The perks of being congressman

DAYS before the 14th Congress opened, Budget Secretary Rolando Andaya Jr. had
humored the neophyte members of the House of Representatives about the enviable
perks enjoyed by lawmakers. The former representative of Camarines Sur who once
chaired the powerful House appropriations committee was invited to orient the
first-term legislators on the budgeting process. During his talk, he remarked
how wonderful it is to be a congressman: "You have flexible time. Pwede kang
pumasok, pwedeng hindi (You may or may not go to work) yet still get your
salary."

Then, he warned them not to make the mistake of paying for meals and drinks at
the Batasan Pambansa's South Lounge as it is their privilege to be served free
food.

Andaya may have meant everything as a joke, only that speaking of the privileges
that legislators enjoy in such manner was hardly amusing, especially given a
quorum-challenged legislature that has been passing fewer and fewer laws each
year despite the ever increasing budgetary allocation to lawmaking. When the
13th Congress formally closed last June 30, it managed to pass only 148 laws ,
setting a new record-low in the history of the Philippine legislature. That is
no laughing matter.

Yet apparently, the mention of perks was the very cue Jose de Venecia Jr. had
also waited for. When came his turn to give the freshman legislators a briefing,
the just elected House Speaker announced even more entitlements for members of
the Lower House, in particular, an annual P1-million foreign travel allotment,
and allocations for additional staff and maintenance of their respective
district offices. There's even a new building in the works to house new offices
for the congressmen.

What the public commonly knows is that his or her district representative gets a
monthly salary of P35,000, plus, of course, yearly pork-barrel allocations
amounting to P70 million -- P20 million in Priority Development Assistance Fund
(PDAF) and P50 million as congressional allocation for public works projects.

What is seldom known are the amounts corresponding to their other entitlements,
apart from salary and pork barrel. As gleaned from the Commission on Audit 's
annual published itemized lists, these include expenses for district staff
allocation, contractual consultants, research, consultative local travel,
communication, and supplies. There are also allocations for a public affairs
fund, central office staff, equipment/furniture and fixtures, and other
maintenance and operating expenses (MOE).

COSTLY CONGRESSMEN
What the Public Spent for the Upkeep of Each Member
of the House of Representatives in 2005
EXPENSE ITEMS* AMOUNT
Basic Salary420,000.00
Foreign Travel220,867.70
District Staff Allocation650,000.04
Contractual Consultants120,000.00
Research396,000.00
Consultative Local Travel788,763.71
Communication129,600.00
Supplies120,000.00
Public Affairs Fund308,400.00
Central Office Staff1,982,033.58
Equipment/Furniture and Fixtures21,537.84
Other MOE600,000.00


Source: Commission on Audit
*Figures for Foreign Travel, Consultative Local Travel, Central Office Staff and
Equipment/Furniture and Fixtures are average amounts. The rest are uniform for
all congressmen.

The COA lists are not at all comprehensive and do not even include expenses of
legislators as committee members and officers which, in 2005, amounted to over
P92 million. In 2004, the House spent about P77 million on these expenses.

Data from the PCIJ book, The Rulemakers , show that the annual upkeep of each
congressman had almost doubled from P2.83 million in 1994 to P5.16 million in
2002. Latest data culled from the published expenses of the 13th House point to
a continuing trend, with the annual upkeep pegged at P5.7 million each
congressman in 2005, or P480, 880.36 a month -- the highest to date.

COSTLY CONGRESSMEN - 2
Annual and Monthly Upkeep of Each Member of the House of Representatives
YEAR ANNUAL UPKEEP MONTHLY UPKEEP
19942,830,608.48235,884.04
19952,588,929.44215,744.12
19963,235,886.71269,657.23
19973,496,225.83291,352.15
19982,827,975.56235,664.63
19994,537,482.57378,123.55
20004,562,446.31380,203.86
20013,917,321.63326,443.47
20025,155,221.54429,601.79
20044,112,520.42342,710.04
20055,770,564.32480,880.36


Source: Commission on Audit

While there has not been any increase in their basic salary since 1999, and most
of the other entitlements have remained at their 2001 levels, each House
member's district staff allocation has been increased to P650,000 annually. MOE
also ballooned to P600,000 in 2005 from the previous year's P411,000. Meanwhile,
expenses on consultative local travel and central office staff were at their
highest in the same year at over P788,000 and close to P2 million, respectively,
per congressman.

Foreign travel expenses in 2005 also was double the 2004 amount at an average of
P221,000 each House member. The total bill paid for by the government for the
overseas trips of 170 congressmen was P59,413,412. 82.

COSTLY CONGRESSMEN - 3
Annual Average Amounts Paid to Foreign Travel of Members
of the House of Representatives
YEAR AMOUNT
199498,444.80
199589,948.98
1996187,176.33
1997184,458.69
1998156,475.83
1999372,988.06
2000432,950.16
2001254,395.86
2002316,201.67
2004110,129.44
2005220,867.70


Source: Commission on Audit

THE HOUSE JETSET*
Top 10 Spenders on Foreign Travel Among Members
of the House of Representatives in 2005
CONGRESSMAN EXPENSES
Antonio Cuenco1,294,058.05
Roque Ablan Jr.1,014,006.90
Monico Puentevella960,789.66
Emilio Espinosa Jr.806,904.43
Ernesto Nieva795,350.89
Juan Miguel Zubiri787,582.99
Abdullah Dimaporo777,886.88
Hermilando Mandanas741,172.72
Arnulfo Fuentebella733,777.65
Reylina Nicolas731,196.5


Source: Commission on Audit

* List does not declare the foreign travel expenses of House Speaker Jose de
Venecia.
Because maintenance, operating, and other expenses of House members are
consolidated with their basic salary in the payroll and classified as "outright
expenses," these are no longer subject to liquidation, which means that
congressmen do not have to account for these funds.

What's more, as reported in The Rulemakers:
They are not expected to submit a payroll of their district staff or report
their function, salaries and withholding taxes. No one starts asking if they do
not produce a report on the research their offices should supposedly undertake.
There is no demand for them to produce the list of consultants they have hired,
as well as the contracts they draw up for those whose services they need. As fas
as the current (lack of) rules go, how the legislators spend their public
affairs fund is their business and business alone.

The generous perks do not end there. The House Speaker is himself a source of
funds with a vast discretionary largesse at his disposal. From this are mostly
drawn the representatives' monthly allowances (which can range from P50,000 to
P100,000), Christmas bonuses (P100,000 to 200,000), as well as the "payoffs" for
votes during speakership contests and "appearance fees" (P50,000 as minimum) for
attending plenary sessions to vote on crucial national bills.

Under de Venecia, who has won an unprecedented fifth term as Speaker, the 14th
House is not likely to veer away from the usual practice. Isn't it high time
that the public demanded greater financial accountability from their
representatives?

ON THE CENSORSHIP OF RIGHTS: 13 Film Artists Statement

ON THE CENSORSHIP OF RIGHTS: 13 Film Artists Statement

"For it is the supreme duty of the artist to investigate the truth, no matter what forces attempt to hide it. And then to report it to the people, to confront them with it, like a whiplash that will cause wounds but will free the mind from the various fantasies and escapist fare that the Establishment pollutes our minds with." - Lino Brocka

Two decades and people power revolutions after National Artist Lino Brocka uttered these words as part of his speech entitled “Artist as Citizen”, the need for Filipino artists to wield their pens, brushes and cameras as instruments in support of social and political movements that take the side of the “violated, abused, opressed, dehumanized” remains.

In June 2007, film artists involved with the Free Jonas Burgos Movement and Cinekatipunan conceptualized a project that aims to engage filmmakers to independently produce public service advertisements that delve on human rights issues including enforced disappearances, extra-judicial killings, curtailment of press freedom and the plight of political detainees. By September, 13 independent filmmakers, namely, Pam Miras, Mike Dagnalan, Sunshine Matutina, Kiri Dalena, King Catoy, RJ Mabilin, Jon Red, Paolo Villaluna, Sigrid Andrea Bernardo, Nino Tagaro, John Torres, JL Burgos and Sigfreid Barros Sanchez, have produced 17 public service advertisements and short works that are now known as the omnibus film titled RIGHTS.

On September 20, the filmmakers received news from the Independent Filmmakers Cooperative (IFC) that the Movie, Television Review Classification Board (MTRCB) exercised full censorial powers and declared RIGHTS not for public viewing ("X”). In a letter dated September 19 addressed to the representative of the IFC and signed by the Chairperson of the MTRCB, Ma.Consoliza Laguardia, the MTRCB reasoned that "scenes in the film are presented unfairly, one-sided and undermines the faith and confidence of the government and duly constituted authorities, thus, not for public exhibition."

That a regulatory body such as the MTRCB possesses the power to lawfully censure political films such as “RIGHTS” and prohibit its public exhibition presents a problem that concerns not only the independent filmmakers but the general public. The criterion in Section 3 of Presidential Decree No. 1986 empowers the MTRCB to arbitrarily quell dissenting opinion and
criticism towards government and duly constituted authorities. It violates freedom of speech, artistic and intellectual expression and the right of the people to access information on matters of public concern, a basic right that is protected in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.

That RIGHTS was censured on the eve of the 35th Anniversary of the official Proclamation of Martial Law is a disturbing affirmation that remnants of a dictatorship that prevailed and forcibly silenced scores of artists and journalists during one of the darkest chapters of our country’s history have not fully and truly been exorcised. It is a reminder for artists to be vigilant in upholding the freedoms that earlier generations of artists and cultural activists fought for.

We, as filmmakers call upon all artists continue to work with integrity, independence and love for the Filipino people. As citizens it is our responsibility to criticize and point our cameras at people in government, elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police, and other duly constituted authorities who have abused their power and failed in their duty to serve and protect the Filipino people. We will not bend to the will of those who wish to censor our artworks for the convenience of the few and the powerful.

An appeal to the Senate to reject the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA)

Dear Friends,

Below is a petition against the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement, which is being deliberated in the Senate for ratification.

Please sign up with your name and organization and email it to no.unequal.deals@ gmail.com on or before November 3.

Thank you!

An appeal to the Senate to reject the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA)

We, the undersigned individuals and organizations call on our Senators to uphold national interest and reject the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement or JPEPA.

After several public hearings in the Senate, we have yet to see credible studies to back up the fantastic claims of the Arroyo administration that the JPEPA will result in economic prosperity for the Filipino people. Rather than economic growth, the agreement is poised to further damage the already crisis-ridden Philippine economy.

We believe that the agreement is grossly lopsided in favor of Japan. The provisions of JPEPA will further reinforce the historically unequal economic relations between the two countries. For example, while removing tariffs for all but two Philippine products (salt and rice), Japan will continue to protect 239 of its own products.

Japan will also gain unhampered access to our nation's wealth, including our human resources, at the expense of the Filipino people.

Job losses are foreseen in the manufacturing and automobile sectors
Farmers and agricultural workers stand to suffer even more from contract-growing arrangements with transnational agri-business corporations. Land use conversion will also affect domestic food production.
Domestic fisheries sector will have no protection from the entry of Japanese fishing vessels which will be allowed to fish in our waters.
The claim that the Philippines will benefit from the agreement via the entry of more Filipino nurses and caregivers to Japan is misleading since the professional standards imposed by Japan are very difficult to achieve. The export of nurses and caregivers also betrays a lack of initiative on the part of the Philippine government to provide domestic employment for its own people.

The JPEPA will not industrialize the Philippine economy because provisions in the agreement limit or do not require technology transfer, local content in products as well as the hiring of Filipinos. On the other hand, special privileges will be given to Japanese investors to the extent of undermining whatever little is left of the country's sovereignty and patrimony. This includes requiring the Philippine government to virtually insure Japanese firms from any damages that may result from civil unrest.

The JPEPA accords Japan a Most Favored Nation status and gives National Treatment to Japanese investors. Such provisions set a dangerous precedent for bilateral trade agreements with other countries. Surely, other countries would seek the same treatment as Japan, thereby further exposing the Philippine economy to plunder by other foreign powers.

The JPEPA is tantamount to a second "Japanese Invasion" of the Philippines, this time in the sphere of economics. For our own survival, we say "No deal!" with the Japanese government.

Uphold national interest! REJECT JPEPA!

SIGNED: