A horrible half-year

Commentary

By Denis Murphy

Philippine Daily Inquirer

Now that the worst is over in Tacloban and some other typhoon-devastated areas, it may be time to look not only at the awful tragedy there but also at the last six months, which were marked by a series of manmade and natural disasters seldom seen together in such a short period. It may be good to look at them now because people are quick to forget, especially with Christmas just a month or so away.

Midyear, economists criticized the national economy for creating “growth without jobs,” which meant that the rich got richer and the poor remained mostly stuck in poverty. It wasn’t an accident; the economy was designed by our business leaders and policymakers to operate in that way. Such an economy, dividing the population even further into rich and poor conditions of living, is at war with notions of solidarity and compassion, which should be guiding norms. (Economist Cielito Habito wrote in this paper on Nov. 12 that it was not enough that we have growth: “It must be growth that produces jobs and livelihoods for as many Filipinos as possible.”)

Then came the disclosures on the pork barrel scam involving leading politicians. In an estimate, a government official claimed that the P10 billion allegedly stolen by Janet Napoles was a trivial matter compared to the P1 trillion (12 zeros) stolen from the government from 2001 to 2010.

Next came the battles in Zamboanga. People have wondered how a small ragtag militia could gear for war and march on that city without the Armed Forces being aware of it, especially since there is a heavy military presence there. People also wonder why the military can’t find criminals, such as former general Jovito Palparan, And even more important: Why can’t the military find missing activist Jonas Burgos?

And then there was the 7.2-magnitude earthquake that jarred Bohol, Cebu and other areas.

Then came “Yolanda.” Day after day, as people watched the news on TV, they saw sorrow and pain, how fiercely men and women can love their children and one another, and how perishable we all are.

We saw people half-crazed with thirst in Tacloban and bodies of beautiful children lying dead by the roads. We heard of looting, and of a new species of criminal, the looter-rapist. Who would have imagined Filipino men taking food and whatever they wanted from poor women in a time of calamity—while dead bodies lay all around—and then raping the women? Many people simply sat and waited for death. And where was our Church? Where were the priests to bury the dead and console those laid low in sorrow? Bodies lay everywhere as if they were the usual garbage.

Some may ask, as Jewish people asked at the time of the Holocaust: Where is God?  God was there in Tacloban, receiving the dying children, the young parents and the aged into His arms. He was wiping away all their tears, as we are told in the Book of Revelation, and bringing them to their true home where there “shall be no more death or mourning, wailing or pain, for the old order has passed away” (Rev. 21:4).

If our economic elite, military, elected officials, and even the Church can disappoint us, to whom will the people look for leadership? To the same institutions—where else?—but these must recognize their weaknesses, and begin anew with the intention to reform. There is an old saying in the Church, older than the Reformation: “The Church must always be reformed.” The same need exists for all our institutions. If the Holy Church needs constant reform, surely our human institutions do, too. There are enough decent, hardworking people in government to do the job.

Reform should include the willingness to listen to all groups of citizens, including the poor. We should remember that in a democracy, policy is a matter of compromise. It is also said: “In a democracy, reform comes from the ballots of the poor.” To help shape the future, the poor must have better jobs and education than they have now.

At a meeting on Nov. 13 at the Ateneo de Manila, the urban poor of Metro Manila and fishermen from Laguna Lake began to play their role in this renewal. The participants covered three matters: 1) what to do when there is conflict between government and poor people’s plans; 2) what to ask of government, now that it is clear there is much more money available than they previously thought; and 3) what service will the poor offer society in the settlement of the pork barrel disarray.

The poor do not expect to become another Neda (National Economic and Development Authority), but they have the skills to analyze government plans and sort out what is good for themselves and the common good, and what is not. They limit their advice to those matters in which they have direct knowledge. The fishermen of Laguna Lake have begun to do this by rejecting the ring road dike around the lake that will require the relocation of 45,000 families, and the shorter Laguna Lake Expressway Dike that will affect about 10,000 families. They will examine alternatives and support those remedies for flooding on the lake that treat them fairly. They will oppose solutions that do not. The fishermen who were at the meeting are from the Calamba-Biñan area. They have fished in those waters for generations, or at least since the time of Jose Rizal, who wrote about how much he enjoyed the fish caught in that part of the lake.

The poor realize that government has much more money than they ever imagined, so instead of pork barrel they ask government to widen the benefits of PhilHealth to include medicines, lab tests, ambulances, and other out-of-hospital expenses at affordable rates. They ask government to please improve the schools in poor areas, and give poor groups funding to begin to upgrade their areas—for example, their drainage. They ask government to review its economic policies and direct the economy to creating jobs. Finally they ask the government to make food available at affordable prices.

In return, the poor will organize to vote out of office all politicians found guilty of involvement in the pork barrel scam. They will make citizen arrests of people they know are guilty. They will cooperate with other groups in these matters.

* * *

For many years Nandy Pacheco and others have urged Filipinos to accept Christ’s peace in their hearts. This peace is the love, forgiveness, compassion and strength of Jesus. It is well described in St. John’s Gospel (Chapters 14 and 20). Christ’s peace takes away our hearts of stone and gives us hearts of flesh. It takes away the sorrows of Tacloban and gives us Christ’s joy.

Denis Murphy works with the Urban Poor Associates (urbanpoorassociates@ymail.com).

Draw Good from Evil

Commentary

By Denis Murphy

One good outcome from the pork barrel scandal—maybe the only good outcome—is that in the future no government official will be able to tell poor people: “We don’t have money for what you want.” We now know there is money, and it’s up to the citizens and perhaps especially the poor to seek what is justly due them.

Janet Napoles is accused of having gained P5-6 billion in real estate. In addition, she most likely has money in bonds, trusts, cars, jewels, etc., and she is only one of a few hundred individuals who grew rich in the pork barrel scam. What is the total loot? Is it P100 billion? Or P500 billion? Then there is the Malampaya Fund and other funds we may hear about in time. Certainly there is money enough for hungry, jobless, sickly, homeless people and for young people who want to go to college as their way to escape poverty, or for people who want to start a small business, or buy a small piece of art to brighten a poor home.

Some urban poor people seek a way by which they can continue to get the benefits they once received from the pork barrel, such as help in times of sickness and death, but now without the corruption.

While the poor and others search for such a good solution, there are steps that can be taken immediately to lessen people’s suffering, now that we know there is adequate money. An example of such a step can be the widening of PhilHealth benefits to include all the medical needs of poor and near-poor families, and at a cost the poor can afford. We can make PhilHealth our universal-healthcare program.

Medicines and laboratory tests and other out-of-hospital expenses can be added to the benefits that people receive. Enrolling fees can be reduced, so all families can afford the program. A young man friend of ours died in Baseco because his family didn’t have money for a doctor at the Philippine General Hospital, and he was put instead on the charity waiting list at No. 176. He died before his turn came. The operation by the doctor who would be paid could have been done in a matter of days. The family also lacked money for the medicines and tests that the operation would require.

In the Covenant with the Urban Poor signed by President Aquino on March 6, 2010, there are sections on improving conditions in the slums, including legal electricity and water connections, more adequate drainage, toilets, garbage removal, and good policing.

Can officials chosen by the President negotiate with Meralco, Maynilad and Manila Water to improve the supply of light and water in all slum areas? Such an improvement—namely, legalizing the connections—can save families P1,000 a month on average. Can the government enter into a public-private partnership contract with a construction company or two for adequate drainage and environmental risk reduction measures? There can also be provisions for toilets and waste disposal. Much of this elementary construction work can be done by the people themselves if they had the funds needed.

Perhaps the most significant contribution that society can help provide our urban poor brothers and sisters is good policing. Drugs are the great problem. People have told me that “almost every day someone in our area is shot dead.” The bodies are left untouched on the ground for hours to make sure everyone has learned it isn’t wise to disagree with the drug bosses. The use of drugs constantly grows. For talented young men the drug business is the best paying and most prestigious work, and often the only work, available.

Democracy and human vitality die when drugs are powerful, and we may end up like the great cities in Brazil—hostages to the pushers and their bosses. The wider society must help, but the poor must demand change. It won’t come sailing into Manila Bay at sunset.

What should our attitude be to the politicians who have betrayed their solemn oaths and the people they are supposed to represent?

Hatred is understandable, but it is not enough. We must seek repentance on the part of the guilty, as well as fitting punishment. Luke’s Gospel has an example of these twin needs. As Jesus is walking on the streets of Jericho, he realizes that the despised tax official Zacchaeus is in the branches of the tree above him. Jesus says: “Zacchaeus, come down quickly for today I must stay in your house.” Zacchaeus came down and, realizing he was forgiven, said: “Behold, half of my possessions I have given to the poor and if I have extorted anything from anyone, I shall repay it four times over.” (Luke 19:1-10). Zacchaeus was as corrupt as any of our pork barrel villains, and in addition he was a traitor to his people because he served the Roman occupation forces.

If the guilty ask forgiveness from God and the people and repay what they have stolen, as Zacchaeus did, maybe like the tax collector they can find forgiveness. Otherwise, there is prison.

Denis Murphy works with the Urban Poor Associates (urbanpoorassociates@ymail.com).

Justice’s two voices

Commentary

By Denis Murphy

Most people I talked with appreciated Luis Antonio Cardinal Tagle’s impassioned critique of the pork barrel scam and his low-key presence at the Aug. 26 Luneta rally. His actions raise once again the question of how the Catholic Church should address the problems facing people in society today, especially the problems of social justice. To whom should it speak? What response should it ask? To whom should we all speak and with whom should we work?

Traditionally the Church has responded to injustice in two ways. In the first, the road more traveled, the Church describes the problem it wishes to solve, and then calls on the heads of state, the rich and the powerful, to solve the problem. The approach presumes that change in society comes from the top and that the powerful can solve the problems. The second approach has been taken by Jaime Cardinal Sin, Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador and many other Church leaders. They realize basic change in society regularly involves a confrontation between the powerful and the powerless. And they choose to speak in the name of the victims, and have the sufferings of the poor and the powerless front and center in their minds. They end by calling on all men and women of good will to oppose the unjust ways of the powerful.

The first approach may have worked in the Middle Ages, when the popes had real power over kings and emperors, and they in turn had near total power over their subjects. But the approach hardly works now: the people of the world have become democrats in their hearts, even if their governments are still authoritarian.

The first approach reechoes the more conservative priestly tradition of the Old Testament; the Cardinal Sin-Archbishop Romero approach continues the prophetic tradition. The second is effective when the Church not only speaks out for the good of the ordinary people but also involves the people in solving the problem. The Church gives a voice to those who are voiceless and calls on the people to take part in the solution. The prophetic voice arises from the suffering heart of the poor, and engages the poor in working out a solution.

This discussion so far is somewhat theoretical. Luckily we have an example of how the two approaches might work out in practice. This example is found in Pope Paul VI’s visit to Tondo in November 1970.

The pope arrived at the Don Bosco school in Barrio Magsaysay on a Sunday afternoon, and almost immediately gave a rather routine greeting and a talk on moral guidance to the mostly urban crowds gathered on the soccer field there. He spoke in Latin, which was translated by a young Salesian priest. The speech, written by the Vatican Curia, was, in general outline, the speech he delivered in the urban poor areas he visited around the world. It was polite. It didn’t speak of the land problem that raged in Tondo. Toward the end of the speech the pope asked the president to help the poor people, little realizing the president was the cause of the land problem.

Chances are the pope didn’t know of the problem. It was created by President Ferdinand Marcos’ desire to evict 180,000 poor people from Tondo to turn the area into an upscale housing and business center. The poor opposed the plan at a very visceral level. The poor people of the Zone One Tondo Organization were there in big numbers in the hope of hearing the pope support their rights to land tenure security.

Then the pope walked through the muddy streets of Tondo—there had just been a major typhoon—to the run-down shack of a poor family. He stayed there longer than expected and, when he returned to Don Bosco, he seemed stunned by the poverty he had seen. He didn’t speak to the officials and priests around him, but held tightly to the hand of a Franciscan Missionary of Mary sister who was just a few feet from me. He looked sad as if someone had died. He looked around and seemed to see the poor people in the soccer field for the first time.

I thought, maybe the poor family he visited had explained the land problem to him. I thought, he may have regretted the inadequacy of his earlier words. Maybe, I thought, he will call for the microphone and speak from his heart about the poverty he had seen and demand that the president settle the problem in a fair and just manner. I thought we might see a pope speak for justice from his heart, with compassion and righteous anger and with all the power of his office.

As everyone knows the pope didn’t. If he had, the history of our Church would be different. Maybe our secular history would also be very different.

Pope Paul’s talk was a good example of the first way the Church has used to approach problems of injustice. His extempore speech would have been an example of the second manner of approach.

* * *

When actor Martin Sheen was here in 1997 to help promote better housing for the poor, he was interviewed by Dong Puno on TV. Puno began by asking Sheen why he was in Manila. Sheen said, “Because I am a Catholic.” He explained that he had been raised to believe that as a Catholic his job in the world was to help the poor and lessen injustice. When he was asked to come to Manila to help, he said he couldn’t refuse.

We may believe we are not qualified to speak about injustice, but then we should read again the early chapters of the Book of Exodus.

Moses said to God when asked to go to the Pharaoh and speak for the Hebrews: “If you please, Lord, I have never been eloquent…. I am slow of speech and tongue.”

God answered: “Who gives one man speech and makes another deaf and dumb… It is I who will assist you in speaking and will teach you all to say.” (Exodus 4:10-12)

Denis Murphy works with the Urban Poor Associates [urbanpoorassociates@ymail.com].