More insidious than pork

In his July 18 column, Conrado de Quiros wrote: “During the last elections, only the senatorial candidates of Ang Kapatiran Party spoke out against it. They were Rizalito David, Marwil Llasos, and JC de los Reyes, and what they found execrable was the pork barrel. No other candidates, from left to right, did so…. If you abolish the pork barrel, you will discourage people from running for senator and congressman? That will be its most salutary effect yet. Then it will leave the field to candidates like the ones from Kapatiran.”

He was probably right when he noted that the Ang Kapatiran candidates, David, Llasos and Delos Reyes, campaigned against the pork barrel during the last May elections. De Quiros, however, made it appear that it was novel and noble of Ang Kapatiran to spouse such cause as if its candidates were the only ones to stand on that platform. Nothing can be further from the truth.

This issue, this controversy, is not new. As a college student 20 years ago, I was already pretty much aware of the dangers of letting corrupt lawmakers get hold of so much money with so little control and audit. In fact many ordinary Filipinos also  see through the stupidity of dispensing pork barrel.

And the truth is Ang Kapatiran is a theocratic party. It is not your normal political party. Ang Kapatiran candidates only used the pork barrel issue to camouflage their real intentions for running for the Senate. They may promote politically correct issues here and there, but their real motivation for running for office was to promote Catholic dogma. Tucked away from sight were their bigoted and impractical stand on reproductive rights, homosexuality and divorce. Like the Catholic Church to which they belong, this is the same political party that wants the Catholic faith into office. Reginald Tamayo, member of the National Executive Board of Ang Kapatiran, even said that “I believe that the Church is God’s living voice. I am confident that Brother Lito will remain a part of that voice and continue to evangelize politics either in or out of the Senate hall.”

Of course, I can’t fault De Quiros for this oversight. He seemed oblivious of this fact. And I think he has given Ang Kapatiran more credit than it deserves.

Electing theocrats into public office is more pernicious, more insidious and more immoral than the issue of pork barrel. With theocrats elected in public office, not only do we surrender our secular government, we surrender the very fabric of democracy itself.

Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/57763/more-insidious-than-pork#ixzz3ASgXVyzy

Ask Filipino immigrants: There’s no shame in relocation

It’s always easy to blame the poor. Ask a balikbayan who has visited Metro Manila about the informal settlers, and you will rarely hear complaints of how the national and local governments have not done anything to help them. Most balikbayan want them evicted because they are either eyesores or their place has become a breeding ground for criminals, or both.

The truth is most informal settlers are readily demonized either as “pabigat sa lipunan” (a millstone to society) or a mere political talking point during elections.

But let us not forget why informal settlers, or squatters as we call them, settled in Metro Manila in the first place: They left home in search of a better life. But unlike them, we Filipino immigrants in Australia settled here legally and we obey the laws. We pay taxes. We do menial jobs even though our diplomas read bachelor. We adapted to the conditions. We complain about the long trip to work, but that does not stop us from working. And even when sometimes circumstances thrust us into a life similar to that of a squatter, we don’t lose hope. We find support in each other in the Filipino community.

And this is the point where I part ways with the majority and some media in the Philippines which put emphasis on the “helplessness” of informal settlers as victims. This “victim mentality” may have created a false reality for many poor Filipinos. Thus, we have bred generations of hopeless and dreamless Filipinos who might have been productive citizens had they been given the proper motivation and education. Barring a dictatorship and another failed economy like the one we had during the Marcos regime, poverty should be no excuse for sloth. Of course, living standards in Australia are far better than in the Philippines.

I’ve heard Salvador Enriquez Jr.’s view that the solution to the squatter problem is to create economically viable new towns for the informal settlers, not just relocation sites. Only that he argued for his position on the premise that other countries have done it. But who cares if or how other countries have done it? What matters at least is the long-term solution being offered.

However, the way some militant groups, like the Alyansa Kontra Demolisyon, are reacting to the idea—injecting other issues, like calling relocation sites as all profit-driven programs conceived and managed by President Aquino’s closest allies—has not been productive. Nor is the inaction of some Metro Manila mayors. The temptation of a militant group or some mayors to appeal to the emotions of the informal settlers is for them simply too much to resist, they would rather stoke class warfare and division.

Let us remind again the militant groups as well as the mayors why  these “poor huddled masses” are in Manila: in search of better lives. And this neither the militant groups nor the local mayors have provided them until now.

There is no shame in relocating. Ask Filipino immigrants, they know.

Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/56293/ask-filipino-immigrants-theres-no-shame-in-relocation#ixzz3ASZ5bl6P