Red flag for P-Noy

EDITORIAL

Last Oct. 16, the Social Weather Stations (SWS) published the results of the its survey on the performance of President Benigno “P-Noy” Aquino III’s “national administration.” The survey drew mixed reactions. However, a large percentage of the respondents were dissatisfied with his “national administration,” specifically on the issue of “Resolving the hostage-taking of Senior Inspector Rolando Mendoza.”

The SWS survey conducted from Sept. 24-27, 2010, showed 41% of the respondents were “dissatisfied” with the performance of P-Noy’s “national administration” while 36% were “satisfied” and 21% were “undecided.”

This survey was actually the third that SWS conducted during the same period from Sept. 24-27, 2010. It is a wonder they were published piecemeal one week apart. The previous two surveys are the following:

The first SWS survey was about P-Noy’s “satisfaction rating.” The results were published on October 5, 2010, to wit: 71% of the respondents were “satisfied” with P-Noy’s performance while 11% were “not satisfied.” That places his “net satisfaction rating” at 60%.

The second SWS survey conducted during the same period was published on October 11, 2010. The respondents were asked: “In your opinion, how many of the promises of Pres. Noynoy Aquino can be fulfilled?” The results were: 9% said “all or nearly all”; 35% said “most”; 50% said “a few”; and 4% said “almost none.”

While the first survey -- P-Noy’s “satisfaction rating” -- was deemed by SWS a “very good” start for P-Noy, it doesn’t look “very good” when compared to his “trust rating” conducted from June 25-28, 2010 just before he took office on June 30, 2010. The results of that survey were: 88% of the respondents had “much trust” in him compared to only 4% who had “little trust” in him; thus, giving him a “net trust rating” of 84%.

Now, if P-Noy’s “satisfaction rating” is measured against his “trust rating” when he was still president-elect, his “positive rating” dropped by 17% and his “negative rating” increased almost three times to 11%; thus giving him a “net positive rating” of 60%. That’s a 24% drop in three months!

Compared with previous presidents’ “satisfaction ratings” during their first 100 days in office, P-Noy’s “satisfaction rating” is higher than his late mother Cory Aquino’s 53%; lower than Fidel V. Ramos’ 66%; tied with Joseph “Erap” Estrada; and much higher than Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s 24%.

However, except for Ramos whose “satisfaction rating” was pretty stable during his first two years in office, the “satisfaction ratings” of Cory, Estrada, and Arroyo plunged during their first year in office.

The question is: Which way would P-Noy’s “satisfaction rating” go during his first year in office? Up or down? While a majority of the people would still be confident that P-Noy is honest and incorruptible -- thus deserving of a high personal “satisfaction rating” -- it might not hold true with his “performance rating” which was manifested poorly in the second and third surveys published last October 11 and October 16.

With 41% of the respondents “dissatisfied” of his performance and 50% believing that he can only fulfill “a few” of the promises he made in his SONA, that is definitely a big “red flag” and P-Noy should strive hard to improve his performance and program of government.

Indeed, P-Noy needs to shift from “campaign mode” to “governance mode.” It’s time for him to digress from demagoguery and start laying the groundwork for the delivery of his campaign promise, “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap” (No corruption, no poverty). His first 100 days in office are over; he should now be cranking out results.

P-Noy has to have the political will to implement the changes he promised the people. He needs to go beyond the “wang-wang” politics that awed the people during his inauguration. He needs to demonstrate leadership skills and do away with “hotdog-eating” gimmickry. While it might endear him to the “common tao” in the short run, the real challenge for him is to assert his primacy as the nation’s leader and impose his supremacy when dealing with recalcitrant and troublesome subordinates.

He can be caring yet resolute. He can be fair yet astute. He can be a benevolent yet stern disciplinarian. And he can be loved by the people yet feared by his enemies. These traits are the mark of a true leader. That’s the P-Noy we’d like to see.