The year's off to a brisk start
The air control snafu is only one part of a brisk start to the year for the powers-that-be
I. This week’s The Long View
My column this week was on the air traffic control failure and a relevant concept: "technical debt." Which is what happens when you postpone software upgrades, betting it's a problem the next management will address:
THE LONG VIEW
Technical debt
By: Manuel L. Quezon III – @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 04:30 AM January 04, 2023
The sixth month of the Marcos Restoration was supposed to be the point when the administration could really hit the ground running, what with the First Lady busy cleaning (purging, really) the Palace of problematic appointees, an obedient legislative supermajority in both chambers of Congress delivering the first budget the President can consider truly his own, and with little discernible friction between the President and the Vice President. Even the price of populism was factored in with the please now, pay later decision to instruct PhilHealth to suspend the increase of premium rates and its income ceiling for 2023. That crowd-pleasing but future-mortgaging decision should have ensured a new year with plenty of smiles for the President, but then Naia happened. The details of this debacle are still too fresh to require restating here.
Just a few days prior to the shutting down of Philippine airspace, Southwest Airlines in the US experienced a shutdown of its operations in the midst of what one employee described as a “routine winter storm.” Despite everyone being on deck, “our antiquated software system failed coupled with a decades-old system of having to manage 20,000 frontline employees by phone calls. No automation has been developed to run this sophisticated machine.” The result was vividly described by the employee: “The two decades of neglect by SWA leadership caused the airline to lose track of its crews … We were there … but there was no way to assign us … And we watched as our customers got stranded without their luggage missing their Christmas holiday.”
Zeynep Tufekci (professor and columnist on complex systems) in the same thread pointed out that months before the Southwest Airlines meltdown, employees had hired a truck, put a sign on it pointing out the airline’s “outdated technology,” and drove it around the company’s headquarters. The summertime had been marked with a public relations disaster when its systems had conked out, canceling dozens of flights during the peak travel season. But what executives had done, according to Tufekci, was to spend billions on stock buybacks: with the effect of boosting the price of stocks, and thus, increasing executive compensation.
The fury over this holiday nightmare led to a term being widely discussed and shared: technical debt. Tufekci helped define what it is. “This method,” she tweeted, “of ‘use duct tape and wire to make old software hobble along’ incurs something called ‘technical debt’—the bill will come due, eventually … Company executives keep betting it will be under the next management … It usually pays off for them … The public pays the price.”
Very clearly, the public paid a big price in terms of canceled or postponed flights, and the time, energy, and even costs of staying longer than expected, arriving later than planned, and every inconvenience in between—including, infamously, the woes of one overseas worker in Hong Kong who feared the loss of her job due to missing her deadline for arrival. There is, too, reputational damage, and thus, the cost in terms of outraged tourists who will turn into ambassadors of negativity about the country’s systems. There is another kind of cost that could end up passed on to the public, because of it being an obligation of the state: One congressman told reporters that if the authorities declare the flight disruptions were caused by safety issues, then the law would require airlines to refund angry customers for their canceled flights. In turn, the airlines could legitimately turn to the government to demand compensation for a situation that was beyond the airlines’ control.
There’s been some criticism of the authorities changing their stories, from blaming software or system glitches, to the main and backup power supply conking out, and thus causing malfunctions. Official statements, however, suggest a series of equipment failures combined with on-the-spot judgment calls to try to improvise solutions that fried some equipment. The Senate has promised to investigate the matter, but the question of technical debt arises because of a specific allegation. After all, back in 2013, the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP) had replaced its then 19-year-old air traffic system, and a new air traffic management center had been inaugurated in 2019. Congress supposedly enacted a P13-billion appropriation that year to put in place a redundancy system that officials claim they’ve been privately advising the President to authorize. The new secretary of transportation is said to be one of these officials, which would make sense because of his intimate familiarity with the needs of airlines (and the industry as a whole): at the very least, it suggests he could be in a very good place to determine which steps are needed, and which steps are not, moving forward.
But this is less about the current secretary of transportation and more about his predecessor, who will now have to explain why he shouldn’t be called to task for incurring a technical debt.
Bilyonaryo outscooped everyone, it seems, by daring to publicize what was only being said in private chat groups: Art Tugade was pinpointed as having made a judgment call not to spend all of what had been allocated for acquiring a new system for the CAAP’s air traffic management software. Instead, what ought to have been spent on a backup system or redundancies was earmarked for the acquisition of electronic billboards and laying down fresh concrete for parking spaces. So it seems probable the Senate will once again welcome former secretary Tugade as a guest.
Any administrator tasked with making decisions on capital expenses can look at Tugade and sigh (with some relief) “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” For the dilemma of anyone running a building is, do we spend on systems and maintenance that no one sees, or on things that may be considered cosmetic but on which the management is judged? Tugade, sensitive to public opinion, apparently decided to pass on technical issues to his successor for the temporary (but who would disagree, politically necessary) public-relations points window-dressing provides. Which brings us to two points for consideration: There is the question of whether a technical debt was incurred; but also, of how it is complicated systems in the midst of failing, can be allowed to be tinkered with, making things worse.
II. A police matter
Something curious happened in the Philippine National Police while the President was away.
The response came swiftly:
But the implications of the exposé are damning, since senior police officials at this point can still largely be attributed to the previous administration in terms of promotions. A purge of this sort addresses, incidentally, the perception that the President up to this point, didn’t fully control the police top brass.
Reorganizing the Office of the President Redux
To me one of the most interesting aspects of any administration is how it decides to organize itself as it provides a glimpse into the governing style of each President and which officials they deem essential to their work. Now comes the 2nd reorganization in 6 mos. See: Executive Order No. 11, s. 2022
The reorganization of the Office of the President under Duterte was a titanic battle between Go and Evasco, one that I chronicled over 12 columns (see this thread for refresher:
). At stake was the ambition and lasting impact of the administration. Go won.
President Marcos Jr. (or to be precise: his then-Executive Secretary in whom he placed near-unlimited trust at the start) kicked off his admin with a sweeping reorganization including abolishing the position of Cabinet Secretary, in E.O. No. 1, s. 2022.
A bit of additional refreshing at this point: the three pillars of the Office of the President could be said to be the Executive Secretary (1936), Cabinet Secretary (1944), and Presidential Management Staff (1976). See:
Of these the two mainstays are Executive Secretary and Presidential Management Staff (which mostly absorbed CabSec functions). These in turn reflect recent history of Office of the President. The PMS is a reminder ES position was once abolished 1975-86.
So let's dispense with the briefers on the evolution and history of the three offices. The Executive Secretary heads the Executive Office. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/about/gov/exec/the-executive-secretary/
The currently defunct Cabinet Secretary was established as an administrative response to the powers of the ES and periodically revives for that reason. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/about/gov/exec/bsaiii/cabinet/the-cabinet-secretary/
The Presidential Management Staff provides support of the most direct kind to presidents, managing many aspects of the official day. When an ES is weak, the PMS is strong; tension between the two is almost guaranteed always. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/about/gov/exec/the-presidential-management-staff/
One reason that almost always, a President begins his or her new term with a reorganization of the Office of the President, is that what works for one prexy may not work for another; dynamics and style of governance change. This is revealing over time. https://www.quezon.ph/2016/06/21/messages-of-the-president/
The Go-Evasco fight under Duterte took place because Aquino III had recreated the Cabinet Secretary Position; Duterte granted little actual power to his ES, so there was a power vacuum which was filled by Go (Special Assistant + PMS) and Evasco (CabSec). Then they duked it out: https://www.quezon.ph/2016/12/14/the-long-view-the-little-president/
So Marcos Jr. abolished CabSec, and reminded everyone the ES (then Rodriguez) was primus inter pares. That eliminated the problem of a CabSec and turfing with PMS. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/downloads/2022/07jul/20220630-EO-1-FRM.pdf
Marcos Jr. then tackled presidential communications. He also abolished the Presidential Spokesperson to restore the powers of the Press Secretary, who was widely understood to be a creature of the then-ES. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/downloads/2022/07jul/20220630-EO-2-FRM.pdf
Fast forward to what has happened since: the fall of the previous ES, the appointment of a new one, the ex-CJ; reliance on the Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (Enrile), and since the Bangkok trip, problems with the PMS who is officially on leave. Revival of Spokesperson post.
Whatever grand plan, if any, the previous ES had convinced the President was necessary, can be understood to be obsolete. We know the President and/or the First Lady, have consulted former officials on the Executive Office. The current ES likely had influence, too, as did CPLC.
The result of all this is EO No. 11. It immediately reasserts the authority of the ES (and, incidentally, revives the proper but long-discarded or ignored term, Executive Office); it subordinates the PMS very clearly; it strengthens the position of Special Assistant to the Pres.
Special Asst. to the Pres. is traditionally head of the Private Office which manages the Palace household, and the various related staff: Social Office, Protocol Office, but it seems now will have different functions: it is now in charge of the presidential assistants, and the Legislative Liaison Office. What the official in charge of the Private Office will be called or who it is, is unstated in the new EO. Other changes include the renaming of the Office of the Press Secretary which becomes Presidential Communications Office. Interestingly, RTVM was detached from the Press Office in EO No. 2 as was the Philippine Information Agency: RTVM had been placed under PMS (I can only guess on the principle that it's coeverage is a close-in function and all close-in matters are PMS' turf) while PIA was placed directly under OP. Both eem unchanged. Interestingly, too, the Correspondence Office is now attached to the Executive Office (once upon a time considered a communications-related office). In renaming the Press Office, a focus on messaging seems to have been revived. For an exploration of mssaging vs. dissemination, two functions of communictions see this briefer: https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/featured/presidential-communications/
While never officially stated (perhaps never even asked by the press), if it's true that the First Lady chose to establish her office not in the Palace, but in the PMS, then it would suggest there is keen interest in running a tight ship in terms of close-in staffing. On the other hand, there won't be turfing under the current setup: whoever ends up heading PMS will now be thoroughly subordinated to the ES while the responsibilities of the Special Assistant to the President are also fairly clear; if someone else ends up heading the Private Office it further limits that position's access to the President: it would be interesting to see who ends up heading the Private Office as it is the real cordon sanitaire.
A note on the Spratleys
News from Beijing: A twin move, but PH media will focus in China saying it's ready to share Reed/Recto Bank gas (Spratleys).
In 2020 I wrote about how such an offer might not imperil our claims, at least as outlined by then-Senior Associate Justice Carpio. Here's my column from October, 2020: see my article, Submerged optimism.