Select Page
Palawan plebiscite a preview of problematic Election 2022

Palawan plebiscite a preview of problematic Election 2022

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

photo from Philipine News Agency

GOTCHA

written on Feb. 24, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Incumbents are using government resources for partisan ends. Public employees who must stay neutral are openly taking sides. Town halls are restricting the movements of rivals in the guise of pandemic safety. Voters are uninformed because of limited online and radio-TV coverage. Low turnout is expected on balloting day. Only a handful of electors will decide. The outcome will entrench political dynasties.

Those issues mar the coming plebiscite to split Palawan into three provinces. They also give a preview of undemocratic national-local elections in 2022.

On the surface, the division of the country’s largest province is economic and administrative. Having separate Palawan del Norte, Oriental and del Sur would “spark growth,” lawmakers said in enacting RA 11259 in 2019. Three provincial capitols would be abler to manage the island’s rich resources. More revenue shares from mining, fisheries and taxes would be retained by three local governments instead of just one.

NGOs oppose the split as potentially disastrous. If Balkanized, Palawan’s special three-decade old Strategic Environment Plan would be dumped. With three capitols allowing exploitation, the “last ecological frontier” would vanish. So will indigenous tribes and cultures. Local economies would sink, as befell earlier divided provinces.

Politics of the dirty kind taints the run-up to the March 13 plebiscite to ratify or reject the split. Political dynasties are mobilizing. They will benefit from having three provinces to rule rather than fighting over the present solo. More positions will be up for grabs: three governorships, vice governorships and sets of provincial boards. There will be four congressional seats from the present three: one each for the three provinces plus one for chartered Puerto Princesa City. Most enticing for the dynasts, splitting would enable them tighter grip of local businesses and investments – and the usual “tong-pats” (bribes) that come with it. Not only “powerlust” but also avarice spur dynasties.

The dynasts are incumbents. They use municipal funds, vehicles, equipment and staff to campaign for “yes,” cries the rejectionist Save Palawan Movement. The environment coalition complains of unfair tactics against their “no” drive. Culion parish priest Fr. Roderick Caabay alleges that a tarpaulin billboard and “no” posters in four barangay chapels were torn down. “Vote-buying has also been reported in many municipalities,” SPM says. Some are in the form of pandemic “ayuda” to barangays, notes Cynthia Sumagaysay del Rosario, convenor of One Palawan campaign. “Yes” proponents in Puerto Princesa city hall, though not part of the plebiscite, have clamped down on residents campaigning for “no” in outlying towns, she adds. A number of barangays have imposed two-week lockouts, choking the month-long campaign that started Feb. 11.

The SPM begs Comelec to enforce fairness. Still, pandemic constraints stunt the election body’s info drive. A Comelec roadshow of pros and antis was cancelled to avert COVID-19 infections. Both sides have been advised to make do with social and broadcast media.

Low turnout is expected due to lack of info, disinterest and coronavirus fear. Only a handful of locals can decide the fate of Palawan. The rule is majority of the votes cast, not majority of the 490,639 voters, says election commissioner Antonio Kho. If only the info drive can be stepped up, he hopes: “We cannot determine if there will be high voter turnout as this is the first time we will hold an electoral exercise with a public health emergency.” (The plebiscite was initially set last May, then moved to October, until approved for next month by the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases.) SPM does not have the cash to match the free spending of the incumbents. It foresees the other side transporting voters to precincts on plebiscite day.

Expect those scenarios on May 9, 2022, national and local Election Day.

Incumbent dynasts will be calling the shots. Having amassed congressional pork barrels and local government payolas, they can easily buy votes. They will also gain name recall via media advertising. Underfinanced political newcomers will be disadvantaged. Tens of millions of voters who lost livelihoods due to pandemic lockdown will only be too wiling to sell their votes. A hungry man is not a free man.

COVID-19 will discourage newbie candidates. Mass inoculation of 70 percent of the population for herd immunity won’t happen till 2023-2025, vaccine czar Sec. Carlito Galvez says. Meager candidacy filings are expected this October; campaign dropouts will be many starting January.

Invoking pandemic protocols, partisan barangay officials and local policemen can curtail the activities of the incumbents’ rivals. Community lockdowns against contending campaigners will be imposed precisely due to spotty vaccination.

Worse, Comelec will still use the hocus-PCOS (precinct count optical scanners) of Venezuelan voting-machine maker Smartmatic. President Duterte has yet to fulfill his promise to replace the unreliable, cheating-prone, expensive gadgetry. Turnout will be dismal.

A reformist congressman predicts Election 2022 to be the most undemocratic in post-Marcos history. The result will be Filipinos in the clutches of a handful of politicos and clansmen for many more years.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

It’s China that must be sued for sea theft, ruin

It’s China that must be sued for sea theft, ruin

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

written on Feb. 19, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Malacañang “hopes” no conflict erupts from China’s new coast guard law to fire on foreign vessels in waters it illegally claims. It’s feeble, critics cry. One doesn’t craft foreign policy on wishful thinking, former national security adviser Jose Almonte said in the 1990s.

China is escalating aggression in our West Philippine Sea. It continues to landfill seven reefs as island garrisons, occupy other sea features and poach millions of tons of fish. Filipinos are barred from traditional fishing grounds. Encroached is 40 percent of Philippine waters.

Total damage so far is $194.5 billion, or P9.725 trillion. Manila can seek indemnity since the Permanent Court of Arbitration has outlawed Beijing’s atrocities. But President Rody Duterte has set aside that 2016 ruling, for loans that hardly came.

Meantime, the Palace demands that America pay up for continuance of the Phl-US Visiting Forces Agreement. Broached is $16 billion that Pakistan received from the US in 17 years. The $3.9 billion given to the Philippines in the same period is paltry since it has big needs against COVID-19, the Palace says.

The VFA implements the Phl-US Mutual Defense Treaty. Forged in 1951, the MDT shields against the expansionist Chinese Communist Party. The CCP had just annexed Tibet and Inner Mongolia, and was infiltrating Indochina and northern Korea. Under the MDT the Philippines and America would aid each other if attacked in the Pacific and adjunct South China Sea.

It’s odd to befriend a bully who has taken our property, a retired general says. Odder still to take money from the guy we expect to help ward off the aggressor. Besides, the pandemic sprang from China, not from America.

Foreign affairs and defense officials oppose termination of the VFA. Not only will we lose US military aid but also more reefs. China harasses Filipino navy men resupplying Marines aboard a grounded vessel in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal. Last year a Chinese warship locked in its weapons on a Filipino patrol near Rizal (Commodore) Reef. Sealifts to Pagasa island in Palawan’s Kalayaan town also are threatened.

One venue for redress is the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea. “Seek damages against China for barring our fishermen from our Panatag Shoal and Recto Bank,” retired Supreme Court justice Antonio Carpio says. “Also for destroying our marine environment after we filed for arbitration.”

“We should not be afraid to do this,” Carpio says. “If we are afraid, then we will never be able to defend the WPS.”

The Philippines can secure an ITLOS award of damages. “We can enforce that anywhere in the world for China assets – in the US, Canada or the Philippines. It’s part of our legal strategy… that China cannot just grab our resources in the WPS.”

Carpio cites the Netherlands’ triumph at ITLOS against Russia in the 2013 Arctic Sea case. The Dutch government sued for damages in behalf of 28 environmentalists and a journalist jailed by Russia for protesting offshore oil drilling. Arbiters granted $6-million indemnity including for the damaged ship Arctic Sunrise; Russia haggled then paid $2.7 million. The case affirmed the right to recompense for aggression at sea. “Russia, a nuclear-armed state, paid the Netherlands damages set by a tribunal under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea,” says Carpio.

The $194.5 billion, or P9.725 trillion consists of:

(1) $4.634 billion or P231.7 billion in damage to seven reefs in 2014-2020.

Concreting killed the corals, and fish that spawn and feed there vanished. The ecosystem was upset. Filipinos lost sources of rare metals, new medicines and biotechnology. Oil and gas fields cannot be used, as Chinese coastguards menace Filipino mineral engineers.

(2) $12.88 billion or P644 billion for 8.4 million tons of fish stolen in the seven years.

From the island-fortresses, China gunboats escort poachers to Panatag, Recto and Sandy Cay. Filipino fishing boats are rammed or driven away with machineguns and water cannons. The livelihoods of 350,000 suffered. Seafood prices rose archipelago-wide. Half the population lives in coastal communities and depends on marine resources for daily needs.

(3) $177 billion or P8.85 trillion in actual coral damage and “rent”.

The US paid $1.97 million (P98.5 million) for 0.235 hectare of coral that the USS Guardian gashed in the Sulu Sea in 2015. Extrapolate China’s damage on the 12,432 hectares stated in the Arbitral ruling, American geopolitics expert Anders Corr, PhD suggests. He adds the P10 billion per year that Manila sought from Washington for continued use of each of six US bases. Such “rent” should commence in 1988 when China grabbed Kagitingan, Zamora, McKennan, Calderon, Mabini and Burgos Reefs; 1995 in the case of Panganiban Reef; and 2012 for Panatag.

Manila can seek recompense in the US and “elsewhere China has substantial assets,” says Corr. “If China refuses, they can seek redress in foreign civil courts to attach China’s offshore assets – of which there are plenty.”

Former foreign secretary Albert del Rosario further proposes attachment of China state assets in the Philippines “to satisfy China’s debt to the people.”

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

China has taken P9.7 trillion in reefs, fish – and counting

China has taken P9.7 trillion in reefs, fish – and counting

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

written on Feb 17, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

• The amount is for poaching, damage and “rent.”

• Computations are based on global scientific measures.

• Duterte can use it for pandemic response, economic recovery.

“We asked so much of them (America) because they have taken so much from us,” President Duterte said Friday. “They have to pay. It’s a shared responsibility, but your share of responsibility does not come free.”

He wants a review of the Phl-US Visiting Forces Agreement. But he was vague on what America has taken or how he will monetize the VFA. The pact is about legalities, like visas for US troops coming for joint military exercises and jurisdiction in case of criminal offenses. The US no longer has military bases in the Philippines. Yet, his spokesman compared Monday the $16-billion Pakistan received from the US in 17 years.

The VFA operationalizes the Phl-US Mutual Defense Treaty. Forged in 1951 the alliance shields against the expansionist Chinese Communist Party. Manila and Washington are to aid each other if attacked in the Pacific and adjunct South China Sea.

The CCP is stepping up sea aggression. Seven Philippine reefs have been landfilled into Chinese island-garrisons. From there gunboat-backed Chinese poachers overfish Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal and mineral-rich Recto (Reed) Bank. All are within the West Philippine Sea, the part of the SCS that forms our 200-mile exclusive economic zone. They are 800 miles distant from China. The Permanent Court of Arbitration has outlawed China’s actions. Manila thus can seek indemnity.

By global measures, China has stolen and ruined P9.725 trillion ($194.5 billion) in Philippine marine wealth to date. The breakdown:

(1) P231.7 billion in seven years of reef ruin.

Starting late 2013 China concreted Kagitingan (Fiery Cross), Zamora (Subi), McKennan (Hughes), Calderon (Cuarteron), Mabini (Johnson South) and Burgos (Gaven) Reefs. Panganiban (Mischief) was fortified since 1995. Corals were killed. Fish that spawn and feed in the reefs vanished. Filipinos lost vital sources of rare metals, new medicines and biotechnology.

Half of the 110 million Filipinos live in coastal communities, relying on marine resources for daily needs. The WPS is 40 percent of Philippine waters, interlinked with land resources as one archipelago. Reef devastation saps Philippine and ASEAN bio-diversity.

Thus, we lose P33.1 billion a year, according to University of the Philippines marine scientists. Prof. Deo Florence Onda, PhD, deems the amount conservative. “The value includes services from coral reefs like climate regulation, and benefits from the ecosystem,” he explains. Damage was calculated at $353,429 (P18 million) per hectare per year. The bases: 2012 studies on global ecosystems, published by Dutch firm Elsevier, a world leader in scientific, technical and medical information.

Satellite images show 1,300 ruined hectares in the seven reefs and 550 in Scarborough. Not included are hazy portions due to weather condition. Thus the low estimate, says international maritime lawyer Jay Batongbacal, PhD.

Former foreign secretary Albert del Rosario sums up the P33.1-billion annual loss to P231.7 billion as of 2020.

(2) P644 billion in stolen fish catch since 2014.

From the island-garrisons Chinese warships harass Filipino fishermen. In Panatag they are driven away with machine guns and water cannons. In Recto in 2019 a Chinese steel-hulled maritime militia trawler rammed an anchored Filipino wooden fishing boat then abandoned the 22 crewmen thrown overboard. More maritime militia vessels, armed with rifles, poach around Zamora, Pagasa island and Sandy Cay. Unprotected, Filipinos have been scared off their traditional fishing grounds. Livelihoods of 350,000 have been diminished, del Rosario says.

Philippine fish catch has dwindled while China’s has multiplied in the WPS, Batongbacal cites global figures. China’s industrialized fishing fleet dwarfs the Philippines’. Each steel-hulled launch can haul in 12 tons per day, according to Chinese publications. Thus the often-sighted 270 Chinese craft in Zamora and Panganiban alone cumulatively catch 3,240 tons per day. That’s 1.2 million tons a year.

That loot is worth P92 billion ($1.84 billion) a year, or P644 billion in the seven years that China escalated its poaching. The figures are culled from Southeast Asia Fisheries Development Center. In its 2018 report on fish capture in the SCS, Seafdec calculates the value per ton at $1,534.21, or P76,710 ($1=P50).

China poaching and reef destruction directly affect 26 percent of Filipinos, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources said in 2016. Fish are Filipinos’ main source of food protein. Their reduced WPS catch drives up seafood prices. The 1.2 million tons equals 1.2 billion kilos of fish stolen yearly by China. It can feed 28.6 million Filipinos, or 6.8 million families.

(3) P8.85-trillion actual damage and “rent” for seven occupied reefs.

Equivalence: $177 billion. American geopolitics analyst Prof. Anders Corr, PhD, presented that figure days after Manila’s arbitral victory of July 2016. He used two computation methods:

• For damage, Corrs cited the $1.97 million (P98.5 million) paid by the US for 0.235 hectare of coral that USS Guardian gashed running aground in the Sulu Sea in 2015; and

• For “rent,” $1.2 billion (P60 billion) a year that Manila demanded in 1988 for continued use of six US military bases, or $200 million (P10 billion) for each.

The arbitral court ruled that China “irreparably destroyed” 12,432 hectares (48 square miles) in the WPS. For Corr, “rent” commenced in 1988 when China grabbed the first six reefs, 1995 for Panganiban and 2012 for Panatag.

Manila and ASEAN members harmed by China can seek recompense in the US and “elsewhere China has substantial assets,” Corr said. “If China refuses, [they] can seek redress in foreign civil courts to attach China’s offshore assets – of which there are plenty.”

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Vaccinations kick off amid politicking, puzzling report

Vaccinations kick off amid politicking, puzzling report

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

Photo from Philippine News Agency

GOTCHA

written on Mar 3, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sunday, Feb. 28, was a big day for Malacañang. Its COVID-19 mass vaccination kicked off at last. Six hundred thousand doses from Sinovac of China arrived in Manila. President Duterte no less accepted the donation. The Philippines became the tenth country in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to start inoculating against the pandemic. ASEAN has ten members.

The 600,000 are for 300,000 vaccinees, at two jabs each. Malacañang aims to procure 140 million doses, to immunize 70 million Filipinos. The 600,000 is 0.4 percent of target. Later deliveries are yet unsure.

Injections followed the next day. Prioritized were frontline health workers at COVID-19 centers, particularly Philippine General Hospital. The queue was orderly. Majority of registrants gave up their place. They had expected to be jabbed with 95-percent efficacious Pfizer, not Sinovac with only 50.4 percent efficacy. Ignored was the Palace spokesman’s earlier call to not be choosy. The press outnumbered the vaccinees.

The 600,000 jabs were a surprise from China’s army. The supposed donee Armed Forces of the Philippines probably didn’t expect it. There was no such previous publicity. China state news agency Xinhua simply announced: “Beijing (Feb. 28) – The Chinese People’s Liberation Army on Sunday delivered a batch of COVID-19 vaccines to the Philippine military at the latter’s request and with approval of the Central Military Commission, said China’s Ministry of National Defense. The PLA previously delivered vaccines requested by the Pakistani, Cambodian and Mongolian armed forces.”

Duterte said Beijing did not ask for anything in return for the vaccines. Beijing also did not ask when it grabbed a Philippine shoal in 2012, concreted seven reefs starting 2013 and blockaded a cay in 2017. Its PLA just went ahead and installed airstrips, missiles and naval bases on the reefs. From there the PLA and its maritime militia menace Filipino fishermen and oil explorers in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone. While warning Beijing against any more aggression, Washington reassured Manila of readiness under the 1951 Phl-US Mutual Defense Treaty. Duterte in turn demanded 20 million vaccines for continuance of the pact.

Curiously, in Vietnam a pharmaceutical firm has begun second stage trials for a homegrown coronavirus vaccine. “[It’s] an important step toward Hanoi’s goal of vaccine independence from China amid rising territorial tensions between the countries,” noted Nikkei Asia. “If trials are successful, Nanogen Biotechnology’s vaccine is expected to be approved for emergency use as early as May. A quick rollout is crucial for Vietnam, which seeks to keep Beijing from exerting influence through its so-called vaccine diplomacy in Southeast Asia.” Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc is closely monitoring developments. Through targeted street lockdowns instead of wholesale, Vietnam’s COVID-19 infections and deaths are but a fraction of the Philippines’.

Malacañang spokesman Harry Roque gaily played politics amid vital inoculations to restart the economy. He gushed Saturday about joining the Inday Cares Volunteers. The group aims to “convince” presidential daughter Sara “Inday” Duterte-Carpio to run as her father’s successor in Election 2022. Images are circulating in social media of “Run, Inday, Run” tarps being mass printed, posted in public and motorcaded by flashy sports cars. Yet Roque twitted Vice President Leni Robredo for “politicking” in volunteering to be vaccinated in public if only to lessen Filipinos’ hesitancy.

Science, not politics, is why most health workers shun Sinovac. In issuing an emergency use authorization for the China brand, the Food and Drug Administration set two caveats. One, not suitable for doctors, nurses and lab technicians often exposed to the virus. Two, OK for healthy 18- to 59-year-olds. A survey at the PGH mid-February showed 94 percent willingness to be injected, the Physicians Association said. But when news came that only Sinovac was to be used, 95 percent backed out.

The doctors declared: “PGH-PA stands firm that Sinovac, despite being the only vaccine at hand, should undergo appraisal by the Health Technology Assessment Council to facilitate individual informed decision-making before it is administered to health care workers… As the national university hospital, PGH should set an example on how vaccination rollout should be executed in the country. PGH should uphold the ideals of ethical and evidence-based medicine, of which it has been a bastion.” Stated differently, lawyers shouldn’t play doctor.

Now Sinovac is to be used on Filipino soldiers. They have no civil rights, like free vaccine choice. The US military hesitates to do that for a mere EUA jab, due to bad experience. In the 1990s, it mandated anthrax shots against the terrorists’ biological weapon. Eighty-five percent of vaccinees suffered serious adverse effects. None of the 35 countries with stringent regulatory authorities has green-lighted Sinovac.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

DOTr, LTO captured by firms that they regulate – senators

DOTr, LTO captured by firms that they regulate – senators

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

written on Mar 5, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

The Land Transport Office came under fire from senators on three counts. First, the costly vehicle roadworthiness tests by select contractors. Second, delayed production of motorcycle registration plates. Third, the sudden imposition of specialized child seats in private cars.

All have been called “arbitrary,” “suspicious,” “shady.” They have a common thread: regulatory capture.

Regulatory capture is when the industry comes to control the regulator. Nobel laureate economist George Stigler coined the term in the 1970s while studying US trends. Regulated entities have a keen immediate interest in influencing regulators, whereas ordinary citizens are less inclined, he noted. Minority sectors win; the general public loses.

Sweet talk and aggressive lobbying are basic tools for regulatory capture. It can graduate into corruption. The law prohibits bribery, conflict of interest, undue favor especially to the unqualified, negligence and contracting that is grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the government.

Notorious, for instance, was the National Food Authority’s grant in 2014 of rice import monopoly to big-time grains smuggler alias David Tan. When admins changed hands in 2016 so did the privilege – to a trader in Iloilo, till import liberalization killed it. Stinky too were the error-filled textbooks by a clique of favored publishers. Crusading educator Antonio Calipjo Go kept exposing them for two decades. Regulatory capture kills, as when the Armed Forces bought faulty bulletproof helmets, and the National Police substandard handcuffs from a fly-by-night supplier in the 2000s. That seller moved up to become the foremost fixer of congressional pork barrels, then down to prison.

Most tragic of regulatory captures are in maritime. Interisland ferries collide, run aground, go adrift, catch fire and sink. Dozens, sometimes thousands, perish in one blow. Reasons: loose licensing of crewmen, inspection of vessels and enforcement of load limits. Due to low sea travel during pandemic even in off-monsoon, there has been no major incident of late. Still the Department of Transportation must modernize shipping as decreed as far back as 1975.

About the Land Transport Office, also under DOTr, senators said:

• LTO’s aim of road safety was laudable in expanding emission testing to 72 other roadworthiness criteria. Yet despite having the funds, it delegated the motor vehicle inspection system to private operators. Accreditation was opaque. Thus was “created a favorable environment for an oligopoly where only very few players can enter and succeed.” Vehicle registrants suddenly were charged three-and-a-half times more for tests, then flunked and made to pay again.

DOTr was implicated in the “policy alteration” and “questionable evaluation process.” It even officially issued last Feb. 21 the press statement of the private operators’ association. Approved was the recommendation of public services committee head Senator Grace Poe for a graft investigation.

• On non-issuance of motorcycle plates, LTO and DOTr are repeating the sins of the past admin. In 2013 the DOTr contracted a blacklisted Filipino firm and its undercapitalized Dutch partner for P3.8-billion platemaking. Only a few were produced – late and substandard. (That was exposed in Gotcha, along with two other P3.8-billion scams, the MRT-3 non-maintenance and the faulty Dalian trains. Refer to book compilation below.)

Now a new P979-million contract hangs, as legalities blocked the favored plate maker. Yet the “swindle” continues of collecting fees for plates that never come, fumed Blue Ribbon committee head Senator Richard Gordon. LTO officials were held liable for graft in delegating motorcycle registration to manufacturers, assemblers, importers and distributors. “You allowed big businesses to devour your functions,” Gordon growled.

• On specialized car seats, the LTO’s aim also was lofty: child safety. But there was no prior info, despite DOTr and LTO’s yearlong rulemaking. Fines on violators were announced on the eve of enforcement date. Parents scrambled for age- and weight-suitable models. Prices quintupled to P60,000 apiece within days. Senators demanded to know which suppliers were being favored and for how much. President Duterte deferred the imposition.

Another DOTr adjunct, the Land Transport Franchising and Regulatory Board, often is accused of regulatory capture. In 2014 then-Metro Manila chairman now Senator Francis Tolentino denounced its exemption of truckers from licensing. In 2018 Rep. Jericho Nograles bared its bias for one ride-hailing service that led to the death of the sole competitor. Loose regulation of bus lines, taxis and tour coaches have been reported.

The ombudsman is mandated to probe and prosecute sleazy regulators. But the anti-corruption agency too can be remiss. Recently it dismissed charges for the P3.8-billion MRT-3 maintenance fiasco. Exonerated were the unqualified Filipino constructor, general merchandiser, agricultural supplier and plumber who allegedly dummied for a Korean railway firm. Complainant Bayan Muna secretary general Renato Reyes had pointed up the irregular alteration of terms during closed-door negotiations in 2015. The ombudsman ruled that the shoddy upkeep occurred in 2015-2017 after the contracting. DOTr said nothing.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Youths are out of school, or not learning in class

Youths are out of school, or not learning in class

by | Sep 21, 2022 | Gotcha

Photo from Philippine News Agency

 

GOTCHA

written on Feb 12, 2021

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

The happy Filipino family may not mind what’s happening to the children. The eldest is forgoing college to drive a tricycle and add food on the table. The second becomes pregnant at age 15. The youngest attends grade school but hardly learns anything from online classes.

There’s an education crisis. And society’s merry existence is hand-to-mouth, with no attention to the youth’s future. Yet lives will be drearier tomorrow precisely due to poor education today.

The problem of education is access and quality. More than 2.7 million students dropped out this school year due to the pandemic. That’s compared to pre-pandemic enrollment in public and private elementary and high schools, and state colleges and universities. Many parents lost livelihoods due to the COVID-19 lockdowns. Children have had to move from costly private to free public schools. Still 10.88 percent of learners left altogether.

One reason is lack of means for distance learning, says Love Basillote, executive director of the NGO Philippine Business for Education. Health protocols prevent face-to-face classes for the present 25 million enrollees. Yet only 1.9 million have laptops, 6.2 million have smartphones and 3.6 have televisions. Despite simultaneous online class hours, siblings must take turns with the home gadgets. And WiFi connection can be spotty.

Asynchronous learning may not always work. Students can choose when to turn on to certain subjects. But for grade schoolers there’s no substitute for teacher’s attention. Most parents have no knack or time for home tutoring.

It may be time to return to face-to-face classes, says Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian. Experiences elsewhere can be studied. Education Sec. Leonor Briones envies the counter-pandemic measures in Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. There, schoolchildren were enabled to regroup as early as July-August 2020.

Take the cue from the US Centers for Disease Control, Gatchalian advises authorities. The CDC sees “little evidence” of coronavirus contagion from in-person instruction. More so in regions with low infection rates. Gatchalian cites a CDC report on 11 North Carolina school districts where 90,000 students and staff returned to school last fall. Only 32 infections were school-acquired, zero cases of students-to-staff transmission compared to 773 from communities. Scandinavia opened grade and high schools in mid-2020. Take note, Department of Education, Commission on Higher Education and Inter-Agency Task Force on the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases.

Even before the pandemic, the dropout rate was already high. Citing older DepEd and CHEd data, Sen. Sonny Angara counts close to four million out-of-school youths. Among the OSYs are those who should be in college or technical skills training but are not. They work odd jobs if not bumming around. Females are vulnerable to prostitution and human trafficking. Angara has a bill to identify and entice them to free college and vocational-technical training. CHEd and the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority can put them in programs that will increase their incomes.

The vulnerability can be seen in the alarming rate of teenage pregnancies. Seven girls aged 14 and younger are giving birth everyday, according to the Commission on Population. The figure jumped seven percent compared to 2010 and has been going on for nine years. Early motherhood takes the girls away from school.

Even if in school, learning is persistently low. Basillote cites the performance of Filipino students in international assessments. Those in Grade 4 came out last among 64 countries in the 2019 tests by Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. Grade 5 students were in the bottom half of the 2019 Southeast Asia Primary Learning Metrics. And 15-year-olds were last in Reading and second to the last in Math and Science out of 78 countries in the 2018 tests of the Program for International Student Assessment.

Students do not learn as much as they should in Grades 1 to 12. With the World Bank, PBEd discovered that Grade 12 graduates learned only the equivalent of 8.4 years of schooling. “Basically, they learned nothing in four years,” Basillote laments. The pandemic may have worsened that to only 7.6 “learning adjusted years of schooling.” Learning loss is directly proportionate to prolonged school break due to the pandemic.

Future incomes are affected. Again with the World Bank, PBEd calculated potential income loss due to pandemic school closure, based on 2018 per capita. If average income per person then was $8,000 (P400,000) per year, it can drop to $7,500 (P350,000).

Malnutrition causes poor learning. One in three students under age five is undernourished and thus unready to learn. They are the so-called “putot, payat (runt, emaciated).” School feeding programs for them have been suspended by remote learning.

The youth are the future of the motherland, Filipinos always say. Yet funds for their education are insufficient. Other countries devote four to six percent of annual GDPs to the effort. The Philippines did that only once this decade.

* * *

            “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” is available as e-book and paperback. Get a free copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe to my newsletter HERE. Book orders also accepted there.

Sinovac safety efficacy and price still need clarifying

Site Terms & Conditions (scroll down for the buttons)

This site, jariusbondoc.com, is free for your use.

However, we do have some terms and conditions which you can find below. By continuing to use or to read from this site, that means you understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions.

I. PRIVACY POLICY

This privacy policy (“policy”) will help you understand how jariusbondoc.com uses and protects the data you provide to us when you visit and use https://jariusbondoc.com/ (“website”, “service”).

We reserve the right to change this policy at any given time. If you want to make sure that you are up to date with the latest changes, we advise you to frequently visit this page.

 

What User Data We Collect

When you visit the website, we may collect the following data:

  • Your IP address
  • Your contact information and email address
  • Other information such as interests and preferences
  • Data profile regarding your online behavior on our website

 

Why We Collect Your Data

We are collecting your data for several reasons:

  • To better understand your needs
  • To improve our services and products
  • To send you promotional emails containing the information we think you will find interesting
  • To contact you to fill out surveys and participate in other types of market research
  • To customize our website according to your online behavior and personal preferences

 

Safeguarding and Securing the Data

jariusbondoc.com is committed to securing your data and keeping it confidential. jariusbondoc.com has done all in its power to prevent data theft, unauthorized access, and disclosure by implementing the latest technologies and software, which help us safeguard all the information we collect online.

 

Our Cookie Policy

Once you agree to allow our website to use cookies, you also agree to use the data it collects regarding your online behavior (analyze web traffic, web pages you spend the most time on, and websites you visit).

The data we collect by using cookies is used to customize our website to your needs. After we use the data for statistical analysis, the data is completely removed from our systems.

Please note that cookies don’t allow us to gain control of your computer in any way. They are strictly used to monitor which pages you find useful and which you do not so that we can provide a better experience for you.

If you want to disable cookies, you can do it by accessing the settings of your internet browser.

 

Links to Other Websites

Our website contains links that lead to other websites. If you click on these links jariusbondoc.com is not held responsible for your data and privacy protection. Visiting those websites is not governed by this privacy policy agreement. Make sure to read the privacy policy documentation of the website you go to from our website.

 

Restricting the Collection of your Personal Data

At some point, you might wish to restrict the use and collection of your personal data. You can achieve this by doing the following:

 

  • When you are filling the forms on the website, make sure to check if there is a box which you can leave unchecked, if you don’t want to disclose your personal information.
  • If you have already agreed to share your information with us, feel free to contact us via email and we will be more than happy to change this for you.

 

jariusbondoc.com will not lease, sell or distribute your personal information to any third parties, unless we have your permission. We might do so if the law forces us. Your personal information will be used when we need to send you promotional materials if you agree to this privacy policy.

 

II. COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All materials contained on this site are protected by the Republic of the Phlippines copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of jariusbondoc.com or in the case of third party materials, the owner of that content. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

However, you may download material from jariusbondoc.com on the Web (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal, noncommercial use only.

If you wish to use jariusbondoc.com content for commercial purposes, such as for content syndication etc., please contact us at jariusbondoconline@gmail.com.

Links to Websites other than those owned by jariusbondoc.com are offered as a service to readers. The editorial staff of jariusbondoc.com was not involved in their production and is not responsible for their content.

 

III. TERMS OF SERVICE

 

  1. GENERAL RULES AND DEFINITIONS

 

1.1 If you choose to use the jariusbondoc.com service (the “Service”), you will be agreeing to abide by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement between you and jariusbondoc.com (“jariusbondoc.com “).

 

1.2 jariusbondoc.com may change, add or remove portions of this Agreement at any time, but if it does so, it will post such changes on the Service, or send them to you via e-mail. It is your responsibility to review this Agreement prior to each use of the Site and by continuing to use this Site, you agree to any changes.

 

1.3 If any of these rules or any future changes are unacceptable to you, you may cancel your membership by sending e-mail to jariusbondoconline.com (see section 10.1 regarding termination of service). Your continued use of the service now, or following the posting of notice of any changes in these operating rules, will indicate acceptance by you of such rules, changes, or modifications.

 

1.4 jariusbondoc.com may change, suspend or discontinue any aspect of the Service at any time, including the availability of any Service feature, database, or content. jariusbondoc.com may also impose limits on certain features and services or restrict your access to parts or all of the Service without notice or liability.

 

  1. JARIUSBONDOC.COM CONTENT AND MEMBER SUBMISSIONS

 

2.1 The contents of the jariusbondoc.com are intended for your personal, noncommercial use. All materials published on jariusbondoc.com (including, but not limited to news articles, photographs, images, illustrations, audio clips and video clips, also known as the “Content”) are protected by copyright, and owned or controlled by jariusbondoc.com or the party credited as the provider of the Content. You shall abide by all additional copyright notices, information, or restrictions contained in any Content accessed through the Service.

 

2.2 The Service and its Contents are protected by copyright pursuant to the Republic of the Philippines and international copyright laws. You may not modify, publish, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in Section 2.3 of this Agreement), create new works from, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content or the Service (including software) in whole or in part.

 

2.3 You may download or copy the Content and other downloadable items displayed on the Service for personal use only, provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein. Copying or storing of any Content for other than personal use is expressly prohibited without prior written permission from jariusbondoc.com or the copyright holder identified in the copyright notice contained in the Content.

 

  1. FORUMS, DISCUSSIONS AND USER GENERATED CONTENT

 

3.1 You shall not upload to, or distribute or otherwise publish on the message boards (the “Feedback Section”) any libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, abusive, or otherwise illegal material.

 

3.2 (a)Be courteous. You agree that you will not threaten or verbally abuse jariusbondoc.com columnists and other jariusbondoc.com community Members, use defamatory language, or deliberately disrupt discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or “spam.”

 

3.2 (b) Use respectful language. Like any community, the Feedback Sections will flourish only when our Members feel welcome and safe. You agree not to use language that abuses or discriminates on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual preference, age, region, disability, etc. Hate speech of any kind is grounds for immediate and permanent suspension of access to all or part of the Service.

 

3.2 (c) Debate, but don’t attack. In a community full of opinions and preferences, people always disagree. jariusbondoc.com encourages active discussions and welcomes heated debate in our Feedback Sections. But personal attacks are a direct violation of this Agreement and are grounds for immediate and permanent suspension of access to all or part of the Service.

 

3.3 The Feedback Sections shall be used only in a noncommercial manner. You shall not, without the express approval of jariusbondoc.com, distribute or otherwise publish any material containing any solicitation of funds, advertising or solicitation for goods or services.

 

3.4 You are solely responsible for the content of your messages. However, while jariusbondoc.com does not and cannot review every message posted by you on the Forums and is not responsible for the content of these messages, jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to delete, move, or edit messages that it, in its sole discretion, deems abusive, defamatory, obscene, in violation of copyright or trademark laws, or otherwise unacceptable.

 

3.5 You acknowledge that any submissions you make to the Service (i.e., user-generated content including but not limited to: text, video, audio and photographs) (each, a “Submission”) may be edited, removed, modified, published, transmitted, and displayed by jariusbondoc.com and you waive any moral rights you may have in having the material altered or changed in a manner not agreeable to you. You grant jariusbondoc.com a perpetual, nonexclusive, world-wide, royalty free, sub-licensable license to the Submissions, which includes without limitation the right for jariusbondoc.com or any third party it designates, to use, copy, transmit, excerpt, publish, distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, create derivative works of, host, index, cache, tag, encode, modify and adapt (including without limitation the right to adapt to streaming, downloading, broadcast, mobile, digital, thumbnail, scanning or other technologies) in any form or media now known or hereinafter developed, any Submission posted by you on or to jariusbondoc.com or any other website owned by it, including any Submission posted on jariusbondoc.com through a third party.

 

3.6 By submitting an entry to jariusbondoc.com’s Readers’ Corner, you are consenting to its display on the site and for related online and offline promotional uses.

 

  1. ACCESS AND AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE AND LINKS

 

4.1 jariusbondoc.com contains links to other related World Wide Web Internet sites, resources, and sponsors of jariusbondoc.com. Since jariusbondoc.com is not responsible for the availability of these outside resources, or their contents, you should direct any concerns regarding any external link to the site administrator or Webmaster of such site.

 

  1. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES

 

5.1 You represent, warrant and covenant (a) that no materials of any kind submitted through your account will (i) violate, plagiarize, or infringe upon the rights of any third party, including copyright, trademark, privacy or other personal or proprietary rights; or (ii) contain libelous or otherwise unlawful material; and (b) that you are at least thirteen years old. You hereby indemnify, defend and hold harmless jariusbondoc.com, and all officers, directors, owners, agents, information providers, affiliates, licensors and licensees (collectively, the “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all liability and costs, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the Indemnified Parties in connection with any claim arising out of any breach by you or any user of your account of this Agreement or the foregoing representations, warranties and covenants. You shall cooperate as fully as reasonably required in the defense of any such claim. jariusbondoc.com reserves the right, at its own expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter subject to indemnification by you.

 

5.2 jariusbondoc.com does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other information displayed, uploaded, or distributed through the Service by any user, information provider or any other person or entity. You acknowledge that any reliance upon any such opinion, advice, statement, memorandum, or information shall be at your sole risk. THE SERVICE AND ALL DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE ARE DISTRIBUTED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT USE OF THE SERVICE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK.

 

  1. COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN JARIUSBONDOC.COM AND MEMBERS

 

6.1 If you indicate on your registration form that you want to receive such information, jariusbondoc.com, its owners and assigns, will allow certain third party vendors to provide you with information about products and services.

 

6.2 jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to send electronic mail to you for the purpose of informing you of changes or additions to the Service.

 

6.3 jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to disclose information about your usage and demographics, provided that it will not reveal your personal identity in connection with the disclosure of such information. Advertisers and/or Licensees on our Web site may collect and share information about you only if you indicate your acceptance. For more information please read the Privacy Policy of jariusbondoc.com.

 

6.4 jariusbondoc.com may contact you via e-mail regarding your participation in user surveys, asking for feedback on the Website and existing or prospective products and services. This information will be used to improve our Website and better understand our users, and any information we obtain in such surveys will not be shared with third parties, except in aggregate form.

 

  1. TERMINATION

 

 

7.1 jariusbondoc.com may, in its sole discretion, terminate or suspend your access to all or part of the Service for any reason, including, without limitation, breach or assignment of this Agreement.

 

  1. MISCELLANEOUS

 

8.1 This Agreement has been made in and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the Republic of the Philippines law. Any action to enforce this agreement shall be brought in the courts located in Manila, Philippines.

 

8.2 Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, nothing in this Terms of Service will serve to preempt the promises made in jariusbondoc.com Privacy Policy.

 

8.3 Correspondence should be sent to jariusbondoconline.com.

 

8.4 You agree to report any copyright violations of the Terms of Service to jariusbondoc.com as soon as you become aware of them. In the event you have a claim of copyright infringement with respect to material that is contained in the jariusbondoc.com service, please notify jariusbondoconline.com. This Terms of Service was last updated on November 7, 2020.