President P-Noy entered Malacañang with a hefty load of political capital courtesy of his electoral mandate. Given the legacy of the Gloria Macapagal Arroyo Administration prevailing poverty amidst rosy economic figures, society and institutions damaged by bad governance, misplaced priorities, appointments based on loyalty rather than competence and a culture of impunity and arrogance, the P-Noy team has a lot of changing to do. With the GMA appointees liberally spread all over the government institutions, especially in the justice infrastructure, P-Noy needs the continuing support of the Filipino people to effect reforms. He cannot depend on fair weather allies in the legislature who had profited from the GMA administration and shifted to him just a few months before the elections and quite a number after the P-Noy proclamation.

P-Noy and his team need to add to his political capital not waste it away on issues of their own creation. Surprising in such a short time, only less than two months, a number of controversial issues have arisen (MC 1, VAT on toll, high profile replacements, controversial appointments, etc).

Regrettably, P-Noy’s high credibility among the Filipino masses is being used in confronting the criticism with the Presidential spokesman stressing that the new administration will not hesitate to depend on P-Noy’s popularity (even if such is swiftly eroded?).

One is Memorandum Circular No. 1 (MC 1) which reminded me of the mass dismissal of elected local government officials during the Cory administration. That gave us a vice president, Jojo Binay who started his political career as Officer-in-Charge of Makati and a President, Erap Estrada, who ousted as Mayor of San Juan, then run for and won as senator, Vice President and President.

The difference is that President Cory acted under the Freedom Constitution while P-Noy is operating under a democratic government. Another distinction is that Cory did away with officials who had stayed in power without any renewed mandate from the electorate while P-Noy’s MC 1 effectively removed government bureaucrats many of whom are covered by security of tenure even if they are not Career Executive Service Officers (CESOs).

The problem would have been avoided if the P-Noy team had bothered to do FVR’s CSW or complete staff work; consulted with the appropriate government bodies – the Civil Service Commission and the Career Executive Service Board; and gotten the advice of legal experts in public administration (not the same as corporate law) and human resource consultants conversant with the government system. Those of us who entered government from the private sector or the academe had the humility to realize that there was much we did not know and that we needed the government bureaucracy if we wanted to succeed.

Another is the replacement of PAGASA head Nilo Prisco. I agree with the decision to replace him. I am saddened that the process was not handled properly. After P-Noy made clear his displeasure at PAGASA during the aftermath of Typhoon Basyang, the DoST Secretary Montejo should have followed through with recommendations to the President on both the relief of Prisco and the improvements in PAGASA. There was no need for the President to be on the frontline answering questions on the case of the PAGASA chief.

The lesson for all members of the Cabinet is that a major part of their roles is to protect the President.

They should be quick to answer for controversies in their spheres of influence; immediately inform the President of potential problem areas and the action they have or will take; and leave if their continued stay is becoming an embarrassment to the Chief Executive.

Remember that there are more significant and important battles ahead for the P-Noy administration if this country is to recover from the moral and economic devastation wrought by the Gloria administration.

Business Bits. “Haste makes waste” was an adage I grew up with. We may be impatient for results but we should realize that imprudent action could result in more and greater mistakes. Such a leadership style could erode credibility.