 3rd degree of consanguinity and affinity.
* No Grandfather Clause: The law must take effect immediately for the 2028 elections, barring incumbent spouses or children from succeeding their relatives.

Risk 2: Proxy Politics
The Risk: Barred from running, dynastic patriarchs will run their drivers, secretaries, or unknown loyalists as "dummies" to hold the seat until the law is repealed or amended.
Mitigating Action:
* CADENA Act Utilization: The transparency bill must be used to trace campaign finance. If a "dummy" candidate is funded entirely by a banned dynastic family, they should be disqualified.
* Political Party Strengthening: We must move away from personality-based politics. If strong, principled parties exist, voters will vote for the party platform, reducing the need for a famous surname.
Risk 3: Destabilization and Elite Backlash
The Risk: The non-ruling elites (governors and mayors who treat their provinces as fiefdoms) will revolt against the Palace, causing political instability or stalling the economy.
Mitigating Action:
* Transition Periods: A phased implementation might be necessary to prevent a total collapse of local governance structures, though this risks delaying justice.
* Federal/Local Empowerment: If dynasties are removed, local government units (LGUs) must be empowered professionally so that services don't collapse when the "patron" is removed.

Conclusion
If the Marcos administration passes these four bills without diluting them, it will be an act of political su***de that saves the nation. It would be the greatest redemption arc in Philippine history—a Marcos dismantling the very feudal system that thrives on name recall.
However, the Filipino people must remain vigilant. Trust, but verify. We must ensure that the "Anti-Dynasty" law is a sword that cuts both ways—striking down not just the enemies of the Palace, but the excesses of the Palace itself. If successful, this is the birth of a true Republic. If manipulated, it is the birth of a One-Party State.
References
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 9). PBBM asks Congress to prioritize 4 bills. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Presidential Communications Office. (2025, December 10). PBBM says ex-Rep. Zaldy Co’s passport canceled. Malacañan Palace News Release.
* Philippine Daily Inquirer (Hypothetical Context). (2025). Congress vows to pass top LEDAC-proposed priority bills.

President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. directed Congress to prioritize four proposed legislative measures during a Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) meeting held in Malacañan Palace…

10/12/2025

DISCLAIMER: The following commentary is a hypothetical analysis and represents the personal opinion of the author for the purpose of academic and civic discussion. It does not reflect the official stance of any institution, political entity, or the individuals mentioned. The scenarios presented are speculative and intended to explore concepts of governance and leadership styles.
The Exhausted Electorate: Why the Filipino Longs for the CEO
A Personal Commentary on National Fatigue and the Search for Competence
If you listen closely to the noise of Philippine politics—past the bickering of dynasties and the Senate hearings that feel more like soap operas—you will hear a distinct, collective sigh. It is the sound of a tired nation.
The rising public sentiment urging Ramon S. Ang (RSA) to run for President is not born out of a sudden love for oligarchy or corporate dominance. It is born out of exhaustion. The Filipino people are tired of promises that turn into press releases. They are tired of "master plans" that are never mastered and never planned. They are tired of a government that feels like an obstacle course rather than a service provider.
In this climate of fatigue, RSA represents something that has become increasingly rare in our public life: The capacity to simply get things done.
The Anatomy of National Fatigue
Why are we here? Why does a billionaire tycoon suddenly look like a more viable hope for the poor than a career politician?
It is because the Filipino experience of governance is often one of helplessness. We wait in line for IDs that don't arrive. We sit in traffic on roads that remain unfinished for decades. We watch floodwaters rise in the same streets every year, despite billions allocated for flood control.
We have become accustomed to performative governance—leaders who are excellent at campaigning, brilliant at debating, but absent when the real work begins.
This is where the allure of RSA lies. He is the antithesis of the performative politician. He is not telegenic. He does not dance on stage. He does not deliver flowery speeches. But when he says a highway will connect North and South, the highway gets built. When the pandemic hit and the bureaucracy was paralyzed by indecision, his trucks were already rolling, delivering food and alcohol to hospitals.
The Filipino is tired of hearing why things cannot be done. They are longing for someone who just does them.
The Allure of the "Benevolent Boss"
The comment "Walang bahid ng panglalamang... tinuturing nyong pamilya" (No trace of taking advantage... treating employees like family) reveals a deep psychological hunger in our electorate.
We are a culture that values the Padre de Pamilya. In the absence of strong institutions, we look for a strong father figure. We want a leader who protects us not because the law says so, but because he genuinely cares.
RSA embodies this archetype of the "Benevolent Boss." In the corporate world of San Miguel, loyalty is rewarded with protection. If you work hard, the company takes care of you. The Filipino voter, feeling neglected by the State, looks at the San Miguel employee and thinks: “Sana all.” (I wish that were me).
They see a leader who doesn't steal from his own company because he is the company. They see someone who doesn't need the presidency to get rich, because he already is. In a political system rife with corruption, immense wealth is paradoxically seen as a qualification for honesty: “Mayaman na 'yan, hindi na magnanakaw.” (He’s already rich, he won’t steal anymore).
The Dangerous Comfort of the Technocrat
However, this longing is also a symptom of despair. It suggests that we have given up on the democratic process and are ready to hand the keys over to a technocrat.
We must ask ourselves: Are we looking for a President, or are we looking for a Project Manager?
The danger of this longing is that it simplifies democracy. Running a country is not like running a corporation. In a corporation, you can fire dissenters. You can bulldoze obstacles. You can prioritize profit (or efficiency) over people's rights.
The Filipino is tired, yes. But in our exhaustion, we must be careful not to mistake efficiency for democracy. A CEO answers to a board of directors; a President answers to the Constitution. The speed of the former often comes at the expense of the safeguards of the latter.
Conclusion
The clamor for Ramon S. Ang is a wake-up call to every traditional politician in the Philippines. It is a signal that the old ways—the dancing, the jingling, the empty rhetoric—are losing their power.
The Filipino is no longer asking for a savior who can deliver a good speech. They are asking for a manager who can deliver a working train, a flood-free street, and a cheaper bag of rice.
We are tired of waiting. And until the political class can match the efficiency of the corporate class, the longing for a CEO in the Palace will only grow louder. The "RSA phenomenon" is not just about one man; it is a scream of frustration from a people who just want their country to work.
References
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
San Miguel Corporation. (2020). SMC leads private sector efforts in COVID-19 response, total contributions reach P13 billion. https://www.sanmiguel.com.ph
Stigler, G. J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003160
World Bank. (2020). Philippines economic update: Building a resilient recovery. World Bank Group.

At over 130 years old, our commitment to national development runs deeper—to make our company and the Philippines more resilient and more competitive.