mongster's nest

- disturbing fantasies, traumatic verses, definitely mongrel thoughts

 

Till debt do us part

Bribery scandal, my article for Global Voices.

The most important legislative measure passed by the Philippine Congress every year is the General Appropriations Act -- the national budget. Through the power of the purse, Congress can reward performing government agencies with higher funding and punish inefficient public institutions with reduced subsidies.

This year, the principal sponsor of the GAA complained that Congress could not provide higher funding for social services since half the national budget is automatically earmarked to service the country's foreign debt. The lawmaker has articulated what peoples' organizations have been pointing out for decades: the Automatic Appropriations Act and the government policy to resort to foreign borrowing have led to less spending for productive social and economic services.

After the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship in 1986, President Cory Aquino assured international financial institutions that the Philippines would honor its debt commitments. The country went on to pay onerous and anomalous debts which were acquired during the Marcos era. Succeeding governments remained dependent on foreign loans to finance large-scale government projects.

Recognizing that huge external debt payments by developing countries are taking away the resources needed for development, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank put in place a debt relief initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries. This innovation has proved successful; more than 20 African countries have benefited from debt reduction packages.

Unfortunately for the Philippines, it is not included in the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries category since it has proven that it can pay its debts through an automatic appropriation in its annual budget. Besides, the Philippines is identified as a middle-income country whose economy is sustained by remittances from overseas Filipino workers.

To resolve this dilemma, Philippine House Speaker Jose De Venecia proposed at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2005 an expanded debt relief program to include heavily indebted middle-income countries like the Philippines. The proposal was to seek conversion of debts into equities to increase investment toward the attainment of the U.N. Millennium Development Goals.

A debt-for-equity swap is not an original idea of De Venecia. This was used extensively in Latin America during the international debt crisis in the 1980s. This process involves three parties: the debtor, foreign investor and the creditor-country. According to the non-government group Jubilee Plus, the debt-equity swap entails the following:

"A commercial debt is converted into an investment in the debtor country. The holder of the debt sells the debt back to the debtor government for local currency; and the local currency is then used to buy a share in a company or to buy property or productive capital in the debtor country."

Civil society groups believe that De Venecia's proposal could worsen the debt situation of the country. His scheme would be impossible to implement in the Philippines since most of the country's debts are commercial debts which are difficult to swap.

Researcher Miriam Azurin-Abaja notes that De Venecia's proposal does not include a debt discount. The proposal also "transforms creditors into owners of the best assets in the debtor-country, sans tax and other transaction costs."

Azurin-Abaja believes the De Venecia proposal would create new forms of debt since debt-equity swap does not promote cancellation or relief. The government will have to borrow again to pay the entire amount owed to a creditor.

Civil society groups are worried that the De Venecia proposal will "put bad creditors off the hook." Illegitimate debts will be honored. This is in contrast to the Vatican-backed Jubilee Campaign that anomalous loans which did not benefit the people should not be paid. The De Venecia proposal could sabotage the debt cancellation program for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries.

Speaker De Venecia should remember that during the Aquino administration, a debt-equity swap was briefly implemented but was suspended because of inflationary costs.

Instead of debt-equity, the Philippines can pursue debt-for-development swaps that do not require transfer of vital public assets. This was already done before. In 1990, the Philippines signed a debt-for-goods deal with Romania. In 1995, a debt-for-nature swap with Switzerland was approved. A debt-for-development agreement with France was used to construct a housing resettlement project in Tarlac.

Civil society groups want an immediate audit of all public debts to determine what onerous debts should be cancelled. Congress can also repeal the Automatic Appropriations Law. Instead of loans, developed countries should increase their Official Development Assistance for developing countries.

Debt conversion has the potential to reduce the debt stock of poor countries but it is no solution to the debt crisis.

The United Nations has recognized that eliminating poverty requires heavy investments for social and economic services. Developing countries cannot reduce poverty if half of their expenditures are used to pay foreign debt. There is a need for fair partnership and genuine dialogue between rich and poor nations.

Related entries:

Paris declaration
Get high on drugs
Gloria and Cory
Marcos as scapegoat

posted by: mongpalatino at October 31, 2007 13:05 | link | comments |
nation

All power to the barangays

On October 29, Monday, 48 million voters will be electing one barangay kapitan and seven barangay kagawad. Also, more than three million Sangguniang Kabataan voters will be choosing one SK chairperson and seven SK kagawad.

All in all, there will be 16 elective positions in every barangay throughout the country. The Commission on Elections estimates the number of candidates could easily reach to more than one million battling for the 671,920 barangay and SK positions.

The Philippine barangay and SK institutions are unique in the world as they allow Filipinos to freely elect their village leaders for a fixed term.

Barangay was the unit of government in most parts of the country before the Spanish colonizers arrived in 16th century. Composed of 30 to 100 families, each barangay was headed by a powerful chieftain who was usually the wise and strong village elder.

It was during the time of former President Ferdinand Marcos when the barangay was formally integrated to the system of government. Marcos extended his influence by politicizing and corrupting many barangay leaders.

Another Marcos legacy is the SK (originally known as Kabataang Barangay). Presidential daughter Imee Marcos headed the KB which was established as an antidote to the growing radicalism among the youth.

There are 41,995 barangays in the country today. Some barangays are famous because of their wealth (Forbes Park and Ayala Alabang) and size of population (Commonwealth of Batasan Hills and Bahay Toro in Quezon City and Addition Hills in Mandaluyong City).

Barangays get 20 percent of the Internal Revenue Allotment as mandated by the Local Government Code. The SK receives 10 percent of the funds of every barangay. An SK leader also has the opportunity to sit in the municipal, city and provincial councils.

Barangay politics reflects the best and worst features of Philippine politics.

At its best, UP Professor Alex Brillantes believes barangays and other local government units can be the “vanguards of democratization” in the country.

The Local Government Code has promoted decentralization which “encouraged citizens’ participation and people empowerment in local governance.” Because of devolution, barangays and other local government units acquired the responsibility for the delivery of many basic services that earlier were the responsibility of the national government.

However, we have yet to see a barangay kapitan who rose to become a congressman, governor or senator. When that day comes, and I hope it would be soon, we can talk about empowerment and democracy.

The ruling elite have so much to be grateful to the barangay system as it gives a semblance of direct governance at the grassroots level. While national politicians can afford to neglect the daily tribulations of the people, barangay officials attend to these mundane concerns.

May rumble sa kanto. Nag-away ang mag-asawa. May snatcher sa palengke. Kailangang may mag-ayos ng trapik sa parada. May hindi nagbayad ng utang. May gulo sa hatian ng lupa. Who do you call? Not the ghostbusters nor the unapproachable congressman but the barangay kapitan.

In short, barangays provide the necessary illusion that the government is doing something concrete for the poor people.

A sense of normalcy prevailed throughout the country even when national politicians were committing self-destructive activities because election campaigning for the barangay elections has occupied the attention of millions of ordinary citizens.

The anomalous ZTE deal, the shameful gift-giving in Malacañang and the unprincipled pardon granted to former president Joepeh Estrada were enough reasons to topple the ruling regime. The barangay elections provided a lifesaving temporary relief to the political crisis engulfing the Manila government.

At its worst, barangays mirror the awful characteristics of Philippine politics. Barangay elections are also dictated by guns, goons, gold and garci.

Unfortunately, political dynasty is also pervasive. It is common that a father or mother is running for barangay chairperson while his/her two children are seeking council seats. The youngest child runs for SK chairperson. After victory, relatives will get a barangay position.

It is reported that Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte’s son is a candidate in the barangay polls. Duterte’s daughter was recently elected as vice mayor of the city.

The Liga ng mga Barangay said barangay elections this year could be the “bloodiest in Philippine history.” This is disappointing but not surprising since Philippine elections tend to be brutal all the time.

Citing figures from the German-based non-profit educational foundation Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Senator Bong Revilla said there were 125 election-related violent incidents that left 75 persons dead and 26 injured in the last barangay elections of 2002.

Paraphrasing Voltaire, we have candidates killing and hurting each other for just about a few lumps of Earth. We have become wretched people who can conceive such mad fury and pointless violence.

This news item caught my attention: A candidate said he is ready to spend P50,000 for his campaign as kagawad in one barangay of Bohol. With only P1,200 monthly honorarium if he wins in the election, he can only get P43,200 in 3 years.”

How can he recoup his investments? Like senators, congressmen and governors who spend millions (possibly billions) of pesos to win in the elections, barangay officials also steal from the public treasury and extort money from businessmen to enrich themselves.

Barangay officials receive allowances and various cash gifts from mayors, congressmen, governors, jueteng lords, drug lords and other dark lords. People appreciate the services given by barangays but they also perceive barangay officials as low-key corrupt politicians.

When cynics proclaim that all politicians are corrupt, barangay officials are included in this category. Sad to say, even the SK, which was supposed to infuse youthful idealism in local governance, was corrupted by the system. The clamor to abolish the SK is related to the widespread impression that barangay officials have not been transparent in their public transactions.

Political forces are contesting for hegemony in barangays throughout the country. Right now, traditional politicians have the upper hand since they control the economic pie. Didn’t Malacañang distribute cash gifts to allow governors and congressmen to finance the candidacies of their purok leaders?

The proposal to postpone the barangay polls was meant to allow mainstream political parties more time to build a stronger machinery at the barangay level.

The Catholic Church also values the role of barangays in its evangelical mission. Archbishop Angel Lagdameo instructed the faithful to vote on October 29 and appealed for a non-partisan barangay system. The Archbishop noted that there are more than 2,000 parishes all over the country and many barangay officials are also members of Barangay Parish Pastoral Councils.

The military claims communist rebels are also organizing at the barangay level. If Russia had soviets and China had communes and brigades (Antonio Gramsci proposed factory councils for Italy), I believe a newly conceptualized barangay system would have some role to play if ever the Philippines would embrace socialism in the future.

Ideally, barangays could spark a genuine grassroots empowerment. This is endorsed by the law but it is not realized effectively. The debate will go on whether the precious little resources of the country are best given to barangays or to other more efficient, productive and accountable institutions. Political forces will continue to vie for influence in all barangays.

Whatever your thoughts on the barangay system, it is a citizen duty to vote on October 29. By the way, UP Professor Danny Arao reminds the public that barangay should be spelled baranggay (with two g’s) if we are referring to the basic unit of governance. He wrote that the Iloko word barangay means boat.

Related entries:

Peaceful 2007 elections
Politics is local
A candidate’s view

posted by: mongpalatino at October 28, 2007 16:58 | link | comments |
nation

Reforming the aid process

In March 2005 the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness was signed by 35 donor countries, 26 multilateral agencies and 57 partner country governments. Initiated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Paris Declaration is an "unprecedented global consensus to reform the delivery and management of aid."

In particular, the reforms are "intended to increase the impact of aid ... in reducing poverty and inequality, increasing growth, building capacity and accelerating the achievement of the 2015 Millennium Development Goals."

The Paris Declaration is significant since it recognizes that the aid process is not transparent and democratic. Reforms are necessary to make the official development assistance received by developing countries effective in reducing poverty.

Furthermore, civil society organizations have been pressuring donor countries to acknowledge the urgency to make aid programs more effective in addressing the development needs of every recipient country.

The Paris Declaration is guided by five principles: ownership (developing countries exercise leadership over their development policies); alignment (support of donor countries to the national development strategies of developing countries); harmonization (donors' actions are more harmonized, transparent and collectively effective); managing for results (all countries will manage resources and improve decision-making results); and mutual accountability (donor and partner countries are both accountable for development results).

Donors and developing countries have 56 specific partnership commitments across all five themes. Signatories also agreed on 12 indicators and measurable targets to be achieved by 2010.

Recognizing the right of developing countries to pursue their own development strategies is important since donor countries have traditionally exercised a dominant influence in the economies of small countries. Aid creates unequal power relationships between donor and recipient countries.

Civil society groups have been asserting that the tying of aid to the procurement of donor goods and services "inflates costs, slows down delivery and reduces the flexibility of developing countries." The Paris Declaration promotes the untying of aid. Donor countries are required to direct aid to the national priorities of developing countries. The procurement and financial management systems of recipient countries will be used by donors.

Civil society groups have welcomed the Paris Declaration as a first step to make the aid process more responsive to the needs of the poor. But they also criticized the "limited framework" of the aid effectiveness agenda. The agreement's indicators do not reflect how aid actually "affects conditions that sustain poverty and inequality."

Civil society groups believe that ownership of development strategies must be democratic. This means the participation of ordinary people, especially marginalized groups, in developing national strategies. Most of the time, national governments of developing countries are unable to include the voices of the poor in formulating a national economic agenda. The Paris Declaration should involve civil society groups in affirming democratic ownership of national development strategies.

Policy conditionality undermines the independence of developing countries. Donors must remove policy conditions and prescriptions for the release of funds. The Paris Declaration has no target to eliminate or reduce economic policy conditionality.

Donor countries have been using aid to influence policies in developing countries. Secret policy dialogues between donors and recipient governments are often held without consulting the public. Many of these conditions have proved harmful to the social and economic interests of developing countries. During the 1990s these donor-imposed reforms were called Structural Adjustment Programs.

Accountability should not just involve donors and recipient governments. What about the accountability of donors and governments to ordinary citizens? Civil society groups are also demanding accountability from international financial institutions. Developing countries should be able to contribute in determining the policies of these important institutions.

The Paris Declaration should recognize civil society groups as development actors in their own right. The biggest civil society group, the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation, is giving more money than some donor countries.

Civil society groups can be subjected to the aid effectiveness paradigm as well. The principles of ownership, harmonization and alignment in the Paris Declaration can be adopted. The relationship of civil society groups from rich countries (donors) and developing countries (recipients) should be probed.

Are civil society groups from poor countries accountable to their donors or to their constituents? Is it more effective if donor countries give money directly to civil society groups from developing countries?

The Paris Declaration has raised many issues which can be maximized to demand genuine reforms in the aid infrastructure around the globe. The lead players should not just involve technocrats, financiers, diplomats and big civil society groups. Grassroots involvement should be advocated.

Aid effectiveness agenda is important. But for what purpose, for whom and as measured by whom?

The Paris Declaration will achieve its objectives if aid reaches the poor and vulnerable groups of developing countries. The poor recognized as "drivers of development rather than objects of development" should be pursued.

There is time to lobby for changes in the Paris Declaration's indicators, timetables and targets. There will be a high level forum of various parties in Ghana next year.

Related entries:

13 going 14
Hong Kong trap
Global competitiveness
Toxic trade

posted by: mongpalatino at October 25, 2007 01:24 | link | comments |
workers

Blogismo

Social critic Teo Marasigan is opposed to progressives promoting the use of blogging among the youth. Here are some of his insights:

“Oo, larangan ng tunggalian ang Internet – pero dehado ang mga progresibo rito. Oo, mahalaga ang mga petiburgis sa pulitika ng pagbabago dahil madali nilang magagap at maibahagi ang progresibong mga ideya. Oo, nag-iisip na seksiyon nito ang nasa blogosphere. Pero papaling-paling ang mga petiburgis, at dominante sa Internet ang mga puwersang hahatak sa kanila palayo sa pagbabago.”

“Masagwa sa mga progresibo ang tumalima rito – sa blog, Friendster, Multiply, Twitter at iba pa – o banidosong ilahad ang mga detalye at larawan ng buhay-petibugoy na dapat ay hindi makasarili at walang mukha para sa Estado. Mapanganib din. Pinapadali nito ang paniniktik ng militar sa mga aktibista at kanilang personal na network. Sa mata ng militar, online na ang dossier mo.”

“May progresibong gamit ang Internet; pero nangingibabaw ang konserbatibo, reaksiyunaryo, o tahasang dekadenteng gamit nito. Hindi ako sang-ayon na palaganapin ng mga progresibo ang pagba-blog. Maglako tayo ng progresibong mensahe, hindi ng midyum lamang na bagamat tila walang pulitika ay dominado sa aktuwal ng mga kalaban ng pulitika ng pagbabago.”

Teo will agree with me that this government is repressive. Censorship is enforced through sophisticated means. But relative to other media, blogs remain partly hidden to the radars of censors. I wonder if Teo would have the same views on blogging if internet censorship in the Philippines is as oppressive in China or Malaysia. Would he still not promote blogging if the Philippine government suddenly decides to clamp down on big media?

As an activist, I have been promoting the use of blogs among my friends (including Teo) because I saw the potential of blogging to be an effective medium to broadcast our advocacies. The revolution will take place outside the internet cafe shops but there is a revolutionary task to perform in the cyberspace.

Blogging is a political statement. It affirms that everyone has the right to publish his/her opinion in the internet. It empowers ordinary citizens to articulate what they feel is relevant to their lives. A person can start to blog about his cat or crush but sooner or later he/she will have to write some political if not subversive commentaries. Why was my article deleted? Why is there a slow internet connection? What is the government doing about these pesky telecommunication services?

Teo recognizes the huge presence of the youth in the internet but he immediately dismisses the prospect of recruiting these literate individuals to the proletarian cause because of their nature as a vaccilating class and the dominant influence of reactionary partisans in the internet.

Ito ay palasukong aktitud. We do not abandon the pettybourgeoisie to the venomous claws of the powerful imperialists. We always persevere. We always struggle.

In schools, factories, offices, even in our homes, reactionary influence is strong. But we recognize the importance of advancing the welfare of the people at all times.

The logic of Capital has pervaded almost all facets of human activity, not just in the internet. Why would we encourage the youth not to blog just because capitalists invented the need for it? We did not discourage the workers from setting up their own newspapers, radio shows and plays even if capitalists have perverted these things into money-making enterprises.

Indeed, there is too much crap in the internet. Same with TV, radio, books and newspapers. We did not ask: Why are you writing a book? Didn’t you know that capitalists will profit from your activity? Didn’t you know that there are too many self-help, tagalog romance and other garbage books in the publishing industry? Didn’t you know that capitalism is suffering from overaccumulation that it needs to create a market for its excess goods?

Corporate interests are dominant in the media industry but activists persevere in establishing alternative and independent media groups. Blogging is an extension of this campaign. Activists have already proven that there are easy battles to win in the cyberspace despite the domination of imperialism. Blogs, unlike mainstream newspapers and TV, could be appropriated by activists to serve various causes.

I blame friendster on why Teo looks down so much on social networking sites. But Teo should appreciate that web 2.0 is more than just friendster or multiply. He belittles Twitter but we activists have learned to integrate chikka text in our daily activities. Twitter is more effective than chikka and yes, activists in other shores use this application to check on the security of their comrades.

Blogs allow individuals to upload their favorite pictures, stories, songs, maps, books and videos in the internet. This was not possible a few years ago. The internet is evolving fast. Imagine the possibilities of what we can do with the internet in the future. Imagine what it can contribute to the revolution.

Teo is worried that Big Brother is compiling our online dossier. But this presupposes that by not using blogs, or by staying away from the internet, we are already safe from Big Brother. Almost all human activities are subject to the surveillance of the State.

There is little we can do to prevent Big Brother from spying our online activities. Even anonymous accounts are not safe anymore.

The least we can do is beef up our security by affirming our ties with fellow citizens and netizens. We form online and offline solidarities with individuals, groups and institutions. Through our public profiles, we are in a way dousing threats since we have some semblance of protection that we belong in a community.

The State will emerge as the victor if the threat of military surveillance succeeds in convincing the public not to use the internet or blog. It denies the public the chance to utilize the emancipatory potential of the cyberspace.

We continue to use texting and mobile phones despite threats of wiretapping. We do this because it is essential for communication and information. The same holds true with the use of internet.

The main task of progressives is not to scare the masa that they are signing their death warrants by owning a blog but to expose and defeat the spying activities of State agents.

Reading Teo’s article reminds me of the debate whether bloggers should be recognized as journalists. For a long time, journalists have looked down on blogging as pseudo-journalism and a threat to their profession. After some time, many journalists have begun to appreciate the various uses of blogging.

I wonder if academics, not journalists, feel the most threatened by blogging. Like journalists before, academics are proud and protective of their monopoly of information about our world. When ordinary citizens attempted to decode the meaning of the universe and life in general through blogs, journalists, and I think academics too, began to dismiss these activities as worthless and trivial. They began to describe blogging as proof of vanity among the youth. They feel insulted that high school students will dare say or write something about what it took them many years to decipher and master.

Teo is right to highlight the motive of capitalism behind the sudden rise of blogging in the world for the past several years. I emphatically agree with his appeal not to overestimate the power of blogging since reactionary interests are more powerful. Activist bloggers are aware of this and they are not leading the naive youth to blog just for the sake of blogging. Teo has been unfair to his activist friends with his righteous remark that progressives have not been critical in the use and promotion of blogging.

Every now and then I always encounter a reactionary writer who looks down on blogging as a waste of time. These rightist writers are protesting why “digital maoists” are given power to say anything they like about our puritan society. Last weekend, a highly respected intellectual of the left used his blog to disparage the initiative of progressives to promote responsible blogging in the country. It’s a funny world.

Related entries:

Blogging the news
Blog works
Cybercampaign
Txtpower

posted by: mongpalatino at October 22, 2007 21:50 | link | comments (7) |
media

In other words*

Join the Yehey! Message Boards: Cash gifts from Malacañang and GMA versus JDV. Buy the new album of Datu’s Tribe: Whoa! Pilipinas.

More than two hundred local politicians were given “cash gifts” after attending a meeting at the Malacañang Palace last week. At least a hundred million pesos was estimated to have been distributed in a single day to loyal allies of the president.

What was the purpose of the “gift-giving” in Malacañang? Who ordered the distribution of the money? Was the president involved in this embarrassing incident? Why was the money handed out in paper bags? What happened to the sanctity of the banking system?

Some administration politicians insist the money is intended for community development projects. Some officials describe the money as “cash allowance” for lawmakers. Others claim they were “goodwill measures” from the president to benefit pro-poor programs. The opposition bloc believes Malacañang distributed bribe money in order to retain the loyalty of local leaders.

For the past week, the money received by politicians was called cash gifts, cash allowance, goodwill measures, charity funds and bribe money. Which one is the correct term? Whatever label politicians assign to the “gift-giving” in Malacañang, it must be emphasized that taxpayers’ money was distributed under dubious circumstances. In our vocabulary, this constitutes a crime.

To obfuscate issues, politicians normally refrain from “naming things for what they really are.” They love to use esoteric terms to intimidate, astound and confuse the naïve public. They use ambiguous words to evade accountability. This practice does not help in promoting transparency in governance.

Calibrated Preemptive Response is a pretty name for violent dispersal of mass actions. EO 464 is actually a gag order. PP 1017 or declaration of a state of national emergency was a disguised term for martial rule. Archbishop Oscar Cruz objects to the use of the term “extrajudicial killing” since the act is plain and simple murder. Besides, there is no such thing as judicial killing anymore in the country.

The Cyber Education Project is a misnomer since it is more like a distance learning program. The Small Town Lottery in the provinces is an institutionalized jueteng operation. The anti-terror bill was renamed as the Human Security Act (it should be renamed as the Human Insecurity Act). Pork Barrel is now known as Priority Development Assistance Funds.

Oppositionists are called destabilizers (sometimes they are described as titans of hate). Activists are labeled terrorists. Traditional politicians are referred to as consensus builders or political reformers. Political compromises are hailed as “win-win” solutions.

The Martial Law anniversary was declared a National Thanksgiving Day. The Japanese invasion of the Philippines in 1940 was part of the so-called “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.” Now, the Japanese-Philippine Economic Partnership Agreement or more commonly known as JPEPA is part of the broader “Comprehensive East Asia Partnership Agreement.” Could this be the second Japanese invasion in the country?

When there is “negative economic growth”, it means economic recession. Beware when politicians speak of “revenue enhancement” since this stands for tax increase. Rationalizing the workforce denotes the dismissal of casual workers.

Political and economic agreements or treaties are usually loaded with confusing words and complex sentences. For instance, in the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law between the government and communist rebels, the term “prisoners of war” was not used. Instead, the two parties decided to adopt this name: persons deprived of their liberty for reasons related to the armed conflict.

But doublespeak is not only pervasive in politics. It seems everyone has chosen to use nice words rather than reveal the painful and inconvenient truth.

Aesthetically-deprived refers to an ugly person. Cerebrally-challenging is a polite term for a stupid person. A newsboy is now called media courier. Environmental hygienist is the new word for janitor while environmental physicist is for the plumber. A gangster is called a member of a career-offender cartel. Toothpick is sometimes called the wood interdental stimulator. And my personal favorite: Poorly buffered precipitation atmospheric deposition of anthropogenically-derived acidic substances is another name for acid rain.

It is not wrong to be creative. Everyone can show-off his or her command of the English language. Sometimes it is necessary to hide our real intent by using obscure words. Writers have to tell the truth in various (and sometimes puzzling) ways to evade censorship and libel suits. We use polite words in order not to offend other persons, especially our family and friends.

But there are times when we have to “name things for what they really are” for the sake of truth, fairness and justice. At a time when politicians, especially members of the ruling coalition, are not concerned with decency and respect of the law, everyone must muster the courage to tell the truth at all cost. And here is my version of truth:

The Philippines is ruled by political dynasties, hunger and poverty is widespread, corruption is rampant, landlessness afflicts the countryside and bribe money was given to politicians last week in Malacañang.

Let me add: Edu Manzano is an overrated TV host (but he is a good movie actor). Globalization is imperialism. Gloria Arroyo is a puppet of you know who. Joker Arroyo has moved to the dark side of the Force. Norberto Gonzalez is an asshole, and this is an understatement.

*Title borrowed from Pierre Bourdieu’s book: In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology.

Related entries:

Name game
Politics of underdevelopment
I see terrorist people

posted by: mongpalatino at October 19, 2007 19:35 | link | comments (1) |
nation

Education for all?

Thank you to all those who attended and supported the Bloggers Kapihan 2.0 last Saturday.

The Philippines is one of the 189 nation states which signed the Millennium Declaration in September 2000. Member states of the United Nations adopted the Millennium Development Goals to affirm their commitment to "reducing poverty and the worst forms of human deprivation" by 2015.

Two of these goals are related to education: Achieving universal primary education and achieving gender parity. This is intended to ensure that by 2015 children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary education. This also aims to eliminate gender disparity preferably by 2005 and no later than 2015.

The most recent Philippine assessment report in 2005 revealed that these goals for education are the least likely to be attained in contrast to the other MDGs, which were rated with high to medium probability of attainment.

Two of the 17 indicators closely being monitored pertain to the MDGs for education: elementary participation rate and cohort survival rate -- meaning the percentage of children who complete their elementary schooling out of those who initially enrolled.

Government statistics show that for the last six years there was a steady increase in total school enrollment, but there was also an increasing proportion of elementary school-age children who remained out of school. In the 2005-2006 school year, almost 65 percent of six-year old children did not begin their primary education on time.

The cohort survival rate was placed at 76 percent in 2001 but it went down to 70 percent last year. The completion rate was 75 percent in 2001 but it also went down to 68 percent last year. The drop-out rate and repetition rate also deteriorated in the last six years.

An independent study by scholars and civil society organizations revealed interesting but disturbing facts. For example, children entering Grade 1 are older than expected. Drop-out rates in Grade 1-3 are highest among "right age kids" while drop-out rates from Grade 5 onwards are highest for "overage kids," especially among the boys. Boys leave school faster than girls. Children who attend pre-school are more likely to finish the full education cycle. As expected, malnutrition was noted as a factor among many who drop out of school.

The Philippine case highlights the need to fine tune the indicators used in measuring the progress report of MDGs for education. Monitoring the number of pupils who come in from grades 1 to 6 and the pupils who leave schools at every grade level are also important. Monitoring quality and accountability is also necessary in reporting the status of primary schooling.

Scholars stress that a child should be able to read by Grade 3 after having finished the universal elementary school period. For Grades 4-6, it is critical to raise the level of functional literacy of the children especially on numeracy, science and reading comprehension.

Educators point out the declining impact of years of low spending on education as manifested by the nominal increases in the annual budget of education agencies relative to the increases in the number of primary school entrants. The budget for the education sector is way below the international benchmark which is set at 18-20 percent of the national budget or about 6 percent of the gross national product.

Education policies need to be reviewed. What happened to the decentralization of the governance of basic education? Can the government clarify and harmonize its language policy especially concerning the use of a child's native language in the first two grades of basic education?

Policymakers can be asked to pursue the organization of free pre-school as part of the formal ladder of education across the country. Funding support should prioritize disadvantaged schools and those with substantial indigenous populations.

How will the School Feeding Program and other health intervention programs effectively address malnutrition and hunger among school-age kids? Is it really advisable to distribute sacks of rice rather than provide actual food like vegetables and milk in schools? Early this year, opposition politicians warned that the rice distribution program could be used to divert public funds into the election campaign expenses of administration politicians.

Education officials need to account for the missing textbooks and CD teaching materials they should have delivered to remote towns. Corruption remains pervasive in the procurement of learning materials. A mismanaged and underfunded bureaucracy will never produce positive learning outcomes nor achieve the MDGs for education.

Improving education is not just about producing the skilled graduates needed to compete in a globalized economy. It is about fulfilling the basic rights of every individual. Education uplifts human dignity and the capacity to realize every individual's potential.

The MDGs provide a good framework to gauge the performance of Philippine education. Sadly, the figures validate that basic education remains inequitable and inaccessible, especially for the marginalized sectors of the population. But it is still possible to save Philippine education. Hopefully, the stakeholders and government will realize the impending social catastrophe if the education crisis is not solved in due time.

Related entries:

Modest proposals
Textbooks of malnutrition
Election questions
Gusto rin nilang mag-aral

posted by: mongpalatino at October 16, 2007 01:04 | link | comments (1) |
education

Bright versus Spice

Bloggers Kapihan 2.0: Blog Ed 101. Teaching, learning and blogging. Please attend: October 13, Saturday, 1:30-4:30 pm, Ramon Magsaysay High School (in front of Nepa Q-Mart EDSA).

A long long time ago, in a land where Wyatt Erap was still the kingpin of the hill, there emerged two camps of young cowboys which entertained and inspired many people. They were known as the Bright Boys and the Spice Boys.

Former president Joseph Estrada was impressed with seven young lawmakers from the administration party LAMP so he named them the Bright Boys. They were Rodolfo Taguinod Albano of Isabela, Alan Peter Schramm Cayetano of Pateros-Taguig, Joseph Felix Mari ‘Ace’ Durano of Cebu, Francis Joseph Guevarra Escudero of Sorsogon, Edmundo Ongsiako Reyes, Jr. of Marinduque, Jurdin Jesus Modina Romualdo of Camiguin and Gilberto Cojuangco Teodoro, Jr. of Tarlac.

Meanwhile, young members of the opposition in the Lower House also formed a group called the Spice Boys. They were Rolando Andaya Jr. of Camarines Sur, Robert Ace Barbers of Surigao del Norte, Federico Sandoval II of Navotas-Malabon, Juan Miguel Zubiri of Bukidnon, Hernani Braganza of Pangasinan and Michael Defensor of Quezon City.

The Bright Boys and Spice Boys represented the youth of Philippine politics almost a decade ago. Their brilliance, dedication and passion to defend their principles gave hope to many that the future leaders of the country will be more responsible, honest and intelligent. In short, these young politicians encouraged skeptics to give the trapo-dominated politics prevailing in the country a second chance.

In the battle to win the hearts and minds of the people, the Spice Boys reigned supreme which culminated in the removal of Estrada from Malacañang. The Spice Boys played a crucial role in articulating the sentiments of the people against Estrada. They effectively used their popularity to inform the poor, especially the students, about the corruption cases, anomalous programs and bad working habits of Estrada. They opposed charter change, press freedom violations and Estrada’s economic policies which hurt the working public.

The Bright Boys successfully defended Estrada in the plenary of Congress. But they were less successful in using mass media to counter the relentless criticisms hurled against the former president. They were indeed bright boys but during that time, Estrada was hopelessly indefensible.

For many people, the rivalry of Spice Boys and Bright Boys ended when then Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo assumed the presidency in 2001. The Spice Boys were given key positions in the Arroyo government. Braganza headed the agrarian reform and media bureau of Malacañang before opting to become a mayor of a booming city in the north. Andaya is now the secretary of the budget and management office. Defensor was appointed as housing czar, environment secretary and presidential spokesperson before announcing that he will take a leave from politics to reinvent himself. Those who remained in the Lower House enjoyed top positions in juicy committees.

The Spice Boys have proven their loyalty to Arroyo but it seems they have turned their backs to the crusade for truth, transparency and honesty in governance. They have chosen to ignore allegations of corruption, electoral fraud and human rights violations involving the president and her family. They castigated Estrada for plundering the nation’s resources but they have avoided criticizing their lady boss in Malacañang for her role in the scams of Jose Pidal, Virgilio Garcillano, JocJoc Bolante, Jovito Palparan and Benjamin Abalos. They have forgotten that the fight for clean government does not stop even if it meant betraying the president.

On the other hand, most of the Bright Boys are now the bright boys of Arroyo. Indeed, there are no permanent friends and enemies in politics. Durano and Teodoro are already part of Arroyo’s cabinet. Escudero and Cayetano are the only remaining active supporters of Estrada.

If every congressman’s dream is to become a senator, then the Bright Boys are the clear winners in this case. Escudero and Cayetano are now senators while Defensor lost and Zubiri’s victory remains questionable.

The rivalry of the Bright Boys and Spice Boys is personified by Escudero and Defensor. The former is the icon of the opposition while the latter is the poster boy of the administration. Both of them tried to convince the public that they represent the hopes and dreams of the youth. In reality, they were only advancing the interests of their rich and powerful patrons.

But it must be emphasized that for the past seven years, Escudero was consistent in exposing the wrongdoings of the present government while Defensor has chosen to remain faithful to Arroyo.

Seven years ago, who would have thought that Bright Boy Escudero, the son of an unrepentant Marcos crony, will eventually become a senator and stalwart of a movement for democracy, civil liberties and good governance? Who would even imagine that Spice Boy Defensor, an activist during his college days who actually chanted imperyalismo ibagsak will become the stereotype of a young trapo?

In the last few weeks, there have been many instances showing the hegemony of the Bright Boys over the Spice Boys. During the senate hearings on the ZTE contract, Senate Blue Ribbon committee chairman Cayetano summoned Andaya to the witness stand many times. Spice Boy Andaya was humbled by Bright Boy Cayetano.

In one incident too, Cayetano referred to Sergio Apostol as “Mr. Madame Wetness.” Nobody commented on this episode. But this was important since a Bright Boy succeeded in humiliating an EDSA Dos personality inside the same hall where Estrada’s impeachment trial was held.

Despite their fidelity to good causes nowadays, Cayetano and Escudero are already showing signs of abandoning their aggressive and principled position against the government. Why did they join the administration coalition in the senate? Is it true that Cayetano was influenced by a rich businessman to delay/scrap the ZTE hearing? Former Congressman Jacinto Paras once asked where Cayetano was in 2004 when the opposition was questioning the election results. Well, Bright Boys will always be Bright Boys.

The Spice Boys and Bright Boys are still prominent politicians of the country. Although this time they have already shed their image as young idealist leaders. They are now traditional politicians. They promote political dynasties. Their political biographies remind the public how politics corrupt the young. Their stories fuel the cynicism of the youth. People are now discouraged to believe and expect that young idealist leaders will remain true to their beliefs.

Perhaps this was the reason why in the past few weeks, so many cause-oriented groups are actively evoking the memories, writings and political legacies of Edgar Jopson and Lean Alejandro. The youth needs good role models. No more of Spice Boys and Bright Boys please. We need another Lean and Edjop.

Expensive medicines, my article for Global Voices.

Related entries:

Deodorant boys
Defining the Filipino youth
Why the youth should vote?
Sons and politicians

posted by: mongpalatino at October 12, 2007 02:09 | link | comments (1) |
youth

Sputnik and Philippine education

I’m encountering technical problems in the comment setting of this blog. For your comments, email them to me, mongpalatino@gmail.com. Thanks

Last week, the world marked the fiftieth anniversary of the launching of the Soviet-made satellite Sputnik into space. The Sputnik was the first successful attempt of mankind to fly an object into space. It was a milestone during the Cold War era since Soviet Russia was able to prove that it was ahead of the United States in space technology. In short, Sputnik sent shivers of fear among anti-communist nations and at the same time roused the world’s curiosity on space exploration.

Sputnik intensified the space race between the two superpowers of the world. Leaders panicked on how to catch up with the advanced technology of Russia. More importantly, Sputnik triggered an education revolution in the US and elsewhere.

Policymakers blamed the system of education of the US on why it lost to Russia in the bid to conquer space during the 1950s. No less than former US President Eisenhower wrote then: “Educators, parents and students must be continuously stirred up by the defects in our educational system. They must be induced to abandon the educational path that, rather blindly, they have been following as a result of John Dewey’s teachings.”

Dewey was the foremost American educator and philosopher during the first half of the 20th century. He criticized the methods of teaching in schools and successfully required the inclusion of play, vocational studies, work, and leisure in the curriculum. His works became a bible for educators disillusioned by the ravages of industrial ideology over education. Experiments in pedagogies concerned in encouraging the experience of the learner as a first step in learning became widespread.

Of course Eisenhower was wrong to blame Dewey. But the president and military strategists found a convenient scapegoat for America’s failure to send the fist satellite into orbit. The US government used the Sputnik to justify widespread reforms in the education sector. Sputnik suddenly created the high demand for scientists, engineers and technology experts. The US started producing thousands of PhD academicians in weeks.

The obsession to beat the Russians forced US schools to abandon the education reforms proposed by Dewey and other radical philosophers. A decade later, students from major US universities will criticize the undemocratic character of American schools. On the other hand, many insist that the focus given by the government and academe on science, technology and math after the launching of the Sputnik allowed the public to own and enjoy a laptop, cell phone and internet today.

The Sputnik-provoked education reforms in the US inspired Philippine educators and policymakers. Philippine schools have traditionally looked up to the American education system as the most superior in the world. New subjects were introduced in Philippine schools like New Math, New English and New Science.

To put it mildly, these education reforms didn’t work for the Philippines. Aptitude in Math and Science among Filipinos never improved. English language proficiency deteriorated. Sputnik revived America’s leading role in the fields of science and technology but it failed to galvanize Philippine education. What went wrong?

Philippine leaders failed to prioritize funding for science and technology. The public school system suffered from dwindling education subsidies. The Philippine government wanted a country which can produce a Sputnik but didn’t want to invest in science and education.

Philippine educators were correct to use Sputnik to inspire students and young scholars. But they may have exaggerated the effectiveness of adopting the education reforms implemented in the US. During that time, the Philippines could have addressed the basic problems besetting the education system such as lack of school facilities, textbooks and low quality of teaching. What was the significance of New Math, New English and New Science when basic literacy and elementary competencies were more crucial to learn?

The Sputnik-inspired education reforms during the 1950s and early 1960s can teach the Philippine government today to be more prudent as it embarks on an ambitious education initiative called the “Cyber Education Project.” This venture will provide a satellite-based distance learning program across the country. According to education officials, it will solve education imbalances between rural and urban schools.

Noble goals but will this very expensive project really spur high learning outcomes? Is this what the Philippines really need today? Or should money be allocated first to finance school building construction, procurement of learning materials and training of educators?

The cyber education project will not make computers accessible to all students. It is mainly a TV broadcast of lectures given by “master” scholars. This is already being done in some provinces. Many groups warn that aside from being a potential source of corruption, this project will not solve the fundamental deficiencies of Philippine schools

The fiftieth anniversary of Sputnik highlights the backwardness of Philippine education. Majority of Science teachers are not specialists in the subjects they are teaching. Many public schools have neither modern science laboratories nor clean toilets. A few years ago, a science textbook was approved by the government which describes the planet Earth as coconut-shaped.

In the US, there are scientists who are hoping for another “Sputnik” to spark more interest in science and space exploration. The Philippines needs another “Sputnik” too. But hopefully, educators will not be distracted from their primary mission of eradicating illiteracy and lack of basic skills among students.

Related entries:

Education crisis then and now
An afternoon in Deped
PC games, schools and Gloria

posted by: mongpalatino at October 08, 2007 12:19 | link | comments |
education

Corrupt nation

Check out the new blogs and websites in the Mongster Link section. Join the Yehey! Message Boards about the barangay/SK elections.

“I have always observed that the really great unhappiness have been the result of our voracious greed.” - Voltaire

The Philippines was ranked by Transparency International as among the most corrupt nations in the world. There is nothing surprising with this report. Most Filipinos perceive government officials as corrupt. But it must be noted that the Philippines does not lack laws and programs to combat corruption. In fact, there are many efforts to promote honesty and integrity in public service.

For example, there are enough provisions in the 1987 Constitution to sustain measures against graft and corruption, prohibit political dynasty, demand accountability of public officers and uphold the right of people to information on matters of national concern.

Congress enacted the Ombudsman Act of 1989, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Ill-gotten Wealth Act, Code of Conduct Act, Bribe Giver Protection, Government Procurement Reform Act and the Anti-Plunder Law. The UN Convention against Corruption was also ratified.

Government agencies and programs established to curb corruption include the Ombudsman, Presidential Anti-Graft Commission, Sandiganbayan, Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission, Inter-Agency Anti-Corruption Coordinating Council, Solana Covenant, Integrity Development Review and the National Anti-Corruption Program of Action.

The Philippines has shown dedication to fight corruption with the passage of good laws and other initiatives yet perceptions on corruption have not improved.

The Transparency and Accountability Network (TAN) believes the government has the power and resources to change perceptions but it lacks political will to fight corruption. The group also noted that the net sincerity of government offices to fight corruption is down, access to information environment is deteriorating, there is inability to hold public officials accountable and a climate of fear and intimidation hinders anti-corruption initiatives.

One example of government’s inconsistent commitment to reforms is the presidential gag order (EO 464) which required members of the executive to seek presidential approval before appearing at congressional hearings.

The public is also denied access to documents which are of national concern such as the Davide Report on electoral reforms, Mayuga Report on military involvement in the 2004 electoral fraud, Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement, Melo Report on extrajudicial killings and the Statement of Assets and Liabilities of the judiciary. There is also no accountability for public officials who lost vital government documents like the “missing” election results of Maguindanao and the “stolen” contract of the controversial national broadband network project between the government and the Chinese firm ZTE.

The Transparency and Accountability Network is proposing the passage of a Right to Information law in order to push for grater transparency in governance. Although stated in the Constitution, there is no law which provides clear operationalization of the public’s right to information. The bill will identify transparency indicators and data protection measures.

Another important measure is the Whistleblower Act. A law is needed to give adequate protection and reward to witnesses and civil servants who are willing to testify and provide credible evidence against public officials who commit illegal and corrupt deeds. Informants who expose anomalous public transactions by presenting solid proof should be protected by law. Joey De Venecia can afford to pin down powerful politicians since he is rich and his father is the Speaker of the Lower House. But what about ordinary government employees who are afraid to testify against big politicians? Sadly, there is no adequate witness protection and reward system existing today.

It takes time to pass a law especially if lawmakers are more interested to accuse other nations of inventing corruption. The executive department can prove its sincerity to fight corruption by improving transparency and participation of public in selection process and appointment of officials in government bodies. Malacañang can start when it names the replacement of resigned Commission on Elections chairman Benjamin Abalos.

Right now, the full authority of the appointing power is delegated only to the president. There should be sufficient public information regarding the criteria for the selection and profile of candidates for appointive government positions. Civil society groups insist the executive can institute a transparent and participatory process similar to the procedure practiced by the Judicial Bar Council which promotes public scrutiny. In this way, appointment to key government positions is more democratic, transparent and not dependent on the political survival of the president.

Laws, programs and government agencies are not enough to win the battle against corruption. Political will and empowerment of the people are also needed. When politicians seem oblivious to the pleas for honesty in public service, the people can make a direct action to punish the corrupt and unrepentant leaders of the country. This is not an impossible task. In times of doubt, remember the case of the plunderer in Tanay.

Related entries:

Impunity
Corruption in high places
Marcos as scapegoat.
Neri and Karina
Abalos and the 2007 elections
JPEPA and bloggers

Three years ago in Mongster’s Nest: The qualities of batang pinoy according to Jollibee, Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code book review, Textbooks of malnutrition from Coke and Deped, outlaw the no permit-no exam policy, defining the Filipino youth, and my very first post: family ties in the time of diaspora.

posted by: mongpalatino at October 04, 2007 02:26 | link | comments |
nation

Can organic farming save Philippine agriculture?

The Philippines used to have a robust agricultural sector. About two-thirds of the population and three-fourths of the poor depend on agriculture. But agricultural productivity has been declining over the years. Government expenditures to improve rural welfare have been decreasing as well. Incomes of farmers are down, peasant communities are impoverished and landlessness remains a social justice issue.

The government's land reform program is about to expire next year yet vast landholdings throughout the country remain in the hands of very few landlord families. Liberalization of the agriculture industry destroyed the livelihood of millions of small farmers. The dumping of cheaper imported farm products in the local market aggravated poverty in the countryside. The communist insurgency in the provinces is fueled mainly by widespread peasant discontent.

There are proposals to extend the land reform program. Peasant groups are asking for a balanced, sustainable and pro-poor trade policy. Addressing rural development should guarantee farmers access to basic services, credit, technology, organization and entrepreneurship training. The government can also consider promoting organic agriculture to raise agricultural earnings in the country.

Civil society organizations define organic agriculture as "an agricultural production system that promotes environmentally, socially and economically sound production of food and fibers and excludes the use of synthetically compounded fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators, livestock feed and additives and genetically modified organisms." The Codex Alimentarius recognizes this kind of farming as "an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity."

Organic agriculture promotes the principles of health, ecology, fairness and care. According to the Philippine Development Assistance Program, organic agriculture is now part of the development agenda with growing recognition from stakeholders, the government and the private sector. It is also perceived as an effective and sustainable approach to food security, proper nutrition, income generation and resource management.

Aside from enhanced consumer awareness on the benefits of natural and healthy products, there is a big market for organic agriculture. The Philippines exported US$2.5 million worth of organic products in 1999, $6.2 million in 2001 and $10 million in 2003. According to the Department of Trade and Industry, organic agriculture is growing by 10-15 percent every year.

The Philippines can aim for more share of the world market. Organic agriculture trading in the world is increasing by 20-30 percent every year. Retail sales for organic products amounted to US$11 billion in 1998 and $17 billion in 2002 and they are projected to reach $100 billion in 2008.

The most popular organic products in the Philippines are bananas, beef, mangoes, muscovado sugar, papayas, peanuts, poultry, soya milk, vegetables from the uplands, yellow corn and rice.

Organic rice is produced in 19 provinces covering 15,000 hectares of farmland, with the potential for 39,000 hectares more of planting area. Production costs are 20-40 percent lower than traditional farming and net income is 10-30 percent higher. Productivity for converted farms ranges from 4-6 tons versus the national average of 3.5-4 tons. Metro Manila consumed 200 sacks per month in 2001 which increased to 1,500 sacks in 2006.

Muscovado sugar is exported to Europe, the United States and Japan. From 2000-2004, the Philippines earned US$6 million through trade in muscovado sugar alone.

Seaweed is another major organic product produced by the Philippines. The island of Sitangki in southern Philippines has 10,000 hectares of production area with potential of 60,000 hectares more for seaweed extraction. Seaweed trading in Sitangki is estimated at more than US$2 million per month.

The good news is that the Department of Agriculture drafted an Organic Agriculture Policy in 2003 and the Implementing Rules and Regulations were promulgated last year. The bad news is that there is no budget allocation to promote organic farming.

The Congress, aside from enacting a genuine land reform program, should also prioritize funding support for organic agriculture. PDAP recommends more investments in post-harvest processing, packaging and technology diffusion. Local governments must build the capacity to increase consumer awareness. An agriculture micro-finance policy can be implemented to benefit small farmers. Academic institutions can spearhead initiatives through research and development programs. Organic agriculture can be included in the curriculum.

Organic agriculture is not the magic pill that will eliminate poverty in the country. But it can increase farmers' income and "help restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony." Organic agriculture will not solve hunger but it can be a key component to realize food sustainability. Organic agriculture trading will not make the Philippines an economic superpower but it can help revive agriculture productivity.

The noble goals of organic agriculture will become meaningless if the program will yield a large profit for a few individuals or groups at the expense of small farmers. The government must promote organic agriculture to improve the countryside and raise the quality of living of farmers.

Related entries:

Land reform and Gloria
Hacienda Luisita

posted by: mongpalatino at October 03, 2007 13:20 | link | comments |
workers