Tougher, more rigorous questions for presidential bets

Given that the last official Philippine presidential debate was held in 1992, any type of presidential debate in 2016 would be an improvement.

The February 21, 2016 debate witnessed by millions at home and abroad was, by far, an improvement from the last 2010 presidential election where there was officially no debate. As people would say, mabuti nga meron pa; dati-rati, talagang wala. (It’s better than nothing.)

But this first-in-a-series debate still needs improvement. A lot of it. It is not just the number of TV commercials that did the damage (about 40% of the 2-hour event was commercials). More importantly, the candidates were not pressed hard enough nor grilled extensively by the hosts and the Inquirer editor.

Some of the questions were somewhat lax, allowing the candidates to skirt the issues. One writer described parts of the debate as more like a graded class recitation. UP Law and Ateneo Law class recitations are much more demanding. There were also not many tough or more rigorous follow up questions to really probe the candidates and have them confront corruption or Mindanao development. (READ: The CDO debate: Summary and highlights)

Some other journalists wrote that the candidates went on the offensive. To some extent, yes, but they were mostly just explaining points or even commending each other as in the case Miriam and Duterte. If the hosts cannot nail an exact answer from the first question as the candidate danced around it or simply evaded it, more rigorous follow up questions are what ideally will do the job. The candidate will be put on the defensive, accept or reject the criticism with explanation, admit to a fault, acknowledge a public grievance, bolster a position, preserve past gains, or even point to somebody else as hero or culprit.

Public not expecting US-type debates

The viewing/streaming public is not really expecting a fiery fight to the finish, sigawan style of debate, or the barahan approach to answering questions. This is still the Philippines where respect and deference to people on top (rightly or wrongly) and to the elderly holds sway. Debating styles still reflect a country’s predominant norm.

No one expects these Philippine presidential candidates to be calling each other liars in public, unlike the recent Trump-Rubio-Cruz exchanges in the US. No one expects them to ridicule the other’s facial appearance or gestures, or trade insults in lieu of explaining a past deed/misdeed. 

Yet, the public surely yearns for something more and far meatier than what was televised on February 21. The public deserves a healthier, more substantive discussion and debate. In a way, the first debate was like the Pacquiao-Mayweather fight. The next two debates should be like any of those Pacquiao-Marquez fights. (READ: Cebu prepares for March 20 presidential debate)

A job interview

The purpose of these types of debates is to convince voters why a candidate is the most appropriate leader of the republic, to fend off allegations of inexperience or incompetence or corruption, and to see what a candidate will do once in office. Unleash those five candidates to sell themselves as best they can, counter the criticisms being hurled at them, and respond to scrutiny to the minutest and finest detail.

It is a job interview, anyway.

Maybe because something like this has not happened in 25 years. Maybe because there were too many commercials in between that candidates were constrained to fewer 30, 60 or 90 second responses. Maybe the candidates were too polite, the hosts too gracious, and the public too forgiving. 

Whatever was the reason for the calm but not-so-substantive debate, here are tougher and more rigorous hypothetical questions and follow up questions.

For VP Jejomar Binay

• You mentioned that you secured many of your real estate properties from your mother. But your TV ads and interviews state that your mother died because there was no money to buy medicines. Shouldn’t these properties have answered for your mother’s medicines and hospital billings (the properties could have been sold to buy medicines)?
• There are no poor people in Makati? What would be your proof? Would you know, as former Makati mayor, how much is the average annual income of folks living in West Rembo, East Rembo, South Cembo and Pembo?
• If elected president, will a President Binay ever support the passage into law of a strong anti-dynasty bill? If the answer is no, what will happen to the anti-dynasty provision in the constitutional mandate?
• Your son was recently dismissed as Makati mayor by the Ombudsman and there are rumors that you might face the same fate. Why do you say that this is all part of a demolition job by the current administration?

• You have explained what you have accomplished as Makati City mayor. But what have you achieved as vice president? Why is it fair or unfair to characterize your 6-year VP term as one very long campaign for your presidential ambition?

For Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago

• Will you reveal to the public your medical history in the last 4 to 5 years?
• Bongbong Marcos is, without a doubt, aiming to be president of the Philippines. There are some portions of the country supporting him, yet there are also many segments who chastise his very candidacy, political ambitions, and insinuations that the country was much better off under Ferdinand Marcos. Why did you choose Bongbong as running mate? In your opinion, was the country truly better off while Marcos was in power in terms of the economy, job stability, peso-to-dollar rate, human rights violations, access to justice and fair playing field in business?
• Was martial law declared to make the people’s plight better? What are your two or three justifications for martial law? Is Senator Enrile correct in supporting and playing a key role in Ferdinand Marcos’ martial law regime?
• How can you defend the Philippines against the bullying stance of China? How will a President Santiago treat the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA)? What is your program for national defense?
• If somebody else is elected, are you open to serving as a cabinet secretary? Who would that President-elect be?

For Mayor Rodrigo Duterte

• You mentioned that you will end criminality and drug abuse in 3-6 months. What specific plan of action or programs do you have in mind to achieve this goal in so short a time? Can you concretize your proposal to “order the killing of all criminals”? How much in terms of government budget will that cost? What is the human rights cost of this program?
• Will you show to the public your medical history in the last 4 to 5 years? You previously said in an interview that you will never show it. Why not? Doesn’t the public have the right to know the medical conditions and physical well-being of the person who will occupy the top post in the country?
• Can you please explain your following statements: will free ex-President Gloria Arroyo (Feb. 5 in San Fernando, Pampanga); will free Sen. Bong Revilla (Jan. 21 in Bacoor, Cavite); will let Sen. Bongbong Marcos take over (Feb. 19 in Laoag City); and will allow the burial of the “hero” Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Feb. 19 in Laoag City)?
• As a strong supporter of federalism, can you explain how you will effect this change? How much power will this change give to provincial leaders? According to your proposal, will this need a constitutional amendment? Will provinces and cities be able to tax residents by themselves? 
• Commentators have said that you are tough on small-time criminal elements (e.g. low level drug pushers and criminals) but will never be tough on big-time criminal syndicates (e.g. drug lords) and people in power (elected or appointed officials) who are alleged to have committed dastardly and more sinister acts. Is this a fair description? You say that a Duterte presidency will be a “bloody presidency,” but whose blood will be spilled? 

For Senator Grace Poe

• In your campaigns, you always refer to having “fresh perspective” as an essential ingredient for good presidential governance. Why is “fresh perspective” better than the firm, tested and battle-hardened governing experience by a mayor, cabinet secretary or long-time Senator?
• When US President Barack assumed the White House in 2008, he was then a first-term senator and was said to have little administrative experience. Almost eight years later, he is still being criticized mostly by the Republicans as having a failed presidency due to his inexperience. Do you think such criticism applies to you being a first-term senator running for president?
• If elected president, how will a President Poe encourage the House and the Senate to pass the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill? How will you convince senators, representatives and other interests who are vehemently opposed to this?
• In two minutes, can you please provide the public with a synopsis of your Philippine residency status?
• Your father was one of the foremost Philippine actors in history and ran for president in 2004. You have mentioned that you will continue his legacy. What is the specific legacy of Fernando Poe Jr in terms of national development, anti-poverty, job creation and anti-corruption? 

For Mar Roxas

• Criticisms have rained on you because of allegations of incompetence in handling the effects of Super Typhoon Yolanda. Binay has said that many people are still angry at you because of your and the national government’s alleged failure to provide quick and adequate service to the victims. There was also the video of your meeting with Tacloban City Mayor Alfred Romualdez that went viral. What are your responses to these concerns? 
• If the presidency is not an OJT (on-the-job training) since a candidate should be President and Commander-in-chief from day 1, why shouldn’t a mayor from Metro Manila or Mindanao with decades of experience be elected as president? Doesn’t an experienced mayor have enough administrative and political experience na hindi na sila mabobola ng kung sinu-sino?
• How did Metro Manila traffic improve under your watch at DOTC? It’s now becoming worse. On a related matter, who or what is to blame for the delay in the issuance of driver’s license cards?
• The Aquino government’s slogan is Daang Matuwid (Straight Path). Yet corruption exists, political patronage dominates, and most of those elected to Congress come from political dynasties. Leaders of the Lumad indigenous group in Mindanao were allegedly killed by para-military forces. How would you rate President Aquino’s government given this backdrop? Do you agree this is the reality? If not, what is the Philippine political reality for you?
• Do you think you have the even-temperedness to be President and Commander-in-chief? Some commentators have described you as quick to anger (maiinitin ang ulo) and dismissive.

Format suggestion

Yes, these are a lot of initial and follow up questions. The two-hour format with 40% commercials will not do. It was a restrained format from the get-go. So why don’t the COMELEC and its media sponsors make it a three-hour format with just 15% commercials (or 27 minutes)? The format can be: 

Part 1 – 51 minutes of opening statements, questions and follow up questions

Commercial break: 9 minutes

Part 2 – 51 minutes of questions and follow up questions

Commercial break: 9 minutes

Part 3 – 41 minutes of questions and follow up questions

Commercial break: 9 minutes

Closing – 10 minutes of responses to the last question and closing statements

Will companies and political groups which advertise on TV support this? Just 27 minutes for commercials for the entire three-hour debate? These interests won’t like it, no doubt, and may express opposition. TV stations and the COMELEC may feel the pressure of commercial interests. Perhaps a compromise on the debate-commercial ratio may be reached. But a debate with 40% commercials just won’t do a good job.

I’m not so sure if Senator Koko Pimentel’s suggestion of a nonstop, commercial-free debate is feasible given that TV stations rely heavily on advertisers’ fees. The senator’s suggestion is good and altruistic but maybe not that practical. 

What can be a doable alternative is to cut down dramatically the airing of commercials from 40% to around 15% – or thereabouts.

The debates and the election process comprise one long job interview. Candidates ought to be pressed, scrutinized, examined, vetted and compelled to answer the toughest questions. Debates cannot be made easy, light or soft for candidates.

Otherwise, what’s the purpose of having them? – Rappler.com  

 

The author is a lawyer and writer based in Washington, D.C. and was educated by Georgetown Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Wharton School of Business, Kyushu Law, and UP Law.  Disclaimer: The ideas and content above are solely the opinion and perspective of the author. They are not representative in any way of the position, opinion or outlook of his past or present employment affiliations, nor should they be interpreted as any form of legal or tax advice.