Governance activism manifests in PBL 2007 SOCA
By: Ben Sumog-oy

Our sharper analysis of the 2007 State of the City Address (SOCA) of City Mayor Pedro B. Acharon, Jr. yields a quite stunning revelation: that what we have today is an activist local government, which is running the city’s governmental affairs within the governance activism framework

The governance activism by the present local government can be easily brought to the fore through judicious examinations of the theoretical moorings of the SOCA, which Mayor Acharon delivered during the regular session of the Sangguniang Panglunsod (SP) on February 7, 2008. It was attended by various government and non-government dignitaries, headed by former congressman and city mayor, Adelbert W. Antonino.

But before we drift further - and for the purpose of setting proper predicate for our discussion - we would like first to clarify that the term “activist” is substantially different from the word “active”, although, in consonance with political concept, the latter can be subsumed as a mere dispensable (meaning, the whole could still be so without it) element of the former.

Firstly, the word “active” is an adjective used to describe an institution, person or a thing who/that is always in motion, while the term “activist” is an adjective that connotes, among other things, political power and its relationship with persons, institutions or things. Secondly, the term “active” operates merely as a simple adjective, while “activist” operates as a social concept, we, sometimes, call ideology. Lastly, the term “active” merely connotes constant or frequent actions with or without frame or direction, while “activism” connotes constant or frequent actions moving along clearly-defined strategies and travels towards a previously-set vision.

Thus, when we say “activist local government” or “governance activism”, we do not only mean “active local government” or “active governance.” We mean more than that.  

There is no doubt that an “active local government” is desirable, but, it is a fatal mistake to consider it as a measure for the effectiveness and relevance of certain Local Government Unit (LGU). This measure is largely inadequate, if, at all, it is a measure.

The highly populist character of a mere active local government makes it predominantly reactionary, thus, such a kind of government, while in constant motion, is not actually budging from where it is situated. Populism, as is known, is not a sustainable government system. Almost always, governments that adopt such as a governmental system are eventually paralyzed, and in many instances, choked to death by their own welfare philanthropy.    

This is the reason why many European and Scandinavian countries, despite their strong beliefs on the ideals of democratic socialism, are now budging backward from their highly populist perspectives, lest, they will be engulfed by relentless demands for more dole-outs from their vigilant citizens.

Here, this is something that meets the eye. Populism or an active government can hardly survive in a country, with an efficient and progressive tax collection system and inhabited by people with no paternalist traditions, whatsoever. It is with more reasons that such a government system cannot survive in this country where transactional politics and dole-outs are well-entrenched in the people’s culture.  

Going back, though crafted in utmost simplicity and ordinariness, it is a grievous error to regard the 2007 SOCA of Mayor Acharon as a mere performance report, fraught with lifeless statistics and obfuscated by litany of governmental achievements. Taken as a whole, the 2007 SOCA is revealing of a situation where people and social institutions operate under an activist local government, moving along the lane of governance activism.

Analyzing the SOCA in the point of view of state and society, it shows, in graphics, how an activist local government plays its role in the city’s political and economic landscape.  For us, Mayor Acharon’s SOCA should be viewed through this social lens, rather than through the one warped by suffocating performance statistics that heavily punctuate the whole stretch of the 2007 SOCA – if we are to give the same SOCA the justice it deserves.

The recent SOCA of Mayor Acharon prominently manifested unrelenting government efforts geared towards the attainment of the city’s vision, which is to build an economically prosperous and globally competitive city inhabited by empowered and healthy people who actively participate in local governance. Towards this end, as shown on the way the SOCA was crafted, the city’s programs, projects and activities are pursued perfectly in accordance with the city’s well-defined development strategies: good governance, competitiveness, bankability and livability.

This means that all the works that one does as a city government bureaucrat serves as a building block for an edifice that we collectively envision for the city. Thus, operationally, works (represented partly by performance statistics in the SOCA) are piled and interconnected as pieces of a whole (vision), which is completely formed upon the perfect assemblage of all pieces (work performances).

Thus, by paying a sharper look at Mayor Acharon’s recent SOCA, we can vividly see the gradual forming of an edifice which the city government had previously drawn on the social canvass, with people from different classes, cultures and sectors constantly and continuously piling and interconnecting building blocks (programs, projects, activities) according to its prepared architectural designs (strategies).

Moreover, Mayor Acharon’s recent SOCA highlighted the dynamic governance partnership and collaboration between and among key forces in our prevailing local political society, namely: city government, private sector and civil society (NGOs/POs). Synergies between and among these forces within our political society are further buttressed by program and project mobilizations under the auspices of different National Government Agencies (NGAs), with the First Congressional District, under Representative Darlene R. Antonino-Custodio, in the forefront of community development works.

The prevailing synergy between and among development forces in the city is a cause for celebration. Considering the complexities of current society, modern governance and development thinkers consider the above-mentioned key development forces as pillars and vehicles for genuine and sustainable development. In accordance with such social framework, they posit that, without the dynamic interactions between and among these key forces, we can never attain our economic development aspirations.

Following the advent of globalization, battles for sustainable local development are now waged in both the national and international arenas, with all competing forces armed with high levels of knowledge and technical competencies. Development warriors who fail to sharpen their weapons are destined to vanish in unfamiliar territories as time enters into entirely new historical strand – the cyber era. 

Thus, as can be gleaned in the Mayor’s recent SOCA, the tooling and retooling of both formal and alternative power centers are not only permanently considered in the city’s annual development programs but they now find concrete expression in various local institutions created for the purpose of capacitating key social forces to adjust to our speedily-changing development landscape.

The many and varied governmental accomplishments mentioned in the SOCA, if used as accounting entries in the social balance sheet, are enough to make us arrive at the conclusion that the city government, under the auspices of Mayor Acharon, does not, at all, lose sight of the major role that the city government should play as a state apparatus.

It is very clear in his SOCA that the city government’s empowerment, justice, social services, welfare and community resource tenure improvement programs, involving people situated in the lower strata of society, dominate the commanding heights of its development offensives.

For purpose of political review, we would like to stress, at this juncture, that this major role of the state, and its various instruments, is meant to regulate corporate, institutional and individual actions to protect the weak from the abuse of the strong and to moderate individual and corporate greed (if we are to borrow CHED Secretary Romulo Neri’s term) so as to advance the common good and the general welfare.

Based on Mayor’s Acharon accounting of the city government’s programs, projects and activities, this particular state’s role was played by the city government in the manner that does not result to the weakening of the middle forces and the elite. It fact, the city government helps to strengthen them for the betterment of the whole society. Though activist in character, the present local government - as a government for all the people and as distinguished from all other traditional activist groups - does not engage in any form of class struggle.

Indeed, our in-depth analysis of Mayor Acharon’s SOCA is revealing of an activist local government, traveling along the governance activism lane. For this alone, the people have all the reasons for their rejoicing.