LODI’s ‘suyod’ to stop the lies
THE suyod, or fine-toothed comb, is familiar to us who grew up in the 1980’s and of course especially to our elders. We use it especially on summer days when boys and girls get hair lice.
Last Thursday, we brought dozens of suyod to Congress, handing them out along with a letter to Rep. Karlo Alexei Nograles who chairs the House Committee on Appropriations. The committee is deliberating on the proposed budgets of the Duterte government, and we in the media and arts alliance LODI used the suyod to symbolize the call for Congress to look closely at the budget increase sought by the Presidential Communications Operations Office.
To help the lawmakers in both houses of Congress, we in LODI listed down questions that, if asked properly, could act as a suyod to the proposed PCOO budget hike.
1. What is the PCOO’s response, if any, to the findings of the Commission on Audit regarding 138.8-million in questionable terms expenses related to the 2017 Philippine hosting of the ASEAN Summit?
For instance, the PCOO approved disbursements of 14.04-million for the RENTAL OR LEASE of IT equipment, although the same could have cost 1946,872 if bought by the government.
The purchase of handmade soap for a price beyond the budget of 1758,0002.
2. Can the PCOO also please explain to Congress the details behind the increase of its expenses for foreign travel? It spiked from 115.12-million in 2016 to 142.36-million in 2017. Domestic travel expenses by the PCOO also grew by leaps and bounds: 114.99-million in 2016, to 1119.62 in 2017.
3. What is the status of the Social Media Accreditation Policy of the PCOO? How many social media practitioners and bloggers have applied for and were granted accreditation by the officer-in-charge, Assistant Secretary Mocha Uson? Who are these social media practitioners and bloggers who have been accredited by the PCOO?
4. Last August, Assistant Secretary Uson drew widespread criticism for a video showing her and a certain Drew Olivar singing and dancing “Pepederalismo.” Did the PCOO approve it? Where exactly was the video taken? Was it taken in the PCOO premises? Were public servants made to take and edit the video? Whose phone was used for taking the video? Is that phone and the mobile Internet service for that phone paid for by taxpayers?
5. Last June 2018, the PCOO erroneously referred to Senator Sherwin Gatchalian as “Winston Gatchalian.” Who was responsible for this and what steps were taken about it?
6. Also last June 2018, the PCOO erroneously referred to former Congressman Roilo Golez as “Rogelio Golez” in a press release about the president’s visit to the wake of the former Member of Congress. Who was responsible for this and what steps were taken about it?
7. And also last June 2018, the PCOO erroneously referred to Norway as “Norwegia” in a press release regarding the awarding by President Duterte of the prestigious Order of Sikatuna on departing Norwegian Ambassador Erik Forner.
8. Last April 2018, RJ Nieto and Assistant Secretary Uson took videos in Kuwait of victims of human trafficking (which, under the law, includes substantial changes to contracts that lead to abuse and exploitation of OFs)? Who gave the green light to Nieto and Uson? Does the PCOO have a mechanism to ensure that there is no conflict of interest that arises from solicitation of funds?
9. Last March 2018, the PCOO apologized for and promised to correct the erroneous International Press Center ID that it issued to the shock of editors and journalists here and abroad. What specific steps did the PCOO take in investigating it? Has the PCOO replaced the IDs Could the PCOO formally present the IDs to this committee and to Congress?
10. What is the policy of the PCOO regarding posts and comments posted on the Facebook Pages and social media channels handled or managed by the agency? Does it tolerate or allow hate speech, threats of rape and murder, defamation, and other forms of speech that deter public debate and endanger individuals? Could the PCOO commit to Congress and the public that it will institute measure to keep all official, taxpayer-funded social media accounts free of hate speech, defamation and partisanship, and instead open and safe to all Filipinos and not just supporters of the president?
11. What is the official status of RJ Nieto, Drew Olivar, Sass Sasot and Trixie Cruz Angeles in the PCOO? Are they paid consultants of the government, working under PCOO? Could the PCOO disclose their consultancy contracts? Did they apply for and granted Social Media Accreditation by the office of Assistant Secretary Uson? Who are in-charge of these bloggers and social media practitioners? Assistant Secretary Uson or Undersecretary Lorraine Badoy?
As we await the plenary deliberations in the House, and the counterpart proceedings in the Senate, we will list down more questions.
Our sense in LODI is that we cannot let Andanar, Badoy, Uson and other PCOO officials get away with their incompetence, ineptitude, stoking of online hate and fake news. PCOO is a government office whose funds come from our taxes. PCOO officials are also paid salaries drawn from the national treasury. Public office is a public trust. PCOO is not and cannot continue to be a hyperpartisan campaign outfit — which is perhaps how the likes of Uson and her most ardent followers view the agency.
We urge members of Congress to perform their oversight duties, and wield the power of the purse so that we could have a PCOO that’s professional, competent, trustworthy, and serves all Filipinos, not just a few. Yes, Congress can help stop the lies.