Political uncertainty has increasingly taken hold of narratives on the country, with Fitch Ratings and Japanese investment bank Nomura being just the latest to warn that the current crisis of governance could hit the Philippines’ investment and overall economic growth hopes.
And when was the last time that mutually antagonistic business and labor groups agreed on a particular issue, after major industry chambers and the Church issued their respective statements? I do not recall, but this cannot be “good” (depends on whether one regards the current situation as a glass half-empty or half-full, I guess).
Still, this governance crisis has not yet developed into a political crisis, much less into an economic crisis (despite the peso falling to a new record-low P59.13 to the dollar at the end of Oct. 28 trades, partly due to governance worries1). The central bank’s third-quarter Business Expectations Survey, conducted from July 4 to Aug. 17, showed that overall sentiment has been generally optimistic, although the quarterly reading for the “next 12 months” has been on a general decline since the first quarter of 2024 to 48.1% of late.2
The view from the ground bears such cautious optimism. For instance, nearly half of German investors in the Philippines who were polled for the Sept. 29 to Oct. 17 AHK World Business Outlook Fall 2025 Survey that was conducted for the German-Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry said they still expect business conditions to remain stable in the next 12 months, even as they cited the need for “[a] stable, predictable and accountable governance environment… [to] further deepen investor confidence, attract high-quality long-term investments, and strengthen the Philippines’ position as a competitive and reliable partner in the region.”3
MINDSET
Optimist that I am, I am always reminded of the Chinese character for “crisis,” consisting of the character for “danger” (wei) on the left and “crucial/turning point” (ji on the right — but which in the West is translated, somewhat erroneously, to “opportunity”). But since Northeast Asian reading convention runs from right to left, one would read the character for “crucial/turning point”/“opportunity” first.
What “opportunity” could possibly arise from the current situation?
Well, businessmen have complained of worsening graft and corruption over the past decade and well into this administration — a sentiment captured in the Philippines’ deteriorating performance in the annual Corruption Perceptions Index that is watched closely by investors. Governance indicators have long figured prominently among metrics tracked regularly by global competitiveness surveys.
Hence, all eyes are now on whether this administration will finally crack down on top corruptors, starting with those close to it (and there, apparently, lies the current problem).
TIME TO COMMUNICATE BETTER
Amid increasingly polarized political discourse, especially in social media, it was thus refreshing to exchange views with a visiting expert international communicator last Monday.
Jack Valero, cofounder of the United Kingdom-based Catholic Voices — formed in 2010 to train lay Catholics to talk in various media about controversial topics related to the Catholic Church — gave practical tips identified by his group that could prove useful for us ordinary folks as we discuss with even those with contrary views alternatives through and out of the current crisis.
Having said in 2009 that “We can build a better world together, even though we disagree on many things,” Mr. Valero told an audience at the University of Asia and the Pacific in Pasig City on Oct. 26 that “[e]very controversy is an opportunity to communicate” on matters which society may not otherwise address in normal times.
“Basically, what happens with a controversy is that it brings to fore a matter that people wouldn’t talk about before,” he told me in a chat on Monday.
“And it is in those times that people are listening to what I have to say, whereas in other times, they may not be as interested.”
STARTING POINT
The first thing one must do to communicate better on controversies, Mr. Valero said, is to “reframe” the starting point of discussions by looking for common ground. He noted that “[e]very criticism appeals to a value… which we share.”
“Conversation is so much more fruitful when we start from a common ground,” he said.
“We are meeting because we want this problem never to happen again. Now, let’s hear different proposals, and let’s evaluate them to see whether they will help us achieve the objective… because we all have the same aim.”
Current corruption controversies, for example, point to the need for integrity — something on which everyone from all political affiliations and persuasions agree.
“When it comes to massive corruption… you wouldn’t expect people would be interested in me talking to them about a life of integrity, and how to educate the young in virtue… They may say: ‘Well, that is all very well, but… I’m busy with things I have to do,’” Mr. Valero said.
“Whereas now, we’re in a situation where everyone wants to know not just the short-term answer — who has done this and who can be sent to prison — but the long-term answer to the question: ‘How do we avoid this ever happening again?’” he explained, clarifying that solutions are not limited to values like integrity, but include installing more robust accountability systems.
REFRAMING TO BUILD BRIDGES
The conversations that follow from such reframing require a spirit of solidarity, whereby one does not build walls. Learn to avoid, for example, using the words, “they” or “other people,” which denote one’s separation from others from the beginning.
Actions could further back up this internal disposition, said Mr. Valero, who recalled an instance when he readily approached other guests in a public program to greet them with a smile (and “Let’s go out for drinks later”) before discussions on a divisive issue began.
That leads to another principle of good communication: communicate ideas clearly, but always with the good of the other person in mind. “We could be more concerned with our doctrine, reputation, possessions… than the wellbeing of people,” he noted.
Furthermore, “compassion counts,” he said, explaining that “people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made them feel.”
“… [T]his will help to get your message across, because if you make the other party feel rejected or tension, then they will not listen to you…”
Looking to build bridges — looking to provide clarity, “light, not heat” (not talking “at” the other party) — is also another requirement for good communication. “There’s a lot of heat in the world, and it’s not leading to communication,” but more to “miscommunication,” he noted.
Still another tip: “witnessing” — walking one’s talk in other people’s eyes — is more effective than any attempt at “winning” an argument. At this point, my mind immediately recalled some lawmakers who excel in such attempts in public hearings or plenary discussions. Acting consistently according to lofty principles in and out of the public eye trumps proclaiming them from rooftops anytime, if one were to convince others.
Now, effective communication, of course, does not lead automatically to dispute resolution — which has other elements — but it is a prerequisite of that objective.
It is, by no means, an exact science, but a way of finding enough common ground to move ahead, while laying the foundation for resolution of other points which parties may not readily agree on for the time being.
1 https://tinyurl.com/25up8b7y
2https://www.bsp.gov.ph/Lists/Business%20Expectations%20Report/Attachments/23/BES_3qtr2025.pdf
3 https://tinyurl.com/2ap8purq
Wilfredo G. Reyes was editor-in-chief of BusinessWorld from 2020 through 2023.
