IN ANOTHER Pampanga daily, Gov. Eddie T. Panlilio was reported to have given himself a grade of 8.5 out of a perfect 10 for the year just past.
And he could have gone even higher – so Panlilio said – had the sangguniang panlalawigan approved the P193-million supplemental budget he requested: “Nung me-approve ya itang supplemental budget, mapalyaring megawa ya ing dalan Porac, Sta. Rita at Lubao pero anyang August ke pa ni-request king SP, angga ngeni ali de pa inaksyunan.”
“Stupidity and the height of ignorance.” That was the retort of Vice Gov. Yeng Guiao to Panlilio’s 8.5 rating of himself, lecturing the governor thus: “Eme puwedeng ibase ing performance mu king supplemental budget uling karagdagan ya ita.”
To Guiao, one parameter of Panlilio’s performance should have rightly been how he managed the annual budget vis-à-vis the targeted programs, projects and activities.
On that score, Guiao gave Panlilio a dismal 4 for what he saw as the governor’s failure to set the Capitol’s goals and objectives for the province.
Another area where Panlilio – to Guiao – could not even merit a pasang-awa is in investments. So how much investments has Panlilio managed to invite into Pampanga, Guiao asks.
Here, I am reminded of the budget hearing last year where the head of the Pampanga investments promotion office (PIPO) reported a total of P31 billion new investments in Pampanga only to learn that all the investments at the Clark Freeport were credited to the Capitol’s performance.
Ranted Guiao: So how many jobs were created through the Panlilio administration for the benefit of the disadvantaged Kapampangans? How many impact projects did he develop not only for a few but for the majority of his constituents?
“Sa health assistance sa mga mahihirap lalo pang bagsak ang grade ni governor. Dahil mas marami pang natulungan kaming mga nasa legislative kaysa kanya. Tingnan niyo na lang ang hugos ng mga tao sa mga upisina ng SP,” noted Guiao.
And what scholarship program is Panlilio talking about?
Dole-out, sneered Guiao. Simple handing out of financial assistance to students. One more extension of patronage politics in the absence of qualification standards, like school grades, as basis for selection of those deserving to be sustained through graduation.
Guiao’s grade of 4 for Panlilio is comparatively higher than others who have graded the governor’s performance.
Business leader Rene Romero of the Pampanga Chamber of Commerce and Industry has consistently rated Panlilio’s performance as far, far from passing. Even the Capitol’s winning a Gawad Galing Pook 2008 for the quarry collection was assailed by Romero as “undeserved.”
Only last December Linda Gaddi-David, president of the Pampanga chapter of the National Federation of Senior Citizens’ Associations of the Philippines, in Talking Points over Infomax 8 gave Panlilio an utterly dismal rating of 20 – out of 100 – for what she said were “broken promises to and lack of concern for the senior citizens.”
And Imang Linda – as we wrote here then – “was roundly criticized by her peers for that rating. Not so much for being harsh on the governor but for being “very kind” to him.
If only for depriving them of the funds rightfully accruing to them from their share in the provincial development fund, Panlilio deserved a grade of 0. Zilch. Nada.”
Another guest in that same cable-TV program, Manuel Divina, Junior Chamber International Philippines area training director, gave Panlilio a “higher but still far from passing grade of 50” for what he said was “the governor’s failure to attend to the needs and aspirations of the youth.” Divina lamented having voted for Panlilio in 2007, and said he would “give Nanay Baby a try.”
So Panlilio gave himself a grade of 8.5. Rather a bloated sense of self there. Given the ratings other people gave him.
And he could have gone even higher – so Panlilio said – had the sangguniang panlalawigan approved the P193-million supplemental budget he requested: “Nung me-approve ya itang supplemental budget, mapalyaring megawa ya ing dalan Porac, Sta. Rita at Lubao pero anyang August ke pa ni-request king SP, angga ngeni ali de pa inaksyunan.”
“Stupidity and the height of ignorance.” That was the retort of Vice Gov. Yeng Guiao to Panlilio’s 8.5 rating of himself, lecturing the governor thus: “Eme puwedeng ibase ing performance mu king supplemental budget uling karagdagan ya ita.”
To Guiao, one parameter of Panlilio’s performance should have rightly been how he managed the annual budget vis-à-vis the targeted programs, projects and activities.
On that score, Guiao gave Panlilio a dismal 4 for what he saw as the governor’s failure to set the Capitol’s goals and objectives for the province.
Another area where Panlilio – to Guiao – could not even merit a pasang-awa is in investments. So how much investments has Panlilio managed to invite into Pampanga, Guiao asks.
Here, I am reminded of the budget hearing last year where the head of the Pampanga investments promotion office (PIPO) reported a total of P31 billion new investments in Pampanga only to learn that all the investments at the Clark Freeport were credited to the Capitol’s performance.
Ranted Guiao: So how many jobs were created through the Panlilio administration for the benefit of the disadvantaged Kapampangans? How many impact projects did he develop not only for a few but for the majority of his constituents?
“Sa health assistance sa mga mahihirap lalo pang bagsak ang grade ni governor. Dahil mas marami pang natulungan kaming mga nasa legislative kaysa kanya. Tingnan niyo na lang ang hugos ng mga tao sa mga upisina ng SP,” noted Guiao.
And what scholarship program is Panlilio talking about?
Dole-out, sneered Guiao. Simple handing out of financial assistance to students. One more extension of patronage politics in the absence of qualification standards, like school grades, as basis for selection of those deserving to be sustained through graduation.
Guiao’s grade of 4 for Panlilio is comparatively higher than others who have graded the governor’s performance.
Business leader Rene Romero of the Pampanga Chamber of Commerce and Industry has consistently rated Panlilio’s performance as far, far from passing. Even the Capitol’s winning a Gawad Galing Pook 2008 for the quarry collection was assailed by Romero as “undeserved.”
Only last December Linda Gaddi-David, president of the Pampanga chapter of the National Federation of Senior Citizens’ Associations of the Philippines, in Talking Points over Infomax 8 gave Panlilio an utterly dismal rating of 20 – out of 100 – for what she said were “broken promises to and lack of concern for the senior citizens.”
And Imang Linda – as we wrote here then – “was roundly criticized by her peers for that rating. Not so much for being harsh on the governor but for being “very kind” to him.
If only for depriving them of the funds rightfully accruing to them from their share in the provincial development fund, Panlilio deserved a grade of 0. Zilch. Nada.”
Another guest in that same cable-TV program, Manuel Divina, Junior Chamber International Philippines area training director, gave Panlilio a “higher but still far from passing grade of 50” for what he said was “the governor’s failure to attend to the needs and aspirations of the youth.” Divina lamented having voted for Panlilio in 2007, and said he would “give Nanay Baby a try.”
So Panlilio gave himself a grade of 8.5. Rather a bloated sense of self there. Given the ratings other people gave him.
