by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
I have always liked Dick Gordon as the architect of the "Subic miracle", as a very articulate Senator who produced the computerization of elections law (among other advocacy's), and as a life-long Red Cross official who best exemplifies the meaning of the word "volunteer".
This admiration is one of the main reasons why I make it a point to exchange political tsismis with him every time I am in the Senate. And I am always amazed by his off-the-cuff commentaries on the floor debates and the side stories in the Senate.
Dick Gordon has made the plight of government workers (teachers and health workers in particular) one of the pillars of his Platform of Government. He promised to increase the salaries of teachers to P40,000/month in the early presidential debates. Lately, he extended his promise to health professionals who will get P50,000/month under a Gordon presidency.
As an underpaid educator teaching at the University of the Philippines, I am happy that he has decided to give the plight of public sector workers the much needed attention. The University has lost so many of its top-notch professors to the private sector and private universities because it simply can't provide competitive wages. This is the reason why UP officials batted for the exemption from the Salary Standardization Law when they were pushing for the UP Charter. UP got its wish, only to find out later that it could not produce the needed funds to increase salaries.
Upon closer examination, however, Gordon's proposal raises some very disturbing questions that if left unanswered, would show that his promise is a pipe dream, or worse, a terrible nightmare.
First, how much will his proposal cost and where will the money come from?
There are almost 600,000 public school teachers in the country today (www.deped.gov.ph/factsandfigures). The Department of Health (DOH) website has no data on health workers but one can imagine the huge number given the many tertiary and specialty hospitals in this country.
Multiply P40,000 x 600,000 teachers and P50,000 times the number of health workers and you get an idea of the cost of Gordon's proposal.
And it gets worse.
The 40,000/month salary of public school teachers will be higher than the monthly salary of a Full Professor at the University of the Philippines! And a UP Professor must have a PhD, must have published articles in recognized journals, and be judged by his/her peers are worthy of the title "Professor".
Increasing the pay of teachers and health workers will distort the current salary structure and fuel calls for an increase by other public sector workers.
And then imagine the cascading effect of a P40,000/monthly salary of a public school teacher on the rest of the 1.2 million public servants in this country.
Where will the money come from? Gordon has not provided any details.
Second, what will happen to the Salary Standardization Law III (SSL III) that is just being implemented?
The Senate has just passed a joint resolution empowering the Department of Budget and Management to rationalize the pay scale of government workers. Gordon was one of those who voted for this measure. Is his proposal now a new amendment to the SSL III which can not be fully implemented because of funding problems?
Thirds, increasing the salaries of public sector workers will worsen the already distorted personnel salary (PS) cost of the national budget.
Personnel salaries now account for more than 30% of the national budget. Some departments, like the DepEd, have PS costs that take up close to 90% of their budget.
Salaries of government personnel + the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) of local governments + automatic appropriations for debt servicing now account for close to 80% of the budget.
Since the IRA allocation, debt servicing, and PS cost are protected by existing laws, any increase in government salaries will result in budget cuts for critical government programs.
Unless of course Gordon can provide additional funds through new taxes, rationalization of fiscal incentives, and of course the famous "I will reduce corruption".
Finally, assuming some funds will be available, aren't these funds better used to address critical development constraints on infrastructure; address classroom, teacher, and book shortages; modernize agriculture; or make us comply with our Millennium Development Goals obligations?
Running for the Presidency requires the presentation of clear and implementable promises. Gordon needs to provide specifics on his promises. Otherwise, his fiscal irresponsibility will only produce impossible dreams.
Showing posts with label presidency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label presidency. Show all posts
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Noynoy Aquino's Legislative Performance
by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
I was surfing the world wide web last night when I stumbled upon an interview I gave in The Correspondents show entitled Ang Laban Ni Noynoy that was shown when Noynoy Aquino launched his candidacy late last year.
I argued in that show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzDRZgzvZ6A&feature=related) and (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKBZx0tC9RY&feature=related) that Noynoy's legislative performance paled in comparison with the other presidential candidates and that the fact that he has not produced a single law will be raised against him as the campaign period shifts into high gear.
As expected, his poor legislative record has become an extremely heavy albatross that has weighed down his campaign. Many columnists and bloggers have made fun of this situation by saying that the much maligned Senator Lito Lapid is more qualified to become President than Noynoy Aquino because he has, at least, produced one law (RA 9999) that would give tax perks to private law firms that render free legal service to poor clients.
In a portion of his official website called The Truth About Noynoy: Huwag Magpalinlang Sa Mga Sabi Sabi (http://www.noynoy.ph/anti-smear/), Noynoy Aquino's supporters answered the question - Wala ba Talagang Nagawa si Noynoy sa Lehislatura? - this way:
"CLAIM: Walang ginawa si Noynoy habang nakaupo sa senado, at hindi sapat ang kanyang mga hinain para sa serbisyong pampubliko.
TRUTH: Senator Aquino’s legislative record is filled with laws that push for transparency, accountability, curbing corruption and leveling the playing field so that special relationships do not take precedence over quality public service. A good lawmaker must not be judged solely on the number of laws penned, but the quality of these laws in the interest of the public good. Congress is a democratic institution that is also meant to guard against government excesses. Aquino believes we already have many good laws, and what is needed is proper enforcement."
There is something wrong, funny, and misleading about this statement.
1. Official records of the Senate and House of Representatives show that none of Noynoy Aquino's principally authored bills have been enacted into law. Then how can his official website say "Senator Aquino’s legislative record is filled with laws that push for transparency, accountability, curbing corruption and leveling the playing field..."?
A bill is not the same as a law. Thousands of bills are filed every year but very few of these bills get enacted into a law. Bills become law because their authors work hard to pass these through committee, defend its merits on the floor, get their colleagues to vote for their bills on second and third readings, and work with their House of Representatives counterparts to reconcile differences in the Senate and House versions.
Is this poor staff work or simply an attempt to mislead the public?
2. "A good lawmaker must not be judged solely on the number of laws penned, but the quality of these laws in the interest of the public good." True. But if a lawmaker has not even passed a single law, how can he be judged whether his laws are in the interest of the public good?
3. "Aquino believes we already have many good laws, and what is needed is proper enforcement." He may believe this, but this is not a factual statement. Let me enumerate several important bills that need to be enacted into law but continue to languish in the Senate because Senators have been unwilling to act on these:
- The Omnibus Amendments to the Local Government Code (Senate Bill No. 1161) that would correct many of the problems facing the country such as the rampant conversion of municipalities into cities and promote more devolution;
- The National Land Use Code (SBN 3426/843/641/82/76) which would serve as a blueprint for the prioritization and utilization of the country’s land and resources, protect agricultural lands from industrial activities as well as residential conversions, and delineate environmentally protected lands and indigenous peoples’ ancestral lands.
- Civil Service Code of the Philippines (Senate Bill No. 1162) that professionalizes the government bureaucracy and protects it from political interference.
- Freedom of Information Act that will allow citizens to access government documents to combat corruption and hold government officials accountable for their actions.
And the list goes on and on and on...
Poor staff work? or Misleading public relations spin to hide poor legislative performance?
You be the judge.
I was surfing the world wide web last night when I stumbled upon an interview I gave in The Correspondents show entitled Ang Laban Ni Noynoy that was shown when Noynoy Aquino launched his candidacy late last year.
I argued in that show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzDRZgzvZ6A&feature=related) and (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKBZx0tC9RY&feature=related) that Noynoy's legislative performance paled in comparison with the other presidential candidates and that the fact that he has not produced a single law will be raised against him as the campaign period shifts into high gear.
As expected, his poor legislative record has become an extremely heavy albatross that has weighed down his campaign. Many columnists and bloggers have made fun of this situation by saying that the much maligned Senator Lito Lapid is more qualified to become President than Noynoy Aquino because he has, at least, produced one law (RA 9999) that would give tax perks to private law firms that render free legal service to poor clients.
In a portion of his official website called The Truth About Noynoy: Huwag Magpalinlang Sa Mga Sabi Sabi (http://www.noynoy.ph/anti-smear/), Noynoy Aquino's supporters answered the question - Wala ba Talagang Nagawa si Noynoy sa Lehislatura? - this way:
"CLAIM: Walang ginawa si Noynoy habang nakaupo sa senado, at hindi sapat ang kanyang mga hinain para sa serbisyong pampubliko.
TRUTH: Senator Aquino’s legislative record is filled with laws that push for transparency, accountability, curbing corruption and leveling the playing field so that special relationships do not take precedence over quality public service. A good lawmaker must not be judged solely on the number of laws penned, but the quality of these laws in the interest of the public good. Congress is a democratic institution that is also meant to guard against government excesses. Aquino believes we already have many good laws, and what is needed is proper enforcement."
There is something wrong, funny, and misleading about this statement.
1. Official records of the Senate and House of Representatives show that none of Noynoy Aquino's principally authored bills have been enacted into law. Then how can his official website say "Senator Aquino’s legislative record is filled with laws that push for transparency, accountability, curbing corruption and leveling the playing field..."?
A bill is not the same as a law. Thousands of bills are filed every year but very few of these bills get enacted into a law. Bills become law because their authors work hard to pass these through committee, defend its merits on the floor, get their colleagues to vote for their bills on second and third readings, and work with their House of Representatives counterparts to reconcile differences in the Senate and House versions.
Is this poor staff work or simply an attempt to mislead the public?
2. "A good lawmaker must not be judged solely on the number of laws penned, but the quality of these laws in the interest of the public good." True. But if a lawmaker has not even passed a single law, how can he be judged whether his laws are in the interest of the public good?
3. "Aquino believes we already have many good laws, and what is needed is proper enforcement." He may believe this, but this is not a factual statement. Let me enumerate several important bills that need to be enacted into law but continue to languish in the Senate because Senators have been unwilling to act on these:
- The Omnibus Amendments to the Local Government Code (Senate Bill No. 1161) that would correct many of the problems facing the country such as the rampant conversion of municipalities into cities and promote more devolution;
- The National Land Use Code (SBN 3426/843/641/82/76) which would serve as a blueprint for the prioritization and utilization of the country’s land and resources, protect agricultural lands from industrial activities as well as residential conversions, and delineate environmentally protected lands and indigenous peoples’ ancestral lands.
- Civil Service Code of the Philippines (Senate Bill No. 1162) that professionalizes the government bureaucracy and protects it from political interference.
- Freedom of Information Act that will allow citizens to access government documents to combat corruption and hold government officials accountable for their actions.
And the list goes on and on and on...
Poor staff work? or Misleading public relations spin to hide poor legislative performance?
You be the judge.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Something Weird Happened on the Way to Club Filipino
by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
In my Monday blog entitled "The Problem with a Noynoy Presidential Run" I pointed to the problems created by a Mar Roxas-Noynoy Aquino political rivalry and urged the Liberal Party to resolve this problem as soon as possible lest it starts affecting their campaign for the presidency.
I ended the column by asking the question: Will it be Noynoy Aquino for President?
A couple of hours later in historic Club Filipino, Mar Roxas answered my question with his dramatic decision to give way to Noynoy Aquino for the sake of LP unity and the demands of various groups all over country.
I was expecting a Mar Roxas slide to be accompanied by the crowning of Noynoy Aquino as the LP standard bearer and a call to arms for the LP base and support groups for 2010.
It did not happen on Tuesday.
As the whole country waited with bated breath on Wednesday, Noynoy Aquino announced in the same historic Club Filipino that he will be going on a "spiritual retreat" before finalizing his decision for the 2010 elections. He also said that his presidential run would be based on three things: 1) his ability to guarantee that there will really be meaningful changes for society and the country; 2) the availability of logistics for his electoral campaign; and 3) the sentiments of his four sisters about his presidential bid.
Wow!! Whoa!! What??
Something definitely weird happened on the way to Club Filipino.
If Noynoy needed to go on a retreat, consult with his family, gauge his ability to lead the country, get a sense of the logistics for his electoral campaign, wasn't it more logical to talk this out with Mar Roxas, declare his intention to contest the presidency, engage in spirited and issue-based rivalry within the LP, and let the party and its support groups decide, through a convention, on who is best fit to carry the LP banner come November?
And why the rush in Mar Roxas' press conference last Tuesday?
While LP party leaders in media interviews were united in asking everyone to respect Noynoy's desire for self-reflection, many wonder why these same party leaders did not manage the Mar to Noynoy transfer of the mantle of leadership better.
The trail of events has placed both Mar Roxas and Noynoy Aquino in a bind.
For all his efforts over the past year to champion the cause of victimized educational plan holders, lead Senate discussions on the JPEPA, attack GMA's ChaCha, develop advocacy ads to show his concern for the poor, send his trusted political lieutenants to negotiate with local leaders, and criss-cross the country with Korina, people's recollection of Mar Roxas is now been defined almost exclusively in his relinguishing his presidential dream to Noynoy who has not accepted it.
Korina Sanchez has enough reasons to feel bad.
And with his reluctance to lead a country that has suddenly found its moral moorings with the untimely death of former President Cory Aquino, his hesitation to present himself before the Filipino people without a clear vision and platform of government, and the real problem of starting his presidential campaign late compared to the others, Noynoy is now being criticized by political pundits like Benito Lim for being "odorless, tasteless, and colorless" and being asked by GMA's attack dogs to differentiate himself from his parents.
Both Mar Roxas and Noynoy Aquino deserve better. The LP leaders should have managed the trail of events better.
In my Monday blog entitled "The Problem with a Noynoy Presidential Run" I pointed to the problems created by a Mar Roxas-Noynoy Aquino political rivalry and urged the Liberal Party to resolve this problem as soon as possible lest it starts affecting their campaign for the presidency.
I ended the column by asking the question: Will it be Noynoy Aquino for President?
A couple of hours later in historic Club Filipino, Mar Roxas answered my question with his dramatic decision to give way to Noynoy Aquino for the sake of LP unity and the demands of various groups all over country.
I was expecting a Mar Roxas slide to be accompanied by the crowning of Noynoy Aquino as the LP standard bearer and a call to arms for the LP base and support groups for 2010.
It did not happen on Tuesday.
As the whole country waited with bated breath on Wednesday, Noynoy Aquino announced in the same historic Club Filipino that he will be going on a "spiritual retreat" before finalizing his decision for the 2010 elections. He also said that his presidential run would be based on three things: 1) his ability to guarantee that there will really be meaningful changes for society and the country; 2) the availability of logistics for his electoral campaign; and 3) the sentiments of his four sisters about his presidential bid.
Wow!! Whoa!! What??
Something definitely weird happened on the way to Club Filipino.
If Noynoy needed to go on a retreat, consult with his family, gauge his ability to lead the country, get a sense of the logistics for his electoral campaign, wasn't it more logical to talk this out with Mar Roxas, declare his intention to contest the presidency, engage in spirited and issue-based rivalry within the LP, and let the party and its support groups decide, through a convention, on who is best fit to carry the LP banner come November?
And why the rush in Mar Roxas' press conference last Tuesday?
While LP party leaders in media interviews were united in asking everyone to respect Noynoy's desire for self-reflection, many wonder why these same party leaders did not manage the Mar to Noynoy transfer of the mantle of leadership better.
The trail of events has placed both Mar Roxas and Noynoy Aquino in a bind.
For all his efforts over the past year to champion the cause of victimized educational plan holders, lead Senate discussions on the JPEPA, attack GMA's ChaCha, develop advocacy ads to show his concern for the poor, send his trusted political lieutenants to negotiate with local leaders, and criss-cross the country with Korina, people's recollection of Mar Roxas is now been defined almost exclusively in his relinguishing his presidential dream to Noynoy who has not accepted it.
Korina Sanchez has enough reasons to feel bad.
And with his reluctance to lead a country that has suddenly found its moral moorings with the untimely death of former President Cory Aquino, his hesitation to present himself before the Filipino people without a clear vision and platform of government, and the real problem of starting his presidential campaign late compared to the others, Noynoy is now being criticized by political pundits like Benito Lim for being "odorless, tasteless, and colorless" and being asked by GMA's attack dogs to differentiate himself from his parents.
Both Mar Roxas and Noynoy Aquino deserve better. The LP leaders should have managed the trail of events better.
Monday, July 27, 2009
BEAT THE ODDS : Fact Check - Part 2
by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
The annual State of the Nation Address (SONA) by the President before Congress allows political pundits, presidential critics and allies, and the general public to look back, reflect, and try to extract accountability from the occupant of Malacanang.
As the 2009 SONA represents (hopefully) the last report of the President, critics and allies have been girding for a showdown over the past two weeks on television, radio and the print media.
The battle shifted to a higher gear this weekend when the administration bought media space on all major newspapers to trumpet its SONA achievements since 2001. In an almost full-page advertisement entitled "SONA Targets Delivered" the administration trumpeted its achievements on its Ten-Point Program, amply called "BEAT THE ODDS".
How much of these claims are FACT and how much is FICTION?
Let me continue the fact-check.
6. HEALING THE WOUNDS OF EDSA
Claim:
P62.93 billion remitted by the PCGG to the Bureau of Treasury for the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.
National Unity and Reconciliation led to the granting of absolute pardon to former President Joseph Estrada.
Fact Check:
Funds for the CARP - Yes, FACT.
I have never believed that granting pardon to ERAP was an act of reconciliation or that it healed the wounds of EDSA. It in fact made a mockery of the judicial system because a convicted plunderer was pardoned too early and too fast.
The bigger problem is not the wounds of EDSA but the wounds that were created after EDSA. Hello Garci, JocJoc Bolante and the fertilizer scam, NBN-ZTE, Romy Neri and executive privilege, and E.O. 464 and the destruction of executive-legislative checks and balances are festering wounds that will challenge the next President.
7. ELECTRICITY AND WATER FOR ALL
Claim:
41,079 or 97.85% of barangays have been energized. 70% of waterless municipalities outside of Metro Manila and 75% of waterless communities within Metro Manila have potable water.
Fact Check:
Significant gains on electrification. Questionable success in providing access to water.
Access to potable water has improved but what "level"? First level (hand pumps, shallow wells, collected rainwater)?; Second Level (Piped water with a communal water point such as a spring system)?; Third Level (Piped water supply inside a house)?
The government's claims are difficult to validate given the sketchy and sometimes contradicting statistics on water access. A WHO-UNICEF report in 2006 stated that only 44% of urban households and 12% of rural households have water piped into their residence. The World Bank Report on Pro-Poor Services (2001) reported that only 64% of respondents had access to formal service providers.
What is clear is that we currently don't trust the quality of water from our faucets and the poor suffer more than the rich when water is inaccessible or of questionable quality. Poorer households now spend a big part of their household income on bottled water.
Access to potable water? Probably FICTION more than FACT.
8. OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVELIHOOD AND 10 MILLION JOBS
Claim:
12 million jobs created from 2004-2009.
For a healthy and productive workforce, the Cheaper Medicine Act will provide more affordable medicine.
Fact Check:
"Unemployment" is defined by the government as those "without work", "currently available for work" and "actively seeking work".
So how would you call those who have been looking for work, failed to find one, and simply gave up and now spend their time playing tong-its and drinking on the street? They are not included in the unemployment rate.
Conditional cash transfers that put money in the hands of the poor so they can spend and make the economy move is good as a stop-gap measure. But will this now become a continuing policy of government?
Employment figures are difficult to judge given the definition, type and quality of government-generated jobs in a period of economic crisis. Plus there is no mention of job losses, especially in a period of economic recession. Both a FACT and FICTION.
Cheaper medicine law for a healthy and productive workforce - correlation is not clear, definitely FICTION.
9. DECONGEST METRO MANILA
Claim:
The PNR system from Tutuban to Buendia is now operational. On going construction of the Metro Manila Skyway Stage 2, MRT/LRT Loop, C5-NLEX-SLEX link, and the Northrail-Southrail Link Phase 1 will further decongest Metro Manila.
Fact Check:
PNR - FACT.
On-going constructions - Can not be judged until completed.
Do these decongest Metro Manila? Yes and No. The creation of rural areas with Metro Manila-like amenities is the only way to decongest Metro Manila short of restricting migration. Partially FACT, partially FICTION.
10. DEVELOP SUBIC AND CLARK.
Claim:
Infrastructure development projects such as the SCTEX boosted the competitiveness advantage of Clark and Subic as prime investment areas. The Diosdado Macapagal International Airport posted a 21% increase in international passenger volume in the first five months of 2009 amid the global economic crisis.
Fact Check:
SCTEX - Definitely FACT. But has this boosted competitiveness? Then why did FedEx leave the country? The sight of boarded-up stores that used to house duty-free outlets in my last visit in Clark was truly depressing. Maybe competitiveness and increased investments is a FICTION?
You be the judge.
The annual State of the Nation Address (SONA) by the President before Congress allows political pundits, presidential critics and allies, and the general public to look back, reflect, and try to extract accountability from the occupant of Malacanang.
As the 2009 SONA represents (hopefully) the last report of the President, critics and allies have been girding for a showdown over the past two weeks on television, radio and the print media.
The battle shifted to a higher gear this weekend when the administration bought media space on all major newspapers to trumpet its SONA achievements since 2001. In an almost full-page advertisement entitled "SONA Targets Delivered" the administration trumpeted its achievements on its Ten-Point Program, amply called "BEAT THE ODDS".
How much of these claims are FACT and how much is FICTION?
Let me continue the fact-check.
6. HEALING THE WOUNDS OF EDSA
Claim:
P62.93 billion remitted by the PCGG to the Bureau of Treasury for the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.
National Unity and Reconciliation led to the granting of absolute pardon to former President Joseph Estrada.
Fact Check:
Funds for the CARP - Yes, FACT.
I have never believed that granting pardon to ERAP was an act of reconciliation or that it healed the wounds of EDSA. It in fact made a mockery of the judicial system because a convicted plunderer was pardoned too early and too fast.
The bigger problem is not the wounds of EDSA but the wounds that were created after EDSA. Hello Garci, JocJoc Bolante and the fertilizer scam, NBN-ZTE, Romy Neri and executive privilege, and E.O. 464 and the destruction of executive-legislative checks and balances are festering wounds that will challenge the next President.
7. ELECTRICITY AND WATER FOR ALL
Claim:
41,079 or 97.85% of barangays have been energized. 70% of waterless municipalities outside of Metro Manila and 75% of waterless communities within Metro Manila have potable water.
Fact Check:
Significant gains on electrification. Questionable success in providing access to water.
Access to potable water has improved but what "level"? First level (hand pumps, shallow wells, collected rainwater)?; Second Level (Piped water with a communal water point such as a spring system)?; Third Level (Piped water supply inside a house)?
The government's claims are difficult to validate given the sketchy and sometimes contradicting statistics on water access. A WHO-UNICEF report in 2006 stated that only 44% of urban households and 12% of rural households have water piped into their residence. The World Bank Report on Pro-Poor Services (2001) reported that only 64% of respondents had access to formal service providers.
What is clear is that we currently don't trust the quality of water from our faucets and the poor suffer more than the rich when water is inaccessible or of questionable quality. Poorer households now spend a big part of their household income on bottled water.
Access to potable water? Probably FICTION more than FACT.
8. OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVELIHOOD AND 10 MILLION JOBS
Claim:
12 million jobs created from 2004-2009.
For a healthy and productive workforce, the Cheaper Medicine Act will provide more affordable medicine.
Fact Check:
"Unemployment" is defined by the government as those "without work", "currently available for work" and "actively seeking work".
So how would you call those who have been looking for work, failed to find one, and simply gave up and now spend their time playing tong-its and drinking on the street? They are not included in the unemployment rate.
Conditional cash transfers that put money in the hands of the poor so they can spend and make the economy move is good as a stop-gap measure. But will this now become a continuing policy of government?
Employment figures are difficult to judge given the definition, type and quality of government-generated jobs in a period of economic crisis. Plus there is no mention of job losses, especially in a period of economic recession. Both a FACT and FICTION.
Cheaper medicine law for a healthy and productive workforce - correlation is not clear, definitely FICTION.
9. DECONGEST METRO MANILA
Claim:
The PNR system from Tutuban to Buendia is now operational. On going construction of the Metro Manila Skyway Stage 2, MRT/LRT Loop, C5-NLEX-SLEX link, and the Northrail-Southrail Link Phase 1 will further decongest Metro Manila.
Fact Check:
PNR - FACT.
On-going constructions - Can not be judged until completed.
Do these decongest Metro Manila? Yes and No. The creation of rural areas with Metro Manila-like amenities is the only way to decongest Metro Manila short of restricting migration. Partially FACT, partially FICTION.
10. DEVELOP SUBIC AND CLARK.
Claim:
Infrastructure development projects such as the SCTEX boosted the competitiveness advantage of Clark and Subic as prime investment areas. The Diosdado Macapagal International Airport posted a 21% increase in international passenger volume in the first five months of 2009 amid the global economic crisis.
Fact Check:
SCTEX - Definitely FACT. But has this boosted competitiveness? Then why did FedEx leave the country? The sight of boarded-up stores that used to house duty-free outlets in my last visit in Clark was truly depressing. Maybe competitiveness and increased investments is a FICTION?
You be the judge.
Making a Historic SONA
As we analyze and reflect on what hopefully would be the last State of the Nation Address of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, let me re-post a column that I wrote for Business World in 2005 at the height of the Hello Garci scandal.
I wonder what will make her 2009 SONA historic?
Making a Historic SONA
by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
It is this time of the year when Congress hosts the President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) for her yearly State of the Nation Address (SONA). Unlike in the United States (US) where citizens eagerly anticipate the State of the Union Address delivered with solemnity, tradition, and pageantry, most Filipinos do not pay attention to the SONA, much less understand its purpose and history.
But this year’s SONA will definitely be different. The usual pomp and pageantry will be overshadowed by the nightmare of “GMA Resign” groups massing outside the Batasan, the threat of a boycott by the opposition, and the public’s impatience to hear what the President will say about the Gloriagate tapes.
What exactly is the State of the Nation Address all about, and what should we expect when the President speaks before the joint houses of Congress this week?
American Colonial Tradition
The SONA is part and parcel of the institutions and processes that we inherited from the Americans during our colonial past. As such, it is important to understand its historical beginnings in order to analyze the practice of various presidents in delivering a SONA and to know what to expect in a SONA.
In the US, the first “State of the Union” speech was delivered by George Washington in 1790 as part of the constitutional requirement that the President shall “from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Article II, Sec. 3 of the US Constitution).
As originally conceived, the Address was supposed to be a conversation between the President and Congress and should contain legislative measures that require immediate action. The Address was also used to present the chief executive’s goals and agenda through broad ideas or specific detail.
Since Washington’s first speech to Congress, US Presidents have “from time to time” given Congress an assessment of the condition of the union. Giving a “State of the Union” speech was discretionary on the part of the President, and for more than 100 years (1801–1913) US Presidents did not find it necessary to talk to Congress about the State of the Union.
With the advent of radio and television (Calvin Coolidge's 1923 speech was the first to be broadcast on radio while Harry Truman’s 1947 address was the first to be broadcast on television), the President’s annual message became not only a conversation between him and Congress but also an opportunity to communicate with the American people. The content, delivery, and objectives of the Address therefore changed because the President was now speaking to two audiences—Congress and the people. It was used to report on the achievements of the administration and rally public opinion to the side of the President.
Philippine SONAs
Unlike in the US where the presidential address is discretionary, the Philippine Constitution requires the President to address Congress at the opening of its regular session (Article VII, Sec. 23). Much like the tenor of Washington’s initial Address that rallied congressional support for the federal union, the first State of the Nation Address delivered by President Manuel Roxas rallied Congress and the people to unite for independence and post-war reconstruction.
Succeeding Presidents used the SONA to deliver historic announcements and cement their place in history. The SONA was used to promote the Filipino First Policy (C. Garcia), decontrol and free trade (D. Macapagal), the New Society (F. Marcos), and Philippines 2000 (F. Ramos). In GMA’s first SONA, she highlighted indicators to measure government performance on the war against poverty.
GMA’s 2005 SONA
What then should we expect when GMA delivers her 2005 SONA and how should we measure her performance?
In order to determine accountability for executive and legislative performance after the SONA, the key question to ask is “who is the President speaking to in her SONA?”
If she is speaking to Congress, we should expect a workable legislative agenda that requires congressional action and then monitor whether the legislature enacts these bills into law within a year. If her SONA is directed at the Filipino people, then she must make an accounting of her past actions and respond to issues that Filipinos want addressed.
But what legislative action will GMA ask given that Congress has already passed the excise tax on sin products and value-added tax (VAT) laws? Political reforms, particularly charter change, appear to be her legislative agenda for this year. Can she call for a shift to parliamentary government and federalism in a situation where her own allies (M. Santiago and R. Gordon) and critics (A. Pimentel, F. Drilon, and M. Roxas) are united in opposing charter change? For Drilon, such a change would not solve the country’s economic and political woes. For Roxas, it would make the situation more turbulent. For Pimentel, it is better initiated by the next President.
And can she get cooperation from Congress when both the opposition (Pimentel, S. Osmena, F. Escudero, I. Marcos) and her former allies (Drilon, F. Pangilinan, and R. Golez) are leading the call for her resignation?
Then maybe she should call on Congress to expedite her impeachment!
If she decides to talk directly to the Filipino people to rally support for her administration, then she must go beyond admitting a “lapse in judgment” and answer the serious questions on the Gloriagate tapes—the poll rigging, abduction of witnesses, and military involvement in the elections.
If she is serious about going beyond her “lapse in judgment” statement, she should lead the hunt for Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Commissioner V. Garcillano, who is at the center of the wiretap controversy and who appears to be the main culprit in the alleged electoral fraud. She should take the initiative to revamp the COMELEC and ensure that all officials whose names were mentioned in the tape are brought to justice.
She should also talk about how she intends to stop jueteng and her family’s alleged receipt of jueteng payola.
And how about graft and corruption?
If what we have seen and heard from GMA and Malacañang in recent weeks is any indication of what the SONA will address, then we can expect a defensive, politically and personally driven theme. The President seems to have used every available resource in her image-rebuilding campaign in an effort to dodge the bullet and ensure her stay in power.
Being forthright and accountable, however, will be the only way for President Arroyo to make the people start believing in her. Anything less only prolongs the political and economic agony besetting this nation. GMA would have then squandered her State of the Nation Address.
Better yet, the President can use the occasion to heed the call of the majority of Filipinos: Resign from public office and spare the Filipino people from further suffering. Indeed this would make the 2005 SONA the most historic of all SONAs and firmly cement her place in history.
I wonder what will make her 2009 SONA historic?
Making a Historic SONA
by Dr. Prospero E. de Vera
It is this time of the year when Congress hosts the President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) for her yearly State of the Nation Address (SONA). Unlike in the United States (US) where citizens eagerly anticipate the State of the Union Address delivered with solemnity, tradition, and pageantry, most Filipinos do not pay attention to the SONA, much less understand its purpose and history.
But this year’s SONA will definitely be different. The usual pomp and pageantry will be overshadowed by the nightmare of “GMA Resign” groups massing outside the Batasan, the threat of a boycott by the opposition, and the public’s impatience to hear what the President will say about the Gloriagate tapes.
What exactly is the State of the Nation Address all about, and what should we expect when the President speaks before the joint houses of Congress this week?
American Colonial Tradition
The SONA is part and parcel of the institutions and processes that we inherited from the Americans during our colonial past. As such, it is important to understand its historical beginnings in order to analyze the practice of various presidents in delivering a SONA and to know what to expect in a SONA.
In the US, the first “State of the Union” speech was delivered by George Washington in 1790 as part of the constitutional requirement that the President shall “from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Article II, Sec. 3 of the US Constitution).
As originally conceived, the Address was supposed to be a conversation between the President and Congress and should contain legislative measures that require immediate action. The Address was also used to present the chief executive’s goals and agenda through broad ideas or specific detail.
Since Washington’s first speech to Congress, US Presidents have “from time to time” given Congress an assessment of the condition of the union. Giving a “State of the Union” speech was discretionary on the part of the President, and for more than 100 years (1801–1913) US Presidents did not find it necessary to talk to Congress about the State of the Union.
With the advent of radio and television (Calvin Coolidge's 1923 speech was the first to be broadcast on radio while Harry Truman’s 1947 address was the first to be broadcast on television), the President’s annual message became not only a conversation between him and Congress but also an opportunity to communicate with the American people. The content, delivery, and objectives of the Address therefore changed because the President was now speaking to two audiences—Congress and the people. It was used to report on the achievements of the administration and rally public opinion to the side of the President.
Philippine SONAs
Unlike in the US where the presidential address is discretionary, the Philippine Constitution requires the President to address Congress at the opening of its regular session (Article VII, Sec. 23). Much like the tenor of Washington’s initial Address that rallied congressional support for the federal union, the first State of the Nation Address delivered by President Manuel Roxas rallied Congress and the people to unite for independence and post-war reconstruction.
Succeeding Presidents used the SONA to deliver historic announcements and cement their place in history. The SONA was used to promote the Filipino First Policy (C. Garcia), decontrol and free trade (D. Macapagal), the New Society (F. Marcos), and Philippines 2000 (F. Ramos). In GMA’s first SONA, she highlighted indicators to measure government performance on the war against poverty.
GMA’s 2005 SONA
What then should we expect when GMA delivers her 2005 SONA and how should we measure her performance?
In order to determine accountability for executive and legislative performance after the SONA, the key question to ask is “who is the President speaking to in her SONA?”
If she is speaking to Congress, we should expect a workable legislative agenda that requires congressional action and then monitor whether the legislature enacts these bills into law within a year. If her SONA is directed at the Filipino people, then she must make an accounting of her past actions and respond to issues that Filipinos want addressed.
But what legislative action will GMA ask given that Congress has already passed the excise tax on sin products and value-added tax (VAT) laws? Political reforms, particularly charter change, appear to be her legislative agenda for this year. Can she call for a shift to parliamentary government and federalism in a situation where her own allies (M. Santiago and R. Gordon) and critics (A. Pimentel, F. Drilon, and M. Roxas) are united in opposing charter change? For Drilon, such a change would not solve the country’s economic and political woes. For Roxas, it would make the situation more turbulent. For Pimentel, it is better initiated by the next President.
And can she get cooperation from Congress when both the opposition (Pimentel, S. Osmena, F. Escudero, I. Marcos) and her former allies (Drilon, F. Pangilinan, and R. Golez) are leading the call for her resignation?
Then maybe she should call on Congress to expedite her impeachment!
If she decides to talk directly to the Filipino people to rally support for her administration, then she must go beyond admitting a “lapse in judgment” and answer the serious questions on the Gloriagate tapes—the poll rigging, abduction of witnesses, and military involvement in the elections.
If she is serious about going beyond her “lapse in judgment” statement, she should lead the hunt for Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Commissioner V. Garcillano, who is at the center of the wiretap controversy and who appears to be the main culprit in the alleged electoral fraud. She should take the initiative to revamp the COMELEC and ensure that all officials whose names were mentioned in the tape are brought to justice.
She should also talk about how she intends to stop jueteng and her family’s alleged receipt of jueteng payola.
And how about graft and corruption?
If what we have seen and heard from GMA and Malacañang in recent weeks is any indication of what the SONA will address, then we can expect a defensive, politically and personally driven theme. The President seems to have used every available resource in her image-rebuilding campaign in an effort to dodge the bullet and ensure her stay in power.
Being forthright and accountable, however, will be the only way for President Arroyo to make the people start believing in her. Anything less only prolongs the political and economic agony besetting this nation. GMA would have then squandered her State of the Nation Address.
Better yet, the President can use the occasion to heed the call of the majority of Filipinos: Resign from public office and spare the Filipino people from further suffering. Indeed this would make the 2005 SONA the most historic of all SONAs and firmly cement her place in history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
