|
Is Business
Globalizing The Constituion?
By Michael Alan Hamlin
August 16, 1999
A The battle lines were drawn last
week by the administration and its supporters and the high-profile
individuals and groups that oppose President Joseph Estrada’s
call for a constituent assembly to revise the Constitution. From
my perspective, it will be difficult to derail the momentum of the
administration, despite the criticism of the elite business groups,
supporters of former president Corazon C. Aquino and Archbishop
Jaime Cardinal Sin, and politicians and lobbyists of a cornucopia
of shades.
It’s interesting to note that
the debate is largely taking place sans the participation of former
president Fidel V. Ramos. The obvious reason for this is the curious
dilemma Mr. Ramos must address to become an active participant.
Does he support Mr. Estrada, whose administration has launched investigations
of the application of public funds during Mr. Ramos’ reign,
and has publicly accused the former president of mismanaging the
government?
Or, does he align himself with Ms.
Aquino and Cardinal Sin and their supporters in big business who
collectively thwarted Mr. Ramos’ own efforts to revise the
Constitution? The third alternative is to keep publicly quiet, and
for the most part, that seems to be the alternative of choice. But
it leaves the respected former president marginalized in a debate
that will determine the fundamental integrity of Philippine democracy
and development.
Those are interesting issues, but
let’s refocus on the involvement of the business community
in the revisionist debate. Reports last week blared the support
of the business sector for Mr. Estrada’s plans. Headlines like
those are always misleading because they communicate the notion
that business is a large monolithic block of like-thinking businesspeople
with common interests. In fact, while there of course is commonality
in interests among the various business sectors, there are great
distinctions, too.
Those distinctions show up clearly
in the debate. Mr. Ramos’ charter change initiative failed
largely because his core constituency abandoned him: the Catholic
church, Ms. Aquino, academia, the middle class, and of course, big
business. Of the three segments of this constituency, it was big
business whose defection hurt the most because it was not only the
most powerful, it was the chief beneficiary of the efforts of the
Ramos administration to reform the economy. By abandoning their
president, big business credibly rejected revision of the Constitution
on principle.
That message was further made credible
because Mr. Ramos choose to frame his support for change in the
context of political imperatives. Put simply, he propositioned voters,
"Wouldn’t you rather have me, than Erap?" The answer
was a resounding "no" for two reasons. Big business was
scared silly that revising the Constitution for purely political
objectives would re-introduce the politics of abuse that characterized
the Marcos years. Mr. Ramos had been an excellent president, but
the prospect of perpetuating an administration raised too obviously
the specter of Marcosian decline.
The second reason is that Mr. Ramos
had virtually no overt support among the masses, non-elitist business,
and the charismatic sects. When business bailed, Mr. Ramos was left
without a safety net. Those same factors, conversely, appear to
assure this time around that the constitution will be revised because
while Mr. Ramos’ constituency continues to object to moves
to revise the Constitution, the numbers are on the side of Mr. Estrada.
Over a year ago I observed that the
power of Mr. Estrada’s constituency — and I was speaking
principally of the masses — began and ended with the power
to elect the president. It seems that I was wrong. In any numbers
game — and this is a numbers game — the influence of economically
powerful sectors of the economy is eclipsed, at least for as long
as the poor continue to support their hero president. But the success
of Mr. Estrada’s initiative will in no small part be due to
the rise of non-elitist business groups (I hope that characterization
does not offend anyone. Consider it a badge of honor. I do.), and
I refer specifically to the associations frequently marginalized
by past administrations whose representatives signed the Resolution
on Globalization last week.
Now, by singling out these organizations,
I risk the same trap of generalization that the headlines trumpeted
last week. It is no doubt true that among the membership of these
associations, there is a measure of dissent, and they also count
some traditional, or elitist, conglomerates and rainmakers among
their members. But it is also true, that whatever that measure is,
it has little or no voice, and is therefore irrelevant in terms
of the outcome of the revisionist debate.
Now, why are these businesses and
associations supporting the administration’s plans: Is it out
of loyalty? Will they gain from the changes? Will there be political
gains? The answers to those questions are: yes, yes, and yes.
While the administration in many
respects is reeling from credible charges of cronyism, it is also
true that the president’s followers appear to be as loyal to
him — unlike many of Mr. Ramos’ — as he is to them.
Part of the reason for this is that these folks genuinely like each
other. Another part is that they are afraid not to support the president,
for the obvious reasons. But to me, it seems that the principal
reason is that for the first time since Edsa, the influence these
groups exert over the economy is eclipsing traditional power centers,
particularly big business. This is their day in the sun.
The next issue is, will these non-elitist
manufacturers, exporters, and service providers gain from the proposed
changes that will provide land ownership for foreigners, allow fuller
ownership in domestic corporations, and provide for participation
in previously closed sectors, including the media? Of course they
will, both directly and indirectly. Directly, many of these companies
will thrive as suppliers to larger firms, which will in theory grow
rapidly because of the infusion of capital and technology. Second,
many of them are looking for partners themselves and want to make
their companies more attractive, and valuable. Indirectly, everyone
should benefit from an expanding economy and the creation of new
jobs.
But the important point is that these
changes will force all companies to be competitive. They do not
provide conditions that will allow local firms to monopolize particular
sectors of the economy — at least not yet.
Finally, what are the political gains?
The bet is that Mr. Estrada — unlike Mr. Ramos — will
be able to sustain influence. Probably not by extending or revising
term limitations, but by sustaining the momentum among the administration’s
constituency necessary to emerge dominant in the next elections.
Does the administration think that strategically?
You bet.
Copyright © 1999 The Events
& Awards Managers of Asia and
Hamlin-Iturralde Corporation. All rights reserved.
|
