Kabataan Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon has called on the House Committee on Basic Education and Culture to look into reported “illegal and compulsory” sale of workbooks, modules, and other supplementary instructional materials to elementary and high school students. 

In House Resolution No. 930 filed this afternoon, Ridon sought for congressional intervention to stop the said practice, which is being rampantly implemented by schools throughout the country. 

Ridon noted in HR 930 that the sale of workbooks and other supplementary instructional materials is prohibited by the Department of Education (DepEd). The lawmaker cited DECS Order No. 65, s. 1990, which prohibits the sale of “textbooks, workbooks, school supplies, magazines, leaflets, newspapers, and other materials to students.” 

The lawmaker noted that DECS Order No. 65 has not yet been amended or rescinded and is thus still in full force and effect. 

HR 930 came after several concerned parents and students voiced complaints on the compulsory sale of workbooks, modules, and other instructional materials in both public and private basic education institutions. 

In consultations conducted by Kabataan Partylist with student organizations and formations, some of the public schools reportedly engaged in illegal and compulsory sale of workbooks and/or modules include the following: 

Kabataan Partylist also received complaints from parents about the exorbitant prices of workbooks sold in private schools. 

In one of the complaints received by Kabataan Partylist, a concerned parent from Cebu City reports that each of his three daughters enrolled in a private elementary school in Cebu pay up to P4,000.00 for a set of workbooks each year. 

“During my school days, we were using standard textbooks that could be used by the next sibling in line resulting to huge savings for my parents. But nowadays, it is different. All books are patterned as workbooks wherein the students are made to answer directly…Thus at the end of the school year, these books become useless and are thrown away,” the concerned parent explained in a letter mailed to Rep. Ridon’s office. 

“The rampant practice of selling workbooks and other supplemental instructional materials to students of both public and private basic education institutions not only violates existing laws, rules, and regulations but also results to additional financial burdens to students and their parents,” Ridon said in HR 930. 

“This issue also reveals glaring loopholes in DepEd’s existing regulations. Due to DepEd’s failure to compel school administrations to comply with said rules and regulations, violators continue with their nefarious deeds without being sanctioned or dealt with,” he added.

“There is a need for Congress to review existing regulations on such nefarious sales activities that victimize our students and burden parents. The regulations have been there for decades, yet violations still go unnoticed,” Ridon said.###

A member of the House Committee on Transportation has called for a review of the concession agreement entered by the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and the Universal LRT Corporation (ULC) for the construction of the P63.14-billion Metro Rail Transit (MRT) 7 project. 

In House Resolution No. 926 filed by Kabataan Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon today, the legislator asked Congress to take particular regard to the arrangement on return of equity, the proposed fare scheme, and the “socio-economic impact” of the project especially on families that will be displaced due to its construction. 

The MRT-7 project involves the construction of a 44-kilometer light rail transit route and road project that spans Quezon City, Caloocan City, and Bulacan. 

The 25-year concession agreement gives ULC, a business entity partly owned by San Miguel Corporation, the sole right and obligation for the development, financing, operation and maintenance of the mass railway transit project that will undergo the “Build-Gradual Transfer-Operate and Maintain” (BGTOM) scheme. 

The rail component of the MRT-7 project involves the construction of a 22.8-kilometer rail transit system that is envisioned to operate 108 rail cars in a three-car train configuration, with a daily passenger capacity ranging from 448,000 to 850,000. 

Despite being signed back in 2008, the MRT-7 project’s implementation was delayed for five years due to the failure of the proponent to secure a performance undertaking (PU) – a financial guarantee on part of the national government which is a requirement for financial closure of projects to be funded by official development assistance – from the Department of Finance (DOF). 

Last month, the DOF announced to the media that it has already endorsed the MRT-7 project to President Benigno Aquino III for approval and will also issue a PU before the first quarter of 2014 ends. 

After the president’s approval, the issuance of the PU, and subsequent financial closure for the project, ULC can then immediately proceed with the commencement of the project, which is estimated to be completed within 42 months. 

Mass displacement

MRT-7 is set to have 14 stations, starting with the North Avenue Station in EDSA, passing through Commonwealth Avenue, Regalado Avenue, and Quirino Highway up to the proposed Intermodal Transport Terminal in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. 

The road component of the project, meanwhile, involves the construction of a six-lane access road from San Jose del Monte to Balagtas, Bulacan North Luzon Expressway Exit. 

Citing data from peasant organisation Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas, Ridon stressed that the construction of the MRT-7 train line and the real estate commitments included in the project will displace more than 300 farmer-families in Tungkong Mangga, San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, and will also displace another 40,000 residents in Tala and Pangarap Villages in Caloocan City. 

“Despite this, no clear plan of action for the affected families is presented by the proponents of the project,” Ridon said in HR 926. 

Onerous deal

Meanwhile, the youth lawmaker also questioned the net revenue sharing presented in the concession agreement. 

In a recent congressional briefing, DOTC revealed that during the 25-year concession period, ULC is set to receive 70 percent of net revenue while the government will get 30 percent if the return on equity in below 11.9 percent. Meanwhile, ULC and the government will get 50 percent shares each when the return on equity reaches the 11.9 to 14 percent range.

In the event that return on equity of the MRT-7 project breaches the 14-percent mark, the government will receive 100 percent of the net revenue.

“Such sharing of net revenue may prove to be disadvantageous to the government and the public in the long run, as it does not encourage optimal financial viability. With the percent share in the net revenue for ULC sharply falling upon reaching the 12-percent mark and above, the private concessionaire may strive to press down profits so as not to breach 11.9 percent return on equity, thereby resulting to loss of potential revenue for the government,” Ridon explained. 

Fare scheme questioned

In the same congressional briefing, DOTC also revealed that the proposed fare for a full 14-station single journey in the MRT-7 from North Avenue to San Jose del Monte, Bulacan amounts to P38.00 for the first year of operation, increasing at a 5-percent rate per annum for 25 years.

“Under such rate, the initial P38.00 will increase to as much as P128.68 by the time the concession agreement ends after 25 years. This is equivalent to a total of P90.68 or 238.63 percent overall increase in the MRT-7 fare in a span of 25 years,” Ridon said.

“Given the flaws in the equity sharing agreement and the fare schedule, and the lack of a comprehensive plan for families who will be displaced by the project, the MRT-7 concession agreement may prove to be an onerous deal that would only burden the Filipino people in the long run,” Ridon explained.###

“The passage of Speaker Feliciano Belmonte’s charter change (cha-cha) resolution at the committee level is not the end of the fight. Rather, it is only the beginning of a head-on battle. We in Makabayan vow to fight fire with fire during the plenary debates.” 

This is the statement of Kabataan Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon following the passage of Resolution of Both Houses (RHB) No. 1 at the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments this afternoon. Members of the constitutional amendment committee voted 24-2, in favor of passing RHB 1. 

A committee report will be made and submitted to the House plenary, after which the floor debates will commence. 

“The railroaded passage of RHB 1 shows just how powerful lobbyists behind this constitutional amendment are. It would not be surprising if millions of pesos were exchanged for this deal,’’ Ridon speculated. 

“While our nation is being ravaged by countless challenges to our sovereignty – including the increasing threats of Beijing and the continued encroachment of US troops in our territory, here we have a Congress that is ready to pass amendments that would enable greater foreign presence in the country,” Ridon added. 

The youth solon has earlier expressed fears that the amendments would “destroy the standards and limits set by the Constitution” and would also spell disaster for the Philippine economy. 

Filed by House Speaker Belmonte last July 2013, RBH 1 seeks to revise the Article XII (National Patrimony and Economy), Article XIV (Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports), and Article XVI (General Provisions) of the 1987 Constitution by inserting the phrase “unless otherwise specified by law” in pertinent sections. 

“RBH 1 poses a double-edged threat: one, it will open new loopholes in the 1987 Constitution that would allow the haphazard revision of economic provisions. Second, the catch-all amendment pushed by the House Speaker will inevitably lead to the bastardization of constitutional standards and limits,” Ridon said. 

Ridon believes that the amendments sought by House Speaker Belmonte are “vague and overbroad” and would open loopholes that would render Article XVII (Amendments or Revisions) of the 1987 Constitution useless.

“I actually think the amendments are courting unconstitutionality for being overbroad and its potential to demolish the standards and limits set by the Constitution,” Ridon said. 

While the Philippine Constitution allows only three ways for cha-cha – via constituent assembly, constitutional convention, or people’s initiative – the amendments pushed by Belmonte would open a new way in amending the Constitution: piece-meal legislation. 

“By inserting the phrase ‘unless otherwise specified by law’ in clauses that set certain limits on foreign ownership of several industries, RBH 1 essentially destroys the standards and limitations set by the 1987 Constitution. If passed, RBH 1 would subject the Constitution to the whims and caprices of the ruling party in Congress,” Ridon explained. 

The youth representative also stressed that economic liberalization, the prime motive of the proponents of cha-cha, would be “disastrous for Philippine economy.” 

“The main argument of those advocating cha-cha is that they will use it to lift constitutional limits to foreign ownership. This amendment, they say, would then lead to the generation of more foreign direct investments and would stimulate economic growth. However, this could be the farthest thing from the truth,” Ridon said. 

“If we lift the current restrictions, local enterprises and businesses would suffer due to the unrestrained dominance of foreign investors. Lifting the economic limits would also open the floodgates for further exploitation of our country’s scarce natural resources, including forests and mineral reserves,” the youth solon explained. 

“Generating more foreign investments is not tantamount to achieving inclusive growth. The country’s experience with foreign investments in the past decades have shown how it only benefited large businesses and corporations, but in exchange stunted job generation and the growth of local industries. This scenario has largely widened the economic divide between the rich and the poor,” Ridon added. 

“The Makabayan bloc will not let RHB 1 pass without a fight. We will do whatever we can to ward off the imminent dangers its passage poses for the Filipino people,” Ridon said.

“The people should be vigilant amid renewed calls for cha-cha. Filipinos should not be fooled by the rosy picture of growth and development painted by powerful corporate lobbyists – as behind that coat of paint lies the grim portrait of intensified poverty and exploitation,” the youth solon concluded.###

Kabataan Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon revealed Thursday that several colleges and universities are exploiting a loophole in the Commission on Higher Education’s (CHED) tuition regulations that allow them to automatically increase tuition and other fees for incoming college freshmen.

In House Resolution No. 895 filed by Rep. Ridon this morning, the youth lawmaker pointed out that CHED has never issued any regulation or guideline that covers increases in tuition and other school fees for incoming freshmen in higher education institutions (HEIs), leaving such fees exempt from the benefit of consultations and any form of state control.

During a media conference this morning, Ridon said that CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) 3-2012, which currently governs increases in tuition and other school fees, and its predecessor CMO 14-2005 and the much older CMO 13-1998 all exempted tuition and other fees for incoming freshmen from any form of regulation.

“The exemption of freshmen tuition from any form of regulation provides leeway for school owners to institute a ladderized tuition scheme or carry-over scheme, wherein incoming freshmen pay more than the tuition paid by the freshmen batch before them. The lack of ample regulations thus resulted to automatic tuition increases for incoming freshmen,” Ridon explained in HR 895.

“There are school owners who reportedly abuse this loophole by applying for tuition increases for students entering higher year levels through guidelines set by CMO 3-2012, while at the same time increasing freshmen tuition rates. Under such scheme, incoming freshmen students – who already suffer from automatic fee increases – would again fall victim to further tuition hikes as they enroll in their second, third, fourth years and so on in the said HEI,” Ridon added.

Data collated by independent task force Tuition Monitor, an alliance of student and youth groups monitoring fee hikes in HEIs in the country, show that automatic tuition increases for incoming freshmen are being rampantly implemented in many schools throughout the country, some of which include the following:

Ridon maintained that there exists no legal basis for CHED not to exercise reasonable supervision and regulation over freshman tuition and other school fees, as these are still school fees.

“The failure to regulate and supervise tuition and other school fees of incoming freshmen students constitute an unconstitutional infringement of the equal protection clause, as it discriminates incoming freshmen students even if there are no reasonable grounds to make a distinction between them and students already enrolled in HEIs,” he explained.

Ridon hopes that HR 895 would result in the crafting of new rules and regulations that would finally regulate freshmen tuition.

“We should not let this loophole continue to exist be exploited at the expense of millions of incoming freshmen year after year,” he concluded.###

Kabataan Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon has filed a resolution Thursday calling on the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) “to order a refund of all developmental fees and other fees of similar nature illegally collected for academic year 2013-2014.”

Ridon noted in House Resolution No. 894 that the CHED en banc has issued Resolution No. 221-2012 back in August 2012, which effectively abolished and prohibited the collection of development fees, or fees collected for the purpose of school improvements such as infrastructure and land development.

Signed by CHED Chairperson Patricia Licuanan and four other CHED commissioners, Resolution No. 221-2012 states, “that upon [CHED en banc’s] deliberation and for purposes of consistency in the implementation of policies since private higher education institutions are not allowed to collect Developmental Fees, the Commission approved the abolition of Developmental Fees to all state universities and colleges (SUCs) effective AY 2013-2014 considering that any school improvements should not be borne by students.”

“Despite this clear issuance, public and private universities still collect developmental fees that range from PhP120 to as much as PhP2,000 in AY 2013-2014,” Ridon said in HR 894.

According to a research conducted by Kabataan Partylist, some of the schools that collected developmental fees for AY 2013-2014 include the following:

Ridon also noted in HR 894 that the issue of developmental fees was the root cause of an ongoing dispute between the student body and the administration of Eulogio Amang Rodriguez Institute of Science and Technology (EARIST), wherein a developmental fee amounting to PhP1,000 has been collected from students every semester since 2012.

On November 26, 2013, over 5,000 EARIST students conducted an indoor protest to condemn the said illegal fee. Due to the protest action, the EARIST administration threatened to suspend and even dismiss several local student leaders who led the protest.

“Upon intervention of CHED and the National Union of Students of the Philippines, however, the EARIST administration did not push through with its threats. However, the status of the collection of the illegal development fee in the said school remains in limbo,” Ridon recounted.

The youth solon also revealed that there are several schools collecting developmental fees under different names. Said schools include:

Ridon maintained that changing the name of a fee that is essentially similar to the nature and use of developmental fees “does not and should not exempt schools from CHED Resolution No. 221-2012.”

The youth representative also pointed out that the collection of developmental fees and other fees similar in nature did not undergo proper consultation procedures stipulated in CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) 3-2012 or the “Enhanced policies, guidelines and procedures governing increases in tuition and other school fees, introduction of new fees, and for other purposes.”

“Anyway you look at it, the collection of this fee is utterly illegal,” Ridon said.

According to Section 13, Article VI of CMO 3-2012, “charges and impositions on miscellaneous and other school fees collected found to be without the benefit of consultation or in violation of the provisions of this regulation, shall be disallowed, and/or ordered to return the already collected fees to the students.”

“CHED should immediately order for the full refund of this illegal fee, as the fees in question are of substantial amount and the immediate refund of illegal collections will provide substantial relief to students and parents, especially at a time when tuition and other fees continue to rise incessantly,” Ridon said.

If HR 894 is passed and subsequently heeded by CHED, students can stand to gain P400 to as much as P6,000 for a full year’s worth of refund for the developmental fees.

“We encourage students from other schools to also study their registration forms and see if this illegal fee is present. Let us all strongly call for the immediate refund of this exorbitant and illegal fee,” Ridon ended.###