---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: DD Coronel <[email protected]

>          *MANILA OBSERVER*
> *100 days silly*
> *Leandro V. Coronel*
>
> MANILA
> The practice of grading a nation's President after 100 days in office is a
> silly idea. To ask for "concrete" results in that short time is loony.
>    But this practice continues here. President Aquino has just finished his
> first 100 days in office. And everyone and his uncle have graded him, many
> of them giving the Chief Executive a failing mark.
>    But how could any executive or leader produce results in three months?
> That is why this practice is silly which, by the way, we adopted from the
> Americans. It was originally a "honeymoon" period to give a new officeholder
> breathing room to get settled in his or her new job.
>    PNoy's (his pop-culture name) critics have gone to town declaring him to
> be a failure after three months. From the Left and from the Right have
> come criticism. He hasn't done this, he hasn't done that. He hasn't made any
> reforms.
>    Can anyone "make" reforms in 100 days? Reforms aren't "made," they take
> time, years, to take form and to transform anything, this time a government
> and a nation.
>    So, is it unfair for critics to flagellate PNoy for "failing" after 100
> days?
>    I think it's too soon to judge a leader, or anyone for that matter, for
> being on the job for three months. In the real world, new employees are
> given at least six months to show their worth. One year is probably more
> reasonable a time to give someone who's new on the job.
>    Your "Observer" thinks it's more reasonable to look for policy
> directions rather than concrete results after 100 days.
>    So, has Noynoy set policy directions that would take the country to a
> new way of doing things, to a new mode of governing, to a new ethic in
> leadership?
>    The answer is yes. PNoy has been able to put in place initiatives aimed
> at demolishing institutional and individual structures of corruption that
> had flourished in the immediate past. The Bureau of Internal Revenue and the
> Bureau of Customs have joined hands in going after big-time tax evaders.
>    Aquino has gone after government-related corporations whose managers
> have been lavishing themselves with obscene perks and privileges, to the
> detriment of the lowly rank and file. The President has abolished government
> units that haven't been functioning well or have no legitimate claim to
> existence in the first place.
>    The new government has stopoped or is reviewing financially questionable
> projects or deals consummated during the previous administration.
>    Aquino has invited the private sector to take a partnership role with
> the government in pushing broader economic development.
>    These are policy directions that set the tone of the new government's
> pledge to bring down entrenched bulwarks of official corruption and set the
> tone for a new way of doing public business.
>    There have been major setbacks that marred the government's public
> image. The hostage-taking in August has given the Aquino government
> a damaging black-eye around the world. The Hong Kong tourists died
> tragically and unnecessarily, something more expert hands could probably
> have prevented.
>    A general aura of ineptness and incompetence has pervaded the Aquino
> administration. This  requires immediate and decisive action by the
> President to get his and his people's acts together to right the unsteady
> ship of State. The public perception is that PNoy hasn't been firm and
> decisive enough in making his subordinates toe his official line. There is
> rumored infighting among Cabinet members this early in the Aquino
> administration.
>    Mr. Aquino has to take a reality check about what's going on in his
> inner circle if he wants to get his government really going. Failing to curb
> the squabbling  and crack the whip to spur action and performance among his
> men will spell doom for him. It would be a long six years if he doesn't act
> with dispatch and with determination.
>    PNoy came to office on the crest of massive popular acceptance and
> well-wishing. He cannot afford to dissipate this unquantifiable goodwill and
> still succeed.
>    Noynoy's great asset is his honesty, personal incorruptibility, humility
> and simple lifestyle. This is what keeps him popular and trusted among the
> people.
>    Despite his critics' vociferousness, the people in general have given
> the President high marks for his performance in his first 100 days. This is
> in contrast to his critics' failing grade. Who is right and who is wrong?
>    One is inclined to believe that the people are correct this time.
> They're willing to give PNoy time before they hand down their verdict on his
> performance, which is the reasonable tack to take.
>    Grading someone after three months is plain silly. Setting a performance
> bar at 100 days is an artificial and unreasonable benchmark. The people are
> being more generous and commonsensical.
>    Is it possible PNoy has spoiled the people with his accessibility and
> willingness to engage in dialogue with them and the media? Aquino is a
> welcome relief from his predecessor who was often aloof and elusive. Is it
> possible his simple style and good-naturedness have emboldened his critics
> to be more vocal?
>    Mr. Aquino's first 100 days have been blustery, if not yet stormy. He
> has his work cut out for him. Let's hope, for the sake of the nation, he
> knows this and makes the necessary changes while it's still early.
> ***
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




-- 
PJ C. Reyes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gimik" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/gimik?hl=en.

Reply via email to