The GOOD GOVERNANCE ACT OF 2013 instituting a Performance Evaluation mechanism of LGUs amending Republic Act 7160 or the

Local Government Code of 1991 and for other purposes BRIEFER Many challenges beset our country, the worst of which is poverty and corruption. But if we are to critically understand our situation, it would be right to say that our real problems are structural in nature. In fact, today, many Filipinos have increasingly been vocal about the structural problems that political dynasties create across the country. To be sure, there is reason to fight against political dynasties: GMA News reports there are at least 55 political families who have been in position for decades some for almost 40 uninterrupted years! The 1987 Constitution (Art 2 Sec 26) itself puts forth the call that the State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public office, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law. Additionally, as Rappler News has highlighted, and observed by NGOs on the ground, many of the poorest provinces in the country are under political dynasties. Yet how are we to solve these problems if the body tasked to legislate the Constitutions wishes has always been reluctant to ban political dynasties altogether? In the Senate alone, Senator DefensorSantiagos Anti-Political Dynasty Bill (SB 2649) did not prosper. We personally believe that we must think out of the box and propose other innovative legislation that calls for meaningful structural changes but which are still acceptable to Congress and will be able to gather broad support from different political inclinations. For this proposal, we were inspired by the initiatives of the late DILG Secretary Jesse Robredo, where he championed the Seal of Good Housekeeping program that rates the performance of LGUs and gives incentives to those who perform best. His program was at core done to challenge LGUs to give quality public service to their localities. Another source of inspiration is being done by the Caucus of Development NGO Networks (CODE-NGO) through the Civil Society Satisfaction Report Card (CSRC) which generates feedback from leaders of local civil society organizations on the strengths and areas for improvement of the local government, measure the satisfaction of the same leaders against the local governments performance in service delivery and in governance, and communicate the results to concerned agencies.1 Thus we propose this Good Governance Act of 2013 that aims to institutionalize a Performance Evaluation mechanism to effectively measure the quality of public service by LGUs. The proposal entails the creation of local independent bodies (under the DILG) called Lupon ng mga Tanod-Bayan. With this proposal we can empower local communities to grade their local governments, realize peoples access to governmental information, create constructive pressure to encourage LGUs to perform well, and, most importantly, initiate political maturation of Filipinos by providing a tool for performance-based local political dynamics. The proposal does seem heavy, we agree, but it is done in the spirit of the continuing struggle, begun in the EDSA Revolution of 1986, to institutionalize people power. Now its time we bring the latter in the realm of local governance. Through this proposal, we may yet dismantle incompetent local regimes.
1

From the CODE-NGO website (http://code-ngo.org)

CONTENT Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled: Preamble The Philippine government resolves to improve the quality of local governance by empowering local communities to exercise their right to information, quality public service, transparency and the accountability of public officials through the creation of a Performance Evaluation mechanism to determine the quality of public service rendered by Local Government Units (LGUs), assessed through an inter-agency and multi-sectoral Lupon ng mga TanodBayan in Independent Component Cities (ICCs), Highly Urbanized Cities (HUCs) and Provinces, thereby developing good governance and political maturity among the people. Definitions 1. Good governance - shall be defined as governance by LGUs that meets public needs with mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability of public officials, efficiency and effectiveness of public service and a mature and level playing field for public office. 2. Quality Public Service shall be defined as the delivery of public services and performance of government duties by LGUs that shall meet standards for effectiveness, efficiency and transparency inherently present in the trust given by the public. 3. Minimum Criteria shall be defined as the basic quality benchmarks that an LGU is required to meet in the different aspects of governance. 4. Fiscal Management shall be defined as the implementation of LGUs of sound financial and accounting policies and procedures to ensure the rightful use of government funds and resources 5. Full Disclosure shall be defined as the implementation of LGUs of a policy towards greater accessibility of the public to governmental information and the efficient reporting of governmental information, like budgets, expenditures, and the like, to the public. 6. Liveability of local communities shall be defined as a framework of sustainable development employed by LGUs in the planning, design and implementation of government projects taking into account sound ecology, building a green economy, public accessibility, public participation and the like, as further defined by the United Nations. 7. Lupon ng mga Tanod-Bayan shall be defined as a local inter-agency and multi-sectoral bodies, under the DILG, that assess and validate the performance of LGUs based on minimum criteria set by this Act and publish Performance Evaluation Ratings for public consumption. 8. Performance Evaluation Rating shall be defined as a numerical grade that represents the performance of an LGU as evaluated against set minimum criteria for quality public service, by local bodies called the Lupon ng mga Tanod-Bayan. Content 1. Framework of good governance. In improving local governance, the government shall understand that: a. The principle of public office as a public trust must be interpreted as the delivery of quality public service; b. The realization of the peoples right to information is a necessary pre-requisite for public accountability; c. And, the government shall encourage a level playing field for public office by developing performance-based local politics. 2. Quality public service. The Local Government Code, as amended, shall be further amended to incorporate the minimum criteria for quality public service for each LGU classification. a. The minimum criteria, broadly, shall include: i. Fiscal Management

ii. Full Disclosure iii. Observance to the Anti-Red Tape Act iv. A comprehensive Development Plan v. Liveability of local communities b. These minimum criteria shall constitute the Performance Evaluation framework. Nonetheless, specific benchmarks shall be set according to population, income and land area classification of the different LGUs. 3. Lupon ng mga Tanod-Bayan Composition. A new local body shall be created to undertake the Performance Evaluation mechanism and these bodies shall be called the Lupon ng mga Tanod-Bayan (LTB). a. The LTB shall, at the minimum, consist of 7 Members: i. Representative from the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) ii. Representative from the Commission on Audit (COA) iii. Representative from the Civil Service Commission (CSC) iv. Representative of the Youth v. Representative of the Academe vi. Representative of the Business Sector vii. Representative of the Civic Sector b. The LTB shall be chaired by the DILG Representative. c. There shall be a LTB in each Province, ICC and HUC. d. The numbers of seats in the LTB shall be expanded in proportion to population, territory and density, i. Provided, however, that there is prior certification from the National Statistical Office (NSO); ii. The number of seats shall always be odd-numbered and majority of the seats shall be held by sectoral representatives; iii. And, the local legislative body (Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Panlungsod) shall create an ordinance that authorizes the expansion. 4. Manner of selection. The Members of the LTB shall be selected by their own office or local sectoral federation in a process that shall be overseen by the DILG, as assisted by relevant government agencies including, but not limited to, the National Youth Commission (NYC), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). a. The Representatives of COA, CSC and DILG shall be determined by their local offices. b. The Representative of the Youth shall come from the local federation of Higher Education Institution (HEI) student councils and registered youth organizations. c. The Representative of the Academe shall come from the local federation of teacher associations. d. The Representative of the Business Sector shall come from the local chamber of commerce and industry. e. The Representative of the Civic Sector shall come from the local federation of nongovernment and peoples organizations. f. Additional Sectoral Representatives shall come from their respective local sectoral federations. g. Exception. No Member of the LTB who is related to an elected LGU official to the third (3rd) degree of consanguinity or affinity shall be selected. 5. Term and compensation. Members of the LTB shall serve for two (2) years and may be reselected twice after.

a. Members of the LTB shall receive compensation corresponding to honoraria in each of their meetings. i. The LTB shall meet every six (6) months. Additionally, they shall meet four (4) times during this month. ii. The amount of the honoraria shall be determined by the DILG. 6. Organization and funding. The LTB shall be a local auxiliary body integrated into DILG divisions in LGUs. a. Funding for the LTB shall be integrated into the appropriations for DILG. i. The staff for the Office of the LTB shall be regular employees under DILG. b. A National Coordinating Committee shall be established by the DILG to provide technical guidance and similar assistance to the different LTBs in the performance of their duties. i. The National Coordinating Committee shall also consolidate all Performance Evaluation Rating reports for publication and archiving. c. As far as practicable, each LTB shall be housed in or adjacent to the DILG local office. 7. Assessment and publication. The LTB, using the Performance Evaluation framework, shall assess the performance of all LGUs under its jurisdiction two (2) times a year. a. The LTB shall release a Performance Evaluation Rating for every preceding quarter during these months: March and September. b. The LTB shall publish the Performance Evaluation Rating in a manner which is open to the public through, but not limited to, pamphlets, billboards or the internet. c. The Performance Evaluation Rating shall contain details of the assessment including the general rating, rating per criterion and strong and weak points. d. Limitation. The LTBs sole powers shall be assessment and reporting. They shall not have the power to prosecute nor recommend punitive measures against local government officials. i. Nonetheless, the LTB shall pass their bi-annual Performance Evaluation Rating Report to COA, CSC and DILG. 8. Guaranteed access to information. The LTB and their staff shall have access to all governmental information, unless such data has been declared exceptions by the DILG. a. Similarly, all LGUs are mandated to pass their Performance Evaluation report every half-year to the Office of the LTB. 9. Enforcement and public relevance. The LTB shall be respected by LGUs as a genuine and independent mechanism for good governance, public accountability and development of a mature brand of local politics. a. The work of the LTB shall be part of the governmental functions of the DILG and the principle that the State cannot be sued without its consent shall apply. i. The publication and reporting of their assessment shall be not impaired by any court order. ii. LGUs may appeal their Performance Evaluation Rating with the DILG. b. The Performance Evaluation Rating of an LGU can be basis for the DILG to initiate an investigation, whereby an LGU with poor performance for at least two (2) consecutive half-year shall be reprimanded by the DILG Secretary. If after six (6) months no action is taken, the Office of the DILG Secretary may file an administrative case against the local government official. c. Similarly, the Ombudsman shall have access to all Performance Evaluation Rating reports and may act accordingly to its findings.

Proposed by: Aaron Marc M. Dimaano, Province of Sorsogon Joshua Israel Sumague, Los Baos, Laguna John Daniel Ang, City of Las Pias NOTATIONS: Passed Committee 1 deliberations Passed Plenary deliberations