Based from Ramon Tulfo's recent entry in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, describes how Congressmen earn from their construction projects through earmarks and commissions from their preferred contractors. This practice, bloats the amount of construction projects because apart from the contractor's profit, they, the contractors, should also give at least 20% of the contract price to their patrons in the government and collude with other contractors bidding for the project.
Despite of this, projects are often left started and takes years, even centuries to be completed.
Here's a part of the story:
The Senate investigation into the blacklisting of three road construction firms by the World Bank in its road construction projects was a far cry from the one at the House of Representatives.
While Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, chair of the Senate committee on economic affairs, castigated Edward de Luna at the hearing, congressmen sang hosannahs to De Luna during the House inquiry.
Both administration and opposition congressmen unashamedly castigated the World Bank for its supposedly arbitrary blacklisting of the local construction firms.
De Luna owns EC de Luna Construction, one of those banned by the World Bank.
All the praises for De Luna and the castigation of the World Bank were done in front of the beleaguered contractor, apparently to bloat his ego.
An observer said he almost puked over the servility shown by the congressmen toward De Luna.
Maguindanao Rep. Simeon Datumanong, former public works secretary, asked De Luna, in reference to my column, whether he (Datumanong) gave De Luna preferential treatment.
De Luna answered in the negative.
If you don’t call that moro-moro, I don’t know what is.
The congressmen’s boot-licking attitude toward De Luna is understandable.Most of them are his “suki” (patron) in their pork barrel projects.Everybody knows that 20 percent of the cost of a road construction or schoolbuilding project from the congressional pork barrel goes to the pockets of you-know-who as commission.
* * *
Charlie Gonzales of Ulticon Builders, an alleged partner of De Luna in the cartel that reportedly corners all road-building contracts at the DPWH, is very close to a Davao congressman.
The congressman, a close ally of the Arroyo couple, reportedly gives Gonzales all his road construction projects from his pork barrel fund.But he is not alone. Other congressmen in the five Davao provinces and city are also Gonzales’ suki.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Babies Know: A Little Dirt Is Good for You
FOR MY LEANA:
By JANE E. BRODY
Published: January 26, 2009
The New York Times
Ask mothers why babies are constantly picking things up from the floor or ground and putting them in their mouths, and chances are they’ll say that it’s instinctive — that that’s how babies explore the world. But why the mouth, when sight, hearing, touch and even scent are far better at identifying things?
When my young sons were exploring the streets of Brooklyn, I couldn’t help but wonder how good crushed rock or dried dog droppings could taste when delicious mashed potatoes were routinely rejected.
Since all instinctive behaviors have an evolutionary advantage or they would not have been retained for millions of years, chances are that this one too has helped us survive as a species. And, indeed, accumulating evidence strongly suggests that eating dirt is good for you.
In studies of what is called the hygiene hypothesis, researchers are concluding that organisms like the millions of bacteria, viruses and especially worms that enter the body along with “dirt” spur the development of a healthy immune system. Several continuing studies suggest that worms may help to redirect an immune system that has gone awry and resulted in autoimmune disorders, allergies and asthma.
These studies, along with epidemiological observations, seem to explain why immune system disorders like multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, asthma and allergies have risen significantly in the United States and other developed countries.
Training the Immune System
“What a child is doing when he puts things in his mouth is allowing his immune response to explore his environment,” Mary Ruebush, a microbiology and immunology instructor, wrote in her new book, “Why Dirt Is Good” (Kaplan). “Not only does this allow for ‘practice’ of immune responses, which will be necessary for protection, but it also plays a critical role in teaching the immature immune response what is best ignored.”
One leading researcher, Dr. Joel V. Weinstock, the director of gastroenterology and hepatology at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, said in an interview that the immune system at birth “is like an unprogrammed computer. It needs instruction.”
He said that public health measures like cleaning up contaminated water and food have saved the lives of countless children, but they “also eliminated exposure to many organisms that are probably good for us.”
“Children raised in an ultraclean environment,” he added, “are not being exposed to organisms that help them develop appropriate immune regulatory circuits.”
Studies he has conducted with Dr. David Elliott, a gastroenterologist and immunologist at the University of Iowa, indicate that intestinal worms, which have been all but eliminated in developed countries, are “likely to be the biggest player” in regulating the immune system to respond appropriately, Dr. Elliott said in an interview. He added that bacterial and viral infections seem to influence the immune system in the same way, but not as forcefully.
Most worms are harmless, especially in well-nourished people, Dr. Weinstock said.
“There are very few diseases that people get from worms,” he said. “Humans have adapted to the presence of most of them.”
Worms for Health
In studies in mice, Dr. Weinstock and Dr. Elliott have used worms to both prevent and reverse autoimmune disease. Dr. Elliott said that in Argentina, researchers found that patients with multiple sclerosis who were infected with the human whipworm had milder cases and fewer flare-ups of their disease over a period of four and a half years. At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Dr. John Fleming, a neurologist, is testing whether the pig whipworm can temper the effects of multiple sclerosis.
In Gambia, the eradication of worms in some villages led to children’s having increased skin reactions to allergens, Dr. Elliott said. And pig whipworms, which reside only briefly in the human intestinal tract, have had “good effects” in treating the inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.
How may worms affect the immune system? Dr. Elliott explained that immune regulation is now known to be more complex than scientists thought when the hygiene hypothesis was first introduced by a British epidemiologist, David P. Strachan, in 1989. Dr. Strachan noted an association between large family size and reduced rates of asthma and allergies. Immunologists now recognize a four-point response system of helper T cells: Th 1, Th 2, Th 17 and regulatory T cells. Th 1 inhibits Th 2 and Th 17; Th 2 inhibits Th 1 and Th 17; and regulatory T cells inhibit all three, Dr. Elliott said.
“A lot of inflammatory diseases — multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and asthma — are due to the activity of Th 17,” he explained. “If you infect mice with worms, Th 17 drops dramatically, and the activity of regulatory T cells is augmented.”
In answer to the question, “Are we too clean?” Dr. Elliott said: “Dirtiness comes with a price. But cleanliness comes with a price, too. We’re not proposing a return to the germ-filled environment of the 1850s. But if we properly understand how organisms in the environment protect us, maybe we can give a vaccine or mimic their effects with some innocuous stimulus.”
Wash in Moderation
Dr. Ruebush, the “Why Dirt Is Good” author, does not suggest a return to filth, either. But she correctly points out that bacteria are everywhere: on us, in us and all around us. Most of these micro-organisms cause no problem, and many, like the ones that normally live in the digestive tract and produce life-sustaining nutrients, are essential to good health.
“The typical human probably harbors some 90 trillion microbes,” she wrote. “The very fact that you have so many microbes of so many different kinds is what keeps you healthy most of the time.”
Dr. Ruebush deplores the current fetish for the hundreds of antibacterial products that convey a false sense of security and may actually foster the development of antibiotic-resistant, disease-causing bacteria. Plain soap and water are all that are needed to become clean, she noted.
“I certainly recommend washing your hands after using the bathroom, before eating, after changing a diaper, before and after handling food,” and whenever they’re visibly soiled, she wrote. When no running water is available and cleaning hands is essential, she suggests an alcohol-based hand sanitizer.
Dr. Weinstock goes even further. “Children should be allowed to go barefoot in the dirt, play in the dirt, and not have to wash their hands when they come in to eat,” he said. He and Dr. Elliott pointed out that children who grow up on farms and are frequently exposed to worms and other organisms from farm animals are much less likely to develop allergies and autoimmune diseases.
Also helpful, he said, is to “let kids have two dogs and a cat,” which will expose them to intestinal worms that can promote a healthy immune system.
By JANE E. BRODY
Published: January 26, 2009
The New York Times
Ask mothers why babies are constantly picking things up from the floor or ground and putting them in their mouths, and chances are they’ll say that it’s instinctive — that that’s how babies explore the world. But why the mouth, when sight, hearing, touch and even scent are far better at identifying things?
When my young sons were exploring the streets of Brooklyn, I couldn’t help but wonder how good crushed rock or dried dog droppings could taste when delicious mashed potatoes were routinely rejected.
Since all instinctive behaviors have an evolutionary advantage or they would not have been retained for millions of years, chances are that this one too has helped us survive as a species. And, indeed, accumulating evidence strongly suggests that eating dirt is good for you.
In studies of what is called the hygiene hypothesis, researchers are concluding that organisms like the millions of bacteria, viruses and especially worms that enter the body along with “dirt” spur the development of a healthy immune system. Several continuing studies suggest that worms may help to redirect an immune system that has gone awry and resulted in autoimmune disorders, allergies and asthma.
These studies, along with epidemiological observations, seem to explain why immune system disorders like multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, asthma and allergies have risen significantly in the United States and other developed countries.
Training the Immune System
“What a child is doing when he puts things in his mouth is allowing his immune response to explore his environment,” Mary Ruebush, a microbiology and immunology instructor, wrote in her new book, “Why Dirt Is Good” (Kaplan). “Not only does this allow for ‘practice’ of immune responses, which will be necessary for protection, but it also plays a critical role in teaching the immature immune response what is best ignored.”
One leading researcher, Dr. Joel V. Weinstock, the director of gastroenterology and hepatology at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, said in an interview that the immune system at birth “is like an unprogrammed computer. It needs instruction.”
He said that public health measures like cleaning up contaminated water and food have saved the lives of countless children, but they “also eliminated exposure to many organisms that are probably good for us.”
“Children raised in an ultraclean environment,” he added, “are not being exposed to organisms that help them develop appropriate immune regulatory circuits.”
Studies he has conducted with Dr. David Elliott, a gastroenterologist and immunologist at the University of Iowa, indicate that intestinal worms, which have been all but eliminated in developed countries, are “likely to be the biggest player” in regulating the immune system to respond appropriately, Dr. Elliott said in an interview. He added that bacterial and viral infections seem to influence the immune system in the same way, but not as forcefully.
Most worms are harmless, especially in well-nourished people, Dr. Weinstock said.
“There are very few diseases that people get from worms,” he said. “Humans have adapted to the presence of most of them.”
Worms for Health
In studies in mice, Dr. Weinstock and Dr. Elliott have used worms to both prevent and reverse autoimmune disease. Dr. Elliott said that in Argentina, researchers found that patients with multiple sclerosis who were infected with the human whipworm had milder cases and fewer flare-ups of their disease over a period of four and a half years. At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Dr. John Fleming, a neurologist, is testing whether the pig whipworm can temper the effects of multiple sclerosis.
In Gambia, the eradication of worms in some villages led to children’s having increased skin reactions to allergens, Dr. Elliott said. And pig whipworms, which reside only briefly in the human intestinal tract, have had “good effects” in treating the inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.
How may worms affect the immune system? Dr. Elliott explained that immune regulation is now known to be more complex than scientists thought when the hygiene hypothesis was first introduced by a British epidemiologist, David P. Strachan, in 1989. Dr. Strachan noted an association between large family size and reduced rates of asthma and allergies. Immunologists now recognize a four-point response system of helper T cells: Th 1, Th 2, Th 17 and regulatory T cells. Th 1 inhibits Th 2 and Th 17; Th 2 inhibits Th 1 and Th 17; and regulatory T cells inhibit all three, Dr. Elliott said.
“A lot of inflammatory diseases — multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and asthma — are due to the activity of Th 17,” he explained. “If you infect mice with worms, Th 17 drops dramatically, and the activity of regulatory T cells is augmented.”
In answer to the question, “Are we too clean?” Dr. Elliott said: “Dirtiness comes with a price. But cleanliness comes with a price, too. We’re not proposing a return to the germ-filled environment of the 1850s. But if we properly understand how organisms in the environment protect us, maybe we can give a vaccine or mimic their effects with some innocuous stimulus.”
Wash in Moderation
Dr. Ruebush, the “Why Dirt Is Good” author, does not suggest a return to filth, either. But she correctly points out that bacteria are everywhere: on us, in us and all around us. Most of these micro-organisms cause no problem, and many, like the ones that normally live in the digestive tract and produce life-sustaining nutrients, are essential to good health.
“The typical human probably harbors some 90 trillion microbes,” she wrote. “The very fact that you have so many microbes of so many different kinds is what keeps you healthy most of the time.”
Dr. Ruebush deplores the current fetish for the hundreds of antibacterial products that convey a false sense of security and may actually foster the development of antibiotic-resistant, disease-causing bacteria. Plain soap and water are all that are needed to become clean, she noted.
“I certainly recommend washing your hands after using the bathroom, before eating, after changing a diaper, before and after handling food,” and whenever they’re visibly soiled, she wrote. When no running water is available and cleaning hands is essential, she suggests an alcohol-based hand sanitizer.
Dr. Weinstock goes even further. “Children should be allowed to go barefoot in the dirt, play in the dirt, and not have to wash their hands when they come in to eat,” he said. He and Dr. Elliott pointed out that children who grow up on farms and are frequently exposed to worms and other organisms from farm animals are much less likely to develop allergies and autoimmune diseases.
Also helpful, he said, is to “let kids have two dogs and a cat,” which will expose them to intestinal worms that can promote a healthy immune system.
WHAT LIFE ASKS OF US
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: January 26, 2009
A few years ago, a faculty committee at Harvard produced a report on the purpose of education. “The aim of a liberal education” the report declared, “is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people and to help them to find ways to reorient themselves.”
The report implied an entire way of living. Individuals should learn to think for themselves. They should be skeptical of pre-existing arrangements. They should break free from the way they were raised, examine life from the outside and discover their own values.
This approach is deeply consistent with the individualism of modern culture, with its emphasis on personal inquiry, personal self-discovery and personal happiness. But there is another, older way of living, and it was discussed in a neglected book that came out last summer called “On Thinking Institutionally” by the political scientist Hugh Heclo.
In this way of living, to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us. As we go through life, we travel through institutions — first family and school, then the institutions of a profession or a craft.
Each of these institutions comes with certain rules and obligations that tell us how to do what we’re supposed to do. Journalism imposes habits that help reporters keep a mental distance from those they cover. Scientists have obligations to the community of researchers. In the process of absorbing the rules of the institutions we inhabit, we become who we are.
New generations don’t invent institutional practices. These practices are passed down and evolve. So the institutionalist has a deep reverence for those who came before and built up the rules that he has temporarily taken delivery of. “In taking delivery,” Heclo writes, “institutionalists see themselves as debtors who owe something, not creditors to whom something is owed.”
The rules of a profession or an institution are not like traffic regulations. They are deeply woven into the identity of the people who practice them. A teacher’s relationship to the craft of teaching, an athlete’s relationship to her sport, a farmer’s relation to her land is not an individual choice that can be easily reversed when psychic losses exceed psychic profits. Her social function defines who she is. The connection is more like a covenant. There will be many long periods when you put more into your institutions than you get out.
In 2005, Ryne Sandberg was inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame. Heclo cites his speech as an example of how people talk when they are defined by their devotion to an institution:
“I was in awe every time I walked onto the field. That’s respect. I was taught you never, ever disrespect your opponents or your teammates or your organization or your manager and never, ever your uniform. You make a great play, act like you’ve done it before; get a big hit, look for the third base coach and get ready to run the bases.”
Sandberg motioned to those inducted before him, “These guys sitting up here did not pave the way for the rest of us so that players could swing for the fences every time up and forget how to move a runner over to third. It’s disrespectful to them, to you and to the game of baseball that we all played growing up.
“Respect. A lot of people say this honor validates my career, but I didn’t work hard for validation. I didn’t play the game right because I saw a reward at the end of the tunnel. I played it right because that’s what you’re supposed to do, play it right and with respect ... . If this validates anything, it’s that guys who taught me the game ... did what they were supposed to do, and I did what I was supposed to do.”
I thought it worth devoting a column to institutional thinking because I try to keep a list of the people in public life I admire most. Invariably, the people who make that list have subjugated themselves to their profession, social function or institution.
Second, institutional thinking is eroding. Faith in all institutions, including charities, has declined precipitously over the past generation, not only in the U.S. but around the world. Lack of institutional awareness has bred cynicism and undermined habits of behavior. Bankers, for example, used to have a code that made them a bit stodgy and which held them up for ridicule in movies like “Mary Poppins.” But the banker’s code has eroded, and the result was not liberation but self-destruction.
Institutions do all the things that are supposed to be bad. They impede personal exploration. They enforce conformity.
But they often save us from our weaknesses and give meaning to life.
______________________________________
I think, individualism will soon fade.
As the financial crisis devour nations and economies, more and more people seek the help of institutions like Governments to ease out the burden of a failing economy and unemployment.
And if the people that run these institutions does not serve its purpose, the crisis will force civilians to take action, demand change in policies and shape their Governments to serve them better. For the corrupt leaders of the Philippine Republic, this is a warning. If they continue with their insatiable greed for corruption and plunder of tax payer's money, the people, in hunger and in pain will take over and a possible civil war might broke.
Filipinos will take their right by force which end the days of peaceful revolutions like EDSA which brought nothing but a new set of same figures that take advantage of the people's trust.
Difficult as it may be, nature it seems has its own way to level things out.
Published: January 26, 2009
A few years ago, a faculty committee at Harvard produced a report on the purpose of education. “The aim of a liberal education” the report declared, “is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people and to help them to find ways to reorient themselves.”
The report implied an entire way of living. Individuals should learn to think for themselves. They should be skeptical of pre-existing arrangements. They should break free from the way they were raised, examine life from the outside and discover their own values.
This approach is deeply consistent with the individualism of modern culture, with its emphasis on personal inquiry, personal self-discovery and personal happiness. But there is another, older way of living, and it was discussed in a neglected book that came out last summer called “On Thinking Institutionally” by the political scientist Hugh Heclo.
In this way of living, to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us. As we go through life, we travel through institutions — first family and school, then the institutions of a profession or a craft.
Each of these institutions comes with certain rules and obligations that tell us how to do what we’re supposed to do. Journalism imposes habits that help reporters keep a mental distance from those they cover. Scientists have obligations to the community of researchers. In the process of absorbing the rules of the institutions we inhabit, we become who we are.
New generations don’t invent institutional practices. These practices are passed down and evolve. So the institutionalist has a deep reverence for those who came before and built up the rules that he has temporarily taken delivery of. “In taking delivery,” Heclo writes, “institutionalists see themselves as debtors who owe something, not creditors to whom something is owed.”
The rules of a profession or an institution are not like traffic regulations. They are deeply woven into the identity of the people who practice them. A teacher’s relationship to the craft of teaching, an athlete’s relationship to her sport, a farmer’s relation to her land is not an individual choice that can be easily reversed when psychic losses exceed psychic profits. Her social function defines who she is. The connection is more like a covenant. There will be many long periods when you put more into your institutions than you get out.
In 2005, Ryne Sandberg was inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame. Heclo cites his speech as an example of how people talk when they are defined by their devotion to an institution:
“I was in awe every time I walked onto the field. That’s respect. I was taught you never, ever disrespect your opponents or your teammates or your organization or your manager and never, ever your uniform. You make a great play, act like you’ve done it before; get a big hit, look for the third base coach and get ready to run the bases.”
Sandberg motioned to those inducted before him, “These guys sitting up here did not pave the way for the rest of us so that players could swing for the fences every time up and forget how to move a runner over to third. It’s disrespectful to them, to you and to the game of baseball that we all played growing up.
“Respect. A lot of people say this honor validates my career, but I didn’t work hard for validation. I didn’t play the game right because I saw a reward at the end of the tunnel. I played it right because that’s what you’re supposed to do, play it right and with respect ... . If this validates anything, it’s that guys who taught me the game ... did what they were supposed to do, and I did what I was supposed to do.”
I thought it worth devoting a column to institutional thinking because I try to keep a list of the people in public life I admire most. Invariably, the people who make that list have subjugated themselves to their profession, social function or institution.
Second, institutional thinking is eroding. Faith in all institutions, including charities, has declined precipitously over the past generation, not only in the U.S. but around the world. Lack of institutional awareness has bred cynicism and undermined habits of behavior. Bankers, for example, used to have a code that made them a bit stodgy and which held them up for ridicule in movies like “Mary Poppins.” But the banker’s code has eroded, and the result was not liberation but self-destruction.
Institutions do all the things that are supposed to be bad. They impede personal exploration. They enforce conformity.
But they often save us from our weaknesses and give meaning to life.
______________________________________
I think, individualism will soon fade.
As the financial crisis devour nations and economies, more and more people seek the help of institutions like Governments to ease out the burden of a failing economy and unemployment.
And if the people that run these institutions does not serve its purpose, the crisis will force civilians to take action, demand change in policies and shape their Governments to serve them better. For the corrupt leaders of the Philippine Republic, this is a warning. If they continue with their insatiable greed for corruption and plunder of tax payer's money, the people, in hunger and in pain will take over and a possible civil war might broke.
Filipinos will take their right by force which end the days of peaceful revolutions like EDSA which brought nothing but a new set of same figures that take advantage of the people's trust.
Difficult as it may be, nature it seems has its own way to level things out.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
ARROYO ATTENDS DAVOS 2009
It's the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland where 41 heads of state attend to discuss world economy and the global financial crisis.
Here's what Amando Doronilla shares in his column:
"President Arroyo is among the world leaders attending Davos. It is not clear what contribution she can make to the forum, except that revealed by her spokesman, who said, “We would like to tell the world that there is a big potential to invest in the country because we have already laid down the foundation to have good business relationships here.” The spokesman also said the President would share Philippine strategies in place, as solutions to the crisis. “The theme is rebooting the economy,” he added.
What’s that, again? What strategies can we share with other world leaders? Masking patronage distribution as stimulus plan?
The costs of attending the forum are such that many executives of big corporations have backed off and withdrawn sponsorship of some of its events. The annual corporate membership required in order to send executives to the meeting is $36,768, plus 18,000 Swiss francs, not including accommodations.
_______________________________
Critics consider this as just a waste of money and time.
Perhaps, our President have no idea that BIG Governments now are more concerned solving the rising problems of their local economy, finance and swelling unemployment in their own countries to pay attention to a Third World Economy's invitation to invest in the Philippines.
This will not work at the moment.
Again, what a waste of OUR money.
What if she just concentrates at home where a lot of urgent fixing requires a President's attention?
Instead of lobbying for support of nations who are in turmoil and sharing her unsolicited advice on their economies which only puts the country in shame, stay and fix the problems in the Philippines. And stop pretending we're in the big leagues.
Obama understands this. He is not attending. He is busy convincing the US Congress of his stimulus plan. Gloria has the same stimulus package and does not even bother telling us the details where the money will go.
Or perhaps, it's all been settled in dark.
Ridiculous and Confused
"Ridiculous and confused” is how Greenpeace describes Executive Order 774. Issued last week by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the executive order reorganizes the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change which she now heads, in effect appointing herself the “Environment Czar,” among her many titles.
In a statement, Greenpeace Southeast Asia Climate and Energy Campaigner Amalie Obusan said that while the intention behind the order may have been “sincere and creditable,” the thinking put into its creation seems muddled.
For one, said Obusan, the order tasks government agencies and bodies to follow laws and regulations that are already in place and which should have been followed and implemented soon after their enactment. For instance, the order says all government agencies should follow the Solid Waste Act, which should already be implemented and are in fact being followed by some local government units and communities.
EO 774 likewise requires the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to “survey, map and protect watershed areas,” which is already one of its responsibilities. It orders that waterways and riverbanks should be cleared of obstructions, already directed under the Clean Water Act, and orders a compliance audit of the Fisheries Code, a task already assigned to the Department of Agriculture. The order also mandates the creation of a Task Group on Renewable Energy to lead the swift implementation of the Renewable Energy Law, “precisely already the duty of the Department of Energy.”
In other words, EO 774 introduces no fresh initiatives or groundbreaking approaches, while creating the impression that the President is taking charge of a bold new environmental effort.
“Any Climate Change Task Force should focus on wide-reaching and lasting solutions, beginning with phasing out coal and nuclear plants, and initiating a massive shift to renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies,” the Greenpeace statement said.
“The President is already head of the government. To appoint herself as chair of a body which mandates government agencies to fulfill what are already their responsibilities — and to put aside a budget for that purpose — is absurd. If, in mandating this reorganization, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo wants to fashion herself as a ‘climate change czar,’ she could do a lot more by personally ensuring the effective implementation of the Renewable Energy Law and guaranteeing that dirty coal and nuclear energy will not override the mainstreaming of clean, renewable energy sources in the country,” it added.
______________________
How surprisingly stupid she is claiming as Environmental Czar introducing nothing!
This is just publicity for publicity's sake to show her in control, when in fact she's so busy for 2010.
I hope her ratings would go up after proclaiming a number of new titles for herself rendering her cabinet useless.
I think, the Philippines, being a third World country would be last to take the environmental issues as a key concern except that we can devote the stimulus package being proposed by Congress to create jobs by employing street sweepers in the Metro.
That is all we can do for now: to keep at least, our vicinity clean if that's our definition of environment.
At the moment, developed countries are making radical steps towards less dependence on fossil fuels and conventional energy resouces. Electric and hybrid cars are becoming popular in the US and stricter emissions rules are being implemented to reduce the effects of the warming of the planet.
When cars in major countries turn electric, petroleum based cars would likely end up and dumped in smaller countries like ours and we remain a small, dirty, carbon emitting country in the planet. Recently, here in UAE, cars more than 10 years old are refused registration. Taxis, have only 5 years life span. With millions of cars becoming obsolete, thrid world economies most likely will serve as dumpsites for these vehicles while developed economies enjoy a cleaner, safer, carbon-free world.
This is not to belittle the Philippines, but we cannot truly make a huge effort on the environment except on making our surroundings clean. Not because we don't have the potential to develop alternative energy sources, we do, we already have in small scale. Problem is, that is not the priority of our Government.
We don't even take our R&D seriously. In fact, we barely have a budget for it amounting to only 0.18% of our national budget in 2004 and significantly lower this year. This means, our science, ingenuity and innovation doesn't get the attention it deserves.
In a statement, Greenpeace Southeast Asia Climate and Energy Campaigner Amalie Obusan said that while the intention behind the order may have been “sincere and creditable,” the thinking put into its creation seems muddled.
For one, said Obusan, the order tasks government agencies and bodies to follow laws and regulations that are already in place and which should have been followed and implemented soon after their enactment. For instance, the order says all government agencies should follow the Solid Waste Act, which should already be implemented and are in fact being followed by some local government units and communities.
EO 774 likewise requires the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to “survey, map and protect watershed areas,” which is already one of its responsibilities. It orders that waterways and riverbanks should be cleared of obstructions, already directed under the Clean Water Act, and orders a compliance audit of the Fisheries Code, a task already assigned to the Department of Agriculture. The order also mandates the creation of a Task Group on Renewable Energy to lead the swift implementation of the Renewable Energy Law, “precisely already the duty of the Department of Energy.”
In other words, EO 774 introduces no fresh initiatives or groundbreaking approaches, while creating the impression that the President is taking charge of a bold new environmental effort.
“Any Climate Change Task Force should focus on wide-reaching and lasting solutions, beginning with phasing out coal and nuclear plants, and initiating a massive shift to renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies,” the Greenpeace statement said.
“The President is already head of the government. To appoint herself as chair of a body which mandates government agencies to fulfill what are already their responsibilities — and to put aside a budget for that purpose — is absurd. If, in mandating this reorganization, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo wants to fashion herself as a ‘climate change czar,’ she could do a lot more by personally ensuring the effective implementation of the Renewable Energy Law and guaranteeing that dirty coal and nuclear energy will not override the mainstreaming of clean, renewable energy sources in the country,” it added.
______________________
How surprisingly stupid she is claiming as Environmental Czar introducing nothing!
This is just publicity for publicity's sake to show her in control, when in fact she's so busy for 2010.
I hope her ratings would go up after proclaiming a number of new titles for herself rendering her cabinet useless.
I think, the Philippines, being a third World country would be last to take the environmental issues as a key concern except that we can devote the stimulus package being proposed by Congress to create jobs by employing street sweepers in the Metro.
That is all we can do for now: to keep at least, our vicinity clean if that's our definition of environment.
At the moment, developed countries are making radical steps towards less dependence on fossil fuels and conventional energy resouces. Electric and hybrid cars are becoming popular in the US and stricter emissions rules are being implemented to reduce the effects of the warming of the planet.
When cars in major countries turn electric, petroleum based cars would likely end up and dumped in smaller countries like ours and we remain a small, dirty, carbon emitting country in the planet. Recently, here in UAE, cars more than 10 years old are refused registration. Taxis, have only 5 years life span. With millions of cars becoming obsolete, thrid world economies most likely will serve as dumpsites for these vehicles while developed economies enjoy a cleaner, safer, carbon-free world.
This is not to belittle the Philippines, but we cannot truly make a huge effort on the environment except on making our surroundings clean. Not because we don't have the potential to develop alternative energy sources, we do, we already have in small scale. Problem is, that is not the priority of our Government.
We don't even take our R&D seriously. In fact, we barely have a budget for it amounting to only 0.18% of our national budget in 2004 and significantly lower this year. This means, our science, ingenuity and innovation doesn't get the attention it deserves.
ARROYO NOT TO CELEBRATE EDSA 2
I'd like to make this brief.
Based on the article "We, the People"
by Conrado De Quiros, Phil. Daily Inquirer.
___________________
Eduardo Ermita explained that Malacañang did not mark the anniversary of EDSA People Power II this year.
“Remember, one legacy agenda [of Arroyo] is healing the wounds of EDSA. And we thought not celebrating [it] will be one of the steps toward healing any hurt feelings brought about by EDSA II.”
What if we also no longer mark days that defined our History. Let us no longer mark Rizal Day on Dec. 30 because that's the they Spaniards massacred him. It might open wounds to Filipinos and Spaniards.
Let us also no mark National Heroes Day for the same reason. Let us forget Bonifacio and the Katipunan who started the revolution for our freedom.
"And also our Independence Day, which Arroyo’s own father, to his eternal credit, changed from July 4, 1946 to June 12, 1898. The Americans granted the Philippines independence on July 4, 1946, Emilio Aguinaldo declared independence in June 12, 1898. The first freed the country in body but kept it enslaved in mind, the second freed the country in mind though it was enslaved yet again in body by the Americans. A valuable lesson in life the father obviously failed to pass on to the daughter".
"The same would be true for celebrating Bataan Day and Liberation, or recollecting the orgy of mayhem the Japanese wrought on Manila before they themselves were killed. That would open old wounds and would be most hurtful to the Japanese, whose sashimi we take to be one of life’s infinite blessings".
"It’s plain idiocy. One is tempted to say that Ermita should have his head examined. But his head is exactly where he wants it to be. He himself knows EDSA II produced only one wound. That is his boss. She goes away and everything is healed. Even cancer".
Ermita should be replaced with a more sanier officer. One who could not invite further damage to this Administration or baka sinasadya nila to shift attention while his Boss cooks something that will caught up by surprise come 2010.
While Obama cherishes the efforts of Washington and Lincoln and invited Americans to look back in history to gather strength in confronting present and future issues, our leaders asks us to forget how this country was built while keeping themselves busy plundering the riches of the nation.
Sometimes I wish I could just keep my silence but no more.
the times have changed perhaps, every Filipino still has the power to shape the future of their counrty in many ways now than before.
I don't have to go to rallies and protest the indignations of this leadership.
Let us all take advantage of the web and shape a solid public opinion to help our nation not bear future leaders in likes of what we have now.
Our situation is far from ordinary. We are more helpless now than before.
If we remain silent, we tolerate the insatiable greed of our corrupt leaders to play tricks on us.
Let your voices be heard, we still have a future to save.
If not for us, at least for our children.
Based on the article "We, the People"
by Conrado De Quiros, Phil. Daily Inquirer.
___________________
Eduardo Ermita explained that Malacañang did not mark the anniversary of EDSA People Power II this year.
“Remember, one legacy agenda [of Arroyo] is healing the wounds of EDSA. And we thought not celebrating [it] will be one of the steps toward healing any hurt feelings brought about by EDSA II.”
What if we also no longer mark days that defined our History. Let us no longer mark Rizal Day on Dec. 30 because that's the they Spaniards massacred him. It might open wounds to Filipinos and Spaniards.
Let us also no mark National Heroes Day for the same reason. Let us forget Bonifacio and the Katipunan who started the revolution for our freedom.
"And also our Independence Day, which Arroyo’s own father, to his eternal credit, changed from July 4, 1946 to June 12, 1898. The Americans granted the Philippines independence on July 4, 1946, Emilio Aguinaldo declared independence in June 12, 1898. The first freed the country in body but kept it enslaved in mind, the second freed the country in mind though it was enslaved yet again in body by the Americans. A valuable lesson in life the father obviously failed to pass on to the daughter".
"The same would be true for celebrating Bataan Day and Liberation, or recollecting the orgy of mayhem the Japanese wrought on Manila before they themselves were killed. That would open old wounds and would be most hurtful to the Japanese, whose sashimi we take to be one of life’s infinite blessings".
"It’s plain idiocy. One is tempted to say that Ermita should have his head examined. But his head is exactly where he wants it to be. He himself knows EDSA II produced only one wound. That is his boss. She goes away and everything is healed. Even cancer".
Ermita should be replaced with a more sanier officer. One who could not invite further damage to this Administration or baka sinasadya nila to shift attention while his Boss cooks something that will caught up by surprise come 2010.
While Obama cherishes the efforts of Washington and Lincoln and invited Americans to look back in history to gather strength in confronting present and future issues, our leaders asks us to forget how this country was built while keeping themselves busy plundering the riches of the nation.
Sometimes I wish I could just keep my silence but no more.
the times have changed perhaps, every Filipino still has the power to shape the future of their counrty in many ways now than before.
I don't have to go to rallies and protest the indignations of this leadership.
Let us all take advantage of the web and shape a solid public opinion to help our nation not bear future leaders in likes of what we have now.
Our situation is far from ordinary. We are more helpless now than before.
If we remain silent, we tolerate the insatiable greed of our corrupt leaders to play tricks on us.
Let your voices be heard, we still have a future to save.
If not for us, at least for our children.
Everybody happy?
Editorial
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:49:00 01/24/2009
The Christmas season has long been over but Congress still seems unable to get over the spirit of giving. It is giving away billions of pesos to various government agencies, including those that didn’t even ask for the funds. And because charity begins at home, of course, the lawmakers have made sure they would partake of their own generosity, too.
Under the P1.415-trillion General Appropriations Act for 2009, whose final form was hammered out by the bicameral conference committee this week, the senators and congressmen voted for themselves a P9.665-billion pork barrel, euphemistically called the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF). This amount is P2 billion higher than what Malacañang proposed for the PDAF, further bloating past pork barrel allocations which used to average P200 million per senator and P20 million per member of the House of Representatives. These are funds set aside for the favorite projects of lawmakers to be undertaken by their favorite contractors, who are expected to show their gratitude to their patrons in millions of ways.
That is not all the pork that will grease the hands of greedy lawmakers. Tucked into the budgets of many executive departments are projects identified by lawmakers that are again to be awarded to their favorite contractors and suppliers. These “earmarks” (as the Americans call it) already built into the separate versions of the budget approved by the Senate and the House have been increased by P35 billion, sliced from the allocation for debt service. The Department of Public Works and Highways got the biggest share with P9.4 billion, boosting its overall budget to P129.9 billion. The Department of Transportation and Communications also saw its budget increased by P3.8 billion, while the Department of Education got P2.0 billion more. In addition, the 2009 budget sets aside a total of P10 billion for various education, skills training and financial assistance programs for the youth as well as displaced and jobless workers.
Lawmakers have justified this massive reallocation of funds by saying the government needs to put together a stimulus package that would breathe some life to a faltering economy. The P50-billion package, which is modest in comparison with the P300-billion package the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo talked about, is meant to soften the impact of the worldwide recession whose effects are starting to make themselves felt through falling exports, the growing number of returning overseas workers and the closure of some big firms. But it is hard to see how far a package laden with pork would go in mitigating the effects of the crisis.
While this economic rescue package may have been intended to make everybody happy, it will clearly make the lawmakers themselves happiest of all. This economic rescue package will help shore up their personal fortunes and boost their chances of winning office anew in next year’s general elections — all at the expense of taxpayers already reeling from high prices and facing joblessness. Can anything be more heartless and callous than voting for oneself bigger slices of pork even as millions go broke and hungry?
But can anything be done to stop our lawmakers from rolling out a much bigger pork barrel and building a bigger war chest for the 2010 elections? Sen. Panfilo Lacson has pointed a way. If President Arroyo vetoes the reduction of the allocation for debt service but leaves the approved appropriations for all government agencies intact, then the appropriations act would become “constitutionally infirm,” Lacson said. That is because, its net effect would be to increase the budget proposed by Malacañang, and the Constitution bars Congress from increasing the budget proposed by the executive.
The same thing would happen if the President signs the bill as it now reads, and the debt service matches Malacañang’s original estimate of P287.87 billion. That is most likely because the estimate for debt service was based on an exchange rate of P40-P43 to a dollar (the dollar was worth P47.40 on Friday). And we have this strange law that gives first priority in the budget to the payment of debts.
It would seem that Malacañang has no choice but to remove one by one the funds realigned from debt service to the different agencies to keep its expenditures down to what it had proposed. But that is assuming we are still a government of laws, not of men who flout the law when it is convenient.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:49:00 01/24/2009
The Christmas season has long been over but Congress still seems unable to get over the spirit of giving. It is giving away billions of pesos to various government agencies, including those that didn’t even ask for the funds. And because charity begins at home, of course, the lawmakers have made sure they would partake of their own generosity, too.
Under the P1.415-trillion General Appropriations Act for 2009, whose final form was hammered out by the bicameral conference committee this week, the senators and congressmen voted for themselves a P9.665-billion pork barrel, euphemistically called the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF). This amount is P2 billion higher than what Malacañang proposed for the PDAF, further bloating past pork barrel allocations which used to average P200 million per senator and P20 million per member of the House of Representatives. These are funds set aside for the favorite projects of lawmakers to be undertaken by their favorite contractors, who are expected to show their gratitude to their patrons in millions of ways.
That is not all the pork that will grease the hands of greedy lawmakers. Tucked into the budgets of many executive departments are projects identified by lawmakers that are again to be awarded to their favorite contractors and suppliers. These “earmarks” (as the Americans call it) already built into the separate versions of the budget approved by the Senate and the House have been increased by P35 billion, sliced from the allocation for debt service. The Department of Public Works and Highways got the biggest share with P9.4 billion, boosting its overall budget to P129.9 billion. The Department of Transportation and Communications also saw its budget increased by P3.8 billion, while the Department of Education got P2.0 billion more. In addition, the 2009 budget sets aside a total of P10 billion for various education, skills training and financial assistance programs for the youth as well as displaced and jobless workers.
Lawmakers have justified this massive reallocation of funds by saying the government needs to put together a stimulus package that would breathe some life to a faltering economy. The P50-billion package, which is modest in comparison with the P300-billion package the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo talked about, is meant to soften the impact of the worldwide recession whose effects are starting to make themselves felt through falling exports, the growing number of returning overseas workers and the closure of some big firms. But it is hard to see how far a package laden with pork would go in mitigating the effects of the crisis.
While this economic rescue package may have been intended to make everybody happy, it will clearly make the lawmakers themselves happiest of all. This economic rescue package will help shore up their personal fortunes and boost their chances of winning office anew in next year’s general elections — all at the expense of taxpayers already reeling from high prices and facing joblessness. Can anything be more heartless and callous than voting for oneself bigger slices of pork even as millions go broke and hungry?
But can anything be done to stop our lawmakers from rolling out a much bigger pork barrel and building a bigger war chest for the 2010 elections? Sen. Panfilo Lacson has pointed a way. If President Arroyo vetoes the reduction of the allocation for debt service but leaves the approved appropriations for all government agencies intact, then the appropriations act would become “constitutionally infirm,” Lacson said. That is because, its net effect would be to increase the budget proposed by Malacañang, and the Constitution bars Congress from increasing the budget proposed by the executive.
The same thing would happen if the President signs the bill as it now reads, and the debt service matches Malacañang’s original estimate of P287.87 billion. That is most likely because the estimate for debt service was based on an exchange rate of P40-P43 to a dollar (the dollar was worth P47.40 on Friday). And we have this strange law that gives first priority in the budget to the payment of debts.
It would seem that Malacañang has no choice but to remove one by one the funds realigned from debt service to the different agencies to keep its expenditures down to what it had proposed. But that is assuming we are still a government of laws, not of men who flout the law when it is convenient.
Monday, January 26, 2009
The Contractors: Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago Privilege Speech
The following is the transcript of Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s privilege speech at The Senate.
Mr. President:
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, a contractor is: “one who contracts for the completion of an entire project, including purchasing all materials, hiring and paying subcontractors, and coordinating all the work.”
That is according to the dictionary. But to many Filipinos, a contractor is simply defined as a crook, who engages in gross overpricing of materials, pays salaries to ghost employees, produces shoddy public works that endanger the public, and gladly hands out massive, clandestine, unreported campaign contributions in cash to candidates, in order to cover up his tracks.
The Senate is poised to conduct an inquiry, in aid of legislation, on whether three Filipino contractors “debarred” or blacklisted by the World Bank, may have bribed certain public officials, and otherwise engaged in criminal conduct, such as collusion in bidding for projects. But the House of Representatives has beaten the Senate to the draw, although their public hearing produced not an investigation, but a comic opera.
Some honorable representatives reportedly joined in singing a hallelujah chorus to the almighty contractors, from whom all good things come. The honorable investigators reportedly morphed into opera singers by sending up embarrassing paeans of praise for the contractors under fire. Thus, once more, the political power of big-time contractors proved itself to be awesome.
We are not talking of penny ante contractors. We are talking of giants in the construction industry: E.C. de Luna Construction, Cavite Ideal Construction, and CM Pancho Construction. Here are some of their multimillion public works projects over the years. First, E.C. de Luna Construction:
Tagaytay-Palico Road - P104.20 M
Road concreting Palawan - P322.20 M
Tagaytay City Flyover - P292.94 M
Road construction Misamis Occidental and Zamboanga del Norte - P254.83 M
Road improvement San Jose, Patnongon - P126.68 M
Overlay Asluman Road, Iloilo and Antique - P 997.57 M
Iloilo East Coast - Capiz Road - P 530.59 M
Second, Cavite Ideal Construction:
Naga-Toledo Road - P 805.6 M
Sablayan Road, Occidental Mindoro - P 889.3 M
Tacloban Road, Leyte - P 964 M
C-5 flyover, Metro Manila - P 765 M
Putlan bridge, Nueva Ecija - P 205.6 M
Lotus Central Mall, Imus, Cavite - P 425 M
Rehab project Echague, Isabela - P 587.9 M
Civil works for Sta. Maria bridge, Ilocos Sur - P 97.6 M
Civil works Baybay Bato, Leyte, Cebu - P 856.2 M
Civil works Reina Mercedes, Isabela - P 562.5 M
Macalelon Road, Quezon - P 654.7 M
Aritao Road, Baguio - P 1,422.4 M
SLEX Service Road, Metro Manila - P 524.4 M
Arterial road, South Leyte - P 829.7 M
Third, CM Pancho Construction. I have a list of their projects, but without the cost.
However, the point common to all these three contractors is that they are masters of their universe, and they could be grand players in politics.
In blacklisting these three contractors, the World Bank Group Sanctions Board said, in its decision dated 12 January 2009:
3. The Notice relies on circumstantial and testimonial evidence of collusion in order to establish that the Respondents engaged in corrupt practices and collusive and other fraudulent practices in connection with the World Bank-financed project. The circumstantial evidence consists of alleged indicia of collusion, including high bid prices, symmetrical relationships among bids, bids containing significant errors, “clusters” of bids, “strange and unnatural” bid prices, submission of fraudulent bid securities, and inconsistent application of criteria within the prequalification process. The testimonial evidence is in the form of statements from multiple witnesses, some identified in the Notice, some anonymous, and others whose identity was withheld from the Respondents as confidential materials. . . .
8. In the case of Respondents E.C. de Luna and Eduardo C. de Luna, the Sanctions Board determined that the appropriate sanction would be debarment for an indefinite period.. In determining this sanction, the Sanctions Board took into account, inter alia, E.C. de Luna’s position as designated winner in the collusive scheme and also the multiple witness statements identifying E.C. de Luna and Mr. Eduardo C. de Luna as ringleaders in this scheme. The Sanctions Board considered as a further aggravating factor that these Respondents had engaged in multiple instances of misconduct, concluding that this conduct was sufficiently egregious as to warrant the most severe sanction.
I wish I were a contractor, instead of a lawyer. Instead of having to be honest, competent, and hardworking, I can grow fabulously rich, and maybe reduce certain legislators to jelly. Instead of reading myself blind, I could just bribe public works and local government officials. Instead of going to boring church every Sunday, darn it, I can just build an entire church and thus secure the redemption of my immortal soul. Instead of serving as a moving target for paid character assassins and expensive PR firms whose only expertise in journalism is bribery of media practitioners who inhabit their pockets, I would be canonized by media.
If I were a contractor, I would just buy off unpleasantness, such as adverse publicity or a congressional investigation. How convenient in a country whose many things are for sale, including men’s souls.
But I digress. After the Senate reorganization, I did not apply, nor did I particularly want, but was nevertheless appointed, as economic affairs chair. When I started on my duties and examined the records, I found that four resolutions on the World Bank scandal were filed, and all were referred to my committee. The three separate resolutions filed by Sen. Roxas, Sen. Legarda, and Sen. Revilla were all referred on 21 November 2007. The fourth resolution by Sen. Lacson was referred on 19 January 2009. With all the four resolutions, economic affairs was the primary committee, while both public works and finance were the secondary committees.
After session was resumed this January, I set a public hearing for tomorrow. I ordered invitations to be sent out, and I buckled down and read the background file. However, last Wednesday, 21 January 2009, a fifth resolution by Sen. Roxas was called for first reading, and would have been routinely assigned to economic affairs. But Sen. Pangilinan suddenly filed a motion for reconsideration to transfer the referral to either the public works or blue ribbon committees. Sen. Roxas, who was formerly chair of the economic affairs committee and author of the latest resolution, objected to the motion. I was no longer in session hall.
The next day when the staff reported the incident to me, I was as shocked as if I had suffered multiple stab wounds. The first stab wound came from behind. In my two terms as senator, the approved parliamentary behavior has been to show respect to a committee chair, by consulting her first, before trying to remove a subject from her jurisdiction. It is just elementary courtesy, but it was denied me.
I immediately dashed off a letter to Sen. Zubiri, the majority leader, filing my opposition on the ground of laches. Laches is the doctrine in equity, by which a court denies relief to a complainant who has unreasonably delayed in asserting the claim, when that delay has prejudiced the party against whom relief is sought. In other words, laches is sleeping on your rights.
The referral of the first three resolutions were made to my committee more than a year ago, in November 2007. Why did not Sen. Pangilinan file a timely motion for reconsideration? At that time, he was majority leader and ex officio chair of the rules committee. Why did he wait more than a year until the committee chairmanship had been assigned to me?
Under the Senate Rules, all four committees involved - economic affairs, public works, finance, and blue ribbon - have overlapping legitimate jurisdictions over the subject. However, the Senate President chose to make the referral no less than four times to the economic affairs committee. Thus, there is no problem with the committee. Perhaps, the only problem is . . . me?
The next day I received a second stab wound. The majority leader was quoted as saying that, without consultation, he had decided to make a new referral to the blue ribbon committee. He cited a consensus allegedly reached in caucus that all investigations of government anomalies should be assigned to the blue ribbon committee.
In effect, does this mean that blue ribbon would have a monopoly of all criminal investigations? Then it should also assume the duty of filing the corresponding bill on each and every subject matter, instead of just filing a report with the Ombudsman. And does this mean that even the committee with regulatory jurisdiction over the subject matter has no personality to participate, even only as a secondary committee? Then every committee would be reduced to administrative research.
Where in the Constitution does it authorize the Senate to vest its power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in just one out of some 36 committees? Doesn’t this alleged consensus amount to a gag rule with respect to every committee chair? For every senator has his or her own style of presiding. I respectfully remind you that the Constitution authorizes the Senate to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, but only “in accordance with its duly published Rules of Procedures.” Has this Senate published this alleged rule on exclusivity?
In the Senate Rules defining the jurisdiction of each committee, the Rules uses the term “all matters.” The Rule does not use the term “exclusive” with respect to the jurisdiction of the blue ribbon committee. For this committee, the Rules merely uses the clause “all matters relating to, including investigation.” If the intention was to change the meaning, then the rule should be formally amended in writing, and published. Otherwise, this alleged consensus should be put to a vote in plenary session.
But putting aside this issue of statutory construction, why make this alleged consensus retroactive? The resolutions were first referred to the economic affairs committee over a year ago, in November 2007, when the consensus had not yet been reached.
If the consensus is that only blue ribbon can investigate government anomalies, then the motion should have sought transfer to the blue ribbon committee alone. But the motion sought transfer to the public works committee, or to the blue ribbon committee. So I demand to know: why is it acceptable to assign the subject to either public works or to blue ribbon, but not to economic affairs?
It is obvious that the Senate probe of the World Bank blacklisted contractors will have little legislative value, because it has been overtaken by events. Pres. Arroyo has already ordered the Department of Trade and Industry to investigate the subject. The Ombudsman is already conducting preliminary investigation of the criminal cases, and she is scheduled to release the results in February.
The World Bank itself has already identified the following administrative remedies:
* An independent permanent assessment and technical audit that strengthens transparency of the bidding process.* Enhanced processes for procurement, financial management, internal controls, and audit of the road management agencies.* Inclusion of a new and innovative coalition of citizen and road users group, called “Road Watch” in the project management setup.
The only value of a Senate hearing would likely be publicity for reelectionist politicians, and other candidates. There might be some political value in Sen. Lacson’s disclosure, if any, of the public official who allegedly received P70 million in bribes.
Last December, the World Bank issued a policy research working paper entitled “Grand Corruption in Utilities.” The paper states:
Grand corruption . . . includes cases when politicians or high-ranking civil servants manipulate a country’s management or regulation of infrastructure industries to gain exclusive benefits. It can be a “purely” public sector phenomenon or involve both public and private agents. In the first case, state-owned public service providers serve as tools for politicians, who benefit in the form of personal revenues, bolstered positions, or party contributions. In the case of public-private interactions, private sector actors used bribes to influence the form of the market or contractual terms at the cost of consumer welfare.. Sometimes these phenomena are described as crony capitalism, in which political networks dominate important private assets, or state capture, in which private firms are able to influence public power to their own benefit. (Emphasis added.)
The only salient issue in the probe is: who are the public officials involved in crony capitalism, and in state capture? There is a complication, because under international law, the government cannot subpoena World Bank officials, or subpoena the written report of its Department of Institutional Integrity. However, it appears that the World Bank has furnished copies of its report to the finance secretary and to the Ombudsman, and we can subpoena these local officials. But the Philippine government has no authority to substitute its own disciplinary judgment for that of the World Bank.
If the Senate probe has little legislative value, why bother to insult me by removing it from my committee? Is the influence of the contractors so strong that they can now determine who shall investigate them? Am I disqualified because I happen to be the only former RTC judge in the present Senate? I feel like Julius Caesar, after he was stabbed by Cassius. The hostility is as palpable as the pain.
In this chamber, I am the only recipient of the Magsaysay Award for government service. I have proved that I will fight the crooks in government at any time, at any place. But to ask me to squabble with my own colleagues in the workplace for scraps of power is unacceptable. This bloodsport is extremely distasteful to me. If my fellow senators do not like my style in presiding at public hearings on scandals, that is their problem.
Many of our colleagues in this lawmaking body are non-lawyers. And of the few lawyers, even fewer have spent enough time in trial courts. I was a multi-awarded RTC judge for five years. I taught Remedial Law, aka the Rules of Court, in UP for ten years. Despite these credentials that I am obliged to recite, there is now a move to prevent me from presiding at a picayune public hearing on the blacklisted World Bank contractors.
If my critics wish to vaporize or neutralize me, that is their impossible dream. But it is a different matter if my own colleagues wish to turn me into a monkey who sees nothing, hears nothing, and says nothing. I cannot remain in the Senate and consent to be emasculated. Hence, I express in the strongest terms my disgust at this transparent attempt to play puerile power games with me. I do not think that the public will be thrilled, much less edified, to watch senators fighting for turf, as if the territory of corruption were not extensive enough in this corrupt country.
Let me serve notice that if I continue to be treated without the respect that I am entitled to as a co-equal senator, even only because of my age and my experience, I shall be compelled to tender my resignation as Senator of the Philippines, and to bring this issue directly to the Filipino people. Let me ask the three big-time contractors - E.C. de Luna Construction, Cavite Ideal Construction, and CM Pancho Construction: Are you people behind this move to prevent me from presiding at the hearing tomorrow? Are you happy now?
May I know if I am permanently barred from presiding at the investigation of any scandal, even if it directly falls under the jurisdiction of the committee on economic affairs and on foreign relations, both of which I chair? If so, I respectfully move to submit this alleged monopoly consensus to a vote on the floor.
Meantime, Mr. President, out of delicadeza, I leave to the sound discretion of our colleagues the question of the scheduled public hearing tomorrow, and who shall preside over it. Because of its urgency for the public interest, I shall deliver tomorrow afternoon the sponsorship speech on the baselines bill, and then proceed to interpellation.
I avail of my parliamentary privilege, and I refuse to take any questions. Instead, I shall now walk out of this Senate, to express my strong personal disgust at the exhibition by some of our colleagues of the absence of common decency, and the failure of parliamentary conduct, in connection with the big-time contractors blacklisted by the World Bank.
Mr. President:
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, a contractor is: “one who contracts for the completion of an entire project, including purchasing all materials, hiring and paying subcontractors, and coordinating all the work.”
That is according to the dictionary. But to many Filipinos, a contractor is simply defined as a crook, who engages in gross overpricing of materials, pays salaries to ghost employees, produces shoddy public works that endanger the public, and gladly hands out massive, clandestine, unreported campaign contributions in cash to candidates, in order to cover up his tracks.
The Senate is poised to conduct an inquiry, in aid of legislation, on whether three Filipino contractors “debarred” or blacklisted by the World Bank, may have bribed certain public officials, and otherwise engaged in criminal conduct, such as collusion in bidding for projects. But the House of Representatives has beaten the Senate to the draw, although their public hearing produced not an investigation, but a comic opera.
Some honorable representatives reportedly joined in singing a hallelujah chorus to the almighty contractors, from whom all good things come. The honorable investigators reportedly morphed into opera singers by sending up embarrassing paeans of praise for the contractors under fire. Thus, once more, the political power of big-time contractors proved itself to be awesome.
We are not talking of penny ante contractors. We are talking of giants in the construction industry: E.C. de Luna Construction, Cavite Ideal Construction, and CM Pancho Construction. Here are some of their multimillion public works projects over the years. First, E.C. de Luna Construction:
Tagaytay-Palico Road - P104.20 M
Road concreting Palawan - P322.20 M
Tagaytay City Flyover - P292.94 M
Road construction Misamis Occidental and Zamboanga del Norte - P254.83 M
Road improvement San Jose, Patnongon - P126.68 M
Overlay Asluman Road, Iloilo and Antique - P 997.57 M
Iloilo East Coast - Capiz Road - P 530.59 M
Second, Cavite Ideal Construction:
Naga-Toledo Road - P 805.6 M
Sablayan Road, Occidental Mindoro - P 889.3 M
Tacloban Road, Leyte - P 964 M
C-5 flyover, Metro Manila - P 765 M
Putlan bridge, Nueva Ecija - P 205.6 M
Lotus Central Mall, Imus, Cavite - P 425 M
Rehab project Echague, Isabela - P 587.9 M
Civil works for Sta. Maria bridge, Ilocos Sur - P 97.6 M
Civil works Baybay Bato, Leyte, Cebu - P 856.2 M
Civil works Reina Mercedes, Isabela - P 562.5 M
Macalelon Road, Quezon - P 654.7 M
Aritao Road, Baguio - P 1,422.4 M
SLEX Service Road, Metro Manila - P 524.4 M
Arterial road, South Leyte - P 829.7 M
Third, CM Pancho Construction. I have a list of their projects, but without the cost.
However, the point common to all these three contractors is that they are masters of their universe, and they could be grand players in politics.
In blacklisting these three contractors, the World Bank Group Sanctions Board said, in its decision dated 12 January 2009:
3. The Notice relies on circumstantial and testimonial evidence of collusion in order to establish that the Respondents engaged in corrupt practices and collusive and other fraudulent practices in connection with the World Bank-financed project. The circumstantial evidence consists of alleged indicia of collusion, including high bid prices, symmetrical relationships among bids, bids containing significant errors, “clusters” of bids, “strange and unnatural” bid prices, submission of fraudulent bid securities, and inconsistent application of criteria within the prequalification process. The testimonial evidence is in the form of statements from multiple witnesses, some identified in the Notice, some anonymous, and others whose identity was withheld from the Respondents as confidential materials. . . .
8. In the case of Respondents E.C. de Luna and Eduardo C. de Luna, the Sanctions Board determined that the appropriate sanction would be debarment for an indefinite period.. In determining this sanction, the Sanctions Board took into account, inter alia, E.C. de Luna’s position as designated winner in the collusive scheme and also the multiple witness statements identifying E.C. de Luna and Mr. Eduardo C. de Luna as ringleaders in this scheme. The Sanctions Board considered as a further aggravating factor that these Respondents had engaged in multiple instances of misconduct, concluding that this conduct was sufficiently egregious as to warrant the most severe sanction.
I wish I were a contractor, instead of a lawyer. Instead of having to be honest, competent, and hardworking, I can grow fabulously rich, and maybe reduce certain legislators to jelly. Instead of reading myself blind, I could just bribe public works and local government officials. Instead of going to boring church every Sunday, darn it, I can just build an entire church and thus secure the redemption of my immortal soul. Instead of serving as a moving target for paid character assassins and expensive PR firms whose only expertise in journalism is bribery of media practitioners who inhabit their pockets, I would be canonized by media.
If I were a contractor, I would just buy off unpleasantness, such as adverse publicity or a congressional investigation. How convenient in a country whose many things are for sale, including men’s souls.
But I digress. After the Senate reorganization, I did not apply, nor did I particularly want, but was nevertheless appointed, as economic affairs chair. When I started on my duties and examined the records, I found that four resolutions on the World Bank scandal were filed, and all were referred to my committee. The three separate resolutions filed by Sen. Roxas, Sen. Legarda, and Sen. Revilla were all referred on 21 November 2007. The fourth resolution by Sen. Lacson was referred on 19 January 2009. With all the four resolutions, economic affairs was the primary committee, while both public works and finance were the secondary committees.
After session was resumed this January, I set a public hearing for tomorrow. I ordered invitations to be sent out, and I buckled down and read the background file. However, last Wednesday, 21 January 2009, a fifth resolution by Sen. Roxas was called for first reading, and would have been routinely assigned to economic affairs. But Sen. Pangilinan suddenly filed a motion for reconsideration to transfer the referral to either the public works or blue ribbon committees. Sen. Roxas, who was formerly chair of the economic affairs committee and author of the latest resolution, objected to the motion. I was no longer in session hall.
The next day when the staff reported the incident to me, I was as shocked as if I had suffered multiple stab wounds. The first stab wound came from behind. In my two terms as senator, the approved parliamentary behavior has been to show respect to a committee chair, by consulting her first, before trying to remove a subject from her jurisdiction. It is just elementary courtesy, but it was denied me.
I immediately dashed off a letter to Sen. Zubiri, the majority leader, filing my opposition on the ground of laches. Laches is the doctrine in equity, by which a court denies relief to a complainant who has unreasonably delayed in asserting the claim, when that delay has prejudiced the party against whom relief is sought. In other words, laches is sleeping on your rights.
The referral of the first three resolutions were made to my committee more than a year ago, in November 2007. Why did not Sen. Pangilinan file a timely motion for reconsideration? At that time, he was majority leader and ex officio chair of the rules committee. Why did he wait more than a year until the committee chairmanship had been assigned to me?
Under the Senate Rules, all four committees involved - economic affairs, public works, finance, and blue ribbon - have overlapping legitimate jurisdictions over the subject. However, the Senate President chose to make the referral no less than four times to the economic affairs committee. Thus, there is no problem with the committee. Perhaps, the only problem is . . . me?
The next day I received a second stab wound. The majority leader was quoted as saying that, without consultation, he had decided to make a new referral to the blue ribbon committee. He cited a consensus allegedly reached in caucus that all investigations of government anomalies should be assigned to the blue ribbon committee.
In effect, does this mean that blue ribbon would have a monopoly of all criminal investigations? Then it should also assume the duty of filing the corresponding bill on each and every subject matter, instead of just filing a report with the Ombudsman. And does this mean that even the committee with regulatory jurisdiction over the subject matter has no personality to participate, even only as a secondary committee? Then every committee would be reduced to administrative research.
Where in the Constitution does it authorize the Senate to vest its power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in just one out of some 36 committees? Doesn’t this alleged consensus amount to a gag rule with respect to every committee chair? For every senator has his or her own style of presiding. I respectfully remind you that the Constitution authorizes the Senate to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, but only “in accordance with its duly published Rules of Procedures.” Has this Senate published this alleged rule on exclusivity?
In the Senate Rules defining the jurisdiction of each committee, the Rules uses the term “all matters.” The Rule does not use the term “exclusive” with respect to the jurisdiction of the blue ribbon committee. For this committee, the Rules merely uses the clause “all matters relating to, including investigation.” If the intention was to change the meaning, then the rule should be formally amended in writing, and published. Otherwise, this alleged consensus should be put to a vote in plenary session.
But putting aside this issue of statutory construction, why make this alleged consensus retroactive? The resolutions were first referred to the economic affairs committee over a year ago, in November 2007, when the consensus had not yet been reached.
If the consensus is that only blue ribbon can investigate government anomalies, then the motion should have sought transfer to the blue ribbon committee alone. But the motion sought transfer to the public works committee, or to the blue ribbon committee. So I demand to know: why is it acceptable to assign the subject to either public works or to blue ribbon, but not to economic affairs?
It is obvious that the Senate probe of the World Bank blacklisted contractors will have little legislative value, because it has been overtaken by events. Pres. Arroyo has already ordered the Department of Trade and Industry to investigate the subject. The Ombudsman is already conducting preliminary investigation of the criminal cases, and she is scheduled to release the results in February.
The World Bank itself has already identified the following administrative remedies:
* An independent permanent assessment and technical audit that strengthens transparency of the bidding process.* Enhanced processes for procurement, financial management, internal controls, and audit of the road management agencies.* Inclusion of a new and innovative coalition of citizen and road users group, called “Road Watch” in the project management setup.
The only value of a Senate hearing would likely be publicity for reelectionist politicians, and other candidates. There might be some political value in Sen. Lacson’s disclosure, if any, of the public official who allegedly received P70 million in bribes.
Last December, the World Bank issued a policy research working paper entitled “Grand Corruption in Utilities.” The paper states:
Grand corruption . . . includes cases when politicians or high-ranking civil servants manipulate a country’s management or regulation of infrastructure industries to gain exclusive benefits. It can be a “purely” public sector phenomenon or involve both public and private agents. In the first case, state-owned public service providers serve as tools for politicians, who benefit in the form of personal revenues, bolstered positions, or party contributions. In the case of public-private interactions, private sector actors used bribes to influence the form of the market or contractual terms at the cost of consumer welfare.. Sometimes these phenomena are described as crony capitalism, in which political networks dominate important private assets, or state capture, in which private firms are able to influence public power to their own benefit. (Emphasis added.)
The only salient issue in the probe is: who are the public officials involved in crony capitalism, and in state capture? There is a complication, because under international law, the government cannot subpoena World Bank officials, or subpoena the written report of its Department of Institutional Integrity. However, it appears that the World Bank has furnished copies of its report to the finance secretary and to the Ombudsman, and we can subpoena these local officials. But the Philippine government has no authority to substitute its own disciplinary judgment for that of the World Bank.
If the Senate probe has little legislative value, why bother to insult me by removing it from my committee? Is the influence of the contractors so strong that they can now determine who shall investigate them? Am I disqualified because I happen to be the only former RTC judge in the present Senate? I feel like Julius Caesar, after he was stabbed by Cassius. The hostility is as palpable as the pain.
In this chamber, I am the only recipient of the Magsaysay Award for government service. I have proved that I will fight the crooks in government at any time, at any place. But to ask me to squabble with my own colleagues in the workplace for scraps of power is unacceptable. This bloodsport is extremely distasteful to me. If my fellow senators do not like my style in presiding at public hearings on scandals, that is their problem.
Many of our colleagues in this lawmaking body are non-lawyers. And of the few lawyers, even fewer have spent enough time in trial courts. I was a multi-awarded RTC judge for five years. I taught Remedial Law, aka the Rules of Court, in UP for ten years. Despite these credentials that I am obliged to recite, there is now a move to prevent me from presiding at a picayune public hearing on the blacklisted World Bank contractors.
If my critics wish to vaporize or neutralize me, that is their impossible dream. But it is a different matter if my own colleagues wish to turn me into a monkey who sees nothing, hears nothing, and says nothing. I cannot remain in the Senate and consent to be emasculated. Hence, I express in the strongest terms my disgust at this transparent attempt to play puerile power games with me. I do not think that the public will be thrilled, much less edified, to watch senators fighting for turf, as if the territory of corruption were not extensive enough in this corrupt country.
Let me serve notice that if I continue to be treated without the respect that I am entitled to as a co-equal senator, even only because of my age and my experience, I shall be compelled to tender my resignation as Senator of the Philippines, and to bring this issue directly to the Filipino people. Let me ask the three big-time contractors - E.C. de Luna Construction, Cavite Ideal Construction, and CM Pancho Construction: Are you people behind this move to prevent me from presiding at the hearing tomorrow? Are you happy now?
May I know if I am permanently barred from presiding at the investigation of any scandal, even if it directly falls under the jurisdiction of the committee on economic affairs and on foreign relations, both of which I chair? If so, I respectfully move to submit this alleged monopoly consensus to a vote on the floor.
Meantime, Mr. President, out of delicadeza, I leave to the sound discretion of our colleagues the question of the scheduled public hearing tomorrow, and who shall preside over it. Because of its urgency for the public interest, I shall deliver tomorrow afternoon the sponsorship speech on the baselines bill, and then proceed to interpellation.
I avail of my parliamentary privilege, and I refuse to take any questions. Instead, I shall now walk out of this Senate, to express my strong personal disgust at the exhibition by some of our colleagues of the absence of common decency, and the failure of parliamentary conduct, in connection with the big-time contractors blacklisted by the World Bank.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
