Better Philippines

Earth Hour Tonight

Earth Hour is up later at 8:30 pm Manila time. Hope you’re up to the task of switching off your lights and other electrical appliance for at least an hour.

By the way why don’t we do one better. Why not have an Earth Hour everyday. An hour of reduced electricity consumption everyday should not be too much to ask.

In An Ideal Philippines

In an ideal Philippines, a true reformist has a fighting chance of getting elected president.

In an ideal Philippines, the true reformist candidate can get popular support without resorting to traditional political tactics.

In an ideal Philippines, influential politicians will give their support to a candidate without asking for anything in return.

In an ideal Philippines, candidates are able to run a decent campaign funded solely by contributions from ordinary people.

In an ideal Philippines, voters are mature enough to see beyond empty campaign speeches.

In an ideal Philippines, campaign sorties are not topbilled by entertainers.

In an ideal Philippines, campaign debates are intelligent and issue-based.

In an ideal Philippines…

Can Panlilio Save The Philippines?

Pampanga Governor Ed Panlilio has presented himself as a possible contender for the presidency in 2010. Panlilio has apparently positioned himself as a reform candidate on a mission to rid this country of corruption.

It would be interesting to see a non-traditional candidate battle it out with the trapos (traditional politicians). But, while I can imagine him demolishing many of the possible candidates on the strength of image alone, I have some doubts if he can make it to Malacanang without crossing over to the dark side of old style traditional politics.

As a man of the cloth and a non-traditional politician, Panlilio already has the advantage of being perceived as being on the side of good. In fact, he got elected precisely because of that.

To his credit, the governor has succeeded in raising the provincial government’s collection from quarrying operations. However, beyond that, much of the publicity that has gone his way has been mostly negative such as the allegations of underperformance and the persistent efforts to have him recalled.

A friend of mine says it is best to examine not only the candidate’s vision but also his or her track record. In Panlilio’s case, I think he will have to come up with something really big to boost his own record as a public servant if he wants to be taken seriously as a presidential contender. Solving Pampanga’s jueteng problem may just do the trick. But, with just a little over a year before the elections, Panlilio may have to perform a miracle.

So what do you think? Does Panlilio have a fighting chance? The bigger question is: Does non-traditional politics have any chance at all under our present corrupt kumpadre system?

One-Two-Three

This country’s next president should seriously look into the graft and corruption that has been going at the Bureau of Internal Revenue. It is my hope that the next president will make it his or her mission to personally ­go after corrupt BIR officials and personnel. I’m thinking at least 10 BIR officials/personnel tried, convicted and penalized per year during the duration of his term. That could be enough to send a chilling message to all the grafters and corruptors.

Clearly, I am still all riled up because of Philippine Star columnist Cito Beltran’s recent piece about the BIR. In his column, Mr. Beltran described how brazen some tax collectors have become and how it seems corruption is tolerated and possibly even encouraged within the bureau. He noted that the system within the bureau has made it possible for our tax collectors to have their way with taxpayers and it wouldn’t matter as long as they are able to meet their quotas.

A number of commenters have criticized Mr. Beltran’s column. A few of them seem to hold the belief that taxpayers should just pay the right taxes and everything will just be peachy. I agree it could be argued that taxpayers are also to blame for all the graft and corruption going on in the BIR. It could be said that graft and corruption would not exist in the BIR if taxpayers just paid what is due to the government and refrained from offering bribes.

The reality is taxpayers are wired to do everything – including illegal means for some – to avoid paying too much in taxes. That is the taxpayer’s nature. The responsibility of ensuring that correct taxes are collected rests with the tax collectors. That is the job we are paying them to do after all. Unfortunately, many, if not all, BIR personnel are parasites.

Curiously, isn’t it strange that our lawmakers don’t seem to have any interest at all to investigate the shenanigans going on in the BIR? Not that we even need a congressional inquiry to uncover the problem. Our lawmakers need only acknowledge, admit and craft the necessary laws to address what they already know.

But, our lawmakers are busy with other things. Some of them may even be thinking about new taxes, which leads me to ask: Why does the national government always seem to be in need of more taxes? I am not an economist and my financial knowledge is limited to counting the very limited money I have in my wallet but I would like to venture a guess. My guess is it is because revenue targets are never met. And, why aren’t revenue targets met? The answer may be as simple as one-two-three.

It is a widely known fact that business owners are favorite targets of BIR people. It is also a known fact that a business owner would eventually end up facing a BIR personnel during the tax season. There’s just no escaping this under the present system.

Negotiations occur during these face-offs. It usually starts out with the BIR personnel informing the business owner that his or her taxes are a certain amount, usually, one that the business owner would find too big. This prompts the business owner to haggle for a reduced amount. So what does the BIR personnel do? He or she offers directly or indirectly the option of paying a reduced amount in exchange for a “fee.” More negotiations ensue but all these eventually end with the business owner agreeing to the terms offered by the BIR personnel. The business owner pays the reduced amount and the BIR personnel collects his “fee.”

It should be noted that sometimes the initial tax amount quoted by the BIR personnel/official isn’t even correct. More often than not it is higher than what is really due. This is the BIR personnel’s strategy to get the business owner to enter into negotiations. As I said it is just one-two-three as in “na-wantutri” or “naloko” in the vernacular.

So what happens when the national government finds that its revenues have fallen short? It calls for more taxes. Unfortunately, imposing more taxes will never fill in the gaps. It will just provide the tax collector the opportunity to carry out his or her evil deeds. The classic theory is that more taxes mean more and better government services. The fact is more taxes just mean more money for the corrupt tax collector.

Damn The (Corrupt) Taxman

Philippine Star columnist Cito Beltran came out today with a piece on the Bureau of Internal Revenue. It’s recommended reading if you want to know  why many people, including myself, loathe BIR personnel. Stories like these should be enough reason for us to vote leaders who have the political will to actually fight corruption. Here are some excerpts.

“Participants in a recent tax forum expressed shock when a top official of the BIR casually said that as far as they are concerned, they are willing to turn a blind eye to whatever means BIR agents use as long as the agency meets their revenue targets or collection quotas. In response to the pressure and the desperation to hit targets, the BIR has foregone restraint and accountability among the good and the bad within its ranks.”

“The corrupt are now asking for an average of P350,000 not to do their job and after a couple of weeks, the reported average rate of accepted bribe is P200,000. There are no distinctions made between feast and famine and if the “agent” gets transferred, the thieves have a referral system.”

I was going to share some of my own thoughts about the shenanigans going on in the BIR but I can’t at the moment as I am overcome with indignation. In the meantime, read the full text of Mr. Beltran’s column here.

Paid Work For Change

Is blogging about change of less value than actually taking action to spur change? I’ve been pondering this question after a friend of mine pointed out that while some people JUST talk or write about change there are those like him who do actual work. He’d probably say I’m just reading more into what he said but I think it is safe to say that he was assigning values and to him taking action ranks higher than just talking or writing about something.

I will have to agree with him. Action trumps lip service — generally.

Ironically, this friend of mine is also a blogger, a prolific one at that who also writes about changing this country of ours. It was for this reason that I really found it strange that he would imply that there is less value in just talking or writing about change. But, then again, he did say he once became part of change.

My friend supports his claim by harping on the fact that he works for –he prefers “works with” — a lawmaker. By his account, his boss is not just any lawmaker, but one of , if not, the best and probably our country’s hope for salvation. He didn’t actually say it that way but his writings would clearly show that he holds this lawmaker in very high esteem. To this lawmaker’s credit, he has really proven himself to be an achiever. I actually voted for him and would probably do so again if and when we do have elections in 2010.

Lately, this friend of mine has been highlighting his boss’ success in getting several measures relevant to our election system legislated. Here is where my friend makes the big jump. Because of his association to this lawmaker, he now believes that he can rightfully say that he was a part of the “change” his boss worked so hard for. I can understand where he is coming from but is that really the case? I’m not sure. What I’m sure of is that he was rendering paid services to this lawmaker. Following his logic, would it then be safe to say that the lawmaker’s driver was also a part of change?

I don’t mean to undermine my friend’s worth but I will have to disagree with his notion that just writing or talking about change is of lower value than what he did or does. The main difference I see here is that, while he is being paid to help this lawmaker achieve his goals, people who just write or talk about change do so on their own accord. As a staffmember, he is doing paid work; those who just write and talk about change are practically doing volunteer work.

I don’t want to belabor this anymore because, like myself, my friend hates splitting hairs. But I will point out the moral of the story and it is this: If you want to be a part of change go work for a lawmaker. Just kidding. The real moral is this:

Working for change is better than just talking or writing about it. But if through your writing you succeed in inspiring others to take action then that’s good too.  It also wouldn’t hurt to get paid for actual services. Patriots have expenses too just like everybody else.

Of Movements And Platforms

I’ve been engaged in a senseless debate over some crappy issue with a very passionate friend of mine. Thankfully, at least one interesting point came out of that senseless exchange. It’s about the concept of movement. That part of the senseless discussion prompted me to ponder what a movement really is and what it is not.

I have always believed that movements are more than just a conglomeration of people. I also hold the opinion that so-called movements centered around a politician are not real movements. As I told my friend, for me, these so-called movements are just campaign machinery.

I may be wrong but I did some checking and I found 2 interesting articles on the subject matter in http://movementbuilders.com. The first one sought to define what a movement is; the second one what it isn’t. The following excerpt from the second article is exactly what I was looking for:

Political campaigns, however, typically fail to involve their members past the electoral cycle.  They may well be a mini-movement while approaching the election, but they fall short of becoming a true movement by ending their efforts too early.

With all the movements sprouting everywhere, I think it’s about time we all learn to distinguish the real movements from the rest. We should be especially concerned about this because, in our country, even the most idealistic movements inevitably end up being commandeered by politicians. “Epal” (pumapapel) as my good friend would like to call it. There’s just no way we can stop politicians from embedding themselves in movements. “Epal” is in their nature. All of them.

Many of us will most likely join a movement especially come election time. To those who will may I suggest a minor adjustment. Instead of basing your choice on the politicians they represent why not base it on the SPECIFIC PLANS (not motherhood vision statements) that these politicians propose. Simply put, let’s support the PLANS, the PLATFORMS not the personality.

Cut The Red Tape

The Bureau of Customs has reportedly achieved what other government agencies have not. It has become compliant with the Anti-Red Tape Law. The Bureau claims transactions that used to take days to complete can now be finished in just a matter of hours. Congratulations to the BOC if this is true and not just another press release.

All government agencies should prioritize the elimination of red tape. Their commitment to making their processes more efficient would reflect their determination to rid their offices of graft and corruption. Conversely, their determination to maintain inefficiencies would just expose their commitment to graft and corruption.

I wonder which comes first. Inefficiencies in the system or corruption? Do grafters look for kinks in the system where they can apply their corrupt practices? Or do they convert efficient systems to suit their evil designs?

I’m pondering these questions because determining how red tape creeps in to a system is an important step towards finding suitable countermeasures. Take the first situation. If there are loopholes in the system the obvious solution would be to plug them. I think for the second situation the simplest solution is to kick out those who initiated the conversion from efficiency to inefficiency. Of course, these are all overly simplified. In the real world, the situations are likely to be more complicated and the required solutions more difficult to implement.

In any case, the key to addressing red tape and the attendant graft and corruption is political will. If it is really true that the Bureau of Customs is now red tape-free then clearly it has already exercised its political will. Are our other agencies up to the task?

Why Do Politicians Run For Office?

Senator Manny Villar recently made the news again with his assertion that it would cost at least P1billion to effectively support a presidential candidacy. If that were true, the question we all need to ask now is: Why would anyone even bother to run for president?

I’m sure many of us have wondered what drives politicians to run for public office. The salary of a public servant — and this includes the president — isn’t much. Top executives in private companies earn so much more. There are also the hazards of the job: constant criticisms, nasty rumors, coup d’ etats, destabilization etcetera, etcetera. And, let’s not forget, the many problems that he/she will have to address.

Our politicians must really be crazy. But, seriously, I wonder why they would even think of running. Is it because of a deep, patriotic desire to serve or a belief that they are God’s instrument? They won’t directly make such a claim but they are not above leading the voting public on to assume that they are the answer to all our problems, the achiever of all our hopes and dreams.

The question remains: What drives our politicians to run for office?

Changing The System

I was one of the very few people who dared to cast their vote for the less popular candidates in the last senatorial elections. Call me a fool but it is true I voted for Victor Wood. Hell, I even campaigned for him in our office.

Younger Filipinos may only know Mr. Wood for his much-publicized fling with Madame “May Asim Pa” Auring.  The slightly older may remember him for his hit songs including his version of Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline” with which he popularized the word “tatsing” as in “Hands, tatsing hands, reaching out… tatsing me, tatsing you… Oh, sweet Caroline…”

Believe me I wasn’t making light of my right to suffrage. I had valid reasons for giving my vote to Mr. Wood. For one I was frustrated over the fact that none of the already established candidates at that time offered anything new. They were all just mouthing off the standard motherhood bulls__t. While most Filipinos cast their votes for the familiar devils, I chose to give mine to a few of those we didn’t know yet.

But, the idea of voting for Mr. Wood first came to me when I saw him in a special episode of the now defunct GMA7 program Debate. In that particular episode, Mr. Wood was asked what he thought was the problem with Philippine politics or something to that effect. I was floored because his response was totally unexpected but more importantly it made real sense.

Without any hint of uncertainty, Mr. Wood candidly said that the problem was that running for public office in the Philippines was just too costly. He elaborated by pointing out that because of this candidates who get elected inevitably try to recoup their expenses through corrupt practices while in office. I’m not sure if I recall it correctly but I think he also pointed out that the major TV stations are the only ones benefitting from the campaign period by way of the expensive fees they charge for the candidates’ campaign advertisements.

Call me a fool but I really voted for Victor Wood. I voted for him because he had the audacity and the balls to point out what many of us — politicians especially — already know but choose to ignore. Our election system breeds corruption.

With the 2010 elections fast approaching, wouldn’t this be the right time to push for change in our system? I’m not talking about automation since that’s already being discussed and debated on. I’m talking about making it cheaper for any candidate to run for office. I’m talking about Mr Wood’s idea.

Of course, a less costly electoral process is not a guarantee that elected candidates will no longer engage in graft and corruption. It would, however, guarantee some meaningful change in the country’s political system. For one, it would open up the political arena for other aspirants who may be poor in terms of finances but are truly rich in terms of having a real and honest desire to lead the Philippines to greater heights.

I think this whole idea is really worth a try. The TV networks, print publications and all the other relevant sectors should agree right here, right now to stop the practice of charging for campaign ads and other election-related materials. These entities should view this as their opportunity to provide the people with real public service. They can count this as their contribution to the country’s well being.

I can already imagine the immediate benefit. More candidates, more choices. More choices, more freedom for the voting public to pick out the truly deserving candidates from the scum.

Mr. Wood, I won’t vote for you again but I thank you for inspiring this post.