Recently in Readers' Blog Posts Category

Editor's Note: This article was originally written by the author for his blog. We're posting it with his permission. By Doy Cinco Nakakalungkot isipin na kung sino pa ang “nagsusulong, nagtutulak at nananawagan ng good governance, moralidad at responsible citizenship, krusada laban sa jueteng at kurakot” ay siya pa ngayon ang iniipit, pinapatanggal sa pwesto at kinakasuhan ng katiwalian at kabuktutan. Ano ang layunin at bakit gustong patalsikin sa pwesto bilang gubernador si Among Ed? Ang recall petition ba’y interest ng nakararaming Kapampangan, para ba ito sa kaunlaran, good governance at para sa pagbabago? Dahil ba sa plataporma at prinsipyong ipinaglalabang political reform, pagwawaksi ng kabulukan ng pulitika, pagwaksi ng guns gold at goons at sistemang padri-padrino? Ano ang political agenda, ano ang ALTERNATIBA? Ang isa pang tanong ay kung bakit tayo nakikialam at nababahala sa pampulitikang sitwasyon ng Pampanga, the same manner na bakit ganun na lamang ang pagmamalasakit natin sa Mindanao, partikular sa Maguindanao, ang lugar ng Ampatuan clan, MOA-AD at digmaang nagaganap sa pagitan ng militar at MILF. Hindi naman tayo Kapampangan, tubong WARAY tayo, hindi tayo tagaMindanao-LUMAD at lalong hindi tayo Muslim. Tulad ng kasabihan at awit ni Jess Santiago, “ang sakit ng kalingkingan ay dama ng buong katawan,” lahat tayo ay stakeholders, lahat tayo ay aktibo’t responsableng mamamayang Pilipino. Tahasang pinangunggunahan na natin na isang “futile exercise, pagsasayang ng panahon at resources lamang ang recall petition ng grupong Kambilan, Bokal at mga mayor ng Pampanga.” Hindi maiiwasan paghinalaang may kinalaman si GMA sa recall petition. Naniniwala ang marami na siya lamang at wala ng iba ang maaring makapagpatigil sa inaasal ng kanyang mga galamay sa Pampanga. Kung tutuusin, isang kumpas lamang ni GMA sa mag-asawang Pineda at kay Guiao, tapos na ang boxing sa Pampanga. Inaamin ni Among Ed at ibang mga nagmamasid na bilyong pisong budget ang gagamitin para maabot ang 100,000 pirma para sa recall petition at special election at tulad ng dati, gagamitin ito sa pananakot, malawakang pandaraya’t panunuhol at vote buying. Malabong magprosper ang recall petition sapagkat, may kasalukuyang umiiral na status quo order pa ang Korte Suprema. Ultimo ang astig na abugadong si Romulo Macalintal ang nagsasabing isang “political absurdity” ang naturang recall petition. Anya, “hindi ito magpoprosper sa dahilang may nakapending na election protest na nakafile sa Comelec ang talunang si Lilia Pineda.” Inaamin mismo ni Con Mikey Arroyo, ang padrino ng lalawigan na “malabong magtagumpay ang recall petiton, sapagkat, “may malaking kakulangan sa historical precedent ang recall sa Pilipinas. Walang recall move ang nagtagumpay at kadalasa’y banderang kapos at hindi na umaabot sa Comelec.” Kung ganun pala, bakit ayaw niyang patigilin ang kahibangan ng kanyang mga alipores sa probinsya. Ano ito, trial and error tactics, tinatakot lang ba, pinaparusahan lang, tinuturuan lang ba ng lesson si Among Ed? Bukud sa babaha uli ng pera at kikita ang ilan, hinding-hindi makapapayag ang mga Kapampangan na muling ibalik sa pwesto ang mga may kasalanan sa taongbayan. Totoong may kahinaan organizationally si Among Ed at may ilang tao sa kanyang paligid ang parang anay na gumigiba ng kanyang programa de gobyerno sa Pampanga. Dahil ayaw tantanan ng mga kaaway sa pulitika si Among Ed, kahit paano, apektado ang delivery basic services at programang ipinatutupad sa lalawigan. Sadyang nagbabago na ang political landscape ng Pampanga. Sa tulong ng mga Macapagal-Arroyo, Pineda, Lapid, Guiao, Henson at Pelayo, unti-unting nagigising at patuloy na lumalakas ang THIRD FORCE, ang makabagong kilusan ng mamamayan, ang “bagong pulitika,” mga AKTIBISTANG hindi klarong Kaliwa at lalong hindi makabagong konserbatibo o maka-Kanang pwersang reaksyunaryo. Kung dati-rati’y usaping agraryo at anakpawis ang pangunahing pwersa at maka-uri (class oriented) ang oryentasyon, ngayo’y tila ata multi-sectoral, nagka-cut across sa lahat ng uri. Kung magtatagumpay ang recall at matatalo si Among Ed sa special election, walang kaduda-dudang magluluksa ang mga Kapampangan. Tiyak na lalong sisigla ang kilos protesta at magreresulta ng malalaking mobilisasyon ng mamamayan kahalintulad ng electoral campaign nuong nakaraang taon ang magaganap sa Pampanga.

By Atty. Soliman M. Santos, Jr. Contributor THE initialed but unsigned final draft of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP)-Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD), the subject of much current controversy at the national level and of fighting in Central Mindanao, has been “set aside for all intents and purposes” by the Philippine government, at least by its Executive Department (we have to be clear these days which of the three departments is actually acting). The matter is still pending in the Supreme Court but the Executive has announced:“No matter what the Supreme Court ultimately decides, the government will not sign the MOA… in its present form or in any form.” In so many words, the MOA is dead. Those who were so worried about what they thought as the MOA giving away national sovereignty and territory to a new Bangsamoro state, in grave violation of the Constitution, need not worry anymore. The MOA is dead. What they should perhaps worry about now is whether the peace process with the MILF is also dead or at a dead end, where the detour taken could lead to a full-blown war. The peace negotiations were meant to resolve the armed conflict on the Moro front through a negotiated political settlement for a just, lasting and comprehensive solution of the Bangsamoro problem. The ancestral domain aspect of that problem was lined up as the penultimate substantive agenda heading before finally working out the political solution and the legal modalities in a Comprehensive Compact. But this mutually agreed process has reached a dead end of sorts with the non-signing of the MOA, as far as the MILF is concerned. It remains to be seen whether this deadlock can be unlocked. The logic of the whole process would seem to dictate that, since the peace negotiations cannot proceed for the MILF, then it can be expected to consider “alternative means to achieve freedom and justice for the Bangsamoro people” (from an official statement of MILF chief peace negotiator Mohagher Iqbal). These other options include a return to armed struggle which the Moro liberation fronts had waged in the first place to achieve political objectives. And when this rebellion is met by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) in order to suppress it, then you have an armed conflict. This could go back in some ways to the situation during the early years of martial law before the 1976 Tripoli Agreement with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). The Executive Department had announced that it will not sign the MOA due to “changed circumstances” like the ongoing controversy at the national level and the precarious ground situation in Central Mindanao, in effect saying that the MOA issue had become more political than legal. Stated otherwise, the MOA has become politically untenable to sign as far as the government’s own Christian majority constituency is concerned. The non-signing the MOA was calculated to give the Executive some space to engage in various political efforts to defuse the political situation as well as address the ground situation. As for the peace process, the Peace Adviser and the GRP Peace Panel Chairperson have mulled continuing this through “further negotiations” that already “move towards a Comprehensive Compact,” of course coupled with “consultation with various stakeholders” -- the major lesson from the aborted MOA experience. But there are strong indications that the MILF will not entertain any GRP proposal for “further negotiations” even towards a final peace agreement with the Arroyo administration after its firmed-up decision not to sign the MOA. For them, never mind if there is another indefinite impasse, they will just wait for the next President, “if we get there.” In the meantime, they will consider other options. Let me try to share my understanding of this likely MILF view of rejecting “further negotiations” with the Arroyo administration. They take what happened to the MOA (including but not just the Executive’s decision of non-signing) as the GRP having negotiated in bad faith, and thus the basic trust built by years of peace talks has been seriously eroded. The bottom line is that the Arroyo administration cannot deliver after all. This whole experience hurts for them but at least they now know the real score and where they stand vis-à-vis the whole Philippine side -- Executive, Legislative, Judiciary, Local Governments, Business Sector, Media, General Public, etc. all ganged up on the MOA. The widespread and loud rejection of the MOA by the whole Philippine side is like a rejection of the Moros and their aspirations for recognition of their identity, way of life and longing for self-rule. The truth hurts but it sets us free. The MOA is now an already closed chapter as far as the MILF is concerned, even as it remains an important document for them. The MOA had at least placed Moro aspirations on the national agenda, discourse and consciousness. They say that it has even become a rallying point for Moro unity. So, there is already with them some sense of moral ascendancy or even victory with the MOA issue. They cannot for their own self-respect go into “further negotiations” which would not be on the basis of a signed MOA. This was already the product of difficult but successful negotiations up to its final draft with the “Government of the Republic of the Philippines” (that’s what the MOA says, not just “Executive Department”) for more than three years starting 2005. They cannot defend doing this (“further negotiations” without first signing the MOA) to their own forces and constituency. They themselves do not see the viability of “further negotiations” for a final peace agreement which may end up just like the MOA. To use an Islamic expression, it would be like “getting bitten by a snake twice in the same pit.” Still, the MOA should be seen an important document, and not just for the MILF and the Bangsamoro people. It is also an important document for the peace process, for history, for eventual understanding between two peoples, and no less for the Filipino people in addressing their various nation-building problems, not just the Bangsamoro problem. Notwithstanding the admittedly unfamiliar and difficult language and concepts in the MOA, Cotabato Archbishop Orlando B. Quevedo, OMI, says it “is a remarkable document. It is a very serious attempt to balance national sovereignty and Bangsamoro aspirations for self-determination and freedom. For this reason, I believe that the MOA can bring lasting peace…. The balancing act… may be seen in the concepts on governance, concretized in such terms as ‘associative relationships,’ ‘shared authority,’ the idea of ‘central government,’ and its responsibility for external defense, etc. For the GRP, the balancing continues with two fundamental democratic safety values -- acts of Congress and referendum [or plebiscite].” In this sense, long live the MOA -- as a landmark or watershed exercise in exploring the possibilities of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace between the Philippine and Moro sides, after decades of armed conflict with long historical roots and complex dimensions. The MOA shows that at least some Filipinos and Moros can compromise or find a middle ground for a proposed Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) which would be something between the existing Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and independent statehood, the original common aspiration of the Moro liberation fronts. This aspiration is based on the historical sovereignty of the Moro sultanates which were once sovereign independent nation-states several centuries before there even was a Philippine State and Constitution. Thus, also a compromise or middle ground between a man-made Constitution with its sovereignty of the people, and a God-made Qur’an with its sovereignty of Allah. The MOA idea is for “shared sovereignty” between the Central Government and the BJE in an “associative relationship” where it is the former, not the latter, which represents the sovereign independent State. Then, there is also a compromise or middle ground between the present ARMM territory and that of the original historical Bangsamoro homeland covering the whole of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. This was their homeland which was annexed to the Philippine Islands ceded by Spain to the United States by way of the 1898 Treaty of Paris, and then incorporated in the Republic of the Philippines granted its independence by the U.S. in 1946, in both cases without the plebiscitary consent of the Bangsamoro people. This was the same homeland in Mindanao which was 76 percent Moro in population in 1903 but which had become just 19 percent Moro by 1990 as a result of government resettlement programs which systematically brought Christian settlers from the Visayas and Luzon into Mindanao over several decades. The MILF to its credit is seeking as territory for the BJE basically those geographical areas which the Moros still actually occupy or where they are the majority per present reality on the ground, and still subject to plebiscite. In any case, this BJE territory would remain part of, not be dismembered from, the national territory. If there is one thing that the MOA issue has opened up, aside from a deeper sense of Moro aspirations, it is the need to “think out of the box” of the Constitution. Newspaper columnist and Sociology Prof. Randy David pointed out, as early as 1999 to 2000, the need for “the readiness on the part of government to allow a wide latitude for institutional experimentation in the region, instead of the constant invocation of constitutional limits as a warning against insolent initiatives.” He also wrote of a certain “constitutional pragmatism” which is necessary to overcome “constitutional obstacles that that have needlessly prevented the exploration of more creative approaches to the Mindanao problem.” He is reminded of John Dewey’s insight: “The belief in political fixity, of the sanctity of some form of state consecrated by the efforts of our fathers and hallowed by tradition, is one of the stumbling blocks in the way of orderly and directed change; it is an invitation to revolt and revolution.” There is, of course, so much more subject matter involved in the MOA. There is still much to learn in further studying and discussing the concepts found therein as well as the issues which have emerged in the controversy about it. After an adequate period of dispassionate, informed and intelligent discussion of these concepts and issues by all concerned -- “after some sanity is restored,” says Fr. Eliseo R. Mercado, Jr., OMI -- the time should come when the parties can viably continue their peace negotiations, presumably from where they left off. Much depends on how an expected interregnum or hiatus or what the MILF’s Iqbal calls “purgatory” is handled by both sides in the coming weeks and months. Given that prospect of no “further negotiations” as well as the danger of military options on both sides, the best bets for the remaining period (one year and ten months) of the Arroyo administration are to somehow maintain the ceasefire, enhance rehabilitation and development work and projects, and pursue the three-part imperatives suggested by Archbishop Quevedo. The premise for the first two “bets” is that the prior agreements on the security and rehabilitation aspects should not to be derogated or set aside. The Quevedo imperatives refer to: “consultation and dialogue, information and education, and building of a constituency supportive of the general goals and specific objectives as well as the processes and contents of peace negotiations.” In these various ways, the ground is laid for a return to the ancestral domain aspect and other substantive matters of peace negotiation when this become more viable, even if in the next administration already. The time for the MOA will come but then in another form.

By Lester Cavestany, Contributor INQUIRER.net FILIPINO patriots went for a swim Monday morning, the 21st of April, to cool down and relax in the crystal clear waters of Manila Bay. Well, not exactly! They dived into the swim-at-your-own-risk waters of Manila Bay to protest against the ratification of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA). Pro-JPEPA senators will be feeling the heat from Filipinos who believe that the government has once again outdone itself when it comes to pimping our motherland to other countries. According to the swimmers who braved the waters of Manila Bay, the treaty will allow large and high-tech Japanese fishing vessels to sweep our waters and get all the fish they want. But the government says that we don’t have to worry about any shortage in fish supply. Keep in mind that this is the same government who’s also telling us not to worry about the shortage in rice supply. So I guess it’s okay for Japan to catch all the fish they want because our government says it’s alright. Greenpeace has also protested against JPEPA saying that it will allow Japan to ship toxic waste to the Philippines. "It’s okay," the Philippine government says, "we don’t have to revise the treaty because 'notes' have already been exchanged between Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo and Japan Foreign Minister Taro Aso." They now have a "gentleman’s agreement" that toxic waste will not be dumped in our country. I would like to believe the foreign ministers and I am sure they are men of their words. But the thing is, I can’t forget what happened in August 1999 when toxic waste from Japan was found in 92 (yes, 92!) 40-foot container vans. They were marked as recyclables but they contained used diapers, used syringes, incinerator ash, radioactive waste, and other disgusting things we should never speak of again. If you still insist that it’s okay to be the trash can of a rich country because they will help our economy by providing jobs and by allowing our exports to enter their country with no tax, then you may join the ranks of our Politicos In Mama Pilipina, PIMPs for short! Join them as they try to convince the nation that JPEPA is definitely a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Join them as they say: "Let’s take in all of Japan’s toxic waste and let’s give all our fish to Japan so that they will give us jobs and economic aid." O Inang Bayan, patawarin mo po kami. Also posted in www.lestercavestany.com

By Lester Cavestany, Contributor INQUIRER.net

IT would always be the same crooks, the same money interests who would take fullest advantage of democracy or any kind of government in the Philippines, while the poor and the brave would always lose out. The batters change in the game of Philippine politics, but the baseball team remains the same and the game remains fixed.

-- Ninoy Aquino[1] As we celebrate the 22nd8th anniversary of the EDSA People Power Revolution, it would be good to look back on the wisdom of the man who inspired us to unite as a people and to defend our country against a corrupt government. We are more aware of Ninoy's oft-quoted, "The Filipino is worth dying for," but I chose the one above because it is more suitable to our present times. To fight again another day After two weeks of excitement about Jun Lozada's testimony, the opposition has yet to come up with more witnesses and more evidence that will prove the corruption in the Arroyo administration. Even after the show of support that the public has done to encourage more people to come out and testify, no new witness or evidence has appeared. To be honest, I am a bit confused as to how other leaders can continue to demand for President Arroyo's resignation when we haven't even proven anything yet. We are being led to believe that having another People Power Revolution (EDSA III) will solve the problems and issues that our country is facing today. But if we listen to what our great hero Ninoy Aquino said, I hope you will also realize that many of the problems we face today are systemic ones and they can't be changed by having another EDSA.[2] Systemic problems need systemic changes Last week's Inquirer Opinion-Talk of the Town article, "Poverty reduction: What we know and don’t know," gives us a concrete example of a systemic problem: the lack of rural development in the Philippines.[3] Nothing much has changed since 1781 when Gov. José de Basco y Vargas introduced commercial farming in the Philippines[4]. Moreover, no authentic land reform has been implemented in our country since the feudal Spanish times. The Americans tried in 1903 when Gov. Gen Howard Taft bought the friar lands in the Philippines from Pope Leo XIII with the intention of reselling it to Filipino peasant-tenants. The good intention never materialized of course, as wealthy Filipino businessmen and politicians (whose descendants still have clout in Philippine society today) stepped in and bought the land and converted them into their private haciendas.[5] And as they say, the rest is history.* In a country where 70 percent of the population live in rural areas and where 2/3 of the people get their livelihood from agriculture, we must make sure that we have programs that promote genuine rural development. This is just one example, but it is a major one. Other systemic problems include public education, economic development, good governance, population control, environmental sustainability, peace and order, and many others. Other bloggers have also written their issues in Janette Toral's Important Issues on Philippines 2010. Of course somewhere in the wish list for political reform, you will also find fighting graft and corruption. But I hope we can all see that it is a small piece of the puzzle. In my personal opinion, we cannot call for President Arroyo's resignation unless we have court-admissible evidence against her. Just because some opposition leaders are trying to convince us that President Arroyo is corrupt doesn't mean we all have to believe it. The opposition leaders bear the burden of evidence. I say to them, Show us proof! Stop using us as your pawns! Stop using the court of public opinion to gain the upper hand. Take your accusations to the court of law and let your evidence, if you have any, speak for itself. And speaking of evidence, what proof or track records have you got to show the public that if you replace the present administration, you will do a far better job than President Arroyo's government in addressing our systemic problems.[6] Happy 22nd8th People Power anniversary! In light of the lack of evidence plus the personal and social troubles that this J-Lo fiasco has caused, I believe that it might be best to set aside our calls for a change in the government and perhaps we should concentrate more on asking for changes in the government and in our country. Unless we are presented with new witnesses or new evidence in the ongoing political raucity, we, the Filipino people, should join the rallies and demonstrations with more focus on the the public outcry for truth and social reforms. I, for one, would love to join in! And so from here in Hanoi, I would like say "Happy 22nd8th People Power Anniversary!" to all my kababayans in the Philippines and around the world. Mabuhay po tayong lahat! Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!

===

Notes: [1] The Martyrdom of Ninoy Aquino Revisited, Joker P Arroyo [2] Systemic problems have been with us even before the presidency of Pres Arroyo; even before 1565 when Spaniards who left from Mexico led by Miguel Lopez de Legazpi arrived in Cebu; and even before 1521 when Magellan claimed our archipelagic country for Spain and called it Las Islas de San Lazaro.

[3] "Poverty reduction: What we know and don’t know," By Arsenio M. Balisacan Philippine Daily Inquirer, 16 Feb 2008 [4] In Search of Southeast Asia: A Modern History. David P. Chandler, William R. Roff, John R. W. Smail, David Joel Steinberg Robert H. Taylor, Alexander Woodside, David K. Wyatt, David Joel Steinberg. Allen & Unwin. Sydney, N.S.W. 1971

[5] The US Congress passed the Cooper, or Organic, Act of 1902, which authorized the American commission to sell Philippine government bonds to finance purchase of the friar lands in the Philippines from the Vatican --- Bound to Empire: The United States and the Philippines. H. W. Brands. Oxford University Press, New York. 1992.

* Atty. Ma. Gracia Rinoza Plazo has recently started an online forum to discuss agrarian reform issues. Please join the discussion and share your inputs.

[6] Mom knows best! My Mama wrote a comment in my post, Sundin ang Utos ni Supremo.

Also posted in www.lestercavestany.com

IF your answer is yes to one or more of the following questions, then this article is for you:

1. Were you affected by the Malu Fernandez controversy?
2. Do you know anyone who is an overseas Filipino worker? (OFW)
3. Do you have a relative who is an OFW?
4. Do you believe that many Filipinos are working abroad because of the lack of opportunities here in the Philippines?
5. Do you believe that OFWs help the Philippine economy?
6. Do you believe that the present administration is corrupt and there has to be some changes?
7. Are you an OFW, or an ex-OFW, or are you planning to become an OFW?

If you said yes to any of these, read on… Perhaps you’ve heard of the controversial memorandum (1) of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) regarding the Guidelines on the Direct Hiring of Filipino Workers. Please allow me to explain to you why OFWs need your support against this memorandum. We really need your help! Please forward our plea for help to as many people as possible. Who are the 'direct hire' OFWs? There are two ways to get a job overseas. You can either go through an authorized recruitment agency in the Philippines or you can directly contact the employer. Obviously, those who can directly communicate with the foreign employer don’t have to go through a recruitment agency and so the process is referred to as “direct-hire” and they are called “direct-hires.” OFWs who go through a recruitment agency usually have to pay their recruiter a placement fee and/or a commission. While those who are direct-hires sometimes take greater risks by staying in a foreign country (sometimes as tourists) and then by God’s grace and through their contacts, they find work. Some direct-hires find work while still in the Philippines when the employer comes to the Philippines to screen applicants. Both ways of finding work have their own advantages and disadvantages, depending on the jobsite, employer, work, and the contract. (2) There are those who say that it’s important to go through a recruitment agency because they make sure that the employer is a good one. Recruitment agencies also look after you when you’re already in your jobsite. On the other hand, there are others who think that they can do away with recruitment agencies. They think they can deal directly with their employers and they can handle their own problems. And if not, they can always run to the Philippine embassies for help. That’s why they’re there, right? If you were to choose between the two, which one do you prefer: Go through a recruitment agency or directly deal with the employer? There is another important thing that we should keep in mind when it comes to the definition of direct-hires. Let’s say an OFW who went through a recruitment agency in their first overseas job finishes their contract with their employer. If he/she decides to find another job overseas with another employer, he/she is now a “direct-hire.” Before Memorandum No. 4 Let’s say, an employer in the Middle East needs to hire an engineer. A Filipino engineer, who has just finished his contract with another employer, applies for the job. He came highly recommended by his previous employer and so he was accepted in the job. His new employer offered him a salary of $1,000 a month. He was more than happy to take the job, especially because if he can’t find work, he will be forced to go back to the Philippines. They signed the contract and the OFW starts working the next day. Simple, right? That’s direct-hiring! Enter Memorandum No.4! Memorandum No.4 (Series of 2007) signed by POEA Administrator Rosalindo Dimapilos-Baldoz took effect on January 15, 2008. All employers, whether individuals or companies, must abide by the so-called “guidelines.” Let’s go back to the story of our Filipino engineer. Now, according to this memorandum, he can’t start working for his new employer. Not yet! First, his employer has to register with POEA. But there’s no need to worry, because the process will not take longer than one month. One month! You mean to say that the Filipino engineer has to wait for a month before he can start working! That’s okay, says POEA. I’m sure his family can wait for a month before he can send money for their food and utilities. But there’s more to it. There are more requirements that the employer has to submit. Here are the other requirements:

1. The employer must submit the following documents to POEA: a) copies of their business registration, license, and identification paper b) sample contracts for the OFW c) proof that the OFW won’t be charged a placement fee (hello? it’s called “direct-hire”)2. Pay a “performance bond” equivalent to the worker’s salary for three months. The performance bond will be used to guarantee compliance of the employer of the contract. So, the performance bond will serve as a penalty fee for the employer in case there’s a breach of contract by the employer. It’s not clear in the memorandum if this performance bond will be given in full to the direct-hire OFW. In the case of our OFW engineer, his employer has to pay $3,000 ($1,000 x 3 months) which is approximately P120,000. This sum is to be paid even before the OFW starts work. Wow! 3. Provide a “repatriation bond” in the amount of $5,000 or approximately P200,000. This money is to be used for the direct-hire’s repatriation expenses in case the contract is terminated. Also, in case the OFW dies while overseas, this money is going to be used to bring the remains back to the Philippines. I thought the government considers OFWs as our modern-day heroes. Then how come they can’t even afford to bring back the remains of OFWs who die while working overseas. I thought this is why OFWs are required to pay their PhilHealth even though they’re not in the Philippines. 4. And the last requirement to get the registration process started is the submission of a Medical Insurance Certificate Isn’t it common practice that the application for medical insurance gets started as soon as the employee starts working? I think this is also true for companies in the Philippines. And isn’t it true that it takes a while before the insurance company releases the medical insurance certificate. Sometimes, it even takes about three months before the document is released. Wow!

In other words If you were an employer looking for foreign workers, would you really go through the trouble of doing all the above requirements? Would you be willing to set aside $8,000 or approximately P320,000 so your Filipino employee can start working for you? I do admire our government’s high regard for our OFWs. They really believe that employers will jump through hoops to get a Filipino worker. I really hope that employers will do all these things to get a Filipino worker. But what if they don’t? What if there are so many foreign workers in the global market these days that they can easily get workers from other countries whose governments don’t have ridiculous requirements? What if they decide not to hire Filipino workers? Who is going to be directly affected by this? Who is going to suffer? Who is going to suffer? It’s fairly obvious that our OFWs are the ones who will be badly affected by this memorandum and I am one of them. Whether you are an engineer, teacher, domestic helper, nurse, doctor, or any other overseas employee, as long as you hold a Philippine passport and you have a job overseas, you will suffer because of this memorandum. If you don’t lose your job now, you’ll have trouble looking for a job later. Families who rely on remittances of their OFWs will also be badly hit by this memorandum. How can OFWs send money home if they don’t have a source of income because they have no work? We all know that many OFWs have mouths to feed and siblings to help send to school. Another victim of this memorandum will be our economy. OFWs brought in $15 billion to our economy in 2007.(3) This amount of money is not to be taken lightly. If you think that the call center industry is helping our economy, then multiply it by five times and it will match the amount of money brought in by OFWs. And how will this affect small and big business companies in our country? Well, let’s try to simplify it for everyone. Less employers mean less work for our OFWs. Less work means fewer OFWs. Fewer OFWs means less remittance. Less remittance means less “spending power” of Filipinos. Less spending power means less money for other things. People will only have money for their basic needs and commodities. Other businesses will close and there will be less jobs for the millions of Filipinos who are working in the Philippines. So they will start to look for work overseas but they won’t be able to find any. All thanks to Rosalinda Baldoz’s Memorandum Circular No.4. So who’s going to suffer from this memorandum? You! Me! Everyone! What should we do? If you ask me, the first thing we should demand is the immediate resignation of Rosalinda Dimapilos-Baldoz, the POEA administrator who signed Memorandum Circular No.4. This memorandum is evidence that she doesn’t understand the needs of OFWs and she does not deserve to be at the helm of POEA. Our second demand should be the immediate revocation of Memorandum Circular No.4. We should all join the mass protest action. It’s clear that we will all suffer because of this new policy on direct-hires. Don’t hesitate to take it to the streets. That’s the only way we can get their attention. Let’s show them that we are serious in demanding for the resignation of Baldoz and the revocation of the memo. If in case you can’t join the mass protest action, here are other ways you can help this urgent cause:

1. E-mail your relatives, friends, and every one you know and ask them to join the protest. Forward the link to this post and other posts about this issue to your friends. There’s also a Filipino version of this post.
2. Text all your contacts and ask them to support our protest.
3. Support the Senate inquiry of Senator Manny Villar (4). E-mail Senator Manny Villar at mb_villar@yahoo.com or go to his website, www.mannyvillar.com.ph
4. Support the Congress resolution of Representative Teddy Casino of Bayan Muna party-list (5)
5. Sign the online petition (6)
6. Blog and comment in blogs about Baldoz and her memorandum. When Malu Fernandez spoke badly about the OFWs, we were quick to point out her wrongs and we succeeded. More than ever, our OFWs need your help. Please hear our plea.

My friend, let’s take action! Let’s demand for the resignation of Rosalinda Baldoz and for the revocation of Memorandum No.4! Click here for the Filipino version of this post. === Notes: (1) POEA Memorandum Circular No.4 - Guidelines on the Direct Hiring of Filipino Workers (2) Magandang ipalabas ng POEA ang kanilang statistics kung ilang OFW ang dumaan sa recruitment agency at ilan ang direct-hire. (3) Top international economist says Philippine economy has to grow 14% to stop OFW exodus, Positive News Media, Jan 31, 2008 (4) $5K bond hinders Pinoys’ search for better opportunities - Villar seeks Senate inquiry on new direct-hire guidelines (5) Solon wants memo on OFW hiring scrapped, Feb 3, 2008, GMANews.TV (6) Online Petition - Abolition of (POEA) Memorandum Circular No. 4

By Willy E. Arcilla, Contributor INQUIRER.net THE AWARENESS and popularity of Canadian-based Fr. Fernando Suarez has been soaring in recent weeks as increasingly more Filipino faithful and Christians worldwide attend and bear witness to his healing ministry at which the disabled walk, the visually-impaired see, the deaf hear and the mute speak. There are patients with cancer and other diseases who are cured. Yet, despite a cult following that seems to rival local celebrities, Father Suarez remains admirably humble, insisting that "I am not a healer" amid persistent labels as the "healing priest" or "miracle priest." Raising his voice somewhat to emphasize the point and ensure that all can hear clearly, "it is not me who heals, but our Lord Jesus Christ, and He uses me merely as an instrument for His grace." He draws an analogy to Christ's healing power with "water passing through one’s hands." During a healing mass held recently at SM Megamall's Trade Hall, Father Suarez repeatedly said in his homily, "I feel so embarrassed whenever people reach out to touch my robes," again emphasizing it is God's omnipotence that heals both the body and spirit. But despite this self-effacing attitude, he urged all the faithful present "not to feel embarrassed in praying for compassion and healing" for all afflictions -- physical or spiritual -- for nothing is impossible with God. He explains that the miracles people see or personally experience are demonstrations of God's love that serve to help strengthen the people's faith. If the source of all evil in this world is pride, manifested in being self-centered and an egoistic "ownership" of one's accomplishments, he says the source of all good must lie in being "Christ-centered" and complete abandonment and surrender to God. "If we rely on Jesus, we will not be disappointed based on His promise that He will not fail us if we trust in Him." However, while he urged all brethren to implore good health and a fullness of life with total confidence as children of God, he also admonished that God wants "holistic healing," and not just "partial healing," including the healing of one's heart and conversion of one's soul. He went on to pray for the moral illnesses and social injustices that bedevil the country, specifically the graft and corruption plaguing government and the wrenching poverty oppressing millions; for the deepest divisions to be healed and discrimination of all forms banished. In offering a reason for why God does not seem to answer all our supplications, he said perhaps "sometimes, what we ask for may not be good for us." In an interview prior to the mass, this writer asked Father Suarez if he can share what God tells him in his personal conversations during private moments of prayer, to which he replied, "God says He loves me, and He is happy with what I do in sharing the gift of healing with all the faithful." This writer later learned that Father Suarez interacts, touches and prays over each and every person in all of his healing services -- regardless of how long it takes or how exhausting it can get. Before an audience consisting of the sick and the curious, the faithful and the skeptics, captured on digital cameras and video recorders, shown live on closed-circuit TV and later on nationwide TV, Father Suarez performed his individualized healing ministry on thousands, moving constantly and laying his hands on the old and the young, many of whom rose from wheelchairs and spontaneously shared poignant stories, testifying to God's goodness through Father Suarez. When this writer asked Father Suarez what he would like to tell the millions of Filipinos who may have desperately wished to attend his healing sessions, but cannot because they are preoccupied with earning a living or do not possess the means, he says reassuringly, "God heals in different ways, so we must all believe in his goodness. While it is God who heals, it is faith that saves." Fittingly, Father Suarez reminds us of the gospel passages when Jesus brings back to life a grief-stricken father's only daughter, and a woman suffering from years of debilitating illness touches the hem of His cloak, in which He says "Take courage... your faith has made you well."

There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo I HAD the wonderful opportunity to meet and speak with Education Secretary Jesli A. Lapus. Gigi and Pam of the Philippine Embassy in Vietnam invited me and Michelle to the despedida party of Consul-Gen Baisa and Ms Bel. Secretary Lapus was the guest of honor and luckily, Ambassador del Rosario asked me to join them at their table. We talked about life, family, careers, and of course, CyberEducation! Here are some of the insights I gained from Secretary Lapus and from my own research about CyberEd: What is Cyber Education? I’m sure you’ve heard of open and distance education (a.k.a. distance learning). This is a hot topic in our generation because of the availability of fast-paced information and communications technology (ICT), which includes e-mail, the Internet, multimedia resources, etc. Distance learning (DL) is not new. [1] It was invented in 1840 by the Englishman Sir Isaac Pitman when he started giving lessons to his students by mail. What a revolutionary idea! You don’t have to go to a classroom anymore to learn. All you have to do is correspond with your teacher by mail. You don’t have to pay for expensive classroom space! No more costly transportation fees! Distance learning gives every one access to learning, wherever, whenever. Progressive countries picked up on the idea right away. In the 1900s, DL was established at the University of Chicago. In 1911, the Department of External Studies was created at the University of Queensland, Australia. And in 1969, The Open University was founded (after much objection by conservatives) in the UK [2] with the mission of bringing high quality degree-level learning to people who don’t have the opportunity to attend campus universities. In the 21st century, Distance Learning is growing at an even faster pace, thanks to e-mail, satellite broadcasts, videos, teleconferencing and, most recently, the Internet. With the arrival of hundreds of online universities, DL is now more commonly known as online learning. The concept is still the same -- by using ICT, we can provide quality education to those who don’t have access to it. So what is CyberEd? The Cyber Education Project (CEP) is the name of DepEd’s revolutionary project that will institutionalize distance learning in our public school system. By using satellite and computer technologies, public school administrators, teachers and students will have access to video instructions and online resources that are sure to raise the standards of teaching and learning, especially in public schools that are at risk. What a wonderful idea! I think, this alone, is reason enough to support CyberEd. But if you’re not yet convinced, then here are seven more reasons which will make you a supporter of CyberEd: 1) CyberEd will level the playing field US Education Secretary Horace Mann, the Father of American Education, once said, "Education is the great equalizer of the conditions of men." And we all agree! But the problem is, not all education systems are created equal. We all know that private schools are somewhat better than public schools. And urban public schools usually have higher standards than the ones in the rural areas. The disparities can be lessened by CyberEd. By accessing short instructional videos presented by “master teachers,” public school students and teachers can increase their knowledge in the subject areas of Language Arts, Math, Science, and Social Studies. The “master teachers” will also prepare lesson plans that go with their videos so that public school teachers will be guided in their teaching. They will also have access to shared online resources including worksheets, websites, etc. As a teacher, I know that this kind of support will immediately increase the quality of teaching and learning, for sure! 2) CyberEd will assist teacher-training The “master teachers” in the instructional videos don’t have to be teachers. Some of them can be resource presenters. For example, the topic is about lawmaking, the presenter can be a senator. So, the public school teacher and the students learn first-hand from experts. Teachers will improve their subject-matter mastery and this will boost their confidence in teaching. Plus of course, with CyberEd, teachers can have access to online degrees to further their professional development. Some people have the misconception that as soon as a teacher graduates from a teacher-training course, that’s it. This is certainly not the case. Even teachers who have masteral and doctorate degrees will admit to the fact that there’s always a need for continuing professional development. Even wealthy private schools who have highly-qualified teachers, allocate thousands of dollars every year to make sure that there is sufficient on-site and external training for their teachers and administrators. 3) CyberEd will help standardize education Depending on its implementation, CyberEd can promote consistency in the standards of teaching and assessments in public schools. I can see the potential of having an online portal where teachers from anywhere in the country can access easy-to-use lesson plans and digital resources prepared by experts. We have a national curriculum but its delivery varies from school to school depending on available resources, human and/or financial. By using the same videos, lesson plans, and online resources, there can be more consistency in the delivery of the national curriculum. We are already seeing improvements in our students’ performance in the standardized tests. I’m sure we will see more when we implement CyberEd. 4) CyberEd will improve communication CyberEd will promote online networking among public schools and DepEd offices. Administrators and teachers will have access to e-mail and websites. Memoranda, letters, reminders, and all kinds of messages will be communicated instantly. I don’t think there’s a need to point out the benefits of having direct communication in any organization, and in any relationship for that matter. It’s simply a must! 5) CyberEd will lessen our dependence on textbooks Back in 2000, Microsoft’s Bill Gates predicted that “Less of the school budgets will be spent on textbooks and more on learning through technology.” [3] Bill Gates’ dream is obviously a textbook publisher’s nightmare. I won’t be surprised to see some of the textbook publishers supporting protests against CyberEd. Somewhere along the way, we have been conditioned to believe that the only way we can achieve quality education in public schools is by having a student-textbook ratio of 1:1. Every year, the government spends billions of pesos on textbooks. What’s worse is that there may even be some irregularities in textbook procurement, according to Senator Lacson. [4] Maybe it’s time we let go of this system. Maybe it’s time we realize the vast potential of having an online portal that will store teaching materials and resources. A portal that will allow access to teachers so that when they like to use something, they just access it, print it and make enough photocopies for their students. No more textbooks. In the not-so-distant future, when we really get our act together, we may not even have to print documents because each public school student will have their own laptop. Believe it or not, many schools abroad are now providing a laptop for every student, as early as Grade 1. 6) CyberEd will increase Internet access in the country, especially in rural areas The December 2000 Report of the Web-Based Education Commission to the President and the Congress of the United States has this to say about the Power of the Internet for Learning: "the Internet enables education to occur in places where there is none, extends resources where there are few, expands the learning day, and opens the learning place. It connects people, communities, and resources to support learning. It adds graphics, sound, video, and interaction to give teachers and students multiple paths for understanding. the Web is a medium today’s kids expect to use for expression and communication." Not surprisingly, the Commission made key recommendations that all point toward the implementation of tech projects with features similar to that of CyberEd’s. [5] 7) CyberEd will help the marginalized and the disadvantaged Oxfam International says in their campaign, "Education is critical to breaking the cycle of poverty… Education is a key to enable poor individuals and marginalized communities to take control of their lives and stand up for their rights." We all know that this is true. We can argue about the different paths to social development, but we all recognize the central role played by education in helping the poor help themselves get out of poverty. The tragic death of Mariannet Amper has awakened our senses to the harsh realities of poverty and now, many of us are asking the question, "How can we help?" Well, here’s one answer: You can help by writing the Education Secretary, your congressman, senators, and the Office of the President and let them know that we, the people, support CyberEd! Your voice counts I read an article in the Inquirera few days ago saying that the Cyber Education Project is still under review by government panels as its credibility was affected by another Chinese-financed government project, the National Broadband Network. I think we need to let our voices be heard by our leaders so that they can make the right decision. I hope you can find time to promote CyberEd. Blog about it, e-mail your friends and write your representatives about this project. It’s a project that will directly assist in providing quality education to the future citizens of our great nation. === References: [1] The Origins of Distance Education and Its Use in the United States. Contributors: Diane Matthews - author. Journal Title: Technological Horizons in Education Journal. Volume: 27. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 1999. Page Number: 54. COPYRIGHT 1999 T.H.E. Journal [2] http://www.open.ac.uk/about/ou/p3.shtml [3] School Textbooks Are Doomed but Kids Will Always Need Teachers; GATES PLANS LAPTOPS FOR ALL. Contributors: Richard Garner Education -- author. Newspaper Title: The Mirror. Publication Date: February 2, 2000. Page Number: 14. COPYRIGHT 2000 [4] http://www.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2006/1011_lacson1.asp [5] The Power of the Internet for Learning: Final Report of Web-Based Education Commission. December 2000 (http://www.ed.gov/offices/AC/WBEC/FinalReport/index.html) (Also posted in www.lestercavestany.com)

THERE has to be at least one of them telling the truth. While JDV III claims that Neri told him about his conversation with the President regarding the so-called offer of Chairman Abalos in order to have the NBN project approved, Neri counters with a completely opposite stance, saying that what JDV III claims is completely untrue. So now, it is left to us: who is telling the truth? Better yet, what is the truth? This question seems to always escape the minds of many whistleblowers as well as witnesses, left and right. It is like a neverending cycle of a thesis and an antithesis. Whistle blowers tend to claim that they are the ones telling the truth. Does that mean that those people who are supposedly guilty of the accusation are kings and queens of denial? One can see how easy it is to just say what you want to say and when you want to say it. In any case, the only way for the Senate to make its hearings of the NBN scandal worth one's time and effort is if the people who are involved in the procedings (i.e. witnesses, whistleblowers, interrogators) truly have one thing in mind: to tell the truth by first stating what is really the truth!

TRILLANES was quick to blame the Palace for the Glorietta 2 Mall blast incident. Well, at this early stage everyone could be a suspect: the Palace through the military/police operatives, JI terrorists, the Communists, etc. The problem however is that Trillanes himself, like most of the Palace people, is not a credible person to throw such an accusation. Sorry, but no matter what the cause or justification they may have, I have very little sympathy for people involved in military coups. As I see it they are as reckless and selfish as most Pinoy drivers. They would grab your lane unmindful of the harm it might cause the innocents just as the failed mutinies and coups have caused harm to our economy.

THERE was collective outrage among bloggers with the Malu Fernandez controversy. There was collective outrage among Fil-Ams at the racist statement from "Desperate Housewives." Today, we are confronted by a much, much more despicable incident but where is the outrage? The opposition is and will bleed the issue for their selfish motives. The commentators and opinion writers are having a heyday making various spins and interpretations with Fr. Panlilio's expose. But where is the outrage? Definitely, it is not only the few who have spoken that received a paper bag with bundles of money. An ABS-CBN video footage showed other politicians carrying similar bags. The rest may deny getting any money but it won't change the fact that public perception is that they indeed got money. Delicadeza is alien to them. Garapalan is the name of the game. But still, where is the outrage? Why are we not out in the streets demanding explanations and even making calls for resignation? Why do we go on with our lives as if this suhulan is just a normal incident? Why is there no collective outrage? No, I am not calling for people power. I am merely asking why have we become so meek and numb as a people in spite of the endless political scandals that confront us everyday. The suhulan did not really come as a surprise. The suprise is when somebody, thanks to Fr. Panlilio, finally came out to expose the incident. (I am quite disappointed with Gov. Grace Padaca when she claimed on the news that she got a Christmas card from the GMA with P50, 000 but never came out to expose this gift giving incident at the time.) Corruption has become a way of life in our country. We know it happens. It is the P500, 000 that Fr. Panlilio showed to media that gave corruption a "face." In his column, Jose Ma. Montelibano said, "Nation building is character building." Precisely. And that is my personal advocacy. Call it character building, value formation, good citizenship. If there is no collective change in our attitude and ways as a people, we will remain unaffected by the corrupt practices we see and hear everywhere. It is not really surprising why there is no collective outrage with regards to this blatant suhulan in Malacañang.