Consumption culture in government: Time to shift to power-saving mode
When asked about mitigating the problem of inflation in our country, BSP Governor Eli Remolona Jr. stressed that government savings should be high enough to at least slow down inflation. The engagement between Sen. Erwin Tulfo and Remolona extended to the household level, with the senator saying that “we spend so much more than we make.” Instead of dealing with the consumption culture at the household level, it should be shifted back to the government’s responsibility.
Apart from the obvious reason of corruption as the highest form of consumption culture, government offices still maintained their usual consumption practices. Despite the energy crisis and inflation, no directives were issued to mandate all government sectors to shift into power-saving mode. It is the same as with a phone: once the power reaches a critical percentage and there is no power supply to recharge the phone battery, power-saving mode will prolong the function of the phone. Of course, only selected and default-important applications can function, especially communication applications.
However, the power-saving mode in a phone is used optionally. In politically correct terms, an optional function is a contingency plan built into a phone. But the government does not need any contingency plans to confront the crisis. What it needs is a new approach that is resilient in the global crisis by integrating power-saving as part of the government discipline in energy spending.
Aside from finding ways to survive in this global and domestic crisis, the government should at least immediately adapt to the crisis by spending less. This can be done through small and significant routine changes in both national and local government offices. Apparently, energy consumption and spending of government funds are still conducted as usual. This means that government buildings and offices did not issue a memorandum directing a strict reduction of energy consumption.
In the case of local governments, all activities were conducted and implemented as usual. They still traveled when meetings could be done online. Online meetings can avoid the expensive purchase of buffet and other amenities. No public announcement was made for energy conservation, like reducing the use of air conditioners. Above all, no directives were made public, at least, to save government funding to address the peak demand for electricity and mitigate rapid fluctuations in prices and rates.
If we apply household analysis to government energy consumption, reducing electricity consumption will reduce the bills, and since the bills decrease, the government can save funds. But because of the consumption culture of the government, it disregards the conservation of energy as the commonsensical way to address the energy crisis.
Perhaps the proper thing to do is not to blame households for the consumption culture because it is an oversimplification. But think of the office as a household so that every government office will conserve energy.
The government is even blind to its consumption culture, where they can spearhead. Of course, it does not mean that the government will suspend its essential activities; it will only suspend inessential activities like overtime use of energy and other entertainment, such as conducting pageants, discos, and other unnecessary recreational activities.
Power-saving is important because we are in a crisis.
Christian Hipolao,
[email protected]
