Abolish NEA, or replace its corrupt personnel

 LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

March L. Fianza

Instead of commenting or writing a story in this opinion column, I decided to replicate in whole, including the title, an editorial of The Manila Times on March 10, 2022 regarding the oppressive moves of the National Electric Administration (NEA) against the electric cooperatives in the country, particularly the Benguet Electric Cooperative (Beneco).
    This. to share its contents especially to member-consumer-owners of Beneco who are directly affected by the illegal overreach of NEA. There is a line in the article that mentions about the “Beneco’s legislative caretaker” which I thought is in a way incorrect. 
    ***
Following is the editorial:   
    THE National Electrification Administration (NEA) is mandated to ensure electricity service throughout the country, and as part of that mandate, it is supposed to supervise and assist electric cooperatives (ECs) that do the yeoman's share of the work in realizing the overall objective of 100-percent electrification.
    That is not happening with the NEA in its current state. The agency has become an instrument of oppression for the ECs, and as a consequence, the millions of consumers who rely on them, to what end no one really knows, but many presume is the eventual extinction of consumer-owned cooperatives and complete privatization of the Philippines' electricity sector. The NEA's efforts have become so aggressive and single-minded, that it has even defied Congress' directive to curb its overreach.
On Sept. 21, 2021, the House of Representatives passed House Resolution 213, directing the NEA to comply with the agency's Memo 2017-035, which established that the authority to appoint or terminate ECs' general managers lies with their boards of directors. What provoked the House resolution was the issuance of another memo by the NEA, Memo 2021-055, which transferred that authority from the EC boards to the NEA.
    In spite of the House resolution having some teeth because Congress holds power over NEA's and its parent the Department of Energy's budgets, the NEA completely ignored it, and then followed through with its disapproved revised rules by attempting a comic-opera takeover of the Benguet Electric Cooperative (Beneco) last October.
    The intended takeover of Beneco is apparently what led to the amended rule in the first place. In April 2021, Beneco's board approved the appointment of engineer Melchor Licoben as general manager, a move that was subsequently formally endorsed by the Benguet Provincial Board and the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) Benguet Chapter, and supported by Beneco's “legislative caretaker,” ACT-CIS party-list Rep. Eric Go Yap.
    The NEA board, however, for reasons that were never clearly explained, declared Licoben ineligible and instead appointed Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) Assistant Secretary Anna Marie Rafael as general manager, despite the latter's having no evident qualifications to manage an electric distribution utility.
    ***
A month’s long impasse between the NEA and Beneco came to a head in October, when, after the NEA issued an order suspending most of Beneco's board, Rafael and other NEA personnel, reinforced by the Cordillera Regional Police Office, staged a midnight raid of Beneco's headquarters in Baguio and seized control of the facility.
    That led to a mob of Beneco employees and customers retaking the headquarters and driving the NEA interlopers out a day or two later, but the NEA has persisted; last week, Rafael took her "oath" as the new general manager, and has carried on the pretense of being in charge despite being unwelcomed and actively resisted by anyone who has any actual business with the cooperative.
    The controversy involving Beneco is not an isolated incident, according to people connected with the Philippine Rural Electric Cooperatives Association (Philreca). In a statement issued in conjunction with an online protest, Philreca accused the administration of using the NEA to seize ECs for the benefit of competing commercial interests, citing a similar situation involving a threat of privatization against the Palawan Electric Cooperative (Paleco) from the Office of the President.
    The irony is that the NEA may be serving its current dubious role because it has otherwise outlived its original purpose.
    The vast majority of ECs in the country are financially stable and performing adequately; there are exceptions, of course, but they are relatively few. Idle hands are the devil's playthings, so the old saying goes, and the NEA as it is now certainly seems to be an example of that. There is never a good time for this kind of bad behavior, but it is especially unwelcome now when the country's energy security is more at risk than ever.
    If the NEA cannot be reformed and compelled to carry out its original, progressive mandate, then it should be abolished. Its existence as it is now is doing the country and ordinary energy consumers more harm than good. – (March 10, 2022 Editorial of The Manila Times) 
 

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

Edsa, before and after

BAGUIO CITY -- Just the facts. Exactly 36 years ago today, I was lazily wandering with three friends on top of the world at Mount Pulag. This was in defiance to a previous invitation to a trip to Manila to welcome Cory’s revolutionary government. But all that we wanted then was peace. The year was 1986.
    A year later, a new Philippine Constitution was signed with a provision under Section 15 that provided for the “creation of an autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera.”
    That year, the new government unceremoniously replaced all incumbent and duly elected local officials from the governor down to the last councilor with OICs (officer-in-charge). Such a move triggered disappointment towards Tita Cory and her men.

In public offices all over the country, government workers and officials in high places looted government property, bringing home furniture, office supplies, refrigerators, electric fans, kitchen utensils and even cars. Many of these workers were reappointed to their posts or were saved by civil service rules.   

That same year, Cory appointed her men to the Cordillera administrative bodies but some were seen as enemies of the people because instead of working for the communities, they were focused on personal interests, practically obsessed with hunting Yamashita’s treasure and becoming professional squatters in Baguio and Benguet.

In the years that followed up to this day, people celebrated the so-called Edsa People Power even when a majority of them were not present during the original event. Not even Tita Cory and family were there because they were hiding in Cebu.

The reason why thousands of people went to Edsa was because they heard on morning radio that President Marcos and family had left Malacanang. It was the biggest lie on February 24, 1986.

Feeling that finally it was over and there would be peace after all, crowds flocked to Edsa, not to join any revolution but to celebrate. It was a gathering of uncontrolled crowds that made American allies convince Marcos to leave for the USA.

Two weeks prior to the Edsa event, then President Marcos scheduled a snap election as promised in an interview with an American correspondent. In that election, the Comelec official tally found Marcos and vice presidential bet Arturo Tolentino as the winners.

However, before the final count at the Phil. International Convention Center, Namfrel volunteer canvassers walked out claiming that Marcos had cheated as the votes from Northern Luzon were taking a long time to be transmitted for tabulation.

A few days after Cory took her oath as president, the Namfrel did a recount of votes and found that the tally still showed Marcos as the winner by around 800,000 votes.

By the way, the canvassers knew that the votes from Northern Luzon could overcome Tita Cory’s votes in Manila and Central Luzon. This could be the real reason for the walkout.

The Cojuangco-Aquino family was not at Edsa but the people power has been mistakenly assumed as their own. They have benefited from the Edsa event that has awarded them and their supporters positions in government. But look at us after 36 years.

Six years earlier, Marcos allowed Senator Ninoy Aquino, his primary critic, to leave the country after the latter sought the President’s permission to leave for America for medical treatment. Ninoy departed for America on May 8, 1980.

But three years later, knowing that Marcos was very ill after undergoing two kidney transplants, Ninoy, who had the vision to be president, returned to the Philippines. We all know that the opposition senator was instead assassinated at the airport tarmac in August 1983.

Of course, Cory had no one to blame for Ninoy’s death but Marcos. This led to street rallies and rumored destabilization plots forcing the latter to call a snap election to end the crisis. Then the Edsa People Power came.

I remember then Defense Minister Enrile’s reply to Cory when she called to ask what she can do to help them during the crisis. According to Enrile, he told her to “just pray.” This only proves that the Aquinos had nothing to do with the Edsa People Power as what many of our younger generation think, much less own up to it.

Since it was first celebrated in 1987 until today and after having two Aquino presidents, Edsa has not found the killer of Ninoy. It has brought the Filipinos nothing but disunity and disagreements. Might as well stop celebrating it and forget about it. 

 

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

Hijacking debates

BAGUIO CITY -- The way campaign sorties in many parts of the country are being done, we will soon see politicians splitting away from their party teams and alliances, hijacking the support of other candidates in their rallies.
With the national elections taking place in less than two months, candidates desperately competing for local and national positions will find themselves rushing to the finish line alone.
    It cannot be denied, we saw in the past how presidential and vice presidential bets used each other for their benefit. The feeling is mutual since both have the mindset that their pair could win or not.
    That is why when Isko Moreno went to Maguindanao, his vice president and social media personality Dr. Willie Ong was not with him. Their spokesman said Doc Willie was asked to skip the campaign sorties in the BARMM because of the intense support for Sara Duterte there.
    For Ping Lacson and Tito Sotto, we see them still sticking it out together. I heard Lacson say that they have refused invitations that attempted to pair one of them with another candidate. At least their campaign sorties are done with decency. No attacks.
In the case of presidentiable Leni Robredo, she was paired with vice presidential bet Sara Duterte who was endorsed by Bicol lawmaker Joey Salceda. The PDP-Laban congressman is the first administration ally to endorse candidates from separate tickets.
    This move left Bongbong Marcos and Kiko Pangilinan by their lonesome for a short while.
Although in the words of Leni and Sara they say that they would still stick with their partners. No one knows how long those words will last.
    Politicians believe in their own lies but such are the realities in politics. A friend today but an enemy tomorrow. That is why they say politics is dirty.
    For Manny Pacquiao, he has a good reputation as a boxing legend and is always warmly welcomed anywhere. Yet he goes in and out of the third spot in the surveys, with just 8% of voter support.
    Pacquiao toured Pangasinan last week without vice presidentiable Lito Atienza. Then someone said he is better off going around without Atienza whose mudslinging campaign against their enemies is affecting the boxer’s chances of winning.
    I heard one comment about the political debates which I readily checked. A political science professor said there were questions that were not being asked. Especially the questions that the general audience could relate to.
    Although there was one question that I liked. “Should politicians be endorsed by the religious sectors?” The most honest answer I heard from one of the Presidential candidates was: “huwag na maging plastic (let us not be hypocrites) as we need all the endorsements we can get.”
    When the professor was asked, “should candidates attend debates on national TV?” Her answer was the same as mine.     She said that is the candidate’s decision. The politicians to be invited to debates should be the ones who need more exposure.  
    Candidates do not have the right to dictate on their co-candidates or call them cowards if they do not join debates because they are on the same footing. Attending debates and public fora is the choice of one who will usually skip or deny invitations because of previously arranged schedules.
    Many have backlogs. For others, not joining debates is a strategy. Still, many agree that it is far better to present one’s platform and program of government in a campaign rather than waste time and effort in a debate that has limited time.
    By the way, if there is only one vice presidential bet from the south and a lone woman at that, the fight for the second post might be a three-cornered fight for Sara, Tito and Kiko. Forget Walden Bello and Atienza who have no program to present.
    True indeed, there are candidates who filed their COCs not to win but to throw mud at their opponents, especially BBM. People are tired of arguments and debates. People are tired of smear campaigns.