The Rallos Chronicle

The Official News Bulletin of the United Architects of the Philippines • Issue No. 02 • August 2008

KABAYAN AT DISTRICT A4 INDUCTION. Vice President Noli “Kabayan” de Castro graces the Induction Ceremony of Regional District A4 . With him are UAP National President Medeliano T. Roldan, Jr., fuap, RD-A4 District Director Virgilio S. Regala, Jr., fuap and UAP National Executive Vice President Ramon S. Mendoza, fuap.

GOLF”, sometimes claimed to be the combination of the first letters of “green”, “oxygen”,”light” and “foot”, always gives people a beautiful fantasy of walking with a casual step on soft grassland, reveling in the bright sunshine and breathing fresh air.

For a long time, its high cost and the time it takes have made it the pastime of the noble and the rich. It seems a regular pattern that golf is widely played only in developed countries.

However, for United Architects of the Philippines, GOLF means “raising funds” to benefit the UAP National Headquarters, thus the Seventh UAP Golf Tournament was successfully held last August 8, 2008, Friday at the Sun Valley Golf Club in Inirawan, Antipolo City, participated by more than 150 golf enthusiasts.

- more on page 6

The Philippines, through the United Architects of the Philippines, the Integrated and Accredited Professional Organization of Architects will host the 2010 APEC Central Council meeting tentatively scheduled for October 10, 2010. The designation was made at the conclusion of the Third Central Council Meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Architects Registry Project held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada last August 8, 2008.

The First APEC Architect Central Council Meeting was held in Tokyo, Japan last May 31 to June 1, 2005 while the Second APEC Architect Central Council Meeting was held in Mexico City, Mexico last May 22-24, 2006.

Also, the Philippine economy through the UAP will serve as the designated Secretariat of the APEC Architect Central Council for the years 2009 and 2010. The APEC Architect Secretariat is responsible for providing administrative services for the APEC Architect Central Council and acting as the project Secretariat is undertaken in rotation by participating economies. The economy performing this role at any time may share its duties with other economies or it may be exempted from them on request. During its term of office, the Secretariat is required to administer all Council business, manage its meetings and coordinate the activities of the independent Monitoring Committees. It acts as a centre of information for the project and maintains the APEC Architect website.

The APEC Architect Secretariat was previously handled by Chinese Taipei, (2004 and 2006) and currently handled by - more on page 2

PRC issues guidelines on CPE; reconstitution of Architects’ CPEC announced

In its Resolution No. 2008-465, the Professional Regulation Commission recently mandated all registered professionals to attend duly accredited continuing professional education courses from duly accredited continuing professional education provides. The aim of which to maintain their status in good standing in their respective professions and to ensure their competitiveness in the light of liberalization of trade in services under the 4th Protocol of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) pursued by the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the ASEAN where the Republic of the Philippines is an active member.

INside---

- more on page 3

3

PRC-NBI Campaign

4

5 7

13th Asian Congress of Architects

2

NEWS - from page 1

Depth in a Partnership Based on Distrust The Office of the Secretary General has recently expressed its deep appreciation for all the support and best wishes UAP local leaders have been extending to UAP involving the on-going debacle with one of it’s former partners in the industry. The Office never experienced such a tremendous show of solidarity. It was also heart-warming to know that despite the enormous resources being waged against the organization, even using some of its members as their fronts, UAP has remained resilient, steadfast and strong as ever knowing that in the end the battle will be fought for the ultimate honor and dignity of the Filipino Architect and his professional organization.

Urgent issues at hand were readily discussed. First, the Office noted that there have been messages circulating that Boysen has decided to return their ‘receivables’, as donation, to the UAP through the chapters and districts.

“Ang tingin namin dito ay lalo lamang nilang pinalalala ang gulong kanilang inumpisahan. Ipipilit nilang isaksak ngayon sa mga baga ng local UAP units ang isang bagay na isinuka na nga noon pa man ng organisasyon!” according to Secretary General Gil Evasco.

When the OSG lamented in its first advisory that some chapter leaders were taking for granted the spirit and wisdom of the UAP By-Laws and Constitution, even the Code of Ethical Conduct, it was meant to make a wake up call for the local counterparts to be very vigilant against disinformation. It did not mention anymore specific cases and personalities that contributed to the earlier reaction from the National Office. Simply, the organization refuses to believe that the ones deciding on programmed events for some chapters are no longer their leaders but their sponsors. “Kapag hindi ninyo binigay ito(event) sa amin ngayon ay wala na kayong maaasahan sa amin sa taong ito” quips one of Boysen agents in the Southern Luzon area.

Second, it came to UAP’s knowledge that they(Boysen) are now talking directly to UAP Past National Presidents, to gain considerable sympathy. Again, by-passing the organization’s hierarchy of authority.

Prompting one of its former national officers to comment that ‘malice’ indeed is no longer in their (Boysen) vocabulary.

The bone of their contention? That they will just suspend, for this fiscal year, their support because this move is only intended for the National President and not for the UAP as a whole. Halleluiah!

- more on page 4

Mexico till December 31, 2008. (January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008). The UAP will serve as the Secretariat effective January 1, 2009.

The Central Council The Central Council has ultimate responsibility for all matters relating to the APEC Architect framework. The Council comprises at least one representative appointed by the Monitoring Committee of each economy authorized to operate a section of the Register. Non-authorized economies may also be invited to attend Council meetings as non-voting observers. The Central Council’s primary duty is to decide the standards and criteria required for registration as an APEC Architect and to establish operational procedures for management of the APEC Architect Register. These are reviewed periodically by the Council to ensure their

continued relevance to the practice of architecture within the APEC region and the effectiveness of the systems employed to assess them. The Council is responsible for the authorization of Monitoring Committees to maintain a section of the Register and for subsequent review of their continued conformance with APEC Architect registration criteria.

Effective communication with relevant authorities in participating economies, architects and consumers alike, is essential for successful operation of the APEC Architect Register. The provision of information on its objectives and achievements, and promotion of the role it plays in facilitating the mobility of architects within the region are also important functions of the Central Council.

The APEC Architect It may be recalled that the introduction

of the APEC Architect Register has created an effective mechanism for achieving the strategic priority of the APEC Human Resources Development Working Group ‘to facilitate the mobility of qualified persons by developing a means for the mutual recognition of their skills and qualifications’. By providing evidence that agreed standards of competence required for professional recognition have been satisfied, APEC Architects may be exempt from many current restrictions on access to independent practice, such as pre-registration examination and host economy experience, that are normally imposed on architects from other countries. Even though they may still be tested on practice issues specific to the host economy, the savings in time and costs for all involved, architects and regulatory authorities alike are substantial.

The APEC Architect

Reciprocal Recognition Framework, which re c o rd s t he re g is t ra t i o n / certification requirements of participating economies for the professional recognition of APEC Architects from other economies, may be viewed on the Central Council website at www. apecarchitects.org T h ro u g h i t s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f common standards of professional competence and the quality assurance systems applied to ensure that they are maintained, the APEC Architect framework provides a reliable and transparent basis for the further negotiation of reciprocal arrangements between APEC economies for the mutual recognition of architects. The APEC goals of progressive liberalization of access to markets for the provision of professional services will become a reality as the benefits of the APEC Architect framework are recognized and endorsed throughout the Asia Pacific region.

3

NEWS The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) and National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) conducted training sessions to frontline staff of PRC so they can be vigilant against fake documents issued by suspected unscrupulous persons wanting to have professional licenses.

NBI Supervising Document Examiner Eliodoro Constantino stressed that fake, fraudulent or tampered documents may include forged transcript of records and other certificates.

“It’s what you call a white collar crime. Somebody can be misrepresented by someone else,” he said during the two-day seminar which began August 19 at the PRC auditorium in Sampaloc, Manila.

Constantino said preventive and control measures can be done against questionable documents and forgery. The veteran NBI agent gave pointers during the seminar dubbed as “Questioned Documents Examination and Forgery Detection Seminar.”

PRC Commissioner Nilo L. Rosas, who gave the opening remarks, said fraud is as old as history. “According to history, Roman Emperor Titus and Roman Gladiator Mark Anthony were the first known forgers,” he said.

“The Philippines had its share of problems with fraud. The PRC and the Department of Education (DepEd) had their share of such cases,” said Commissioner Rosas, who was Education Undersecretary from 1998 to 2000.

DepEd and PRC have had such fraudulent cases over the years wherein both government agencies have to cancel certificates of some people who faked their transcripts and other official documents.

A classic case is that of fake marine engineer who was also caught with fake school records and birth certificate. The suspect’s wife became confused if the

man she married was an impostor.

“Forgery undermines the competency of the different professions.

And so, this seminar is the first step on how to detect fraudulent documents,” Commissioner Rosas said.

Constantino delved on the mechanics of handwriting identification, detection of fraud through signatures, and in-depth study of actual alterations of documents.

According to Constantino, a traced forgery is the result of an attempt to transfer to a fraudulent document an exact facsimile of a genuine signature which was executed by actually following the outline of a genuine signature with a writing instrument.

Participants will be able to detect if the signatures on the documents is genuivne and if the document is forged.

PRC issues guidelines on CPE - from page 1 It may be noted that under the said protocol, the Philippines is mandated to ensure it can offer competitively to other WTO members professional services in Health and Education, Marketing and Distribution, Telecommunications, Business Outsourcing Services, Information Technology, Engineering, Architectural and other construction services, Tourism and allied services, Transportation and Logistic services, among others.

As a result of this resolution, all forty-four (44) state-regulated professions shall undergo the continuing professional development (CPD) program in order that all PRC-registered and licensed professionals shall be afforded opportunities to improve their stock knowledge and the skills pertaining to their chosen professions, i.e. to keep abreast with global professional practices and to help make the Filipino regulated professionals truly world class.

Among the key innovations/ differences with the previous continuing professional education (CPE) programs are: 1. that the new CPD program shall be strictly voluntary (and NOT mandatory); as such, no CPD credit units shall be required by the PRC for the renewal of the PRC identification (ID) cards i.e. the three (3)-year PRC-issued licenses to practice architecture; 2. that testing and the passing of CPD tests/ examinations shall be mandatory to earn the full credit units.

The CPD requirement for professional self-improvement shall still be at twenty (20) credit units a year or sixty (60)

credit units for the three (3) year period covered by a renewed PRC ID/ license to practice.

Cognizant of this responsibility to hone and improve the knowledge and skills of regulated professionals, the Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture (PRBoA) announced that the Architects’ Continuing Professional Education Council (CPEC) will be formally reconstituted and members shall be sworn into office by the PRC on Thursday, 18 September 2008 at the 3rd Floor of the PRC Main Building, Paredes St., Manila from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM. The CPEC for Architects shall have three (3) members appointed by / nominated from the: 1) Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture (PRBoA); 2) the United Architects of the Philippines (UAP); and 3) the Council of Deans and Heads of Architectural Schools in the Philippines (CODHASP).

The primary functions of the CPEC include but are not limited to: 1) the accreditation of CPD Providers i.e. institutions, organizations, schools, firms and individuals; and 2) the approval of CPD courses.

The future of CPD may include the following: 1) the use of earned CPD units (in parallel consideration of verifiable professional practice duly certified by the IAPoA and/or the PRBoA) to lead to the granting by the PRBoA of a Certificate of Specialized Practice in Architecture; and 2) the possible use of the same CPD credits earned to lead to the possible granting by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) of a possible academic degree (to

be possibly based on equivalencies to be officially established and approved by the CHED).

For RLAs wishing to avail of CPD credits, these may be earned through the following modes: 1) CPD program offerings/ courses by CPD Providers duly accredited by the Continuing Professional Education Council (CPEC) for Registered and Licensed Architects (RLAs) and approved by the PRC; 2) CHED-recognized graduate (masters) and post-graduate (doctoral) academic degrees earned via residential or distance modes; 3) Self-directed Learning Packages; 4) Authorship; 5) Invention; 6) Post Graduate/In-Service Training; and 7) Study/Observation Tours; 8) Professorial Chairs; and 9) Other modes recommended by the CPEC for PRC approval.

4 DISTRICT A1A PANGASINAN-DAGUPAN BAGUIO ILOCOS-CIUDAD FER. LA UNION ILOCOS NORTE-LAOAG SUMMER CAPITAL PANGASINAN SCALE YLOCOS VIGAN

GOOD STANDING COMPARATIVE FIGURES A

B

C

48 65 34 35 31 37 51 30

71 105 38 46 39 41 53 31

35 86 26 29 26 35 18 5

24 33 9 22

26 16 10 18

40 79 41 8

15 48 34 12

38 45 51 21 45 43

35 33 76 11 35 7

238 62 83 45 27 39

182 46 16 34 28 23

DISTRICT A1B CAGAYAN VALLEY 18 ISABELA SIERRA MADRE 14 NUEVA VIZCAYA 6 CAGAYAN NORTH 18

DISTRICT A2A NUEVA ECIJA CABANATUAN 30 BULACAN 58 BARASOAIN 30 STA. MARIA-BUL. EAST 7

DISTRICT A2B ZAMBALES-OLONGAPO 31 TARLAC 38 PAMPANGA-SAN FERNANDO 39 BALANGA-BATAAN 16 ANGELES CITY 38 SINUKWAN-PAMPANGA 33

DISTRICT A3 QUEZON CITY 169 QC SILANGAN 43 QC CAPITOL 48 QC TANDANG SORA 19 QC SOUTH TRIANGLE 16 QC CENTRAL 24 LOS ANGELES

DISTRICT A4 QC DILIMAN 92 NEW MANILA 40 CAMANAVA HILAGA 33 QC ELLIPTICAL 31 NOVA CENTRAL 30

DISTRICT A5 RIZAL TAYTAY 44 PASIG 52 MARIKINA VALLEY 63 SAN JUAN MANDALUYONG 54 GREENHILLS 50 RIZAL EAST 31 CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO RIZAL KALAYAAN 100 30 RIZAL CAINTA 101

DISTRICT B1 MANILA ATELIER 18 MANILA SAMPALOC 21 MANILA METRO 130 MANILA CENTRUM 37 MANILA ARCHIZONIAN 40 MANILA STA. MESA 24 CANADA CALGARY

159 48 48 44 36

124 51 48 33 19

57 90 108 86 63 35

51 59 71 69 32 24

38 36

23 14

66 34 154 57 48 44

51 20 142 54 12 56

DISTRICT B2 MANILA MAGS 6 13 10 MANILA MAHARLIKA 89 119 54 MANILA MAYNILAD 31 54 42 MANILA CORINTHIAN 55 72 69 MANILA INTRAMUROS 22 39 36 MANILA ALCALDIA 15 27 15 ONTARIO-CANADA 39 40 31 MANILA LA SOLIDARIDAD 24 24 24

LegendA - Paid UAP Members as of 9.30.07 (FY 07-08)

B - Paid UAP Members as of 6.30.08 (FY 07-08)

C - Paid UAP Members for FY 2008-2009 (as of 8.30.2008)

A

B

C

DISTRICT B3 MAKATI MAKATI-CBD PARAÑAQUE-PALANYAG MAKATI GREENBELT ALABANG CAVITE FORT BONIFACIO

102 82 57 33 57 31 58

173 133 85 76 98 63 79

129 88 60 51 68 50 68

DISTRICT B4 QUEZON PROVINCE SAN PABLO LAGUNA BATANGAS PALAWAN

55 32 38 53 11

59 33 48 69 14

42 33 35 60 6

DISTRICT B5 CAMARINES LEGAZPI IRIGA-RINCONADA DARAGA-CAGSAWA SORSOGON-KASANGGA..

DAET-CAMARINES NORTE TABACO CATANDUANES MASBATE RODEO

30 64 19 31 15 9 12 6 6

38 73 21 32 18 11 13 6 9

18 50 6 25 11 2 12

DISTRICT C1 CEBU DUMAGUETE RAJAH HUMABON BOHOL LAPU-LAPU SUGBU

58 32 117 45 39 74

76 32 154 58 43 94

40

DISTRICT C2 BACOLOD NEGRENSE

80 39

98 39

7 52

DISTRICT C3 LEYTE SAN JUANICO LEYTE WEST METRO TACLOBAN SAMAR SINIRANGAN

6 16 20 17 2

24 24 28 25 8

9 25 7 9 7

DISTRICT C4 ILOILO 78 CAPIZ 18 MARIKUDO 53 ANTIQUE HAMILI 30 AKLAN 12

90 21 63 7 30 15

89 14 41 1 2 11

DISTRICT D1 DAVAO MOUNT APO COTABATO SOCSKSARGEN KADAYAWAN-DABAW NORTH DAVAO TAGUM

118 46 12 25 38 2

64 26 3 29 5 1

DISTRICT D2 ZAMBOANGA 30 ZAMBOANGA-CHAVACANO 19

32 19

2 18

DISTRICT D3 CAGAYAN DE ORO BUTUAN SURIGAO GOLD-CDO

47 23 14 19

54 29 14 23

42 13 9 21

DISTRICT D4 ILIGAN CITY DIPOLOG OZAMIS CITY PAGADIAN

18 13 10 9

23 15 12 9

10 10 8 1

- from page 2

69 40 12 20 35 2

1

116 6 37 62

Note: If you think you’ve found an error in our data, please let us know so that we can make the appropriate changes. Thank you.

UAP Chapters Chartered in August ISABELA SIERRA MADRE MANILA CENTRUM NUEVA ECIJA-CABANATUAN GREENBELT ANGELES CITY MANILA MAYNILAD

09-Aug-98 20-Aug-88 28-Aug-77 30-Aug-85 31-Aug-86 31-Aug-86

The bald eagles have become angels of reason! You do not burn the entire forest to get that small ant you hated so much!

By treating the UAP National Office as an outsider and cuddle its local chapters like adopted puppies and fed with its expired milk Boysen is consciously dividing the organization, pure and simple. Kahit saang anggulo man tingnan yan binabasag nila ang isa pang samahan ng mga propesyonal.

Third, it is not true that UAP never attempted to resolve their (Boysen’s) perceived ‘shortchanged’ issue. Countless backdoor efforts were initiated by the organization for Boysen to hear and see UAP’s side of the circumstances, but to no avail! It is already resigned to adopting a very self serving unilateral action. Basta next year na lang kami babalik ‘pag wala na si Boy Roldan diyan. Okay lang, ang mga chapter naman hawak pa rin namin.

Ano yan aso? Hawak nila saan? On the Secretary General’s knowledge, no less than National President Boy Roldan sought (na parang nagmamakaawang pulubi) for an audience with the President of Boysen to discuss and resolve matters at their levels.

What the Boysen honcho did is to direct no less than the top leader of the awardwinning UAP-IAPOA to deal instead with a certain Mr. Ruben D. Cueto leaving the fate of the entire negotiation in Cueto’s mercy.

Eh, galit nga ‘yong tao kay President Boy di ba! Anong gagawin niya? Humalik sa lupa para mapagbigyan lang? Now they are desperately cleaning up their mess at the district and chapter levels, offering among others, free laptop computers and cash donations, again at the expense of the UAP National Office. Questions on professionalism are now being raised by them and even joined by some of the ‘trapos’ in the organization. The OSG could hardly recall after President Nestor S. Mangio’s term ended that it has consciously maligned any incumbent UAP national officer who won handily in a highly-contested UAP National Election. To these hypocrites the OSG has this to advise: basahin na lang nila ang Lucas 6:39-42. The Office enjoys unrestricted access to all these trapos’ past and forgettable records but it is not the habit of the OSG to dwell on people’s past shortcomings. Hindi rin namin ugali ang makipagtalo sa mga nakakatanda sa amin.

National President Boy Roldan this year was given a fresh mandate to lead the organization with 85% of the votes cast going in his favor. His team got an average of 70/30 winning margin. This could be among the strongest if not the strongest mandate for a UAP National President and his team. That is why the organization can not allow any acts of destabilization in the organization to flourish especially involving his office. Simply because this is tantamount to destroying the very institution that primarily promotes the objectives and mission of the organization and the architecture profession.

Fourth, and last. Is the present administration trying to see a flicker of light at the end of this dark and unwanted journey?

Certainly. The organization never closes - more on page 6

5

National Administration Office

GIL C. EVASCO, UAP Secretary General

OF MISTAKES AND DECEPTION:

Assigning Value on What People Do When I was younger back in a countryside around Compostela Valley I had a classmate who was such a brutal trouble-maker. I can never find him without adversaries before our school week would end. He would engage anyone to long debates and would argue his way out sometimes concluded with some short shouting and even boxing matches! He never did blame himself for his shortcomings.

What about the people most of us come into contact with everyday?

Do you think they are eager to admit mistakes or be criticized?

Over my long years of service with the United Architects of the Philippines I was able to convince myself that there are two fundamental facts about mistakes.

Number one, we all make them.

Number two, we are more than happy to point them out in others, but how we hate it when someone points out one of ours! No one, I mean absolutely no one, likes to be on the receiving end of a complaint, a criticism or a bad evaluation. We all want to bristle when the finger of responsibility is pointed at us. This is easy enough to understand. Nothing stings the ego like being told we have made a bad decision or supervised a failed marketing project or performed way below expectations.

It is even more difficult when criticism turns out to be correct.

On September 4 of this year I wrote about a former industry ally withdrawing its support to the organization. This unilateral decision on their part was received not without howls from our local chapters nationwide. “This is a big mistake for them. They are burning their end of the bridge!” many would say. But mistakes get made. Arguments certainly would arise.

Complaints, both legitimate and exaggerated, get lodged day after day especially in the local grounds. Traditional partners are now becoming unhappy. Actually, nobody is on target all the time.

Mistakes are a natural part of life. Nobody is perfect but criticism is hard to swallow! Let no one deny that it is not always easy keeping both balls in the air. But it is not impossible either. After a while, all of us in the industry would agree that this particular juggling act can be mastered by almost anyone. After 33 years, UAP has already established a skillful act of managing its affairs against the emerging demands of the architecture profession.

I took up architecture in college at my mother’s urging but with a subtle decree that one day I would build a house she could call her own. That was two decades ago. She had her house and I got to keep my penchant for putting value at what people do and believe. I love advertising and visual journalism even before I went to high school. This, perhaps made my work at UAP today a bit easier and bearable. Maybe relevant at this time is a continuing saga of letting go a bad nightmare that is Boysen Paints. In its June

5 letter to the organization it pointed out ‘ Delegates Kits’ as one of its particulars complete with its own computation. What a lousy advertising maneuver indeed! The detail said that Boysen pays for the Filipino Architect P115.00 worth of bag with a “sole Boysen logo’ on it. Multiply it by the number of delegates which is 1200 one would get a total amount of P138,000.00. To them this is already the cost of advertisement when the architects start carrying their bags around! Certainly I find this wanting and somewhat insulting to the Filipino Architect. Records I have gathered show that in every UAP Convention, Boysen pays only Three Million Pesos for its 3-day multi-faceted exposures. Its cost for the provincial delegates are costs intended for, as the word connotes, the probinsiya and not in any way attributable to the national office. From brochures, to venues, press releases, functions and socials. All the works!

Let me illustrate here some real figures. Years ago, when I was working for my mother’s company I would deal with some leading broadcast networks in the business of supplying production sets, complete with people and transports. I would assign value to all our services and reflect this against the equivalent airtime accorded for the company.

I would see huge figures running before my eyes representing cost of advertisements and marketing exposures on a primetime program. My cost for asking a Filipino Architect to carry Boysen’s Bag is certainly not P115.00! Assuming that the bag lasts for a year and the architect carries it with him say only for five months I would be paying him a decent P500.00 per month of carrying the bag as a conservative advertising cost. Now that would be a total of P2500.00 for the package. You multiply that with 1200 delegates you will realize that Boysen is already paid with its Three Million pesos by the Delegate’s bag alone! Now, I do not want to venture anymore into dark arguments on who is being shortchanged here and who is not.

This organization, ideally, does not want to point a finger and assign blame. What it is trying to do now is fix a system. A system of putting the right values in favor of a partnership that is not based on greed and influence. We have to make it better one way or another. We have to step back and say, “How can we improve the situation?” Blame will never get us any closer to achieving this.

But, sometimes the people in this system, may they be the suppliers or the architects, do need to be criticized constructively. If we feel the need is urgent enough, the danger is severe enough, and if the mistake from both parties is made often enough, then something needs to be mutually said and not to act on it alone. In short, criticize respectfully and create a receptive environment for what one has to say.

6

NEWS

UAP Welcomes the Appointment of

New PRC Chairman

The United Architects of the Philippines, through its National President, Arch. Medeliano T. Roldan, Jr., fuap has welcomed the assumption to office of former Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, Justice Nicolas P. Lapeña as Chairman of the Professional Regulation Commission.

Justice Lapeña was appointed recently by President Arroyo to replace outgoing chairperson Leonor Rosero whose term expired last month. He took his oath last Aug. 22.

In an interview, Justice Lapeña said that “We will just continue what has been started, and we will look into the areas where we can still make some improvement. As of now, our main problem is the congestion of applicants in the PRC main office,”.

Justice Lapeña said the continued decentralization of the operations of the commission and moving to a more spacious facility from R. Papa St. in the Sampaloc “University Belt” will be among his top priorities as he takes the post vacated by Rosero.

“The PRC has already ten regional offices and two satellite offices. With these, we will try to help in improving the services that the commission is extending as to the supervision of 43 different professions is concerned,” he added.

He said he will bring up some proposed reforms such as the reduction in the requirements that applicants have to submit to enable them take the licensure examination in their respective professions.

PRC records showed that 2,000 applicants go to the commission every day. It even reached as high as 6,000 a day during peak months when teachers, nurses, and mariners will take the board

exam. Among those who welcomed Lapeña were PRC Commissioners Nilo L. Rosas and Ruth Padilla. The 500-strong rank-and- file staff also welcomed his appointment to the PRC. “We are looking forward to a better PRC because of his extensive experience in the judiciary and academe. His background in education will be helpful in running the PRC,” Rosas said.

According to the Memorandum Circular No. 2008-16 issued by the PRC, Lapeña was born on September 17, 1931 in Baliuag, Bulacan. He is married to Aurelia T. de Guzman and blessed with four children.

Lapeña earned a Bachelor of Laws degree at Manuel L. Quezon University (MLQU) in 1958, Master in Public Administration at the University of the Philippines (UP)-Diliman, Quezon City in 1962, M..A. Development Economics at Williams College in Massachussets, USA (1965), and Master of Laws at the University of Manila (2000).

He began his career at the Central Bank of the Philippines in 1954 to 1969. After that he taught law at the Philippine Judicial Academy, U.P., San Sebastian College, Ateneo de Manila University, University of Manila, and New Era University (NEU), where he became president from 1978 to 1983.

He also became president of the Eagle Broadcasting Corporation (1973 to 1978) and concurrent chairman of the Philippine Postal Savings Bank (2002 to present). He’s a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), Philippine Institute of Certified Accountant (PICPA), Christian Lawyers Association Foundation Inc., and Philippine Association of Law Professors, Philippine Association of Law Schools.

- from page 4

its door to those who know how to give the Filipino Architect the respect he rightfully deserves. Per latest discussions with the National Leadership, the OSG agrees to following a path that since Boysen decided to forego its support this year, it should be all across the organization. Binitiwan nila ang National, bitiwan na rin nila ang mga Chapter. They should stop dangling any carrots of support to the chapter behind the back of the National Leaders for this constitutes a direct insult to the regular members of the National Board.

The organization, however, does not deprive Boysen from covering individual architects. UAP recognizes the fact that it is inherent upon every professional architect practicing his discipline to maintain an open mind for the sake of the industry. What the organization does not want at the moment is any UAP units(Chapters and offices) being issued a check with Boysen’s Account name on it. As the UAP has always been professing, as declared by its National President, its doors are always open. We are simply protecting a great institution of service and the rich heritage of excellence in professionalism it now carries.

A UAP NewsBulletin published by the UAP National Administration Office Medeliano T. Roldan, Jr., fuap National President Gil C. Evasco, uap Secretary General Jason Ramos Aban News Correspondent UAP National Secretariat News Team UAP Bldg., 53 Scout Rallos St., Diliman, QC Email us at: uapnational@gmail.com UAP Service Hotline: (632) 4126403

- from page 1

Winners from the various categories were presented with beautiful trophies to commemorate their victories. The overall

winner in this year’s tournament was the Archt. Mike Peña, the Immediate Past Chapter President of Marikina Valley Chapter and the 2007 MADE Competition (Architecture Category) Winner, with total net of 71.15.

Winners for each class were the following: Class A – James Rosca (71.23), Champion; Tony De Ubago (71.53), 1st Runner-up; Julian Confesor (71.98), 2nd Runner-up; Ibrahim Nuño (73.33), 3rd Runner-up; Armando Sauler, Jr. (73.35), 4th Runner-up; and Jovanni Chua Unsu (73.43), 5th Runner-up; Class B – Mario Nabor (70.58); Gilbert Cruz (71.58); Butch Bernal (72.13); many Ko (72.85); Jose Siao Ling (73.40); and Ed Blanco (74.40); Class C – Mikee Da Jose (74.75); Tony Sabater (75.48); Alex Hilario (77.03); Boni Embuscado (77.75); Joel Christie Sarmiento (78.75); Anthony Barreto (78.85).

Fun Hole Winners were Rolly Francisco (Nearest to the Pin, 146 inches); Armando Sauler, Jr. (Longest Drive, 240 yards); Tony Ong (Perfect Drive, 6 inches); Wilbert Tan (Most Number of Birdies, 2 birdies); Tony De Ubago (Most Number of Pars, 10 pars); Resty Salazar (Most Number of Bogeys, 11 bogeys); and Andrew Figueroa (Most Number of 8’s, 7 eights) About 162 architects and allied professionals teed-off supported by DAVIES PAINTS as mega sponsor while EMERALD VINYL CORPORATION and BOSTIK PHILIPPINES, INC. as minor sponsors, meanwhile, H-CHEM INDUSTRIES, INC. and MOLDEX PRODUCTS, INC. served as Front and Back Sponsors, respectively.

The Tournament Committee is headed by the Project Director, Arch. Ana Mangalino Ling and Arch. Ramon S. Mendoza as Tournament chairman. Architects Samuel C. Esguerra, Jr., Edgar S. Pasion, Cipriano T. Cruz served as Rules and Regulations, Scoring and Prizes & Awards Chairpersons, respectively.

The ways and means committee is headed by Arch. Jose Siao Ling with Architects Wilson Y. Sioco, Alejandro O. Cua, Simeon C. Tan, Daniel C. Go, Eduardo S. Casares, Joenel C. Kho, and Nilo B. Villanueva as members.

INTERNATIONAL NEWS

Theme Rationale The repercussions of a global culture are all around us and can no longer be blinked away.While accepting the ubiquitous demands of globalization, we architects from the Asia region are also struggling to imbue our work with an identity that is exclusively ours. Contemporary architecture is no longer determined by local, physical or metaphysical criteria alone. The revolutionary impact of networking technologies has mutated sociological, economical and political factors from a local to a global state, at times, to the detriment of our natural environment. We are now at a precarious point where we must take responsibility for our precious resources through environmentally sound building practices, for the sake of the generations to come.

1. The City and Architecture vis-à-vis Political Power Mitterrand instigated a renaissance of French architecture through his vision of La Defense; and currently in Korea, the government is taking aggressive measures with regards to housing and urban planning policies, the process and outcomes of which are as yet questionable in lieu of the imminent change in governing party.

How does the particular political structure of a nation’s governing bodies affect that nation’s architecture and urban environment?

2. Art and Philosophy in Architecture Art and Philosophy have always been essential ingredients in the conceptualization of architecture. Industrialization and the fascination with technology have undeniably altered the impact of these ingredients in our profession. What role can art and philosophy play in architecture and urban planning in today’s complex and uncertain times?

3. Economic and Environmental Concerns in Architecture The effects of the highs and lows in our respective economies are mirrored in our built environment.The 2008 Beijing Olympics have brought about a boom in stadiums, cultural and institutional buildings, mega-structures and road systems permanently altering the face of China. Korea is now identified as the Apartment Republic; Japan, by Roppongi Hills; Malaysia, by the Petronas Towers; and Taipei, by 101... . Such icons of economic advance are concurrent with an equally potent decline in ecology. How can we alter this equation to a win-win situation?

7

8 The 10-member bloc of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) signed recently the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) on Architectural Services in conjunction with the 13th ASEAN Summit which was held from November 18 to 22 in Singapore.

It may be recalled that in 1995, the ASEAN Heads of Governments adopted, in the Bangkok Summit Declaration, the Agenda for Greater Economic Integration, which includes, among others, the introduction of greater transparency in standards and conformance, the alignment of national standards with international standards and undertaking projects to facilitate mutual recognition arrangements (MRAs) to facilitate greater intra-regional trade.

In general, the MRAs could be an important means of eliminating Technical Barriers to Trade and enhancing market access and that such mutual recognition could be of particular interest to small and medium-sized businesses in ASEAN. It is expected that MRAs could contribute positively in encouraging greater international harmonization of standards and regulations and that any such MRAs would require confidence in the other Member States’ capacity and competence to test or assess conformity to a Member State’s own requirements.

According to the government official who witnessed the signing, the MRA would help reconcile differing standards and regulations of the architecture profession among the 10 countries and help ease the entry of Filipino architects to the more developed members where demand is expected to outstrip local supply in the coming years.

The Asean MRA on Architectural Services states that the pact “would strengthen professional capabilities by promoting the flow of relevant information and exchange of expertise, experience and best practices suited to the specific needs of” members.

The Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) on Architectural Services will: (1) facilitate the mobility of architectural professionals within ASEAN; (2) enhance information exchange in order to promote adoption of best practices on standards of architectural education, professional practices and qualifications; (3) conform to the spirit of ASEAN co-operations based on fair distribution of resources and benefits through collaborative research; and (4) set standards and commitment of technological transfer in architecture among ASEAN Member Countries.

The MRA also provides for the establishment of: Monitoring Committee (MC) to develop, process and maintain a national ASEAN Architect Register (AAR) in the Country of Origin; and ASEAN Architect Council (AAC) to facilitate ASEAN Architects (AA) with existing policies, procedures and practices and thus develop and promote strategies

to implement the MRA. It will encourage member countries to adopt and harmonize the mutually agreed standards and criteria.

Under this Arrangement , an ASEAN Architect (AA): (1) must register with the Professional Regulatory Authority (PRA) of the Host Country where he/she intends to practice as a Registered Foreign Architect (RFA); (2) must comply with the Guidelines on Criteria and Procedures for submission to AAC as well as agree to the Codes of Professional Conduct and Accountability; (3) must satisfy the Assessment Statement of the MC in each participating ASEAN Member Country; and (4) shall practice architecture only in the specific projects in which he/she has been judged to be competent under this Arrangement.

The MRA on Architectural Services will enable Filipino services suppliers to further tap into the opportunities provided within the region as ASEAN countries liberalize the services sector.

Member States of the ASEAN who signed the agreement are the following: The Governments of Brunei Darussalam, the Republic of Indonesia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, the Union of Myanmar, the Republic of the Philippines, the Republic of Singapore, the Kingdom of Thailand and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. For the Republic of the Philippines, Secretary Peter B. Favila of the Department of Trade and Industry signed the said agreement.

PHOTONEWS

EXECOM MEETS. Members of the UAP Executive Committee during the Regular Execom Meeting held at UAP National Headquarters.

REP RODRIGUEZ AT JOINT CDO AND CDO GOLD. Cagayan De Oro Second District Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez graced the Joint CDO and CDO Gold Induction of Officers

Seeing that health tourism has jump-started a regional trend toward private health care that promises to snowball in coming years, the UAP Diliman Chapter (Regional District A4) will be holding its 2ND DESIGN CONFERENCE, entitled “Medical Tourism: Rx for Architects” on September 26, 2008, Friday, from 1:00 – 5:00 pm, at the Astoria Plaza Hotel (Ortigas Business District).

The event will be graced by three prominent personalities who have so far greatly contributed to the Philippine Wellness Industry.

UAP Diliman Chapter President, Arch. Minnie Rosel noted that “in recent years, the costs in the medical sector in the United States and Europe have skyrocketed and continue to spiral even higher.

More and more Americans and Europeans are going off-shore, opting for treatment that offers high quality care at a fraction of the cost. While a number of venues around the world now offer these so-called medical tourism services, nowhere has the growth been more dramatic than in Asia , especially in the Philippines” “There is much cooperative effort professionals and experts in different fields need to discuss and plan on to ultimately prepare and transform the Philippines into a premier health holiday destination”, said Arch. Rosel.

Seminar Fee of PhP1,000.00 (with 20% discount to District A4 members and students) is inclusive of food, kits and CPD certificates....limited seats only, reservations can be made through Arch. Minnie Rosel at Mobile No. 09189352848 and or email address: mrosel@heritagepark.com or to any UAP Diliman member.