hacienda luisita: nob. 16, 2009

Please email the author for proper image credit

tulad mo rin, noynoy, ang dambuhalang pabrika sa inyong azucarera
na walang imik nang dumating ang sandaang sasakyan ng protesta
patuloy lamang sa pagbuga ng usok ng mga makinang lumalamon sa tubó at tubo,
at tulad ng mga armadong gwardya sa kanyang pintuan
hindi ikaw, kundi si bise palengke ang sumalubong sa mga hamon at tanong
habang pilit kang nagkukubli sa alaala ng mga magulang mong
taliwas sa iyong akala ay di namin kinakalimutang maylupang panginoon.

naroon din ang iyong kapamilya, bitbit ang kanilang tagapagbalita’t kamera
pero maliban sa ginawang pantabing sa likod ng nakaposturang anchor
ang mga sulo at bandila, wala nang iba pang narinig tungkol sa protesta,
kung bakit at paanong ang katarungan at kamatayan ng pitong magsasaka sa luisita

limang taon na mula noong masaker ng nobyembre 16

at ang marami pa nilang kasamahang patraydor na ibinuwal ng mga bayarang duwag
kahit ang piketlayn ay malaon nang nabuwag, ay hindi lumabas sa teleprompter,
at wala ang imahe ng paniningil sa mga tulad ni pat sto. tomas na nagbigay
ng assumption order licencia de masaker
at wala ang hiyaw ng hustisya ng mga naiwang asawa, anak at ilan pang natira sa welga,
kung bakit wala kahit isang linya kung paanong patuloy na pinapaslang at ginugutom
ng sdo at huwad na repormang agraryo ang mga magsasaka’t manggagawang bukid
tumakbo ka man o hindi, manalo ka man o mabigo,
ibenta mo man ang iyong sapi at hugasan ang iyong kamay ng dugo,
mula pa noong 1989 hanggang ngayon, at pagkatapos ng eleksyon,
ay hindi kami magmamaang-maangang di namin batid.

pero ito ang dapat mong malaman
na walang pangingimi naming sasabihin sa iyo
at sa lahat ng naniniwalang kaya mong baguhin
ang kawalan ng katarungan sa bayang ito

– hindi kasindali o kasinsimple ng idinireheng pagpapasa ng sulo
mula kay marian rivera hanggang kay kris aquino ang pagbabago,
at hindi nadadaan sa madramang kanta’t magarbong bidyo
ang tunggalian ng mga walang lupa at ng labis-labis pa sa mayroon,
sa tunggaliang ito, hindi kami manlilimos ng iyong awa at atensyon.

Ay, Pacquiao

Photo from Chris Farina/Top Rank

Magtutuloy-tuloy ba ang pamamakyaw ni Manny ng titulo at titirising parang kuto si Miguel?

Sabi ng isang artikulo, malayo na ang narating ni Manny Pacquiao mula sa mala-Palito nitong hairstyle at ‘syanong hip-hop na porma. Sukatan na nga raw ng mga baklang fashionista ang minsang ipinakilala sa ring ng isang salbaheng Kanong anawser bilang boksingerong galing sa bundok ng General Santos. Hinintay ko noong umatungal si Manny pero hindi.

Pero tiyak kong bukas uungol si Miguel Cotto sa mga malupit na bigwas ni Manny. Knockout ang prediksyon ni Freddie Roach. Siya ang bet ng mga sugalero sa Vegas at basagulero sa kanto. Siya rin daw ang bet ni Hillary Clinton. Hindi handang mabigo ang milyun-milyong Pinoy sa buong mundo. Nakataya nang buong-buo pati pamato ng ating pambansang kaligayahan sa Pambansang Kamao bukas.

Sa pre-fight press conference, idineklara ni Manny in English na ang duwelo niya kay Cotto ang most important fight ng kanyang karera sa boksing. Target ni Manny na sungkitin ang ika-pitong titulo sa pitong magkakaibang weight division na hindi pa nagagawa sa kasaysayan.

Dapat na ngang mangatog ang tuhod ni Cotto. Most important fight din ni Manny, sabi niya noon, ang mga pinagwagian niyang laban kina Morales, Marquez, Barrera, dela Hoya, at Hatton. Ito na ang MOST most important fight – sa ngayon, bago syempre ang inaasahan at mas pinananabikan niyang bakbakan sa aroganteng si Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Anuman ang mangyari, nakaukit na sa kasaysayan bilang dakilang boksingero si Pacquiao – ang kasalukuyang Pound for Pound King ng bibliya ng boksing na Ring Magazine, isa sa mga pinakamaimpluwensyang tao sa daigdig ayon sa Time Magazine, at isa sa mga pinakamayamang atleta sabi ng Forbes Magazine. Iba na nga ang tingin ni Manny, iba na ang kanyang ngiti.

Hihintong sandali ang mundo ng mga Pinoy bukas. Putul-putol na paghinto para sa mga walang pang-peyperbyu at magtitiyaga sa kilo-kilometrong komersyal ng beer, baterya ng kotse, pain reliever, pulitiko.

At agad na iikot muli hanggang sa susunod na laban.

Petron, Shell lying about “losses” due to EO 839

IBON cartoon

Pilipinas Shell today (Nov. 12) claimed that because of EO 839, it has incurred losses of as much as ₱80.9 million in just six days (or about ₱13.48 million daily). Also today, Petron Corporation reported a net income of ₱3.38 billion from Jan. to Sep. but quickly warned that if EO 839 is not lifted until yearend, it will suffer over ₱1 billion in losses in the fourth quarter.

Kung ganyan, bakit hindi na lang sila magsara? And then the State can just take over as proposed recently by senior senators.

Because the truth is they are not losing money and on the contrary have been raking billions of pesos in extra profits (i.e. on top of their regular profits) due to overpricing, which has become more intense and unbridled under the current DOE and Arroyo administration.

When EO 839 was issued on Oct. 20, petroleum products nationwide were overpriced, on the average, by ₱5.48 per liter, according to Bayan. Consequently, oil firms are earning extra profits of about ₱212.38 million daily. Due to overpricing, Petron is earning extra profits of around ₱82.19 million daily; Shell ₱63.5 million; Chevron, ₱29.94 million; Total, ₱9.56 million; and other players, ₱27.18 million.

If they could afford to reduce their prices and still earn, why do oil firms, in particular the big foreign players, oppose EO 839? The reason is more political than economic. While it is supposed to be based on RA 8479, EO 839 in effect puts into question the wisdom of oil deregulation and affirms the argument that for public interest, the market should not be left to itself.

What is at stake in the debate on EO 839 is not the profitability or viability of the industry. The bigger issue is that EO 839, despite its inherent limitations in terms of truly protecting in a sustainable manner the interests of oil consumers, has provided a glimpse of what the state can do if it is serious enough and has the needed political will to stand for public welfare.

EO 839 itself, because it was pursued in the framework of deregulation, did not protect consumers but simply increased the burden of consumers in the Visayas and Mindanao, where oil prices have been raised to offset the supposed losses of the oil firms due to the Malacañang order and where pump prices  have been historically higher than Luzon’s. 

To a certain degree, however, it questioned the lies long peddled by the oil companies and staunch defenders of neoliberalism about neoliberal free market economics. If left unchallenged, EO 839 could become a precedent in policy making – that the government, in the name of public good and welfare, could take decisive action against abusive corporations.

Recent pronouncements by several policy makers about taking over the industry and state-led oil importation must be welcomed. They affirm what opponents of oil deregulation have been saying all along.

Now it remains to be seen if these will translate to actual policy reforms.

Notes on the economic and social impact of Ondoy and Pepeng

Ondoy victims in Pila, Laguna receive relief goods from volunteers of Bayan's Bayanihan Alay sa Sambayanan or BALSA (photo from Bulatlat.com)

The twin devastation brought by typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng hit the Philippines at a time when the country is still reeling from the impact of the global financial and economic crisis. According to the latest (as of Oct 16) consolidated report of the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), the total cost of damage from the two typhoons reached ₱21.29 billion. The cost of damage to agriculture accounted for 64.8% of the total, and infrastructure, 35.1%. About 7.43 million were affected in the country’s 12 regions, including Metro Manila. (See Table 1)

Initial estimates from the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), meanwhile, claimed that the macroeconomic impact of the two typhoons is about 0.2% of the gross domestic product (GDP). This could be mitigated, according to NEDA, by remittances from overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) who would tend to send home more money because of emergencies and “will make up for the billions lost in devastating floods”.

Table 1. Estimated extent of impact of Ondoy and Pepeng, data cited as of Oct 16, 2009
Indicators	Ondoy	Pepeng	Total
Affected no. of people (in million)	4.32	3.11	7.43
Total no. of casualties, of which:	781	654	1,435
No. of dead	354	419	773
No. of injured	390	184	574
No. of missing	37	51	88
Cost of damage (in ₱ billion), of which:	10.85	10.44	21.29
Infrastructure	4.08	3.40	7.48
Agriculture	6.77	7.03	13.8
Private property	n.d.c.	0.003	0.003
Total no. houses damaged, of which:	101,278	33,883	135,161
Totally	25,259	4,040	29,299
Partially	76,019	34,843	110,862
Regions affected, of which:	III, IV-A, IV-B, V, VI, IX, X, ARMM, CAR, NCR	I, II, III, IV-A, V, VI, CAR, NCR	n.a.
No. of barangays	1,902	4,585	n.a.
No. of municipalities	155	361	n.a.
No. of cities	30	35	n.a.
No. of provinces	25	27	n.a.
Notes: n.d.c. – no data cited; n.a. – not applicable
Compiled using data from the NDCC Situation Report No. 31 dated Oct 16, 2009

Because of the need for additional spending for post-Ondoy and Pepeng rehabilitation and reconstruction, on top of the need to pump-prime the economy amid the global financial and economic crisis, the 2009 budget deficit could reach as much as ₱307.9 billion, according to the Department of Finance (DOF). There is no official figure yet on the actual amount needed for rehabilitation and reconstruction but Congress has already approved a ₱12-billion supplemental budget for the immediate needs of the typhoon victims.

In addition, a total of ₱32 billion spread over 10 years is needed to relocate more than half a million illegal settlers, including those occupying waterways in Metro Manila. Mrs. Arroyo has ordered the immediate relocation of families near waterways following the massive flooding caused by Ondoy.

Meanwhile, the Arroyo administration has also successfully raised $1 billion from the global bonds market which it said would be used for its reconstruction efforts in regions affected by Ondoy and Pepeng.

While government tends to downplay the effects of the recent typhoons on the economy, with NEDA pointing out that reconstruction will spur domestic growth, the costs are actually much higher considering the still unquantified short- and medium-term effects of losses in jobs and livelihood due to Ondoy and Pepeng, although independent think tank IBON Foundation, in an estimate, said that Ondoy alone would push at least 276,000 families in NCR, Calabarzon, and Central Luzon into “long-term poverty”.

Note also that official unemployment before the storms ravaged the country was pegged at 7.6% nationwide (National Statistics Office’s July 2009 Labor Force Survey), with the top three highest regional unemployment posted by the NCR (12.1%); Calabarzon (11.1%); and Central Luzon (9.9%) – the regions most affected by the typhoons. These regions account for 79.9% of the total number of permanently displaced workers due to economic reasons from Jan 2008 to Jun 2009 as well as 69.3% of the total number of families affected by Ondoy and Pepeng. (See Table 2) 

Table 2. Unemployment rate, no. of permanently displaced workers due to economic reasons, and population affected by Ondoy and Pepeng by region
Region	Unemployment rate (in %, Jul 2009)	No. of permanently displaced workers due to economic reasons (full-year 2008 & 1st half 2009)	No. of affected families by Ondoy & Pepeng (as of Oct 16, 2009)
NCR	12.1	40,427	176,776
IV- A – Calabarzon	11.1	22,241	509,221
III – Central Luzon	9.9	9,902	382,788
I – Ilocos Region	6.7	328	234,479
Cordillera Administrative Region	4.6	1,182	54,507
VI – Western Visayas	7.4	1,360	316
X – Northern Mindanao	5.7	982	0
V – Bicol Region	5.4	347	70,389
XII – Socksargen	5.1	226	603
IV-B – Mimaropa	4.3	635	7,296
IX – Zamboanga Peninsula	4.1	295	191
ARMM	3.4		350
II – Cagayan Valley	2.8	308	105,529
National total (including other regions not affected by Ondoy & Pepeng)	7.6	90,788	1,542,445
Compiled using data from the NSO on unemployment, BLES on displaced workers, and NDCC on affected families by Ondoy & Pepeng

Beyond Ondoy and climate change, blame goes to Arroyo and Teodoro

Residents wade in floodwaters caused by Typhoon Ondoy in Cainta Rizal east of Manila September 27, 2009 (photo from Reuters)

First published by Bulatlat.com

“A President must be on the job 24/7, ready for any contingency, any crisis, anywhere, anytime… As a country in the path of typhoons …we must be as prepared as the latest technology permits to anticipate natural calamities when that is possible; to extend immediate and effective relief when it is not….The mapping of flood- and landslide-prone areas is almost complete. Early warning, forecasting and monitoring systems have been improved…”

These were the confident words of Mrs. Gloria Arroyo in her State of the Nation Address (SONA) last July 27 as she vowed that her government will continue to invest in environment even as, according to her, the country is “safer from environmental degradation”.

But on that fateful weekend of September 26-27, all these talk about disaster preparedness – and sadly along with it more than 280 lives and more than ₱5 billion in properties (and counting) – were deluged by tropical storm “Ondoy”, which brought the heaviest rains and flooding in the country since 1967.

No excuse

As expected, Malacañang quickly warded off criticisms for its obvious lack of prompt and organized response to Ondoy. In an attempt to explain the unprecedented devastation caused by Ondoy, Anthony Golez, one of the presidential spokespersons, noted that “When you try to scientifically observe the data … we will find this year and last year as very strange years, and we can only presuppose that this is due to climate change”.

Indeed, there is no disputing the fact that Ondoy in less than half a day brought rains in Metro Manila and nearby provinces a volume that was even higher than the usual rain that falls on the metropolis for the entire month of September.

But while there is no debate about climate change, which explains the abnormal typhoon patterns and intensity in recent years, accountability still falls on the Arroyo administration in particular on Mrs. Arroyo herself as President and climate change czar and her 2010 presidential bet Defense Secretary and National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) Chairperson Gilberto Teodoro Jr.

More than two years ago, Mrs. Arroyo created the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change (PTFCC) as government recognized that “being an archipelagic country and located in the typhoon belt” the country “is highly vulnerable to the adverse effects resulting from climate changes and has been experiencing unusual number of high-intensity typhoons that have wrought devastations and anguish to our people”. In December 2008, Mrs. Arroyo appointed herself as the head of this task force so she can have a “hands-on approach in crafting and implementing initiatives for environmental security”.

Among the PTFCC’s tasks is to design concrete risk reduction and mitigation measures and adaptation resources, especially to address short-term vulnerabilities, on sectors and areas where climate change will have the greatest impact. This entails among others preparedness to respond to devastation or impact of extreme weather conditions brought about by climate change such as Ondoy’s.

 At a loss

 What happened last weekend? As early as Thursday evening (September 24), the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration (Pagasa) had already issued flood warnings and even raised storm signals by Friday (September 25). By that time, the NDCC could have already coordinated with concerned local government units (LGUs) and readied an evacuation and rescue plan. The forced release of water from the Angat and other dams during the height of rainfall last Saturday (September 26) – which aggravated the flooding – could have been properly timed with evacuation efforts, and would surely have saved many lives in affected areas.

But none of these were evident during Ondoy’s onslaught. Until Saturday noon, during the height of the heavy rains and when flooding began, the NDCC seemed to be at a loss on what to do. Numerous pleas for rescue from affected residents through the broadcast media mostly went unheeded and many were able to escape death by themselves or with the help of neighbors.

The NDCC’s excuse was that they only had 13 rubber boats at that time. Government, however, could not claim lack of funds. In 2007 alone, the Philippines received official development assistance (ODA) commitments from foreign donors worth $8.9 million to fund disaster prevention and preparedness aside from $32.28 million from 2005 to 2007 for climate change-related initiatives. These amounts are on top of what government allocates for its calamity fund. What happened to these funds?

Warnings came much earlier

Actually, the warnings came much, much earlier than Pagasa’s flood bulletin last September 24, if only government listened and responded enough. Extreme weather events and climate anomalies have already been observed in the country in the past couple of decades. The 2007 report of the United Nation’s (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for instance, noted that the number of typhoons entering the Philippine area of responsibility has increased by 4.2 during the period 1990 to 2003. Increases in annual rainfall and in the number of rainy days have also been noted as well as the increasing sea level in the country’s major coastal cities, with Manila exhibiting the highest increase.

The Philippines, in fact, is among the first countries to recognize the threats of the climate crisis. As early as May 1991, the late Pres. Corazon Aquino already issued Presidential Order No. 220 that created the Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change (IACCC) under the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The country is also among the original signatories to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) in 1994 and among the first to ratify its Kyoto Protocol in 2003.

It is important to note, however, that these landmark agreements which direct global response to climate change are hampered by fundamental issues. For instance, not only are the targets outrageously low, rich countries – which account for bulk of historical greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with the eight richest countries comprising about 65% – can also achieve them even without actually reducing their emissions. In fact, the implementing rules of the Kyoto Protocol, as largely defined by First World countries and corporate lobby groups, could even result in a net increase in GHG emissions in the long run. Critics point out that the introduction and use of market-based mechanisms namely, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Emissions Trading, and Joint Implementation have systematically weakened and distorted the Kyoto Protocol “from the inside”. Meanwhile, under the current Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP 2004-2010), the Arroyo administration has pursued environmental management and addressing the threats and impact of climate change mainly in the context of energy independence and investment promotion.

In terms of response to the impact of climate change, it has been noted in a 2005 World Bank report that “the Philippine institutional arrangements and disaster management systems tend to rely on a response or reactive approach, in contrast to a more effective proactive approach, in which disasters are avoided, by appropriate land-use planning, construction and other pre-event measures which avoid the creation of disaster-prone conditions”.  The report went on to say that “local level systems are response-driven –there is no obvious effort to initiate proactive hazard management/risk reduction coordination”.

Disastrous response

While there are crucial issues that the international community and the Philippines must address in terms of mitigation and adaptation approaches in relation to climate change, Ondoy’s devastation and its aftermath have also exposed some very alarming and more basic issues. Among them is that while the country’s handling of extremely changing weather conditions is being described as reactive, it appears that even in terms of effective disaster response the country is not also well-prepared.

This is so evident not only in the disastrous rescue efforts of the NDCC but also in the current relief drive of government. The scene of flood victims scrambling for limited relief goods, overcrowded evacuation centers lacking basic hygiene necessities, displaced families forced to spend the night on sidewalks and some in a slaughterhouse amid reports of a depleted national calamity fund, etc all paint a picture of chaos, of a government stumped and perplexed in the face of a tropical storm that experts say was not even super typhoon.

Making the Palace an evacuation center for a handful of “fortunate” flood victims who enjoy relatively better food and more “convenient” temporary shelter to generate favorable publicity for Gloria and Gibo will not do the trick. The Arroyo administration, in particular Mrs. Arroyo and Teodoro as the top officials dealing with climate change and disaster response, must be held accountable for the hundreds of deaths and unspeakable suffering that the victims of Ondoy currently endure. They could not blame Ondoy or climate change – these are realities that the country must now face – but the question is are we dealing with them effectively and responsibly?