In defense of DAP and PNoy’s lump sum (2)

28 October 2013

In last Tuesday’s column (PJ, October 28) I made mention of various groups and personalities opposing and demanding the abolition of the DAP, as well as the lump sum funds both in the GAA and those  classified as non-budget funds.

Various reasons are given for their opposition, among them the DAP’s being unconstitutional and illegal, as well as both fund items being discretionary, unequitable, and the danger of its being abused by a corrupt President in the future.

Although I expressed my disagreement with the views of those who oppose the DAP and the lump-sum funds, I also recognize their right to have such views, and hope that they would somehow display the same attitude towards others, like myself, who disagree with them.

As I indicated earlier, I don’t think that the DAP is unconstitutional, and more so, illegal. And I also don’t subscribe to the ridiculous idea being peddled by those against the DAP (which includes the hard core PNoy haters) that the administration consciously engaged in a sinister project when it used the savings that accrued out of the under-spending in 2011, for accelerating government capital project expenses in 2012. And I have various reasons for saying this.

First of all, the government did not waste any time in explaining the background and the reasons for the DAP when its existence was being questioned. It tried its best to be transparent and its statements can be substantiated by the contents of the President’s messages to Congress for both the 2011 and 2012 National Budgets (those interested to read the said messages - to have a better perspective of the issues - can access them through the following URLs, namely, http://www.dbm.gov.ph/?page_id=632 and http://www .gov.ph/ 2011/07/26/ president-aquinos-2012-budget-message/).

The 2011 Budget message reflected the intense determination of the President to fight corruption as shown both by the controls he installed, and in his calling for the involvement of the various sectors of society in monitoring how the government funds are spent.

The said message also clearly indicated following: the then new administration’s intention to cut down the 2011 Capital outlays by 5.7% (as compared to 2010); the implementation of stringent measures in the release of funds (both of which slowed down project processing and approval); and the intention to tap PPP for the implementation of government capital projects (which barely materialized). These factors, I would say, largely caused the under-spending that resulted in the unsatisfactory 3.7% GDP growth in 2011.

Meanwhile, the President’s 2012 “Results-Focused” Budget message given to Congress on July 26, 2011 (http://www .gov.ph/ 2011/07/26/ president-aquinos-2012-budget-message/) continued to strongly manifest his desire to achieve the “…reduction of leakages, inducement of efficiencies and better selection of projects priorities…” and is reflected in the following statements lifted from the said 2012 message.

“Financial accountability studies have also convinced us to similarly tighten the gravely abused generation and use of savings. We have reformulated the General Provision in our proposed spending program that allows the use of savings [so as] to strengthen DBM oversight [function] on the realignment of funds across allotment classes, within capital outlays, and over their use for allowances like magna carta benefits.

“Hence, in the 2012 proposed Budget, we have removed the special provisions granted to the Department of National Defense (DND) and the AFP to propose realignments in their budgets to clearly signal the need to avoid these. The budget must already reflect the best of the operational plans of agencies. We only reiterate the fiscal autonomy and privilege to realign savings granted in the Constitution to Congress, the Judiciary and the constitutional offices. A more stringent reporting requirement is also proposed.”

Perhaps, after being alerted by the low GDP growth in the first 2 quarters of 2011, the need to accelerate the implementation of capital projects in the coming year was therefore included in the President’s 2012 Budget message to Congress, and such intention was reflected in the following lines.

“By Expense Class, Capital Outlays (CO) will increase by 25.4 percent to P328.6 billion, as compared to its budgetary allocation this year of P262.0 billion. In particular, Infrastructure and Other Capital Outlays have increased significantly by 33.1 percent to P255.2 billion from P191.7 billion. With this, I stress that this administration will not spend on infrastructure randomly and with much leakage: rather, in an efficient and targeted manner that supports our priority economic growth drivers.

“Infrastructure for development. Pursuing inclusive economic growth means that we must ensure sufficient investments in strategic infrastructure projects that support expansion and job creation in priority economic sectors for development.

“For 2012, we are providing for a larger infrastructure program to catalyze economic activity, reduce poverty and address climate change: P182.2 billion or 25.7 percent higher than this year. At this point, I stress that we will implement our infrastructure program in a new way, not in the corruption-laden ways of the past.”

I think that the preceding paragraphs quoting or paraphrasing relevant parts of the 2011 and 2012 Budget messages of the President to Congress more than reflect the administration’s transparency and sincerity in its effort to fight corruption and improve the country’s economic standing. And it also more than debunks that ridiculous idea being peddled by the anti-DAP personalities (and PNoy haters) about the DAP being a sinister administration project.

Actually, because the administration implemented its accelerated spending for government capital/infrastructure projects, as planned in the 2012 National Budget (and as advised to Congress), the effort resulted in GDP growth rates of 6.4% for the 1^st Quarter, 5.9% for the 2^nd Quarter, 7.1% for the 3^rd Quarter and 6.8% for the 4^th Quarter, for a 6.6% GDP growth for the year which was to my understanding was the best in the ASEAN and topped only by China’s performance.

As to the constitutionality and legality of the DAP, I think that the administration’s explanation and justification (invoking Article VI, Section 25, Sub-Sec. 5 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, and Sections 39 & 49 of Chapter 5, Book 6 of the 1987 Administrative Code, which I accessed and am posting here for the consumption of the reader and for him/her to form a conclusion as to the legality of the DAP) is very clear, even to a legal simpleton like myself.

“Article VI, 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines Section 25, Sub-section (5): No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President…may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”(http:// www.chanrobles.com/article6.htm)

“E.O. No. 292, Administrative Code of 1987, Book VI –National Government Budgeting Section 39. Authority to Use Savings in Appropriations to Cover Deficits. – Except as otherwise provided in the General Appropriations Act, any savings in the regular appropriations authorized in the General Appropriations Act for programs and projects of any department, office or agency, may, with the approval of the President, be used to cover a deficit in any other item of the regular appropriations: provided, that the creation of new positions or increase of salaries shall not be allowed to be funded from budgetary savings except when specifically authorized by law…”

“Section 49. Authority to Use Savings for Certain Purposes. – Savings in the appropriations provided in the General Appropriations Act may be used for the settlement of the following obligations incurred during a current fiscal year or previous fiscal years as may be approved by Secretary in accordance with rules and procedures as may be approved by the President: (9) Priority activities that will promote the economic wellbeing of the nation, including food production, agrarian reform, energy development, disaster relief, and rehabilitation” (http://philippinelaw.info/statutes/eo292bk6-administrative-code-of-1987-book-vi-national-government-budgeting.html).

Due to space constraints, the continuation of this article will follow as part 3 in a subsequent article. Meanwhile, comments/reactions will be appreciated and can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko @gmail.com) or this writer’s blog (http://mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).

In defense of DAP and PNoy’s lump sum (1)

28 October 2013

There are various reasons being advanced by the different groups and personalities opposing, and demanding, the abolition of the Disbursement Acceleration Program and the lump sums funds provided for in the GAA, as well those classified as non-budget funds.

Among the reasons advanced by those opposing the DAP and lump sum funds  are that they are unconstitutional  and illegal (at least for the DAP), discretionary  - therefore a source of corruption, un-equitable, as well as, subject to abuse - in the future - by a corrupt president.

I believe that our democratic way of life entitles every bonafide citizen to his/her own view over issues, and he/she is free – if so desired – to publicly express such view. Given this, I now indulge in such prerogative and express my own position - on the two issues - which incidentally are not consistent with the views of the anti-DAP and anti-lump sum crowd.

Despite this, however, I declare that I respect their views, with the hope that they likewise respect mine. And having stated this, I now present my various positions regarding the said issues:

On the constitutionality and legality of the DAP. As soon as the existence of the DAP was made known, the reason for the existence of the DAP was explained by the administration which to my understanding is as follows:

The government underspent during the FY 2011, and this detrimentally affected the country’s economic growth which – in terms of Gross Domestic Product - shrank to only 3.7% of GDP as compared to 7.6% of GDP the previous year -2010 (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_thePhilippines). So, because of this, the government had to scramble to catch up by accelerating the implementation of projects in 2012 using the savings (i.e. the unspent project funds in the 2011 GAA).

In searching for substantiations and explanations, a check with the 2011 President’s Budget Message to the 15^th Congress, dated August 24, 2010 (http://www.dbm.gov.ph/ ?page_id=632), revealed that this first ever national budget submitted by President Noynoy to congress, which he termed a “Reform Budget” proposed that “To maximize the efficient use of our scarce resources…more stringent measures…be observed in the release of funds” so as to “…curb inefficiencies and corruption in the disbursement and utilization of public funds.”

The message went on to cite an example of a stringent measure which is “…a special provision… requiring the Department of Agriculture’s (DA) farm-to-market roads (FMRs), for construction by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to be based on a network plan…[which] shall be supported by a construction design submitted by the DA.”

The President also appealed to the members of both chambers of Congress to be his “…mighty ally in instituting reforms” and “…to join [him] in putting an end to the wanton waste of… [the] people’s money.”

In the same message, he also underscored the need for the help of “…civil society, the academe, public servants and private individuals, to track government expenditures… [and that] he believe[s] that the responsibility to check where the funds go and how these are spent should not be left to the COA alone. [He says] we are all tasked with looking after the public welfare, and this includes prudence and accountability in the allocation and spending of public funds.”

The said 2011 Budget message also included an explanation that the proposed “Capital outlays… [was] decrease[d] by 5.7 percent…” or P12.8 billion as compared to that of 2010, and that this “…decrease in outlays can be mitigated by…efforts to attract public-private partnerships and improve the implementation of government capital projects.”

Interpreting (and extrapolating from) the information contained in the foregoing paragraphs, I formed at least two impressions, the first of which reflects the intense desire of the President to fight corruption as reflected in the mechanisms he installed in the budget, not only to check leakages but in harnessing also the participation of the various sectors of the society in monitoring the national budget.

The second impression is that it seems that the under-spending that caused the low economic growth in 2011 stemmed from not only the deliberate 5% reduction in that year’s Capital outlays. It seem to have been caused also by the (unintended) delay in the implementation of programmed capital projects due to factors like the new administration still in the early stage of their “learning curve” and therefore not yet up to par in the use of the governments systems, as well as the effect of the implementation of more stringent controls (to contain fund leaks and wastages), but which have stalled execution. There was also, I think, an over expectation of PPP projects which did not materialize.

Due to space limitations, the continuation of this article will follow as Part 2 in the next column. Meanwhile, comments/reactions will be appreciated and can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko @gmail.com) or this writer’s blog (http://mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).

Random thoughts and lessons from the Bohol tragedy

24 October 2013

The magnitude 7.2 earthquake that devastated Bohol (and also affected Cebu, Negros, Syquijor and parts of Mindanao) about a week ago turned out to be caused by the vertical movement of an unknown fault system – to as much as 3 meters in some parts - which has finally been pinpointed in Barangay Anunang, Inabanga, northeast of Tagbilaran, after 7 days of searching by Phivolcs personnel.

Prior to the October 15 earthquake, it seems that (based on available records) Bohol was also hit last year (December 19, 2012) by a 4.6 magnitude earthquake that had its epicenter in the island itself. This is about 54 kilometers east of Tagbilaran, around the vicinity of the town of Jagna which is practically located in the opposite side of the island, about 50 kilometers away, with respect to Inabanga.

So far, according to reports, the volcanologists have already surveyed about 5 kilometers of the fault – and are continuing to trace its extent - and they say that faults like these can run up to hundreds of kilometers.  So, I won’t be surprised if they’ll eventually find out that the Jagna epicenter Is connected to the Inabanga fault.

A number of sinkholes in different parts of the Bohol also were discovered after the earthquake. This was explained by state geologists as something that can happen because underneath a big part of the island is limestone which can easily be eroded by underground water flow. Over a long period, water would carve out a big portion of this limestone deposit creating an underground void which, during a strong earthquake would cause the ground on top to cave in, creating the sink hole.

So far more than 2,000 aftershocks have been recorded, with some hitting magnitudes of as much as 4.5 to 5. This prevents Boholanos from returning to their abodes (for safety reasons) and as a result, hundreds of thousands of persons are forced to live temporarily in tents.

The government, as well as the citizenry responded fast in providing rescue and material aid to the victims, particularly in Bohol, but the effectiveness of distribution is hampered by the extensive damage also to road systems, as well as landslides which isolated Barangays, especially those that are in the remote mountain areas. The armed forces of the Philippines have resorted to using helicopters already to reach, and deliver aid to, the isolated barangays,  but TV footages show that the victims, particularly children, out of desperation, resort – as of the seventh day - to waiting by the roadside with signs asking for food (or help) from vehicles that pass by. In the fishing villages, the fishermen are scared to go out fishing, especially in the evening, for fear of the rather strong aftershocks.

Because of the logistical difficulty that we have encountered, it just crossed my mind that the country misses the support that the USA can give during natural disasters, like when they provided helicopters, in the past, to facilitate the delivery of aid to disaster victims. Their absence this time is understandable though, since they are still reeling from the recent government shutdown that they had. Their absence, to me, however, just emphasizes their being our true friends, because no other country (as far as I perceive, and in the absence of the US) have pitched in to assist us in the manner that the US can, and have done.

It is also so revolting that “epal” politicians don’t even have the decency to refrain from campaigning, in deference to the grave conditions brought about by the disaster, and still pursue their ends callously by providing aid in bags brandishing their name. So disappointing also is the reported hoarding of aid materials by some politicians, as well as fights over “turf” (as in who is authorized to distribute) at the expense of the disaster victims.

As of the writing of this article, I’ve read of reports that all roads are already passable and that all Bohol towns are already accessible and connected. This will make faster the delivery of aid to victims. But one shining act in all of this misfortune is the gesture of the President in immediately and personally going to Bohol to show his sympathy and concern for the citizens there. Reports from the ground there say that the gesture is well appreciated by the victims, and raised their spirits. Some even said that they consider his presence even more valuable than the material aid that they are receiving.

 Earlier today, the President, just back from a state visit in South Korea, is once again back in Bohol to see to make sure that the flow of aid to the province is flowing smoothly, and he reportedly intends to sleep also in a tent as a gesture of “pakikipagisa” with the hundreds of thousands of still displaced victims of the disaster.

The 7.2 magnitude earthquake is a very sad and very unfortunate incident because of the loss of lives, property and the massive damage to our historical legacy. But there is a very important value that this disaster may have served. And this is that it could be used as the model in preparing for the “big earthquake” that is just waiting to happen in Metro Manila on account of the Marikina Valley Fault System that experts say could trigger a “large scale earthquake with a magnitude of 7 or higher.”

When this happens, it is predicted that the death toll will be as high as 35,000, about 120,000 or more injured, and about 3 million persons needed to be evacuated.

The Bohol 7.2 magnitude earthquake, more than ever, emphasizes the reality of the Marikina Valley Fault threat. Since Bohol provides us now with more or less the needed empirical information, maybe the state can make use of these data to prepare and implement programs that would mitigate damage, injuries, and loss of lives that an earlier study projected (and that I believe was based on theoretical inputs).

Comments/reactions will be appreciated and can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko @gmail.com) or this writer’s blog (http://mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).

Hoodlums in Robes

20 October 2013

I first heard of the words “hoodlums in robes” during the inauguration of ex-President Erap in June 1998 who vowed to go after the corrupt judges, thus, another confirmation of the public’s perception then of widespread corruption in the judiciary.

 This fighting stance of the newly sworn president, elating as I heard it, however, ended up instead in disappointment as the supposed “hunter” was himself forced by public pressure to leave the presidency because of corruption charges.

But what turned out as an irony is that instead of the unseating and eventual conviction of a president becoming a major example that should discourage the progress of corruption, the reverse occurred. Unquestionably (as far as I’m concerned), like a fertilized plant, the malady blossomed further during the regime that followed, and although the level dipped rather significantly during the first 3 years of the current administration (see http://www.sws.org.ph/pr050125.htm  and “The TAG 2012 SWS Surveys on Corruption”), these corruption levels, currently, are still uncomfortably high and warrant an intensified partnership (and effort) between the government and the concerned public in fighting it.

With respect to the judiciary, the 2012 IBP National President, Atty. Roan I. Libarios, in his editorial in “The Bar Tribune” posted 8/20/2012 (http://ibp.ph/PDF/PresCorner/A%20Defining%20Moment.pdf) mentioned of an SWS survey that says that public’s “perception of corruption in the judiciary is pervasive.” This conclusion was further supported by statistics indicating that 39% of “judges and justices asks for bribes”, 36% of “litigants pay bribes”, and 20% of “lawyers suggest bribes to win cases.”

Two weeks ago, Mr. Jarius Bondoc of the Philippine Star revealed in his column (PS, 7 October) the existence of a certain Ma’am Arlene who he likens to Janet Napoles in the sense that this Ma’am Arlene acts like she “owns the judiciary”, in the same manner that Napoles acts like “she owns the congress.” Reportedly, this Ma’am Arlene has “court bigwigs and key personnel in her payroll”, as well as influence that extends all the way to the DOJ and the Office of the Ombudsman, and is reputed to be a “notorious fixer of cases with investigators, prosecutors and magistrates.”

Mr. Bondoc, in a subsequent column mentioned that SC Administrator Midas Marquez reacted to his expose’ and wrote that “his office has long been investigating [this] Ma’am Arlene” and asked for helpful information. It turned out also that Marquez, has claimed to have actually uncovered 3 Arlenes instead.

I wonder how long Marquez has been working on his investigation, because based on information regarding this issue that’s rapidly flowing out, this (or these) Arlene(s) have been operating successfully already for quite some time (which explains the clout that she allegedly established in the judiciary community). She even reportedly earned being seated at the head table during the Philippine Judges Association conference in Bacolod last year (which the Chief Justice addressed), and is even said to have influenced the election of the PJA officers about 2 weeks ago.

I also wonder why he seems to be dilly dallying with his investigation, or maybe he is just not a competent investigator. Perhaps he hasn’t heard that more than a year ago, even the then IBP National President came out with the SWS statistics regarding corruption in the judiciary. I only hope that he comes out transparent with this activity because after having observed his actuations during the trial of his boss last year, I, and I believe a large part of the public, especially the netizens, aren’t comfortable with his being on top of this investigation. As it is now, my personal impression is that the issue is starting to get muddled by the appearance, suddenly, of multiple Ma’am Arlenes.

It’s a good development though that the Chief Justice decided to tap the services of the DOJ/NBI, which to me is the right move because they are the ones with the skills, resources and network that could effectively gather needed evidence.

It is high time that a real clearing and cleaning of the judiciary of corrupt persons is done, and those that are guilty should be convicted and jailed regardless of who they are or where they are in the judiciary's hierarchy.

But, just like with the matter of the corrupt legislators and corrupt officials/personnel of government agencies, this cleaning needed in the judiciary can be successfully achieved only through the joint effort and determination of the players in the judicial community, i.e. the trial lawyers, the litigants and the “still” virtuous judges themselves, all of whom should courageously report corruption related activities. But in addition to this would be the significant involvement of the public, especially the netizens, who can, by sustaining focus – through the social media network - on any exposed judicial anomaly until it is resolved, can provide the psychological (and maybe even the material) strength to whoever the change proponent is. In the same manner, public and netizen pressure could also prevent vested interests from thwarting efforts against corruption.

Comments/reactions will be appreciated and can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko @gmail.com) or this writer’s blog (http://mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).