Why We Are Poor and On Endless Crisis: A Theory To Ponder

The roots of crisis: A neo-colonial state preserved as a raw material economy by the geopolitical requirements of U.S. post-war imperialism; and what is to be done.

By: Alejandro Lichauco
Paper prepared for delivery before the Pilgrims for Peace scheduled October 27, 2004, Quezon City.

Introductory

Any attempt to understand the essence and roots of the nation's crisis must begin with recognition of the nature of the Philippine state. The Philippines isn't - and one must stress that - a sovereign, independent state that it is assumed to be and which its constitution claims it is.

A neocolonial state

The Philippines is a neocolonial state - which, by definition, means a state that is sovereign and independent in theory but which in fact is the colony of another, or of others. As a people, we are the classic victim of what Webster's New World Dictionary calls neocolonialism and which it defines as "the exploitation of a supposedly independent nation as by imposing a puppet government."

This has been so from the day and moment that we assumed the status of sovereign nationhood in 1946. That sovereign nationhood was pure fiction. It was pure fiction because the colonial power which supposedly returned to us the independence which it had wrested from Bonifacio's revolution never really left and never really allowed us to exist and act as a free and sovereign people.

The process by which we have been preserved as a neocolony is a story of its own, and neither time nor space allows that I deal with it in detail. It should suffice to focus on the essentials of that process. We have been preserved as a neocolonial state through the flagrant and systematic intervention of the U.S. government in our political process and in the creation of a collaborator class.

Neocolonialist intervention, of course, hasn't been confined to the political process. You see and feel the hand of that intervention in just about every aspect of Philippine society and the political economy. You see and feel it not only in government and politics but in the business community, in our schools, civil society, media and even the churches.

But the intervention has been most crucial and fatal at the level of our presidential politics. As the late and former President Diosdado Macapagal admitted in an article he wrote for the Bulletin a few years before he passed away, the U.S. government has been a decisive factor in every presidential election since 1935, and no presidential aspirant objectionable to Washington has ever been elected president. By the same token, any sitting president who manages to displease Washington invariably winds up unseated by Washington. That has been generally the fate of all incumbent presidents. They were mounted to office by Washington and eventually unseated by Washington.

That's how puppet governments are mounted and that's essentially how we have been preserved as a neocolonial state.

But that's for another paper. At the moment we are focused on the economic crisis.

The fiscal crisis as a diversionary issue

The fiscal crisis, which you invited me to discuss, is in truth only one of the many facets of the economic crisis that grips the nation. There is the crisis of the peso, the crisis of unemployment and inflation; there is the crisis of the industrial and agricultural sectors, and there is the overall crisis of underdevelopment and poverty.

There is the crisis of the very economic system by which we have lived all these years.

To be lured into a discussion of the fiscal crisis therefore is to be lured away from a discussion of the totality of the crisis and the nature as well as the root of that crisis. And that I suggest to you is exactly what the enemies of the state intend. They intend to lure us away from an examination of the total crisis and to trivialize that crisis by luring us into a discussion of what they call the "fiscal-debt crisis."

But it is the essence and root of the total economic crisis that we should focus on.

The economic crisis as the crisis of a neocolonial state

If we have a total economic crisis in our hands - a crisis whose most visible and terrifying manifestation is the mass hunger, and not only the mass poverty, that now grips the land and which government itself has acknowledged - it is because in this post-industrial age, we remain a nation of 80 million mired in the pre-industrial stage of history.

The question is: Why have we remained stuck in the pre-industrial age of history when neighbors once more impoverished and backward than we are have either graduated, or are dramatically in the process of graduating, into the age of science and industry?

And the answer is that it has been planned that way.

From the beginning, it was planned in Washington that the Philippines shall remain essentially a raw material economy in order to service the raw material requirements of an industrial Japan.

The Dodds Report and the origin of the Philippine crisis

In 1946, the Truman administration adopted the recommendation of the report which proposed that Japan be developed as the primary, if not sole, industrial powerhouse in the Asia-Pacific region and that countries like the Philippines should be preserved as raw material economies, obviously to service the requirements of Japan's factories. As the Asia-Pacific war came to a close, the U.S. obviously made a fateful decision to utilize Japan as the base from which to project U.S. military power, and that required the development of Japan as an industrial powerhouse. But since Japan is a nation bereft of natural resource, the plan obviously required that countries like the Philippines be preserved as raw material economics to ensure Japan with a continuing and permanent source of raw material.

We owe our knowledge of the Dodds Report to the late Salvador Araneta who, during his self-exile in Canada during the martial law years, uncovered the existence of the document and denounced it in his book America's Double? Cross of the Philippines.

These were Araneta's denunciatory words, as he explained the failure of the nation to industrialize: "The indifferent economic development of the country ... was due to America's policy toward Japan and the Philippines. This policy was the result of the Dodds Report which Truman accepted and which had as its objective to make Japan the industrial workshop of Asia and the Philippines a mere supplier of raw materials."

As Araneta bitterly continued: "We do not argue against the wisdom of providing Japan with the means to rehabilitate herself and allowed to become an industrial country once again, although this was contrary to the prior recommendation of a post-war planning committee headed by Secretary Morganthau, a recommendation which was in line with the prevailing sentiment at the end of the war. But certainly we can argue against a policy that would make Japan the exclusive industrialized country in the Far East, for such a policy was most detrimental to the Philippines. Indeed, the United States could not justify a policy that provided all kinds of stumbling blocks, to the industrialization of her ally (Philippines) in the war against Japan. As a result of this policy, industrialization in the Philippines suffered severe setbacks…”

It was a division of labor, or of functions, which the Dodds, Report crafted for America's allies in the Far East.

The Dodds Report explains the continuing obsession to this day of U.S. foreign policy to keep the Philippines a free and open market for imports because a liberal import policy - another name for free trade - ensures that this country will never be able to industrialize and take the same protectionist, nationalistic developmental strategy that enabled once poorer neighbors like Taiwan, Malaysia and Thailand, to transform into the newly industrialized countries that they are today.

The geopolitical plan embodied in the Dodds Report explains what the late Claro M. Recto described as "America's anti? industrialization policy for the Philippines."

Although Recto had no knowledge of the existence of the Dodds Report at the time - its existence would surface only in the '70s after Araneta exposed it - his enormous analytical power enabled him to deduce from policy statements of U.S. officials that behind U.S. policy in this country was a malevolent design to see to it that we never industrialize.

Conclusive proof of what Recto described as America's "anti-industrialization policy for the Philippines" came when Marcos formally launched an industrialization program in the late ‘70s based on 11 heavy industries led by the steel, petrochemical and engineering industries. The announcement of that plan was swiftly followed by protest from the IMF and the World Bank and the pro-American technocrats in the Marcos cabinet led by no less than his then Prime Minister. In the end, after four years of struggle with the IMF, the World Bank and his own technocrats over his industrialization plan, Marcos gave up the plan but not until after he had expressly denounced a conspiracy between his own technocrats and the IMF-WB to keep the Philippines under the heels of the industrial powers.

Soon after his election to the presidency, Joseph Estrada in an interview with Asiaweek confirmed that the U.S. has indeed sabotaged the industrialization plan of Marcos.

The U.S. anti-industrialization policy for the Philippines is what those IMF conditionalities are really about. The anti-industrialization policy has been implemented all these years through the IMF conditionalities and it isn't any coincidence that for the last forty years this country has been under the continuous economic supervision of the IMF.

There is no country in the world that can claim to be under the supervision of the IMF for even a fraction of that time. And it isn't coincidence either that this country, which has been under the continuous supervision of the IMF for 40 years, is the only country in the region that isn't making any headway toward industrialization.

When the Asean was founded in the early 160s by the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Singapore, not a single one of them was an NIC. Today, only the Philippines remains outside the magic circle of NICs. The four other co-founders of the Asean are now acknowledged NICs.

That should explain why the Philippines has the longest and oldest communist insurgency in the region.

A nation of 80 million without even the capability to produce a decent hammer or a decent toy gun can't possibly have any future except hunger.

We are today a hungry people in a land so fertile that one can drop a seed anywhere and see it sprout into something he can eat. And we are hungry because we are a nation frozen by design in the pre-industrial age, preserved as a raw material economy.

The essence and root of our crisis, to stress, are to be found in the nature of the Philippines as a neocolonial state preserved by U.S. post-war imperialism as a raw material economy to service the raw material requirements of an industrial Japan.

The treason of the Edsa Constitution: Art. X1 1, sec. 1, par 2 and the constitutionalization of the formula for underdevelopment and poverty

The ultimate tragedy of a neocolonial state is that even its own Constitution becomes an instrument of its own and perpetual enslavement.

And the Philippine case is a classic illustration.

I invite your attention to Art. XII, Sec. 1, par. 2 of the Constitution which reads as follows: "The State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound agricultural development and agrarian reform through industries that make full and efficient use of human and natural resources, and which are competitive in both domestic and foreign markets. However, the State shall protect Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.”

That provision you will note automatically prohibits an industrial policy based on the heavy industries and the application of protectionist measures against foreign competition, whether fair or unfair. While the provision stipulates that the "State shall promote industrialization" it simultaneously qualifies that constitutional directive with an entire complex of conditions and limiting reservations which makes it impossible for the State to adopt any industrialization strategy other than one that is specifically and exclusively based on "sound agricultural development and agrarian reform" whatever that means. For example, the provision literally prohibits an industrialization strategy based on the heavy industries, like steel, chemicals, machine tools and machine production.

But that's precisely the kind of strategy that made NICS of our neighbors. Our neighbors - particularly South Korea and Taiwan - didn't transform into newly industrialized countries through the industrialization strategy explicitly mandated by the above-cited provision of our Constitution. Those countries, imitating Japan, pursued an industrialization strategy anchored on the development of industries based on and moved by machine power rather than on "sound agricultural development and agrarian reform."

A real industrialization program is one that is based on what is known as the capital goods industry - industries based on machine power and the production of what is known as the means of production. Any other industrialization program can only be a program based on light consumer industries that are totally dependent on industrial raw material and industrial machines produced by the industrialized countries.

You will further note that the constitutional provision insists that industries should be competitive in both the domestic and foreign markets. With that provision, there is hardly any industry that can qualify for government support and protection, and that is precisely what the provision intends. That provision serves as justification for our reckless entry into GATT and the equally reckless accelerated tariff reduction program of the government - programs which have contributed heavily to the bankruptcy of National Steel Corporation, the closure of Caltex refinery and the financial problems of an enterprise like Hacienda Luisita, all of whom have attributed their crisis to the flood of imports unleashed by the government's commitments to the WTO.

No country rose from rags to riches through industrialization by exposing its industries to foreign competition the way we have done.

Examine the industrial policies of the Asian NICs and you will see how protective those policies are of their basic industries, even if these are not competitive in the foreign markets. While the constitutional provision does provide that the State shall protect Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition, it doesn't define what unfair foreign competition means. For example, we have exposed our agricultural sector to competition from subsidized agricultural imports, but the authorities don't consider that a contravention of the Constitution. The result is that even the agricultural sector has been marginalized. Apparently, the authorities see nothing wrong with pitting our farmers, most of whom hardly made it to sixth grade, with the corporate farmers of the industrial countries, who do their farming with the aid of satellites.

The authorities must be reminded that any underdeveloped economy struggling to industrialize would have to protect its basic industries from foreign competition, whether fair or unfair. To insist that even infant industries should be competitive in the foreign markets would be tantamount to killing these infant industries from the start.

he question is: Why did the authors of the present Constitution feel it necessary to qualify the industrialization mandate with the kind of restrictions they placed on it?

And the answer is that the authors of the cited provision were the very elements who had opposed the heavy industrialization program launched by Ferdinand Marcos in 1979. The Marcos industrial program was based the establishment of industries driven by machine power and not - repeat, not - by "sound agricultural development and agrarian reform" as stipulated by the present Constitution.

In brief, no less than the Constitution has become the barrier to the real industrialization of our economy. Under the "industrialization" provision of the Charter there isn't any way that this country can transform into a newly industrialized country or NIC.

Which means that there isn't any way we can get out of the poverty trap which has now mutated into a hunger crisis.

ARTICLE XII, SEC. I PAR. 2 OF THE CONSTITUTION IS THE BEST EVIDENCE OF OUR STATUS AS NEOCOLONIAL STATE. IT IS ALSO THE ULTIMATE WEAPON WHICH ENSURES THAT THE ANTI-INDUSTRIALIZATION AGENDA OF THE DODDS REPORT WILL REMAIN UNCHALLENGED BY ANY GOVERNMENT ELECTED UNDER THE PRESENT CHARTER.

If by some miracle we should have a government tomorrow bent on industrializing the economy by adopting the same industrial policies that have made industrialized countries of our neighbors, such a government would run afoul of the Constitution.

WHAT THEN IS TO BE DONE?

Complete the unfinished nationalist revolution of Bonifacio. What needs to be done is clearly to forge a national coalition of forces committed to recovering the sovereignty which American imperialism wrested from Bonifacio's revolution and to transform the Philippines from the neocolonial state that it is to the truly sovereign and independent state that it claims to be and should be.

Only when the Philippines becomes a truly sovereign and independent state can it then proceed to pursue the kind of developmental policies necessary to lift the economy out of the pre-industrial age of history and to catapult it to the ranks of newly industrialized countries.

Three processes that should be unleashed if social peace is to be achieved. Such a coalition could be forged on the basis of a program that would unleash three vital processes, namely: The process of decolonization, the process of industrialization and the process of economic democratization.

Only when these three processes are unleashed simultaneously, through a program of government crafted specifically for that purpose, can the nation begin the journey towards social peace. The reason is that social peace can only come with social justice and economic democracy.

But social justice and economic democracy can come about only if there is economic development, and economic development can come about only with an industrial revolution which in turn can come about only with national independence. I propose accordingly that no time be lost organizing a national coalition based on a program that would unleash the three processes of de-colonization, industrialization and economic democratization.

In 1986, I proposed such a program to the then ongoing Constitutional Commission - which that body completely ignored. I now propose that that program be adopted as a working basis of dialogue among all elements in Philippine society determined to transform the Philippines into a truly sovereign and independent state so that it may proceed with the war on mass poverty and thereby pave the way for the much longed social peace which has long eluded us. That program is embodied in a slim volume I authored titled Towards a New Economic Order and the Conquest of Mass Poverty, and which I incorporate by reference in this paper. That program, incidentally, is a synthesis of the basic principles found in the program of the Movement for the Advancement of Nationalism and the Vatican encyclicals which condemn laissez-faire capitalism and justify on moral grounds the principle of state activism in the economy.

Along with the program outlined in Towards a New Economic Order and the Conquest of Mass Poverty, I recommend the adoption, as a working basis of dialogue, an emergency program of government proposed by the Citizens Committee on the National Crisis last January, which I also incorporate by way of reference.

We must complete Bonifacio's unfinished revolution if we are to face up to the crisis that has made this only Christian nation in Asia a humanitarian disaster, where 80 percent of Filipino households live under hunger conditions.

The imperatives of national survival and the revolution against hunger which has now overtaken us call for nothing less than the revolutionary nationalism which forged Filipinos into one nation.

Only when the country commits itself to a program of government that would unleash the three processes of de-colonization, industrialization and economic democratization can it begin the march toward social peace because only a government committed to the unleashing of those three processes would have the credibility to deal with the insurgents and the secessionists. That is one way of saying that the road to social peace begins with the struggle to regain the sovereignty and independence which U.S. imperialism stole from Bonifacio's revolution.

That sovereignty and independence should be recovered at all cost if we are to survive as a viable society.

One final and concluding note: Debt repudiation

There isn't any way we can proceed to retrieve our sovereignty and independence unless we first repudiate the foreign debt. The repudiation of that debt should be the starting point of any genuine effort at national independence and sovereignty.

I have written the Senate a letter-memorandum outlining the case for unconditional debt repudiation and I incorporate that letter-memorandum to this paper by way of reference. I suggest that the Pilgrims for Peace initiate a signature campaign urging the Senate to adopt the letter-memorandum for debt repudiation.

Such a campaign could well serve as the catalyst for a nationwide coalition that would complete the unfinished revolution.

The principal contradiction

The contradiction between colonialism and nationalism remains the principal contradiction of Philippine society. To the resolution of that contradiction all other contradictions should be subordinated. The road to peace starts with that. It starts with the drive to eliminate colonialism in all its forms and from whatever source.

Recto, the consummate Filipino nationalist and Mao, the consummate Chinese Communist, will shake hands on that.

“IT’S GMA’S PAYBACK TIME ” - COURAGE

Press Release
by: COURAGE

Government employees are restive. Many government offices are slated for abolition, privatization, mergers, transfer, reorganization and rationalization which would. Almost everyday, Executive Orders in order to implement these are issued by Malacanang, the most recent of which is EO 366 or the rationalization of the functions and operations of the agencies under the Executive Branch of the government. Recent estimates range 300,00 to 420,000 government workers shall be affected by the administration’s streamlining efforts.

And the employees have reasons to be upset. For while tenured rank and file employees are being targeted for lay-off, early and forced retirement, the President is creating new offices and appointing new officials.

Since July this year, 8 new offices were created with 10 new cabinet level positions appointed to wit: Office the Presidential Adviser on Job Generation headed by former DA Secretary Luis Lorenzo Jr., Office of the Cabinet Officer for Provincial Events – Conrado Limcaoco, Offcie of the Political Adviser – Gabriel Claudio, Office of the Communications Director – Silvestre Afable, Presidential Adviser on Revenue Enhancement or PARE – Narciso Santiago and the Office for External Affairs – Eduardo Pamintuan (former NHA General Manager).

New Presidential advisers and consultants were also appointed such as Presidential Adviser for New Government Centers (Rodolfo del Rosario, former Davao del Norte Governor), Presidential Adviser for Rural Electrification (Francisco Silva, former NEA Chief), Pres’l. Adviser for Trade and Development (Rodolfo Severino, former Sec. Gen. Of the ASEAN), Pres’l. Adviser for Region VI (Raphael Coscolluela) and Pres’l. Assistant for Transport and Tricycle Concerns (Ariel Lim).

COURAGE the mother organization of government workers nationwide scored the Arroyo Administration’s “obvious double standard and political accommodations at the expense of the employees”.

“The cash-strapped government while pushing for streamlining of government workers is creating new offices and even allocating millions of funds for its operations to accommodate its political lackeys or those who helped her during the election”. COURAGE National President Ferdinand Gaite cited the new Office of External Affairs, which according to reports duplicates the functions of other government agencies such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the National Anti-Poverty Commission. “Pamintuan’s minions at the OEA have nothing in their credentials to speak of aside from their former links with the militant cause oriented groups which clearly, they capitalized on to corner their posts. These are the same people behind the Kasimbayan and Pro-Gloria machinery of the administration during the elections where millions of government funds where siphoned to, in order to ‘sell’ a candidate the masses so detested”.

Gaite also pointed out Jun Santiago’s appointment as PARE the offcie which was created “to help govt find ways to ease current fiscal crisis”. Santiago is the husband of Senator Miriam Santiago who defected to the administration’s ticket before the election and a kumpare of President Arroyo who is Ninang to their adopted children.

As a sign of protest, employees of the National Housing Authority, Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) and the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) today staged simultaneous noontime rallies in front of their respective offices. Said agencies are targetted for privatization.

COURAGE anounced that they will hold a nationwide protest against rationalization, privatization, transfer and other forms that directly undermine the employees’ jobs on October 28. Thousands of affected employees are expected to participate nationwide. #

On the Corruption in the AFP: Worse than “Terrorists”

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Pagpupugay Kay Kasamang Ver

“TINAMAAN KAYO NG SAMPUNG PATUNOG’…may diin…may tulak…may pinatutungkulan! Mga katagang madalas mamutawi sa bibig ng taong laman ng mga kilos-protesta sa lansangan na sa harap man ng mga anti-mamamayang puwersa ay handang makipagbanggaan at makipagdikdikan. Taas ang kamaong isinisigaw… KARAPATAN, KALAYAAN at KATARUNGAN!

Sino ba ang taong ito na nagtataglay ng diwang mapagkaisa na walang pag-aalinlangang gumagampan ng tungkuling nakaatang sa kanya? Sino siya na handang isaisantabi ang sariling kapahingahan at walang pagod na nagpaparoo’t parito para lamang papag-ugnayin at ganap na pagkaisahin ang noo’y binubuong alyansa ng mga puwersa ng mga kawani sa UP Diliman at ng sa UP Manila/PGH? Sino siya na isinasakripisyo ang sariling kalusugan na kahit may mabigat na karamdaman ay hindi iniinda at bagkus ay buong tatag na humarap sa mga pagsubok at buong sigasig na sumuong sa mga pakikibaka para sa kapakanan ng lahat? Sino siya na hanggang sa huling sandali ng kanyang buhay ay “pagsilbihan ang sambayanan” pa rin ang linyang taglay at walang kahinaang ipinakita kundi lalong pagpupursiging ganap na paglilingkod sa bayan?

Siya si G. Virgilio Panganiban o Ka Ver. Sa bawat indayog ng kanyang mga kamao, sa bawat katagang pinakakawalan at sa bawat padyak ng mga paa na may halong panggigigil, damang-dama ang kaseryusohan sa kinapapaloobang laban, laban na hindi biru-biruan at walang anyo o bahid ng paglalaro na maging ang banta ng sakit ay walang puwang para bigyan ng pansin. Patuloy at patuloy pang gumanap ng kanyang gawaing pag-oorganisa sa masa! Binura ng namamayaning determinasyon at nag-aalab na adhikain ang lahat ng takot at panghihina at taas-noong tinatanaw ang nalalapit na pagkakamit ng tagumpay sa isinusulong na Pambansa Demokratikong Pagkakaisa ng Sambayanang Pilipino tungo sa isang tunay at ganap na pagbabago.

Si Ka Ver ay di lang isang mabait at responsableng ama na nagtaguyod sa kanyang mga anak na sina Beverly at Melvin, o tapat na kabiyak ni Ka Letty na katuwang niya sa pangangalaga sa katatagan ng isang maipagmamalaking pamilya, o kaya’y kaibigan na kahit saan magtungo’y maraming kakilala. Si Ka Ver ay isang kasama. Kasama sa paghahawan ng mabalakid, baku-bako at sira-sirang landas ng pagbabago, kasama rin sa mga tagapaglikha ng kasaysayan at nagtatayo ng bagong pundasyon na sandalan ng darating na henerasyon. Siya ay kasama sa pagpapalaya ng bayan. Kaya’t ang kanyang pagkamatay ay di dapat pag-aksayahan ng luha ng kalungkutan. Hindi siya nawala! Pisikal na kaanyuan lamang ang umalis habang ang diwang taglay niya ay nananatiling kapiling natin…buhay na buhay at kasa-kasama sa pagsusulong ng tunay, palaban at makabayang adhikain tungo sa isang makabuluhan, makatarungan at malayang kinabukasan.

Mga kasama, kung may luha mang pumatak mula sa ating mga mata ay luha iyon ng panghihinayang… panghihinayang na di na maririnig ang kanyang tinig na sa bawat pagkilos natin ay lalong nagpapainitt, nagbibigay buhay at nagpapataas ng moral sa ating pakikibaka. Mga luha ng pagmamalaki dahil mayroon tayong Ka Ver na isang tunay na organisador at ehemplo ng katatagan, isang matibay na moog na di magigiba kaylan man, balon ng katitikan ang taglay na karunungan at balwarte ng pakikibaka ang kanyang kabuuan.

Mabuhay ka Kasamang Ver!

All UP Workers Union Manila
Ika-9 ng Oktubre 2004

Si Kasamang Ver o Virgilio Panganibaan ay siyang National Executive Vice President ng All UP Workers Union (2001-2004). Isa siyang Business Manager (SG 22) sa UP Press. Siya ay binawian ng buhay noong ika-9 ng Oktubre 2004 sa edad na 56, matapos atakehin sa puso.

Salaries of Public Health Workers: Rice and Salt Subsistence

PRESS RELEASE
October 11, 2004

Reference: JOSSEL I. EBESATE
Telephone No: 404-3721
Mobile Phone No: 09189276381

After going bald in thinking of means to make both ends meet amidst the ever-increasing prices of goods, now comes the reality of Public Health Workers’ nearing to a hand-to-mouth existence.

Health Workers of the country’s largest state hospital, again launched today a picket rally with noise barrage in front of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) to emphasize the urgency of their call for a P3,000.00 across the board salary increase for all government employees. This is, following another round of increases in the prices of oil, transport fares, and electricity rates. To further dramatize the worsening economic plight of the Public Health Workers, who have chosen to remain in the country, the protesting PGH Health Workers eat their lunch consisting of rice and salt at the PGH Flagpole Stage. The increase in electricity rates starting on October billing was particularly worrisome to the protesting Public Health Workers because aside from the increase of 28.52 centavos per kilowatt-hour for residential consumer of more than 100 kWh a month; government hospitals will also pay an additional 43.56 centavos per kWh.

The activity held during lunch break (12:00 – 1:00 PM) was again spearheaded by the All U.P. Workers Union, Manila Chapter.

“The elimination of cross-subsidy on government hospital will translate to an average of about P1 million in additional cost per month to PGH, further depleting the already lacking budget allocation for patient services,” says Mr. Jossel Ebesate the Union’s Chapter President. “The monthly take home pay now of most of our Public Health Workers drived us on a rice and salt subsistence, it is already an ominous sign to Malacañang and the ruling elite!” added, Mr. Ebesate.

The increase of 28.52 per kWh for individual household translates to a minimum of P30 additional expense per month on electric bill alone. The added expense adds up to the monthly poverty threshold in the NCR of P16,862.00 (February 2004/NSCB). In contrast, the gross monthly salary of a PGH Utility Worker I (SG1) is just P5,082.00, Nursing Attendant II or Clerk III (SG6) is P7,606, Nurse I (SG10) is P9,939.00, while that of a Medical Officer III (SG18) is P15,831.00, still below the poverty threshold.

Aside from the All U.P. Workers Union, the said activity was supported by the All U.P. Academic Employees’ Union, the PGH Physicians’ Association, the Utility Workers Association of PGH and the Alliance of Health Workers. ###

UPDATE on the Rice Subsidy

Yesterday afternoon, October 4, a pre-bidding conference with prospective bidders for our rice subsidy was held by the UP Manila Bids and Awards Committee I (BAC I). The All UP Workers Union Manila was represented by Mr. Ernesto Ragudos upon my request as I have a prior speaking engagement with 2nd year nursing students of the Manila Central University (Kalookan).

Those who participated were the Primavera Rice Mill Corp. (the previous rice supplier) and Masaganang Sakahan (a Land Bank Subsidiary).

Based on the bidding schedule, the bids will be opened on Monday, October 18, 2004 and delivery of rice is expected one week later. The Union has already opted to have the delivery of rice in the offices and no longer through house-to-house.

There were some problems from PGH but we consider these as procedural in nature that should be addressed by approporiate levels and offices without necessarily delaying further the bidding and delivery schedule.

For those who kept on asking (there were reports that there was already a circulated petition that opted for cash rather than rice) if the fund for rice subsidy would be taken from the P5,000.00 year-end incentive bonus, we reiterate our position that we are against such arrangement. About a month ago, we have already queried the UP Central Administration and we were told by Vice President Martin Gregorio that at this point in time we are only talking here of the rice subsidy, the year-end incentive bonus was yet to be discussed by Management, noting the possibe implications of the austerity program of the National Government.

Considering such responce, we are advising our colleagues especially those from PGH Budget Office to refrain from speculating or disseminating unfounded perceptions. UP Manila's Vice Chancellor for Administration Dr. Arlene Samañiego had already talked with UP Manila and PGH Budget people regarding this matter upon query also from our end.

We note that although the P5,000 Year-end Incentive Bonus was already included in the Internal Operating Budget for 2004 while the P1,000 rice subsidy was not; it is not correct to say at this time that the P1,000 for rice subsidy was taken from the P5,000 UP Bonus - until such time that the Board of Regents had already decided on our Year-end Incentive Bonus.

Indeed, nobody, not even the UP Central Administration could forecast what would happen within the next 2-3 months especially on our fund releases from the DBM considering the twisted priorities of the government. That is, if in a worst case scenario, the DBM withheld our remaining fund releases for the rest of year. In such case, our accumulated savings so far and income would not be enough to cover our budgetary requirements for the rest of the year.

It is therefore within our hands if we just let those people with twisted minds in government to kept on their "irritating entertainment" and self-serving pursuit rather than serve the interest of the people. Or, we the people, show them the exit door.

Can we count on you? or you will just remain a kibitzer on such scenario?

Hanggang "usi" na lang ba tayo kahit nilulublub na sa putikan ang ating Inang Bayan at ginugutom na ang marami sa ating mga kababayan?

Winston Garcia and the Plunder of GSIS

A welfare agency is supposed to look after its members so its funds must be managed well and spent prudently. However, as alleged by critics, it takes only one abusive, highly paid official to profit from the moneys contributed by underpaid employees, much to the consternation of the supposed beneficiaries.

BY DABET CASTAÑEDA
http://www.bulatlat.com/news/4-35/4-35-garcia.html

This government corporation was established for a good cause but it has now become a symbol of corruption.

The Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) was created by Commonwealth Act No. 186 on November 14, 1936, a year after the inauguration of the Philippine Commonwealth. It was mandated to provide and administer compulsory and optional life insurance, retirement benefits, disability benefits for work-related contingencies and death benefits.

Today, about 1.5 million government employees from various agencies, local government units and government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) are members of the GSIS.

The GSIS’ workforce currently consists of 3,104 employees, 52 percent of whom are in the head office at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) complex in Pasay City. The remaining 48 percent are in the 48 branches and 78 satellite offices nationwide. They are unionized under the Kapisanan ng mga Manggagawa sa GSIS (KMG or workers union) which has about 800 members in the head office alone.

Lost mandate?

Lawyer Jose Cortes, a former director of the Bureau of Legal Assistance of the Department of Agrarian Reform, told Bulatlat over the weekend that today, the GSIS has almost lost its mandate. “Nakalimutan na ang element of service” (They have already forgotten the element of service.).

Cortes retired in 2000 when he reached the retirement age of 65. He enjoyed medical assistance benefit during the first three years of his retirement. However, since mid-2003, he has not received a single cent of his medical assistance benefit.

He said he has traveled back and forth from his home in Malabon to the GSIS head office in Pasay City to inquire about his reimbursements. “The last time I asked, I was told that there is no fund to pay for my medical needs,” Cortes said.

Lost billions

KMG President Albert Velasco, who is also a lawyer, said in a separate interview with Bulatlat, that the GSIS acquires billions every month from the employees’ mandatory contributions. These contributions, called premiums, should go directly to the trust fund, he explained.

Citing the annual report of the GSIS for 2003, premium payments totaled P40 billion ($710.48 million, based on an exchange rate of P56.30 per US dollar) reported under the social insurance fund.
Velasco alleged that the money is being used by GSIS President and General Manager Winston Garcia for his “personal quirks.”

Documents acquired by the KMG show that Garcia made the following extravagant investments: a P1-billion ($17.76-million) loan to the Public Estates Authority; purchase of a P611.8-million ($10.87-million) property in London to pay for the Philippine Embassy office there; and the purchase of various paintings, among them Juan Luna’s Parisian Life which cost the GSIS P45.4 million ($806,394.32).

In his first 10 months in office, Garcia had cash advances amounting to P5.25 million ($93,250.44).
From September 2003 to July 2004, records showed that Garcia had P6,883,006.63 ($122,255.89) in miscellaneous disbursements.

He approved a P700-million ($12.43 million) computerization project even if, according to the KMG, the same computer functions and programs can be obtained for P40 million ($710,479.57) through the GSIS branches.

Garcia also spends P300,000 ($5,328.60) a month for advertisements while spending another P200,000 ($3,552.40) a month for personal legal assistance.

It is this alleged grave misuse of the government employees’ pension fund that has kept Garcia under fire and it comes as no surprise that there is now a groundswell of support for his ouster.

Garcia has denied all charges and challenged his critics to face him in court. His superior, President Macapagal-Arroyo, has asked the embattled GSIS president to explain and she made assurances that everything will be transparent. Bulatlat

A Report on the September 29, 2004 Senate Committee on Education’s Technical Working Group Meeting on the UP Charter

This was an excerpt from an e-mailed Report from Prof. Judy Taguiwalo, National President of the All UP Academic Employees Union. The administrative sector (All UP Workers Union) especially from Manila Chapter although invited for the said Senate Committee TWG Meeting, was not able to send a representative because of tight schedule (we have an emergency Expanded Executive Board Meeting yesterday at around 9:00 for a discussion of our Discussion Guide for the P3,000.00 Salary Increase campaign, and other related plans for the said campaign. Considering our hospital setting (PGH) it is always a struggle to go get people on short notice.

Delen was informed only on September 27 that a meeting of the Technical Working Group for the UP Charter Bills in the Senate was to be held on Wednesday, September 29

Delen, Edvil, Judy, Marco and Ken attended the meeting which was presided by Atty. Quimbo, COS of Sen. Flavier and staff of senators who are members of the Committee on Education.

The UP Administration was represented by VP Diokno, VP Butch Dalisay, VP Rodriguez, Pritchie Legazpi, and two or three other members of the Legal Office.

What actually transpired was again presentations on three key areas: democratization, commercialization and exemption from SSL (which Marco suggested for inclusion). While VP Diokno felt that the discussion was redundant and wanted to proceed to the presentation of a consolidated bill, Atty. Quimbo explained that the process was decided upon by his principal and while he consulted the latter during the break in the hearing, continued with the process.

On governance

We reiterated our position that after 100 years a change in the governance structure from a BOR to a democratically elected UP System Assembly is necessary given that UP has grown from one unit to seven constitutent universities with more than 50,000 students. UPSA will allow representation from Mindanao, Visayas, Baguio, LB, Manila,Diliman and avoid the current Manila-centric composition of the Board. The mere expansion or changes in the BOR would not necessitate a new UP Charter as this would only require an amendment in the present charter.

Academic concerns would still be the purview of the faculty as the Univesity Councils retain the power it is enjoying at present.

The link of UP to the national government is retained through the retention of the membership of the Chair of CHED, the Chairs of the House and Senate Committees on Higher Education and on Education, respectively

There was not too much discussion on these as the lines are quite drawn between a democratically elected UPSA and a small BOR. I think our strength here, relative to the interest of some of the Senators (Pimentel, Biazon) is the concern about the BOR composition being Manila-centric.

There were discussions on actual problems such as the unilateral and anti-democratic actions of the UPLB Dean and the intervention of Pres. Nemenzo in the process of the selection of the Dean of the UP College of Nursing. Diokno said that Pres. Nemenzo was merely concerned about the application of a May 2004 decision of the BOR which was supposed to be for UP Diliman alone (the removal of a search committee, under certain conditions, in the selection of the officers of the university). Once this was clarified, the Dean selected by the College Assembly of the UPCN was appointed. (I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT HERE, BUT NOT IN THE SENATE HEARING, THAT THIS PROCESS WAS ADOPTED BY OUR COLLEGE, CSWCD, IN OUR SELECTION OF OUR NEW DEAN IN NOV. 2003, EVEN WITHOUT THE BOR DECISION) While Marco provided as example that one-semester appointments of more than 150 faculty in Los Banos, Diokno was saying that it was the fault of the Regent and the Acad Union President in LB that up to now she does not have the papers she wanted regarding the cases.

The question was raised by one of the staff whether the problems are really operational rather than structural in nature and again there was an exchange about this.

On commercialization

Delen read the section of HB 2327 (Section 28, 3): To prevent the commercialization of the university, programs, projects or mechanisms to generate revenues and other resources from the land grants and other real property entrusted to the University should be consistent with university’s academic mission and orientation as the premier state university and shall not be meant to replace, in part or in whole, the annual appropriation provided by the national government to the university. Such programs, projects or mechanisms shall require the approval of the UPSA and shall require the approval of the UPSA and shall be subject to a transparent and democratic process of consultation with university’s constituents” to explain that we are not against the utilization of the land grants and other assets of the university but such utilization should be in consonance with the university’s academic mission and should require the approval of the UPSA.

There were discussions on the question of outright sale of properties such as the Citibank property and the Pandancan property of UP and even a property in Cebu donated by the Yulos. Our position is that exceptional cases may be decided upon by the UPSA but would not require the inclusion of a provision of expanding the powers of the BOR to include the sale of UP properties as these are more the exception rather than the rule.

Judy read from the minutes of the January 28, 2004 Senate deliberations of SB 2587 (the Pangilinan Bill)to remind the meeting that this aspect of the proposal had been raised in the 12th Congress: “Given the temptation to sell properties, Senator Arroyo asked how the properties can be preserved. Senator Pangilinan said that at the proper time, he would propose the deletion of the provisions on outright sale and put in a requirement of two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the Board before a sale or lease could be affected. Senator Arroyo said that he was thinking more of internal safeguards within the Act, noting that UP has been free of scandals so far, probably until it sells real estate assets. He further noted that throughout the deliberations, no satisfactory answers have been provided by representatives of UP”…

While Atty Quimbo initially summarized that there was an agreement to drop the phrase “outright sale”, VP Diokno insisted in its retention to make explicit that this is the power the BOR should have.

In the process of the discussion, VP Rodriguez said that there is no need for consultation with the faculty regarding the disposition of the assets of the University as this is a non-academic matter. Judy commented that he had a short memory as we were together in the 1996-97 opposition to the Javier’s Commonwealth Property Development Plan (CPDP) which was conceptualized and implemented without consultation with the university constituency. Diokno was quick to point out that the opposition was not because there was no consultation but because it was a violation of a law limiting leases to only a 25 year period while the CPDP allowed a lease of 75 years. There was an interesting discussion on the relationship between consultation and transparency and the legality and correction of an action with our side emphasizing that the two are very much interrelated.

On the Exemption from SSL

Marco reiterated the concern of the students, who while recognizing that the faculty and staff of UP together with other government employees are receiving low salaries, an explicit provision exempting UP from the SSL would mean UP has to generate the income for the higher salaries. In turn, this would translate into higher tuition and other fees from the students.

Butch Dalisay wanted to hear from the faculty representatives of UP WIDEM regarding this matter.

Judy reiterated out position on this. We recognize that the salaries of UP faculty and staff are low and should be increased. We also recognize the inherent defect of the SSL which was the basis of the opposition of the All UP Workers Union and other government employees union when this was passed in the early 90s. However, the experience of GOCCS as well as PNU has shown that such an exemption was at the expense of the constituencies (government employees had to pay higher premiums for GSIS insurance and PNU students had to face a 400% tuition fee increase a year after the new PNU charter was passed). She also reiterated that even under the current SSL, the UP administration can look into increasing non-salary benefits (such as housing provisions) for faculty and staff. She also pointed out that the loss of UP faculty cannot merely be attributed to lower salaries but the intradepartmental conflicts and lack of democracy and transparency in the decision-making in the University are factors that should be looked into. A one-sided emphasis on the low salary of UP faculty is self-defeating as UP can never compete with private universities such as Ateneo which charges astronomically high fees or with transnational corporations such as Intel which has pirated several young UP engineering professors.

At the end of the meeting, the staff of Sen. Pimentel wanted to know if the College of Law has a position paper on the charter. VP Diokno assured him that UP will be sending them such as soon as possible

What next

Another Technical Working Group meeting has been set on Oct. 7, Thursday at 9 am to discuss a consolidated bill. The bill will be distributed on October 4. (Note: Everybody from UP Manila/PGH who could spare some time for it, are enjoined to witness/participate in the said meeting.)

Scores Hurt at GSIS Rally Dispersal

Mula sa Tanggapan ni Anakpawis Rep. Crispin B. Beltran

News Release
September 28, 2004
House of Representatives, South Wing Rm 602
Telephone No: 931-6615
Ina Alleco R. Silverio, Chief of Staff
Email: anakpawis2003@yahoo.com
Celphone number 09213907362
Visit geocities.com/ap_news

GSIS security personnel ordered to teargas protestors, scores hurt includingRep. Beltran; solon accuses Garcia of nepotismScores were hurt at 11:30 this morning when the security personnel of theGovernment Service Insurance System (GSIS) lobbed two teargas canisters at the main body of protestors during a rally in front of the GSIS against GSISpresident and general manager Winston Garcia.

Over 200 protestors from the Confederation from the Unity, Recognition andAdvancement of Government Employees (Courage) and the Kapisanan ng Mangaggawa saGSIS (KMG) union of GSIS employees and Anakpawis Party-list were peacefullyholding a demonstration in front of the GSIS building in Quezon City when theywere hosed down by two firetrucks. The strong blasts of watercannons, however, did not deter the rallyists whostood their ground. Anakpawis Rep. Crispin Beltran had just finished delivering his speech of support to the crowd when they were hit doused with water. When it became apparent that the rallyists were not leaving, the securitypersonnel of the GSIS itself approached the gates and lobbed two canisters of teargas at the crowd. This caused the rallyists to immediately disperse as the strong and sharp fumes of the tear gas spread. The rallyists tripped and fell on the pavement as they ran to escape the fumes that stung their eyes, noses and very skin. Many sustained cuts and bruises, and not a few threw up violently.

Rep. Beltran strongly condemned the dispersal, but said that he will not file charges against the security personnel of the GSIS who threw the tear gas. Instead, he said that he is even more determined to push for the immediate relief of Winston Garcia from the GSIS." If there's anyone who should be blamed for all this, it's Garcia. He is desperately clinging to this post when it's very clear that all he has done is make a mess of things. Now, apart from single-handedly making the GSIS one ofthe most corrupt government agencies, he has made the GSIS a bastion of anti-labor practices. The attack against the demonstrators this morning is yet another display of Garcia's arrogance and stubborn refusal to resign in the face of strong protests against him," he said.

Beltran added more fuel to the bonfire against Garcia, saying that that Garcia was guilty of nepotism. He filed yesterday HR 290 calling on investigationsinto the anomalies and irregularities being committed by the GSIS managementand Board of Trustees when it came to hiring and promotions. Beltran said that the union of employees KMG question the appointment of acertain Nita P. Javier as corporate secretary. They pointed out that theJavier's appointment has long been declared by the Civil Service Commission tobe null and void and the latter's Motion for Reconsideration has been denied. Up to the moment of the filing of the complaint and up to the moment of the drafting of Beltran's resolution, however, Javier still assumes the position and receives compensation; Beltran also alleged that the members of the Board of Trustees appointed relatives within the prohibited degree of relationship as will be seen in the following tabulation:

Trustee Relative RelationFlorino Ibanez Aida NoceteElmer T. Bautista Fulgencio Factoran Reynaldo P.Palmiery Hermogenes Concepcion Elenita Martinez Lenie de Jesus IreenIbanez-Dimaano Ildebrando F. Ibanez Iandro F. Ibanez Ma. Laura Consuelo C.Nocete Adrian R. Bautista Geronimo P. Estrella Jennifer L. Palmiery Angel T.Concepcion Jr.Orlando D. Tumala Alex John C. TumalaMa. LS Concepcion DJ Hernandez

Daughter Son Son Daughter Son Son-in-law Daughter-in-law Nephew Nephew Nephew Daughter

"The appointments are nepotic because the appointing authority of the GSIS is the President and General Manager and the Board of Trustees pursuant to Sec. 45of RA 8291 (GSIS Charter), which provides that "The President and General Manager, subject to the approval of the Board, shall appoint the personnel ofthe GSIS in accordance with the Civil Service rules and regulations. " It was also stated in a Supreme Court decision in the case GSIS vs. GSIS Employees Association, 154 SCRA 236 ruled that: "However weighty they may be, recommendation cannot control the discretion of the appointing authority which, in this case, is the General Manager and the Board of Trustees of the GSIS." In the case of CSC vs Dacoycoy, 306 SCRA 425, the Supreme Court ruled that "Under the definition of nepotism, one is guilty of nepotism if an appointment is issued in favor of a relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity or affinity."

The appointment of members of the Board of Trustees to executives positions in the GSIS, Beltran said, is also questionable. This, they point out, is prohibited under Sec. 3 (i) of RA 3019 , as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which provides the following that "Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having material interest in any transaction or act requiring approval of the Board, panel or group of which he is a member and which exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board, committee, or group. Beltran questioned the appointment of Trustees Elmer T. Bautista and Reynaldo P. Palmiery who assumed executive positions as Chief Legal Counsel and Sr.Executive Vice-President respectively. The employees point out that Trustees are much interested in securing positions as executives in the GSIS because as such they will have career positions and regular compensation unlike when they are only Trustees they receive only per diem and representation and transportation allowance (RATA). Garcia himself in a report published in Businessworld (September 24, 2004) defended his appointment of his own sister and executive assistant CarolynGarcia Empemano, saying that that the appointment of family members and relatives to confidential positions in the government was "an accepted practice among top government officials."#

EMPLOYEES FROWN ON RETIREMENT PACKAGE

The All U.P. Workers Union Manila fully supports the following statement by Mr. Ferdinand Gaite, President of COURAGE. Indeed, almost every word now that comes from Malacañang is a doublespeak. The sad truth is that this government is out to save its own neck now, their brethren and their cronies; never for the people, neither for the welfare of the country and for posterity.

“IT’S A CUP OF HEMLOCK, NOT A SILVER PARACHUTE." An early retrenchment not retirement plan”. This was how Ferdinand Gaite, COURAGE National President,described the PhP1 million per taker early retirement package being proposed by Malacañang. Gaite added that the figures being dangled may look enticing at first but once an employee availed of it, only then that the truth will be known - the early retirement plan of the administration is a bait, a sugarcoated bitter pill meant to retrench the personnel of the bureaucracy and abandon basic social services.

Based on Malacañang proposal, those who wish to avail of the package shallreceive a corresponding amount depending on their years of service-50percent of salary for each year of service for those with less than 20years, 75% for those with less than 40 years, and 100% for those with 40 ormore years. These allegedly are on top of the regular retirement benefitfrom the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). But the catch, according to Gaite is that the employees of the former MWSS, National PowerCorporation and Economic Intelligence and Investigation Bureau who availed of the early retirement plan offered by these offices, have yet to receive in full or worst even a fraction of the supposed retirement pay.

“It is also ominous that they will once again tap the GSIS to bankroll theP15 billion allocation for the program. The mismanagement and fund abuse issues raised against GSIS with Winston Garcia at the helm have yet to be settled, now the government will once again dip their hands into our funds. Imagine, money from the employees’ sweat and blood to finance the employees’ early retrenchment.” Gaite also scored Rep. Joey Salceda’s statement that Arroyo’s early retirement program for the government employees “is a solid step of thePresident towards fiscal health and is likely to excite investors”. “A heartless Congressman who would rather please the investors at the expense of the thousands of employees who will lose their jobs. We wonder, how much is he being paid for being the spokesperson of the government’s streamlining program. Salceda being a member of the Economic Manager’s Group of the President should instead subject the President to audit, ask for the liquidations of the expenditures that went beyond the income and receivables of the government especially during the elections.”

COURAGE warns that it will not just the government employees who will be affected by the streamlining program of the government but also the delivery of basic public services. And as such, the government can expect that it will not just face the restiveness of the employees but the general public as well. #

POETRY: Balangiga

The Philippine Financial Crisis and the Neo-Colonial State

Michael Moore, Uncensored

Statement on Magdalo Group's Apology

Press Statement
Promotion of Church People's Response (PCPR)
September 25, 2004

Reference: Rev. Fr. Allan Jose Arcebuche, OFM
National Co-Chairperson, PCPR Contact: 4107623

Challenge to Magdalo leaders: Continue the fight against corruption

We in the Promotion of Church People’s Response (PCPR) believe that whatever is the reason behind the Magdalo leaders’ apology, investigation on the rampant corruption in the military and involvement of the AFP in the series of bombings in Mindanao must be pursued.

It’s apparent that they apologized due to extreme pressure in detention including financial difficulties to support their families.

The Magdalo group accused former DND Secretary Angelo Reyes and former ISAFP chief Brig. Gen. Victor Corpus as the planners of the March 4, 2003 Davao International Airport and April 2, 2003 Sasa wharf bombings. The motives, they claimed, were to affect the listing of the MILF as a terrorist group and to pave the way for increasing US military financial and logistical aid. Through the Mindanao Truth Commission, an independent investigation on the Davao bombings initiated by Christian and Muslim leaders, the sworn affidavits of Capt. Milo Maestrecampo, Lt. Kristopher Yasay and Lt. Jose Dingle lent credence to the existence of a special order within the AFP to lob grenades at civilian targets. Again consistent with the Magdalo group’s exposé, the MILF was repeatedly blamed by the AFP for the Mindanao bombings, and US military presence in various parts of Mindanao through so-called anti-terror war games is ever increasing. In fact, Davao City is being targeted as venue of the next US-RP Balikatan exercises.

GMA, Gen. Reyes, Corpuz and all the guilty officers and leaders of the corrupt government have all the means to force the rebel soldiers to apologize and retract their statements. But our nation cannot truly heal as long as the issues exposed by the Magdalo group remain unresolved.

We challenge the Magdalo leaders and all the decent men and women in the AFP to continue the fight against corruption within the AFP and the government. Though their means in July 2003 were faulty and unacceptable, the message of the Oakwood mutineers against corruption was morally right and must not be simply buried in the nation’s collective memory. We continue to demand justice for the victims of bombings in Mindanao and for all Moro civilians who have become victims of profiling, forced disappearances, illegal searches and arrests. Police and military agents grossly violated due process in resorting to illegal arrest and detention in order to produce suspects, most of whom were Moro civilians.

According to the Mindanao Truth Commission, a total of 9 Moro civilians were abducted including Datu Sabdurah Ala of Ma-a Riverside, Davao City, on April 3, 2003; Ustadz Alimudin Zulkifle, 28, of Sirawan, Toril, Davao City, on April 6, 2003; Lajmar Jumdail, on April 10, 2003; Muslimen Maro, 38, a Maranao and a resident of Mini-Forest, Boulevard, Davao City on April 15, 2003, and a Juanita Ybanez. Four of them continue to be missing. Illegal searches were also conducted in the aftermath of the Davao bombings, such as the raids in Muslim Village and Open Space in Bangkal, Davao City on April 14, 2003. The abusive elements of the Davao Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), Task Force Davao (TFD), and other state agents involved in these human rights violations must be punished along with the real culprits behind the series of Mindanao bombings.

N.B. The All UP Workers Union Manila supports the call that investigation on the rampant corruption in the military and involvement of the AFP in the series of bombings in Mindanao must be pursued even if the Magdalo group's leaders had already seeks an apology for their July 2003 caper. We are also in unison with PCPR in the challenge to the Magdalo leaders and all the decent men and women in the AFP to continue the fight against corruption within the AFP and the government. Indeed our nation can not truly heal and leap forward as long as the issues exposed by the Magdalo group remain unresolved.

FUND OWNERS SCORE MALACANANG'S SILENCE ON GARCIA'S FUND ABUSE

"News about Garcia's wanton use of our funds is no longer a surprise to us. But Malacanang's silence in this obvious display of profligacy amidst its tough talk on sacrifice and belt tightening is appalling".This was the statement of Ferdinand R. Gaite, COURAGE National President on GSIS President and General Manager Winston Garcia's over P5 million cash advances.

In an interview, the leader said the 1.4 million government employees have long called for an investigation and prosecution of Garcia's excessive salaries and perks, and his abuse of the pension fund but these has fallen on deaf ears. The fund members' protests even went as far as calling for Garcia's ouster in 2002 but instead, President Arroyo retained Garcia further bolstering their claim of a possible collusion between Garcia and Gloria. "For why would President Arroyo retain Garcia other than the fact that both are benefiting from each other. And we're not just talking of the Cebu votes here but the siphoning of our funds to bankroll Gloria's Presidential bid. It's about time that Congress investigates not just the salaries and perks of Garcia and other GSIS officials but also order the auditing of the funds of the GSIS and all the questionable investments and policies of the GSIS".

Gaite also criticized the other officials of the GSIS who defended Garcia. "What do you expect from these officials but to save their own kind. They are not just toying with our funds but are splurging it as if these were their own money. They have completely betrayed the trust of the GSIS members". He went further and stressed, "What competence or integrity they are talking about? The purchase of Juan Luna's painting "Parisian Life" which took Php50.6 million from our fund and was eventually disallowed by the Commission on Audit, or the Php1 billion used to finance the Pres. Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard? No amount of reason can justify their windfalls amidst the pitiful benefits and services the fund members are receiving. It is simply criminal to bleed dry the fund which came from our blood and sweat!"

COURAGE also laugh at Garcia's statement of voluntarily giving up Php160,000 of his monthly take home pay of Php200,000. The group claimed, "It wont hurt him a bit because mas malaki ang sinasahod nya kaysa sa sweldo" in obvious reference to Garcia's discretionary fund, cash advances and other perks which amounts to millions. COURAGE launched a nationwide rally of employees today, September 23 where thousands of government employees shall take part. They however assured the public that services will not be affected because they also considered it and ensured that there will be employees left at the frontline of services. #

Note: The All UP Workers Union Manila is one with COURAGE in condemning Malacañang's silence to the mess that was happening in the GSIS. The gall of these people to mess with "our fund." Mga tinamaan sila ng lintik!!! Pera natin yun na inilalaan para sa matinding pangangailangan at pagreretiro - tagapangalaga lamang sila at wala silang karapatang lustayin ang ating mga pinaghirapan!!!

"A Solution Must First-of-All Socially Just"

Patients Kin, Health Workers Decry Low Health Budget

PRESENTATION TO THE SENATE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CHARTER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

Prof. Judy M. Taguiwalo
President, All-UP Academic Employees Union
September 16, 2004


Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate Committee on Education, Arts and Culture and fellow guests of the Committee,

On behalf of the All-UP Academic Employees Union, we would like to thank Senator Flavier and members of the Senate Committee on Education, Arts and Culture for inviting us to make this presentation regarding the proposed charter of the University of the Philippines.

The All-UP Academic Employees Union is the union of academic personnel (faculty and research, extension and professional staff or REPS) of the UP System with Certificate of Registration No. 1167 from the Department of Labor and Employment and the Civil Service Commission. We are in the process of working for recognition as the sole and exclusive negotiating agent of rank-and-file faculty and REPS with the UP administration.

While UP faculty and REPS were originally part of the All-UP Workers Union when it was established in 1987, a July 1992 Supreme Court Decision (G.R. No. 96819) necessitated the formation of two separate bargaining units for UP employees: one for the rank-and-file non-academic personnel and the other the rank-and-file academic employees. Hence in December 2001, the General Assembly of the All-UP Workers Union voted for the separation of academic and non-academic members and the All-UP Academic Employees Union was established. However, the two unions work closely together on common issues and concerns as UP and public sector employees.

Our stand on the need for a new UP Charter:

We are one with the sponsors of the various Senate Bills and with the UP Administration on the need for a new UP Charter. The present UP Charter enacted in 1908 needs to be replaced by a new Charter which will embody the changes that the University has undergone after almost 100 years and make the University more responsive to the times.

However, we differ with regards to two substantive aspects of SBN 226, SBN 566, SBN 1066 of Senators Osmena, Villar Jr., and Angara respectively: the retention of the Board of Regents as the governance body of the university and the section on land grants and other real properties; to wit:

“The Board of Regents may plan, design, approve and/or cause the implementation of contracts, mechanisms and financial instruments, such as joint ventures, long-term leases, fully-owned subsidiaries, securitization and outright sale, to give the University the flexibility to generate revenues and other resources from land grants and other properties.”

A Governance Body Which is Democratically Selected, Representative and Transparent

The issue of democratization is very much at the heart of our support for a governance body composed of elected representatives from the faculty, REPS, administrative staff, students and alumni from the seven constituent universities of the UP System together with the Chairs of the CHED, of the Senate Committee on Education, of the House Committee on Higher Education and the President of the UP Alumni Association. We believe that the Board of Regents, a creation during the American colonial period, has retained its colonial character as a small body not accountable to the principal university constituencies. After almost 100 years, isn’t it about time to democratize the governance system of our premier state university?

The creation of a System University Council (Section 12 of SB 1106, Section 13 of SB 221) is not the answer to our call for the democratization of the governance structure of the University. In fact when we had consultations on our proposal for a UP Charter, a section on a University Senate with powers similar to that of System University Council was dropped after discussions revealed that many of the powers of a University Senate are already exercised by the University Councils of the different constituent universities. Instead the consultation agreed that the formulation of academic policies with system-wide implications such as the University’s Admission Policies or a General Education Program can be done by convening, as the need arises, a special body composed of representatives from the different University Councils rather than creating another layer of bureaucracy in the University structure.

No to Commercialization

Members of the Committee who were part of the 12th Congress, may be aware of the opposition raised by organizations of students, faculty, REPS and administrative staff regarding then SB 2587 or the Pangilinan Bill. That history of opposition included the violent dispersal of our September 9, 2003 rally and the arrest and detention of 10 UP students and three young faculty members. The major locus of that opposition then concerned the same provision on Land Grants quoted above.

While SB 1106 sponsored by Sen. Drilon basically retains the Board of Regents as the governing body of the University, we note that the bill does not contain the explicit subsection on the Board of Regents’ power to commercialize UP mentioned above which the three other bills have. Instead, the bill contains Section 10 (q) which gives the BOR the power “(t)o organize and finance a corporation under the Corporation Code to assist the University in the discharge of its functions”. Is this another way of saying the same thing or does Senator Drilon share our view that the University of the Philippines as the premier state university in the country should not be involved directly in commercial ventures which are not the purview of a state university?

We hold to the belief that the University of the Philippines is the country’s premier state university and that for it to be able to fulfill its role in providing quality but affordable education to our youth, it must focus on its role as an academic institution. However, the trend has been towards the freezing or reduction of government budget allocation for social services including education and a demand from the government for the state universities and colleges to raise their own funds.

But state universities and colleges, based on May 2003 data from the Commission on Higher Education, comprise only 7.51% of the total number of tertiary level educational institutions. Even if we include the local universities/colleges (LUCs) and other state managed tertiary level schools, the percentage share of these is only 10%. Moreover, of the three million students at the tertiary level for AY 2004-2005, only 26% can be accommodated by state universities and colleges. (Bulletin, June 6, 2004)

In sum, tertiary education in the Philippines is in the main already privatized. The pressure on UP and other state universities and colleges to raise their own funds and to go into commercial ventures is another indication of the abandonment of the state and is essentially in consonance with the recommendations of the 1999 World Bank and Asian Development Bank report, Philippine Education for the 21st Century: The 1998 Philippine Education Sector Study (PESS) The ideal system of education, according to PESS, is a “privately provided system, selectively supported with public funding”. It recommends that the “central government should limit its activities to those that cannot be covered well by the private sector” and criticizes the budget increase for secondary and tertiary education during the 80s. According to the study, such increase “has had the predictable effect of undermining the private sector’s share of the education market. Indeed, the sheer size of the private sector is an indication that the private market was satisfying quite well the demand for education at these levels, at least in urban areas.”

Hence our opposition to the section on giving the power to the Board of Regents to enter into securitization, joint ventures and outright sale is an opposition to the continuing trend of the state abandonment of its obligation to provide affordable and quality services to the people, including education.

Special Attention to the Research, Extension and Professional Staff or REPS

There are over 1000 research, extension and professional staff in the University. They are librarians, research personnel, extension personnel with many having master degrees and PhDs. Previously called the academic non-teaching staff or ANTS, the REPS as non-teaching academic personnel have academic eligibilities which are in many cases at par with the faculty. The section on Appointment Requisites (Section 20 of SB 221, Section 18 of SB 1066 and Section 21 of SB 1106) of three of the four bills gives recognition to the REPS by exempting them, together with the faculty from any Civil Service examination or regulation as requisite to their appointment.

However, this same recognition of REPS as a distinct sector of the University is not accorded even in the limited addition to the composition of the Board of Regents in all the proposed bills. The REPS have no separate Regent as the proposed Staff Regent represents both the administrative (non-academic personnel) and the academic non-teaching personnel.
Finally, we would like to put on record that the two substantive content of SB 221, SB 566, SB 1066 and SB 1106 : the retention of the Board of Regents and the provision on giving the BOR the power to enter into commercial ventures which we oppose are intertwined. It would be easier for a small body such as the Board of Regents to accelerate the commercialization and privatization of the University of the Philippines.

Thank you.

Senate Starts Public Hearing on the New UP Charter

The Committee on Education of the Senate led by Senator Juan Flavier have started yesterday its public hearing on the new UP Charter. As of 9:30 AM yesterday there were a total of 6 bills filed by individual Senators to revise the UP Charter. Almost all bills filed have similar features primarily on the the highest governing body (Board of Regents), utilization of UP assets (geared towards commercialization. Our version (UP Widem II) of the revised UP Charter was not yet filed in the Senate

The hearing started at around 9:30 AM with all the twelve members of the committee attending. Our set of speakers were the first to state their positions. Our speakers (in order of acknowedlement by the Committee Chair) Prof. Judy Taguiwalo of AUPAEU, Dr. Ed Villegas and Dr. Delen Dela Paz of AUPEAU, Manila, Mr. Noli Anoos, AUPWU, representative from from the Office of Student Regent and Mr. Ken Ramos from the UP Manila's University Student Council. After all our speakers have finished delivering their respective pieces, the UP Administration's set for spekers follows. The Administration's side (of course favoring all the bills filed) was headed by Vice President Mariz Diokno, representatives from the UP Diliman's University Student Council ad the Medical Student Council, and one other Professor from UP Diliman. The Vice Chancellor of UP Manila Prof. Roland Simbulan also spoke but have a vague position on the issue.

After all speakers for and against the filed bills have finished, each of the Senators present have commented, made some clarificatory questions and their views on the issues raised. In winding up, the chair ruled that considering that the previous committee on education of the 12th Congress had already came up with a report, such report will be adopted and be part of the materials that will be tackled by the Technical Working Group (TWG) that will consolidate all reported bills on the subject. He further ruled that no more public hearings will be called, instead all interested gruops shall be consulted by the TWG while in the process of consolidation.

N.B. Our version of the UP Charter will be filed by the Office of Senator Bong Revilla this week or at most next week.

Government Nurses Shortchanged by 114,000.00 Each

NEWS RELEASE/14 September 2004

For Reference: REP. LIZA LARGOZA MAZA <lizamaza@tri-isys.com>
0920-9134540Tels: 9316268, 9315001 loc7230;
Jang Monte (Public Information Officer) 0917-8226635

GABRIELA Women's Partylist Liza Largoza Maza sought today the investigation of the national government's non-implementation of a salary hike due government nurses since the implementation of the RA 9173 or the Nursing Act of 2002. This, as government nurses, health workers and employees intensified their call for the immediate legislation of a P3,000 across the board salary hike.

According to Maza, "The Nursing Act of 2002 provides for an increase in the basic pay of government nurses from P8,000 or Salary Grade 10 to P14,000 or Salary Grade 15. This means that government nurses have been shortchanged by P6,000 monthly by the national government for almost two years now."The lady solon said, "President Arroyo signed the Nursing Act into law last October 2002. This means that an increase in the government nurses' salaries should have been incorporated in the 2003 budget. At the minimum, nurses should have enjoyed this increase in wages since 2003. Thus, the national government now owes every single nurse in government service since January 2003 as much as P114,000."

Maza is set to file today a resolution calling on the House of Representatives to investigate the non-implementation of the nurses' salary adjustment as provided for in the Nursing Act of 2002. "We cannot just legislate and fall short on implementation to the detriment of our nurses and the delivery of health services."

The Philippine Nurses Association earlier said they have been lobbying for the longest time at the Department of Budget and Management as well as Congress and the Senate for the salary adjustment. But Maza notes, "they shouldn't have had to lobby because it is already provided for in the law."Maza further said, "Our nurses work hard to give patients quality health care and services. They most certainly deserve an increase in their basic pay. Moreover, their present salaries are simply not enough to cope with the skyrocketing prices. It is not surprising that over 13,000 nurses leave the country annually to serve either as nurses or even caregivers and domestic helpers abroad."

"If the national government wants to avert a health crisis of epidemic proportions resulting from the lack of government health workers, then this adjustment in wages is most urgent and necessary," Maza concluded. #

PGH Nurses Go Bald, Demands Pay Hike

WHAT SHOULD A U.P. PRESIDENT BE?

Statement ON THE 2004 SELECTION OF A NEW UP PRESIDENT

ALL UP WORKERS UNION and ALL UP ACADEMIC EMPLOYEES UNION

September 14, 2004

The University of the Philippines is now in the midst of a selection process for a new President. There are 11 nominees to the UP Presidency new UP President will preside in the commemoration of the centennial of UP in 2008.

In 1999, the All UP Workers Union issued the following statement during the search for the UP President who would replace President Emil Javier:

“Officers and members of the All-UP Workers Union have been asked to support this or that candidate. As an organization, the All UP Workers Union does not support any particular candidate. This is due to several reasons.

The selection process remains undemocratic. Under a process of selection which leaves to the Board of Regents the final decision on who would serve as the president of the university in the coming six years, the direct participation of the All UP Workers Union and other sectors of the university is at best only a form of tokenism. We have witnessed in the past selection of the UP president that even with a semblance of participation of the faculty, REPS, administrative employees and students in the form of straw polls, balloting, or show of hands, the popular choice, if he or she was not the choice of Malacanang, was easily disregarded by justifications that the leadership of an academic institution is not a popularity contest. Even this concession to a show of participation has been removed with the elimination of the straw polls, balloting or show of hands, as a key consideration for the selection. It is not surprising then, that the efforts of generating “popular support” for a particular candidate is aimed at influencing members of the Board of Regents or the President of the Philippines, who eventually has the final say in the selection. In the end, the UP President is accountable not to the majority of the university’s constituency but to a handful of people, and especially to the President of the Philippines who has the power to appoint the majority of the members of the Board of Regents. Therefore, the direct participation of the All-UP Workers Union as an organization, would merely mean an exercise in futility or worse, a means to provide legitimacy to a flawed and basically undemocratic process.

The All-UP Workers Union remains consistent in its criteria for the selection of officers of the university. The union as an organization of faculty, REPS, and administrative staff of the university, is committed to advancing the welfare and democratic rights of all employees of the UP and in supporting the just demands of the students and community residents of the university. The union recognizes that the situation and problems of UP employees cannot be divorced from the situation and problems of other government employees and identifies itself with the struggle of the rest of the citizens of the country. It takes to heart the vision of a university that is truly in the service of the Filipino people. Consequently, the union, in previous selection processes of university officials, whether they be chancellors, faculty regents or deans of academic units, has opted to come out with a set of criteria by which candidates for the position may be evaluated prior and even after their selection.

The All-UP Workers Union seeks a UP president who:

• Is committed to improving the welfare of university employees.
• Believes in the democratization of the university and supports efforts of the university constituency to exercise their democratic rights including the right of the faculty, REPS and administrative employees to form and maintain their unions and associations.
• Opposes the commercialization and privatization of the university in whatever forms and guises as these violate the basic character of the UP as a safe university.
• Resists all forms of foreign intervention, whether in the curriculum or in national affairs, that put at risk the autonomy of the university and the sovereignty of the country.”

The selection process for the search of a UP President for 2005-2011 has not essentially changed from the one conducted in 1999. However, in the present context of the continuing attack against state support for social services including education and health; the faster pace of commercialization of the University; the ongoing reign of an anti-democratic chancellor in UP Los Banos; the obstacles to the implementation of salient provisions of the Collective Negotiation Agreement and the struggle for a new UP Charter in Congress, the All UP Workers Union and the All UP Academic Employees Union forward the following specific and additional criteria for the UP President we would support:

1. A UP President who will support a democratic governance structure for the University and explicitly oppose the commercialization and privatization of UP as contained in HB 2327 or the UP Charter of 2004
2. A UP President who will fight for a bigger budget for education and health and for a moratorium in the automatic appropriations for debt payments in the national budget
3. A UP President who will implement the provisions on additional economic benefits contained in the Collective Negotiation Agreement between the UP Administration and the All UP Workers Union signed in April 2002;
4. A UP President who will support the payment of the back COLA of UP employees
5. A UP President who will not tolerate, oppose anti-democratic actions of university officials, and will seriously investigate charges against high ranking UP Officials; such as the charges against the current UP Los Banos Chancellor

===================

UP Presidency Selection

The eleven who accepted the nominations for UP President are:

1. Dr. Consolacion Alaras, former Chair of the Department of English and Comparative Literature,College of Arts and Letters, UP Diliman
2. Dr. Soledad Cagampang-De Castro, former faculty, UP College of Law
3. Dr. Ernesto De Castro, Acting Chancellor, UE Caloocan Campus
4. Dr. Georgina Encanto, former Dean, College of Mass Communication, UP Diliman
5. Ambassador Edgardo Espiritu, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland and Iceland, and former member, UP Board of Regents
6. Dr. Ester Garcia, former Chair, Commission on Higher Education and former Professor of Chemistry, UP Diliman
7. Dr. Federico Macaranas, Executive Director, Asian Institute of Management-World Bank Development Resource Center
8. Prof. Solita Monsod, Professor of Economics, UP Diliman andformer Philippine Socio-Economic Planning Minister (later Secretary)
9. Dr. Emerlinda Roman, Chancellor, UP Diliman
10. Regent Abraham Sarmiento, former Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the Philippines, currently member of the UP Board of Regents
11. Dr. Eduardo Sison, Chairman of the MADECOR Group, a consulting firm based in the Philippines and former faculty, UPLB Institute of Food Science and Technology

Revised Schedule

• UP Baguio, Friday, September 10, 2004; 10 am
• UP Visayas (Iloilo), Wednesday, September 15, 2004; 10 am
• UP Cebu, Thursday, September 16, 2004; 9 am
• UP Mindanao, Friday, September 17, 2004; 10 am
• UP Manila, Monday, September 20, 2004; 9 am
• UP Los Baños and UP Open University, Thursday, September 23, 2004; 1 pm
• UP Diliman, Monday, September 27, 2004; 2 pm

Attendance of the nominees in the public fora is optional; non-appearance in the fora shall not disqualify a nominee. Members of the UP community who will attend a public forum shall be requested to submit written questions before the start of the public forum. The Board has requested the Chancellors to help solicit questions from different sectors. The source of the question shall not be identified during the forum. Only written questions shall be entertained by a panel consisting of the regents present, the Chancellor or his/her representative and the ALL-UP Workers' Union representative. One of the Regents shall chair the panel during the forum.

The criteria for the selection of the UP President (see Update #1) are repeated below to help you think of questions to ask.

1. Stature in the academic profession, administrative capability, national and international reputation as a scholar, probity and moral integrity;
2. Possesses the political will and the political skills to defend and promote academic freedom and institutional autonomy, commitment to academic excellence, a clear and inspiring vision of UP's role in the 21st century;
3. Ability to raise funds without compromising the traditional values and ideals of academia, capacity to manage available resources to sustain the UP modernization program, fairness in dealing with all constituents; does not persecute or dispense special favors; does not engage in factionalism;
4. Preserves the secular and non-sectarian character of UP, maintains and enriches intellectual diversity; does not promote a particular religion or school of thought, keeps UP above politics, but respects the rights of faculty members and students to participate in political debates and campaign for their beliefs within the limits of law.

The BOR is scheduled to interview the nominees during the period October 11-15, 2004.