The Office of the Vice-President for Academic Affairs (OVPAA) released a memorandum on April 8, 2011, requiring students to submit additional requirements (notarized income tax return or employment contract of parents and vicinity map of family residence1) to enroll under STFAP (Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program) Bracket B. This replaced the previous procedure wherein students would be allowed to enroll under Bracket B based on their declared family income alone.
UP Political Society (UP POLSCi) acknowledges that frugality in government spending is necessary to be responsive to the country’s ever-changing social and economic climate. The organization also recognizes the key role of education in development. Thus, while it is no substitute for greater state subsidy in making UP education more accessible, UP POLSCi supports the implementation of a socialized tuition scheme through which the burden of payment is more equitably spread across the student body. Furthermore, the organization supports the more stringent procedures for applying for STFAP Bracket B to ensure that both the state’s and the students’ payments are going where they are needed most. However, the organization raises the following concerns:
1. Proper Implementation – Another memorandum from the OVPAA, dated June 8, 2011, clarified that the procedure would only apply to incoming freshmen and transferees from other schools1. In spite of this, some upperclassmen have been asked to submit the new requirements. It is the policy of the University not to “change the rules in the middle of the game” as stated by UP Vice-President for Public Affairs J. Prospero E. De Vera III1. To avoid imposing a greater burden than necessary on students, UP POLSCi calls for the UP administration to implement these new procedures in accordance with University policy.
2. Efficiency and Transparency – While ensuring more effective distribution of the University’s funds, the new STFAP procedure makes enrollment for those under Bracket B, who compose a large proportion of the student body, much more difficult. UP POLSCi calls for the UP administration to meet students halfway in shouldering this added burden. Specifically, the organization calls for efficiency through a fixed deadline for processing STFAP applications and transparency by requiring the Office of Scholarships and Student Services (OSSS) to state its specific reasons for rejection for each denial of an STFAP application.
3. Review and Revise – The inaccuracy of the current economic indicators being used in the STFAP renders it difficult for applicants to be accepted in Brackets C, D or E even if they deserve it. UP POLSCi calls for the UP administration to review and revise the STFAP and its faulty indicators, through broad and genuine consultation with the students, so that it would truly reflect equity and social justice.
4. Understanding – Worrying about payment should never be a hindrance to the pursuit of academic excellence. Thus, UP POLSCi calls on the UP administration to renew its efforts to extend every possible consideration to students experiencing difficulty in paying tuition and other fees.
In light of these challenges, UP POLSCi remains strong in its conviction that 6% of the GNP must be allocated to education and that tuition fee increase should not be a default option in generating income for the university. Furthermore, the STFAP should not be used as a pretext for reducing state subsidy. UP POLSCi urges the government to increase UP’s budget in accordance with its status as a national university.
No deserving student who desires a UP education should ever be denied for financial reasons. This is UP POLSCi’s vision for our University. While difficult, UP POLSCi believes that through cooperation among students, the administration and all the University’s stakeholders, UP will rise to this challenge.
[1] Llaneta, C. A. (2011, July 1). No STFAP re-bracketing, no tuition increase – UP officials. UP Newsletter, (Volume xxxii Number 7), ¶ 4-16. Retrieved July 31, 2011 from http://up.edu.ph/upnewsletter.php?i=1489

Statement of Solidarity for the People of Norway

The University of the Philippines Political Society (UP POLSCi), an organization of political science students, young leaders, and activists, sends its sincere condolences to the people of Norway, in connection with the Oslo and Utøya attacks. We are outraged and deeply saddened by this tragic loss. We express our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims.

Further, we stand in solidarity with the Norwegian people to condemn these acts of terror rooted in xenophobia and extremist ideology. We also express our admiration for the Norwegian authorities for upholding due process and the rule of law in the prosecution of Andres Breivik.

Finally, UP POLSCi encourages the Norwegian people, especially the youth, to stay true to their democratic ideals. Indeed, the answer to these attacks and the hatred that fuels them lies in “more openness, more democracy” to foster, protect, and preserve our common humanity. We believe that, as it remains faithful to its principles, Norway will emerge from this tragedy stronger, more united, and a shining example for democracies all over the world.

Rearview: A Critical Assessment of Aquino’s First Year

In the service of Leadership, Excellence, Service, and Politics, UP Political Society (UP POLSCi) brings you a critical assessment of the first year of President Benigno Aquino III. Has our country finally embarked on the Daang Matuwid, or does it continue to tread on the path to mediocrity? From examinations of three major pillars of administration policy, UP POLSCi believes that the Aquino administration has failed to live up to its promises of change. How? Read ahead:

On Poverty and the Economy:

While the Aquino administration’s handling of the economy has managed to register a respectable growth rate (4.3%) over the past year, whether it is truly committed to long-term sustainable growth is yet uncertain. An increasingly hostile labor market, continuing reliance on the conditional cash transfer program, and a lack of a truly inclusive long-term development plan are telling signs that the Aquino administration has failed to live up to the expectations of the Filipino people.

NEDA touts a falling unemployment rate (7.2% in April 2011 from 8.0% in April 2010) as part of continuing growth, but the devil remains in the details. The underemployment rate remains high and at 19.4% is higher than last year’s 17.8%, still far from showing full and gainful utilization of the Filipino worker. The growth in the share of agricultural workers relative to services and industrial workers in the labor force also does not bode well for an economy seeking to join the ranks of the wealthy industrialized nations. Behind the pretty statistics is an ugly truth: that the Aquino administration has not done enough to promote gainful and dignified employment for the masses.

Also disturbing is the administration’s growing reliance on the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), the conditional cash transfer program of the Department of Social Welfare and Development. Even as funding is increased for this program, supply-side solutions like increasing funding for education and health continue to receive decreased priority, threatening to render the program but a mere patronage outlet.

The administration’s adoption of the Philippine Development Plan (PDP), the blueprint for the next five years’ economic policy, is also cause for concern. Economic policy for the next six years continues to show unsettling continuity with all other post-Marcos presidents, betraying a disquieting complacency among our country’s economic managers and a continuing refusal to include the voices of civil society in fixing our economy.

On Human Rights:

Human rights violations (HRVs) in the first year of the Aquino administration have continued unabated despite Aquino’s vows to prevent them and clean up the police and military committing such violations. More extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances were reported in the first six months of the Aquino administration than in the last six months of the Arroyo administration. The poor and the political left remain disproportionately affected by these HRVs, with most violations reported as having been committed against them.

Though some of these problems may be considered “structural”, mere attribution to deeply embedded problems is not enough. The government must continue to press charges against rights violators, and continue to promote transparency in the most egregious violators (the military and police). Otherwise, the blame will now squarely fall on the Aquino administration for failing to prevent these heinous crimes.

The government has also proven slow to promote other rights, especially those of marginalized sectors like women, students, indigenous peoples, and the LGBT community. The reproductive health bill has not been made law despite Aquino’s widely publicized commitment to the bill, though this might be attributed more to the ongoing debate in Congress rather than his inaction. Bills for student rights and against discrimination also remain tabled in the legislature.

On Corruption:

Aquino’s pledge to renew the fight against corruption marked a refreshing shift from the culture of denial prevalent in the previous administration. But his administration’s discourse on the subject continues to ignore two important issues.

The first is that corruption in the Philippines is an institutional problem. What the Philippine state needs are reforms that will make institutions corruption-proof, instead of making officials corruption-free. Second is that corruption is only one of many impediments to Philippine development. It is patently false that “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap”. Even if corruption is eradicated or merely reduced, if other policies cannot create progressive outcomes for the oppressed and marginalized in society, this declaration remains a string of empty words.

Even on his own terms, Aquino has failed to deliver. The campaign to prosecute former President Gloria Arroyo has proceeded at a sluggish pace even after the resignation of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and the whistle-blowing of key Arroyo officials. He has been slow to act on the incompetence of officials known to be close to him, and has created redundant positions in government offices for political allies, undermining our bureaucracy. His inconsistenly pursued campaign against corruption continues to be dogged by news of scandal, showing little sign of genuine progress.

In light of the upcoming State of the Nation address, we call on everyone to watch it and remain vigilant: to cast a critical eye on the achievements highlighted by Aquino and to hold him accountable for the promises he will make. Only by taking an active role in our nation’s political life can we rescue it from the scourges of poverty, ignorance, violence, and corruption.