The umbrella group Bagong Alyansang Makabayan today criticized the Aquino administration for “washing its hands” in the issue of the Value Added Tax on toll fees set to take effect on Monday. The group said that Malacanang’s reasoning that the VAT is an old law from the previous administration is unacceptable.
The previous government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo enacted a law that expands the coverage of the VAT to include oil, power and other services. The Bureau of Internal Revenue is pushing for the coverage of VAT on toll fees. Some lawmakers have opposed this saying that government services like toll ways should not be covered by the VAT. A petition is now pending before the Supreme Court asking it to issue a temporary restraining order on the implementation.
“The Aquino government cannot hide behind the feeble defense that the VAT is an Arroyo-era law that needs to be implemented. The present government has all the powers to stem the implementation of onerous taxation and spare the people from further hardship. The VAT on toll has not been implemented since 2005. Why is the BIR in a hurry to implement it now when there are many questions as to its validity?” said Bayan secretary general Renato M. Reyes, Jr.
Bayan believes that the implementation of the VAT sets the tone of the Aquino government’s fiscal policy.
“It seems that the Aquino government’s fiscal policy is to pass the burden to the people. Fast-tracking the VAT on toll is meant to pass on to the people the humongous budget deficit and public debts incurred by the past regime. Instead of providing immediate economic relief, the Aquino government is promoting additional economic burdens for the people,” said Reyes.
“Aside from the VAT on toll fees, government is also readying a fare hike for the MRT, another added burden on the people,” he added.
Bayan believes that the revenues from the VAT on toll fees will not go to poverty alleviation programs but rather to paying off government debts incurred over the last nine years.
“The claim of Sec. Lacierda that poverty alleviation programs will be the result of additional taxes is something we’ve heard before. That was the same promise given by Arroyo when she first implemented the EVAT,” Reyes said.
“The reality is that for every P10.00 raised by government, P6.00 goes to debt spending. That is how it has been for some time now. The new government doesn’t seem to be departing from that,” he added.
Quoting reports from the Bureau of Treasury, Bayan said that as of the first half of the year, national government debt spending has risen to 12% or some P406 billion compared to the same period last year when it spent P361.5 billion.
“Let’s not mislead the people that poverty alleviation projects will come about when what the government is really spending for is paying off debts,” Reyes said.### Aquino gov’t shouldn’t wash hands off VAT on toll fees
Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Friday, August 13, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Pagbabalik ng ROTC haharangin ng kabataan
Pagbabalik ng ROTC haharangin ng kabataan
Darius Galang, Pinoy Weekly
Tinututulan ng iba’t ibang grupo ng kabataan, maging ng kabataang kinatawan sa Kamara, ang panukala sa Kamara na ibalik ang Reserved Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) sa mga estudyante sa kolehiyo.
“Tinuturuan ng ROTC na magbulag-bulagan at walang-imik ang mga estudyante. Ginagamit pa ng AFP ang programa sa red-baiting laban sa progresibong mga grupong pang-estudyante, sa pamamagitan ng mga lektura nila sa ROTC na ang mga aktibistang grupo na ito ay may-ugnay sa rebeldeng New People’s Army,” ayon kay Kabataan Party-list Rep. Raymond Palatino.
Iminungkahi ni Cebu Rep. Eduardo Gullas sa Kamara na ibalik ang mandatory na (ROTC) at lusawin ang National Service Training Program (NSTP) para sa mga mag-aaral ng mga kolehiyo at unibersidad. Bahagi raw kasi ng programa ng ROTC, na pinamumunuan ng Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) ang pagtuturo ng patriyotismo sa mga kabataan.
Sinusugan ni Sek. Voltair Gazmin ng Department of National Defense ang panukala sa Kamara, dahil maibabalik daw ang disiplino at pagmamahal sa bayan ng mga kabataang Pilipino kung ibabalik ang ROTC.
Ngunit sinabi ni Palatino na maliban sa mapanupil na kulturang itinatanim ng ROTC sa mga estudyante, nagsisilbi rin ito para sa paniniktik sa kabataang mga aktibista sa iba’t ibang unibersidad. Sinabi ni Palatino na dati nilang naidokumento ang paniniktik ng mga estudyanteng opisyal ng ROTC sa militanteng mga organisasyon, at pagtatag ng mga student intelligence network sa mga kampus.
Noon pang 2006, nagpalaganap ang mga ito ng mga polyeto na pinipigilan ang mga estudyante na tutulan ang noo’y isinusulong na 300% tuition hike sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at inaakusahan ang mga lider ng mga protesta na “tagarekluta ng NPA.”
Napaulat na nangyari rin ang kahalintulad na insidente noong 2007 sa Politeknikong Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at, nitong taon lang, sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas-Los Baños nang nanawagan ang walkout ang mga lider-estudyante.
Ayon naman kay Anton Dulce, pangalawang tagapangulo ng Anakbayan, “Sa pagbabalik ng mga protesta sa kampus laban sa pagtaas ng matrikula at iba pang bayarin, kasama pa ang di-makatarungang polisiya ng administrasyon ng mga paaralan, natatakot kami na ang mandatory ROTC ay gagamitin bilang kasangkapan laban sa mga mag-aaral na lumalaban para sa kanilang mga karapatan.”
Kasama sa isinususog na dagdag sa programa ng ROTC ang pagtutuon ng pansin sa serbisyong pangkomunidad at pagtugon sa mga kalamidad at sakuna.
Ngunit para kay Terry Ridon, tagapangulo ng League of Filipino Students (LFS), “Ang mga diumano’y mabubuting intensiyon na ito ng AFP ay isinasagawa na ngayon ng citizen-driven na mga komponent ng NSTP tulad ng Literacy Training Service at Community Welfare Training Service, at epektibo naman ang pagsasagawa nito sa implementasyon ng batas ulok sa NSTP. Ang balakin ng AFP ay nauuwi lamang sa pagpapaulit ng programa. (program redundancy).”
Dagdag pa niya na sa halos isang dekadang pagsasagawa ng NSTP ay binigyan nito ng laya ang mga mag-aaral na pumili para sa kanilang sarili ng programang maghahasa sa kanila at magbigay ng serbisyong pampubliko. “If it ain’t broke, why fix it?” sambit pa ni Dulce.
Mariin na tinututulan ni Palatino ang programang pagbabalik ng ROTC sa mga paaralan, at isinasaad niya na walang puwang ang puwersang-militar sa mga paaralan.
“Dahil sa madugo at malagim na rekord nila sa karapatang-pantao, walang karapatan ang AFP sa pang-akademikong pakikisali ng ating kabataan. Ang isang warmongering at mersenaryong institusyon ay hindi dapat hayaang makapasok sa mga paaralan at magturo sa mga mag-aaral,” ani Palatino, na nangakong lalabanan ang pagpapasa ng panukalang-batas sa Kamara.
Sa ulat ng alyansang pangkarapatang pantaong Karapatan, umabot sa 23 biktima sa mahigit 1,000 kaso ng ekstrahudisyal na pamamaslang sa ilalim ng pamahalaang Arroyo ay mula sa mga grupong kabataan tulad ng Anakbayan, ang League of Filipino Students, at Kabataan Partylist.
Tatlong miyembro pa ng Anakbayan ang kasama sa mahigit 300 kaso ng enforced disappearances sa ilalim ni Arroyo.
“Ang isang institusyong nabahiran ng dugo ng maraming kabataan ay hindi dapat na palapitin lomampung metro sa kahit anong kampus. Hindi pa ba sila kuntento sa kanilang pagpaslang at pagdukot sa karamihan ng ating kasamang lider-kabataan?”dugtong ni Dulce.
Nawala sa kurikulum ang ROTC noong 2001 bunsod ng malawakang protesta ng mga kabataan at mga biktima ng panggigipit at napaulat na pangingikil sa mga paaralan. Ang pagkamatay ni ROTC cadet at mag-aaral ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas na si Mark Chua bunsod sa ROTC “hazing” ang lalo pang nagpatingkad sa isyu ng ROTC sa kabataan.
[update Agosto 7, 2010]
Naglunsad na ng petition signing campaign ang mga grupong pangkabataan upang humiling sa mga estudyante, magulang at mga guro na tutulan ang panunumbalik ng ROTC sa mga pamantasan.
Samantala, nananawagan ang Kabataan Party-list kay Pang. Benigno Aquino III na basagin ang kanyang pananahimik ukol sa isyu ng panunumbalik ng nasabing programa.
Nakapagsalita na ang kabataan ngunit ang tindig ni Aquino sa isyu ng mandatory ROTC ay hindi marinig saan man. “Talagang nakakabingi ang kanyang pananahimik,” dugtong ni Palatino.
Ayon kay DND Spokesperson Eduardo Batac, ang naturang panunumbalik ng programa ay tutugon sa suliranin ng AFP’s sa kakulangan ng tauhan bukod sa kanilang “kakarampot na badyet.”
Bagay na ikinadismaya ng nakababatang kongresista. “Una, ang pagmomodernisa ng AFP sa pamamagitan ng public-private partnerships. Ngayon ito naman. Maguumpisa silang bumuhay ng batalyones ng laruang sundalo mula sa abo para sa ikabubuhay ng isang insitusyong militar,” pagtatapos ni Palatino.
Darius Galang, Pinoy Weekly
Tinututulan ng iba’t ibang grupo ng kabataan, maging ng kabataang kinatawan sa Kamara, ang panukala sa Kamara na ibalik ang Reserved Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) sa mga estudyante sa kolehiyo.
“Tinuturuan ng ROTC na magbulag-bulagan at walang-imik ang mga estudyante. Ginagamit pa ng AFP ang programa sa red-baiting laban sa progresibong mga grupong pang-estudyante, sa pamamagitan ng mga lektura nila sa ROTC na ang mga aktibistang grupo na ito ay may-ugnay sa rebeldeng New People’s Army,” ayon kay Kabataan Party-list Rep. Raymond Palatino.
Iminungkahi ni Cebu Rep. Eduardo Gullas sa Kamara na ibalik ang mandatory na (ROTC) at lusawin ang National Service Training Program (NSTP) para sa mga mag-aaral ng mga kolehiyo at unibersidad. Bahagi raw kasi ng programa ng ROTC, na pinamumunuan ng Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) ang pagtuturo ng patriyotismo sa mga kabataan.
Sinusugan ni Sek. Voltair Gazmin ng Department of National Defense ang panukala sa Kamara, dahil maibabalik daw ang disiplino at pagmamahal sa bayan ng mga kabataang Pilipino kung ibabalik ang ROTC.
Ngunit sinabi ni Palatino na maliban sa mapanupil na kulturang itinatanim ng ROTC sa mga estudyante, nagsisilbi rin ito para sa paniniktik sa kabataang mga aktibista sa iba’t ibang unibersidad. Sinabi ni Palatino na dati nilang naidokumento ang paniniktik ng mga estudyanteng opisyal ng ROTC sa militanteng mga organisasyon, at pagtatag ng mga student intelligence network sa mga kampus.
Noon pang 2006, nagpalaganap ang mga ito ng mga polyeto na pinipigilan ang mga estudyante na tutulan ang noo’y isinusulong na 300% tuition hike sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at inaakusahan ang mga lider ng mga protesta na “tagarekluta ng NPA.”
Napaulat na nangyari rin ang kahalintulad na insidente noong 2007 sa Politeknikong Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at, nitong taon lang, sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas-Los Baños nang nanawagan ang walkout ang mga lider-estudyante.
Ayon naman kay Anton Dulce, pangalawang tagapangulo ng Anakbayan, “Sa pagbabalik ng mga protesta sa kampus laban sa pagtaas ng matrikula at iba pang bayarin, kasama pa ang di-makatarungang polisiya ng administrasyon ng mga paaralan, natatakot kami na ang mandatory ROTC ay gagamitin bilang kasangkapan laban sa mga mag-aaral na lumalaban para sa kanilang mga karapatan.”
Kasama sa isinususog na dagdag sa programa ng ROTC ang pagtutuon ng pansin sa serbisyong pangkomunidad at pagtugon sa mga kalamidad at sakuna.
Ngunit para kay Terry Ridon, tagapangulo ng League of Filipino Students (LFS), “Ang mga diumano’y mabubuting intensiyon na ito ng AFP ay isinasagawa na ngayon ng citizen-driven na mga komponent ng NSTP tulad ng Literacy Training Service at Community Welfare Training Service, at epektibo naman ang pagsasagawa nito sa implementasyon ng batas ulok sa NSTP. Ang balakin ng AFP ay nauuwi lamang sa pagpapaulit ng programa. (program redundancy).”
Dagdag pa niya na sa halos isang dekadang pagsasagawa ng NSTP ay binigyan nito ng laya ang mga mag-aaral na pumili para sa kanilang sarili ng programang maghahasa sa kanila at magbigay ng serbisyong pampubliko. “If it ain’t broke, why fix it?” sambit pa ni Dulce.
Mariin na tinututulan ni Palatino ang programang pagbabalik ng ROTC sa mga paaralan, at isinasaad niya na walang puwang ang puwersang-militar sa mga paaralan.
“Dahil sa madugo at malagim na rekord nila sa karapatang-pantao, walang karapatan ang AFP sa pang-akademikong pakikisali ng ating kabataan. Ang isang warmongering at mersenaryong institusyon ay hindi dapat hayaang makapasok sa mga paaralan at magturo sa mga mag-aaral,” ani Palatino, na nangakong lalabanan ang pagpapasa ng panukalang-batas sa Kamara.
Sa ulat ng alyansang pangkarapatang pantaong Karapatan, umabot sa 23 biktima sa mahigit 1,000 kaso ng ekstrahudisyal na pamamaslang sa ilalim ng pamahalaang Arroyo ay mula sa mga grupong kabataan tulad ng Anakbayan, ang League of Filipino Students, at Kabataan Partylist.
Tatlong miyembro pa ng Anakbayan ang kasama sa mahigit 300 kaso ng enforced disappearances sa ilalim ni Arroyo.
“Ang isang institusyong nabahiran ng dugo ng maraming kabataan ay hindi dapat na palapitin lomampung metro sa kahit anong kampus. Hindi pa ba sila kuntento sa kanilang pagpaslang at pagdukot sa karamihan ng ating kasamang lider-kabataan?”dugtong ni Dulce.
Nawala sa kurikulum ang ROTC noong 2001 bunsod ng malawakang protesta ng mga kabataan at mga biktima ng panggigipit at napaulat na pangingikil sa mga paaralan. Ang pagkamatay ni ROTC cadet at mag-aaral ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas na si Mark Chua bunsod sa ROTC “hazing” ang lalo pang nagpatingkad sa isyu ng ROTC sa kabataan.
[update Agosto 7, 2010]
Naglunsad na ng petition signing campaign ang mga grupong pangkabataan upang humiling sa mga estudyante, magulang at mga guro na tutulan ang panunumbalik ng ROTC sa mga pamantasan.
Samantala, nananawagan ang Kabataan Party-list kay Pang. Benigno Aquino III na basagin ang kanyang pananahimik ukol sa isyu ng panunumbalik ng nasabing programa.
Nakapagsalita na ang kabataan ngunit ang tindig ni Aquino sa isyu ng mandatory ROTC ay hindi marinig saan man. “Talagang nakakabingi ang kanyang pananahimik,” dugtong ni Palatino.
Ayon kay DND Spokesperson Eduardo Batac, ang naturang panunumbalik ng programa ay tutugon sa suliranin ng AFP’s sa kakulangan ng tauhan bukod sa kanilang “kakarampot na badyet.”
Bagay na ikinadismaya ng nakababatang kongresista. “Una, ang pagmomodernisa ng AFP sa pamamagitan ng public-private partnerships. Ngayon ito naman. Maguumpisa silang bumuhay ng batalyones ng laruang sundalo mula sa abo para sa ikabubuhay ng isang insitusyong militar,” pagtatapos ni Palatino.
‘Dato’s melodramatic privilege speech: pathetic,’ says IAM
Due to the crimes of the former First Family to the Filipino people
‘Dato’s melodramatic privilege speech: pathetic,’ says IAM
Reference: Mark Louie Aquino, IAM Spokesperson
The Imprison Arroyo Movement (IAM) today said that Camarines Sur Second District Representative Diosdado ‘Dato’ Arroyo’s privilege speech on Monday is indeed melodramatic and pathetic. They also said that it is very obvious that the former First Family only wants to solicit sympathy and appeal to emotions of the Filipino people to be able to save themselves over criticisms to their vast crimes against the Filipino people.
IAM insisted that the ‘son-defending-mom’ picture that we witnessed is not effective and will no longer make the Arroyos innocent to the massive corruption and human rights violation cases that Pampanga’s Second District Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and minions executed during her nine years stay as president.
On Monday, the youngest Arroyo in Congress gave his privelege speech at the Lower House shielding his mom against critics, particularly Bayan Muna Party-List Representative Teddy Casino. IAM believes that this ‘telenovela-inspired scene’ only aims to whitewash their criminal obligations to the people and pacify attacks against them.
‘If there’s anyone that should be pitied of, it is definitely not GMA nor the members of their family. It should be the Filipino people who were long-been victims of social injustices under the Arroyo administration,’ says Mark Louie Aquino, spokesperson of IAM.
He added, ‘It is indeed incredible for someone like Dato Arroyo to talk of rights on his privilege speech where in fact they were the ones involved in various loads of attacks on human rights.’
‘Dato’s “in-defense-of-mother-speech” is a pathetic hogwash trying to smother the former first family’s crime against Filipinos. Dato’s pity-us fashion of soliciting of sympathy is not going to work. The Filipino people’s call for justice is louder than Dato’s privilege speech,’ explained Aquino.
IAM further calls on the attention of President Benigno ‘Simeon’ Aquino III to conduct speedy trial and prosecution of GMA. They said that after almost 41 days of PNoy in office, nothing substantial, concrete and meaningful measures have been put forward.
‘The time for PNoy to realize his promise to serve justice to the Filipinos is running out. We can no longer wait to see GMA behind bars and there will be no other time to do that but now,’ Mark Louie Aquino ended. ###
‘Dato’s melodramatic privilege speech: pathetic,’ says IAM
Reference: Mark Louie Aquino, IAM Spokesperson
The Imprison Arroyo Movement (IAM) today said that Camarines Sur Second District Representative Diosdado ‘Dato’ Arroyo’s privilege speech on Monday is indeed melodramatic and pathetic. They also said that it is very obvious that the former First Family only wants to solicit sympathy and appeal to emotions of the Filipino people to be able to save themselves over criticisms to their vast crimes against the Filipino people.
IAM insisted that the ‘son-defending-mom’ picture that we witnessed is not effective and will no longer make the Arroyos innocent to the massive corruption and human rights violation cases that Pampanga’s Second District Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and minions executed during her nine years stay as president.
On Monday, the youngest Arroyo in Congress gave his privelege speech at the Lower House shielding his mom against critics, particularly Bayan Muna Party-List Representative Teddy Casino. IAM believes that this ‘telenovela-inspired scene’ only aims to whitewash their criminal obligations to the people and pacify attacks against them.
‘If there’s anyone that should be pitied of, it is definitely not GMA nor the members of their family. It should be the Filipino people who were long-been victims of social injustices under the Arroyo administration,’ says Mark Louie Aquino, spokesperson of IAM.
He added, ‘It is indeed incredible for someone like Dato Arroyo to talk of rights on his privilege speech where in fact they were the ones involved in various loads of attacks on human rights.’
‘Dato’s “in-defense-of-mother-speech” is a pathetic hogwash trying to smother the former first family’s crime against Filipinos. Dato’s pity-us fashion of soliciting of sympathy is not going to work. The Filipino people’s call for justice is louder than Dato’s privilege speech,’ explained Aquino.
IAM further calls on the attention of President Benigno ‘Simeon’ Aquino III to conduct speedy trial and prosecution of GMA. They said that after almost 41 days of PNoy in office, nothing substantial, concrete and meaningful measures have been put forward.
‘The time for PNoy to realize his promise to serve justice to the Filipinos is running out. We can no longer wait to see GMA behind bars and there will be no other time to do that but now,’ Mark Louie Aquino ended. ###
‘Arroyos must be in jail, not in the halls of Congress,’ says IAM
Anti-Arroyo movement cries foul over proclamation of Mikey as party-list representative
‘Arroyos must be in jail, not in the halls of Congress,’ says IAM
Reference: Mark Louie Aquino, IAM Spokesperson
The Imprison Arroyo Movement (IAM) today cries foul over the recent proclamation of Mikey Arroyo as party-list representative for Ang Galing Pinoy (AGP). This movement calling for the imprisonment of the Arroyos against their crimes against the Filipino people said that the junking of the disqualification case against AGP representative is a clear bastardization of the entire party-list system.
IAM stresses that the former First Family, including Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Mike Arroyo and the rest of their kin and minions deserves to have detention cells rather seats inside the halls of the House of Representatives or any other government posts. They said that the proclamation of Mikey Arroyo will serve as a bad precedent to future nomination in the party-list race.
‘The Arroyos must be in jail not in Congress,’ says Mark Louie Aquino, spokesperson of IAM and Youth Revolt.
Aquino insists, ‘This is a clear betrayal of the Arroyo-backed Commission on Elections against their own rules and to the will of the Filipino people. We will not allow this kind of connivance among the number one enemy of our people and of the poll body.’
IAM also challenged President Benigno ‘Noynoy’ Aquino III to break silence on the matter and condemn the said proclamation. Anti-Arroyo groups further told P-Noy to block the entry of the Arroyos and their cohorts in their corrupt practices and violations of human rights. IAM said that to start cleaning his government, P-Noy must not allow Arroyo allies to stay inside his backyard.
Mark Louie Aquino said, ‘It is indeed a strong political will that is badly needed by P-Noy in order for him to realize what he promised on his inauguration speech that reconciliation will not be possible if justice will not be served. It is in high time also for P-Noy to prove that the alleged alliance between him and GMA is really non-existence.’
Finally, IAM will closely monitor every move of the Arroyos and their allies inside the House of Representatives. They also vow to pursue all possible means of action to imprison the Arroyos in the soonest possible time. ###
‘Arroyos must be in jail, not in the halls of Congress,’ says IAM
Reference: Mark Louie Aquino, IAM Spokesperson
The Imprison Arroyo Movement (IAM) today cries foul over the recent proclamation of Mikey Arroyo as party-list representative for Ang Galing Pinoy (AGP). This movement calling for the imprisonment of the Arroyos against their crimes against the Filipino people said that the junking of the disqualification case against AGP representative is a clear bastardization of the entire party-list system.
IAM stresses that the former First Family, including Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Mike Arroyo and the rest of their kin and minions deserves to have detention cells rather seats inside the halls of the House of Representatives or any other government posts. They said that the proclamation of Mikey Arroyo will serve as a bad precedent to future nomination in the party-list race.
‘The Arroyos must be in jail not in Congress,’ says Mark Louie Aquino, spokesperson of IAM and Youth Revolt.
Aquino insists, ‘This is a clear betrayal of the Arroyo-backed Commission on Elections against their own rules and to the will of the Filipino people. We will not allow this kind of connivance among the number one enemy of our people and of the poll body.’
IAM also challenged President Benigno ‘Noynoy’ Aquino III to break silence on the matter and condemn the said proclamation. Anti-Arroyo groups further told P-Noy to block the entry of the Arroyos and their cohorts in their corrupt practices and violations of human rights. IAM said that to start cleaning his government, P-Noy must not allow Arroyo allies to stay inside his backyard.
Mark Louie Aquino said, ‘It is indeed a strong political will that is badly needed by P-Noy in order for him to realize what he promised on his inauguration speech that reconciliation will not be possible if justice will not be served. It is in high time also for P-Noy to prove that the alleged alliance between him and GMA is really non-existence.’
Finally, IAM will closely monitor every move of the Arroyos and their allies inside the House of Representatives. They also vow to pursue all possible means of action to imprison the Arroyos in the soonest possible time. ###
Drilon files resolution calling for Senate probe on excessive salaries of gov't officials
Reacting to reports of excessive and unwarranted salaries and other perks received by certain top government officials, Senator Franklin Drilonl last Thursday filed a resolution directing the committees on Finance, together with the Committee on Government Corporations and Public Enterprises, to conduct an investigation into the matter.
"Reports of excessive and unwarranted monetary remuneration and perks accruing to the benefit of board directors and top officials of government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) and government financial institutions (GFIs), in the guise of allowances, per diem, honoraria, and bonuses, is like rubbing salt to an already open wound," Drilon laments.
"As public officers, we are all accountable to the people," explained the senator, while asking, "how can we expect people to trust us when they see that top government officials are given bonuses left and right, yet we cannot even grant them (the people), their clamour for higher wages?"
Drilon was referring to President Noynoy Aquino's state of the nation address wherein the President mentioned the case of MWSS, whose board of directors reportedly received millions on top of their regular salaries, in the guise of allowances, bonuses and other benefits.
"In these difficult times when workers both in public and private sectors are clamouring for more decent pay, such reports of excessive and unwarranted benefits and privileges being enjoyed by top officials and board directors of GOCCs and GFIs only exacerbate the level of discontent on the part of our poor countrymen," Drilon said.
"These alleged excesses in the use of public funds have to stop," Drilon said, adding that "this seemingly anomalous situation has been going on for too long, primarily because of the powers vested in the boards of these institutions to determine and fix their own compensation and benefits."
"The Aquino administration vowed to eradicate corruption in government, and it is my duty to help the President achieve this by ensuring that transparency and good governance will be in effect from this moment forward, Drilon added."
"As the chairman of the committee on Finance, I am recommending for the Senate to come up with the appropriate legislative measures to rationalize, and standardize, to a reasonable level, the compensation package of the top officials and board directors of GOCCs and GFIs, with the end in sight of promoting public trust, and protecting much needed public funds."
"Reports of excessive and unwarranted monetary remuneration and perks accruing to the benefit of board directors and top officials of government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) and government financial institutions (GFIs), in the guise of allowances, per diem, honoraria, and bonuses, is like rubbing salt to an already open wound," Drilon laments.
"As public officers, we are all accountable to the people," explained the senator, while asking, "how can we expect people to trust us when they see that top government officials are given bonuses left and right, yet we cannot even grant them (the people), their clamour for higher wages?"
Drilon was referring to President Noynoy Aquino's state of the nation address wherein the President mentioned the case of MWSS, whose board of directors reportedly received millions on top of their regular salaries, in the guise of allowances, bonuses and other benefits.
"In these difficult times when workers both in public and private sectors are clamouring for more decent pay, such reports of excessive and unwarranted benefits and privileges being enjoyed by top officials and board directors of GOCCs and GFIs only exacerbate the level of discontent on the part of our poor countrymen," Drilon said.
"These alleged excesses in the use of public funds have to stop," Drilon said, adding that "this seemingly anomalous situation has been going on for too long, primarily because of the powers vested in the boards of these institutions to determine and fix their own compensation and benefits."
"The Aquino administration vowed to eradicate corruption in government, and it is my duty to help the President achieve this by ensuring that transparency and good governance will be in effect from this moment forward, Drilon added."
"As the chairman of the committee on Finance, I am recommending for the Senate to come up with the appropriate legislative measures to rationalize, and standardize, to a reasonable level, the compensation package of the top officials and board directors of GOCCs and GFIs, with the end in sight of promoting public trust, and protecting much needed public funds."
Sunday, August 8, 2010
She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-in-the-Plenary
She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-in-the-Plenary
Privilege Speech of Kabataan Partylist Rep. Raymond Palatino
August 4, 2010
Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleagues.
I wish to speak about the events this week which I think might affect my duties as a member of this House. We are all adjusting to the new situation: a former president is now a member of Congress.
Sabi ng marami, we are now at the crossroad of history. In the President’s own words, narito tayo ngayon sa isang punto kung saan pipili tayo kung alin ang tatahakin nating landas—ang daang baluktot o ang daang matuwid.
Cliché as it may sound, it is imperative that we assess the previous roads we have taken in order to properly determine the best route towards national progress. It is required that we deliver a post mortem to the previous administration. We should not entirely abandon this duty to the Truth Commission. As the representatives of the people, we have to articulate the sentiments of our constituents. It may not be good news for some, but there are people in this country who do not echo the sentiments of the previous government, who do not equate infrastructure with performance, GDP growth with genuine progress, people who do not live in delusion.
Sa proseso ng paglalagom sa nakaraang administrasyon, it is inevitable that something unpleasant will be delivered on the floor about the previous government. Because the truth Mr. Speaker and fellow representatives, outside this confined space of bright lights and grandeur is a world of darkness, of glaring poverty, of suppressed freedoms.
This is the dilemma, and this is I ask to all of you: How do we perform our duty without offending “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named” in the plenary? Which should we value more: the sensibilities of House members or the right of the people to hear the truth about the past government?
I fear that 50 years from now, when historians will review our journals, they will only find glowing remarks about You-Know-Who or She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-the-Plenary? Why? Because all the remarks that deal with the unpleasant, the ugly realities of the past government have been removed from the records under the guise of upholding decency and decorum. Sadly, this was backed by the House leadership which is affiliated with the new government that promises an era of change. The same government which proclaims, “there can no reconciliation without justice.”
This week, Representatives Walden Bello and Teddy Casino were accused of disrespecting a fellow member by delivering allegedly “unparliamentary” remarks in their speeches. Parts of their speeches were removed from the records particularly those referring to the corruption and human rights violations of the past administration. Your honor, this sets a bad precedent.
I have been here only for one year, 16 months to be exact, but long enough for me to hear speeches of fellow members criticizing fellow members.
Let me cite a few examples:
June 1, 2009: Former ANAD partylist Representative Jun Alcover blatantly and without basis named progressive partylist representatives as a “scourge of deceit and brutality.” He accused Representatives Maza and Ocampo as adherents of an inhuman ideology.
December 4, 2009: Former Bantay Partylist Representative Jovito Palparan accused Samar Representative Reynaldo Uy of having a private army.
Last day of session of the 14th Congress. Former A Teacher Partylist Representative Piamonte accused Representative Sarmiento of the same partylist of corruption and told him to “resign and shut up.”
In these instances, no one objected. No one moved to strike from the record such accusations that reek of malice and fallacy. The leadership allowed the speech to be included in the records.
My point is this: striking off the perceived unparliamentary remarks is not the only option. The body, the leadership, can tolerate to hear negative remarks. It is not encouraged but we have a practice of allowing members to stand on the floor and criticize, sometimes viciously criticize, a fellow member.
Today, there seems to be this worrisome obsession to find “unparliamentary” words in our speeches. It might send a bad signal to other members, especially to new members, that privilege speeches about the past government is ok, as long as they are not unpleasant in the ears of the supporters of “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.”
I listened to the speeches of Bello and Casino, and I didn’t find any shocking expose, no new revelation. To use the words of Minority Representative Lagman, “bitin nga ako.” What they merely delivered was the sentiment of the people. Believe it or not, we have fellow Filipinos who believe that the previous government is guilty of spectacular crimes against the people. And maybe Representatives Bello and Casino think that the use of strong words to drive a point is needed. And the political situation today is such that colorful language must be used to remind us that “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” must be held accountable.
I understnd where Bello and Casino are coming from, especially Representative Casino who was holed up here in Batasan for several months in 2005. They are both part of the movement which attempted year after year to force the Congress to probe the alleged wrongdoings of the past government. The problem is wala kasi tayong closure. Now that the “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” is part of congress, would you expect the two to sing praises for her?
Lahat na lang ba ng negative remarks about “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” ay dapat tanggalin? Should I expect to hear only pro-You-Know-Who speeches in the next 3 years? What if a supporter of She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named stand on the floor and begin to enumerate the so-called achievements of the previous government? What if I also stand on the floor and move for the removal for what is to me offensive words? Would that be allowed by the leadership?
I hope the recent mania to scrutinize the speeches of anti-“She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” solons is not a symptom of the reflection of our unwillingness to accept the truth about what happened in the past government.
It is tragic that we are more offended by the use of words that speak to truth, words that refer to acts of crime, rather than with the crimes itself.
My proposal is to give House members, especially members of the former opposition the freedom to speak and speak without fear of being censured about the past government. If it is founded on lies, it will not hold water. No one will believe them. Trust fellow members that they are capable of substantiating these allegations. Do not censor our speeches. Let the people judge. Let history be the judge. Do not purify and cleanse the records in the name of decorum.
Privilege Speech of Kabataan Partylist Rep. Raymond Palatino
August 4, 2010
Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleagues.
I wish to speak about the events this week which I think might affect my duties as a member of this House. We are all adjusting to the new situation: a former president is now a member of Congress.
Sabi ng marami, we are now at the crossroad of history. In the President’s own words, narito tayo ngayon sa isang punto kung saan pipili tayo kung alin ang tatahakin nating landas—ang daang baluktot o ang daang matuwid.
Cliché as it may sound, it is imperative that we assess the previous roads we have taken in order to properly determine the best route towards national progress. It is required that we deliver a post mortem to the previous administration. We should not entirely abandon this duty to the Truth Commission. As the representatives of the people, we have to articulate the sentiments of our constituents. It may not be good news for some, but there are people in this country who do not echo the sentiments of the previous government, who do not equate infrastructure with performance, GDP growth with genuine progress, people who do not live in delusion.
Sa proseso ng paglalagom sa nakaraang administrasyon, it is inevitable that something unpleasant will be delivered on the floor about the previous government. Because the truth Mr. Speaker and fellow representatives, outside this confined space of bright lights and grandeur is a world of darkness, of glaring poverty, of suppressed freedoms.
This is the dilemma, and this is I ask to all of you: How do we perform our duty without offending “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named” in the plenary? Which should we value more: the sensibilities of House members or the right of the people to hear the truth about the past government?
I fear that 50 years from now, when historians will review our journals, they will only find glowing remarks about You-Know-Who or She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-the-Plenary? Why? Because all the remarks that deal with the unpleasant, the ugly realities of the past government have been removed from the records under the guise of upholding decency and decorum. Sadly, this was backed by the House leadership which is affiliated with the new government that promises an era of change. The same government which proclaims, “there can no reconciliation without justice.”
This week, Representatives Walden Bello and Teddy Casino were accused of disrespecting a fellow member by delivering allegedly “unparliamentary” remarks in their speeches. Parts of their speeches were removed from the records particularly those referring to the corruption and human rights violations of the past administration. Your honor, this sets a bad precedent.
I have been here only for one year, 16 months to be exact, but long enough for me to hear speeches of fellow members criticizing fellow members.
Let me cite a few examples:
June 1, 2009: Former ANAD partylist Representative Jun Alcover blatantly and without basis named progressive partylist representatives as a “scourge of deceit and brutality.” He accused Representatives Maza and Ocampo as adherents of an inhuman ideology.
December 4, 2009: Former Bantay Partylist Representative Jovito Palparan accused Samar Representative Reynaldo Uy of having a private army.
Last day of session of the 14th Congress. Former A Teacher Partylist Representative Piamonte accused Representative Sarmiento of the same partylist of corruption and told him to “resign and shut up.”
In these instances, no one objected. No one moved to strike from the record such accusations that reek of malice and fallacy. The leadership allowed the speech to be included in the records.
My point is this: striking off the perceived unparliamentary remarks is not the only option. The body, the leadership, can tolerate to hear negative remarks. It is not encouraged but we have a practice of allowing members to stand on the floor and criticize, sometimes viciously criticize, a fellow member.
Today, there seems to be this worrisome obsession to find “unparliamentary” words in our speeches. It might send a bad signal to other members, especially to new members, that privilege speeches about the past government is ok, as long as they are not unpleasant in the ears of the supporters of “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.”
I listened to the speeches of Bello and Casino, and I didn’t find any shocking expose, no new revelation. To use the words of Minority Representative Lagman, “bitin nga ako.” What they merely delivered was the sentiment of the people. Believe it or not, we have fellow Filipinos who believe that the previous government is guilty of spectacular crimes against the people. And maybe Representatives Bello and Casino think that the use of strong words to drive a point is needed. And the political situation today is such that colorful language must be used to remind us that “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” must be held accountable.
I understnd where Bello and Casino are coming from, especially Representative Casino who was holed up here in Batasan for several months in 2005. They are both part of the movement which attempted year after year to force the Congress to probe the alleged wrongdoings of the past government. The problem is wala kasi tayong closure. Now that the “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” is part of congress, would you expect the two to sing praises for her?
Lahat na lang ba ng negative remarks about “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” ay dapat tanggalin? Should I expect to hear only pro-You-Know-Who speeches in the next 3 years? What if a supporter of She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named stand on the floor and begin to enumerate the so-called achievements of the previous government? What if I also stand on the floor and move for the removal for what is to me offensive words? Would that be allowed by the leadership?
I hope the recent mania to scrutinize the speeches of anti-“She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” solons is not a symptom of the reflection of our unwillingness to accept the truth about what happened in the past government.
It is tragic that we are more offended by the use of words that speak to truth, words that refer to acts of crime, rather than with the crimes itself.
My proposal is to give House members, especially members of the former opposition the freedom to speak and speak without fear of being censured about the past government. If it is founded on lies, it will not hold water. No one will believe them. Trust fellow members that they are capable of substantiating these allegations. Do not censor our speeches. Let the people judge. Let history be the judge. Do not purify and cleanse the records in the name of decorum.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The role of the progressive party list bloc in the 15th Congress
The role of the progressive party list bloc in the 15th Congress
Privilege speech delivered by Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño
August 3, 2010
Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleagues.
At the opening session of the 15th Congress last week, Bayan Muna and the other partylist organizations comprising the progressive party list bloc – Gabriela Women's Party, Anakpawis, Kabataan, and Act Teachers Party – voted with the majority in electing Congressman Feliciano Belmonte as Speaker of the House.
Marami ho ang nagtatanong. Ngayong nasa mayorya kami, kami ba daw ay mananahimik na? Pipigilan ba daw namin ang sarili sa pag-kwestyon sa mga disisyon at legislative agenda ng administrasyon at ng liderato ng Kamara? Magbabago na daw ba ang aming papel bilang mga kritiko ng status quo at ng gobyernong nagtataguyod nito?
Mr. Speaker, ang mga tanong na ito'y nagpapakita ng kalituhan sa papel ng mga progresibong kinatawan ng party list sa Kamara. Nakadagdag ang nakaraang eleksyon sa kalituhang ito. Ang pag-domina ng mga party list group na sinuportahan ng mga makapangyarihang political dynasty at malalaking interes sa negosyo ay nagsasalaula sa sistema ng party list at nagbibigay duda sa kakayanan nitong kumatawan sa mga dehado at walang boses sa Kongreso.
Indeed, what is the role of the partylist representatives? To answer the question, may I first quote the Supreme Court in its landmark 2001 decision in Bayan Muna vs. the Solicitor General.
“It is ironic” the High Court said, “that the marginalized and underrepresented in our midst are the majority who wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity. It was for them that the party-list system was enacted – to give them not only genuine hope, but genuine power; to give them the opportunity to be elected and to represent the specific concerns of their constituencies; and simply to give them a direct voice in Congress and in the larger affairs of the State.
“In its noblest sense,” the Court further said, “the party-list system truly empowers the masses and ushers a new hope for genuine change. Verily, it invites those marginalized and underrepresented in the past – the farm hands, the fisher folk, the urban poor, even those in the underground movement – to come out and participate, as indeed many of them came out and participated during the last elections. The State cannot now disappoint and frustrate them by disabling and desecrating this social justice vehicle.”
Ayun po, Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleagues. Malinaw na malinaw. The party lists are in Congress to represent and fight for the oppressed and downtrodden. To be a powerful voice to those whose voices are hardly heard in the corridors of power. We are here to use every opportunity for social change and the betterment of the marginalized masses. To be the genuine opposition to the oppressive and bankrupt social system that has afflicted our nation for so long.
We are at our best as a conscience bloc, as proponents of progressive and alternative policies, as champions of social reform and the politics of change. For us in the progressive party list bloc, our work in Congress is a mere extension of the people's movement for justice, freedom and national democracy.
It is in this context that we join the Majority in the 15th Congress.
Hindi ito ang unang beses na kami'y makikipagtulungan sa ruling coalition. In 2001 until 2005, we sided with the majority while retaining our independence and initiative within this working relationship, taking positions on important issues and legislative measures pushed by the majority consistent with our principles.
In 2001 as in today, we had a new administration claiming to be a product of People Power. On that premise of change and the promise of reform, we joined the Majority and expressed our readiness to overcome our historic and well-grounded skepticism of the ruling elite, provided the new leadership deliver on its promises. Alas, our skepticism turned out correct. By 2005, we quit the Majority and initiated the first of four impeachment proceedings against the former President.
Mr. Speaker, naging isang bangungot sa amin at sa mamamayang Pilipino ang rehimen ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Nabiktima tayo ng isang pangulong tinaguriang sinungaling, magnanakaw, mandaraya at mamamatay tao. Isang pangulong tila hindi nagdalawang-isip na baluktutin ang ating mga batas; suhulan ang ating mga mambabatas; takutin, dukutin at patayin ang kanyang mga kritiko; upang manatili sa poder at magpayaman sa pwesto. Hindi ko na po iisa-isahin pa ang mga krimen at pagkakasala ng dating pangulo at kanyang mga alipores, at baka umabot tayo hanggang bukas. Ang importante, kailangan nilang managot. At sisiguraduhin naming sila ay mananagot.
The question now, Mr. Speaker, is will the incumbent President be any better?
Curiously, President Noynoy Aquino's innaugural speech and SONA expressed much the same things as Mrs. Arroyo's in 2001 although in more mundane but populist terms. Sabi niya: “Kayo ang boss ko. Walang wangwang, walang counterflow, walang kotong. Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.”
Magagandang salita, Mr. Speaker. Noon at ngayon, magagandang pangako. Ngunit ang tanong, nasaan ang pagbabago ng sistema na matagal na nating inaasam-asam?
Mr. Speaker, we are an underdeveloped country still dominated by the colonial powers led by the United States and continually being exploited and plundered by their big banks, corporations and multilateral financial and trade institutions.
In the countryside, our farmers are mired in chronic poverty, shackled by age-old feudal and semi-feudal structures and oppressed by big landed families that comprise the political dynasties in their areas.
Genuine democracy remains a pipe dream, with the political system dominated and systematically corrupted by the ruling elite. The civilian bureaucracy and military forces are mere adjuncts of whoever is in power, and government is treated as one big business meant to be plundered for the benefit of oneself and one's relatives and friends.
We need change and we need it badly. But will the new administration deliver?
We in the progressive party list bloc can not help but be more skeptical this time around. Nowhere in the President's pronouncements did we hear any policy change or proposal addressing these root problems. Mga lumang problema ang hinaharap ng bagong administrasyon. Mga luma ring solusyon ang hinahapag. Nasaan ang pagbabago?
It was no surprise, Mr. Speaker, that the Minority Leader, Congressman Edcel Lagman, in his contra-SONA last week, boasted that the Aquino government is actually adopting many of the programs and policies of the previous administration. It seems that under President Aquino, we will see even more liberalization of the economy, more deregulation of strategic sectors, and more privatization via public-private partnerships. I am particularly apprehensive about such partnerships considering the key government posts now occupied by former executives of big companies involved in electricity generation and distribution, water distribution, infrastructure, real estate and telecommunications. From being service oriented, our utilities will now be profit oriented.
Ang sabi ng Pangulo, maling pulitika daw ang pagpigil sa pagtaas ng presyo ng tubig, kuryente at pasahe sa MRT. Ano ho ang ibig sabihin nito, itataas na ang presyo ng tubig, kuryente, pamasahe at iba pang batayang serbisyo? Siguradong pumapalakpak ang mga bangko at mga negosyanteng may interes sa mga proyektong ito.
When the President spoke to us, there was no mention of agrarian reform. No mention of the plight of our workers and their demand for just wages and better working conditions.
We hoped that the efforts to hold the Arroyo regime accountable for its crimes would include not only cases of plunder, graft and corruption but human rights violations as well, which is a bigger concern even in the international community. To our dismay, it seems the more than one thousand victims of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and other human rights atrocities under Arroyo will not find justice under Aquino. Cases of human rights violations were left out of the Truth Commission's mandate. The Alston report continues to gather dust, its recommendations ignored. The state of denial continues, the killings have not stopped.
It also seems that under the new administration, the prospects for peace are dim with the President's insistence on various preconditions, like a ceasefire, for the talks to resume. It was inappropriate for President Aquino to dare the NDF to give concrete proposals because in fact, the various agreements and talking points since the 1992 Hague Agreement, including the 1996 agreement on human rights and international law and the proposed agreement on social and economic reforms in 1998, show so many concrete proposals from the NDF that were never reciprocated by the Philippine government.
I can go on, Mr. Speaker, but I think the point is clear. Ang tanong ng bayan, nasaan ang pagbabago? Hanggang wangwang na lang ba? May makabuluhang pagbabago ba para sa mahihirap at inaaping mamamayan na aming kinakatawan?
Ang sabi ng iba, bigyan natin ng pagkakataon ang Pangulo na patunayan ang kanyang mga sinasabi. Kailangan daw ng panahon para madama ang pagbabago. Sana nga. Sana nga. Subalit sa aming nakikita at naririnig, mukhang malabo.
Sa ganitong kalagayan, Mr. Speaker, ang papel namin ay hindi lang tiyaking tinutupad ng administrasyon ang kanyang mga pangako, subalit itulak at palawakin pa ito para maging tunay na makabuluhan para sa masang Pilipino. Sa ganitong balangkas kami'y nakahandang makipagtulungan.
Sa kabilang banda, hindi kami mangingiming ilantad at tutulan ang anumang kontra-mamamayang patakaran o batas na itinutulak sa Kongreso o kahit na anong ahensya ng gobyerno, maging ito'y galing sa administrasyon o oposisyon. Sa ganitong balangkas kami'y nakahandang makipagtunggalian.
Sa ganang akin, may isang dosenang kagyat na kahingian ang sambayanan na dapat matugunan ng administrasyong Aquino:
1. Panagutin at parusahan ang dating pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at mga kasabwat niya sa kanilang mga krimen sa bayan.
2. Bigyan ng hustisya ang mga biktima ng human rights violations, ipatupad ang mga rekomendasyon ng Alston report kaugnay ng Oplan Bantay Laya at iba pa.
3. Ipamahagi ang lupa ng Hacienda Luisita sa mga magsasaka at ipatupad ang tunay na reporma sa lupa.
4. Ipasa ang isang legislated, across the board wage hike, itigil ang kontraktwalisasyon sa paggawa.
5. Ibaba ang presyo ng mga bilihin, tanggalin ang VAT sa langis, kuryente, tubig at mga batayang serbisyo't produkto.
6. I-repeal ang PD 1177 at ire-channel ang badyet ng debt service patungo sa edukasyon, kalusugan, pabagay at ibang batayang serbisyo.
7. Bigyan ng subsidyo ang mga magsasaka at protektahan ang mga manggagawa at negosyong Pilipino laban sa mga dayuhang produkto at kapital.
8. Baliktarin ang liberalisasyon sa mga produktong may lokal na katumbas, i-atras ang deregulasyon at pribatisasyon sa power generation, distribusyon ng tubig, industriya ng langis at pagmimina, at paggamit ng ating likas yaman.
9. Ibasura at bumaklas sa mga kontra-mamamayang kundisyon ng mga free trade agreements at iba pang dikta ng IMF, WB at WTO.
10. Paigtingin pa ang laban sa korapsyon. Lansagin ang sistema ng pork barrel, ipasa ang mga batas para sa pagpapalakas ng papel ng mamamayan sa pagsugpo ng korapsyon.
11. Ibalik ang peace talks ng walang kundisyon.
12. Itigil ang Balikatan exercises at ibasura ang MDT, VFA, MLSA at iba pang di-makatwirang kasunduang pang-militar.
Ginoong Speaker, mga kagalang-galang na kasama, asahan ninyong sa ika-15 Kongreso, isusulong namin ang mga ito upang higit pang mapaglingkuran ang masang Pilipino.
Maraming salamat po.
Privilege speech delivered by Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño
August 3, 2010
Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleagues.
At the opening session of the 15th Congress last week, Bayan Muna and the other partylist organizations comprising the progressive party list bloc – Gabriela Women's Party, Anakpawis, Kabataan, and Act Teachers Party – voted with the majority in electing Congressman Feliciano Belmonte as Speaker of the House.
Marami ho ang nagtatanong. Ngayong nasa mayorya kami, kami ba daw ay mananahimik na? Pipigilan ba daw namin ang sarili sa pag-kwestyon sa mga disisyon at legislative agenda ng administrasyon at ng liderato ng Kamara? Magbabago na daw ba ang aming papel bilang mga kritiko ng status quo at ng gobyernong nagtataguyod nito?
Mr. Speaker, ang mga tanong na ito'y nagpapakita ng kalituhan sa papel ng mga progresibong kinatawan ng party list sa Kamara. Nakadagdag ang nakaraang eleksyon sa kalituhang ito. Ang pag-domina ng mga party list group na sinuportahan ng mga makapangyarihang political dynasty at malalaking interes sa negosyo ay nagsasalaula sa sistema ng party list at nagbibigay duda sa kakayanan nitong kumatawan sa mga dehado at walang boses sa Kongreso.
Indeed, what is the role of the partylist representatives? To answer the question, may I first quote the Supreme Court in its landmark 2001 decision in Bayan Muna vs. the Solicitor General.
“It is ironic” the High Court said, “that the marginalized and underrepresented in our midst are the majority who wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity. It was for them that the party-list system was enacted – to give them not only genuine hope, but genuine power; to give them the opportunity to be elected and to represent the specific concerns of their constituencies; and simply to give them a direct voice in Congress and in the larger affairs of the State.
“In its noblest sense,” the Court further said, “the party-list system truly empowers the masses and ushers a new hope for genuine change. Verily, it invites those marginalized and underrepresented in the past – the farm hands, the fisher folk, the urban poor, even those in the underground movement – to come out and participate, as indeed many of them came out and participated during the last elections. The State cannot now disappoint and frustrate them by disabling and desecrating this social justice vehicle.”
Ayun po, Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleagues. Malinaw na malinaw. The party lists are in Congress to represent and fight for the oppressed and downtrodden. To be a powerful voice to those whose voices are hardly heard in the corridors of power. We are here to use every opportunity for social change and the betterment of the marginalized masses. To be the genuine opposition to the oppressive and bankrupt social system that has afflicted our nation for so long.
We are at our best as a conscience bloc, as proponents of progressive and alternative policies, as champions of social reform and the politics of change. For us in the progressive party list bloc, our work in Congress is a mere extension of the people's movement for justice, freedom and national democracy.
It is in this context that we join the Majority in the 15th Congress.
Hindi ito ang unang beses na kami'y makikipagtulungan sa ruling coalition. In 2001 until 2005, we sided with the majority while retaining our independence and initiative within this working relationship, taking positions on important issues and legislative measures pushed by the majority consistent with our principles.
In 2001 as in today, we had a new administration claiming to be a product of People Power. On that premise of change and the promise of reform, we joined the Majority and expressed our readiness to overcome our historic and well-grounded skepticism of the ruling elite, provided the new leadership deliver on its promises. Alas, our skepticism turned out correct. By 2005, we quit the Majority and initiated the first of four impeachment proceedings against the former President.
Mr. Speaker, naging isang bangungot sa amin at sa mamamayang Pilipino ang rehimen ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Nabiktima tayo ng isang pangulong tinaguriang sinungaling, magnanakaw, mandaraya at mamamatay tao. Isang pangulong tila hindi nagdalawang-isip na baluktutin ang ating mga batas; suhulan ang ating mga mambabatas; takutin, dukutin at patayin ang kanyang mga kritiko; upang manatili sa poder at magpayaman sa pwesto. Hindi ko na po iisa-isahin pa ang mga krimen at pagkakasala ng dating pangulo at kanyang mga alipores, at baka umabot tayo hanggang bukas. Ang importante, kailangan nilang managot. At sisiguraduhin naming sila ay mananagot.
The question now, Mr. Speaker, is will the incumbent President be any better?
Curiously, President Noynoy Aquino's innaugural speech and SONA expressed much the same things as Mrs. Arroyo's in 2001 although in more mundane but populist terms. Sabi niya: “Kayo ang boss ko. Walang wangwang, walang counterflow, walang kotong. Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.”
Magagandang salita, Mr. Speaker. Noon at ngayon, magagandang pangako. Ngunit ang tanong, nasaan ang pagbabago ng sistema na matagal na nating inaasam-asam?
Mr. Speaker, we are an underdeveloped country still dominated by the colonial powers led by the United States and continually being exploited and plundered by their big banks, corporations and multilateral financial and trade institutions.
In the countryside, our farmers are mired in chronic poverty, shackled by age-old feudal and semi-feudal structures and oppressed by big landed families that comprise the political dynasties in their areas.
Genuine democracy remains a pipe dream, with the political system dominated and systematically corrupted by the ruling elite. The civilian bureaucracy and military forces are mere adjuncts of whoever is in power, and government is treated as one big business meant to be plundered for the benefit of oneself and one's relatives and friends.
We need change and we need it badly. But will the new administration deliver?
We in the progressive party list bloc can not help but be more skeptical this time around. Nowhere in the President's pronouncements did we hear any policy change or proposal addressing these root problems. Mga lumang problema ang hinaharap ng bagong administrasyon. Mga luma ring solusyon ang hinahapag. Nasaan ang pagbabago?
It was no surprise, Mr. Speaker, that the Minority Leader, Congressman Edcel Lagman, in his contra-SONA last week, boasted that the Aquino government is actually adopting many of the programs and policies of the previous administration. It seems that under President Aquino, we will see even more liberalization of the economy, more deregulation of strategic sectors, and more privatization via public-private partnerships. I am particularly apprehensive about such partnerships considering the key government posts now occupied by former executives of big companies involved in electricity generation and distribution, water distribution, infrastructure, real estate and telecommunications. From being service oriented, our utilities will now be profit oriented.
Ang sabi ng Pangulo, maling pulitika daw ang pagpigil sa pagtaas ng presyo ng tubig, kuryente at pasahe sa MRT. Ano ho ang ibig sabihin nito, itataas na ang presyo ng tubig, kuryente, pamasahe at iba pang batayang serbisyo? Siguradong pumapalakpak ang mga bangko at mga negosyanteng may interes sa mga proyektong ito.
When the President spoke to us, there was no mention of agrarian reform. No mention of the plight of our workers and their demand for just wages and better working conditions.
We hoped that the efforts to hold the Arroyo regime accountable for its crimes would include not only cases of plunder, graft and corruption but human rights violations as well, which is a bigger concern even in the international community. To our dismay, it seems the more than one thousand victims of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and other human rights atrocities under Arroyo will not find justice under Aquino. Cases of human rights violations were left out of the Truth Commission's mandate. The Alston report continues to gather dust, its recommendations ignored. The state of denial continues, the killings have not stopped.
It also seems that under the new administration, the prospects for peace are dim with the President's insistence on various preconditions, like a ceasefire, for the talks to resume. It was inappropriate for President Aquino to dare the NDF to give concrete proposals because in fact, the various agreements and talking points since the 1992 Hague Agreement, including the 1996 agreement on human rights and international law and the proposed agreement on social and economic reforms in 1998, show so many concrete proposals from the NDF that were never reciprocated by the Philippine government.
I can go on, Mr. Speaker, but I think the point is clear. Ang tanong ng bayan, nasaan ang pagbabago? Hanggang wangwang na lang ba? May makabuluhang pagbabago ba para sa mahihirap at inaaping mamamayan na aming kinakatawan?
Ang sabi ng iba, bigyan natin ng pagkakataon ang Pangulo na patunayan ang kanyang mga sinasabi. Kailangan daw ng panahon para madama ang pagbabago. Sana nga. Sana nga. Subalit sa aming nakikita at naririnig, mukhang malabo.
Sa ganitong kalagayan, Mr. Speaker, ang papel namin ay hindi lang tiyaking tinutupad ng administrasyon ang kanyang mga pangako, subalit itulak at palawakin pa ito para maging tunay na makabuluhan para sa masang Pilipino. Sa ganitong balangkas kami'y nakahandang makipagtulungan.
Sa kabilang banda, hindi kami mangingiming ilantad at tutulan ang anumang kontra-mamamayang patakaran o batas na itinutulak sa Kongreso o kahit na anong ahensya ng gobyerno, maging ito'y galing sa administrasyon o oposisyon. Sa ganitong balangkas kami'y nakahandang makipagtunggalian.
Sa ganang akin, may isang dosenang kagyat na kahingian ang sambayanan na dapat matugunan ng administrasyong Aquino:
1. Panagutin at parusahan ang dating pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at mga kasabwat niya sa kanilang mga krimen sa bayan.
2. Bigyan ng hustisya ang mga biktima ng human rights violations, ipatupad ang mga rekomendasyon ng Alston report kaugnay ng Oplan Bantay Laya at iba pa.
3. Ipamahagi ang lupa ng Hacienda Luisita sa mga magsasaka at ipatupad ang tunay na reporma sa lupa.
4. Ipasa ang isang legislated, across the board wage hike, itigil ang kontraktwalisasyon sa paggawa.
5. Ibaba ang presyo ng mga bilihin, tanggalin ang VAT sa langis, kuryente, tubig at mga batayang serbisyo't produkto.
6. I-repeal ang PD 1177 at ire-channel ang badyet ng debt service patungo sa edukasyon, kalusugan, pabagay at ibang batayang serbisyo.
7. Bigyan ng subsidyo ang mga magsasaka at protektahan ang mga manggagawa at negosyong Pilipino laban sa mga dayuhang produkto at kapital.
8. Baliktarin ang liberalisasyon sa mga produktong may lokal na katumbas, i-atras ang deregulasyon at pribatisasyon sa power generation, distribusyon ng tubig, industriya ng langis at pagmimina, at paggamit ng ating likas yaman.
9. Ibasura at bumaklas sa mga kontra-mamamayang kundisyon ng mga free trade agreements at iba pang dikta ng IMF, WB at WTO.
10. Paigtingin pa ang laban sa korapsyon. Lansagin ang sistema ng pork barrel, ipasa ang mga batas para sa pagpapalakas ng papel ng mamamayan sa pagsugpo ng korapsyon.
11. Ibalik ang peace talks ng walang kundisyon.
12. Itigil ang Balikatan exercises at ibasura ang MDT, VFA, MLSA at iba pang di-makatwirang kasunduang pang-militar.
Ginoong Speaker, mga kagalang-galang na kasama, asahan ninyong sa ika-15 Kongreso, isusulong namin ang mga ito upang higit pang mapaglingkuran ang masang Pilipino.
Maraming salamat po.
Privilege speech delivered by Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño
August 3, 2010
New Economics for a New Administration
PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. BELLO
Mr. Speaker, the title of my speech is New Economics for a New Administration.
Corruption was the signature of the administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. This is why this Representation shares the public disgust with a record of orgiastic compensation, brazen manipulation of government agencies and funds for political purposes and massive waste of the people’s money, detailed by President Benigno Aquino III during his State of the Nation Address on Monday, July 26, 2010. The public is still reeling from the presidential revelations about the rotting of millions of sacks of imported rice in the warehouses of the National Food Authority, the way that the National Power Corporation (NPC) was commanded to sell electricity at a low price for electoral gain and the amazing privileges which the board and top executives of the MWSS gave themselves. However, I fully agree with my friend from Cavite, Hon. Elpidio Barzaga, when he said that President Aquino should not stop at that issue of MWSS because there are other government-owned and -controlled corporations and government financial institutions that have arrogated more exorbitant rewards for
their directors.
In this regard, let me just mention the astronomical P500,000 monthly salary that the former head of the GSIS gave himself, and the only less celestial salaries of the 48 vice presidents, 48 that made up his court—a fact revealed a few days ago by Ferdinand Gaite, the head of a major public employees’ union.
If the subordinates of the GMA administration behaved like pigs, kung ang mga galamay ng nakaraang administrasyon ay kumilos ng parang buwaya, ito ay dahil meron silang magandang halimbawa sa pangungurakot sa itaas. They have a good model at the top. This was a model not only in corruption and plunder but a model on how to behave with impunity and subvert democratic institutions. The channeling of P105 million of the calamity fund to the Second District of Pampanga while starving other districts and provinces of these resources, the P329 million NBN-ZTE scandal, the P728 million fertilizer scam, the stealing of the 2004 presidential elections, the glorification of butcher Palparan as hundreds of activists and journalists were killed or made to disappear, the coddling of warlords like the Ampatuans in return for political favors—for these deeds, the Representative of the Second District of Pampanga awaits prosecution and hopefully this process gets underway soon so that she can be transported from this august Chamber to the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa where she belongs.
On this occasion, let me quote the words that Cicero flung at the great subverter of Rome’s institution, Catiline, which says: “Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?” How much longer will you abuse the people’s patience, Gloria?
Let me proceed with my main intent in giving this privilege speech which is the need for the administration to articulate the policy paradigm to compliment its anti-corruption thrust.
We, in Akbayan, support the passage of a National Land Use Bill and some of the other measures mentioned by President Aquino two days ago, but there is a need for a more strategic approach and detailed policy package and I hope the majority and the minority can cooperate in filling out a positive policy agenda for the administration to follow over the next six years.
The dominant feature of the Aquino administration was, as we said, pervasive corruption, but its most destructive legacy in the long term will probably be its policy failure. The ascent to power of a new President, backed by a new Congress, provides the opportunity for a fundamental shift in policy in order to end poverty and re-launch the Philippines on the road to development.
The policy paradigm of the administration was one it inherited from previous administrations. This was a pro-market, neo-liberal approach, the keys or prongs of which were accelerated trade and financial liberalization, deregulation and privatization. In addition, President Arroyo continued her predecessor’s policy of fully servicing the foreign debt, dealt with the ever-widening budget deficit by imposing a 12 percent value-added tax that hit mainly the middle class and the poor, and left it to the market to address poverty and income inequality.
With its pro-market orientation, the Arroyo presidency followed the lead of previous administrations in refusing to pursue an industrial policy, reducing budget support for agriculture to a minimum, and radically bringing down tariffs on both agricultural and manufacturing imports. Abandoned to global market forces as the administration embraced the ideology of globalization, the economy was channeled to the massive export of labor, export-oriented low-value-added manufacturing, particularly of electronic products, and providing personnel for the outsourced operations of transnational corporations like call centers.
Not surprisingly, dear colleagues, the country’s GDP growth rate was consistently significantly below those of its Asian neighbors, the radical reduction of tariffs decimated manufacturing, the country was turned from a net food exporter into a net food importer, the poverty rates stubbornly refused to go below 30 percent of the population, and income distribution worsened. In addition, the ecological crisis intensified, owing to desultory environmental management and failure to promote a reproductive health policy for fear of offending the Catholic Church hierarchy.
Let me just say in this regard that Congress’ continuing tolerance of the idiotic obstruction of population planning by benighted forces amounts to criminal negligence. We, in Akbayan, agree with Minority Floor Leader Edcel Lagman that we must immediately pass the Reproductive Health Bill.
The country’s plight under the lash of wrong policies over the last four administrations becomes clearer in a comparative perspective. According to the United Nations Human Development Report, the Philippines registered the second lowest average yearly growth rate, 1.6 percent, in Southeast Asia in the period 1990-2005—lower than Vietnam (5.9 percent), Cambodia (5.5 percent), and Burma (6.6 percent). The only country registering above average growth below that of the Philippines was Brunei which, being an oil-rich,
high-income country, could afford not to grow.
The partisans of the past administration say that its big achievement is that the Philippines grew by 4.4 percent a year over the last decade. This is nothing to be proud of since most economists say the economy needs to grow by at least 7.0 percent just to counteract its high birthrate and thus contain poverty. Can we really boast of a 4.5 percent growth rate when the second tier ASEAN countries, with none of the advantages of our country, sprinted ahead of us, with Vietnam growing by an average of 7.5 percent a year last decade; Laos by 7.5 percent and even conflict ridden Cambodia by 6.5 percent.
In the last two years, the seemingly unending crisis of the domestic economy has been exacerbated by the worst global economic crisis since the great depression—a development that is a product of the same principles of deregulation and trade and financial liberalization. This dual crisis coincides with the arrival of a new President and provides an unparalleled opportunity to break with the paradigm that has condemned this country to stagnation for nearly three decades.
First and foremost, among the necessary changes is the transformation of the Philippine State or government from a passive actor hijacked by corrupt private interests and corrupt officials into a proactive agent of development. The role of the State is not simply to regulate or discipline the market in the private sector though this is an important function. More important, the State must lead in developing and implementing a strategic program for Philippine development—one that harnesses the energies of the public sector, civil society and the market to achieve development targets. Planning, which has become a dirty word in recent years, must again take pride of place among the instruments of economic development, with the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) ceasing to be simply a statistical collection agency and becoming the planning agency it was originally meant to be.
In this regard, my esteemed colleagues, we do not understand why the President has appointed a man, Dr. Cayetano Paderanga, who does not believe in planning, to be the head of the country’s planning agency.
The revival of an economy with a solid industrial and agricultural base must be among the key aims of the activist state since industry and agriculture are the main sources of solid growth in the economy.
So, this means engaging in the national policy or the strategic deployment of tariffs and other mechanisms, not only to protect domestic manufacturing from unfair competition, but more importantly, to give it depth, diversity, coherence and complementarity. It also means making agriculture, again, a centerpiece of the economy through the strategic management of tariffs, quotas, subsidies for farmers and sustainable agro-technology. The long-awaited completion of agrarian reform is, of course, a central element in the agricultural policy package, and the President’s electoral campaign promise to distribute Hacienda Luisita to its tenants would give the green light for this. We must confess some disappointment that that green light did not flash last Monday, but we remain confident that the President will live up to his promise to distribute the lands of Hacienda Luisita to its tenants.
Market-driven, export-oriented industrialization and export-oriented agriculture were the main prongs of the old discredited paradigm. It is time to make the domestic market again the driver of growth. This can only be done, however, by increasing the purchasing power of Filipinos in lower income groups. This will involve income and asset redistribution, including a deepening of the land reform program. Higher wages for workers, income subsidies for the poor and strengthened support services for peasant farmers are also mechanisms to achieve this goal of activating a vibrant domestic market that will be the locomotive of growth. In the current global economic crisis, the Philippines and other countries, via stimulus programs, have fallen back on the domestic market to make up for the shortfall in foreign market. This reorientation must be made permanent, a prescription that is underlined by the poor prospects of recovery by export markets in the next few years.
Asserting the role of an activist developmental state does not mean a return to the old developmental paradigm of the 1960s and 1970s. The old paradigm focused on achieving high growth rates, prioritized industrial development, made equity a secondary consideration, and paid little attention to environmental damage. The new economic policy, in contrast, stresses the quality of development with a strong emphasis on equity and ecological stability. A lower rate of growth that would meet the needs of development and poverty reduction without destabilizing the environment is not a Utopian dream, but it can only be brought about on the basis of a more equitable sharing of the fruits of growth. Thus, equity in the distribution of income, assets and resources fulfills simultaneously the needs of demand-driven growth, environmental sustainability and social justice.
The new economic policy must acknowledge the value of women’s work. For too long, women’s central role in the production of the economy has not been acknowledged, leading to the devaluation of women’s work and generating systemic inequality in income distribution between the sexes. That the majority of the poor are women is not an accident. Addressing the inequality created by gender will involve coming up with a set of complementary mechanisms, including income support, affirmative action employment and the promotion of women-friendly methods of family planning.
Production, consumption, equity and ownership of the means of production are closely linked. In contrast to a system where one form of property subjugates others, an equity-oriented system of production combines various forms of ownership, including stake ownership, private property, cooperatives and ancestral domain or communal property. Full recognition and protection of ancestral domain or communal forms of ownership, as enshrined in the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997, is the best guarantee for enhancing the economic welfare of indigenous peoples. Their well-being can also be promoted through the establishment of an effective maintenance of protected areas where environmental management will be in the hands of indigenous communities. Such sanctuaries must be created not only in forest and mountain areas, but also in the seas and lakes. Fishing in waters at a designated distance from the shore must be preserved for artisanal or small-scale fishing communities.
Mining for natural resources is an important economic activity, yet government policies have supported foreign corporations that brought little of their profits to the country and left mainly environmental disasters, like the Marinduque mining disaster in 1992. Constitutional restrictions on the nationality of owners of mining firms must be fully respected, mining policy must favor mainly small operators, tight environmental restrictions must be instituted, and profits of mining operations must flow mainly to mining communities. The repeal of the 1995 Mining Act, whose provision on financial and/or technical assistance agreements allowing 100 percent foreign ownership was judged unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, will be necessary to bring about a pro-people mining regime.
In all areas of the economy, there must be a concerted shift to green technology. In agriculture, for instance, land reform and a reversal of the destructive trade liberalization are not enough. To be sustainable, agricultural technology must be made less dependent on the chemical-intensive technology that has proven so ruinous to environment and public health. At the same time, it must avoid the illusion of a new green revolution based on genetically-engineered seeds that are owned by transnational corporations. Organic agricultural methods suitable to small-scale farming must be developed and promoted with the aid of the government and our local scientific community. In this regard, the appointment of one of our former colleagues, Proceso Alcala, as head of the Department of Agriculture gives us heart for he is one of the country’s leading practitioners of organic agriculture, as is our colleague Congressman Villafuerte from Camarines Sur.
The last three decades have witnessed a disastrous experiment in the privatization of power, water and other public goods. Privatization has resulted in higher profits for the private sector but it has not brought about more efficient management.
Privatization has not brought about more efficient management and lower costs of power and water. Water rates have skyrocketed to P33.00 per cubic meter since Maynilad took over the distribution of water of a large part of Metro Manila in 1997. Then, the rate was only P8.49. In April, this year, MERALCO raised the price and charged customers by a hefty P1.20 per kilowatt hour, citing a rise in the cost of power it bought from suppliers that were owned by the Lopez family, who has a huge stake in the firm itself. Just last week, Manny Pangilinan, the chairman of this obnoxious monopoly that has five million residents of Metro Manila in its grip announced that it enjoyed a profit surge of 50 percent in the first half of 2010. This is what privatization has brought, Mr. Speaker.
People have a basic right to power, to water and production, and the delivery of these goods by public or cooperative enterprises is the best guarantee that their price remains within the range of all citizens. Making public goods affordable will sometimes involve some form of subsidization in which the richer classes and organizations assist through transfer payments, the poorer sectors of the community.
Mr. Speaker, taxation is an indispensable mechanism for government to raise the resources to spend for the public welfare. The problem in the Philippines is a system that is regressive where, owing to reliance on the value-added tax and other forms of indirect tax, the burden of taxation falls principally on the poor and middle classes. The key to raising resources is to shift the burden of taxation to the rich through higher tax rates for those in upper income brackets, more efficient collection of income taxes and corporate taxes, and increasing taxes on socially unhealthy activities such as gambling, drinking, smoking, and carbon emissions. This mix of measures will yield a significant part of the resources to cover the now gargantuan budget deficit.
Fiscal balance will not, however, be achieved without addressing the debt problem. A key reason for our national debt of P4.4 trillion is the massive borrowing by the former administration which contracted credit that was more than thrice the amount borrowed by the Aquino, Ramos, and Estrada Administrations combined. This year, automatic appropriations for paying of interest comes to two percent of the budget or P341 billion of P1.5 trillion. If you factor in amortization of the principal, the total for debt service comes to P746 billion or 48 percent of the national budget . No wonder our colleagues, the Honorables Rufus Rodriguez and Maximo Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro City, have filed a bill to revoke the Automatic Appropriations Act for Debt Servicing. The burden grows more onerous each year. Last year, the government shelled out $4.3 billion to service the foreign debt. This year, the figure is $5.2 billion. Next year, it will be $5.8 billion. Debt servicing has become the single most important item contributing to the government deficit, especially since the government is now borrowing at higher and higher rates of interest mainly to repay debt coming due. Servicing the debt has become the top national priority and this has had not only fiscal consequences, but also developmental ones. This practice has contributed to the massive reduction in public expenditures, capital expenditures, which has in turn caused a decline in the rate of investment since the government is the biggest investor in the economy and government investments crowds in or attracts private investment. This in turn has translated into a depressed rate of economic growth. With funds going to service debt instead of being invested in the economy, we will never catch up with our neighbors.
As pointed out by Dr. Raul Fabella of the University of the Philippines School of Economics, the country’s investment rate measured as the ratio of gross domestic capital formation to GDP comes to only 15 percent, well below Indonesia’s 25 percent, Singapore’s 22 percent, Thailand’s 28 percent and Vietnam’s 38 percent. Devoting the largest part of the budget to debt service, the Rodriguez brothers also remind us that it is a violation of the Constitution which says that education must have the top budget allocation. Without a radical change in our debt management policy, along the lines of our debt moratorium or a negotiated or unilateral reduction of the government’s debt burden, successfully implementing a new economic policy that will launch the Philippines anew on the road to development will not be possible. A fundamental change in debt management similar to Argentina’s decision in 2002 to pay only 25 cents for every dollar it owed to foreign creditors is the sine quanon or necessary condition for a change in the direction of economic policy.
The President himself recognizes the need for bold action in this area when he spoke about the need for debt repudiation during the electoral campaign. Let me repeat, the President during the campaign favored radical action on the foreign debt, and with the aid of Congress, he is now in a position to implement this. In sum, a golden opportunity awaits the administration of President Benigno Aquino III. A break with past policy, however, is necessary. The contours of a new strategy that will re-launch the country on an ecologically and socially benign development path are discernible. An active State, industrial policy, reinvigorating agriculture through a reversal of trade liberalization, domestic market-driven growth made possible by equitable income distribution, environmentally benign production processes in industry and agriculture, affirmative action for women and indigenous peoples, a mixed property regime instituting such an alternative comprehensive program will take a great deal of courage and determination especially at the beginning.
A Chinese proverb says, “Every journey of a thousand miles begins with a first step.” That first step is to take the bold measure necessary to tackle the biggest problem weighing down the country, the foreign debt.
Mr. Speaker, esteemed colleagues, thank you very much for your patience in listening to some of these thoughts for a new economic policy.
Mr. Speaker, the title of my speech is New Economics for a New Administration.
Corruption was the signature of the administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. This is why this Representation shares the public disgust with a record of orgiastic compensation, brazen manipulation of government agencies and funds for political purposes and massive waste of the people’s money, detailed by President Benigno Aquino III during his State of the Nation Address on Monday, July 26, 2010. The public is still reeling from the presidential revelations about the rotting of millions of sacks of imported rice in the warehouses of the National Food Authority, the way that the National Power Corporation (NPC) was commanded to sell electricity at a low price for electoral gain and the amazing privileges which the board and top executives of the MWSS gave themselves. However, I fully agree with my friend from Cavite, Hon. Elpidio Barzaga, when he said that President Aquino should not stop at that issue of MWSS because there are other government-owned and -controlled corporations and government financial institutions that have arrogated more exorbitant rewards for
their directors.
In this regard, let me just mention the astronomical P500,000 monthly salary that the former head of the GSIS gave himself, and the only less celestial salaries of the 48 vice presidents, 48 that made up his court—a fact revealed a few days ago by Ferdinand Gaite, the head of a major public employees’ union.
If the subordinates of the GMA administration behaved like pigs, kung ang mga galamay ng nakaraang administrasyon ay kumilos ng parang buwaya, ito ay dahil meron silang magandang halimbawa sa pangungurakot sa itaas. They have a good model at the top. This was a model not only in corruption and plunder but a model on how to behave with impunity and subvert democratic institutions. The channeling of P105 million of the calamity fund to the Second District of Pampanga while starving other districts and provinces of these resources, the P329 million NBN-ZTE scandal, the P728 million fertilizer scam, the stealing of the 2004 presidential elections, the glorification of butcher Palparan as hundreds of activists and journalists were killed or made to disappear, the coddling of warlords like the Ampatuans in return for political favors—for these deeds, the Representative of the Second District of Pampanga awaits prosecution and hopefully this process gets underway soon so that she can be transported from this august Chamber to the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa where she belongs.
On this occasion, let me quote the words that Cicero flung at the great subverter of Rome’s institution, Catiline, which says: “Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?” How much longer will you abuse the people’s patience, Gloria?
Let me proceed with my main intent in giving this privilege speech which is the need for the administration to articulate the policy paradigm to compliment its anti-corruption thrust.
We, in Akbayan, support the passage of a National Land Use Bill and some of the other measures mentioned by President Aquino two days ago, but there is a need for a more strategic approach and detailed policy package and I hope the majority and the minority can cooperate in filling out a positive policy agenda for the administration to follow over the next six years.
The dominant feature of the Aquino administration was, as we said, pervasive corruption, but its most destructive legacy in the long term will probably be its policy failure. The ascent to power of a new President, backed by a new Congress, provides the opportunity for a fundamental shift in policy in order to end poverty and re-launch the Philippines on the road to development.
The policy paradigm of the administration was one it inherited from previous administrations. This was a pro-market, neo-liberal approach, the keys or prongs of which were accelerated trade and financial liberalization, deregulation and privatization. In addition, President Arroyo continued her predecessor’s policy of fully servicing the foreign debt, dealt with the ever-widening budget deficit by imposing a 12 percent value-added tax that hit mainly the middle class and the poor, and left it to the market to address poverty and income inequality.
With its pro-market orientation, the Arroyo presidency followed the lead of previous administrations in refusing to pursue an industrial policy, reducing budget support for agriculture to a minimum, and radically bringing down tariffs on both agricultural and manufacturing imports. Abandoned to global market forces as the administration embraced the ideology of globalization, the economy was channeled to the massive export of labor, export-oriented low-value-added manufacturing, particularly of electronic products, and providing personnel for the outsourced operations of transnational corporations like call centers.
Not surprisingly, dear colleagues, the country’s GDP growth rate was consistently significantly below those of its Asian neighbors, the radical reduction of tariffs decimated manufacturing, the country was turned from a net food exporter into a net food importer, the poverty rates stubbornly refused to go below 30 percent of the population, and income distribution worsened. In addition, the ecological crisis intensified, owing to desultory environmental management and failure to promote a reproductive health policy for fear of offending the Catholic Church hierarchy.
Let me just say in this regard that Congress’ continuing tolerance of the idiotic obstruction of population planning by benighted forces amounts to criminal negligence. We, in Akbayan, agree with Minority Floor Leader Edcel Lagman that we must immediately pass the Reproductive Health Bill.
The country’s plight under the lash of wrong policies over the last four administrations becomes clearer in a comparative perspective. According to the United Nations Human Development Report, the Philippines registered the second lowest average yearly growth rate, 1.6 percent, in Southeast Asia in the period 1990-2005—lower than Vietnam (5.9 percent), Cambodia (5.5 percent), and Burma (6.6 percent). The only country registering above average growth below that of the Philippines was Brunei which, being an oil-rich,
high-income country, could afford not to grow.
The partisans of the past administration say that its big achievement is that the Philippines grew by 4.4 percent a year over the last decade. This is nothing to be proud of since most economists say the economy needs to grow by at least 7.0 percent just to counteract its high birthrate and thus contain poverty. Can we really boast of a 4.5 percent growth rate when the second tier ASEAN countries, with none of the advantages of our country, sprinted ahead of us, with Vietnam growing by an average of 7.5 percent a year last decade; Laos by 7.5 percent and even conflict ridden Cambodia by 6.5 percent.
In the last two years, the seemingly unending crisis of the domestic economy has been exacerbated by the worst global economic crisis since the great depression—a development that is a product of the same principles of deregulation and trade and financial liberalization. This dual crisis coincides with the arrival of a new President and provides an unparalleled opportunity to break with the paradigm that has condemned this country to stagnation for nearly three decades.
First and foremost, among the necessary changes is the transformation of the Philippine State or government from a passive actor hijacked by corrupt private interests and corrupt officials into a proactive agent of development. The role of the State is not simply to regulate or discipline the market in the private sector though this is an important function. More important, the State must lead in developing and implementing a strategic program for Philippine development—one that harnesses the energies of the public sector, civil society and the market to achieve development targets. Planning, which has become a dirty word in recent years, must again take pride of place among the instruments of economic development, with the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) ceasing to be simply a statistical collection agency and becoming the planning agency it was originally meant to be.
In this regard, my esteemed colleagues, we do not understand why the President has appointed a man, Dr. Cayetano Paderanga, who does not believe in planning, to be the head of the country’s planning agency.
The revival of an economy with a solid industrial and agricultural base must be among the key aims of the activist state since industry and agriculture are the main sources of solid growth in the economy.
So, this means engaging in the national policy or the strategic deployment of tariffs and other mechanisms, not only to protect domestic manufacturing from unfair competition, but more importantly, to give it depth, diversity, coherence and complementarity. It also means making agriculture, again, a centerpiece of the economy through the strategic management of tariffs, quotas, subsidies for farmers and sustainable agro-technology. The long-awaited completion of agrarian reform is, of course, a central element in the agricultural policy package, and the President’s electoral campaign promise to distribute Hacienda Luisita to its tenants would give the green light for this. We must confess some disappointment that that green light did not flash last Monday, but we remain confident that the President will live up to his promise to distribute the lands of Hacienda Luisita to its tenants.
Market-driven, export-oriented industrialization and export-oriented agriculture were the main prongs of the old discredited paradigm. It is time to make the domestic market again the driver of growth. This can only be done, however, by increasing the purchasing power of Filipinos in lower income groups. This will involve income and asset redistribution, including a deepening of the land reform program. Higher wages for workers, income subsidies for the poor and strengthened support services for peasant farmers are also mechanisms to achieve this goal of activating a vibrant domestic market that will be the locomotive of growth. In the current global economic crisis, the Philippines and other countries, via stimulus programs, have fallen back on the domestic market to make up for the shortfall in foreign market. This reorientation must be made permanent, a prescription that is underlined by the poor prospects of recovery by export markets in the next few years.
Asserting the role of an activist developmental state does not mean a return to the old developmental paradigm of the 1960s and 1970s. The old paradigm focused on achieving high growth rates, prioritized industrial development, made equity a secondary consideration, and paid little attention to environmental damage. The new economic policy, in contrast, stresses the quality of development with a strong emphasis on equity and ecological stability. A lower rate of growth that would meet the needs of development and poverty reduction without destabilizing the environment is not a Utopian dream, but it can only be brought about on the basis of a more equitable sharing of the fruits of growth. Thus, equity in the distribution of income, assets and resources fulfills simultaneously the needs of demand-driven growth, environmental sustainability and social justice.
The new economic policy must acknowledge the value of women’s work. For too long, women’s central role in the production of the economy has not been acknowledged, leading to the devaluation of women’s work and generating systemic inequality in income distribution between the sexes. That the majority of the poor are women is not an accident. Addressing the inequality created by gender will involve coming up with a set of complementary mechanisms, including income support, affirmative action employment and the promotion of women-friendly methods of family planning.
Production, consumption, equity and ownership of the means of production are closely linked. In contrast to a system where one form of property subjugates others, an equity-oriented system of production combines various forms of ownership, including stake ownership, private property, cooperatives and ancestral domain or communal property. Full recognition and protection of ancestral domain or communal forms of ownership, as enshrined in the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997, is the best guarantee for enhancing the economic welfare of indigenous peoples. Their well-being can also be promoted through the establishment of an effective maintenance of protected areas where environmental management will be in the hands of indigenous communities. Such sanctuaries must be created not only in forest and mountain areas, but also in the seas and lakes. Fishing in waters at a designated distance from the shore must be preserved for artisanal or small-scale fishing communities.
Mining for natural resources is an important economic activity, yet government policies have supported foreign corporations that brought little of their profits to the country and left mainly environmental disasters, like the Marinduque mining disaster in 1992. Constitutional restrictions on the nationality of owners of mining firms must be fully respected, mining policy must favor mainly small operators, tight environmental restrictions must be instituted, and profits of mining operations must flow mainly to mining communities. The repeal of the 1995 Mining Act, whose provision on financial and/or technical assistance agreements allowing 100 percent foreign ownership was judged unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, will be necessary to bring about a pro-people mining regime.
In all areas of the economy, there must be a concerted shift to green technology. In agriculture, for instance, land reform and a reversal of the destructive trade liberalization are not enough. To be sustainable, agricultural technology must be made less dependent on the chemical-intensive technology that has proven so ruinous to environment and public health. At the same time, it must avoid the illusion of a new green revolution based on genetically-engineered seeds that are owned by transnational corporations. Organic agricultural methods suitable to small-scale farming must be developed and promoted with the aid of the government and our local scientific community. In this regard, the appointment of one of our former colleagues, Proceso Alcala, as head of the Department of Agriculture gives us heart for he is one of the country’s leading practitioners of organic agriculture, as is our colleague Congressman Villafuerte from Camarines Sur.
The last three decades have witnessed a disastrous experiment in the privatization of power, water and other public goods. Privatization has resulted in higher profits for the private sector but it has not brought about more efficient management.
Privatization has not brought about more efficient management and lower costs of power and water. Water rates have skyrocketed to P33.00 per cubic meter since Maynilad took over the distribution of water of a large part of Metro Manila in 1997. Then, the rate was only P8.49. In April, this year, MERALCO raised the price and charged customers by a hefty P1.20 per kilowatt hour, citing a rise in the cost of power it bought from suppliers that were owned by the Lopez family, who has a huge stake in the firm itself. Just last week, Manny Pangilinan, the chairman of this obnoxious monopoly that has five million residents of Metro Manila in its grip announced that it enjoyed a profit surge of 50 percent in the first half of 2010. This is what privatization has brought, Mr. Speaker.
People have a basic right to power, to water and production, and the delivery of these goods by public or cooperative enterprises is the best guarantee that their price remains within the range of all citizens. Making public goods affordable will sometimes involve some form of subsidization in which the richer classes and organizations assist through transfer payments, the poorer sectors of the community.
Mr. Speaker, taxation is an indispensable mechanism for government to raise the resources to spend for the public welfare. The problem in the Philippines is a system that is regressive where, owing to reliance on the value-added tax and other forms of indirect tax, the burden of taxation falls principally on the poor and middle classes. The key to raising resources is to shift the burden of taxation to the rich through higher tax rates for those in upper income brackets, more efficient collection of income taxes and corporate taxes, and increasing taxes on socially unhealthy activities such as gambling, drinking, smoking, and carbon emissions. This mix of measures will yield a significant part of the resources to cover the now gargantuan budget deficit.
Fiscal balance will not, however, be achieved without addressing the debt problem. A key reason for our national debt of P4.4 trillion is the massive borrowing by the former administration which contracted credit that was more than thrice the amount borrowed by the Aquino, Ramos, and Estrada Administrations combined. This year, automatic appropriations for paying of interest comes to two percent of the budget or P341 billion of P1.5 trillion. If you factor in amortization of the principal, the total for debt service comes to P746 billion or 48 percent of the national budget . No wonder our colleagues, the Honorables Rufus Rodriguez and Maximo Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro City, have filed a bill to revoke the Automatic Appropriations Act for Debt Servicing. The burden grows more onerous each year. Last year, the government shelled out $4.3 billion to service the foreign debt. This year, the figure is $5.2 billion. Next year, it will be $5.8 billion. Debt servicing has become the single most important item contributing to the government deficit, especially since the government is now borrowing at higher and higher rates of interest mainly to repay debt coming due. Servicing the debt has become the top national priority and this has had not only fiscal consequences, but also developmental ones. This practice has contributed to the massive reduction in public expenditures, capital expenditures, which has in turn caused a decline in the rate of investment since the government is the biggest investor in the economy and government investments crowds in or attracts private investment. This in turn has translated into a depressed rate of economic growth. With funds going to service debt instead of being invested in the economy, we will never catch up with our neighbors.
As pointed out by Dr. Raul Fabella of the University of the Philippines School of Economics, the country’s investment rate measured as the ratio of gross domestic capital formation to GDP comes to only 15 percent, well below Indonesia’s 25 percent, Singapore’s 22 percent, Thailand’s 28 percent and Vietnam’s 38 percent. Devoting the largest part of the budget to debt service, the Rodriguez brothers also remind us that it is a violation of the Constitution which says that education must have the top budget allocation. Without a radical change in our debt management policy, along the lines of our debt moratorium or a negotiated or unilateral reduction of the government’s debt burden, successfully implementing a new economic policy that will launch the Philippines anew on the road to development will not be possible. A fundamental change in debt management similar to Argentina’s decision in 2002 to pay only 25 cents for every dollar it owed to foreign creditors is the sine quanon or necessary condition for a change in the direction of economic policy.
The President himself recognizes the need for bold action in this area when he spoke about the need for debt repudiation during the electoral campaign. Let me repeat, the President during the campaign favored radical action on the foreign debt, and with the aid of Congress, he is now in a position to implement this. In sum, a golden opportunity awaits the administration of President Benigno Aquino III. A break with past policy, however, is necessary. The contours of a new strategy that will re-launch the country on an ecologically and socially benign development path are discernible. An active State, industrial policy, reinvigorating agriculture through a reversal of trade liberalization, domestic market-driven growth made possible by equitable income distribution, environmentally benign production processes in industry and agriculture, affirmative action for women and indigenous peoples, a mixed property regime instituting such an alternative comprehensive program will take a great deal of courage and determination especially at the beginning.
A Chinese proverb says, “Every journey of a thousand miles begins with a first step.” That first step is to take the bold measure necessary to tackle the biggest problem weighing down the country, the foreign debt.
Mr. Speaker, esteemed colleagues, thank you very much for your patience in listening to some of these thoughts for a new economic policy.
Source:
PLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 15th CONGRESS, FIRST REGULAR SESSION
Monday, August 2, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)