Centrist Democracy Political Institute - Items filtered by date: March 2017
The Centrist Democracy Political Institute together with Konrad Adenaur Stiftung (KAS)-Philippines will be conducting a Thematic Conference and Workshop on Political Party Management and Development at One Pacific Hotel, Makati City on 17- 18 March 2016.

The rationale of the conference and workshop is to present the status of major parties in terms of daily operations and management and how CDPI will be able to address the demand for trainings, workshops, conferences and in terms of developing their thematic commissions.

Miss Cristita Marie L. Giangan, MPMD, Program Manager at Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Philippines, will be presenting the Aspects of Political Party and Sector Management. She will discuss the general aspects of party management and on how the mother party will relate its programs, advocacies, and efforts to its established sector associations (and vice versa).

Mr. Benedikt Seemann, Country Director of Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Philippines will be discussing the Creation of Commissions in a Political Party and How to sustain them: The Case of the Christian Democratic Union, how it has established and the method of selection of members, among others.

The next session will be facilitated by Mr. Roderico Y. Dumaog, Chairperson of the CDP Iligan City Chapter. He will be facilitating a discussion and workshop on political party thematic commissions.

Mr. Renato G. Tibon, Fellow and Concilium Member, Centrist Democracy Political Institute, will be giving a discussion on Political Party Structural Framework vis-à-vis Work Relations & Dynamics of Thematic Commissions.

Prof. Maria Lourdes N. Tiquia, Founder and General Manager, Publicus Asia, Ltd. and also a member of the CDPI National Board of Advisers, will be giving a presentation of case studies on successful party management and strategies. She will be presenting a set of case studies of at least two political parties that are successful in terms of internal party management.

The thematic conference and workshop will hopefully help the participants understand the principles and mechanisms of political party work and development.
Published in News
Tuesday, 07 March 2017 10:05

Multiplier effect

DAVAO is “three times bigger than Metro Manila, six times the size of Cebu, one of the largest metropolitan areas not just in Asia but in the world.” Today, it is the unofficial capital of the country. The Davao formula was for the mayor to handle peace and order, use political will to build the city, and the local bureaucracy to attend to the rest. Can this formula be scaled up to the whole of the country?

To a certain degree, yes, in terms of peace and order and infrastructure development. The other side of which is, no, because you have an unwieldy legislature trying to curry favor with PRRD (death penalty for illegal drugs?) or launch diatribes against him (EJK, Matobato, undeclared wealth, Lascañas and every anomalous act is labeled as done by Duterte). The 17th Congress in fact has just enacted two bills into law: the General Appropriations Act, or the national budget, and the postponement of the barangay elections. There are no super majorities because if there were, the legislative agenda of the President would have been on track.

PRRD has convened the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) and the chambers have crafted their own agenda. A common legislative agenda is said to be in the final drafting. Though we can do without more laws considering there are laws that have not been implemented fully and there are unfunded mandates, we need more and more for Congress to exercise its oversight function over the Executive and Judicial branches if it is to help PRRD in his effort to pursue reforms.

In a study done by the Congressional Policy and Budget Reform Department of the House of Representatives, there are “62 laws [that]remained partially funded while 75 laws were not funded at all as of 15 October 2015. Unfunded laws grew by 127.3 percent from 33 in 2007 to 75 in 2015, while partially funded laws grew even higher by 376.9 percent from 13 to 62 in the same period.” These laws amounted to “P367.3 billion. Of this amount, only P242.1 billion was allocated, leaving a funding deficiency of P125.2 billion.” Unbelievably, “the House committee on oversight (13th Congress) which made an inventory of unfunded laws even indicated that two laws enacted by the First Philippine Republic—the Friars Lands Act (1904) and Cadastral Survey Act (1913)—were not implemented because they required a huge funding of P1.5 billion.”

So if Congress can’t act as a direct partner to PRRD on infrastructure development and decides to use their pork for the innocuous projects that do not build a nation, then PRRD and his political will should push the envelope daily until such becomes the bureaucratic discipline. Why? Because doing infrastructure development is the way to respond to some promises of the President: inclusive growth, lowering poverty by the end of his term, providing jobs and bringing sunshine (economic activities) to the poorest provinces.

With political will, PRRD can connect the 7,641 islands by a system of airports, ports, bridges and rails. The bridges can be tourist attractions just like the bridges in Porto, Portugal. Porto is the second largest city after Lisbon and it has a mixed transport system of bus, rails, trams and subways. One can do a tour of the Duoro river and see the different designs of the bridges; some are modern while others are historical in make and design. If PRRD can implement Build.Build.Build and other infrastructure plans every year in the three islands of the country then we would have done much, much more than any administration has.

The nautical highway of then PGMA must be continued and further developed. Just look at the development it brought to Roxas, Oriental Mindoro. Roxas, the smallest municipality of the province, was a sleepy, fourth-class municipality. Today, it is a place of heightened economic activities because of the nautical highway, connecting its port to the famous destination, Boracay. Today, it is a second-class municipality from being a pass-through from Batangas to the Calapan piers and to Caticlan, Aklan.

The underlying reason for pushing for Build.Build.Build is that of the so-called multiplier effect. We can be competitive at the end of PRRD’s term if we are able to launch and implement the infrastructure plan. The multiplier effect is “an increase in income generated by an increase in spending,” which should be part of our national conversation. Such conversation should not settle for mere infra for infra sake but “wise” infra investment. The qualifier “wise” refers to projects that fill a need of the community they serve and which are economically viable. A key lesson is that “projects that have a lot of private capital behind them would have the biggest impact because more often than not they won’t be a road to nowhere.”

Further, it has been a settled model that “an additional 1 percent of GDP invested in transport and communications on a sustained basis increases the GDP per capita growth rate by 0.6 percent. “Productivity growth— and therefore competitiveness—is higher in countries with an adequate supply of infrastructure services.” So, we can even pursue a smart infrastructure development of a mix of hard and soft infra with ICT merged to it to create a resilient Philippines.

Clark should therefore be made as the main gateway, with Subic and Batangas designated as alternative, complementary ports to Manila. Clark and Subic should serve the northern part of Luzon while the south (CALABARZON) can be served by Sangley airport and port system. NAIA can be dedicated to the 12 million residents of Metro Manila. A tri-airport system in Luzon unclogs the bottlenecks of Metro Manila and spurs development from center to the peripheries.

Our unique geography, between East and West, allows us to be a competitive logistics hub. In a Transport Intelligence Report (TIR) in 2015 estimated “Philippine logistics to triple to P326 billion by 2020 from the present P100 billion.” TIR said that by 2020, based on low 11 percent compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) and high of 18 percent CAGR growth scenarios, the logistics market is forecasted to reach P204 billion (low) to P326 billion (high).

The forward linkage index of the Philippine logistics industry as of 2011 was placed at 1.4, the lowest in Southeast Asia, compared to Indonesia, 2.1; Thailand, 2.73; Cambodia, 2.48; Vietnam, 2.64; Thailand, 2.73 and Malaysia, 4.03. Based on the study, logistics’ multiplier effect is such that “every P1 investment has a multiplier of 2.81 investments in other industries such as services.”

There are 109 local and foreign logistics service providers in the country with aggregate revenue of P60 billion. They are very much concerned over the provision of efficient transport infrastructure, conducive policy environment, and regulations that will foster the logistics sectors’ competitiveness in terms of cost, service quality and reliability.

Based on a 2010 traffic study by the Japan International Cooperation Agency in Metro Manila and its environs, truck trips (per day) is expected to increase from 694,271 in 2010 to 872,329 in 2020 and 1 million by 2030. The share of trucks going to and from Manila is 60 percent. That means, we need to increase our road networks.

The Department of Public Works and Highways’ (DPWH) budget has increased dramatically over the last four years. In 2015, almost half (49 percent) of the government’s outlay infrastructure went to DPWH. The big challenge is improving the paved ratio of local roads that comprise 84.5 percent of the country’s total road network. Provincial and municipal roads have a low paved ratio of 35 percent, while city roads have a paved ratio of 62 percent.

Trains and trams are something we need to seriously pursue. Trains can be transshipment mode for raw and finished products, from Mindanao to the Visayas or Mindanao to Luzon. Trams can be an efficient mass transit in urban centers to the peripheries. But Congress will have to contend with the problematic Philippine National Railways (PNR) mandate, which has been pending in Congress despite the extension of its corporate life.

The good news is that under PRRD, the infra spending has been placed at 7 percent, an increase of 2 percent from BSA3’s 5 percent. The other good news is he is hands-on on infra coupled with the political will to push the projects fast. When we see projects launched and a building spree all over, then we test the government’s effort on corruption. If the infra projects are corruption-free, then we see why a Duterte is better than the rest. The surest way to defeat destabilization efforts is to perform well and accomplish more. Unfortunately, the Department of Transportation (DOTr) and the Department of Information and Communication Technology (DICT) are laggards instead of being shining stars. The social welfare clusters are moving. The economic clusters have rolled up their sleeves and the DPWH is getting things done. Agriculture is moving to remove bottlenecks one by one. The uni-dimensional focus must end.

The Duterte administration needs at least P8 trillion to close the infrastructure gap over the next six years. An initial list of 18 big-ticket items worth a total of P427.5 billion has already been approved by the National Economic and Development Authority. Clearly, accelerating infrastructure spending to help pull down the poverty rate to below 15 percent by the time he steps aside in 2022 is vital.

The reality is that the total resources of the Philippine financial system is P16.2 trillion and the Duterte administration would have to invest about Php8 trillion over the next six years on infra to be on a par with Asean. So, the more Congress spends time on this problem area, the better for the whole infra plan to be a reality.

Getting your act together has a multiplier effect, too. It quiets the shrillness in politics. Getting your act together is getting all hands deck, no lone stars. Getting your act together is no public meltdown; the only meltdown should be on tasks not done. From June 2016 to March 2017, or eight months hence, hold the reins tight and get things done. Don’t be derailed by the political noise.

As Socrates said, “the secret of change is to focus all of your energy not on fighting the old, but on building the new.”
Published in Commentaries
HOUSE Deputy Minority Leader Harry Roque on Thursday described as “plain and simple cowardice” the Super Majority coalition’s move to pass the death penalty bill through a voice vote or “viva voce.”

“They do not want their votes to be known by their constituents and they do not want their votes recorded in history. It’s plain and simple cowardice,” the Kabayan party-list congressman said in a text message.

“Definitely, it is not a resounding victory. Many of them are bothered by their conscience,” said Roque.

On Wednesday, motions made by anti-death penalty lawmakers for nominal voting were repeatedly denied by Deputy Speaker Raneo Abu of Batangas and House Deputy Majority Leader Juan Bondoc of Pampanga.

Without nominal voting, there was no record of who were the lawmakers for and against the death penalty during the vote for second reading approval on Wednesday.

The House passed a bill that imposes capital punishment only on manufacturers and traders of illegal drugs.

Rep. Teodoro Baguilat of the Liberal Party said the viva voce vote showed that administration lawmakers were afraid of losing their committee chairmanships if they voted against the death penalty.

“It goes both ways. Those who will eventually vote against death penalty are hesitant to show their true colors to a vengeful majority leadership. Likewise, the cowed majority members who are voting for death penalty are ashamed of going against their conscience and belief system so they’d rather hide behind the viva voce mode,” Baguilat said.

House rules however state that nominal voting is required for third reading approval.

Suffrage and electoral reforms panel chairman Sherwin Tugna of Citizens’ Battle Against Corruption party-list said those for or against the bill would be known on March 8 when the bill goes through a vote on third reading.

“This is where each and every member will be accountable and show their vote for the death penalty bill,” Tugna said.

Reacting to the House vote, Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo, a former Camarines Sur congresswoman, asked: Why impose death penalty when it doesn’t stop crime?

“There is no empirical data showing that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. Death penalty did not reduce crime incidents. Since death penalty does not improve the situation, then why do we still have to implement it?” Robredo said in an interview after the turnover of fishing boats in Maribojoc, Bohol as part of her office’s “Angat Buhay” program.

Limiting the death penalty to drug traffickers and manufacturers doesn’t make the measure acceptable, she said.
Published in News
House Bill No. 4799 declaring Cagayan de Oro City as mining-free zone has just passed the House committee panel on natural resources.

Authored by Cagayan de Oro City 2nd Dist. Rep. Maximo B. Rodriguez Jr., the measure was approved with an amendment which excludes gravel, sand and other non-metallic minerals from the coverage of the proposed law.

Rodriguez’s law stemmed from the illegal mining operations in the city’s hinterland barangays such as Dansolihon, Mambuaya, Taglimao, Tapangi, Tuburan and Tumpagon which have been blamed for the flashfloods in the downstream area of the city.
Published in News
Thursday, 02 March 2017 08:19

I am EDSA, we are EDSA

I WROTE last week in Part I of this series: “Today … 31 years after, I am again putting on paper my thoughts, a little bit more appreciative and perhaps a little bit more dispassionate about the events that transpired – given the distance of years and the dissipation of emotions and passion that propelled us then to bring about this ‘revolution’.”

My children, Lara and Carlo, then 12 and 8 years, respectively, may only have a vague idea of the significance of the four-day events in February of 1986; though they were certainly affected by the antecedents over the years leading towards these events. We all lived in Davao during the repressive Marcos regime and saw the rise of the communists in the city making it their “laboratory”.

We lived in the outskirts of the city near the infamous Buhangin circumferential-diversion road where “salvaged bodies” were disposed of. They certainly saw the many bodies covered with newspapers during our sorties downtown.

My wife Sylvia and I tried to protect them from these realities. Several times she had to gather the kids from their rooms and sleep in the master bedroom comforting them when the intermittent gunfire from around the area came dangerously close.

I was mostly away from home from the late 1970s to 1986, contributing my share in the struggle against the dictatorship. My absences and the strain inflicted on my family I’d like to think have long been recompensed, perhaps by my hopes then that things would revert to normalcy upon the “restoration of democracy” by EDSA.

And this is the point at issue. I was both wrong and right!

I was right in the sense that a certain amount of normalcy has descended on my personal life. I was recruited to President Cory’s government and relocated my household to Manila where we were again an intact family until the children came of age and “flew the coop,” so to speak.

I was wrong on my expectations about the “restoration of democracy”. What was restored came with it too the re-establishment of the rule of an oligarchy and the continued perpetuation of traditional politics, albeit with a new set of personalities.

Many of us in the decades-long struggle for real democracy from the mid-1960s, adherents of a parliamentary-federal structure of government, were enthusiastic in supporting Cory Aquino as she was our symbol in the fight against the repressive dictatorship. We understood that she was from the elite and her values were therefore of those of her class but we were hopeful that she would transcend these with the outpouring of love and adulation shown by the masses–whose values were not congruent with hers.

A few of us recruited to her administration implored her to continue to rule under the Revolutionary Constitution to give herself more time to dismantle not only the martial law structures but the unitary system of government which we then and still now believe perverted the principles of democratic governance. We were no match for the ruling class. Cory surrendered her prerogatives to real socio-economic-political reforms by rejecting the people’s gift—the 1986 Freedom Constitution. She then proceeded to embed her dogmas in her 1987 Constitution.

This is the Constitution guarded zealously by her son, PNoy, that President Duterte and we, the Centrist Democratic Party (CDP), the PDP-Laban and the majority of the downtrodden Filipinos want to replace with a federal-parliamentary system and a social market economy (SOME).

Those were our expectations. But what were the expectations, then and perhaps now, of the others who participated at EDSA in February of 1986? First, let us identify the dramatis personae.

The Yellows 1986

We were all “Yellows” then, as this was the color we wore, after the assassination of Ninoy, symbolizing our protest against this dastardly act and our struggle to boot out the dictator Marcos from power and institute real reforms. The masses that congregated at Edsa were a motley crowd of Filipinos, from all walks of life—from the ordinary folk, some members of the elite and some of the oligarchic families dispossessed by the Marcos cronies; members of religious groups, Islam and Christians, prominently headed by Cardinal Sin and the Catholics. We all had disparate motives but were welded together by a pent-up anger against the Marcos family.

The Military

This was not a homogeneous group. The EDSA uprising was precipitated by a small breakaway group of mostly mid-level officers of the Reform the Armed Forces Movement (RAM) and their patron, Defense Secretary Enrile, whose plan for a putsch was exposed and nipped in the bud. It was the timely reinforcements of Gen. Ramos and his PC-INP and allies in the Army and Air Force that gave precious time for Cardinal Sin’s army to gather the people to stop the tanks and heavy artillery of Gen. Ver and saved the day. The putschists never did forgive the Yellows for snatching victory from the jaws of defeat—for saving their skin. Their revenge fell upon President Cory, who crushed seven coup attempts during her years in office.

The ‘Reds’

These were the people, foremost among which was the Kilusan ng Bagong Lipunan (KBL), who supported the Marcos regime and his family sucking the country dry. We the “Yellows” then booted him out–for a time. But now his minions are back and his family is politically reinstated.

(Part 3 of this article will appear next Thursday, March 9.)
Published in LML Polettiques
Wednesday, 01 March 2017 11:17

Aquino tells LP members: Time to speak up

Former President Benigno Aquino III on Tuesday urged his fellow Liberal Party (LP) members to “speak up” and make the party’s “voice heard again,” after four members were ousted from the majority in the Senate.

Aquino also asked party members to “be constructive and supportive” of the Duterte administration without sacrificing the party’s principles and ethics.

Quezon City Rep. Christopher Belmonte, the LP secretary general, summed up Aquino’s guidance during a three-hour party caucus in Quezon City following the party members’ ouster from the Senate majority on Monday.

“I’d like to think the opinion of the [former] President [was that] we wanted to be constructive, we wanted to be supportive and we wanted to be helpful but not to the point that we give up our party principles and our basic positions and ethics on issues,” Belmonte said in a press conference.

“His basic guidance was: It’s about time we speak up, it’s about time that the LP voice be heard again,” Belmonte said.

Aquino wanted the people to “realize our good intentions for the country,” he said.

In an ambush interview, Aquino said he was keeping his self-imposed yearlong moratorium on being critical of the current administration.

“I want to keep true to my word,” he said. But the ouster of Liberal senators from key posts in the upper chamber on Monday “definitely” bothered him, he said.

Sen. Francis Pangilinan, the LP president, told reporters that the caucus centered on the death penalty bill and the continued membership of the Liberals in the House supermajority.

He said the membership issue would be taken up after the death penalty debates.
Published in News
Page 3 of 3