NOT NOW!: An Objective take on why SK should NOT be abolished ...

In the current government's efforts to save money and re-channel funds for priority projects, the Aquino administration is looking at the possibility of abolishing the Sangguniang Kabataan, for the simple reason that it wants to save cost. Instead, according to Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, the government will push for "an amendatory law" that would elect one SK representative to the Barangay council rather than elect the full eight-man SK council this coming October.

I would not normally react as our esteemed duly elected representatives of the youth in government do, coming with motherhood statements which say that we are depriving the youth of a voice in government. I've heard that many times, and I'm not going to ride on that bandwagon just to offer token resistance to a somewhat sensible proposal.

HISTORY OF THE SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN

"The Sangguniang Kabataan was born on October 10, 1991 when the President Corazon C. Aquino signed into the law Republic Act 7160 also known as the Local Government Code of 1991 which have been authored by Senator Aquilino "Nene" Pimentel."

The Sangguniang Kabataan commits itself to the survival, protection, development and participation of the youth toward empowerment, and patriotism, achieved through strong partnership between and among the government, private and youth sectors, serving with the degree of professionalism and competence in an atmosphere of unity, solidarity, teamwork and camaraderie."

Okay, those sound good to the ear, but let's evaluate the tangible, measurable performance of our SK officials.

THE PRO'S

In 2009, I remember President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo delivering a speech at the SK National Congress, where she mentioned that the previous administration created the National Youth Service Corps and the Youth Conservation Corps, coordinated by the National Youth Commission, to provide jobs and livelihood opportunities for those aged 18-24. Right now, 15,000 young individuals are captured under the program. That's actually something good, but I hope there's sustainability in the efforts.

THE CON'S

There has been a popular opinion, though, going against the Sangguniang Kabataan, that it has become a breeding ground for corruption in governance. Many argue as well that SK officials are non-performing or have insignificant contribution to the community; most of their projects are building waiting sheds and signages, sports fests or paliga. Another is one is that SK officials cannot perform their function as they have to attend school (or SK officials have to cut schooling just to perform their functions).

Most of the observations came from a study conducted by Marlon Cornelio of the Youth and Students Sector of the National Anti-Povery Commission.

MY IDEA

Having presented some of the main reasons to abolish SK, I seek to provide an objective take on the matter.

First, corruption levels should be measured, not speculated upon. This calls for agencies who conduct research on corruption in government to include levels of corruption in the Sangguniang Kabataan. Unless we have factual manifestations on how corruption is rampant in the SK, our basis is futile and unfounded.

Second, discussions in the plenary on the abolition or reforming of the Sangguniang Kabataan should not only be value laden, but also factual and objective. Why don't we conduct committee hearings to find out the disbursement of funds of the SK, and call on the National President of the SK to defend their use of those in view of their projects? There we can establish and find out where exactly the funds are going, if we are bent on really saving costs while not sacrificing the youth's participation in governance. Based on the committee report, then we can have a holistic take on what should be done to reform the SK or worse, if it is really needed to abolish it.

Third, has there ever been a consultation with other youth groups outside of the Sangguniang Kabataan, in as far as SK Reform Bill is concerned. Of course, the proposal, since it is made by people who are in the system, will be meddled with interests. There has to be an alternative voice, or a voice of reason from the outside, especially that this is governance, not just a school organization matter- which should be consultative, participative.

Fourth, I find the SK Reform Bill lacking in substance. I will enumerate the following points and come up with pieces of evidence to prove such.

• To promote transparency and accountability, the BUDGET of the Sangguniang Kabataan should not follow a LUMP SUM format; rather, it should follow a LINE ITEM BUDGETING FORMAT, where SK councils would have to justify the use of these funds on certain portions of the Appropriated Fund. According to Amendment on Section 2 entitled Barangay Funds of House Bill 1963 filed by Rep. Palatino:
  
  " Section 329. Barangay Funds. – All income of the Barangay DERIVED FROM whatever source shall accrue to its general fund and shall, at the option of the Barangay concerned, be kept as trust fund in the custody of the city or municipal treasurer or be deposited in a bank, preferably government-owned, situated in or nearest to its area of jurisdiction. Such funds shall be disbursed in accordance with the provisions of this Title. Ten percent (10%) of the general fund of the barangay shall be set aside for the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK). THE SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY SHALL APPROPRIATE THE SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN FUND IN LUMP SUM. THE SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN SHALL HAVE FISCAL AUTONOMY IN ITS OPERATIONS AS TO DISBURSEMENTS AND ENCASHMENT OF THEIR INCOME AND EXPENSES."
  
  My question is- how can you give them fiscal autonomy if they do not have the sufficient background on Budgeting in the first place? How can you allow them to appropriate their fund in lump sum if you haven't taught them lessons on FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY?
  
  My counter proposal to have the budget line-itemed is for them to exhaust their efforts in defending, at the proper venue, and justifying the use of these amounts of funds for this particular line item. Here, we train them to research, canvass and learn the art of allocating scarce resources. We are not taking away their right to have a budget for their projects, what we want them to do is to justify the use of these funds, and what social returns would be realized in the conduct of these projects. Some of their projects, for an instance, may just be a duplicate of what non-government organizations or government agencies are doing. In this case, partnerships may have been the best option.
  
  Fiscal Responsibility involves three important components: wise utilization of funds, raised by government from the people, preparing for future and more urgent projects that need heavy funding, and avoiding debt, because we have more than enough.
  
  Managing public money is a matter of public trust, and when we do not have a mechanism to train our SK officials to be fiscally responsible, then we are also betraying the public's trust to capture in law, rules that would govern the behavior of our public officials, even the young SK ones, at that.

• To encourage good performance amongst SK officials, for the year following the implementation of the supposed SK REFORM BILL, the rate (in percentage) to be allocated from the Barangay Fund as SK fund must be defended at the proper venue, perhaps in the City Council, through its duly elected SK City Representative. This is a performance monitoring mechanism, like what head of the department agencies in government are doing when they attend budget deliberation hearings, so that good behavior can be rewarded with higher appropriation, while bad behavior can be assisted by Local Government Units, at a correlative cost of a lesser share in the appropriated Barangay Fund.
  

• We must establish an SK Leaders Academy to ensure that ALL candidates vying for SK positions undergo sufficient training under the supervision of the Department of Interior and Local Government. They must be sufficiently trained where their functions as public officials and youth leaders are made known and are clarified with them, and capacitated to become productive leaders of their community. They should be prepared before their tenure as SK officials, not during their term as public officials. The Sangguniang Kabataan should not be seen as an on the job training for young people, because this is real governance. However, there should be continuity in terms of evaluating and continuously aiding our SK officials with how they govern their respective constituencies. This should be INCLUDED in Section 8, or section 428 of Republic Act 7160, as part of the qualifications to be an elective official of the SK.
  

• I agree with Akbayan's proposition to have an Anti-Dynasty provision in the SK Reform Bill. This must be included in the SK Reform Bill filed by Rep. Palatino.
  

• There should be Internal and External Auditing Provisions in the SK Reform Bill. Morals are not self-made, thus we must manage it by institutionalizing measures to govern those morals. Corruption cannot be prevented at a young age, if there are no safety nets to prohibit such action.

Given these manifestations, I believe the SK Reform Bill should be re-structured first, before it is filed in Congress. There must be sufficient safeguards to protect the integrity of the institution from perpetual allegations of irrelevance, and at the same time, there must be monitoring mechanisms and stick and carrot approaches contained in the provisions to reward good behavior at such young age.

However, I do believe we should not use CUTTING COSTS as a primary reason to deprive our YOUTH from having seats in government. It should cost government social expenses and consequences once we remove the youth's participation in governance. Worse, it will only contribute to the youth's deteriorating interest in joining and participating in government, in the long run.

If we are guided by a well phased, carefully written SK LAW, then I believe the COST is worth the DEVELOPMENT OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE to mobilize social action.

The YOUTH will find ways to be CREATIVE and DYNAMIC, so long as there are institutions that protect their integrity, guide their morals, and safeguard their rights.

A Strong Institution breeds Effective leadership.

AARON BENEDICT DE LEON
2010 LAKAS-KAMPI-CMD Presidential Campaign (Gilbert Teodoro) Platform Spokesperson
Secretary-General, YOUTH Philippines
Corporate Affairs, GREEN TEAM PILIPINAS
http://spokespersonabdl.blogspot.com/