Draft Statement: (Not Yet Official) Save Lives: Increase Spending for Reproductive Health Care Including Family Planning

Save Lives: Increase Spending for Reproductive Health Care Including Family Planning

A joint statement of the University of the Philippines College of Social Work and Community Development (CSWCD) and the UP Center for Women's Studies (UPCWS)


Every day 11 Filipina women die from pregnancy and birth complications. . Every year 400,000 Filipinas suffer some form of illness or disability because of giving birth.

The majority of those who die or become ill from childbirth come from poor communities and families who can least afford to lose a mother or a sister or a wife. The health care burden to poor and middle income families of morbidities related to childbirth , can also be devastating.

And yet, we have the capacity to avoid most of the deaths and half of the morbidity related to childbirth. Health experts agree that delivery with a properly trained birth attendant, access to obstetric and new born care , and access to family planning services are effective and doable measures that will ensure better health outcomes for pregnant women and their families.

Of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) the Philippines is likely to fail in meeting the goal of reducing maternal mortality rates by 2015. The reason is clear, the Arroyo administration has consistently neglected the services women need. This, despite compelling evidence that major sectors of our society (health, academic, business, labor) and the majority of our people accept the need for contraceptive services.

Today, we reiterate our call, echoed in the promises of the Philippine government and the policy pronouncements of President Benigno Aquino III, to ensure adequate funding for contraceptive supplies as a first step towards ensuring access to family planning services to all women.

Today, we reiterate that access to contraceptives within the framework of informed and free choice is a moral imperative guaranteed by international human rights standards and the Philippine Constitution as well as sentiments of the common citizenry.

With political will, we can yet achieve the health related MDGs, including the MDG on the goal of significantly reducing maternal mortality by 2015. Achieving this will definitely redound the attainment of other related MDGs on gender equaliy, women's empowerment and poverty reduction.

Beyond the political debates, the scientific data, international and local laws, the reality upon which an enlightened and moral policy on family planning must be based is that is saves the lives of women and their children.


September 30, 2010

Contact Persons:

Sylvia Estrada-Claudio, MD, PhD
Director
UPCWS

Amaryllis T. Torres
Dean CSWCD

INformal Settlers Seeking Relocation (From ABS-CBN News)

NHA: More informal settlers want relocation

MANILA, Philippines – More informal settlers in Metro Manila are availing of voluntary relocation, the National Housing Authority (NHA) said on Monday.

Around 67 families a day are now filing applications to be relocated to government housing projects, NHA community relations chief Socorro Salamat said.

She said that before the demolition of shanties in North Triangle, Quezon City, the NHA had been receiving only 50 applications a day.

Salamat said some families who had been considering relocation are now having second thoughts because the demolition project was suspended.

She praised the government’s relocation project and allayed fears raised by informal settlers.

Senate Edgardo Angara, meanwhile, said the upper house will look at the possibility of realigning around P6 billion in government funds for housing projects.

The amount is currently earmarked for various projects under the Department of Interior and Local Government and the Department of Social Welfare and Development.

Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) Undersecretary Nestor Borromeo said the agency’s allotted budget is not enough to meet the public’s need.

He said the HUDCC only received P5.6 billion from the P11 billion budget that the agency asked for.

"What will be greatly affected is the program of the National Housing Authority," Borromeo said.

He added that lack of funds will prevent the NHA from relocating informal settlers and families living in danger zones.

He said the HUDCC may also fail from reaching its target of building 350,000 new homes. – Atom Araullo and Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News

North Triangle Demolition

Quick facts about the North Triangle project and demolition of Sept. 23

Ayala Land signed an agreement with the National Housing Authority to develop, at a cost of P22 billion, 29 hectares of the 256-hectare of the North Triangle area that is to be developed as the QC Central Business District, presumably to be pattermed after Ayala Business District in Makati..



But there are 6,000 families in the area. The residents have already held 4 dialogues with the NHA since they received the 30-day notice of demolition on May 2010 where they offered suggestions to the authorities. However NHA officials insist that they should resettle in Montalban, Rizal, which is more than 20 kilometers north..



The NHA offered the residents P1,000, 5 kilos of rice, 2 packs of instant noodles and 2 canned sardines if they would agree to be relocated to Montalban..



They are also being offered a 20-square meter house at the relocation site, worth supposedly P250,000 which are not free. On the second year, those who would be relocated would have to pay P200 monthly and P600 monthly from fifth year onwards.



The biggest problem of the 6,000 families is that they earn their livelihood near the area , and Montalban is more than 20 kilometers away. Aside from that, they complain that the facilities like water and power are not yet in place, and the area is prone to flooding.



Residents said they are not fighting to own the land but to get what is due and fair to them, which includes an on-site or in-city relocation.



Judge Maria Padilla of RTC 225 ordered a stop to the demolition mid afternoon yesterday, and today Aquino III stopped the demolition for the moment.



For more facts and figures, go this page:



http://www.arkibongbayan.org/2010/2010-09Sept24-NTriangle/demolition.htm

Conditional Cash Transfer - Unsustainable?

GOV’T CAUTIONED AGAINST CONDITIONAL CASH TRANSFERS: PROGRAM UNSUSTAINABLE, ADDS TO DEBT BURDEN


As allocations for poverty programs continue to be deliberated in the national budget for 2011, research group IBON cautions government on the conditional cash transfers program (CCTP), saying that the program is not sustainable and will add to the country’s debt burden.

The 2011 national budget has proposed a Php29.2-billion allocation for the CCTP, a program that distributes cash to indigent families with various conditions such as ensuring the children’s school attendance and immunization among others. The program is funded by loans, and with the latest US$400 million-loans (Php19 billion) from the Asian Development Bank, will mean an additional debt burden for Filipinos.

The program moreover is not sustainable; according to the group, when funding for the program runs out, Filipinos will be left jobless and poor as ever, especially with how present economic policies prevent the economy from creating jobs and incomes for the country’s growing population.

Even the United Nations (UN) has criticized current approaches to cutting poverty like the CCTP and has warned that these may be “misconceived” especially with how such programs separate poverty from broader processes of economic development. The UN has moreover estimated that these approaches to poverty may leave around 1 billion poor worldwide by 2015.

IBON stresses that the CCTP is a dole-out program which does not address the roots of poverty and only sugarcoats the implementation of the neoliberal policies that have caused deep unemployment and severe poverty in the country.

The group also notes that the program is prone to corruption, especially with its primary task being the distribution of cash down to the barangay level. Similar to other countries that implemented the CCTP, the program lacks a reliable monitoring mechanism ensuring that cash transfers are received by indigent families.

While giving out cash transfers to indigent families may be an option at certain times, this should not be at the core of government poverty programs. IBON stresses that basic economic reforms are needed to substantially address poverty. At present however, the CCTP seems to divert the public’s attention from the real causes of poverty and on how government continues to implement problematic economic policies that worsen the conditions of poor Filipinos. (end)


IBON Foundation, Inc. is an independent development institution established in 1978 that provides research, education, publications, information work and advocacy support on socioeconomic issues.

UNITY MARCH TODAY AS STEPS 4PM

Christmas Song by Sir Nilan

Hi guys:

Please view a song written by Sir Nilan. Below is the link or just copy paste it to your browser. Thanks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wOt2BVCwgs

SW 122 Final Paper Guide

SW 122 FINAL REPORT GUIDE
I. introduction

A. National Situation – Facts and Figures related to your sector; Situation of the Philippines at present and how it affects your sector/ may include historical accounts if needed in your analysis
B. Local Situation – A Thorough description of the situation of the sector in the Philippines
1. Facts and Figures
2. Issues affecting the sector

C. Discussion on important concepts on the Sector (Mostly what you presented in class)

II. Analysis of the Situation of the Sector in General
A. Perspective to be used in analysis (Structural Functionalist; Conflict; Interactionist; Constructivist; Feminist; Post-Modern, etc)

B. Framework for Analysis – Specific Conceptual framework applicable to the issue you chose; It may include specific theories that are sector specific (e.g. theories or frameworks on children)

C. Discussion on how your issues may be viewed from the chosen perspectives and theories.

III. CASE PRESENTATION (Thorough Narrative of the Case explained in your own words – exact copies of the case may be attached in the annexes)

IV. INTERPRETATION & ANALYSIS OF THE CASE (Use your perspective and theories)

A. How the issue affects the situation of the marginalized sector
B. Identification of the gaps that need to be addressed by social welfare
C. Discussion of the role of Social Workers, Community Development, and Public Administrators in addressing the gaps

D. A Survey of the Existing Agencies (GO, NGO, PO, IO), Programs and Policies already extending services and support to the sector in matrix form, showing the basic thrust of the agency, a short description of the program, policy or project
E. Identifying further the gaps or areas not addressed by the existing structures (Mostly from the workshop- sharing done in class)

V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY

VII. ANNEXES AND ATTACHMENTS [Tables; copies of news articles; copies of policies; other details of the agencies, programs and policies;

VIII. Softcopy of the Report and Powerpoint presentation, videos and other materials you wish to submit

UP BUDGET CUT PRIMER

DBM 2011 Budget Site:
http://www.dbm.gov.ph/index.php?pid=9&xid=30&id=1306

Narito ang pahayag sa pormang praymer ng UP Kilos Na: Labanan ang budget cut.
Ang pagbubuo nito ay isa sa mga naging resolusyon ng Sept.2 and 3 System-wide, Multi-Sectoral Conference na ginanap sa SOLAIR. Kanina, Set. 16, nagkaroon ng round table discussion sa UP Diliman na inorganisa ng tatlong Sectoral Regents. Dinaluhan ito ng mga opisyal ng mga organisasyon ng faculty, kawani at estudyante at ilang mga college faculty administrators sa UP Diliman. Napagkaisahan na buuin ang Diliman chapter ng UP Kilos Na: Labanan ang budget cut para maglobby sa HOR at Senate para mapigilan ang P1.39 B cut sa proposed 2011 budget para sa UP.


Napagkaisahan din ang mga sumusunod na mga aktibidad:


1. September 22: maging bahagi ng system-wide campus actions to oppose the budget cut. Sa UP Diliman, magkaroon ng talakayan sa AS lobby ng 11:30 to 1 pm at magkaroon ulit ng talakayan sa AS steps umpisa ng 4 pm.
2. September 24: BOR meeting at Public Forum ng 11 nominees para sa UP President.
3. September 27: HOR Committee on Appropriations hearing on SUC budget.
Paghahandaan din ang pagdalo sa plenary session ng Lower House kung saan tatalakayin ang SUC budget. Wala pang petsa ito.


Hinhiling sa mga kasamahan sa mga ibang UP units na magkakaroon din ng mga pagkilos para tutulan ang budget cut at maigiit ang mas mataas na budget para sa ating unibersidad. Bukod sa mga lokal na talakayan at mga aksyon, hinihiling na lapitan. magkaroon ng dialogue sa inyong mga Kongresista para ihapag ang ating panawagan.


Pakibahagi ng inyong mga plano at mga pakilos. Salamat.


Judy










Labanan ang P1.39 budget cut sa UP!

Igiit ang mas mataas na budget para sa UP at sa iba pang SUCs
Pahayag sa Anyong Praymer ng
UP Kilos Na: Labanan ang Budget Cut!
Setyembre 16, 2010






Sa panukalang P1.645 trilyong budget para sa 2011 ni Pangulong Noynoy Aquino, anu-ano ang dinagdagan at anu-ano ang binawasan?



Halos pitong porsiyento ang itinaas ng P1.645 trilyon na panukalang budget para sa 2011, ang kauna-unahan sa termino ni Aquino, kumpara sa P1.54 trilyong budget noong 2010. Tinawag ito ni Aquino bilang “reform budget” at aniya’y may pagkiling sa mahihirap.



Pansinin kung anu-ano ang nagkaroon ng pagtaas:






Interes sa Bayad-Utang
+ P80.9 bilyon

AFP
+ P10 bilyon

PNP
+ P 6.6 bilyon

PDAP (pork barrel)
+ P13.9 bilyon

GOCCs
+ P 1.1 bilyon [1]

Incentives for private investments
+ P15 bilyon

Basic Education
+P 32.3 bilyon

Pabahay
+ P273 milyon




Naglaan ng P823.27 bilyon (P357.09 bilyon sa interes at P466.18 bilyon sa prinsipal na hindi isinama sa kabuuang buget proposal ng pamahalaan) sa bayad-utang. Tumaas ng P80.9 bilyon ang alokasyon sa bayad sa interes pa lamang. Samantala, dinagdagan ng P10 bilyon ang budget ng Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) at lumaki rin ang pondo ng Philippine National Police (PNP) ng P6.6 bilyon.



Higit sa doble rin ang naging pagtaas ng budget para sa takaw-korapsyon na “pork barrel,” mula P10.9 bilyon tungong P24.8 bilyon. Naglaan din ang pamahalaan ng mahigit P15 bilyon para akitin ang mga pribadong mamumuhunan na makipagsosyo sa gobyerno upang magtayo at magpatakbo ng mga serbisyo at imprastraktura sa pamamagitan ng “public-private partnerships.” Taliwas ito sa sinabi ni Aquino noong kanyang unang SONA na walang gagastusin ang pamahalaan para sa mga hakbanging ito.



Taliwas sa anunsiyo ni Kalihim Florencio Abad ng Department of Budget and Management (DBM) na mababawasan ng P16 bilyon (mula P39.3 bilyon tungong P23.3 bilyon) ang budget para sa mga government-owned and controlled corporation (GOCC) ay tataasan ito ng P1.1 bilyon batay sa pag-aaral ni Senador Franklin Drilon.



Tumaas naman ng P32.2 bilyon ang alokasyon para sa basic education para tugunan ang dagdag na silid aralan, dagdag na mga item para sa mga guro at pagtaas ng suweldo ng mga empleyado sa sektor ng edukasyon. Ang alokasyon naman para sa pabahay ay nagkaroon ng bahagyang pagtaas na P273 milyon tungo sa kabuuang P5.7 bilyon


Sa gitna ng mga pagtaas na ito, kailangang pansinin ang ilan sa mga nabawasan:



Serbisyong Pang-ekonomiya
-P37.8 bilyon

Kalusugan
-P1.4 bilyon

State Universities and Colleges (SUCs)
-P437 milyon




Nabawasan nang halos sampung porsyento ang alokasyon para sa serbisyong pangekonomiya: mula P398.9 bilyon noong 2010 tungo sa P361.1 bilyon para sa 2011. Tinamaan nang husto ang agrikultura at repormang agraryo, komunikasyon, kalsada, at iba pang imprastrukturang pangtransportasyon, enerhiya, pagpapaunlad ng water resources, at flood control. Nagbabadya ang ganitong pagbabawas ng lalo pang pribatisasyon ng mahahalagang imprastrukturang pampubliko at ang kakambal nitong pagtaas ng presyo.



Ang 2010 alokasyon sa kalusugan na P40 bilyon ay nabawasan pa, ginawang P38.6 bilyon na lamang para sa 2011.





Gaano kalaki ang planong pagbabawas sa budget ng UP para sa 2011?



Sa taong 2011, sa unang panukalang budget na inihapag ng kauupong administrasyong Aquino, bumulaga ang planong muling bawasan ang budget ng ating unibersidad. Mababa ng halos P1.4 bilyon ang 2011 panukalang UP budget kumpara sa naaprubahang budget noong 2010.




Panukala
Aktwal

2010
P5,289,346,000
P6,916,801,000

2011
P5,525,844, 000
(P5,525,844, 000)

Difference
+P236,498 M
-P1.39 B




May pagtaas sa personal services (PS) bunga ng implementasyon ng ikalawang tranche ng Salary Standardization Law 3 (SSL3), ngunit kinaltasan ng P654 milyon ang maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE). Samantala, walang inilaan o zero ang capital outlay (CO).




PS
MOOE
CO
TOTAL

2010
P4,275,534
P1,358,332
P1,282,935
P6,916,801

2011
P4,871,845
P653,999
0
(P5,525,844)

Diffe-rence
P596, 311
-P704,333
P1,282,935
-P1,390,957






Ano ang naging pahayag ng Administrasyong Roman kaugnay ng nakaambang pagkaltas sa budget ng UP?



Ayon kay Pangulong Emerlinda Roman sa interbyu sa kanya ng Philippine Collegian, ang pagbaba ng MOOE ng mahigit pitong milyong peso ay bunga ng “‘non-recurring items’ in the budget, which are sums given to the university for specific research and construction projects in a certain year.” (“DBM slashes P1.3B from proposed P11B UP budget,” Set. 3, 2010, p. 3). Totoo man ang ganitong paliwanag, lumalabas na mismong si Pang. Roman pa ang nagbibigay ng katuwiran sa pagliit ng budget ng UP. Batid naman ng administrasyong Roman kung gaano naiipit ang iba’t ibang kolehiyo at yunit, pati na ang Philippine General Hospital (PGH), dahil sa kakapusan ng panustos para sa pagmementina ng mga gusali at pasilidad, at dahil sa kakapusan ng pambayad sa taon-taong pagtaas ng gastusin sa tubig at kuryente sa gitna ng pagtitipid ng mga administrador at empleyado.



Sa kaniyang paliwanag sa Philippine Collegian, litaw na litaw ang pagtanggap na lamang ni Pang. Roman sa budget cut at ang kaniyang kawalan ng political will upang ipaglaban ang mas mataas na UP budget:



“The President’s (Aquino) message about reducing subsidy to higher education is not different from the previous administration’s position… This is why UP has been trying to generate resources from other sources and its land grants.” (ibid)



Tila nakaligtaan ni Pang. Roman ang probisyon sa 2008 UP Charter, Section 22 (f):



“That funds generated from such programs, projects or mechanism (patungkol sa kikitain ng unibersidad sa mga land grants at iba pang pag-aari) shall not be meant to replace, in part or in whole, the annual appropriations provided by the national government to the national university.”




Ano ang magiging epekto sa komunidad ng UP ng patuloy na pagliit ng UP budget?



Kapag higit pang binabaan ang UP budget, mas may dahilan ang administrasyon ng UP na magpataw ng dagdag na bayarin at singilin sa mga estudyante, at mapabilis pang lalo ang komersyalisasyon ng mga lupain at mga serbisyo ng UP.



Apektado rin ang mga faculty na walang item, mga kontraktwal na kawani at ang mga doktor sa UP Manila PGH na “without compensation” ang katayuan. Sa isinumite ng administrasyong Roman na P18 bilyong 2011 UP budget sa DBM, mayroong alokasyon para sa mga dagdag na item para sa kaguruan at para sa regularisasyon ng mga emplayadong kaswal. Mayroon ring alokasyon para mabayaran ang mga doktor ng PGH na ngayon ay “without compensation.” Humingi rin ang UP ng dagdag na MOOE.



Nakikita rin na dahil sa patuloy na pagkaltas sa UP budget, lalong igigiit ng administrasyon ng UP ang pagsasara sa University Food Service upang diumano’y makatipid at upang magkaroon ng dagdag na kita sa pamamagitan ng mas marami pang pribadong concessionaire. Higit pang tataasan ang mga singilin sa mga sektor ng manininda at drayber ng mga pampublikong jeep sa UP.





Ano ang maaari nating gawin para labanan ang budget cut sa UP?



Alalahanin ang tagumpay na nakamit natin sa sama-samang pagkilos noong 2009 para ipaglaban ang mas mataas na budget para sa UP. Nag-lobby tayo sa Kongreso at nagkaroon ng maraming kilos-protesta para igiit ang mas mataas na budget para sa UP at sa buong sektor ng edukasyon. Dahil sa sama-samang pagkilos, napigilan ang pagbawas sa MOOE at nadagdagan ito ng halos P400 milyon. At sa halip na zero ang CO ay nakakuha tayo ng P1.28 bilyon para sa iba’t ibang proyektong imprastruktura sa unibersidad.




2010 Panukalang Budget ni Arroyo
2010

Aprubadong Budget

PS
P4,609,223,000


P4,275,534, 000

(di kasama ang retirement benefits)

MOOE
P680,123,000


P1,358,332,000



CO
0


P1,282,935, 000

TOTAL
P5,289,346,000


P6,916,801,000






Sa kasalukuyang budget deliberations sa Kongreso, magkaisa tayo para igiit ang sumusunod na mga kahilingan para sa karagdagang budget ng UP batay sa mahahalagang pangangailangan ng ating unibersidad:





Additional Faculty Item
P238.331 milyon

Regularization of Existing Casual
P57.592 milyon

Lump sum for honoraria/ allowance/ for UP Manila faculty without compensation (WOC)
P26 milyon

Additional MOOE
P693.356 milyon




Ang mga nasa itaas ay kinuha sa P18.53B 2011 UP Budget na isinumite ng UP sa DBM. Bukod sa mga ito, humihingi tayo ng alokasyon na P200 milyon para maipatayo ang bagong gusali ng UPIS sa loob ng academic oval na matagal nang hinihingi ng mga guro, magulang at mag-aaral nito. Humihingi rin tayo ng dagdag na alokasyon para makapagpatayo ng housing sa loob ng kampus para sa mga faculty at empleyado ng UP. Walang naitayong bagong housing sa campus sa termino ng tatlong nakaraang Pangulo ng UP: Javier, Nemezo at Roman, o sa nakaraang halos 18 taon.



Nakasaad sa 2008 UP Charter na bukod sa regular na alokasyon at dagdag sa taunang GAA, may taunang centennial fund na P100 milyon, sa loob ng limang taon, na dapat kasama sa budget ng UP. (Section 28, 2008 UP Charter: “In addition to the regular appropriations and increases for the university under the annual GAA, a centennial fund shall be appropriated in the amount of One Hundred Million Pesos (P100,000,000.00) per year for a period of five years, which shall likewise be included in the annual GAA.”)





Bakit sinasabi na inaabandona ng Administrasyong Aquino ang obligasyon ng gobyerno sa tersaryong edukasyon?



Ayon sa pag-aaral na ginawa ng Kabataan Partylist[2], matindi ang pagbawas sa budget hindi lamang ng UP kundi ng halos lahat ng SUCs:



Para sa taong 2011, ang ilalaan na kabuuang subsidiya ng administrasyong Aquino para sa mga SUC’s ay mahigit-kumulang P23.41 bilyon (kabilang na ang pondo para sa Personnel at Retirement Pension benefits na sa aktwal na General Appropriations Act ay hiwalay sa budget ng SUC’s). Mas mababa ito nang mahigit P437 milyon mula sa budget ng SUC’s ngayong 2010, at mas mababa ito nang halos P2 bilyon mula sa budget ng SUC’s noong 2009



Ang pinakamalalang tatamaan ng mga budget cut para sa 2011 ayon sa indibidwal na proposed budget ng mga SUC’s (hindi pa kasama ang dagdag na halaga mula sa hiwalay na Personnel at Retirement Pension benefits) ay ang mga sumusunod:

SUC’s NA MAY PINAKAMALALANG BUDGET CUT SA 2011 (AYON SA PORSYENTO)
1. Philippine Normal University (-23.59%)

2. Aurora State College of Technology

(-22.21%)

3. Cerilles State College (-21.95%)

4. University of the Philippines (-20.11%)

5. University of Southeastern Philippines

(-20.03%)



SUC’s NA MAY PINAKAMALALANG BUDGET CUT SA 2011 (AYON SA AKTWAL NA SUBSIDIYA)
1. University of the Philippines (-P1.39 bilyon)

2. Philippine Normal University

(-P91.35 milyon)

3. Bicol University (-P88.81 milyon)

4. University of Southeastern Philippines
(-P44.39 milyon)

5. Central Bicol State University of Agriculture (-P31.65 milyon)


Lumaki ang bahagdan ng mga bayarin ng mga estudyante ng SUCs mula halos pitong porsyento (6.6%) noong 2000 tungong 20.2% ngayong 2010 at magiging 22.1% sa 2011. Samakatuwid, ang self-generating income ng SUCs ang inihahalili sa pagkaltas ng budget ng SUCs. Tuloy-tuloy ang pagliit ng subsidyo ng gobyerno sa pampublikong paaralan sa tersaryong lebel, mula 87.74% noong 2000 tungong 66.31% sa panukalang 2011 budget. [3]

Lantarang inamin ni Pangulong Aquino sa kaniyang budget message ang kaniyang pagpapatuloy sa programa ng Administrasyong Arroyo:



“We are gradually reducing the subsidy to SUCs to push them toward becoming self-sufficient and financially independent, given their ability to raise their income and to utilize it for their programs and projects.”



Tulad nang nagyayari sa UP, ang pagliit ng alokasyon para sa SUCs ay nangangahulugan ng pagtaas ng singilin at bayarin sa mga mag-aaral at ng higit pang komersyalisasyon ng mga pampublikong unibersidad. Imperatibong labanan natin ang pagpapatuloy ng bagong administrasyong Aquino sa mga patakaran ng administrasyong Arroyo, at ang pagsunod sa dikta ng World Bank sa pag-abandona ng gobyerno sa obligasyon nito sa edukasyon.





Labanan ang P1.39 bilyong budget cut sa UP!

Labanan ang budget cuts sa SUCs!

Igiit ang mas mataas na budget para sa tersaryong edukasyong pampubliko!

Irechannel and debt-servicing at budget ng militar sa edukasyon at iba pang serbisyong panlipunan!

Labanan ang tumitinding komersyalisasyon at pribatisasyon ng UP at ng lahat ng SUCs!

Tutulan ang pag-abandona ng estado sa edukasyon!






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] “Palace jacks up GOCC subsidy by P1B”, Philippine Daily Inquirer, September 4, 2010, http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100904-290537/Palace-jacks-up-GOCC-subsidy-by-P1B
[2] Kabataan Partylist. “Ang Proposed 2011 Budget ng Administrasyong Aquino: State Universities and Colleges’ Budget Briefer 2001”, September 6, 2010. http://kabataanpartylist.com/blog/state-universities-colleges-budget-briefer-2011/
[3] Datos mula sa Budget Expenditures and Sources of Financing (BESF) ng Department of Budget and Management (DBM), http://www.dbm.gov.ph/index.php?pid=9&xid=30&id=1306

From Ma'am Bennette:

Dear Class:

Here are some insights shared by Ma'am Bennette regarding the hostage taking incident. It may help you in accimplishing the quiz.

Subject: Fw: Chinese Tiananmen Square and the Phippine Quirino Granstand and their respective August carnage... something to think about









--- On Wed, 9/1/10, rossane bahia wrote:









It is sad to have noted the unfortunate attacks that happened recently in your
country. When we visited Manila we could never have thought of such vicious
acts. I hope God will give sanity to other perpetrators to be and make them
realise the importance of life. That way peace will prevail on earth...



The known facts are these:

On August 19, 2005, Emmanuel "Bong" Madrigal, a Manila-based Filipino executive
of the multinational Shell, was visiting Beijing on vacation with his wife
Vivian, his daugher Regina Mia, and two younger daughters. That day, they rode a
tourist bus to Tiananmen Square, the heart of the capitol.

Upon arriving at the square, Emmanuel Madrigal was the first to descend from the
bus, followed by Vivian and Regina Mia. A Chinese man wielding a scythe--in some
reports it was described as a sword--suddenly appeared out of nowhere and hacked
Emmanuel across his torso. He died on the spot. The man also attacked and
seriously wounded Vivian. He then slashed at and killed Regina Mia. By this
time, bystanders were trying to subdue the man, and Vivian shouted to her two
other daughters to get away and save themselves. Somehow the girls made their
way back to the hotel. Vivian was brought to a Beijing hospital, where she died
several days later of her injuries.

An Associated Press report still circulating on the internet states that the
killer was Wang Gongzuo, 25, a farmer from eastern China's Jiangsu province. He
was sentenced to death for the murder of the Madrigals and executed a few weeks
later, in September. The AP report states: 'Wang's motive for killing the two is
unclear. After the incident occurred the Beijing Morning Post reported that he
had wanted to 'affect society using extreme actions,' but didn't elaborate."

Reflect on the parallels. A family of vacationers on a tourist bus: the Leungs
and the Madrigals. A killer out to "affect society using extreme
actions": Mendoza and Wang. A massacre in a public place of symbolic
significance: The Quirino grandstand, where the presidential inauguration had
been held just weeks before, and site of the civil society protests against the
Marcos regime; and Tiananmen Square, since ancient times the symbol of the
centralized power of the Chinese state, and site of the 1991 civil protests
against the government.

In both incidents, the state failed miserably in protecting innocent tourists.

And there the parallels end.

President Aquino has apologized to the families of Mendoza's victims and
conveyed his sorrow to the people of Hongkong, Chief Executive Donald Tsang, and
Ambassador Lin Jian Chao. The Philippine National Police acknowledge that they
botched matters beyond comprehension. Philippine legislators, ahead of their
Hongkong counterparts, called for a full investigation. Philippine media
organizations are looking to their own culpability in the affair. And masses of
ordinary Filipinos, on TV, radio, print, and the Internet, are expressing
collective horror, remorse and pity over the terrible fate of the innocent
tourists, and bow their heads in shame before the Hong Kong people's sorrow and
anger.

That is how it should be, that is only right. But.

To this day, five years after it happened, there is no public record of any
Chinese official acknowledging the tourist killings in Tiananmen Square and
apologizing to the Madrigals, much less the Filipino people, for the murder of
Emmanuel, Regina Mia and Vivian. Not a single expression of regret that the
Chinese police failed in their duty to protect the lives of innocent tourists in
the very heart of Beijing, in the symbolic center of a state that prides itself
most of all for its ability to control and contain disorder. There was a total
blackout on the part of the Chinese press, and, according to another news
report, government censors quickly blocked many internet sites where Chinese
users had begun to post comments about the killing. So we will likely never know
what ordinary Chinese citizens had to say about about the incident. Maybe some
of them were actually sorry for what happened.

The closest thing to expressed regret was in fact the final reported action of
the killer Wang, who waived his right to appeal the sentence of execution, and
got a bullet in the back of his head.

To add to the horror, it would appear that the Arroyo administration was
complicit in the silence. No public statement was ever made by the Philippine
government regarding the incident. Unlike in Hongkong, no flags were flown at
half-mast in Manila, and no three-minute silence was observed to mark the deaths
of the innocent Filipino tourists. No demand has ever been made by any Filipino
official for an apology, and for an accounting.

A full investigation of the Quirino Grandstand killing is ongoing. But what of
that other killing, also in August, five years ago in Tiananmen Square?


###


NB: This email and its contents are subject to our email legal notice which can
be viewed at: http://www.treasury.gov.za/Email_Disclaimer.pdf