After the Lebanon crisis, plans to set up the OFW Bank has temporarily been shelved. Originally, the plan is to convert the Philippine Postal Savings Bank into an OFW bank and will be initially funded at P1B ($19.1 million, based on an exchange rate of P52.35 per US dollar) from the Overseas Workers Welfare Fund (OWWA) fund.
Migrant workers organizations and NGOs expressed their opposition by submitting their position papers to concerned government agencies and their representatives in Congress, enlisting media for its advocacy, and participating in various fora such as the forum sponsored by the Center for People Empowerment and Governance (CenPEG) and its partner organizations held 07 June 2006. In this forum, officials of OWWA and representatives of migrant NGOs such as Women in Development (WID) Foundation, KAIBIGAN ng OFWs, Migrante International, Philippine Association of Maritime Training Centers Inc. (PAMTCI), and United Filipino Seafarers (UFS), and other migrant NGOs also acknowledged that while the intention is good, they expressed doubt about the intent, integrity and merits of the proposal.There are five (5) bills currently filed in the 13th Congress that seek the creation of a bank for OFWs: Senate Bill No. 639 by Sen. Manuel B. Villar, Jr.; House Bill No. 723 by Rep. Judy J. Syjuco; and HB No. 1565 by representatives Jaime C. Lopez and Prospero Nograles. In all these bills, the funding will be sourced mainly from OWWA, which is money held in trust for OFWs as these funds come from $25 membership fee paid by OFWs.
Some of the provisions invite curiousity such as the manner of granting contracts which includes private negotiations instead of public bidding. Words like “particularly,” “preferably” and “priority” which were used in the bills confuse and blur meaning. In the bills, it was stated that the OFW Bank “grant loans particularly to OFW’s and their family members” or “to grant loans and other financial assistance preferably to Filipino overseas workers, their spouses, their compulsory heirs.” It is evident from the bills that the OFW Bank will not serve the OFWs exclusively, but will be given priority.
Doubt was also cast in the Villar’s version, which included provisions on acquisition or ownership of “housing projects preferably for the benefit of Filipino overseas workers, their spouses or compulsory heirs.” Villar is a real estate developer.
The Lebanon crisis placed the OWWA in the spotlight particularly questioning its use of funds, and whether these funds are actually intact. OFW groups went to town digging old suspicions (OWWA Medicare Funds used by PGMA to campaign in last elections) and reviving buried (almost buried) cases of failed OWWA-funded projects (that is clearly not for OFWs) such as those implemented by RII Builders, owned by Reghis Romero, a close ally of the Ramos Administration who was unable to pay his company's loan and calling on the government guarantee to bail him out. Being perceived as another predator to OWWA funds is a political suicide considering the proximity of the election season. Weighed under these considerations, proponents of the OFW Bank have chosen to wait. Migrant groups however are expecting a WAKE.
Migrant workers organizations and NGOs expressed their opposition by submitting their position papers to concerned government agencies and their representatives in Congress, enlisting media for its advocacy, and participating in various fora such as the forum sponsored by the Center for People Empowerment and Governance (CenPEG) and its partner organizations held 07 June 2006. In this forum, officials of OWWA and representatives of migrant NGOs such as Women in Development (WID) Foundation, KAIBIGAN ng OFWs, Migrante International, Philippine Association of Maritime Training Centers Inc. (PAMTCI), and United Filipino Seafarers (UFS), and other migrant NGOs also acknowledged that while the intention is good, they expressed doubt about the intent, integrity and merits of the proposal.There are five (5) bills currently filed in the 13th Congress that seek the creation of a bank for OFWs: Senate Bill No. 639 by Sen. Manuel B. Villar, Jr.; House Bill No. 723 by Rep. Judy J. Syjuco; and HB No. 1565 by representatives Jaime C. Lopez and Prospero Nograles. In all these bills, the funding will be sourced mainly from OWWA, which is money held in trust for OFWs as these funds come from $25 membership fee paid by OFWs.
Some of the provisions invite curiousity such as the manner of granting contracts which includes private negotiations instead of public bidding. Words like “particularly,” “preferably” and “priority” which were used in the bills confuse and blur meaning. In the bills, it was stated that the OFW Bank “grant loans particularly to OFW’s and their family members” or “to grant loans and other financial assistance preferably to Filipino overseas workers, their spouses, their compulsory heirs.” It is evident from the bills that the OFW Bank will not serve the OFWs exclusively, but will be given priority.
Doubt was also cast in the Villar’s version, which included provisions on acquisition or ownership of “housing projects preferably for the benefit of Filipino overseas workers, their spouses or compulsory heirs.” Villar is a real estate developer.
The Lebanon crisis placed the OWWA in the spotlight particularly questioning its use of funds, and whether these funds are actually intact. OFW groups went to town digging old suspicions (OWWA Medicare Funds used by PGMA to campaign in last elections) and reviving buried (almost buried) cases of failed OWWA-funded projects (that is clearly not for OFWs) such as those implemented by RII Builders, owned by Reghis Romero, a close ally of the Ramos Administration who was unable to pay his company's loan and calling on the government guarantee to bail him out. Being perceived as another predator to OWWA funds is a political suicide considering the proximity of the election season. Weighed under these considerations, proponents of the OFW Bank have chosen to wait. Migrant groups however are expecting a WAKE.
No comments:
Post a Comment