SOUNDING BOARD is an outlet for opinions on good and crazy things going on at home (wherever I may be). All are welcome. You are not expected to bring anything except your common sense & sense of humor.
'If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce would today cost $100, get one million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside.'
-Robert X. Cringely (from geek wisdom)
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, December 17, 2003
_____________________________________________
8 days before Christmas
Time flies.
I remember during the first few days of December last year, I was struggling to recover from cough and flu from having been exposed again to Manila's polluted environment after being away from the country for almost one and a half years. It is not very difficult to get used to a country so clean and orderly: where you can take long walks along the major roads without getting suffocated from carbon monoxide; where you can walk alone at night (even after midnight) without any apprehension that someone might poke a knife at you and take all your valuables; where you can stand before a pedestrian lane and expect motorists to make a full stop and wait until you have fully crossed; where people fall in line automatically in bus stops; where you can comfortably use your mobile phone outside without fear that some moron might snatch it from you; where you can relax and feel comfortable riding public buses; where MRT stations are so well-ventilated; where MRT is so convenient to take; where you can call a cab through your phone and expect it to be there in 5 minutes; where parliamentary debates are so intellectually stimulating; and where efficiency is a norm in public service. The list could go on and on. I just needed a week to adjust. After all, I have spent nearly 20+ years of my life here in Manila.
It was also in December last year when President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo announced that she will not be running for the Presidency in the 2004 national elections. I was one of the first to raise an eyebrow on this feigned retreat strategy. It turned out I was right all along. She is now running for President. Whatever the results of the forthcoming elections, I doubt if the country will progress significantly in the next 10 years or so. With the kind of interest group politics we have where one group cancels another, where elections are mere popularity contests, where critical mass is but a handful of people, it may even take more than 10 years.
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
_____________________________________________
16-day campaign to eliminate violence against women
The Philippines joins the rest of the world in commemorating the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (25 November 2003) by having a 16-day Campaign to Eliminate Violence Against Women from 25 November to 10 December 2003.
Average monthly expense of around Php 9,000 per client is incurred at the Women's Crisis Center (WCC) Shelter. This includes food and transportation subsidy, medical assistance, therapies, utilities and other personal needs like tioletries, towels, slippers, etc.
The Government of the Philippines spends an estimate of six billion pesos to treat violence against women (VAW) survivors per year. it includes medical, psychollogical and crisis intervention alone (NCRFW-UNFPA, The Economic Cost of Violence Against Women, 1998).
(a) 64% were inflicted inside the home;
(b) 65% were accomplished by hand/fist and feet;
(c) almost 40% happened from 6PM-12MN;
(d) 16% occurred during Sundays;
(e) almost 50% were inflicted by husbands, relatives, live-in partners and fathers; &
(f) almost all perpetretors were males.
The UK government is also ensuring that sufficient policy and enforcement mechanisms are in place as its parliament considers the passage of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims bill. If the law is passed, it will cover gay couples and unmarried heterosexuals, as well as people who have never lived with their partners. Courts can order suspected offenders to keep away from their partners (sort of like giving a yellow card) but the government is trying to make such orders easier to enforce.
The main objective of this 16-day campaign is to lobby for the passage of the bills on Anti-Domestic Violence and Anti-Abuse of Women in Intimate Relationships. However, with the election fever inflicting both houses of Congress, even more than 16 days of drumbeating may not be enough. And in a country such as the Philippines where majority of politicians are elected based on sheer popularity, where most candicates can change from one political party to another, one doubts whether there is hope over the horizon for this bill.
posted by Allan at 9:18 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, November 07, 2003
_____________________________________________
One boring Friday
Sometimes, I really wish there are days we could skip by clicking the move-to-the-next-day key. Today is one of them. Unfortunately, and this does not surprise me at all, I just realized that I have been dreaming of having access to that kind of key for a couple of days now.
When I was in Singapore (stayed there for a year and a half, not so long ago), I used to hangout in a small café called Beehive. The first time I sat there, sipped my coffee and puffed a couple of sticks, I said to myself ‘this is it’. I was there almost everyday/night especially when I’m into those I’d-rather-talk-to-myself-than-talk-to-these-people moods. There were even a couple of times when I brought my books there to study, while Jason (part owner of Beehive) plays his (and mine too) favorite CDs. However, and somehow it surprised me, Beehive was instrumental in transforming me into a social animal, in a way. It surprised me because I figured I wouldn’t be talking to people I don’t know at all if I were in Starbucks or Seattle’s Best. And making some friends in a totally different country is also a big deal for an anti-social animal such as myself. So Beehive became a place where I hangout with a handful of Singaporean friends.
Unfortunately, because of its poor location, Beehive closed down a few months before I went back home. It was surrounded by hawkers' area, and if you've been to Singapore for quite a long time, you'll see that even rich people flock to the hawkers. It's not uncommon to see BMWs parked in front of hawkers in Singapore, with fashion-conscious Singaporeans having snacks seemingly unmindful of the late afternoon heat.
---------------------
Somehow it always pisses me off that I have to endure the heat even when inside airconditioned public transport. They're just not cold enough. Worse, when you take a shuttle to work, people don't even complain about it, as if it's a very natural thing to fan yourself to death. As usual, I always turn out to be the bitchiest (excuse me for the term) passenger who would perennially complain about it. Taxis are even worse. Most of them are poorly maintained and so it's not uncommon that I get nauseous after a 30 minute bonding episode with the stinking seat fabric. Unfortunately, and I'm not surprised at all given our track record in public transport maintenance, I've also encountered several instances when the MRT's aircon system makes me wonder if it would be better to just open the windows. And whoever designed the stations must have failed to consider the air circulation. Just stand in any of the stations even without moving and you'll immediately feel humid and sticky. There's just not enough air circulating.
You could say, of course, it's better to have *that*, than to be stuck in even more humid and stinky aircon buses. Maybe people seldom complain about these things. And it sucks.
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, November 03, 2003
_____________________________________________
A challenged democracy
It was a disaster waiting to happen. The attempted impeachment against Chief Justice Hilario Davide of the Supreme Court by the Lower House of Congress may have released the Sword of Damocles that could usher in the most critical wound to an already chaotic democracy.
The pride of having successfully overthrown two presidents through 'people power' may have facilitated the Filipinos' acquired inclination to use extraordinary means to effect change in governance. One thing that may have been forgotten along the way is that extraordinary means are meant for extraordinary circumstances. The case being made here is that we have not reached that point that warrants extraordinary means. The 'initiative' of congress may, to some, reflect a working democracy in terms of checks and balances. However, the Constitution mandates the Commission on Audit (COA) to ensure legal and acceptable use of the Judicial Development Fund (JDF). Nevertheless, and granting that even COA's determination of the legality and acceptability of the use of the JDF is questionable, an impeachment proceeding is not necessary at the moment.
I have always believed that development (economic, social and legal) reforms rooted in a strong judicial branch is the best way to go. No matter how chaotic the legislative and executive branches are, swift dispensation of decisions emanating from the Supreme Court down to the lower courts will ensure a solid foundation for reforms. After all, the Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the Constitution.
The inability to strengthen an independent Judicial branch during the past administrations is one of the main factors behind 'development inertia' in the Philippines. There is always hope over the horizon but the penchant for using extraordinary means is one of the factors that could take even the modicum amount of hope left among the people. With this kind of attitude fuelling interest group politics in the Philippines where one group cancels the other, I would not be surprised if, after ten years, the country is still faced with the same basic challenges on governance.
posted by Allan at 11:25 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, October 16, 2003
_____________________________________________
Chemicals in baby food jars
BBC News on Wednesday reports that a chemical, semicarbazide (SEM), has been found in very small quantities in some jars of food. Baby food manufacturers are now being urged to change the way they package their products amid fears over cancer (BBC News 15 October 2003).
The European Food Safety Authority says it has found traces of a potentially dangerous chemical in some jars. Officials said there was no need for parents to stop giving their children food from jars because the cancer risk is extremely low. However, they recommended that manufacturers consider introducing safer packaging.
Authorities said that the chemical was not found in any type of food used or containers. The chemical was released by a particular type of packaging, including glass jars with metal lids, containing sealant gaskets.
While it is good that this was discovered early during routine checks, one could only hope that the existence of the chemical should have been found earlier during the testing stage, before these products are sold in the market. But it could also be possible that the chemical is emitted after a certain period of interaction time between the mode of packaging and the materials used. Maybe it is time to expand the coverage of food labeling standards to cover not only ingredients but also packaging techniques. With respect to the current risks, I understand that the evidence points to very small traces of chemicals. I do not think, however, that I would take the risk, even a very small risk, when it comes to my child's food and nutrition. Would you?
posted by Allan at 8:57 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
_____________________________________________
I told you so
That was the first thing I said when President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo announced that she will run for President in 2004. Somehow, I did not believe her (see featured posts). And there you go, on Saturday she finally declared she will run in 2004. We all witnessed how she initially invoked divine intervention from the moment she declared in December 2002 that she will not run, and then, invoked the same divine intervention when she was thinking deeply whether she should really run or not. Having been criticized from left to right, she now declared that it was her own decision, now rationalizing her change of mind because of the needs of the country. It was expected, but it was nevertheless a good show of utter lack of 'palabra de honor' (word of honor).
If, somehow, people can convince themselves to vote for a someone who doesn't have a word of honor, then maybe we really get the leaders we deserve. Some regard her as the 'necessary evil' implying that the 'bench is really that shallow'. Granted that the necessary evil argument is valid, however, these people may have never asked themselves why the bench is shallow in the first place. It is shallow because we have voters who merely accept the fact that it is. Period.
posted by Allan at 7:53 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, September 26, 2003
_____________________________________________
Abuse of women in intimate relationship: going beyond Kris and Joey
The headlines were shattered by Ms. Kris Aquino's revelation that boyfriend and live-in partner Paranaque Mayor Joey Marquez allegedly physically and emotionally abused her, and worst, pointed a gun at her. That prompted Kris to seek help from her mom (former President Corazon Cojuanco-Aquino) and brother (Representative Noynoy Aquino). Forget Ms. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's falling rating, whether she will run or not, the failure of Cancun talks, the anomaly in the recent Bar exam, Charter change, forget everything. This is one 'national issue' wherein every Filipino, rich or poor, male or female, and every other category you can think of, has been closely and eagerly following. In a society characterized by stereotyped gender roles (thanks to the gullible majority), the not-so-gullible among us should go beyond downplaying the issue as a private matter.
Abuse of women in intimate relationship is the issue
The quarrel apparently climaxed when Joey received a text message from a lady. Kris got jealous and a heated argument followed. Joey, being sexist that he is, reasoned 'buti kung maganda yung babae, eh hindi naman' ('It's ok if the lady is pretty, she's not.') (Manila Bulletin 23 September 2003). What kind of reasoning is that, Mayor? But that's beside the point. The issue is this: Joey allegedly physically abused Kris and pointed a gun at her. The succeeding revelations by Kris over national television took all of us by surprise: it wasn't the first time that Joey physically abused her; she has endured verbal abuse from Joey; and maybe the most shocking of all, Joey has inflicted her with a sexually-transmitted disease (which was eventually cured at St. Lukes). Kris had to be the first to reveal it because Joey was allegedly using it to blackmail Kris and prevent her from coming out in the open about the abuses she endured from Joey.
Gender stereotyping
The issue took us all by surprise because we did not expect this to happen to Kris. After all, she is quite powerful, rich and famous. We have been unfortunately conditioned by the stereotyped world we live in that expects women to be boxed into certain roles. Thus when women are outspoken and sexually active, when they do not conform to our stereotypes, we give them bad connotations. Worse, when they get hurt, we blame them because they do not live up to the roles that our macho, double-standard society ascribes to them.
This is not to say that we are pre-judging Joey. We will let the courts decide on the case. However, when a woman presents herself as a victim of abuse in intimate relationship, we, especially the government, have a responsibility to see to it that the victim/survivor gets the all the assistance she needs, and ensure that she is not look down upon as a Mary Magdalene who should be stoned to death because she did not conform to our stereotyped view of women.
We should not also fall into a flawed reasoning by the Mayor's gullible constituents and friends that because Joey has not abused them in anyway, Joey could not have done such acts. Bear in mind that this is a crime committed within the context of an intimate relationship. So if you are not or has not been in an intimate relationship with Joey, if you are not or have not had sex with him, chances are your limited and gullible mind does not fully grasp the situation at hand.
It is NOT a private matter
There are a large number of people saying that Joey and Kris should resolve their differences among themselves because this is a private matter. This is NOT a private matter. When a woman in intimate relationship is physically and emotionally abused, the issue ceases to be a private matter. It becomes a crime. Let noone make you believe that physical abuse is part of buhay mag-asawa (married life).
In aid of legislation
It is this particular reason why there is a proposed legislation on Anti-Abuse of Women in Intimate Relationships (AWIR). No man has the right to physically or emotionally abuse his partner, and no man should get away with that by couching the act as a 'private matter'. I hope that this issue serves as a wake-up call to our legislators.
posted by Allan at 9:28 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, September 25, 2003
_____________________________________________
On internet censorship and freedom of expression (or the lack of it) in China
The Human Rights in China (HRIC) reported that another person was arrested in China for voicing dissent over the internet. Li Zhi, a 32-year-old local official from Dazhou, in Sichuan province, has been charged with conspiracy to subvert state power. According to HRIC, Mr. Li was detained on 8 August 2003 and formally charged on 3 September 2003. If found guilty, he could face 15 years in prison (BBCNews.com 24 September 2003).
This is not the first time that the Chinese government had someone arrested for voicing political opinions over the internet. Internet crackdowns and bans seem to be a common thing behind China's red firewall, even to the extent of banning Google (and consequently lifting the ban).
For an empirical analysis of internet filtering in China, this site is worth checking out. See also a BBC article on China's Red Firewall.
Given the openness of web access technology, and the growing open-mindedness of its citizens, the Chinese government will find it increasingly difficult to impose its selective ban on internet access. Two words: human rights.
posted by Allan at 10:06 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, September 24, 2003
_____________________________________________
Dragging God into dirty politics
When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo announced in December 2002 that she will not be running for President in 2004, she categorically stated that God was her adviser. Ms. Arroyo is now praying very hard for divine guidance whether she should run in 2004. Has politics become so dirty that even God is being dragged into this mess? If the President is really hell-bent on going through with her feigned retreat, then there is only one ‘good’ thing that came out of this --- I now realize who I am NOT going to vote for in 2004.
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, September 19, 2003
_____________________________________________
This week's pick: nose picking
Between Ms. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's gloating over the forthcoming visit of George W. Bush to the Philippines and anti-US protests, it's quite amusing to be (willingly) side-tracked by interesting news on.... errr nose picking?
Marc Abrahams, founder of Ig Nobel Prizes, has come up with the book 'The Ig Nobel Prizes: The Annals of Improbable Research'. The book offers insight into some of the most bizarre research ever presented, among them is on nose picking among adolescents.
The 2001 report found that nose picking is the same across social classes. They also found that about 80 percent of teenagers do it exclusively with their fingers while the rest are split almost evenly between using tweezers and pencils as their excavator of choice. Delving deeper, the good doctors found about 50 percent of people pick to unclog their nose, 11 percent do so for cosmetic reasons while a similar number does it just for fun. (Reuters 18 September 2003)
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, September 05, 2003
_____________________________________________
Amend the Constitutution to boost investments?
Director General Romulo Neri of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) on Wednesday's Manila Times Internet Edition boldly came out in the open advocating for the need to '...amend the Philippine Constitution to rid it of protectionist provisions that have limited foreign investments in the country.' Vice President Tito Guingona was not very happy with the statement and therefore asked Neri to explain if his words 'constitute national policy and signal a 180-degree shift in President Arroyo’s declared neutrality and non-involvement in the persistent attempts to amend the 1987 Constitution' (Philippine Star 3 September 2003). Of course DG Neri's statements were entirely his and do not necessarily reflect NEDA's position, not even the President's. Are we missing something here?
Neri's position completely mirrors his mentor's --- Joe De Venecia. The great De Venecia 'dream' is to amend the Constitution. 'Plan 747', mouthed by both by JDV and Neri, catapulted Neri to his NEDA post. And where would De Venecia want to fly with his '747' and proposed Constitutional amendments? We could be gullible at times, but definitely not stupid.
Understanding where Neri's statement is coming from isn't that difficult if one remembers the circumstances when he was appointed as replacement to then NEDA DG Dante Canlas. As posted from 16 December 2003 edition of Sounding Board (a few days before the President declared she will not be running for Presidency in 2004):
Malacanang further rationalizes its motives behind the "resignation" of Secretary of Socioeconomic Planning and NEDA Director-General Dante B. Canlas, amidst the criticisms that the country's economic performance has nothing to do with it. Through Spokesperson Rigoberto Tiglao, Malacanang even had to resort to saying "....Canlas wanted to go back to the academe because he was bored by his tedious work at the NEDA, which required more of his handwriting than his analytical skills" (INQ7.net 14 December 2002). Critics are not biting. Only Amando Doronila seems to have picked it up.
Romulo Neri, the new NEDA chief, outlines the "necessary" changes: "...refocusing of strategy from external sources of growth to internal sources of growth; shift from demand side stimulus represented by grand infrastructure programs to supply-side productivity and efficiency; and shift from macro-economic reforms to micro-economic reforms (INQ7.net 16 December 2002). Before we all get lost in these big words, maybe we should go back to some basic questions. Do we really have an "economic" problem as Malacanang desperately emphasizes? So why the sudden change and desparate rationalizations? Malacanang knows very well that the government's economic team has been practising a centrist economic management. It is as if Mr. Canlas is an extreme "demand-sider". It is as if Mr. Neri is an extreme "supply-sider". It is as if both are not for freer markets. It is as if we will see major policy shifts. It is as if we are that stupid.
And what about Mr. Neri's Plan 747? The President seems to have been terribly impressed by it despite the fact the the economy is doing fine. Plan "747" stands for a growth rate of seven percent for seven years. This is a recycled platform which nobody picked up when it was launched several years ago. So why the sudden interest from the President? This is the same President who reviewed and approved the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP), which is the country's socioeconomic plan until 2004. This is the same President who heads the NEDA Board, which subjected the MTPDP to a tedious consultation process - within government, across sectors and regions. This is the same President who wants to be with us even after 2004. Unless we do something about it.
We do not know yet if the President is not really running for 2004 elections. Her statements have been transforming from 'I'm not running...' to 'No comment' to 'I think I should stick to that decision'. And as I said before, she did not say she WILL stick to her decision. She said she thinks she should (stick to her decision).
What seems clear is the way Neri's position on charter change resembles that of De Venecia's. In fact, if you substitute JDV's name and position to that of Neri's, you wouldn't probably recognize the difference. But is it possible that Neri's statement reflects Malacanang's position on the issue, and Malacanang's hand is at work here? Again, we could be gullible at times, but definitely not stupid.
posted by Allan at 12:15 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, August 19, 2003
_____________________________________________
Paranoia and press freedom
Some paranoid members of the Arroyo government may have to be reminded of three things. Press freedom, press freedom and press freedom.
Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Hermogenes Ebdane Jr. admitted on Monday that some members of the media are under surveillance, and further admitted that this is not the first time media personnel have been the subjects of surveillance.
This announcement came after President Gloria Arroyo berated GMA-7 reporter Tina Panganiban-Perez on Friday and accused her of "abetting rebellion" after she interviewed Senator Gregorio Honasan whom the government has accused of masterminding the failed July 27 mutiny. Almost as quick in unleashing the infamous presidential temper, the President was also quick to 'explain the incident' to the network's officials. Press Secretary Milton Alingod reported that Ms Macapagal went to the GMA 7 studios Saturday night for an hour to talk to GMA-7 management and clarify with network officials that Malacanang never intended to pursue legal action against Panganiban-Perez.
Abetting rebellion is a very strong accusation from no less than the President. Is there anything wrong with conducting interviews with suspected "enemies of the state"? I don't think so. In any case, I don't think even the President has any business berating a journalist for doing her job, and doing her job quite well, if I may say so. After all, the government has all the resources, machinery and access to media - something that suspected coup plotters may not have. In short, the playing field may not be so equal from the very start.
There is a very thin line between harassment and whatever it is that government is doing with media right now. Dinner, anyone?
posted by Allan at 2:18 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, August 18, 2003
_____________________________________________
Amando Doronila on the 'arrogance' of mutineers
Had Max Soliven not spoken on the 'gentleman's agreement' entered into by government negotiator Roy Cimatu with rebel soldiers in Makati recently, Amando Doronila's 'ANALYSIS' could have been excellent in discussing the essence of ambiguity in conflict resolution.
posted by Allan at 3:54 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, August 06, 2003
_____________________________________________
Negotiating with the mutineers: government style
Max Soliven, a newspaper publisher and a witness to the negotiations between government (represented by lead negotiator Ambassador Roy Cimatu) and the mutineers, categorically said that the government failed to honor a "gentleman's agreement" (INQ7.Net 6 August 2003). The government negotiator assured the rebel soldiers that they would face court marshall in accordance with the Articles of War. However, on 1 August 2003, the National Bureau of Investigation filed charges of coup d'etat against the 321 soldiers in a civilian court. Soliven also stated that Cimatu even stated that the assurance of a court marshall was approved by Malacanang.
While I make no judgments on the acts committed (including the technical argument of the act as rebellion or coup d'etat), if this is any indication on how government negotiates with rebels, then this is alarming because that kind of negotiation tactic only works once. In noncooperative continuous games (game theory), reneging may give you an upperhand for a single round, but it is highly unlikely that the other player will trust you in the succeeding ones. In theory and in practice, ensuring that both parties will honor agreements reached during negotiations also requires a third party (and agreements to be written down!). Nevertheless, the government should hope that this will be the last negotiation with military rebels. Otherwise, the ensuing negotiation(s) may require more than a single weekend.
posted by Allan at 12:48 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
_____________________________________________
Separating the bull from the shit: Revisiting the weekend mutiny
Lt. Senior Grade Antonio Trillanes IV and the rest of the flat group of mutineers may have failed in the eyes of many as they called off their rebellion on Sunday against the corrupt military system they were trying to expose. They, however, succeeded in exposing the most abhoring facet of corruption in the military --- sale of arms to insurgents. And if this is followed by an independent, honest-to-goodness inquiry, who knows? The eyes of the sleeping majority may soon be opened. Or am I asking to much?
The Magdalo group claimed they had nothing personal to gain from the mutiny. They were a bunch of idealistic junior military officers who do not seek to grab power but merely to air their grievances. They succeeded in doing just that. Because they really seem not to have any answer to the 'what's next' question, the mutiny was bound to end the way it did.
The alleged corruption in the military goes beyond sale of arms. It goes beyond the alleged dealing with insurgents too. The worst news came a few months back when the military was linked to having colluded with the terrorist Abu Sayyaf group. Arroyo's response was predictable: she ordered an investigation on the matter.
Arroyo, in her State of the Nation (SONA) address on Monday ordered the setting up of two indepedent commissions to investigate the mutiny. On Tuesday, she announced the appointment of a retired Supreme Court justice to head a committee to investigate the issue. The Senate also planned to conduct its own investigation, the same senate which cleared the military of collusion charges with Abu Sayyaf in October 2002.
The Magdalo group tried to expose corruption in the military. Their method was certainly quite different from the way Fr. Nacorda and Grace Burnham used, but it carried a similar message. The government has conducted an inquiry in the past. A so-called 'independent' commission ordered by the President and a Senate inquiry will be conducted very soon. Too many inquiries, very few answers. Judge for yourself.
posted by Allan at 12:15 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, July 21, 2003
_____________________________________________
Another reason to jerk off
A team of scientists based in Melbourne studied the sexual habits of more than 2,000 men, half with cancer and half healthy. They found out that those who ejaculated more than 5 times a week were less likely to develop serious prostate cancer. In the words of scientist Graham Giles, 'The more you flush the ducts out, the less there is to hang around and damage the cells that line them (Life and Style, This is London 17 July 2003).'
I am not going through the threats to external and internal validity and all those serious stuffs (that may take away the fun heheee). But if this is confirmed, just in case (c'mon stay with me heheee), then it's like 'once a day keeps prostate cancer at bay'. Preventing cancer and promoting peace? Not bad... not bad at all.
posted by Allan at 5:20 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
_____________________________________________
Badass
I don't usually do this but since my stress level is way too high lately, and since greengrl gave me an idea, here goes...
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, July 11, 2003
_____________________________________________
On UNIFEM's website: Improving Compliance to the Gender-Responsive Budgeting in the Philippines
The United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) is currently featuring the policy analysis I did in during my stint at the Public Policy Programme, National University of Singapore. Here's the introduction:
"This study was prepared by Allan O. Millar of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Republic of the Philippines, during 2002 in fulfillment of the requirements for a Masters degree in the Public Policy Programme, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, at the National University of Singapore (NUS). This innovative Programme requires that students undertake their Masters level research for a specific client. Allan had earlier met the UNIFEM Regional Economic Adviser through UNIFEM support for gender mainstreaming in the Philippines. As he was interested in gender budgeting, particularly the Philippines Gender and Development Five Percent budget, Allan requested that the UNIFEM Regional Programme for Engendering Economic Governance become his client. The Regional Economic Adviser provided input and feedback to the research, and feedback to NUS. However, the views expressed in this study do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of the Philippines, NUS or UNIFEM."
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, July 08, 2003
_____________________________________________
Time of reckoning
Now is the time.
BBCnews.com on Monday reports that some claims about Iraq's weapons were given too much weight by the government. UK's all-party foreign affairs committee says a suggestion that 'Iraq could deploy chemical and biological weapons within 45 minutes' should not have been given such prominence by the government (BBCnews.com 7 July 2003). Tony Blair has some serious explaining to do.
This inquiry is long overdue. The coalition of the willing went to war with one major reason - to preempt Iraq's possible use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Until now, no WMD has been found. Are we really so naive to believe that if the coalition found any existence of WMDs, they would not be gloating globally to prove that the war was indeed justified? But the justification for going to war, in reality, was not found. Now it's time to turn the tides around. Perhaps this is the time of reckoning where in democratic systems and processes shall be put to test. And Britain's inquiry is certainly the first step.
posted by Allan at 11:51 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, June 30, 2003
_____________________________________________
On women and parliamentary politics
There are now, more than ever, a lot of efforts on increasing women’s political participation, particularly in decision-making positions. I find it intellectually amusing to find a few good (and short!) papers asking the most basic yet important questions on the topic. One of these papers has been written by Sandra Grey (Political Science Program, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University). Ms. Grey’s paper focuses on the ‘critical mass’ argument that claims that ‘women will only impact upon political decisions once they achieve a critical mass within legislative bodies’ (Grey, S. 2001. WOMEN AND PARLIAMENTARY POLITICS: Does Size Matter? Critical Mass and Women MP in New Zealand House of Representatives. Paper for the 51st Political Studies Association Conference, 10-12 April 2001, Manchester, United Kingdom [online]. Available at: http://www.psa.ac.uk/cps/2001/Grey%20Sandra.pdf [Accessed 27 June 2003].). She tested the argument through a case study on New Zealand House of Representatives.
In answering the question (Does size matter?), Ms. Grey has this to say:
‘In the New Zealand case there was evidence of increased feminization of the political agenda at a time when the gender balance in the House of representatives rose to almost reach Kanter’s skewed ratio of 15:85. Female politicians were more actively involved in debates on child care and parental leave and spoke more proudly of their gender and their intent to represent women as a group once they reached 14.4 per cent of the seats in the New Zealand parliament…. It seems that in order to impact upon the New Zealand parliamentary agenda and the parts of the political culture centred on self-perception, size does matter….While women had made significant advancements since 1975 in terms of overall parliamentary representation in New Zealand, until the 1999 election the number of females in cabinet (the powerhouse for policy making) was marginal. Even in 1996, only one woman sat in cabinet. There was evidence that low proportions of women in Government ranks prevented women impacting on public policy’.
The paper notes the importance of the concept of critical mass in terms of women’s political participation. Ms. Grey also emphasizes in the end that ‘…what we should talk about is different critical masses – dependent on what we want to achieve through group representation.’
It should be interesting to test the robustness of the findings in other country's context. And perhaps to complete the picture, in addition to the critical mass argument, we should consider the impact of interest group politics on the critical mass of women in decision-making positions. Operationally, the critical mass argument is very much linked to interest groups’ influence in decision-making. It is necessary to integrate the interplay of critical mass in government and outside of government (interest groups) and how such interaction influences the policy agenda – of women in position, and of those in power in general.
posted by Allan at 11:53 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Sunday, June 22, 2003
_____________________________________________
To change or not to change
Malacanang is going full blast on charter change, says Bert Gonzales, the President's adviser on special concerns. Despite the President's non-committal stance, Gonzales et al target to amend the Constitution before the President steps down in 2004, with the incoming President to serve as a transition President.
The current presidential system indeed has its loopholes, lots of them. However, these loopholes are rooted more in the people behind the system rather than the system itself. This is probably the most widely used, abused and misused argument but still the most valid. Call it politics of patronage, interest group politics, or any other term. Unless a system is backed up with a critical mass and a strong and independent judicial system, no country is going anywhere. In a country where the gullible majority decides the outcome of elections based on popularity of candicates and implicit or explicit endorsement of church leaders, and where justice is delayed from simple theft to corruption and plunder, it is not very difficult to get cynical. This must be why some would like the change to happen not earlier than 2010.
We have to distinguish what makes a system work. When we have resolved the fundamental parameters, then, and only then, should we ponder on charter change.
posted by Allan at 9:04 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Sunday, June 15, 2003
_____________________________________________
Featured software: UC Berkeley's The National Budget Simulation
The National Budget Simulation was created in 1995 by Anders Schneiderman and Nathan Newman, then co-directors of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research. The simulation allows web users get a sense of the balancing act involve in coming up with the national budget of US.
I must say this is a very interesting and informative piece of software. Some of us may find it useful for teaching exercises and even workshops.
I had a problem getting into the details of what the budget category includes. I encountered errors after clicking the linked categories. Having no way of knowing the coverage of categories, I assume that official development assistance is included in 'international affairs'? I wonder what other things are included in that category.
I may be very naive but I hope some sort of a generic software counterpart (wherein we could edit the categories and assumptions so we can tailor-fit the simulation within specific country settings) may be developed. Yes, that would be quite naive. Two words: copyright and money.
Lastly, budgets of different countries are always influenced by lobby groups and priorities and political leanings of the current administration. It maybe be more interesting (and useful without taking away the simplicity of the technology) to factor in these political contraints. For example, if a lobby group is quite influential in one budget category, the web user is limited to a certain range (so as not to lessen the unpopularity of a budget cut for instance).
Congress, which is composed of the Upper House (Senate) and the Lower House (Congress), acts through their respective congressional oversight committees in seeing to it that agencies implement the policies that they enact. Congress and the agencies encounter a principal-agent problem, i.e., a problem that arises when an agent (agencies) pursues its own goals, which are not consistent with that of the principal (congress). In some cases, these hearings are political posturing (Cameron, C.M. and Rosendorf B.P., 1993. A Signaling Theory of Congressional Oversight. Games and Economic Behavior [online], 5 (1). Available from: http://www.idealibrary.com/links/toc/game/5/1/0 [Accessed 24 March 2002].). This is an opportunity for legislators to make a good impression or get media’s attention. However, in some cases, these hearings are signals that reveal their priorities. This is the case being shown here.
The relationship between congress and agencies may be adequately explained by game theory, particularly by the 'congressional hearing game', the principles of which are based on 'The Auditing Game' in (Rasmusen, E., 2001. Games and Information: An Introduction to Game Theory, 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Inc.). The game is played by 2 players – legislature and agencies. Congress plays the principal while government agencies play the agent. Congress convenes oversight committee hearings to check if they agencies are complying with the policy. Agencies are required to attend the hearings and be subject to the committee’s inquiry. Print and TV media cover the committee hearings. Therefore, they have two strategies each. For congress, it decides whether to conduct hearings or not. For agencies, they decide whether to comply with the policy or not. The game is continuous, with congress as the first mover, i.e., signaling its resoluteness in seeing to it that agencies comply. The payoffs are ordered as: {congress, agencies}.
In the absence of a direct sanction, the public hearings conducted by the legislature can function as deterrent to non-compliance. There is no Nash equilibrium here, i.e., a situation where neither player wishes to change strategies as neither one of them gains by doing so. Upon receiving feedback, congress convenes public hearings and agencies comply with the policy (hearing, comply). Congress gains good publicity as well as agencies. Civil society groups and the public at large will view them as “doing their job” and hence giving due attention to women’s issues. However, Congress could not afford to conduct committee hearings on this particular policy all the time. Hence, the conduct of a hearing sends a signal of resoluteness of Congress to pursue the issue. When agencies start complying, Congress shifts back to 'no hearing'. This situation - wherein Congress does not call agencies to a committee hearing or inquiry and agencies comply – is an ideal situation. Unfortunately, when agencies realize that Congress is not conducting committee hearings, the deterrent function of hearings is relaxed. Therefore, agencies have an incentive not to comply, or, stating it in another way, non-compliance is not penalized with any (proxy) 'sanction'. When compliance falls again, Congress begins to show resoluteness on this issue, and the cycle goes on (please refer to broken arrows). The 'equilibrium' here is in mixed strategies. The best strategy for Congress, for example, is to conduct hearings from time to time only, given that it is costly for them to conduct hearings all the time. The best strategy for the agencies is to comply all the time, but as soon as congress stops conducting hearings, agencies have a bigger payoff if they do not comply. The broken arrows show the movement of mixed strategies.
The analysis above assumes that the agencies’ payoff (pegged to -1) is not so high that will deter the agencies from not complying. If the cost of complying is so high for some agencies (assume greater than F), then the movements will be different. Simply put, even the threat of being subjected to a committee hearing will not deter non-compliance. In which scenario is this possible?
The budget quota (gender budget quota amounting to 5% of agencies' budget) is a regarded as a prized victory of the women’s movement in the Philippines. Therefore, any proposal to scrap the quota is not politically acceptable given the dynamic civil society in the Philippines. This is fine insofar as the operational definition of compliance (i.e., submission of plans) is maintained. If it is extended to cover meeting the quota, most agencies will have difficulty in complying. This will reflect a lower compliance rate. For example, among the 123 agencies which complied in 2000, only 33 agencies allocated at least five percent of their total budgets to gender concerns. In our game matrix above, if the cost of compliance is higher, hearings will not be a deterrent. Ultimately, even congress may decide not to conduct hearings at all if they see no effect on overall compliance.
posted by Allan at 6:54 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, May 23, 2003
_____________________________________________
'I think I should stick to that decision' --- President Gloria Arroyo
Since December 2002, President Gloria Arroyo has been denying categorically that she will run for 2004. It seems the cloud of doubt has no other business but to follow her.
This was brought to the fore again when she gave a 'no comment' answer to a question abotu her plans for 2004 (elections). An in a press conference during the State Visit to US President George Bush, Ms. Macapagal gave this answer when asked what could change her mind, "You know I feel so comfortable (about) not being a candidate for president. I'd been able to make so many unpopular but correct decisions so I think I should stick to that decision," (INQ7.net 22 May 2004).
I called it 'feigned retreat' tactic before, borrowing from an unusual war strategy to catch your opponents off-guard by implying a retreat, while building up for a massive attack, and ultimately defeating the enemy (Alexander, B., How Wars Are Won: The 13 Rules of War from Ancient Greece to the War on Terror 2002.). I still believe it is. Note the change in tone from 'I'm not running...' to 'No comment' to 'I think I should stick to that decision'. And note too that she did not say she WILL stick to her decision. She said she thinks she should (stick to her decision).
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, May 19, 2003
_____________________________________________
IMF Working Paper: Gender-Responsive Government Budgeting
The abstract of the working paper states:
“This paper examines the concept of gender-responsive government budgeting, promoted in recent years by women’s nongovernmental organizations, academia, and multilateral organizations, and the extent of its implementation by national governments in both advanced and developing countries. Owing to recently developed analytical and technical tools, government budget management systems in some countries can help promote gender equality – the extent of government involvement in gender-sensitive sectors and programs – at any level of available funding. However, to be fully effective, obstacles such as gender-biased culture, the lack of appropriate budget classifications, and the lack of gender analysis expertise and gender-disaggregated data in most countries need to be addressed.” (Sarraf F. 2003. Gender-Responsive Government Budgeting. IMF Working Paper 03/83)
The paper is laudable insofar as it explains gender-responsive government budgeting, discusses the tools for its implementation, and assesses its the scope and practicality. It also describes the political, technical and financial support provided by multilateral organizations to national governments. Personally, I think any additional focus on gender-responsive government budgeting is very much welcome. At the very least, it generates awareness from a wider audience on its policy and program implications, as well as its intended benefits.
Having said those points, let me also stress that the paper is more focused on the tools and technical nuances that are necessary for gender-responsive government budgeting to be effective and operational. In view of this, the paper’s analysis missed the critical role of the political environment (including the different stakeholders) and the necessary strategies to manage such environment. The management of the political processes and stakeholders is a crucial factor that separates an operational gender-responsive budgeting policy from one that is ‘good only in paper’ (One may even argue that there is no such thing as a policy good only in paper because if it is, then it missed the critical role of the bigger political environment. Such policy, in effect, may be considered ‘bad on paper’ from the very start.).
First, the paper assumes ‘that there is strong will and commitment to use the government budget, among other policy instruments, to promote gender mainstreaming…’ (a very dangerous – maybe even useless – assumption indeed!). Gender budgeting is a tool to address women’s needs and rights, and in so doing, seeks to change gender roles - socially differentiated roles which limit participation of women (and men), politically, economically and socially. It is important to note that the operationalization of gender budgeting should maximize support and minimize resistance. Often, if not always, the political will (of the current leadership and government as a whole) to go into gender budgeting is not there. If it is, then we should be able to see a better picture of gender budgeting in most, if not all, countries.
Second, the paper also assumes the existence of a ‘built-in rigidity in government budget structures’ in both advanced and developing countries that limits the capacity of government budgeting in addressing cross-sectoral concerns and issues. Perhaps this flows from the initial assumption that a strong will and commitment exist. Given such ambitious assumption, it seems that the next step is to blame the rigidity of the budgetary structures for the inadequacies of gender budgeting.
The more critical questions are: If we take these two things given – resistance to gender budgeting and rigidity of the budgetary structures – how do we operationalize gender budgeting? Specifically, how do we manage the resistance (and indifference) of those agencies who are supposed to be on the forefront of gender budgeting? Given the rigidity of the budgetary structures, how do we make the structures and processes transparent and accountable to the citizens who are supposedly the intended beneficiaries of the budgeted government programs and projects? How do we maximize civil society participation and checks and balances (role of congress perhaps for carrots and sticks)?
The paper did mention the value of analyses of impacts on beneficiaries and households (even this level of analysis is gender-blind to a certain extent) and redirecting budgetary allocation in the next budgeting cycle toward addressing gender issues. However, it overemphasized the technical aspect by saying, ‘the results of the surveys and debates would only be useful (emphasis supplied) if they could be integrated into a specific budget classification’. Perhaps a more accountable and transparent way of using the budget and getting around its rigidity is to ensure that it results to programs that correct gender imbalances. Budgets should be analyzed, and the resulting analyses should be used for lobbying for changes in budgetary priorities – regardless of the budget classification. In the end, what matters most are not the classifications under which programs are funded. What matters is whether or not the government budget responds to the needs and priorities of its constituents.
In the advent of performance-based budgeting, most countries now have a very potent tool in their hands to hold leaders and government agencies accountable and responsive to their contituents’ needs and priorities. We now have a way to link government budget and priorities – including the availability of succeeding budgetary outlays based on previous ‘performance’. The crucial question that we all should be vigilant about is how to make performance-based budgeting more participatory as we go on.
Perhaps in addition to the oversimplified assumptions, the title of the paper limits the analysis. Gender budgeting is not only a government activity. It is not government budgeting in a strict sense. When one emphasizes the government part of it, as in ‘gender-responsive government budgeting’, it is not very difficult to get bogged down to the so-called ‘rigidity’ of the budgetary process. Gender budgeting is a participatory method by which we hold our leaders accountable to our needs and priorities. It is a process where we, ourselves, can ask even the most basic questions such as, ‘how much is going to this and that project, or whether such projects even exist in the pipeline’. Basic questions that provide valuable information to us, women and men. Basic questions that serve as our handle in participating in ‘government' decisions affecting our day-to-day lives.
posted by Allan at 12:49 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, May 09, 2003
_____________________________________________
Revisiting Abu Sayyaf-military collusion: same old story
President Gloria Arroyo ordered an investigation on the claim of Gracia Burnham that there was collusion between the military and Abu Sayyaf. This is like instructing someone to find a needle in the haystack - blindfolded.
Gracia Burnham was one of the American hostages take by the Abu Sayyaf in 2001. After her release, she published 'In the Presence of My Enemies' which describes her experiences as one of the hostages.
When an order to investigate is accompanied with an expression of confidence with the military, one doubts the objectivity of such a process. In addition, let us not be fooled by this sudden 'get-to-the-bottom-of-this attitude' by Malacanang as if this is a new issue.
'The Muslim community on Basilan is especially sceptical of the US role there, because they argue that the Philippines military is at least as much to blame for the endemic violence on their island as the various rebel groups. They point out several occasions on which the military appears to have colluded with, rather than fought, Abu Sayyaf - notably in June 2001 in the town of Lamitan. At the time the Abu Sayyaf faction holding the two American hostages and several Filipinos was surrounded - but troops were ordered to pull back and at the same time a large quantity of cash was handed over to the rebels to get two of the Filipinos released. The Abu Sayyaf gunmen slipped away, and held on to their American captives until the botched rescue attempt a year later.'
'Salonga has publicly stated that the Abu Sayyaf is a group of common criminals covered already under civil law. They have not been dealt with because of corruption. Payoffs are made to the local government and military by the Abu Sayyaf using some of the huge kidnap ransoms they collect.'
In October of the same year, the House Committee on National Defense cleared the military of the alleged collusion with Abu Sayyaf and dismissed the allegations as mere 'speculations'. Have the recommendations of the Committee been acted upon by Malacanang and the concerned agencies? Senator Ramon Magsaysay Jr., chair of the defense committee, stressed that since the committee submitted its report in August last year, 'the concerned agencies had yet to say what they have done' to the recommendations.
Make no mistake about it. This collusion issue has been with us for quite some time now. So will this new investigation lead us closer to the truth? I hope so, but only if Malacanang displays political will - if ever it has one.
posted by Allan at 11:48 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, May 05, 2003
_____________________________________________
Terrorism and Development: Using Social and Economic Development Policies to Inhibit a Resurgence of Terrorism
This study examines development policies by three countries - Israel, the Philippines, and the United Kingdom - to inhibit the resurgence of terrorist violence [emphasis supplied]. It highlights the benefits and shortcomings of using social and economic development as a way to counter terrorism. In the Philippines' case, the study assessed the 1996 Davao Consensus, which created the Autonomous Region of Muslim Minadanao (ARMM).
With respect to the Philippines, some conclusions deserve to be highlighted. The study concludes that social and economic development can discourage terrorist recruits. However, when inadequately funded, such programs are likely to discourage local communities and renew support for violence. The study also emphasizes the downside of having poor (preparation and) implementation of programs - especially when large-scale projects were undertaken without community-based needs assessment. In simple terms, the Philippine government implemented the projects they wanted, not the projects the communities needed. Finally, the study ended by saying that 'development policies alone do not eliminate terrorism'. They are most effective when integrated into a wider socio-political context.
The study should be commended for identifying 'generic' lessons - the upsides and downsides in using development as a counterterrorism tool. After reading the report from cover to cover, however, one is left wondering whether the authors have some idea on how to operationalize the lessons learned. For example, more than community-based needs assessments, what facets of social mobilization and/or community organizing should be looked into so that the women and men in the community would feel they are the driving force, and not just some passive recipients of mana from the central government, or from a foreign government or organization?
As a matter of framework, there are three things that should go into any counterterrorism strategy - social and economic development (specifically, poverty alleviation), military strategy (including reforms in the military), and a third component I call the 'soft approach' to counterterrorism --- trust-building through community organizing and advocacy.
Of course, there is a big difference between terrorism and insurgency. MNLF is not a terrorist group. One would expect RAND to know better because it published a paper on 'Trends on Outside Support for Insurgent Movements' where it distinguished insurgency from terrorism. In contrast to terrorirm, insurgency has a distinct aim to 'create an alternative government capable of controlling a given area' (Byman, Chalk, et al. 2001. Trends on Outside Support for Insurgent Movements. RAND.). Let's just assume that this is one honest mistake.
Having made that distinction (lest I be accused of not knowing the difference, excuse me), I hope that President Arroyo's 'Mindanao Natin' is not mana from central government. I hope it is not just a compilation of existing efforts, spiced up with one or two new government programs. Hope. That is what one can do, especially if one knows that the issue lies deeper and more basic than just development and peace - LAND.
posted by Allan at 8:09 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Saturday, April 26, 2003
_____________________________________________
An autopsy on SARS-victim Adela Catalon's father showed the elder Catalon had died from pneumonia according to Health Secretary Manuel Dayrit. This is the first confirmed local transmission. Dayrit said the lungs showed bronchopneumonia, which could have been the immediate cause of death.
The first thing that comes to my mind is the corona virus and whether or not the virus was found in the autopsy (it was not mentioned in the news report). Or whether this is really SARS or regular pneumonia. However, given that this thing is being blown out of proportions, in the minds of people, it does not matter whether Philippines is 'SARS-free' or not. SARS is here and that's what matters.
Try coughing and people will look at you as if you're a carrier or something. Try calling in sick and report to work the following day. The first question they'll ask is, 'do you have SARS?'
Congressional circus II: Senator proposes to remove doorknobs or close the senate
As if one congressman's proposal to include intentional sneezing as an act of terror is not enough, this time, a senator may have expressed his concern too much over the SARS epidemic. Senator Noli De Castro asked the senate if they need to remove all the doorknobs or even close the senate. To this, Senate President Franklin Drilon declared, "I'm not taking this seriously. End of the story."
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, April 25, 2003
_____________________________________________
Congressional circus
Intentional sneezing to be included as an act of terror? Click here to get a taste of congressional circus in the Philippines. Our representatives in congress forgot to include intentional coughing, and intentional spitting on someone's face especially if the face belongs to a representative.
I've seen debates in Singapore and UK parliaments broadcasted on TV and on the web. I must admit their debates are not as 'entertaining' as ours, to say the least.
posted by Allan at 9:58 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, April 24, 2003
_____________________________________________
When international diplomacy worsens domestic politics: Arroyo's humanitarian and peacekeeping mission to Iraq
Here she goes again, making decisions with poor political and economic sense.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on Wednesday said her decision to send humanitarian and peacekeeping forces to Iraq was about goodwill, not money, as the government would shoulder the initial expenses of the country's 500-man humanitarian mission. In her own words, "Let's not frontload the issue of money as if this were a market sale. This is about international goodwill and democracy'' (INQ7.net 23 April 2004).
So if government spends for the mission, it ceases to be a monetary issue? All the while I thought her economics is better than her politics. When people complain that money and effort should rather be spent to domestic problems such as the situation in Mindanao, that's about money. To talk in the language of economics, that's opportunity cost, loosely defined as what is given up when one decision is made over another, or in monetary terms, the benefit that the resources could have yielded if used elsewhere.
Decisions on competing uses of resources are always entangled with political issues. Arroyo would rather spend the resources to the Iraq mission than anywhere else. It wasn't enough for her that US commended her country's all out support for going to war against Iraq even without UN backing. It is as if she wants to overwhelm US with her support.
Robert Putnam, in his 1988 article 'Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games' (International Organization, 42[3], 1988: 427-460), discussed how national political leaders must come to terms with domestic and international stakeholders. While it is clear that domestic politics and international relations are often entangled, it is generally pointless to debate whether domestic politics determine international relations or the other way around. In Arroyo's case, however, it is crystal clear that her international diplomacy (or diplomatic relations with US, to be exact) is taking its toll on domestic politics.
So don't blame the President's detractors if they want to impeach her even if it's almost 2004. A colleague of mine once said, 'We get the leaders we deserve.' Maybe he's right - if, and only if, we do nothing about it.
posted by Allan at 11:28 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
_____________________________________________
How can the government of the Philippines improve compliance to the gender-responsive budgeting policy?
The question hangs in the so-called gender-circle in the Philippines for several years now. This study was completed in November 2002 in an attempt to answer the question based on a succint and no-nonsense policy analysis. The title of the paper is 'Improving Compliance to the Gender-Responsive Budgeting Policy in the Philippines: The Inside-Outside Model'. This is obviously not my usual post.
Gender-responsive budgeting in the Philippines take the form of a quota on agencies' budgets. Section 28 (or 27, it sometimes changes from year to year) of the General Appropriations Act mandates agencies, GOCCs, LGUs and other instrumentalities to utilize at least 5% of their respective budgets to programs addressing women's needs/rights. Only the Philippines uses a quota in its gender-responsive budgeting. UNDP, in its Human Development Report 2002: Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World (page 80), defines gender-responsive budgets as '…not separate budgets for women and girls. Rather, they are analyses of public spending through the lens of gender' (UNDP 2002). This definition is based on different counties’ initiatives. Not surprisingly, it does not cover Philippines’ unique 'model'.
Although the Philippines started the policy on gender-responsive budgeting earlier than most countries, compliance rate among national government agencies is low. The causes of low compliance are as follows: (1) policy ambiguity; (2) absence of sanctions; and (3) minimal involvement of civil society in the budgeting process. Low compliance is a problem because it leads to further complications, namely: (1) it perpetuates greater ambiguity in the interpretation of the policy and in the implementation process; (2) it downplays the importance of the policy; and (3) it does not achieve the main purpose of the policy, i.e., to improve the quality of life of women.
The policy alternatives are: (1) status quo; (2) independent group’s 'outside' approach; (3) bureaucracy’s 'inside' method; and (4) the 'inside-outside' model. The first alternative is the status quo, the source of the problem on low compliance. In the outside approach, a policy oriented non-government organization (NGO) conducts analysis of previous year’s budget to determine the differentiated impacts to women and men. The inside approach is done by the government agencies. Each department conducts gender analysis of the previous year’s budget, and the department heads issue statements before the budget hearings regarding the result of the analysis. The inside-outside model is a hybrid of the Australian and South African experiences. Government departments conduct the analysis, and an NGO analysis is subcontracted periodically, e.g., every three years.
The analysis shows that the policy question can be answered by revising the policy to one that directs agencies to implement an inside-outside model – in-house gender analysis supplemented by a periodical independent work from outside the government. This model addresses the main causes of low compliance. The stakeholder analysis highlights the link between performance budgeting and gender-responsive budgeting, and the need to look into the broader mandates of agencies – on how to harmonize their expertise with the evolution of the policy. The proposed solution also brings in the vital role of civil society as 'watchdogs' in a more systematic way of giving feedback to congress or to National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW) and using the budget analysis as a lobby tool to push for shifts in public spending that would reflect priorities of women. This feedback can only be effective if matched by a corresponding proxy for sanctions, i.e., the threat of being called to a congressional oversight committee hearing. The hearing and 'fire alarms' serve as deterrent against implementation failure.
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
_____________________________________________
Meralco asks Supreme Court to revisit ruling of its third division
In a motion filed on 16 April 2003, Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) asked the Supreme Court to modify its refund order to cover only one year instead of the four years stipulated in the original ruling. Meralco vice president Elpi Cuna said Monday that the filing of the motion was Meralco's last resort. Meralco warned that it would go bankrupt if it were to refund its customers in full, which according to its own estimates, vary from 8 to 28 billion pesos (US$ 160 million to US$ 560 million valued at US$ 1:Php 50).
In an April 9 resolution, the third division of the Supreme Court 'denied with finality' Meralco's motion for reconsideration of a decision dated Nov. 15, 2002, that found Meralco had overcharged its customers. "Public utilities cannot be allowed to overcharge at the expense of the public and worse, they cannot complain that they are not overcharging enough," the court ruled (INQ7.net 10 April 2003).
The Supreme Court is often called the 'Court of Last Resort' since decisions and resolutions issued by it with finality may no longer be appealed. Meralco lawyers may have filed the motion on the technical argument that it was the third division that issued the resolution and not the whole Supreme Court. True enough, the decision of the third division is not yet final and executory. Meralco is entitled to file a motion for reconsideration within 15 days after the decision of the third division. Meralco's motion will be deliberated by the Supreme Court en banc. Then it gets to be REALLY final.
posted by Allan at 8:25 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, April 21, 2003
_____________________________________________
Tone down the rhetoric
The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) is currently holding a Strategy Workshop on Mainstreaming the MDGs at Dusit Hotel Nikko, Makati City. Basically, the aim of the workshop is to find ways on how to do two things: (1) integrate the MDGs into the country's goals at the national and subnational levels; and (2) speed up the achievement of the MDGs to meet the goals by 2015. This is an opportunity for concerned stakeholders from government, private sector, donor organizations, and civil society to get together and strategize on how best to attain the MDGs and integrate it in national development processes. The MDGs represent our desire to move forward with a renewed commitment and undying resolve to bring people several steps closer to the specified goals and targets. It is, in essence, upholding people's right to development.
Before I turn SOUNDING BOARD into an MDG advertisement, I would like to say that we have seen all these goals before. In fact, NEDA probably can mouth the issues surrounding the MDGs anytime even without coming up with a text-heavy progress report. If you've been exposed to government reports, go ahead and pick up a report or two and compare it with the MDG report. Most probably you'll see the same banana - only this one discussing MDGs, that one discussing the President's socio-economic report, etc etc.. Technology has a way of nicely describing this process - cut and paste. Mention one goal and NEDA may already have a few paragraphs in mind to go with it.
Everything boils down to goal 8 (Develop a global partnership for development). But the way goal 8 was written, and the way it was discussed in the Philippines' progress report, I doubt if anything new will come out of this exercise.
Goal 8, like most of the goals, was vaguely written. One would expect that since this is the most critical, the targets should be very specific and will leave no room for *misinterpretation*. Well, look again.
The target on official development assistance (ODA) says: 'Address the special needs of the least developed countries (includes tarrif- and quota-free access for exports, enhanced debt-relief for HIPC and cancellation of official bilateral debt, and more generous ODA for countries committed to poverty reduction)'. Now, let's separate the shit from the bull. Donor countries and organizations can waste the whole century by merely 'addressing' the special needs of LDCs in a manner that is favorable to them. Of course there is a line enclosed in parenthesis that mentions some strategies which *may* be explored. Maybe we should be critical and ask: What does 'enhanced debt relief' means? 'More generous' ODA for countries 'committed' to poverty reduction? If donor countries and organizations are sincere in helping poor and developing countries, then it makes no economic sense to let poor and developing countries spend a great deal on debt-servicing. Debt-relief acts as a budget support by freeing funds for basic social services. It makes no economic sense, and it makes no ethical sense either.
There have been fund-related targets in the past --- 20/20 initiative, 0.7% of development countries' national income for ODA, etc etc. Every single target starts strong, attempting to bind actors to certain tasks. Quite expectedly, all of them end being written as mere 'initiatives' between consenting countries or worse, they are labeled as a toothless UN target. The MDGs are no exception.
So will the MDGs make a difference in the Philippines? I don't think so. Note that the country report says the Philippines is generally on track with respect to goals 1 to 7. The country's efforts along those lines will move on even without the MDGs. The critical goal in the MDGs is the most vague one - goal 8. The issues surrounding the achievement of this goal will not be resolved at the country level. This requires bargaining and negotiation with the donor countries and organizations. As we have seen often, the result is a 'non-binding and compromised agreement' - a phrase which implies another decade of empty promises.
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, April 18, 2003
_____________________________________________
Mainstreaming the Millenium Development Goals: From global to country-level rhetoric
The MDGs are global goals on poverty reduction, social development and environmental regeneration, which were agreed upon by world leaders at the Millennium Summit of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2000. There are seven substantive goals and an eighth goal aimed at establishing and strengthening international partnerships for achieving the previous seven. These goals are backed up by 18 targets and 48 success indicators.
These goals should be very familiar to those who keep abreast of the goings-on in the international development circle. The MDGs are based on numerous agreements signed in international conferences during the 1990s. These agreements were stamped with the promises of the world leaders to themselves and to their peoples. Then came the MDGs in 2000. It had a reputation of being the 'mother of all summits'. It was a set of global goals stamped with the same promises given to previous international conferences.
If it did not worry you in 2000, you should be concerned now. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan sounded the alarm during the UN Day last year. He stressed that 'we are not on track... if we don't do better... we shall miss most of the goals'. In essence, the general concern was to prevent the 'mother of all summits' from becoming the 'mother of all rhetorics'.
When you read the MDGs, pay more attention to the success indicators rather than the goals and targets. The goals and targets were poorly and vaguely written such that you get a different impression from what it actually want to say. For example, the goal 'promote gender equality and empower women' only has one target --- 'eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005 and in all levels of education not later than 2015'. Then the target has success indicators on 'share of women in wage employment in non-agricultural sector' and 'proportion of seats held by women in national parliament' (in addition to the obvious male-female enrolment ratios). Other than the goal being too broad for the target, it is quite unrealistic to expect that the 'share of women in wage employment in non agri sectors' and 'proportion of women in parliament' determines whether our efforts to close the gender gap in primary and secondary education are successful or not. You would tend to hope that one thing leads to another. In reality, however, the causation is not as clear-cut as one would expect. In addition, when you have a gobal target of 'improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers' (under goal7), one doubts whether the vagueness was intended to mask the difficulty of the task.
A multisectoral Strategy Workshop on Mainstreaming the MDGs (Philippines) will be held on 21 April 2003, Dusit Hotel Nikko, Makati City. The main objective is to find ways to achieve the MDGs faster and integrate it in the country's development agenda. Philippines has recently come up with a country report assessing its performance and whether it is on track in achieving the MDGs or not. Said report will be the main document in the workshop, plus several presentations from civil society groups.
Having looked at the MDGs, and you said to yourself, 'I've seen these goals before', chances are you are suffering from a condition known as 'summit fatigue' --- a condition even more widespread than SARS. In the next few days before the forthcoming workshop, SOUNDINGBOARD will issue an analysis of the MDGs, especially in relation to the Philippines. The main question we all would want to ask is this: What difference will the MDGs make?
posted by Allan at 11:55 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, April 10, 2003
_____________________________________________
Game over
Despite the unexpected stumbling blocks that the coalition forces had to go through, the Iraqi forces were expected to give in sooner or later. And they did. Or at least that's what the coalition forces hope they are seeing right now. If, indeed, the war is over, then we are moving to a more difficult phase --- post-war reconstruction. This may be UN's last chance to get a grip on the situation. We do not want to suspect any American agenda on Iraq reconstruction, do we?
I did not see any WMD and I certainly do not want one to be released at this point. But I wonder if this basis for pursuing preemptive strike against Iraq is now being diluted amidst all the other issues. I just wonder.
posted by Allan at 10:39 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, April 08, 2003
_____________________________________________
Re-adjusting the war plan
Johanna McGeary of Time Magazine did a special report on the three flawed assumptions on the war against Iraq: (1) there would be little resistance; (2) Iraqis will welcome the coalition with open arms; and (3) the war plan covered all contingencies. The report validated and substantiated Peter Arnett's opinion on the failure of the war plan.
Pentagon officials admitted that they underestimated the strength of Iraq's paramilitaries (Fedayeen) who were embedded behind front lines to engage in guerilla tactics to drag the war. On March 16, VP Dick Cheney said he believed they would be greeted as liberators once they moved in. It didn't happen. Paramilitaries wore civilian clothes and easily blended in the crowd. Even the doctrine of 'preemptive strike' will be politically suicidal. These civilian-clothed paramilitaries will never win the war, but they proved they can delay the advancing forces (and make the coalition forces look bad if they hit populated areas).
What does this say about the firing of Peter Arnett? It's pretty obvious, isn't it?. Arnett was recently hired by UK's Daily Mirror to continue telling the truth. Indeed, the truth will set you free.
posted by Allan at 12:06 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SARS and politics
The knee-jerk reaction from Hongkong and China to maintain a business-as-usual climate may have been smart from a self-interested and parochial (and very narrow-minded) point of view, but it definitely wasn't that smart from a global perspective.
The seemingly automatic response to turn a blind eye on the crisis and project a posture that everything is under control has proven to be more deadly in more ways than one. The most obvious was the tremendous effect on public health. Then, almost instantaneously, tourism is affected pulling down the rest of the economy.
In contrast to Hongkong and China (see previous issue), Singapore implemented a somewhat stronger approach in infection control. The "ring-fence approach", wherein the government isolates suspected victims and painstakingly retraces their steps in the days before they fell ill, seems to have worked very well. Of course, we have to undertand the political context of Singapore (not to mention its population size). In more ways than one, Singapore is always an exception to the rule. This was again proven true in the case of the way the Singapore government was able to handle infection control very well. Until today. Last night, Health Minister Lim Hng Kiang announced the bad news - seven new cases of SARS (highest daily increase in two weeks) and additional two reported deaths. Even the "ring-fence approach" is proving to be very difficult for a very mobile population.
The Government of the Philippines says the country (of 75 billion people) is SARS-free until now. I hope it remains that way, although I am not very optimistic.
I do not want to linger on "what could have beens". Clearly, a faster response could have paved the way for a quicker availability of the vaccine. Let's just hope that Hongkong, China, and the rest of the world will be able to produce the vaccine. And let's hope the virus doesn't mutate into something nastier.
posted by Allan at 10:52 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Sunday, April 06, 2003
_____________________________________________
Chinese government apologizes for slow response to SARS
The public apology was made amidst persistent efforts of the Chinese government to present a normal situation in the country, particularly in Guangdong province, where the origin of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is currently being traced.
Thanks to internet and text messages, the Chinese people have other sources of information other than news from government-run news agencies. In a way, China is indeed getting smaller with the advent of new technologies. Under the principle what they don't know won't hurt 'em, the Chinese government can't keep its people in the dark for long. Sooner or later, people will get the information they deserve from friends and relatives around the world.
Citizens have the right to be informed. Of course, if you're in China and you don't have access to technology, you certainly would be surprised why foreigners are wearing masks. In that case, what the Chinese people don't know will definitely hurt them.
posted by Allan at 11:29 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, April 02, 2003
_____________________________________________
Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid?
Alberto Alesina (Harvard University) and Beatrice Weder (University of Basel) came up with Working Paper 7108 entitled "Do Corrupt Governments Receive Less Foreign Aid" under the National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series which was subsequently published in the September 2002 issue of the American Economic Review. It was also featured in Mark
Thornton's 19 November 2002 article in the Mises.org.
A loud NO. That's the answer of the Alberto Alesina and Beatrice Weder. Basing their analysis on international economic statistics and surveys on corruption across countries, the authors find that there is no evidence that indeed less corrupt governments receive more foreign aid.
Let's probe deeper.
Off the cuff, one may challenge the authors' findings by saying that more corrupt countries receive more aid because donors may be trying to help them improve governance. In fact, the authors recognize that measures of corruption are highly correlated to other characteristics of countries (e.g., poverty and poor institutional development), which may be targeted by donors. When matched with the rhetoric (of donors) that aid works best when "allocated in an environment where there are good policies and good institutions in place..." (see page 4 of press briefing on Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn't, and Why), the authors, however, find it hard to argue that foreign aid should go to more corrupt countries to reduce corruption. But when they controlled for several other determinants of aid (correlated to corruption), they find a surprising result: more corrupt governments receive more foreign aid than less corrupt ones.
The next step is to ask the nasty question: why do more corrupt governments receive more foreign aid than less corrupt ones (even after controlling for other determinants of aid)? Although evidences are not so clear cut (and the authors even admitted this), one may think that donors may not have been paying critical attention to the soundness of governance in aid-receiving countries. Of course, the paper was done in 1999. Multilateral and bilateral donors may have already made strides in concretizing the rhetoric that aid works best in an environment with good policies and good institutions in place. Or am I just being naive?
posted by Allan at 5:35 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, March 24, 2003
_____________________________________________
God help us all
While US-Iraq war is at Day 6, we have just gone through our 6th day of interesting discussions on using statistics for gender-responsive policy analysis and advocacy. I feel a certain weird feeling staring at the monitors in the UN building watching a blow-by-blow account of the war. What a coincidence. I am watching the events inside the UN building. Reflecting on the events leading to this war, there are two main points I wish to put forward: (1) the war characterizes the kind of democratic process the US has at the moment, and related to this, (2) the outcome of this war is not so much whether or not US and its allies win, but whether or not Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs) will be found.
Democracy is all about influencing policies from outside. If non-state actors are having a hard time doing that, then we need to reflect on the level of substantive and procedural democracy we have. The past and current demonstrations against the war implies a certain inadequacy of the process which was undertaken by the Bush Administration in establishing the rationale for going to war. One doubts whether there was genuine public consultation. One doubts whether the inadequacy of consultation was deliberate.
But the main issue arising from this issue if inadequate debate or consultation is more exciting. What if US and its allies do not find any WMDs - the rationale for going to war? What does it imply to the kind of decision-making process in US?
More than the fear of Saddam's use of WMDs (if, indeed, there are), if US and its allies don't find any WMD, God help us all.
posted by Allan at 6:26 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, March 10, 2003
_____________________________________________
Workshop on Using Statistics for Gender-Responsive Policy Analysis and Advocacy (17-26 March 2003, UN Conference Centre, Bangkok, Thailand)
I'll be leaving on the 26th (Sunday) for a meeting among economists/policy analysts, gender experts and statisticians. Each country will be represented by a team composed of one economist/policy analyst, one gender expert and one statistician. Each team is supposed to prepare and submit a country paper on the 15th of March (even before reaching UN Bangkok). We are currently preparing our paper, which will focus on the contractualization of labor and its implications on women workers in the Philippines. No earth-shaking paper is necessary because the main focus of the meeting is to improve the capacities of countries to utilize statistics for gender-responsive policy analysis and advocacy. And the paper is just that --- a sample policy analysis using gender statistics. I will post updates on the Bangkok meeting as soon as I get there.
posted by Allan at 9:36 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, March 03, 2003
_____________________________________________
Deployment of US troops in Sulu for military execises: defend-then-attack semantics?
Amidst growing objections to the deployment of US troops in Sulu, Malacanang is hellbent on how to mask the deployment into semantics so as not to contradict the prohibition stated in the Philippine Constitution.
The problem is, even if the government restricts the US troops' action to military exercises, the troops may defend themselves when fired upon. It would be suicide not to grant them authority to do that. Given the perfect timing that this military exercises will take place, there is a good chance that US troops may 'defend' themselves. Some sectors are concerned that the defensive tactic may be used to justify involvement of US troops in combat. The defend-then-attack is a viable method for 'defenders' who have better weapons and superior tactical system (Alexander, B., How Wars Are Won: The 13 Rules of War from Ancient Greece to the War on Terror 2002.).
This deployment issue is further heated by President Arroyo's 90-day deadline to crush the Abu Sayyaf. This is nothing new. Arroyo's Medium Term Philippine Development Plan targets the annihilation of Abu Sayyaf by 2003. Strategic Forecasting, a US think-tank said that this deadline is ill-advised (only this one?) because it may invite insurgents (of course they did not categorically used that word) to launch new attacks on weak areas, i.e., areas deprived of military presence due to the intensified attack on Abu Sayyaf. Sure. And this, ladies and gentlemen provides more justification for US intervention. So what's new? Didn't another US think-tank recommend warming up the Philippine soil for US troops in case these troops are needed for an immediate US intervention in Taiwan? Coincidence?
And what if the hype on the Abu Sayyaf deadline is Arroyo's tactic to divert the real intention - to strike hard on MILF? Holding one place, striking another? Nah. She's not that smart, is she?
posted by Allan at 11:01 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Intensity 4 earthquake hits Metro Manila and Central Luzon
According to the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (Phivolcs), the the earthquake struck at 1:57 a.m.. The epicenter was at 11 kms northeast of Palayan City, Nueva Ecija.
This was an hour after I finally fell asleep. I was still feeling the effects of whiskey up in my head whenever I lie down. So I played Warcraft III until 1:00 am. Jana Proudmore died in the hands of Grom Hellscream's orcs and I wasn't able to help her! Mission failed. Blame it on the headache. I was in dreamland when the quake happened. Good.
The first major earthquake I experienced was the 16 July 1990 earthquake. I just came from my class that time. I was carrying my 1 year old cousin in my arms when I felt the ground shaking. All I was able to say was, ''Wag ka umiyak baby, wag ka matakot. Aaalis tayo dito. ('Don't cry baby, don't be scared. We're getting out of here'.) Then the quake subsided, only to give way to strong aftershocks. I learned that the quake was intensity 7.8 on the scale. It was scary, and I sure don't want to repeat that exprerience. The little boy I was carrying was lucky because he wasn't fully aware of what's happening. I was lucky this early morning I didn't feel anything. Thanks to the headache. Thanks to the whiskey.
posted by Allan at 7:40 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
