Opinion

Federalism enhances government

SEEN SCENE - Elfren S. Cruz - The Philippine Star

November 3, 2016 | 12:00am

The principal goals of a democratic constitution are to advance individual liberty and to provide an effective governance framework. It becomes the biggest challenge of any democratic government to look for the perfect balance between these two objectives which may seem, at many times, contradictory. In fact, there is often a public perception that these two goals are in conflict.

In order to protect individual liberty, a constitution provides for a bill of rights and the rule of law. The government is also structured to provide checks and balances.

There is also a need to provide for a more effective government. The reality is that sometimes effective governance requires the resources and expertise of a national government. But there are times that issues can be addressed more effectively at the local level.

For example, the enforcement of monetary policies, including interest rates, should remain centralized. This requires that a nation have a single monetary authority or Central Bank. There is clearly also a need for a single, unified Armed Forces to defend the country from external threats or internal rebellions. Economies of scale also dictate that there should be national regulation for food and drugs to ensure that these products are safe.

On the other hand, a national fire department, with a centralized bureaucracy is more costly and offers little benefits. While an independent fire department for each municipality is not financially and technically feasible, a regionalized fire department with a regional administration seems to be the best solution.

Police forces are supposed to be an integral part of the communities they guard. Therefore, it makes no sense to assign policemen from Northern Luzon to areas like Mindanao where they have no knowledge of local dialects, local terrain and local customs. Again, regional police forces will bring the police forces closer to the communities they are supposed to patrol.

Policing is just one example of the value of decentralized decision making which allows government to better meet diverse local needs. This diversity can be the result of differences in geography, economy or even cultures. There are significant differences between the needs of a highly urbanized area like Metro Manila and predominantly rural areas like the Cagayan Valley or Eastern Visayas. There are clear distinctions between the transportation and communication needs of a mountainous region like the Cordillera and the lowlands like Central Luzon. There are cultural differences between the Muslim regions of Mindanao and Central Visayas or Bikol.

Accountability is another area which should be divided between the national government and the regional governments. The state of the currency, a common education curriculum, the protection of individual human rights, the defense of territorial sovereignty and ensuring the rule of law are principal obligations of national government. But local governments, for example, should be held accountable for proper construction of school buildings, providing relief goods, maintenance of infrastructure, peace and order, land use planning, and basic health services.

This division for governance and accountability is best accomplished by a federal form of government where there will be a national government and regional governments or states. This is a way to try and achieve the balance between an effective government and the protection of individual liberty.

Great man and government

Do great leaders really affect history or are they simply prisoners of broad long term historical forces?

Former British Prime Minister David Lloyd George once said: “... a gifted or resolute person has often postponed for centuries a catastrophe which appeared imminent and but for him would have befallen.” The famous Russian author of War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy believed that “...historical personages are the products of their times, emerging from the the connection between contemporary and preceding events.” He felt that great men were no more than “...labels giving names to events.”

The Great Man Theory was popularized by the Scottish writer, Thomas Carlyle, who believed that certain individuals who, due to their personal charisma, intelligence, wisdom, or political skill could utilize their power in a way that could have a decisive impact on history. He said: “ the history of the world is but a biography of great men.”

However, Carlyle would also later write that the prime cause of the French Revolution was “...hunger and nakedness and nightmare oppression lying heavy on 25 million hearts.” In 1928, the American historian Arthur Schlesinger sought a convergence of the two historical points of view and said: “ ...Great Man is merely the mechanism through which the Great Many have spoken.”

If the Great Man does not necessarily lead to great government, what then makes successful government? In the short run, any government that can control society and the means of communication has a good chance of becoming a successful government. Mussolini made the trains run on time.

What makes for successful government in a democracy in which political leaders depend on public support? Professor Vernon Bogdanor said that: “ The three main enemies of successful government are ideology, morality and panic. Ideology leads to a closed system of thought rather than necessary openness to experience. A government that seeks to create a “...a new heaven on earth is unlikely to prove successful nor will a government that imposes its own values upon society...It is also likely to be limited government rather than hyperactive government.”

In summary, he says: “ Successful government then is government aware of its limitations, quiet government by men and women with a highly developed sense of history. The trouble is that successful government...is almost always dull government.”