mongster's nest

- disturbing fantasies, traumatic verses, definitely mongrel thoughts

Youth and Charter Change

Last Saturday, I spoke in a forum organized by political science students from different Metro Manila schools. The other speakers were Jose Abueva, Benjie Tolosa, Olivia Caoili and Sonny Africa. Below is the text of my speech.

Check out the new pictures in my photoblog.

Any proposal to amend the constitution has the potential to arouse the interest of the youth. After all, we do want changes in the system. We want to end corruption. We want a more responsive government. We want to end the seemingly endless cycle of poverty and hopelessness in the country.

An honest review of the fundamental law of the land is welcome since it can remove irrelevant provisions in the Constitution and infuse better measures that would safeguard our democracy and promote economic growth.

But why did Cha-Cha fail? Why didn’t it receive overwhelming public support? Why was it rejected by many young people?

To rephrase my question, bakit na-turn-off ang kabataan sa Chacha?

1. The motives in pushing for ChaCha are suspect. With due respect to the sincere advocates of charter change, there were many who believed charter change was endorsed in 2005 by the President to distract the attention of the people from various scandals/irregularities hounding the regime;

2. The ‘No-elections’ or no-el proposal. This validated our fear that incumbent politicians will use ChaCha for their own narrow interests. Besides, election is a sacred activity in a democracy. Why cancel the 2007 elections – it would be an opportunity to remove incompetent officials and reelect performing leaders;

3. People’s Initiative of Sigaw ng Bayan. The Supreme Court correctly described this initiative as a ‘grand deception’. We could have used the people’s initiative for genuine reforms demanded by the people. But we saw how this proposal became a politician’s initiative. Besides, how could Sigaw ng Bayan succeed in fooling the youth? This is the ‘reality generation’ which cannot be fooled because they know what’s real (McCann inter-generation study);

4. The proposal to abolish the Senate. Indeed, the prestige of the Senate has gone down over the years. But it is a necessary component in our democracy to check the excesses of the Executive branch of our government. If we want to adopt a parliamentary form of government, why propose the removal of the Senate? There are parliamentary systems which have bicameral legislatures like Canada, Australia, India, Malaysia and Japan. Most countries of the world with federal systems have bicameral legislatures.

5. Con-Ass or Consa. Congressman Butz Aquino said the best reason why we should not switch to a parliamentary form of government is the current members of Philippine Congress. You’ve seen how they railroaded Con-ass in the Lower House. You’ve seen how they defeated themselves last December. It was a low point in Congress history.

6. Fear of authoritarianism. Despite its flaws, the 1987 Constitution was a product of the anti-dictatorship struggle. It contained many provisions against the return of Marcos-type of martial law. It was feared that ChaCha will be used to curtail civil liberties. The fear has basis since this government has succeeded in reviving the horrors of martial rule. This is the same government which imposed PP 1017, EO 464 and calibrated preemptive response.

ChaCha in schools

Despite these reasons, ChaCha made a strong impact among the youth last year. Lobat may be word of the year but ChaCha was the most spoken word in Philippine politics and it resonated in our campuses. ChaCha was discussed, debated, supported and opposed in most schools. Pro and anti ChaCha groups toured the universities and communities throughout the country explaining the strengths and weaknesses of proposals to amend the Constitution. Students became more familiar with different types of government, different modes of changing the Constitution and different ways to support or oppose a political proposal. Parliamentary, presidential, concon, peoples’ initiative became household terms. Even in cyberspace, ChaCha was discussed in chatrooms, blogs and in many websites. ChaCha politicized and divided many members of the academe and the youth sector.

Concom report

Let me now highlight the proposed amendments in the Constitution which would directly affect the youth or which would be a major concern of young people in the future.

The Constitutional Commission was the first to draft a set of recommendations to change the Constitution. In its report, it proposed the deletion of the following progressive provisions in Article II (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) of the 1987 Constitution:

Section 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.

Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living,and an improved quality of life for all.

Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs

Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development.

Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.

Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption.

Also deleted was Section 3 of Article XIV, on education, which states:

“They [educational institutions] shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and promote vocational efficiency.”

We registered our opposition to the deletion of provisions which mandate the State to recognize and promote youth welfare and the prioritization of education. The National Youth Commission noted our opposition and agreed to lobby for the retention of these very important provisions of our Constitution.

After the Concom report, the House adopted different versions of changing the Constitution. In the new House revisions, the provisions I mentioned have been retained.

Opening the economy

In all versions of ChaCha, what is common is the proposal to open up the economy and allow foreigners to own land and industries in the country.

In the House version, Section 12 in Article XII read as follows:

“Section 12. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 2 and 11 hereof, citizenship restrictions are hereby lifted relative to the ownership and lease of alienable lands of public domain which include agricultural, residential, commercial and reclaimed lands, development of natural resources, ownership of franchises and of public utilities, mass media, education, insurance and advertising, unless otherwise provided by law. Parliament shall provide for limited foreign ownership in regard to franchises granted to corporations including public utilities of large scale.”

This will allow foreign schools to set up campuses in the country.

Before I proceed to the discussion on whether the entry of foreign schools can improve Philippine education, let me cite a statement by former Senator Wigberto Tanada on the danger of depending too much on liberalizing the economy:

“…But have we not liberalized the entire industrial sector and opened it up to full foreign ownership? Have we not liberalized the entire financial sector, making it one of the most open in Asia? Have we not liberalized the trade sector, exposing our domestic industry and domestic agriculture to the full brunt of foreign competition, most of which is subsidized foreign competition (e.g., subsidized American agricultural exports and Chinese industrial exports cheapened by an undervalued renminbi)? Have we not liberalized the agricultural sector, drastically reducing in the name of agricultural deregulation the support the government used to extend to small-farmer development? Ang tanong ngayon, sa kabila ng pagbukas ng ating ekonomiya, nasaan na ang inaasam-asam nating foreign investment?”

Sen. Tanada noted that despite the ‘obsolete, nationalist, protectionist’ provisions in the 1987 Constitution, the government was able to open up the economy and liberalize various industries. Yet economic prosperity did not materialize.

Citizenship restriction is the least of foreign investors’ concerns. What they complain is corruption, security problem, red tape and weak infrastructure system. Opening up the economy will also not automatically lead to economic growth. What is certain is that foreign companies will exploit the cheap labor in this country.

Welcome foreign schools

Now, what will be the consequences of allowing foreigners to own schools in the country? Will it improve Philippine education? Will it reverse the declining quality of learning in the country? In my opinion, the entry of foreign schools will be detrimental for Philippine education. It may lead to the closure of many schools which can’t compete with foreign schools.

Foreign schools may also entice our bright teachers to work for them by offering large incentives.

In many of the school assemblies organized by pro ChaCha groups, students were asked whether they want to study in Harvard or Oxford. Support for ChaCha, according to pro ChaCha groups, would allow Harvard or Oxford to set up a branch here in the Philippines. I think this is mere wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking because the schools which would probably operate here would be large corporations involved in the education sector and not the reputable universities like Harvard or Oxford. Big corporations which would offer ‘global courses’ and standardized teacher-proof modules.

This I think will worsen the already commercialized character of Philippine higher education. This will lead to the further strengthening of an education system responsive to the manpower requirements of other countries rather than our domestic needs.

Right now, the most popular courses are the marketable courses, or those which offer easy employment in other countries after graduation. Nursing is the most popular course today. Everybody wants to study nursing. Even doctors are studying to become nurses.

Imagine if foreign schools are allowed to operate here, would we expect them to offer courses which our agricultural economy requires? Most probably they will continue focusing on courses required by the ‘global economy’ over our national needs.

ChaCha will be a major issue after the elections. Talking about the idea of changing the Constitution is not enough. We have to scrutinize the actual amendments that are being proposed. We have to continue asking. We have to continue debating.

We can actually begin today. Election campaigning has already started. Registered voter or not, your voice will be heard by all politicians. We should start questioning all candidates. Are they in favor charter change? Why and why not? Are they in favor of a stronger Executive? Are they in favor of abolishing the Senate? How about the protection of our civil liberties? Remember also the names lawmakers who railroaded Con-Ass last December.

Make a stand on the issue of ChaCha. Let the world know about your position. Speak out, write, text, chat, blog – there are many ways to express your position on ChaCha. The important thing is that we do not remain silent today.

Related entries:

Shall we dance the ChaCha?
ChaCha during the monsoon season
Plebiscite question
Con-ass moments
Private or public education


*******************************

ChaCha at ang krisis sa edukasyon


Sinulat ko ito mga dalawa o tatlong buwan na ang nakakalipas....

Upang makakuha ng suporta sa taongbayan at kabataan, dinadaan sa panlilinlang ang paglalako ng panukalang baguhin ang Saligang Batas o ChaCha.

Ayon sa mga tagapagsulong ng ChaCha, gaganda ang kinabukasan ng kabataan, bubuti ang kalidad ng edukasyon at dadami ang mga trabaho kapag natuloy ang pagbasura ng Konstitusyong 1987.

Pawang kasinungalingan, kasinungalingan at kasinungalingan.

Lalong lulugmok ang kabuhayan sa bansa, didilim ang kinabukasan ng kabataan at sisidhi ang krisis sa edukasyon kung ipapatupad ang ChaCha.

Nakakabahala ang mga probisyong gustong idagdag at alisin sa panukalang ChaCha. Titiyakin nito na lalong magiging makapangyarihan hindi lang si Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at mga tradisyunal na pulitiko kundi lalo na ang mga dayuhang mandarambong.

Sa ating pag-aaral, ang sumusunod ang tuwirang implikasyon ng ChaCha sa kabataan at estudyante:

1. Pagtanggal ng probisyong nagtitiyak na prayoridad dapat ng Estado ang edukasyon, sining, agham at teknolohiya (rekomendasyon ng Abueva Commission);
2. Pagtanggal ng probisyong kinikilala ng Estado ang papel ng kabataan sa pagbubuo ng matatag na nasyon (rekomendasyon ng Abueva Commission);
3. Pagtanggal ng probisyong nag-aatas sa mga eskuwelahan na ituro ang nasyonalismo, pagkilala sa mga pambansang bayani at karapatang-pantao (rekomendasyon ng Abueva Commission);
4. Pagpasok ng banyagang eskuwelahan o ang dayuhang pagmamay-ari ng mga institusyong pangkarunungan;
5. Pagdagdag ng salitang ‘responsible’ sa ating pinaglabang mga karapatan sa pamamahayag at malayang asembliya (rekomendasyon ng Abueva Commission);

Paano makikinabang ang sektor ng edukasyon sa ChaCha kung hindi na obligasyon ng pamahalaan ang pagbibigay ng edukasyon? Paano magiging makabuluhan ang edukasyon kung ang mga eskuwelahan ay pagsisilbihan ang interes ng dayuhan? Paano mapapangalagaan ang kapakanan ng kabataan kung hihikayatin lamang ang mga dayuhan na magnegosyo sa Pilipinas at pagsamantalahan ang murang lakas paggawa ng ating mga batang propesyunal?

Edukasyon para sa iilan, edukasyon para sa dayuhan

Higit na mauunawaan ang kabuktutan ng panukalang ChaCha kung tutumbukin natin ang mga pulisiya sa edukasyon ng pamahalaang ito.

Hindi lamang negosyo ang edukasyon sa bansa. Ito ay nagsisilbi sa pangangailangan ng mga dayuhan. Kasalanan ni GMA kung bakit patuloy ang pagbulusok ng kalidad sa edukasyon. Nangunguna kasi sa prayoridad ng pamahalaan ang pagtitiyak na kumikita ng limpak-limpak ang mga kapitalista-edukador at patuloy na nagluluwal ang mga eskuwelahan ng mga gradweyt na may sapat na kasanayan para makapagtrabaho sa mga dayuhang kumpanya.

Mula noong 2001, lalong pinabilis ng pamahalaan ang pribatisasyon ng edukasyon o ang sistematikong pagpapabaya ng pamahalaan sa obligasyon nitong pag-aralin ang kabataang Pilipino. Binigyan ng pahintulot ang mga pribadong paaralan na malayang itakda ang mga bayaring sinisingil sa mga estudyante. Ang badyet ng mga pampublikong pamantsan ay kinakaltasan bawat taon. Ito ang nagbubunsod ng pagtaas ng matrikula at ang pagbebenta ng yamang intelektuwal ng mga nasa pampublikong pamantasan sa pribadong kapital.

Higit na pinatingkad ni GMA ang kolonyal na oryentasyon ng ating edukasyon. Ilang beses naglabas ng utos ang Malakanyang na dapat gamitin ang Ingles bilang midyum ng pagtuturo para hindi raw mahirapan ang sektor ng Business Process Outsourcing sa pagtanggap ng mga empleyado. Inatas din ni GMA sa mga pamantasan ma mag-alok ng kurso para sa call center. Pinaasikaso sa TESDA ang pagsasanay ng mga supermaid upang maging eksport ng bansa. Hindi lamang kurikulum sa basic education ang dinisenyo ng mga dayuhang bangko. Maging ang mga kaalyado ni GMA sa Kongreso (Rep. Pichay) ay nagrereklamo kung bakit kailangang aprubahan muna ng World Bank ang mga teksbuk na gagamitin ng mga estudyante.

Ipinapatupad ba ang mga programang ito bilang paghahanda ng pamahalaan sa tuluyang pagtanggal ng mga ‘makabayang’ probisyon sa Konstitusyon o sinusulong ba ang ChaCha upang maging legal ang komodipikasyon ng edukasyon at pagbebenta ng ating kabataan sa mga dayuhan? Ang malinaw ay higit na magiging kolonyal at komersyalisado ang edukasyon kung magtatagumpay ang ChaCha.

Krisis sa edukasyon

Hindi solusyon ang ChaCha sa krisis sa edukasyon. Sa halip ito ang magiging dahilan sa tuluyang pagkalugmok ng edukasyon. Sa pagpasok ng mga banyagang korporasyon sa sektor ng edukasyon, ibubunsod nito ang isang di-pantay na kumpetisyon na maaaring maging dahilan ng pagsasara ng mga maliliit na eskuwelahan. Lalong magiging elitista ang sistema ng edukasyon dahil mayayaman lamang ang maaaring makapag-aral sa mga pribadong eskuwelahan. Nakaamba ang pagtalikod ng pamahalaan sa responsibilidad nitong magbigay ng mura at makabuluhang edukasyon. Milyun-milyong kabataan ang kukuha ng mga kursong mas tutugon sa pangangailangan ng mga dayuhan.

Mabibigo ang pangarap ng mga kabataan kung matutuloy ang ChaCha. Mabibigo ang pangarap nating magkaroon ng isang maunlad na lipunan.

Hindi dapat tanungin kung kailan ang tamang panahon para sa ChaCha. Ang mas mainam na katanungan ay kung para kanino ang panukalang ito.

posted by: mongpalatino at February 05, 2007 08:12 | link | comments (1) |
speeches

Comments:

Comments: