Manny Pacquiao has nothing to be ashamed of

Manny Pacquiao has nothing to be ashamed of


Posted 01:03am (Mla time) Mar 23, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the March 23, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


THIS may sound like heresy to diehard Manny Pacquiao fans, but Erik Morales won that fight fair and square. Manny may have the speed and power, but Morales is the better boxer. It was like a bullfight, pitting a fast, furious and powerful bull against a skillful matador. Morales had the experience, guile, good tactics, effective defense. Manny didn't land a solid punch on him. Even if Manny didn't get that cut from an accidental head butt, he would have had a difficult time turning the tables on Morales.

But although he lost, Manny need not be ashamed of anything. He put up a good fight. He has a fighting heart. As the ring announcer said repeatedly, he is a warrior. He lost only by a very slim margin, 2 points, 115-113. With a little luck, it could have gone the other way.

What Team Pacquiao won was the propaganda war. Manny's handlers were better propagandists than fight tacticians. The hype was so much that when Manny lost, the shock and disappointment were much more. Manny and his handlers may have believed their own propaganda and became over-confident. But boxing bouts are not won by propaganda but by the fists of the boxers.

Nevertheless, the Morales-Pacquiao bout was a good fight. It will be one of the classics that will be watched again and again. There should be a return match. That would draw even a bigger crowd.

* * *

I received a quick reply from councilor Ariel E. Inton, majority leader of the Quezon City Council, to our column last Friday on the ordinance raising real estate taxes in Quezon City.

The column cited four reasons why raising taxes in Quezon City at this time is not justified:

1. The city does not need the extra money, as it is the richest city in the country with a P5.8-billion income last year.

2. With the prices of everything going up, this is the worst time to raise taxes. Government should be the first to help the people cope with diminishing incomes, not add to the people's burden.

3. The taxes homeowners and businessmen pay are not spent to help them against squatters. On the contrary, the money is spent to coddle squatters who steal their property and don't pay taxes.

4. Although the Local Government Code puts the maximum realty tax at 20 percent, that is not mandatory. That is the limit precisely to prevent local government units from abusing their taxing powers. Local officials are expected to use their common sense.

But Inton has his own reason for raising taxes. "It is not true," he wrote, "that the City Council did not conduct proper hearings on the proposed increases. The council conducted a series of hearings for which notices were issued and private sector representatives were invited. The hearings were well attended and the opinions of the private sector representatives were heard and recorded.

"They were allowed sufficient time to submit their position papers. It was precisely after the public hearings that the City Council approved an increase of only 3 percent for real estate property and only 5 percent instead of 10 for commercial and industrial areas.

"While almost all the cities of Metro Manila have imposed the maximum tax rates of 20 percent for residential and 50 percent for commercial and industrial real estate properties, it is only this time that Quezon City is increasing the rates which will take effect only next year. Marikina City imposed the maximum rates as early as 1994, San Juan in 1997, and Manila last year.

"Even if Quezon City imposes the allowable maximum rates, it will still be collecting the lowest real estate taxes compared to other cities in the National Capital Region mainly because it has one of the lowest market value assessments in real estate properties. The last general revision of tax rates for real estate properties was conducted in 1996. Yet, under the Local Government Code, this general revision is to be conducted every three years.

"This means that in Quezon City, the market value of real estate properties has not been revised and adjusted since 1996 or for the past nine years.

"Quezon City has to impose a modest increase in tax rates to meet its increasing budgetary requirements. If the income of Quezon City remains the same in the next three years, the city treasury would again be in the red, something Mayor Belmonte wants to avoid or prevent. Remember that in 2001, when he first assumed office, the city treasury had a cash deficit of over P10 million, outstanding debts and loans amounting to over P2.5 billion and a budget deficit of nearly P1 billion.

"For the last three years, Quezon City has been enjoying a surplus budget. But its income will not increase; it will reach a plateau in two years and may have to experience another budget deficit thereafter.

"Private roads, under the law, are taxable. Whenever turned over to the city, they become tax-free. Many subdivisions now want to turn over their private roads to the city as they see numerous city streets long neglected now being improved and concreted.

"Mayor Belmonte has always attended to the concerns and needs of both subdivision owners and the informal settlers. His office, particularly on Mondays, is always open to callers. He has never been absent, even once, on any Monday which is known in Quezon City as Peoples' Day."

* * *

TODAY'S JOKE: Manny Pacquiao's fans are grumbling that their idol lost because there were too many congressmen during the fight at Las Vegas. They said while fans were cheering him "Manny, Manny, Manny!" the congressmen were shouting "Money, Money, Money!"

Original sin on oil prices

Original sin on oil prices


Posted 00:38am (Mla time) Mar 16, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 16, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


FUEL prices are being raised by the oil companies every week, and this has a domino effect on the prices of everything else, since commerce and people depend on transportation to get from factories to consumers, and transportation, in turn, depends on oil to be able to move. Since Congress passed the Oil Deregulation Law that removed government control on the oil industry, prices have risen steadily without letup. It was like chaining the guard dogs and then opening the sheep pen's door to let the wolves in and attack the helpless sheep.

I think the Oil Deregulation Law and the Urban Land Reform Law are two of the most stupid laws ever passed by Congress. The motives behind them are commendable, but Congress failed to provide safeguards to prevent abuses, largely because it succumbed to lobbying by vested interests. These errors are now evident in the inexorable oil price increases and the increasing anarchy by squatters.

The motive of the Oil Deregulation Law is to encourage other oil players to compete with the three big oil companies already here -- Petron, Shell and Caltex -- so that competition and market forces will force prices down. But instead of prices going down, they went up. What went wrong?

Because of shortsightedness, lobbying and perhaps corruption, Congress left gaping loopholes in the law that allowed the oil cartel to continue dictating prices at will. Worse, it deprived government of any power to control prices.

First, no real competition materialized between the Big 3 and the new oil players. Many of the new players bought finished products from the Big 3 and resold them to the consumers. So how can they compete with the prices of the Big 3? On the contrary, they just followed the pricing of the cartel. In short, while there may be a hundred or so oil companies in the Philippines, it continued to be in the grip of the cartel.

What should have been done was to deregulate gradually to allow new players to become strong enough to really compete with the Big 3, during which time the government retained control of pricing to prevent opportunism. But the first thing our government did was to lift price controls, which was what the cartel wanted.

Other countries that deregulated their oil industries had long, open-ended and indefinite transition periods before full deregulation, during which time partial price controls remained. Only when there was real competition among the oil companies was full decontrol imposed.

If I'm not mistaken, South Korea has had oil deregulation for more than 10 years already, but it is still in partial decontrol mode, with price controls still in effect. Other Asian countries that also deregulated their oil industries followed the same procedure.

In contrast, our Congress provided for only a six- or three-month transition period. Worse, then-President Fidel V. Ramos shortened it to a farcical one month or so (if I remember right) when he signed the bill into law. In short, the original sins were committed by Congress and President Ramos, serpents in barong and suits, and our Paradise started its descent into Hell.

In sum, in spite of the Oil Deregulation Law, or because of it, we are still in the clutches of the oil cartel -- in fact, two oil cartels, one composed of the oil producers, the Organization of Oil Exporting Countries, and the other composed of the refiners and producers of the finished products, the cartel in the downstream oil industry right here.

Our Constitution clearly says that it is the duty of the state to dismantle monopolies, cartels and restraints in trade. Based on this provision, then-congressman (now Bataan governor) Enrique Garcia filed a petition with the Supreme Court to declare the Oil Deregulation Law unconstitutional. The Court decided in his favor and the law was sent back to Congress and amended.

Garcia argued that the law was still unconstitutional because the transition period, which would make sure that the intent of deregulation would be fulfilled before full deregulation, was unrealistically short. The Court replied that that is "a judgment call" of Congress, but until know, 10 years later, it has not made a definite decision on the case brought to it by Garcia. While the Court tarries and delays justice, the people are suffering from the lack of wisdom of that law.

Before Garcia's term as congressman expired, he had filed a bill to repeal or amend the Oil Deregulation Law to make it conform to its original purpose, but Congress adjourned without acting on it, largely because, Garcia suspects, of the influence of the cartel. Although he is no longer a congressman but a provincial governor, Garcia continues his fight against the oil cartel. His son replaced him as congressman, and Rep. Antonio Roman represents the other congressional district of Bataan. Together, they are continuing the fight in Congress. At the last Kapihan sa Manila forum on oil prices and the Oil Deregulation Law, Roman bewailed the lack of action of the present Congress and the slowness of the Supreme Court in deciding the case brought to it by Garcia, while the consuming public continues to suffer at the hands of the cartel.

What's taking the honorable justices so long? Do they need 10 years to decide what is right and what is wrong? In case of doubt, the tradition is to resolve it in favor of the people, not of big business. But has big business been able to reach the honorable justices of the Supreme Court, just like they have the members of Congress?

'Golden parachutes'

'Golden parachutes'


Posted 11:41pm (Mla time) Mar 13, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 14, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.


IT looks like many people, including officials in the Arroyo administration, do not believe that her government is going to last long. This early, they are already providing for their future, like rats deserting a sinking ship but with balls of cheese in their mouths. So many shady deals are being discovered, with tens of millions of pesos for kickbacks to the smart ones who cooked up the deals. The P593-million Minimi deal in the Department of National Defense is just one of these. The latest is the privatization of one of the functions of the Bureau of Treasury, which will provide golden parachutes to retiring government and private officials.

The administration wants to transfer the Registry of Scripless Securities from the Bureau of Treasury to a private corporation called the Philippine Depository and Trust Corp. (PDTC). The registry is a record of the loans and debt documents of the government. A private corporation will henceforth do the recording, as though the officials of the Bureau of Treasury do not know how to do such a simple thing. The corporation will collect a fee based on the amount of debt. The Philippines has a peso debt amounting to P3 trillion, so you can imagine how much the PDTC will rake in. The PDTC admitted that it would net at least half a billion a year (but I think this is a very conservative estimate), this only for registering the debt papers.

Even as it will make the shareholders of the PDTC very rich, the transfer will discourage investments in government securities and raise the country's debt burden. It will raise the cost of investing in government securities. Instead of the interest earnings going to the investors, a large part of it will go to the PDTC; instead of the government getting all that it borrowed, part of it will also go to the PDTC; thus the government will have to borrow more to finance its needs. And PDTC officials will go sailing merrily in their golden parachutes just by recording government debts.

The Constitution and pertinent laws are very clear on the functions of the Bureau of Treasury. One of them is to keep the record of government securities. But the Department of Finance and the Bangko Sentral are so hot about the transfer of the Registry of Scripless Securities to the PDTC that they fired the national treasurer, Norma Lasala, a respected banker, just four weeks after being appointed into the position for refusing to endorse the transfer. Appointed to replace her is one Omar Cruz (who he?) whose marching order is to implement the transfer.

Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. will give more details on this deal in a privilege speech today, and he will ask Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima and Bangko Sentral Governor Rafael Buenaventura to reconsider this questionable proposal that favors a private entity at the expense of the people.

By the way, there is a common thread running through the shareholders of the PDTC: they are all alumni of the American Citibank.

* * *

Methinks the administration is going overboard with this privatization mania. Like a drug addict, alcoholic or black sheep of a family, it is selling all the family's assets to satisfy his money needs.

Before the PDTC, the government wanted to privatize the Bureau of Internal Revenue, an idea also cooked up by American lackeys. Imagine the tax collection and part of the Bureau of Treasury, whose job is to keep the funds and keep track of government money, in the hands of private corporations whose primary motive is profit. The government also is in the process of privatizing the National Power Corp., whose job is to provide the people with a basic service, electricity. It has already privatized another basic service, the distribution of water. Next, it will privatize the Bureau of Customs.

This has been proven to be wrong, as shown by the fiasco that is Maynilad Water. The privatization of transportation in Metro Manila has also been proven to be wrong, as witness the traffic nightmare, the colorums, and the corruption. All the cities in the world with efficient transportation have systems run by the government. Not in the Philippines.

After selling Fort Bonifacio, the government now wants to sell the National Mental Hospital and Welfareville compounds, the Veterans Memorial Medical Center, and the Bilibid Prisons in Muntinlupa. It also wants to privatize the Social Security System and the Government Service Insurance System. It has already sold the Tutuban Railroad Station which it now needs for the planned North Rail and the South Rail.

It almost sold Fort Aguinaldo until they were told that they cannot because the deed of donation by the Ortigas family has a provision saying that if the government doesn't need the camp anymore, the property will revert back to the Ortigases.

It sold control of Petron and now we are reaping the whirlwind of that folly. Had Petron remained in the control of the government, it could have countered the greed and opportunism of the other oil companies. But in private hands, it is now a member of the oligopoly raising their prices at will and the government and the people are helpless to do anything.

The privatization rush is not only because the government is bankrupt and needs money. I think the other reason is that administration officials are providing themselves with golden parachutes-through generous commissions from the privatization sales-for the future, when President Macapagal-Arroyo is no longer in power and they are out of their jobs.

The never-ending search for happiness

The never-ending search for happiness


Posted 01:51am (Mla time) Mar 11, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 11, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


THE PHILIPPINES is becoming famous all over the world-but for all the wrong reasons. Its latest achievement is being the second most corrupt nation in Asia, according to a survey of foreign businessmen conducted by a Hong Kong consultancy group, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy Ltd. (PERC).

There will surely be protests from the administration, but Filipinos recognize not only that the survey is correct but also the Philippines should perhaps be No. 1 on the list.

Filipinos love to be record holders, whether it is for the biggest shoe or the longest “longganisa” [native sausage], but the Philippines already holds many records. It has the highest birth rate; the slowest judicial system; the longest red tape; it is among the poorest countries in the world; it has the widest gap between the rich and the poor; it has the most number of citizens who have to work in other countries to support their families at home; it has the second highest electricity rates in Asia; it is the kidnap and “carnap” [car theft] capital of the world; it has one of the highest crime rates and, not surprisingly, the most inefficient police force; it has the most congested streets and the most unruly drivers; it has the most number of squatters and the greediest legislators who steal the biggest tax money in the form of pork barrel; it probably has the biggest number of citizens who want to leave their country and live elsewhere. Being the second most corrupt nation in Asia is only the latest crown.

In spite of all these, the Philippines ranks as the 6th happiest nation in the world, a fact that we should be happy about. Many people found the result of this particular survey surprising. How can the poorest people in the world be among the happiest? Perhaps, they said, they surveyed public officials, which explains why they are happy.

But no, I think the survey is accurate: Despite the grinding poverty, or because of it, there are more Filipinos who are happy than those who are unhappy. Because it doesn't take much to make the poor happy. Give them a meal and that will make them very happy. If a scavenger finds several kilos of scrap metal or a big bag of leftover food in the garbage, that will make him very happy. Give a jobless man a job and he will jump for joy.

On the other hand, rich people are very hard to please. A rich businessman who already has millions of pesos in the bank will be unhappy, even though he is still making several millions in profit, if what he is gaining today is less than what he was netting yesterday. A multi-billionaire, among the richest in the world, will be unhappy if a famous magazine ranks him lower than his rival on its list of the world's richest. A rich society matron will be very unhappy if her rival gets a bigger picture in the newspapers.

I once worked for a very rich publisher. He was very powerful and influential; government officials paid obeisance to him; he had a number of profitable businesses; when he held his birthday parties, champagne literally flowed from a fountain.

Yet every evening I saw this rich and powerful man pacing his office, a worried look on his face, and his fingers nervously plucking at the stubble on his chin. What could such a rich man be worried about? Perhaps he was worried he could not pay his debts. Or that one of his businesses would fail. Perhaps a rival was doing better than him. Or perhaps he was worried that one of his children would be kidnapped.

No such worries bother the poor. Nobody will bother to kidnap any of their kids. Their only worry is where to get the next meal. When they get it, they are very happy.

As for the rich, you serve them the best food cooked by the best chef but they can't eat; they have no appetite. Give the poor a little rice and two pieces of “tuyo” [dried fish] -- food the rich won't even look at -- and you make them happy. Could it be that the Philippines is a happy nation because there are so many poor people in it?

What I'm driving at is that happiness is relative. Different things make different people happy. What makes one person happy will not necessarily make the next one also happy. What a person lacks most will make him happy if he gets it.

Most people think that wealth will make them happy. But when they already have it, they are still not happy. Others think fame will make them happy, but we see so many famous people shunning the limelight, going through all sorts of disguises so they won't be recognized by the public that adores them. Some think it is high office, but that's not it either.

Sickly people will be happiest when they get their health back; and a couple who quarrel will be happiest when they kiss and make up. Sometimes, a simple thing like a baby's smile will make a mother or father very happy. Or a child who has been neglected by his or her father will be gladdened by just one kind word from him. Love and family are big sources of happiness but not completely. And as Peanuts has said so often, "Happiness is a warm puppy."

Yes, the search for happiness is a never-ending one. You chase a goal you think would make you happy but when you finally get to it, you are not completely happy. So you chase the next goal and when you find it, it's the same thing -- something is still lacking. What is it? True happiness is elusive.

Ask a Born Again Christian and he has the answer.

* * *

KAPIHAN NOTES: Monday's topic at the Kapihan sa Manila forum is the rising oil prices and the Oil Deregulation Law. Guests are Energy Secretary Vince Perez, Bataan Gov. Enrique Garcia who has the answer to the problem, Raul Concepcion of Oil Price Watch and a representative each from the oil companies, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board, and a jeepney drivers' association.

Environment dept has contradictory functions

Environment dept has contradictory functions


Posted 00:22am (Mla time) Mar 09, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 9, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


THE FEW filthy rich loggers have won over the rest of the Filipino nation who want to save the remaining forests in the Philippines. Environment Secretary Michael Defensor has lifted the total log ban imposed by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last Dec. 8 after the floods and landslides that wiped off the face of the earth villages in Quezon, Aurora and Nueva Ecija and killed hundreds of people and rendered tens of thousands more homeless. The disasters were caused by rampant logging on the mountains, as did the flood that also buried Ormoc earlier. But the dead have been buried and the disasters are no longer on the front pages, so it is now safe for Defensor to allow logging again, with nary a whimper from the President who had imposed the total ban.

Besides, Defensor has no choice. The loggers and wood producers have been waging a campaign for the resumption of logging, and among their most ardent defenders and boosters is Surigao Rep. Prospero Pichay.

Who is Pichay? Why, he is the chair of the Commission on Appointments. And Defensor has not yet been confirmed by the CA. In fact, the two of them went together to the Caraga Region in Mindanao to lift the suspension of logging there and in Regions 9 (Davao provinces) and Region 11 (Zamboanga Peninsula). Some of the country's biggest loggers are in Surigao, Pichay's home province.

Defensor said he chose to allow logging in the three regions because "they enjoyed constant rainfall, which helps in the natural growth of forests." That is the environment secretary speaking. But any student will tell him that there is plenty of rainfall in tropical rainforests precisely because the forests are there. The trees give off plenty of oxygen, which rises to the sky and forms the clouds that condense into rain. Cut the trees and the rains will stop. So when logging is allowed in the three regions, there won't be "constant rainfall to help in the natural growth of forests." That is why denuded areas become semi-deserts. That is basic science.

There's another thing Defensor should know. In a photograph accompanying Monday's story on the lifting of the log ban, Defensor and reforestation czar Victor Corpus were shown loading seeds on a dispenser fitted on a Philippine Air Force helicopter in preparation for aerial seeding at the Angat watershed. What's wrong with that?

Well, it's the beginning of summer, which means this is the wrong time for seeding. The right time would be in late May, just before the rainy season. Every student also knows that, and therefore the environment secretary and reforestation czar also should. The rains will water the seeds and make them grow so that when the next dry season comes around, they will be big enough to withstand the heat and lack of water. Plant the seeds or seedling in summer and you only waste time, money and effort.

Defensor and Pichay, by the way, were invited to last Monday's Kapihan sa Manila media forum along with Rep. Juan Miguel Zubiri and Blas Tabaranza Jr. of Haribon, precisely to discuss the pros and cons of the log ban, but as I said, the two had to go to Mindanao to lift the log ban. The loggers were more important to them than explaining to the people why the suspension of logging is being lifted. Besides, it is difficult to defend that lifting against environmentalists Zubiri and Haribon.

Zubiri warned that because of the resumption of logging, more disasters would visit the Philippines. "Mark my words," he said, "when the heavy monsoon rains come in June and July, more villages will be devastated. Nature is already punishing us."

Tabaranza said that scientists all over the world consider the Philippines to be "on the verge of environmental collapse." In every international conference on the environment, delegates talk about the Philippines as a "hot spot," with about 190 species of birds on the verge of extinction. "We are in the top five disaster areas in the world," he added.

Tabaranza said Mindanao could no longer afford to lose its remaining forests. We have barely six million hectares of forests remaining all over the Philippines, which is long past the threshold of sustainability. "Regardless of their geographic or regional location, our remaining forests are in critical condition -- any further reduction can trigger major catastrophes," he said.

He said that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) failed to consider that these three regions "have many disaster prone areas." They also "hold 14 biodiversity areas (and) serve as the last frontiers of the Philippine eagle."

Instead of region-based logging, Haribon proposed:

1. A total ban on commercial logging nationwide.

2. Establishment of tree plantations to supply our domestic wood needs.

2. Vigorous reforestation to rehabilitate degraded watersheds.

3. Pursue a comprehensive land use program to determine possible timber production areas outside of the natural forests.

4. That the DENR stops being a mere regulatory agency and become a developmental one by catalyzing stakeholders, including LGUs, in forest conservation.

I think the original sin was combining "environment" and "natural resources" in one agency. The two have contradictory purposes: one protects the environment while the other exploits natural resources. The DENR has a split personality, a Jekyll-and-Hyde personality. Like the United States, we should have an Environment Protection Agency under the Office of the President whose main duty is to protect and preserve the environment.

Don't just cut pork barrel; totally abolish it

Don't just cut pork barrel; totally abolish it


Posted 11:25pm (Mla time) Mar 06, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 7, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.


I HEARTILY endorse the suggestion of Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago that all congressmen and senators commit mass suicide "as a service to the people." Yes, why not? After all, that's what they always say when campaigning for elective positions: they only want to serve. What better service can they give than to say goodbye to the people permanently? Santiago should immediately set the example. I propose, however, that three senators be exempted: Panfilo Lacson, Alfredo Lim and Franklin Drilon, who just saved the taxpayers P360 million by rejecting their pork barrel. We need more officials like them.

The exchange of accusations between the congressmen and senators over the recent passage of the 2005 national budget has exposed the trickery and deceit that legislators employ to steal money from the people. Several persons, still blissfully unaware of the knaves that their representatives are, have asked me what the quarrel is all about. In two dirty words, it's about "pork barrel."

For those who are still confused, this is what happened: Malacañang had submitted a proposed budget with the pork barrel reduced from P200 million to P120 million for each senator, and from P70 million to P40 million for each congressman. The House of Representatives passed this budget and sent it to the Senate. The Senate passed it in toto a few days ago. This infuriated the congressmen.

Why are they angry when the Senate passed the budget that they themselves approved? Because they had planned to restore the pork barrel to its original amount during the bicameral committee conference. Then, they'd pin the blame on the senators by claiming that the bill they passed had a reduced pork barrel budget. The alternate plan was to boycott the bicam committee meeting so that no new budget would be passed before the March 16 deadline. Under the law, when no new budget is passed after that date, the previous year's budget is automatically adopted-as what happened last year when the 2003 budget was adopted for the year 2004. That budget contains a higher allocation for pork barrel.

The senators got wise to this trick and hastily passed the budget earlier approved by the House, foiling the clever plot of the congressmen. The latter thought they were being smart but the senators outsmarted them. That's what made the congressmen furious.

In retaliation, they accused the senators of secretly restoring their own pork by realigning the intelligence funds of different agencies.

False, said Senate President Drilon last Saturday. What they did, he explained, was to identify which and where specific slices of the intelligence funds would be going-e.g., the witness protection program-so that auditing would be more accurate. If all were lumped together, any expense could be labeled "for intelligence" and that would be the end of it, he said. That makes graft, corruption and abuse easier to commit. In short, no part of the intelligence funds will go to their pork, Drilon said.

What the Senate should have done was to totally abolish the pork barrel, not just reduce it.

"I have no objection to that," Drilon said, reminding the journalists that he and two other senators (Lacson and Lim) have already rejected their pork and have told the budget department not to release them. Which means the three of them together have saved P360 million for the government. It is not likely that the representatives will do the same thing (they have less moral scruples), but in case any of them does, I suggest that we erect a statue for him or her at the Luneta.

Next year, Malacañang should have the guts to submit a proposed budget that has no allocation for pork. How can it ask the people to pay more in taxes when it allows members of Congress to waste tax money on such a corrupt expense as the pork barrel? Despite denials, everybody now knows that legislators cannot let go of the pork because part of it goes into their private pockets.

In the first place, it is not the job of legislators to usurp the functions of the Department of Public Works and Highways. Their job is to make laws, not to be another DPWH. Legislators legislate laws; the executive units-national and local-implement these laws. The Constitution is very clear on this.

Legislators claim they only identify projects for their districts and that none of the money passes through their hands. The money doesn't pass through their hands but parts of it end there-after (the contractors are paid and sometimes even before) and pass on the kickbacks.

Besides, if the legislators really want to, they can name their projects at the city, municipal, provincial and regional development councils of which they are members.

Let's face it, the legislators cling to the pork because it is a source of kickbacks and a source of votes. They say that their constituents go to them for projects and that if they don't endorse those projects, the credit and votes will go to the mayors and governors. But if they make it clear that their job is to make laws, not to usurp the job of the DPWH, the people will stop bothering them. They won't have to be tempted with kickbacks and they won't have to violate the Constitution by usurping executive functions. If Lacson, Lim and Drilon can do without their pork, why can't they?

* * *

Starting today and every Monday hereafter, the Front Page piano bar will feature celebrity cooks to whip up dishes for lunch for journalists and their guests. The first such cook is Rep. Imee Marcos. She will cook today popular Ilocano dishes, what else.

It's fall, spring and summer in Philippines all at once

It's fall, spring and summer in Philippines all at once


Posted 00:20am (Mla time) Mar 04, 2005
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the March 4, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


IT IS early spring in the temperate regions, but in tropical Philippines it is spring, summer and fall all at the same time. Aren't we blessed for that?

Look around you. The big, broad, rounded, shiny leaves of the talisay trees are turning yellow, orange, red, purple and rust, then fall off like trees do in autumn. Some santol leaves, also big and broad, also turn red, but the tree doesn't shed all its leaves like the talisay. On the other hand, the mahogany sheds all its leaves, littering the ground below with brown leaves that are blown about by the wind. To a lesser extent, the narra and acacia trees also drop their leaves. Afterwards, the trees all stand naked with their bare branches pointing to the sky, exposing the birds' nests and the nests of the big red ants called hantik in the higher branches, as though it is wintertime.

After several days, the bare branches and twigs will burst with tiny buds as trees do in spring. Those of the mahogany are purplish-brown, all the others are light green. As the buds unfurl into tiny leaves, waving merrily in the wind like so many tiny buntings, the trees attain a light green tinge and, as the days wear on, progressively turn darker green. The tamarind trees also unfurl light green leaves that June bugs find irresistible, just like the humans who gather them for “sinigang” and “sinampalukang manok.” In May and June, the light green color is dotted with black shapes. They are called June bugs, though they are not really bugs but beetles.

Often you will see trees standing side by side doing all these at the same time. One tree would have all its leaves intact while beside it another starts shedding leaves. Still another would be fully bare, with the dead leaves surrounding the ground around it, while a fourth would be sprouting buds and a fifth beside them spreading out light green leaves.

Next time you pass Quezon Avenue in Quezon City, take the opportunity to watch nature changing seasons as the mahogany trees, all in a row beside the street, shedding, sprouting and growing leaves at the same time beside one another, as though they cannot decide whether it's fall, winter or spring.

At the same time, some trees, shrubs and vines burst out with blossoms ahead of the others. The first to bloom is the lowly kakawati, which is already in full bloom with profuse pink blossoms that rival the more famous cherry blossoms of Japan. Next are the hot-hued bougainvilleas that adorn fences, hedges and trees with their red, orange, purple and white flowers, single-petaled or multi-petaled, signaling that summer is really here, what with the heat beginning to soar and Holy Week only a couple of weeks away.

The kalachuchi hangs out not only red, pink, yellow and white blossoms, but also spreads its perfume in the air. Walk under a kalachuchi tree and you can smell its fragrant breath.

Soon, as the heat of summer reaches its peak, it will be the turn of the regal fire tree to take center stage with its red orange blossoms putting its wide-spreading crown on fire. Those passing through Quezon City, especially in and around the Diliman campus of the University of the Philippines, and the two nearby parks, Quezon Memorial and the Ninoy Aquino Park, will soon see this red-hot summer show.

If you happen to drive by Laguna Lake on the Rizal side, look out for an island on fire in the middle of the lake. This is Cielito Lindo, the love island of the late Mr. and Mrs. Jesse Bello who owned it. The couple planted many fire trees on it and in summer, when they bloom, the island is a red spot, looking even from afar as though it is on fire.

* * *

In the last two columns, I argued that instead of cutting down our forests, we should preserve them for tourism as other countries like America, Canada and Japan do.

Decades ago, the New Englanders planted deciduous trees on their hills and mountains and farms. The leaves of these trees turn into a riot of colors before falling in autumn. Now these trees attract hordes of tourists every autumn who tramp all over the New England states just to gawk at the colorful foliage and leave a lot of money to the hotels, inns, cottages, restaurants, gift shops, resorts and their employees.

Since we can't have many trees with leaves that turn into many colors in autumn, what if we plant trees that bear colorful blossoms instead on denuded mountains? After several years, they would be tourist attractions, and instead of foliage tours, we would have our own flower tours.

The trouble with our present reforestation efforts is that we plant fruit trees like mango and cashew or hardwood trees with high-priced timber like narra and mahogany. But they don't grow to harvestable size until 20 years or more. For 20 years or more, the tree farmer has no income from his trees. So why don't we intersperse with them softwood trees that grow faster and can be harvested earlier and at the same time bear colorful blossoms? The leguminous trees like acacia, fire tree, giant ipil-ipil and kakawati are fast-growing softwood that can be harvested after five years. They are good enough for woodcraft, furniture, charcoal and firewood. The farmer, therefore, will have a steady income while waiting for the high-priced hardwoods to mature. What's more, their leaves are rich in nitrogen and make good fertilizer, and they are self-propagating.

Imagine if we had whole mountainsides and hills full of blooming kakawati and fire trees. Won't they attract eco-tourists?