Activism 102

About three-thirty AM yesterday. Lea sat up from our bed and got worried that a rush of fluid flowed from her. Then she proceeded to the toilet as she felt like defecating. Then pelvic pain ensued. For about 10 minutes, she and I waited wondering if she was already due to give birth. Only when the pelvic pain continued did we resolve to rush to the hospital. She prepped up while I went out to call a tricycle, which transported us to St. Vincent Hospital.

At the emergency room, an attendant screened her while I was asked to fill up a couple of forms, one was about her admission and another about my consent to her ligation (yes, we decided that to punctuate our desire for the great future for our children). Lea’s pelvic pain heightened and contractions went more regular. Her blood pressure rate was 130/90 and opening, 4 cm. After a dextrose was attached to her, she was brought upstairs into the delivery room. I was asked to wait outside. Argh!

I’m sort of used to that pattern as it was the fourth time that Lea was to deliver a baby. But being blessed with another angel is a feeling like no other. The concern for Lea’s safety has always been there but anticipating a child gift from God feels like a new divine experience for me.

While waiting outside the delivery room, I met a man in his early 30s who chatted with me. He said that his wife had just given birth to their first baby. I was glad to know from him how he felt when his wife experienced the pain while giving birth. That fed into my view that husbands do share the pain of their wives, if only vicariously, wishfully thinking that they could take the pain away from their beloved.

Over one hour into the waiting, I felt weak and was reminded about my own health condition. Wishing that I wouldn’t miss the time of our baby’s birth, I went back home to take my breakfast and bring a few things to the hospital. Back at the hospital, I was surprised to know that the baby girl was just born at 6:20. Of course, I was elated by the news but was equally sad that I missed to see it as soon as it was born. Anyway, after a few minutes, the doctor went out of the delivery room and asked me to get inside to see the baby. Wow! I was so blessed to see her. She looked tall and her cheeks were rosy. The doctor remarked that she’s beautiful. I agree as she looked like her mother.

With my excitement, I forgot to take a picture of her. That should have been a copy that my wife would see while she’s still away from our daughter.

At 8am, I still felt alone inside Room 201 becuase Lea’s not yet brought in. Doctor said she’s still asleep and under observation. While waiting, I told the news through a text message to all our colleagues, friends and relatives, about 80 of them, who have numbers in my phonebook. Expectedly, most of them replied with congratulations and best wishes. Two of them called me. One was Singapore-based Ninong Joven, father-in-law’s best friend, who said he didn’t know about Lea’s pregnancy. He congratulated me and gave his regards to the Banares clan. Another caller was Mars Mendoza, who expressed surprise at the coincidence that the name we gave to our daughter is the same name she’s giving to a baby girl she’s about to adopt.

Another coincidence was noted by Lea’s best college friend. In her text message, she informed me that a strong typhoon is about to visit the country, named Hannah. I replied saying that the typhoon is a good one.

Speaking of our baby’s name, Dea Hannah. Dea is a blend of Dong and Lea, which is a good thing because it also means God. Hannah means gift (from God), which also puts consistency in our naming our children, whose second names start with “H”: Howell, Harmon, and Herald.

At past 12pm, Lea was finally brought inside our room. She was already awake but looked still having pain. I kissed and congratulated her for our new baby girl. Then we exchanged updates. She narrated how she labored with her BP shooting up to 150/90. She said that her doctor ably sensed her condition, giving injections each to her back shoulders and buttocks to counter the threat of convulsion. She further said that she had felt groggy and unable to make sense of her surroundings. According to her, even the remark by the doctor that Dea Hannah was beautiful sounded nothing to her because of her state.

In our exchange, we could not help but analyze the situation where I should have been at the important three-day activity of my organization. I was not even prepared for the cost of Lea’s delivery. Last week, we made an appeal to our baby, with me speaking in front of my wife’s stomach, that she be born on October 1, after the three-day activity of her Dad is finished and the money for the hospital cost, produced. We were conditioned about that “imposed covenant” with the baby. But, with what happened, Lea half-kidded that perhaps Dea tested her naughtiness to make “lambing” with her Dad. Lea surmised that perhaps that is already a sign of Dea’s being “malambing” (affectionate), particularly to her dad. I guessed so.

God was really benevolent because I was able to find ways to meet my financial needs that day. My office mates were there to support me, facilitating my emergency loan. And so was my godfather, who gifted me with sufficient amount of money to complete the amount needed for the hospital cost.

The day was also enervating because I had to do errands to buy stuff related to my “mag-ina” (wife and baby). Nevertheless, I think that was good enough for me as a form of physical exercise.

My dear God. I feel like I’m being pampered by You with the blessings that come our way. I know that I must be prepared for possible trials along the way. So please give me strength to remain humble and persevering in life. And thanks very much for another angel in our midst: Dea Hannah.

Powered by ScribeFire.

My bad. It took me three days to publish here the second and last part of the expose/white paper about a corruption involving DAR top officials. The first part is here. Now enjoy reading the part two, as follows:

SARO Fiasco, Fake NCAs and Advance Commissions – Part II

AS a continuation to the P500 million SARO fiasco, the lazy bugs (with the “s”) in DBM shared to our DAR spiders (again with the “s”) more damning revelations of SAROs and NCAs proliferating around supposedly for CARP pump-priming projects. These SAROs and NCAs were dangled to LGUs and favored contractors who would agree to provide our mafias “advance commissions”.

According to our Spiders, aside from the SARO E-06-10436 (P500M) stated in an earlier paper, another SARO was issued on December 29, 2006 (SARO No. E-06-10435) worth P347M broken down as P197M for MOOE and P150M for Capital Outlays. A Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA-BMB-E-07-0000395) for P150 Million was subsequently issued. Curiously, based on documents at hand, there were two sets of “annexes” with different sites of project implementation using the same amount of P150M and referring to the same NCA with DBM barcode encryption.

This prompted then FMAO Use to request assistance from S! ec Andaya (DBM) in clarifying the authenticity of the SAROs, NCAs, and “annexes”. Walang kopya si Usec? Would this mean that the two mafias by-passed the FMAO and lobbied directly with the DBM for the SAROs, NCAs? One thing is definite here; all communications of Mr. Work in Progress and Mr. Bigote to the DBM used the letterheads of DAR which is very unusual as it should be the PARC officials, using PARC letterhead, who are to communicate with DBM on CARP funds as per official protocol.

The DBM lazy bugs were baffled on the many instances of double letters, double project sites, and double SAROs that they would have to consult their ophthalmologist as they were having double vision. Even our eight-eyed spiders were mystified that they made some sleuthing on how the mafia operates in our department.

Here’s how the mafia operates, as seen from the cobwebs.

ARMM mafia don Mr. Work in Progress asks the boss of our Lazy Bugs to immediately release SARO or NCA for “much needed” CARP pump-priming projects. He provides a copy to PARC, and secretly slips another copy to the CL Mafia boss, headed by Mr. Nite. Boss Nite, orders his top hammer, Mr. Bigote and some close frat-brod operators to shop for “willing” LGU executives and contractors in Region 3 and Region 4A for the supposed implementation of pump-priming projects.

From the SAROs and NCAs, t he ARMM mafia boss will be assured of fund allocation for some towns in ARMM (i.e. millions for the Municipality of Datu Odin Sinsuat in Maguindanao) plus a 20%-30% commission from all the operations of the CL Mafia group in the agreed “pump-priming areas”. The CL Mafia group would retain another 40% of the total project cost. Only 30%-40% of the “pump-priming programs” are actual implementation focusing on road RE-GRAVELLING under “Farm-to-Market Roads (FMR)”. Mas malaki kasi ang kikitain sa regravelling at madaling ilusot sa COA. Halos lahat ng money-making racket sa DAR at DA ay nasa road rehab, improvement at regravelling. Cost of each FMR projects as itemized by Mr. Work in Progress, Mr. Nite and Mr. Bigote ranges from P5million to P30 million, depending on the willingness of the LGU and contractor on such arrangement.

According to the lazy bugs of DBM, Sec Andaya has been informed last Friday on the mafia operations in the department but showed no interest on pursuing an investigation on the proliferation of fake SAROs, NCAs, annexes of project sites, saying: “problema nila SNCP yan”.

May kinalaman kaya si Sec Andaya dito? O may mas higit pang mataas na opisyal na sangkot dito? The lazy bugs suddenly hid under the bed.

Amidst yesterday’s mass protests in Burma and Philippine Senate’s grilling of COMELEC Chair Abalos and former NEDA chief Neri about the NBN/ZTE controversy, a roundtable discussion about Bayan Muna’s proposed FOSS Act Bill took place in UP’s College of Law. And it’s hard to tell whether the bill warrants the policymakers’ attention, at least at this point in time.

I came to the forum impressed. Nuh, it had no relation to the forum but was about the Malcolm building, which gave me the eerie feeling of being in a maze, much less a haunted place. High ceilings, dim corners, almost no signages anywhere, and hidden doors. I was also impressed by the setup of the Sta. Ana Room (is it UP Law’s typical classroom setup?) with its rising rows of seats.

The forum was well-attended. It was SRO even. Here’s the cheat sheet: A throng of students of Prof. JJ Dissini (and of Prof. Dizon, too?) were there, one of whom told my seat mate that their attendance in there was not mandatory but ‘highly encouraged.’ The students were scattered around the place, some of whom maximized the time for other concerns. Perhaps they were dividing attention to the forum’s topic and their reviewing for their finals next month?

Now, to the topic: Mandating the use of free and open source software (FOSS) in government agencies and encouraging private and public sectors to use FOSS. Rep. Ted Casiño graced the forum by explaining the Bill to the attendees. He presented the Bill’s main features and benefits:

Proposed FOSS Bill (RA 1716)

Main Features

1. It declares as state policy the use of open source software products developed by Filipinos (Sec. 2);
2. It defines open standards and FOSS and mandates the government to recognize licenses in this area (Sec. 3,4,5,6);
3. It mandates the use of open standards and FOSS in the public sector, except in extraordinary circumstances as determined by public hearing (Sec. 5, 6, 7);
4. It gives preference for Filipino-owned ICT companies in the government’s procurement of FOSS goods and services (Sec. 8);
5. In the private sector, the bill promotes the use of FOSS and open standards through non-fiscal incentives (Sec. 10);
6. It promotes FOSS and opens standards in educational institutions and prohibits schools from offering certification programs exclusively for proprietary software (Sec. 9);
7. It bans the patenting of software (Sec. 11);
8. It mandates the CICT to oversee the law’s implementation and creates the Office on FOSS Migration as an attached agency to ensure this (Sec. 13, 14, 15);
9. It sets targets for FOSS migration for the first five years of the Act’s implementations (Sec. 13).

Benefits

1. Guard the people’s right to access public information;
2. Lower the overall cost of ICT in the public and private sectors;
3. Make IT more accessible to a greater number of users;
4. Unlock the potential and encourage the development of a self-reliant, genuinely Filipino IT industry; and,
5. Provide greater security for highly sensitive government and private information systems.

To explain the concept of FOSS to the uninitiated, the Congressman unleashed his favorite analogy: Pinakbet. The name is not copyrighted and the recipe is in the public domain. People are not prohibited to modify the recipe to come up with their own versions of Pinakbet. Had the Pinakbet been copyrighted, pinakbet would not be popular. And to prove the feasibility of FOSS, he mentioned Venezuela as among the countries that mandated FOSS in government.

Towards the end of his talk, Rep. Casiño admitted that the FOSS Act Bill has been in a stiff battle. In fact, in the previous Congress, only three legislators expressed support of the bill. It underwent only one hearing and was overtaken by events. This Congress, Bayan Muna wanted to breathe a new life to it by refiling it as House Bill 1716. He further told the attendees that the Congress itself has been a captive market for Microsoft, because the latter has been able to set up an E-learning center in Congress and provided free laptops (?) to few congresspersons. Although, he couldn’t see why government cannot see the light. “My entire office has gone open source already. The Supreme Court already uses OpenOffice, and so does the DOJ,” he enthused. Finally, he said that there’s nothing wrong with free choice so long as it is an informed one.

The Congressman had to leave immediately after his talk. But he left behind him his Chief of Staff, Marco Polo (?), whom he assigned to answer questions for him during an open forum afterwards. Two lawyers gave their reactions to the bill. Atty. Dizon, I understand the Bill’s consultant, gave his own take about the positive aspects of the bill, namely: a) developing local capacity and industry, b) reducing imports, conserving foreign exchange, c) enhancing national security, d) reducing copyright infringement, e) enabling localization, f) increasing competition, g) access to information, and h) encouraging cooperation.

Atty. Dizon further gave his comments. Unfortunately, I couldn’t make out all of what he said but the ones that I picked up were that the bill: a) is aggressive in policy and targets, b) has not elaborated further on the definition of FOSS, and, c) must not merely focus on the TCO side but on the technology transfer and access to know-how. Then, it was Atty. Dissini’s turn to speak. He seemed to suggest that FOSS must be subjected to the marketplace. If FOSS is not yet ready for the market and government gives special treatment of it, then we’re in for a big trouble in the end. FOSS must be able to compete with the proprietary softwares in terms of companies that are ready to provide FOSS services.

At the open forum, Prof. Feria was the first one to give his view of the bill. He feared that the bill will fail just because there is not enough infrastructure to support the adoption of FOSS. FMA’s Al Alegre agreed with Prof. Feria and further advised that to make sure that we won’t practicaly lose at the end, we may either come up with a separate bill on the bill’s ‘winnable’ aspects or change the bill so that it softens on the radical aspects and highlights the acceptable ones. He specified ‘open standards and open formats’ as two of these aspects. He also advised that the Bill consider the eco-system that currently prevails as far as softwares and ICT are concerned.

A director from a government-owned corporation that provides ICT services to government services (I didn’t get the names) described the bill as “a loaded gun poked on a child.” He claimed that the Bill misses out on the realities. He said that government lacks the mechanisms for successful ICT projects as well as the expertise to sustain them. It’s not enough that you provide softwares without giving consideration of support. His point was basically echoed by another lady who claimed to be a “partner” of Microsoft and Oracle and an open source advocate herself. (I think that she said that she’s been involved in POSITIVE [Philippine Open Source Initiative] that aims to promote open source technologies in institutions and key industries. She said that there are already 240 schools that have adopted open source in various ways.)

That lady sounded like mouthpiece of the proprietary software world, despite her saying that she’s an open source advocate and that FOSS and proprietary softwares can co-exist. She said that people should be given a free choice particularly in situations when proprietary solutions are better than open source ones. She also said that mandating FOSS will kill the software industry. I found her funny by saying that government cannot automatically choose FOSS because it’s a (product) brand, a no-no in the procurement process. What?

I was surprised by the apparent unpreparedness of the Rep. Casino’s Chief of Staff to react to the points raised. He could only participate or engage in the discussion through general statements and an assurance that the points raised by the participants will be considered. Also, when I asked him if BM will get prepared during Congress hearings through feasibility studies, he did not answer directly. He just said that Cong. Casino will be prepared to face the Congressmen. When Al asked him how many Congressmen have signified support for the bill, he initially said that the Bill is not actually difficult to seek supporters as it “crosses party lines”, and later said there are 10 (in contrast to 3 that Casino was quoted by inquirer.net). When further pushed to specify the names, he could not do so except to name Peter Cayetano and Chiz Escudero, who are now Senators themselves. I could only imagine that four of the 10 supporters are representatives from Bayan Muna, Gabriela, and Anakpawis. I think that the Bill, as it is today, is more acceptable under a more democratic (or socialist) government, or when government leaders truly espouse national sovereignty and people-based development.

Indeed, the proposed Bill, with all its noble intentions, will be in a very stiff battle in Congress. If Bayan Muna will not consider the comments from both the progressives who are not necessarily radical and techies who are not necessarily conservative or close-minded, the Bill will just become a losing battle. For the first type, has BM really consulted those outside its own network? For the second type, has BM tried to rub elbows with “Microsoft-friendly” software developers and user communities?

As the bill touches on highly ideological and theoretical concepts, BM must exhaust all means to debate with those with contending views.

I think that it would be better if Bayan Muna goes back to the drawing board and reflects: Are we really doing a great service to FOSS by not letting it fail in the end? I’m an out-and-out FOSS advocate (I bash Windows at the slightest opportunity) so I don’t want my FOSS advocacy, our FOSS advocacy, to fail. After all, our advocacies are not only confined at the halls of Congress. With our without the bill, we need to increase the FOSS tribe down to the grassroots level. And I’m sure that if there’s critical mass to push for FOSS, the FOSS bill, with all the necessary changes to it, will win hands down.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The writing on the wall says that Burma is on its way to achieving real freedom from military dictatorship. More and more Burmese people have joined over 30,000 monks who are in the forefront of the march since Monday. This has ushered in the groundswell of the movement that opposes the current form of government in Burma, which has not done any to address the country’s chronic problems of poverty, lack of access to basic social services, and the general feeling of insecurity in the society.

As of this writing, there are already over 100,000 protesters. And people remain unfazed despite the draconian curfew rule that the government has just promulgated. (See Yahoo! News slideshow on Myanmar protests.)

The Burmese people need our help. Let’s pray for the success of their cause, that there may be no bloodshed as a result of government’s counter-pressure to stop them. Let’s also sign up to two online petitions that are targetted to gather support from the world and to pressure other governments and the UN Security Council to intervene in the seemingly insurmountable political crisis in Burma:

An appeal to the UN Security Council to protect the people of Burma

Stand with the Burmese Protesters

Let’s prod all our fellow bloggers and online loved ones and friends to do the same: Pray for the safety and success of the Burmese protesters and sign the online petitions.

Powered by ScribeFire.

It’s great to know that IBM has joined the efforts to propagate open source office suites using ODF format. Thanks to the announcement over PLUG mailing list, I came to know about IBM Lotus Symphony. Followed the link and readily installed the suite in my laptop computer.

However, the long time it took me to install the package had me suspect that Symphony would run slow in my laptop. And it excruciatingly did. I came back to the thread about the IBM announcement and found out that the Beta version was specifically meant for Suse Linux Enterprise 10 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, which require 900MB disk space minimum, and 1G RAM memory minimum. Tsk, tsk. I’m to blame because I didn’t refer to the Requirements page.

Two comments affirmed my glitchy exploration into Symphony:

1. “It installs under Ubuntu Feisty. But that’s about it. I see in the program menu, bu it doesn’t run. I have to go back and look at their prerequisites.”
2. “Install fine with Fedora 7 but I can say oOo still opens much faster. Its built heavily on Java and Eclipse technology which probably good because because plug-in development is very ccessible. It also uses its owned bundled IBM java version.”

On the positive side, Symphony appears to be the answer to Microsoft Office 2007 for its ‘Windowsy” look. It’s also user-friendlier in terms of the context-sensitive task panes at the right side of the window. But still, the bad news is that Symphony does not have equivalents for OpenOffice.org’s Base, Draw, and Math.

A day after the IBM-announcement post, I then learned about the official release of OpenOffice.org’s latest version at 2.3. Initially, I downloaded and installed it from OpenOffice.org’s site. No major changes except minor yet important ones. I tried to explore the Base and Impress and I felt that few  annoyances I had experienced were resolved already. With Base, the form and report wizards have come back. With Impress, handouts layout options were a bit changed for the better.

It’s unfair to compare Symphony from OpenOffice.org at this point in time. To Symphony, good luck. To OpenOffice.org, continue to rock.

This is my first time to publish over my blog “white papers” I’m receiving over email. What follows is one of two related white papers I’ve received from Timone Tumba (what an anonymous name) regarding alleged corruption at the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) involving top officials. I understand that it is the white paper’s purpose to catch the attention of legislators and concerned authorities.

Being a concerned citizen and an advocate of authentic agrarian reform, I think that there may be truth in the expose and should therefore warrant the public’s attention. So, here’s the text of the white paper. Do note that I didn’t use specific names to save me from possible incrimination.

P500M SARO scramble and bungled money-making operations reveals Mafia-like operations in DAR

20 September 2007

Two separate letters to the DBM from our top officials would later reveal a modus operandi being employed by mafiosos in DAR to suck out CARP funds in the guise of improving the lives of agrarian reform beneficiaries.

Both letters were dated and sent on the same day, January 30, 2007. One letter signed by Mr. Work in Progress for his penchant use of “its work in progress” whenever confronted with various issues by the media, requested for the release of National Cash Allotment or NCA for pump priming projects under CARP, while another letter was signed by Mr. Bigote, requesting for the release of Special Allotment Release Order or SARO also for the same pump priming projects under CARP.

The letter of Mr. Bigote has an attached list of project areas for the implementation of the pump priming projects with corresponding amount of project cost. Notably, the P500 million, as per Mr. Bigote’s long list, would be utilized entirely for selected municipalities in Region 4-A and two municipalities in Bulacan.

The SARO No. E-06-10436 with an amount of P500 million was actually issued on December 28, 2006 by the Department of Budget and Management for the purpose of “To cover requirements of Pump-Priming projects under CARP” and charged against the general automatic appropriations for RA 6657 and EO 228.

According to our lazy bugs in DBM, a copy of the SARO No. E-06-10436 was already released to DAR in mid-January and that DBM was surprise to receive two letters of the same date from Mr. Work-in-Progress and Mr. Bigote. “Nag-kukurutan na naman siguro dyan sa department nyo” surmised the lazy bug.

What the DBM insects doesn’t know are the brewing conflicts from amongst the big time mafiosos in our department. There are two groups of mafiosos in our midst. The first group is identified with Mr. Work in Progress (or the ARMM mafia) and the other one headed by Mr. Nite (or the CL mafia). Mr. Bigote is identified with the CL mafia.

At the beginning of the SARO fiasco, Mr. Bigote tried to snatch the money allocated under SARO from the ARMM mafia, and overeagerly followed up with the DBM to have it released immediately to the DAR Region 4A in which he is the Regional Director. Mr. Bigote even dangled the SARO No. E-06-10436 with his favorite town mayors in Rizal and favored contractor saying “its in the bag!”.

But unknown to Mr. Bigote, our quicker Mr. Work in Progress has already got hold of the money in February and as of March 2007 has already sent P200 million to ARMM, P200 million to different politicos under the Lakas-CMD-UMDJ and Kampi, and P100 million as personal reward! Teka, pang pump-priming ng CARP projects yan ah…hoy!

Meanwhile in the municipalities of Teresa, Baras, and Tanay, all in Rizal province, the favored contractor (MJP Construction) started working on the “regravelling” project at the prodding of the CL mafia, the total amount involved is a staggering P 47 million! And that’s in three barangays alone!

However, in a PARC Memorandum signed by a Director dated June 14, 2007 for Mr. Bigote showed that the SARO E-06-10436 has already been programmed for priority projects NATIONWIDE, including Region 4A and that his long list are not included in the programmed projects. Naloko na. Paano na ngayon mababayaran ang contractor, eh nagpa-bidding pa naman ang DAR region 4A. Paano na mga komisyon?

The DBM lazy bug told us that a letter was sent on August 16, 2007 by the MJP Construction to Secretary Andaya seeking for the release of funds representing the amounts which they were made to believe were covered by CARP priority programs and SARO E-06-10436. The local mayors of Rizal were starting to howl on the failed project promises of DAR.

Sensing that the situation is getting out of hand, Mr. Work in Progress reached out to the CL Mafia to put their acts together and immediately settle money matters for contracted construction companies and appease the municipal mayors. Mr. Nite was appointed OIC for FMAO, another to head the Field Operations, and Mr. Bigote as OIC Asec for Operations.

Teka, ito kaya ang dahilan kung bakit nagresign si ang isang undersecretary?

The formula is for Mr. Work in Progress to provide open opportunities for more funding (meaning more opportunity for kurakots) and the CL mafia to do the dirty work. The CL mafia will support Mr. Work in Progress, in return the CL mafia will be given more power and greater access to the department funds.

“In three years wala na tayo dito, sabayan na natin ang nasa taas”, where the words of the don from the ARMM mafia, according to the insects who bugged the meeting.

On August 17, 2007, Mr. Work in Progress sent another formal letter to the DBM Secretary requesting for P750 million allocation again for pump priming the CARP projects. This time no parallel letter was sent to DBM from the CL Mafia.

Mababayaran na rin kaya ang contractor! Mapapakalma na kaya ang mga Mayor? Magkakatotoo na rin ba ang komisyon? Pero teka, hindi ba’t dapat imbestigahan ang mga pandarambong na ito? Kabang yaman ito ng bansa, for DAR program implementation!

Tinatawagan po namin ang mga kakampi ng kabutihan at mga kalaban ng kasamaan…tinatawagan namin ang senado, ang kongreso, ang PAGC, ang Ombudsman, ang Sandiganbayan, ang sambayanan!

Kung may ZTE controversy, SARO hullabaloo at mga ghost o overpriced projects naman sa DAR.

Bring back the lost glory, dignity and credibility of our Department; we owe it to the millions of Filipino farmers we vowed to serve.

Abangan ang susunod pang mga katarantaduhan ng mga mafia…

In response to taroogs who displayed a “free view” of his current Ubuntu desktop, let me show mine here. No, it’s not Ubuntu but Kubuntu. (Although, I have to admit that my computer has Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu installed at the same time. It’s just me. But since isda (name of my laptop) is kinda slow [not necessarily as slow as the owner's grey matter], I’m oftentimes confined to running IceWM instead, which takes up less resources [CPU and memory]).

My desktop explained

What’s the purpose of my desktop? First, to gratify myself. Second, to attract somebody else’s attraction. “Wow, great desktop! What Windows version are you using?” A 5 to 10 minute introduction to Linux then follows.

The wallpaper is courtesy of a KDE fan who contributed it to be among the free-of-charge KDE wallpapers. Atop are links to my active documents, i.e., those I’m currently editing or writing as well as those I just downloaded either for review or reading.

Noticed the picture thumbnails? Yeah, they’re the cutie snapshots of my beloved. Of course, Josh Herald, my youngest, takes the most number of ads

The toolbar. It’s rather big compared to Windows’ default size. But I like it big, anyway. Because it can host a number of icons, applets and links to open programs. And have you noticed the clock? Noticed its complete date and time info? Does Windows provide the name of the day?

Oh, I almost forgot. I’m already running bleeding-edge (meaning not yet official) version of Gutsy Gibbons. The Beta version will be released two days from now. But I can’t wait for it. I’d rather enjoy the excitement of an early adopter: “I have it first.”

Yesterday morning, I received mail from a bicycle-riding mailman. It’s my copy of the latest issue of the AIM Alumni Leadership Magazine. Apart from the excitement about cool updates from AIM and its alumni, the mail label got my attention because it misspelled my middle initial. It should have been ‘B’, not ‘V’. I thought that the labels that AIM is using are seamlessly produced from out of its alumni database, which I’m sure contains correct ID info about me.

Although, I must say that there’s a ring of accuracy in the misspelling. Yes, my middle initial could be, or should be, V. Befuddled? Let me explain before you complain, using the words of the showbizlandia’s witty man, Joey de Leon.

I’m actually adopted child of my aunt and her husband. After my aunt had multiple miscarriages, the couple was blessed with only one biological son. That I think was the reason why it decided to adopt me. I’m sure my adoptive parents didn’t get disappointed, after all.

So I’m using my foster father’s surname, Calmada, not my biological father’s, Benavente. My aunt’s maiden name should be my last name and biological mother’s, my middle name–Vergara. Thus, the inch of truth in the mail label’s error. And thanks to that for I got to remember my real parents, whom I failed to meet face to face as parents and child, because my foster parents hid that truth from me until when I was 19 or 20 years old already. So sad because the only time I got to see the face of my real mother was when she was dead lying inside a makeshift coffin. Until now, there’s a longing for me to see the face of my real father even in a picture. And the conscious search hasn’t begun yet.

There are times when I wanted to write my name in full, as in my middle name is completely spelled. That is my way of remembering, and giving tribute to, my father. But that is kinda weird, because people usually emphasize the middle name to give tribute to their mothers.

I remember that I tried to do that–giving tribute to mothers–during my organization’s assessment-planning activity in 2003. When I facilitated a session, I gave an exercise wherein a participant was tasked to remember the middle names of his/her seatmates, after which I asked them in random for these middle names. Lesson from that exercise: It’s not easy to remember two family names of your colleagues.

I thought that the exercise was my way of instilling gender consciousness among my colleagues. Perhaps, they appreciated that. Although, I came to realize later that the exercise indeed was not really gender-sensitive because there’s no certainty that a person’s middle name is actually the surname of his/her mother. So I must have received a rating of E for that effort, don’t you think?

Haven’t there been efforts to change the Philippine personal naming system so that mothers, or women, for that matter, get equal recognition across all generations? I’m not trying to be wet blanket here. I’m just trying to propose two amendments. One, each person must bear two family names, each from his/her mother and father. (I observe that couples attempt to inculcate parity to their pre-schooler kids’ minds by having them memorize their full names only to give in to the men-biased system when they grow up.) Two, marrying women should not be given an option to change their family names. (Ladies, I believe that there sure are other ways to show love and respect to your men, right? Although, I’m flattered and proud that my wife is bearing my surname in some of her public engagements. I wish I could do what some Brazilian men do–adopt the surnames of their wives.)

Never mind the inconvenience of saying and writing long names, if that means our women will be given due respect forever. But then again, I wonder how I’d treat my real mother’s maiden name. Ampons surely share this angst.

Powered by ScribeFire.

There are two ways to take a critical look at the controversial Cyber Education Project (CEP) (See the slide below). One is the process by which it was crafted and peddled in public. The other is its feasibility in the Philippine context. This article attempts the second.

An ordinary folk surely asks: What is that thing called Cyber Education Project? I don’t have an easy answer but based on my copy of the electronic presentation prepared by the Department of Education (DepEd), which unfortunately does not give a one-liner definition of it, I define it as one that provides basic education to all areas in the country through a satellite technology that connects in real time all DepEd offices and public schools, which use hi-technology multimedia devices to facilitate learning process. (Caveat: This definition has to be checked against the expected reach of the project. See below.)

The project contextualizes itself within the challenges in education, namely, low academic performance of students, significant drop-outs, and big population of out-of-school youths and functionally-illiterate adults. Thirty-percent and 60% of children entering Grade 1 do not finish elementary and high school, respectively. Mentioned in the reasons for drop-outs were lack of pre-school preparation, disinterest in the lessons, poverty, malnutrition, and transportation problems.

The rationale cites the difficulty for the DepEd to service the 9.16 million functional illiterates and 12.24 million illiterate youths and adults with its insufficient resources (800 mobile teachers and 0.17% of the department’s budget used for the alternative learning system).

And here’s the proposed solution: Reach the illiterate youths and adults with the aid of electronic multi-media technology. Better yet, use a satellite technology that connects all schools in real time so that contents and processes are standardized. Thus, the CEP proposal, with China’s Tsinghua University as the major partner to lead in the turn-key setup. The Philippine government will rely on the university’s experience in satellite and long-distance education technologies.

The project targets to benefit not all of the public elementary and secondary schools, though, but only 37,794 or 90%. Only about 70% of the schools will be provided with satellite-based facilities. Likewise, if the slide presentation of DepEd is to be believed, only those “outside the 1st and 2nd class cities” will stand to benefit. I’m sure that this will invite backlash from the education personnel and Mayors of the excluded cities. It is not therefore true that the project will benefit all public schools.

The project also targets to reach at least 13 million students and 800 classes for out-of-school-youths.

To realize this project, a total of P26.48 billion is entailed over five years, with equipment and operating cost taking up the biggest share of the pie. To get the project rolling (for year 1), over P5 billion is required, to be sourced from USD100 million soft loan from the Chinese government plus Philippine government’s counterpart of P1.3 billion. DepEd boasts that the investment per pupil is P1.22 per day compared to P15 per hour spent in an Internet cafe. Over five years, the average cost per student per day is 64 centavos.

The projected impact of the CEP on public education consists of improved student performance, savings of up to P60.3 billion in DepEd operations, and new possibilities for the Philippine education sector.

While they are not averse to the role of ICT to supplement Philippine education, various civil society organizations have already raised their criticisms of the project. These focused on a) the unnecessarily high cost of investments, without really building on the existing or previous ICT projects, b) DepEd’s lack of capacity to handle the project, and c) the project’s apparent romance with ICT for its ability to replace face-to-face education activities. (I have with me the draft briefing paper but I don’t have the permission yet to publish it here.)

I agree 100% on the criticisms. I also want to build on some of their criticisms and add mine. Yes, government is wont to introducing a project as if it were novel and had no relation whatsoever to the related previous ones. The CEP has been packaged as though projects like “PCs for Public Schools”, e-skwela, and GILAS have failed. If indeed these projects have failed, then the more the government has no right to delve into this grandiose, waste-of-money undertaking.

Moreover, the CEP is deemed as though it is a stand-alone project. It doesn’t recognize the roles that other stakeholders should play, like LGUs that should ensure sturdier school buildings and stable supply of electricity in far-flung areas and NGOs that could assist mobile teachers in reaching out to out-of-school adults and youths.

The DepEd lacks more plausible ways of convincing people about the project’s cost of investment. Surely, the claim that tens of billions of pesos will be saved in the deparment’s operations sounds like the savings could be used for other noble purposes. But comparing the cost per pupil from the hourly rental fee of Internet cafes is purely ridiculous. Who in this earth has proposed to the government to subsidize students’ Internet cafe activities? And will the CEP’s studios provide the same serendipitous learning that Internet cafes are able accord their student customers?

The CEP claims to be the best solution in addressing the challenges of in Philippine education, which includes poverty, malnutrition, and transportation problems. But how? I wonder if it can really fill in these gaps. Note that the (additional) 800 classes intended for OSYs are set up right in the elementary schools, not in areas closer to the OSYs. So the project’s claim that it will “provide 12 video channels, wireless wide-area networking, local area networking and wireless internet all in one package to the remotest area of the country” is all but propaganda. Poor, mobile teachers, they’ll remain to fend for themselves.

Now, about the equipment. By estimate, a multimedia classroom will cost almost half a million pesos. That is really high considering that half that amount is sufficient enough. That would reduce the project’s cost by over P5 billion.

Clearly, Congress must hold an inquiry into the CEP. It must give it the same importance it has given to the NBN/ZTE deal. Besides, the CEP and NBN/ZTE are closely linked to each other.

Before the government is allowed to implement this kind of huge project, it must:

1. Give a full accounting of its ICT projects, including their impact.
2. Have clear guidelines on how the project will be implemented, including procurement of equipment and the software applications that will be used. The guidelines must be clear about open standards, including the software source codes and document formats.
3. Come up with a feasibility study, which should include DepEd’s capacity to implement the project as well as the project’s assumptions and risk analysis.

Unless the abovementioned are done, the CEP will be another scam in Philippine history. And no one will bear the brunt but the tax-paying Filipino citizens, rich or poor.

The Burmese military government’s recent move against democracy is ‘hi-tech’. It has cut off the phone services of activists and journalists. This developed as the government had feared that another wave of popular protest would unfold through mobile phones. Because of speed and cost efficiency, campaigners have resorted to mobile phones as indispensable tools to spread information aimed at social mobilizations.

Actually, the government showed “a bit of democracy” by announcing the warning first. And then right after that, the cutting off of the mobile services. Of course, members of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) were not exempt from the measure. Even their office’s landline phone was disconnected.

I can’t imagine myself living in Burma when my mobile phone would suffer that fate. It’s like having an accident in the middle of the road without any way to call for emergency. Besides, a mobile phone has been a work gadget, without which I would deliver practically nothing.

Catching up with the digital age, activists consider mobile phones as extensions of their hearts and minds. They are their last resort in tough times, when it becomes impossible for them to reach out to their constituencies. But digital age threatened by the ghost of feudalism has to bear with the “glitches” like what Burmese government did. I call it glitch because government will surely think of ways to retain the business of mobile phones while effectively curbing popular protests. (I wonder if Philippine government would do the same disservice to Filipino activists of all hues without any pressure from telcos which would incur loss from it.)

The problem facing the pro-democracy movement in Burma is that government has the monopoly over the telecommunications through Myanmar Posts and Telecommunications. And it will use all its military machine to stop others who’ll attempt to break it. In fact, in 2006, government successfully launched a crackdown on “illegal” importation and use of cheap China-made mobile phones. Even business people use Chinese mobile phones because of the better services.

Let me digress a bit. Can Filipino activists of the second millennium go on with their political lives without their mobile phones? Look, mobile phones do not only provide quick and cost-efficient delivery of information; they also provide a relative security for the info senders in terms of anonymity. I’m not saying that mobile communications are the only way. Mobile phones are tools and they must be seen as only complementing “offline” tasks of activists.

But I’m interested to know whether new-generation activists can really dispense with their mobile phones. Can they instead use a landline, a fax machine? Can they use what they predecessors loved doing–spreading copies of a piece of onion-skin or palara paper folded many times to avoid attention  from the police or enemies because such paper bears incriminating information?

I cannot live without my mobile phone. And I think I will die (or I will kill) if I’m denied connection to the Internet for life.

Powered by ScribeFire.