CIA World Fact Book

RC: Are you suggesting, Mr. President, that it's time for the Philippines to consider shifting to a parliamentary form of government?

Ramos: Yes, that issue has been debated, since 1990, because if you recall, the 1987 constitution says this constitution should not be amended in any way until the lapse of five years. So there was 1990, '91 and then '92, the issue of constitutional change became part of our daily bread, almost, and now is the time, after, well, 18 years.

RC: Let's shift gears a little bit, Sir, and let's talk about the Philippines in the context of ASEAN. We're a founding member of ASEAN, and yet our role in ASEAN seems to be continually evolving. How do you situate the Philippines within the context of ASEAN today?

Ramos: We're in a very favorable situation. Why? ASEAN, which are the Southeast Asian nations with ten members now, are very near the biggest markets today, meaning China, Japan, Korea, Northwest Canada, and Northwest US. That is our favorable situation. We are the closest, being the northernmost of the ASEAN countries, to China, to Japan, even to Russia, which is a big market potentially, and of course to Korea, Canada, and the Western US. Now, we are also favored by knowing English a little better than the others, and having that advantage, which I think we are not yet fully exploiting, should position us very well within ASEAN, in terms of intra East Asia trade, and also intra Asia-Pacific trade and investment.

RC: But how do you see the Philippines' role within ASEAN? For example, you look at recent initiatives by Singapore and Thailand to do free trade agreements, they seem to be taking a leadership role in terms of moving forward on trade issues. The Philippines has not yet moved so aggressively on trade issues, but are there other areas where the Philippines could play a leading role within ASEAN?

Ramos: Okay, on free trade we are still negotiating our free trade arrangement with Japan and Korea within the ASEAN context. Of course, bilaterally as you have mentioned correctly, Singapore and Thailand have gone ahead, but this should not deter us from doing our own thing, because the bilateral situation of free trading will eventually have to give in to sub-regional, meaning ASEAN, and regional, meaning East Asia and the entire Asia Pacific. So what we must do is to serve the market, and right now, what does China need? Food, agricultural products, electronic components, and all other components that go into high-value manufacturers. We're into that right now, but we're not exploiting our land. Land use in the Philippines is very - as a policy - very obsolescent, even anachronistic. That includes reclamation. We're looking at Southern China, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore, Indonesia, they're reclaiming all over the place. This is already devolved, to capable local government agencies, even to the private sector. In our case, it's all centralized, and so we're not exploiting that situation. Subic and Clark are there. I'm glad that finally the government is doing the corridor between them and bringing in more shipping companies, on the part of Subic, and airlines on the part of both, so that they can serve the region a little better with the Philippine flag carriers in the forefront.

RC: One thing that for me distinguishes the Philippines as a member of ASEA, is that we're the oldest democracy. And we have had very strong links with the United States and the West. Do you see the Philippines, maybe within the context of ASEAN, as a promoter of western-style democracy in the region? Is that a role the Philippines can play?

Ramos: If we're talking about an American-style democracy that is a little different from western style in general, no; because western style is parliamentary in nature, with a lot of devolution, and decentralization, and even deregulation, or privatization. So if you recall, I used the five letter Ds to define my concept of good governance and these are devolution, get out from central government, as much as the local governments' functions that are regulatory or developmental, so that everybody is given the authority to do his or her own thing within the national framework. Then decentralization is the next one: get out of Metro Manila. So we created this special agency in government during my time called the PEZA, the Philippine Economic Zone Authority, so that special economic zones and investment areas could be identified and then established without each little zone or roofed area having to go through congress to get a franchise to operate as such. So instead of just having 10, when I came in, now we have more than 100 of these special economic zones where locators, investors, both foreign and local, can enjoy certain benefits, incentives and grace periods and perks. This is the way we should go, because not only are other countries doing it, but we have this geographical advantage I spoke about, which we're not yet exploiting. Now those are the three Ds, there are two more, this is democratization of opportunity, and this has to do with education to begin with, as well as micro credit, meaning whatever your status in life, if you have something good happening, let's help that person. Let's extend, issue credit to them so that they can expand. Then the last, of course, is development of a sustainable kind. This is precisely why the presidential system did not work for us, or is not working for us, because we are limited by three-year cycles, which are the terms of the local government officials, and the six-year term for the senators and the president and the vice president. Now, the other system, which is the parliamentary, is more continuous, and more predictable, in terms of what's coming up next after the elections. So we must look at these better practices of others, so that we can really get on in the global economy.

RC: Do you ever feel that when you left office you left behind some unfinished business? That there were some things that maybe you would have wanted to complete had you been given more time? And do you have any regrets about that?

Ramos: No, because I felt that I really gave it my best during my six years. What we must understand is that nation building is not a one year, or six-year affair. As the saying goes, Rome was not built in a day, but what all leaders should appreciate and implement is that there must be continuity and beyond that there must be predictability, surprises and end runs. These things don't work any more, and beyond all of that, leaders must respect accountability, because that is really the most important factor now in global relations. Countries may not have natural resources, not even human resources. Look at Singapore. But what you lack in your own country you can always outsource or import. But there is one thing you cannot outsource, and that is good governance, which must be homegrown. And to investors, those with capital around the world, this is the main factor that they look for now, because you can always outsource all the other things, but not good governance.

RC: And one hundred years from now, what do you want the history books to say about Fidel Ramos?

Ramos: Well, I'll still be around at the time, so it might be premature to be talking about that period. But anyway, let me say that I'll be happy to be seen as a builder, I'm a civil engineer by profession so that's very important, peacemaker, and reformer.

RC: All right, Mr. President, I've enjoyed this conversation. Thank you for talking to us and spending this time with us.

Ramos: Thank you, I'm glad to be here.