---

Juan Miguel Luz and good people in government

It is sad to see what happened to USec Juan Miguel Luz as he got fired by the President as DepEd UnderSecretary. Most sees it in relation to his refusal to accommodate post-dated checks issued to several legislators.

How can we have honest people in government when they are penalized for simply doing their jobs, and uphold what is right and proper, according to law and procedures established by government itself? Is it because he is not a "team player"? But isn't it the interest of the Filipino people who should be protected than those in power?

I look forward to what Juan Miguel Luz has to say, about what happened to him, in the future, when the time is right.

FVR talks Cha-cha

Last Thursday, I attended a joint meeting of the American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM), European Chamber of Commerce (ECCP), Canadian Chamber of Commerce (CANCHAM), and Japan Chamber of Commerce (JCCP).

Their guest of honor is former President Fidel V. Ramos (FVR). It was a jampacked event as the four organizations did not expect a great turnout.

I was told that FVR is actively speaking in various events lately discussing the need for charter change and shift to a parliamentary form of government. Lobbying now is being made by one of the most influential political personalities in the country.

It is my first time to listen to him. I must admit that based on what I heard, he did not disappoint me. His crowd charisma made him truly a charismatic speaker. As usual, he threw away his talking points, ask everyone to shake the hand of the person next to them (which I haven't done and glad that he asked), and other pleasantries. He was able to work out the crowd to have a good mood at the start of his speech.

And then came the main topic, charter change (cha-cha). FVR believes that the presidential system is falling apart like old pair of shoes. Although some segments feel that the country's Constitution is engraved in the system and must not be changed, he feels the other way. "It should mirror the times and as it changes, we should be able to adjust."

FVR is known for campaigning the shift to parliamentary system since his presidential campaign days. He explains that he wants a fairer and representative of all of us, to be anchored in our Constitution. "Charter change is necessary due to the inefficiency and inflexibility of the political system. It is affecting people's daily lives, especially of poor Filipinos. People power, as a result of unsatisfaction, always results to constitutional crisis. It is unfortunate as well that popularity, not intelligence, competence, and experience, are the best points to enter public office today."

He explained some of the merits of the parliamentary government that includes:

- The legislature combines the role of the elective assembly by creating laws and in performing executive decisions.

- The moment the leader lose confidence, they are forced to resign and can be replaced by a vote of no-confidence.

- Sheer popularity in the parliamentary system will not be enough to enter the system. Young people can be given a chance if they are good and proven leaders. They can rise to the top at much less expense.

- The parliamentary system will unify the policy making process.

- The government will be accountable to the people. They shall be subjected to the regular but intense question hour.

As an example, FVR cited that in the Senate, there's only 1 bill passed but 50 independent investigations are happening in aid of legislation.

He believes that the only way to keep people out of poverty is through job generation, efficient government, and all other solutions are band-aid. 30% of GDP should be invested in productive endeavors. Today, the country only invests 19% of GDP compared to neighbors like Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia who are investing more than 25% or up to 1/3 of their GDP. The improvement of the system is important to meet the global challenges and competitiveness demand today.

One participant asked, "Will cha-cha solve our problems?" He answered, "No. But it can help in cleaning our country, deal with changes in government, equitable enforcement of law, establish responsible civil service, and modernize political parties to become efficient channel and representative of public expression."

He encourages forum participants to persuade and compel our leaders to work as a team. "Let us break out our political stalemate in order to break into economic momentum. A democracy can't confined itself as it has room for improvement. It is always in flux and can't be controlled. Democracy is no more than an idea."

FVR has no desire to take part in the political system that he proposes to take place. However, he is not retired from his duties from advocating his beliefs. He had done it before and would consider it a demotion if he would take it again. He challenges Congress to prohibit former presidents from running in a parliamentary office in the future.

He ended, "Be patient and stay with us. Learn how to swim. Do not abandon ship. We will learn how to swin not because we are abandoning but to rescue everybody who jumped before and try to save them. That is our role to our people. When all of this happens, assuming the best case scenario, we will come through as a better country than we ever are."

4 important elements that can make it all work for the country in the future:

1) Strong leadership (not popularity)
2) Good constitution, 
3) People who must be enlightened that at the end of the day that it is about competitiveness, self reliance, and not dole-outs that will get us to the next level.
4) External elements that we don't have control of, that we must always be ready to face.

One participant asked, "Why are you lobbying for change when the presidential system seemed to work well during your time?" FVR replied, "I was successful during my time because we were working like 25 hours a day. However, why give the same hassle to the future generation when we can do something about it?"

I recalled that FVR faced a tough term with our power and water crisis then. As we are all in pain, there's a great spirit then for everyone to work together for the sake of the nation.

Another participant asked, "In the past 12 months, Congress pass 5 laws, and based on Congress' composition and competencies today, how confident are you that they'll be able to review the Constitution, in all sensibility within 6 months, when it took them so long to pass a law?"

FVR remains optimistic as he doesn't see the need to overhaul the entire Constitution but only to focus on 4 issues that need to be amended:

- Form of government (Convert to parliamentary system.)
- Electoral reform (New kind of arithmetic to put in place, to make an honest and credible elections, computerized but simplified procedures in vote handling and proclamation of winners.)
- Political party reform (Serve to eliminate dynastism and turncoatism. Those who change parties should not run for public office for 3 years.)
- Economic prohibitions (To speed up the dispensation of justice, limit economic interventionist of our courts.)

"Those that have qualms about this (especially in the Senate), work out some transitional provisions that will respect their term of office. Better to start with a completely new slate. We must all take the necessary sacrifice," FVR ended.

I must admit that I'm keen for constitutional change way back in 1999. I even said such in a forum as our competitiveness will not be sustainable if we can't catch up with all the incentives other countries are offering such as land ownership, investment in mass media, education, among others.

However, I like to believe that cha-cha can only progress as fast as the administration likes if it will give the same speed of process for the impeachment trial. The more the administration blocks the impeachment process to proceed, the more likely that cha-cha will not happen in PGMA's term. I recall reading a news item last week that House Speaker Joe De Venecia (JDV) belittled the opposition's claim that they are nearing the 79 votes that they need, JDV said that he finds that to be impossible as he had assurance from his allies not to support such moves. It gives an impression that regardless of merit, they are already firm not to support it. I find that sad as it totally conflicts with his earlier statements that he wants the truth to come out and clean PGMA's name.

Most of us Filipinos have no access to our leaders, the best that we can do for now is air our public opinion, at least through blogs. It our children's future that is now hanging in the air with our current state of flux.

 

I encountered this interesting page of Sacha that contains links to all articles and blog posts published about the Digital Pinay 2005 contest. Check it out when you have time. This issue is very interesting and have never seen bloggers, especially women, got so vocal in expressing their opinions.

Digital Pinay and the meaning of Power

Like many Internet users, I was surprised when I received the application form for Digital Pinay 2005. Right there and then, I knew this would solicit many reactions and have read some of them in various mailing lists.

After reading the Inq7.net article, I visited the Philippine Computer Society website but no details are posted so far. I think the only way that this project will succeed is for PCS to organize this competition at the school level where JPCS exist and let all winners compete at a nationwide level. At least, all participants were pre-selected.

I don't really have anything against the contest. Well, I was a product of a contest too, Miss STI Kalookan 1988. It was one of the Foundation Day activities and each class send a representative. I was asked to represent our class. As I'm not in my high moods at that time, I took the challenge. There were I think 10 of us then during the practice session but only 3 showed up that night. So I guess winning that contest didn't hold any weight.

Did I benefit from it? Yes. When I was looking for work the next year, I decided to go back to school and ask if I can be accepted as a trainee, without pay. I just want to be able to say that I have some trainee experience when I apply for work. They accepted me. If I didn't "won" that contest, the school personnel would hardly remember me and neither give consideration. It is at this time that I met Jun Mendoza, the school's CEO and have taught me a lot as my career blossomed.

A "beauty" contest, in a way, can help you get started. Let people know that you're not just another girl in the class.

What strikes me in the Inq7.net article is when it mentioned that the contest will help produce the next "Most Powerful Women in I.T." My question is, are they ready to mentor them? Will they be mentored to do what is right and not what is popular? In my opinion, most organizations are now behaving according to what is popular especially if the personalities at stake are one of their own.

From one success to another, you gain power. Without warning, power can blind you. Makes you believe that you can do anything even when you fail.

However, the true test of leadership is when you give someone power. There are personalities today who got hold of power, did not get contended, and wanted to have more. What makes them dangerous is they were able to persuade the mob. Some who think otherwise are afraid to speak up and become unpopular.

Principles, sadly, are easily compromised these days. One day, you find organizations fighting with all their heart as one government entity wants to control all ICT related projects. But today, because the proponent is one of their own, they are in an all out support. I don't know what kind of mentors they will make. How will they be remembered? Those who try to twist the law today to their favor (like what is being done by some to the E-Commerce Law) have no moral authority to lobby for new laws. What's the use of asking Congress to fix things if an E.O. can be easily executed, insult the law's intent, thereby humiliating Congress and proponents as well. 

Jun Mendoza was betrayed by the people he trusted the most in business. His betrayal story is no different from Alexander the Great and our Philippine heroes. In 1999-2001, I wielded power as the Y2K Law and E-Commerce Law got passed. I tried dispersing the power I had, even to critics. However, like snake, they turn on to you when you don't speak on interest that favors their perspective. It is a law of power that I now don't believe in - giving those who don't like you, whether you know them personally or not, a chance to gain their trust and be trusted. 

After experiencing the worst betrayals from friends and allies that I cherished the most, helped, and even fought for, I decided to stepped down in 2001 and vowed not to give in to the mob and neither to what is popular (but unrighteous), protect the E-Commerce Law, and patience in due process.

I re-build my life with my family, who matters the most. As I turned my back from power, I realized who my true friends are.