Pork, budget scams: FOI a key tool

BUDGET SCAMS, pork by any other name, who should stand trial — the pain and the rage against the controversies of recent weeks could, and should, end in a few good things for the Filipino people.

A Freedom of Information (FOI) law tops the list as an imperative in outing the truth to all these issues, according to the Right to Know, Right Now! Coalition.

In a statement released on Friday, the Coalition of over 160 member-organizations and civil society leaders said it will join the people’s indignation rally against pork and budget scams on Monday, August 26, 2013, at the Luneta.

“We find repugnant the breakdown in government checks and accountability mechanisms, with the plunder prospering under the very noses of the Department of Budget and Management and the various implementing line agencies of the Executive, the legislators in their PDAF allocations,” the statement said.

“Now more than ever we are convinced of the urgency to pass the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act,” the Coalition said.

However, it also noted “the glaring absence of the passage of the Freedom of Information (FOI) law in the measures on PDAF proposed by the President” who spoke on Friday about his intention to reform the pork barrel system.

“We reiterate our resolve to fight, alongside legislators who are showing independence and similar commitment, for the passage of an effective and empowering FOI law. This is our contribution to the various citizens’ initiatives to push for the accountability of all those involved in the plunder, and to finally put a stop to the budget scams, whether in PDAF or elsewhere, that have bled our public resources,” the Coalition added.

The PCIJ is a founding member of the Right to Know, Right Now! Coalition that recently filed a People’s FOI bill with both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

What follows is the full text of the Coalition’s statement:

FOI advocates joining Luneta indignation on budget scam

The Right to Know. Right Now! Coalition heeds the spontaneous call for a people’s march to Luneta on August 26. We join the people in expressing collective indignation over the large-scale budget scam reported by various media outfits and by the Commission on Audit (COA), and currently under investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

While we are still far from knowing the complete facts of this controversy, it is already established that corrupt individuals have systematically created bogus non-government organizations or foundations for the purpose of plundering hard-earned taxpayers’ money through ghost projects, under-deliveries, or overpricing in the implementation of the Priority Development Assistant Fund (PDAF).

Already the public rage is bearing positive government response. In addition to the ongoing investigation by the DOJ, the Senate has reversed its earlier decision not to conduct its own investigation. The President has also proposed a “new mechanism” that will embody changes in project scope and budget releases.

Such initial positive responses from the different government agencies, however, should further stoke rather than dampen the spontaneous action in Luneta on August 26. We have just begun to scratch the surface of the issue.

For one, the question of what to ultimately do about the system of pork barrel remains up in the air. For another, the investigations are still at the preliminary stages, with more questions remaining unanswered and details still to uncover before we can even proceed to the stage of full accountability.

Equally important, we find repugnant the breakdown in government checks and accountability mechanisms, with the plunder prospering under the very noses of the Department of Budget and Management and the various implementing line agencies of the Executive, the legislators in their PDAF allocations, the Commission on Audit, and the Ombudsman, and with applicable safeguards such as the procurement law.

If such breakdown of checks and accountability mechanisms can happen to PDAF constituting less than 1.5 percent of the total government budget, how can we be assured that no such breakdown happens in the bigger 98.5 percent of the budget? We note, for instance, that the fertilizer fund scam that appears to have used similar modus operandi happened with agency budget and not PDAF. While the COA special audit covered expenditures made prior to 2010, we are deluding ourselves if we think that similar schemes just magically disappeared with the change of administration.

Now more than ever we are convinced of the urgency to pass the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. We cannot help but observe the glaring absence of the passage of the FOI law in the measures on PDAF proposed by the President. True, the measures reiterate the ongoing program of proactive disclosure by the DBM on the budget, but we emphasize that such proactive transparency, largely limited to general or aggregate allocations and spending or listing of projects, is not enough to allow citizens to get to the bottom of scams.

While these provide leads, we need to complement them with request-based access to information to be able to dig deeper. The People’s FOI Bill seeks to address this, but it is also the potential effectiveness of FOI in mitigating scams that appears to be the reason why it has been facing determined resistance across government administrations.

We reiterate our resolve to fight, alongside legislators who are showing independence and similar commitment, for the passage of an effective and empowering FOI law. This is our contribution to the various citizens’ initiatives to push for the accountability of all those involved in the plunder, and to finally put a stop to the budget scams, whether in PDAF or elsewhere, that have bled our public resources.

In relation to the FOI legislative process, we are happy to note that Senator Grace Poe, Chairperson of the Committee on Public Information at the Senate, is already in the process of scheduling the first committee hearing on the FOI Bills. We hope for a prompt passage of FOI in the Senate, to allow everyone to focus on overcoming the roadblocks that historically characterize the legislative process on FOI at the House of Representatives.

For the August 26 march, we come in solidarity with citizens who choose to take action, and encourage others to do the same. Our contingent will assemble at Leasing Boniface at 9 a.m, and we will then march by 10 a.m. to Luneta to join the people’s gathering.

Stop the budget scams! Deepen, expand and promptly complete the investigation! Prosecute those found to be culpable! Pass the People’s FOI Act!

PNoy reverses self: Pork gone for good or just a makeover?

THREE DAYS after mounting a vigorous, if effete, defense of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or pork barrel, President Aquino today reversed his position and said in no uncertain terms that “panahon na pong i-abolish ang PDAF.”

But that is perhaps the only clear and cogent portion of his statement.

The President also spoke about revising and reviewing the PDAF system that he said Budget Secretary Florencio Abad will work out with his partymates and allies in Congress, Senate President Franklin Drilon and Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr.

The good thing is the President said consumable soft projects, and small and quickie infrastructure items will have to go. The good thing is the President said that some pork-tainted government-owned and -controlled corporations will now be shut down.

But it would have been better if the President had also clarified exactly what are the new procedures and checks that he deems important to assure greater transparency and true accountability in the use of pork funds — from project identification to disbursement of funds to review of project completion.

Pork, the President as a senator had said before, is “a great equalizer.”

Lawmakers, he had said, are somehow more appreciated (and could assuredly be elected on and on) if they could deliver goods and services to their constituents.

Pork has also oiled the legislative wringer many times over, in favor of or against bills that the President had wanted to rush or ruin.

Thus far, the DBM’s transparency initiative on pork has largely been limited to specifying a menu of projects that could be funded with pork. How the funds are spent, and who gets how much in cuts, the DBM has not assured.

And what about the P200-million pork barrel allocation that the President has accorded Vice President Jejomar Binay — on the latter’s request and with endorsement from both Drilon and then Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile?

Binay is not a lawmaker but he got his pork kitty beginning 2011 and how he disburses it are data not disclosed on the DBM’s website. Will Binay continue to feast on pork?

The question: Is the President saying pork barrel is gone for good or will it just metamorphose into a new, revised, rechristened, and possibly less fatty menu?

Since it was created in 1990 by lawmakers as a purse from which lawmakers could dip to roll out their pet projects, pork has been renamed twice at least — from CDF (Countrywide Development Fund) to CIA (Congressional Initiative Allocation) to PDAF.

Is this a moment for celebration or just a little reprieve of sorts for all those who love, and love to hate, pork (the barrel, not the swine)?

Read between the lines — the full text of the President’s statement. The medium is the message, or the message is the massage?

STATEMENT OF HIS EXCELLENCY BENIGNO S. AQUINO III
PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES
ON THE ABOLITION OF PDAF AND BUDGETARY REFORMS
MALACAÑAN PALACE, MANILA, AUGUST 23, 2013

Taong 1990 nang binuo ang tinatawag na nating PDAF ngayon para sa isang marangal na layunin: Ang bigyang-lakas ang inyong mga Kinatawan sa Kongreso, upang tumukoy ng mga proyektong hindi kayang pondohan ng mga LGU. Wala pong mali o masama sa polisiyang ito. Ang mali, ang masama, at ang siya ngang ikinagagalit ng taumbayan, ay ang pagsasabwatan sa pagitan ng isang pangulong handang makipagtransaksyon para manatili sa kapangyarihan; mga mambabatas handang makipagkuntsabahan; kung nariyan ang kooperasyon ng burukrasya; at mga mamamayang tila namanhid na sa panlalapastangang ginagawa sa kanila– kung nagsama-sama po ang mga sangkap na ito, maaaring maabuso ang PDAF. Kailangan nating maniguradong hindi na maaabuso ang sistema.

Akala po ng iba, pera nila ang PDAF, na puwedeng gastusin kung paano nila gusto. Pero mali po ito: Pera ng bayan ang pinag-uusapan dito, at sa bayan dapat– at hindi sa iilang gahaman lamang– ang pakinabang nito. Nakakagimbal nga po ang mga rebelasyon tulad ng mga nakapaloob sa COA Special Audit Report ukol sa paggamit ng PDAF noong 2007 hanggang 2009, na inilabas nitong nakaraang linggo. Dalawang bagay po ang malinaw na kailangan nating gawin sa panahong ito.

Una, ang panagutin ang mga umabuso sa sistema. Kahapon, iniulat ko sa inyo: Inatasan ko ang DOJ, sampu ng lahat ng ahensya ng ehekutibo sa ilalim ng Inter-Agency Anti-Graft Coordinating Council, o IAAGCC, na mag-aambagan at magtutulungan upang mapabilis ang proseso, mula sa imbestigasyon, hanggang sa pag-usig, hanggang sa pagpapakulong, at pati na ang pagbawi ng ilegal na yaman. Malinaw ang aking direktiba sa lahat ng ahensya at kawani ng gobyerno: Ibigay ang inyong buong tulong at kooperasyon upang mahanap ang katotohanan, at nang mapanagot ang dapat managot.

Buong-buo po ang kumpiyansa ko sa integridad nina Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, Kalihim Leila M. de Lima ng DOJ, at Chairperson Grace Pulido-Tan ng COA; alam kong wala silang kikilingan. Kinakatawan nila ang panunumbalik ng tiwala ng publiko sa mga institusyong kanilang pinamumunuan.

Iyan po ang balangkas ng ating unang layunin. Ang ikalawa: maghanap ng mas mainam na paraan upang siguruhing ang pera ng taumbayan ay mapupunta sa taumbayan lamang. Lilinawin ko po: Simula pa lamang, pilit na tayong nagpapasok ng reporma upang bawasan ang diskresyon, na siyang ugat ng labis at maling paggamit ng PDAF. Naniniwala tayo: kung hayag ang proseso, mababawasan din ang pang-aabuso sa sistema. Inatas po nating itala sa Pambansang Budget kung magkano ang PDAF na natatanggap ng bawat mambabatas, at ipinagbawal na rin natin ang congressional insertions. Partikular na lamang ang menu na puwedeng paglagyan ng PDAF, hindi katulad dati kung kailan inilalagay lamang ito sa kung saan-saan. Hinihingi na rin natin ang mga detalye ng proyekto, di gaya ng nakaraan kung kailan kahit malawak ang depinisyon ay naaaprubahan ito. Real time na ring ina-upload sa website ng DBM ang listahan ng proyektong napopondohan ng PDAF, kaya’t malaya itong nabubusisi ng madla. Pagdating naman sa bidding, lahat ng bid notices at awards ay nakapaskil na rin sa Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System o PhilGEPS.

Naalala ko nga po noong Senador ako. Ang budget, nakalaan para sa January 1 hanggang December 31. Noong 2007, naaprubahan ito, Abril na. Ibig sabihin, mula Enero hanggang Abril, carry over ang budget mula sa nakaraang taon. Di ba makatuwiran na dahil na-reenact ang budget, tanggalin na rin sa budget ang pondo para sa mga buwan na nakalipas at nagastusan na? Natalo ang mungkahi ko — kaya bumoto ako ng “No” sa budget ng 2007. Tinatayang 36 billion ang biglang naging savings noong taong ito — saan naman po kaya napunta ito?

Kaya nga po, mula nang maupo tayo, maaga na ring isinusumite at inaaprubahan ang budget, upang hindi na ito paulit-ulit na ma-reenact, na maaari ring magamit bilang instrumento ng pang-aabuso. Sa araw matapos ang SONA, isinusumite na namin ito sa Kongreso; naaaprubahan po nila ito bago matapos ang taon, kaya’t nabawasan na rin ang pagkakataong makalikot ito at mapagkakitaan.

Sa kabila po ng mga repormang ito, nakita natin sa mga ulat na lumabas nitong mga nakaraang linggo: kailangan pa ng mas malaking pagbabago upang labanan ang mga talagang pursigidong abusuhin ang sistema. Panahon na po upang i-abolish ang PDAF.

Ngayon, bubuo tayo ng bagong mekanismo upang matugunan ang pangangailangan ng inyong mga mamamayan at sektor– sa paraang tapat, gamit ang tama at makatuwirang proseso, at nang may sapat na mga kalasag laban sa pang-aabuso at katiwalian.

Katuwang nina Senate President Frank Drilon at Speaker Sonny Belmonte, sisiguruhin kong bawat mamamayan at sektor ay makakakuha ng patas na bahagi ng pambansang budget para sa serbisyong pangkalusugan, scholarship, proyektong lumilikha ng kabuhayan, at lokal na imprastruktura. Makakapagmungkahi ng proyekto ang inyong mga mambabatas, ngunit kailangan itong idaan sa proseso ng pagbubuo ng budget. Kung maaprubahan, itatala ang mga ito bilang mga line item, alinsunod sa mga programa ng Pambansang Pamahalaan. Mapapaloob ito sa batas bilang Pambansang Budget– hihimayin ang bawat linya, bawat piso, bawat proyekto, gaya ng lahat ng iba pang programa ng inyong pamahalaan.

Dagdag pa rito, ang mga proyekto, at ang pagre-release ng budget para sa mga ito, ay magkakaroon ng mga sumusunod na patakaran laban sa katiwalian:

1. Itutuloy natin: Kailangang manggaling sa isang limitadong menu ang mga proyektong popondohan.

2. Ngayon, bawal na ang mga consumable na soft project tulad ng fertilizers, punla, gamot, medical kits, pustiso, paliga, training materials, at iba pang mga bagay na hindi masusuri kung totoo ngang may kinahihinatnan, o kung nagmumulto at pinagkakakitaan lang naman pala.

3. Ngayon, bawal na rin ang mga panandaliang imprastruktura, o kaya’y mga dredging, desilting, regraveling, o asphalt overlay project.

4. Ngayon, bawal na ring padaanin ang pondo sa mga NGO at piling GOCC tulad ng ZREC at NABCOR. Bubuwagin na po ang mga GOCC na ito at iba pang tulad nila, na paulit-ulit na ginamit sa kuntsabahan, at parang wala namang ibang silbi kundi ang maging instrumento ng katiwalian.

5. Ngayon, limitado na sa distrito o sektor ng mambabatas na nag-sponsor ang kanyang panukalang proyekto.

6. Ipagpapatuloy natin ang tapat at bukas na bidding para sa bawat proyekto; kailangang ipaskil sa Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System o PhilGEPS ang lahat ng mga bid notices at awards.

7. Patuloy din po: Upang masubaybayan ng taumbayan ang implementasyon ng mga proyekto, ihahayag ito nang buo sa website ng DBM at kaukulang ahensya, pati na sa National Data Portal ng gobyerno (www.data.gov.ph).

Inatasan ko na si Secretary Abad ng DBM na kumonsulta kina Speaker Belmonte at Senate President Drilon upang pandayin ang mekanismo, at isumite ito sa akin. Ilalatag natin ito upang ang mga alokasyon sa bawat distrito ay mapabilang na sa ating Pambansang Budget simula sa panukalang budget ng 2014.

Gagana lamang po ang sistemang ito kung makikiisa at makikilahok kayo. Ihahayag po nang buo ang impormasyon; suyurin at kilitasin po natin ito. Nananawagan akong makiambag at magsikap ang bawat isa, gaya ng pakikiambag at pagsisikap ng inyong gobyerno. Sama-sama nating pagtibayin ang pananagutan at katapatan, upang masigurong ang pera ng bayan ay ginugugol sa paraang makatarungan at tunay ninyong napapakinabangan.

Maraming salamat, at magandang araw.

*Please check against delivery.
**English Translation of the statement to follow.

SOURCE:

Office of the Presidential Spokesperson
3/F New Executive Building,
Jose P. Laurel St., Malacañang, Manila
Tel. No. (+632) 736-0719
Fax No. (+632) 735-6167
Email: spokesperson@malacanang.gov.ph

Pork ‘mafia’ of executive, legislature

PRESIDENT BENIGNO S. AQUINO III delivers his fourth State of the Nation Address on Monday amid allegations that more than P10 billion in Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), more commonly known as the pork barrel, had gone to commissions and ghost projects implemented by government agencies and ghost NGOs.

But while the President’s allies have appeared to have evaded being linked directly to the scandal (authorities are currently investigating PDAF releases from mostly opposition legislators), there are no indications that the Aquino administration will remove pork, despite the growing public outcry.

Over the years, the proportion of the national budget that are highly discretionary lump-sum and special purpose funds has remained big. For 2013, for example, almost P450 billion of the national budget may be identified as pork barrel-like funds. This is over and above the P25 billion earmarked annually for the more infamous pork barrel of senators and congressmen.

In its latest offering, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism looks into the dynamics of the pork barrel, patronage, and politicking.

The report, authored by PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas, may be read here.

Also check out a sidebar story by PCIJ Research Director Karol Ilagan on the flow of pork funds.

Netizens, journos in the Metro: This PCIJ seminar is for you!

CALLING all journalists, netizens, and bloggers based in Metro Manila:

Are you into investigative reporting?

Would you like to attend a PCIJ seminar?

The last of four seminars on “Political Clans, Governance, and Journalists’ Safety” of the PCIJ will be held on September 19-22, 2013 for the journalists, netizens, and bloggers of Metro Manila.

August 1, 2013, Thursday, is the deadline for application.

Who may apply?

Researchers, anchors, producers, editors, news managers, freelance reporters, contributors, and stringers of print, TV, radio, and online media may apply. Citizen media and bloggers covering public policy issues are also eligible.

The seminar will feature the following sessions:

* Media Killings, Political Violence, and Impunity in the Philippines
* Political Clans: Past and Future Links
* The Government’s Purse: Tracking the State’s Resources
* Ethics and Safety: Field and Newsroom Judgment Calls
* The Fundamentals of Investigative Reporting
* Tracking the Investigative Trails
– The Paper Trail: Understanding, Connecting, and Organizing Documents and Databases
– The People Trail: The Art of the Interview
* Putting the Story Together (for print, broadcast, and multimedia)

Funding

The PCIJ will cover:
- Round-trip transportation from the participant’s place of work and/or residence to the seminar venue.
- Board and lodging during the seminar.

The PCIJ will also provide a modest fellowship grant for story proposals that will be approved during or immediately after the seminar.

Application Requirements

1. Completed application form with two references (download here).
2. One or two samples of work discussing public policy, development, human rights, or governance issues.

For print and online: link to the stories or attach copies of stories in Word or PDF

For TV and radio: script, story concept/treatment, talking points, or research materials used in the broadcast story. A recording of the broadcast may also be submitted. Work samples may be submitted via:

a. Mail — enclose the CD or USB flash disk containing the recording of broadcast
b. Email — attach the material or send the link.


Selection process

Applicants will be selected based on the following criteria:
- Track record or experience in covering public policy issues.
- Demonstrated interest in doing in-depth reports on governance, development, and human rights issues.
- Potential for playing a key leadership role within his/her organization or media community.

Successful applicants will be notified within 10 working days after deadline.

The seminar graduates will be accorded priority slots in the subsequent Advanced Investigative Reporting Seminars that the PCIJ will conduct in 2014.

Sending your application:

By email:
Email address: training@pcij.org
Please state ‘Application to Attend the PCIJ’s Basic IR Seminar’ on the subject line

Note: We will acknowledge receipt of all submissions. If you do not receive any reply within three working days, please resend your application and move a follow-up email or call (02) 410-4768.

By fax:
Telefax: (02) 410-4768
Please write ‘ATTN: PCIJ Training Desk’ on the fax cover sheet
Note: After faxing, please call (02) 410-4768 to confirm if all the documents had been transmitted successfully.

By mail:
The Training Desk
Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism
3/F Criselda 2 Bldg., 107 Scout de Guia St.
Brgy. Sacred Heart, Quezon City 1104
Note: We will acknowledge receipt of mailed applications via email or text.

Questions?
Please contact the PCIJ Training Desk at (02) 410-4768 or training@pcij.org


Other PCIJ regional seminars!

Mindanao
Seminar Dates: July 25-28, 2013

Luzon
Seminar Dates: Aug. 22-25, 2013

NCR
Application Deadline Aug. 1, 2013
Seminar Dates: Sept. 19-22, 2013

Why attend?

Through combined onsite and field learning sessions, the seminar aims to enhance the participants’ investigative reporting skills and practice, and offer a framework for analyzing media killings and safety issues in the context of governance, the culture of impunity, and the presence of political clans and private armed groups in many parts of the country.

The seminar also seeks to highlight the role of the police and human rights organizations as vital sources of information for journalists.

The seminar will feature lecture-discussions and workshops to identify potential risks and practical safety tips when covering dangerous assignments.

A Story Development Workshop will give participants an opportunity to pitch story proposals that the PCIJ may consider for fellowship grants and editorial supervision.

Experts from the academe, national media organizations, the police, human rights agencies and organizations, and data repository agencies will lead the discussions.

Expense reports of Senate bets do not match pol ads

THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS was deluged by election contribution and spending reports for the May 2013 elections, after the Commission started started enforcing campaign finance laws more strictly.

But while the volume of documents received by the Comelec was indeed overwhelming, the quality or the truthfulness and accuracy of these documents is another matter.

In our latest report on the 2013 elections, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism looks at the campaign spending declared by the candidates in their Statements of Election Contributions and Expenditures (SOCE), and compares these with the advertising reports submitted by media entities.

Unfortunately, much of the figures do not even match. The differences range from the hundreds of thousands, to the tens of millions of pesos.

This two-part report by PCIJ Research Director Karol Ann Ilagan was informed by databases that the PCIJ developed using information contained in 25 reams of documents that the candidates and their parties filed with the Comelec, or 12,500 pages of documents.

Read the first part of the story here.

The second part of the series, also written by PCIJ Research Director Karol Ilagan, looks into how 17 senatorial candidates and their parties splurged almost half a billion pesos on advertisements that are, well, technically not campaign ads, but suspiciously look and sound like such.

Read the second story here.