UNIVERSITY STUDENT COUNCIL University of the Philippines-Diliman Council Session No. 3 Date: June 13, 2011 Attendance: Roll Call started at 5:10pm : Not called during the first and second roll call
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
Name Garcia, Jemimah Grace Ramos, Dan Neil Alcantara, Marie Catherine Banzon, Melvin Diño, Gabriel Escandor, Soraya Elise Fuentes, Jianica Therese Ligsay, Ace Loon, Jose Martin Melad, Amancio III Pangalangan, Raphael Recto, Mara Kristina Venturina, Ana Motohara Viray, Fra Angelico Santiago, Maria Shaina
16. Duque, Duchess Aleksei
17. Avila, Christine Ann
18. Cortez, Wesley Paul
19. Miranda, Paulina 20. Gupalor, Paolo 21. Mateo, Timothy James
22. Ildesa, Christian Rayson
Position Chairperson Vice-chairperson Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Asian Institute Tourism Representative College of Architecture Representative College of Arts and Letters Representative College of Business Administration Representative College of Education Representative College of Fine Arts Representative College of Home Economics Representative College of Engineering
Attendance 5:50pm
Representative College of Engineering Representative College of Human Kinetics Representative College of Law College of Mass Communications Representative College of Music Representative College of Science Representative College of Social Sciences and Philosophy Representative College of Social Work & Community Development Representative National College of Public Administration and Governance Representative School of Economics Representative School of Library and Information Science Representative
23. Santos, Paulo Martin
24. Tiu, Simon Stephenson
25. Tiu, Michael Jr. 26. Orduña, Gail
27. Bautista, Patricia Isabel 28. Tan, Bea Helene 29. Ramos, Dan Christian
30. San Gabriel, Markus
31. Ongkeko, Antonio Rafael Jr.
32. Tagnipez, Christian Kelvin 33. Putong, Orly Van Andre
Time Started: 7:15pm Legend: : Attendance Remarks : Topic Agenda 1. 2. 3. 4.
Chairperson’s Report Vice Chairperson’s Report StRAW Update COFS Update
6:15pm
5:38pm
5. People’s Struggle tie-up with CRAW committee: framework setting, activities in line with campaign 6. BSS’ dorms and student services update 7. Mass Media Committee: RTR for DZUP Launching, tasking, funding for The Oblation 8. Secretariat Committee: Buddy announcements, committee members announcement, office management 9. Ways and Means: Marketing 101, rummage sale, merchandise sale 10. Gender updates 11. Finance Committee: Fin101
Vice Chairperson Ramos announced that a League of College Council (LCC) meeting will be held on Thursday (June 16, 2011). He reported to the body that there has already been an approval of the league on the issue of STFAP. The following calls were approved: 1) Roll back the tuition, 2) Scrap Roman’s STFAP and TOFI, and 3) Ensure an assistance mechanism funded by the state. Chairperson Garcia said to clarify that Councilor Escandor was asked to speak in behalf of the council on the said matter since the initial speaker was not yet there. In the same way, Vice Chairperson Ramos manifested disappointment towards the College Representatives since they were the ones initiating the debate in the LCC. He emphasized that in all chances, USC members, as much as possible, must standby what was talked about in the council. A reminder for everyone to not bring about committee activities during LCCs. It would be better if all are going to be brought up in the USC General Assembly. The role of the LCC only includes urgent activities which has important campaigns. Chairperson Garcia said that she was there too. She said it was disappointing since it came to the point that she herself was debating with the college representatives. It was such a shameful scene to the LCCs since it shows how disunited the council is; the fact that it came from the same people of the same stances. Councilor Ligsay then asked for Chairperson Garcia what the unity points of the council are for clarificatory purposes. Chairperson Garcia said that she had a face book conversation with Councilor Ligsay. Chairperson Garcia said that unity points are: roll back the tuition fee, scrap Roman’s STFAP and TOFI, fight for greater state subsidy, and ensure a mechanism that students can study in UP regardless of economic status. Councilor Ligsay asked Councilor Fuentes to speak up regarding the matter. Councilor Fuentes said that what was reflected in the minutes is that there was not a definite fourth point agreed upon by the council. She said that this is also the reason why in the text brigade of the USC UPDATE on the night of the first General Assembly, only three points were included in the message. She said that both points of Chairperson Garcia (ensure a mechanism that students of the university can study in UP regardless of economic status) and Councilor Ligsay (Comprehensive Assistance Program) was raised. However, no final point was agreed upon by the body. CSWCD Representative San Gabriel arrived at this point: 5:38pm
Councilor Ligsay said that from what he remembers, the body was debating as to whom the assistance will come from; is it from the students or from the government. He further elaborated that the body was not in favor of STFAP, but there was a Comprehensive Assistance Program agreed upon. Chairperson Garcia said that there is actually no point of contention in the issue because it is not about sloganeering. Law Representatiev Tiu said that there is also no point in debating whether it should be called as a program or mechanism. What is being avoided is the part whether it will come from the government since there is no point of unity in that regard. AIT Representative Santiago arrived at this point: 5:50pm Councilor Viray said that he agrees on the assistance program and sees nothing wrong with it as long as it does not come from the students. Chairperson Garcia then asked what the stand of the body is, should it be obtained from the government or the students. If the body does not make a stand, it is also good as saying that the council actually made a stand. Law Representative Tiu said that in his point of view, no matter what angle you look at it, the essence of having an assistance program is all the same. Vice Chairperson Ramos said that if the body agrees on having an assistance program, it would just be the same with having STFAP. It should be clear-cut from where the assistance must come from. Councilor Ligsay said that there is actually no point of unity in that regard since one side of the body believes in what STFAP can offer. However, he made it clear that what the body is debating at the present is what the fourth point is. Vice Chairperson Ramos said that if the body decides on merely scrapping STFAP without any qualifier, it would be just lame. Having no qualifier also creates disunity in the council. Law Representative Tiu suggested harmonizing both points. Chairperson Garcia then asked why the body cannot push for any qualifier. Law Representatiev Tiu said it is because the fourth point will be superfluous. The reason why the exact mechanism was not bluntly stated last GA is because there is no point of unity as to whom the assistance will come from. Vice Chairperson Ramos said that a call for assistance mechanism defeats the purpose. The body, hence, should not push for a non-qualifier since in a sense, it is also an IGP. Law Representative Tiu responded that kind of perspective is skewed on Vice Chairperson Ramos’ bias for STFAP. He then asked that whatever bias the body has can be first set aside. Thus, have a statement without a qualifier first. Chairperson Garcia said that if there would be no qualifier, then the body should scrap all together the call for greater state subsidy if it cannot choose if it will come from the government or the students. The call is the maximum call the body can agree upon. She said she cannot understand why the body is afraid to explain and pinpoint that the responsibility lies on the state and not the students. The choice should not be limited alone or even accepted that this assistance must be obtained from the students. Chairperson Garcia asked that if the body can actually face the students when asked on the issue and say that it cannot choose between the state and the students.
Councilor Ligsay said that it is not on the point of choosing; the point is if we scrap its very essence. The body’s point of unity is to scrap Roman’s STFAP. He said that he believes that the students can actually help other students while the government cannot give the said assistance yet. If this point is not pro-student to the body, then it would be another point of debate. Councilor Fuentes said that the way she sees it, there is nothing really wrong with having an assistance program for students. However, the sharpest question to ask is should this be the case, would the government be really pushed to give the right budget for education given that it sees that the students can actually take care of themselves. CMC Representative Orduña said that for her, it is not pro-student if another student would get her tuition from another student given the UP is a state university. There is no hierarchy when it comes to socio-economic status. It should not be the case that students also pay and problematize other students’ tuition fees. It is the state’s responsibilities and not theirs. More so, the state is using it as an excuse. Law Representative Tiu said that the body should not equate STFAP with CAP. The absolute claim of the other side of the body is that it should not come from the government. While the government cannot fund for the students’ tuition, there should be a consistent mechanism of how to address the needs of the students. It is not dependent on the perception that if has a certain thing in STFAP, and then the government will not fund at all. It should be the case that it translates if there is STFAP or none. Chairperson Garcia said that if the USC is to make a statement, it should be rooted on the ground. What is clear is the 2011 budget message. What was the exact reason why the budget was reduced? CBA Representative Cortez responded that for a university to earn through an income generating project. Chairperson Garcia continues in saying that according to former UP President Roman, STFAP is used as an IGP for the university. For the past year, it has already profited 500M. The question now is can the university still have STFAP while fighting for greater state subsidy given these facts? This is of the government’s choice to not give UP its budget. Eng’g Representatiev Ildesa disagrees with the points raised by Councilor Ligsay and Law Representatiev TIu. He said that he acknowledges that the government does not pay. What the body should resort to is to really fight for state subsidy. He reiterated that as the body makes its arguments, it should be united to fight for greater state subsidy. Therefore, other stands must be disregarded. Law Representative Tiu said that it is not a possibility. Eng’g representative Ildesa said that the students must fight for greater state subsidy and must recognize the responsibilities of the government that were not recognized then; and create a mechanism that will go against that. Law Representative Tiu said that the government actually gives a state subsidy, only that it does not reach zero-level. Chairperson Garcia clarified that the reason why one side of the body is being adamant about students subsidizing their co-students is because it remains that the burden is still given to the students. And the body cannot let this smoke screen pass. Therefore, it is not really an issue as to what mechanism must be favored.
Councilor Ligsay said that the final calls may be: Roll back the tuition and recognize that the government must subsidize for it; Scrap Roman’s STFAP bracketing; Fight for greater state subsidy regardless if it is STFAP or not, there should still be a transitory mechanism. Chairperson Garcia said that the problem does not lie on the order of calls; rather it is with the coherence. How can the body explain the consistency in the calls given these? In light of Roman’s STFAP, it probes more on the discussion of how sincere the students are in choosing whether it will come from the students or the government. If it resides with the students, then the call for fighting for greater state subsidy must be taken out since it is very contradictory. CSSP Representative Ramos arrived at this point: 6:15pm Law representative Tiu asked, do we recognize that the state cannot give us full subsidy? The body said ‘NO’. Law Representative Tiu disagreed and asked why. Councilor Escandor said that the debates are cycling already. She then channeled the discussion and said that whenever the body is confused, it must always go back to the principles; and that is, it is the government’s responsibility to give education to students. What the body is doing now is actually a means to legitimize the budget that the government cannot give the students. This means, making it as an excuse for the government in terms of education being a right. Law Representative Tiu said that the principles are actually rooted on the ground. The thing is how the body will explain to the students that while the government cannot zero the tuition, how then can we help them in having free education? Councilor Escandor responded that the sharperst to say is that it must come from the government because it is its responsibility. Councilor Ligsay asked the body what if the government cannot really give it; the council has to standby the needs of the students. This cannot be done overnight. Councilor Viray said that the zerotuition can actually be done by the government overnight; the students just have to assert it thoroughly. To add on to that point, Chairperson Garcia said that the government gave out more budgets to the military overnight, given that, it can also do the same with education. Law Representative Tiu said that there is no problem with assertion. The fact remains that no matter how big the action is the government cannot be the only factor. The people must also have a political will. Chairperson Garcia said that what the body is resolving is why it should resort to the government and not the students; this is because students cannot really get what it wants until continuous assertion is done. CS Representative Tan cited from experience that she has been to state universities her and abroad, and never did she know of any university that reached the zero-tuition state. The need for assiatnce program is in a realistic level rather than resorting to nothing at all. Councilor Melad said that the body is operationalizing in two scenarios. What it should do is to work at its maximum: assert as the USC that the government can provide for the students’ needs. For example in PUP, their USC found a way to not have an increase in their tuition fees, and it showed that
the government actually can. Second scenario, the students do not need an increase in tuition fee. As the USC, we should stand that the government must provide for these rights. And that we do not need to avail of such mechanisms. The body’s point of unity is how to make possible what PUP has done as a state university. As to what Representative Tan said, he believes there is a difference when comparing different states. What we wanted to do is to set that kind of trademark that we, as the USC, can win this fight through collective action. We can find a way as tax payers of this nation. Councilor Escandor said that she just wants to hit on what Law Representative Tiu said a while ago that the students indeed lack on asserting that is why it is not being heard by the government. However, this council should not work on the framework that it will be defeated. What the framework must be is that we trust the students that we can be united and we can actually make a move. We should never doubt the student body because no one else will be heard if we ourselves turn our backs from them. We should be positive about this. Thus, trust must be present. CSSP Representative Ramos questioned the premise “iskolar ng iskolar ng bayan” since he accepts that the program must be assisted by the government. More so, what he sees is that the importance of the debate lies in the premise that those who can pay, should pay. Chairperson Garcia said that if that is the case, then the body has no contentions after all as long as the government subsidizes the students’ needs. The fact that this body cannot decide while waiting for the greater state subsidy; those who can pay should pay to subsidize for those who can. Councilor Ligsay asked if that is the same with paying P300.00 per unit. Chairperson Garcia said that paying for something implies the obvious that the government is trying to reduce its responsibility to the state. Councilor Ligsay said that whatever the case may be, there will still be a roll back. Personally, he said that he wants the zero-tuition fee. However, if this cannot be, something must be done for those with lower income. Chairperson Garcia then asked, where or from whom will the subsidy be obtained? Councilor Diño said that STFAP was already present then, even during the time that the base tuition is P300.00. The tuition fee was already socialized only that, no one pays higher than P300.00. Chairperson Garcia channeled the discussion again and said that the body is resolving a question here. She asked what the clear understanding with regards to STFAP is. Councilor Diño responded that it does not mean that one pays more; it means that person is already paying for the tuition of another student. Law Representative Tiu said that payment for tuition is not an end in itself. One pays for his/her education. When one pays for that P1,500.00, you are paying for your tuition fee. Chairperson Garcia requested to make it clearer for the body to get the point as well. Councilor Alcantara said that it was never asserted that when one is paying the full cost tuition, he/she is already paying for another. It simply said that those who can pay should pay. Those who cannot should be subsidized. Councilor Ligsay added that the framework that the body abandons is the same framework, they also abhor. He said that if the body agrees with Councilor Alcantara, then it is all just the same.
Chairperson Garcia said that she disagrees and said that the new STFAP is not the same with Roman’s STFAP framework. With regards to the free tuition fee, in Cuba, they do not pay anything for education. But whatever the case may be, the question still remains, will the subsidy come from the students or the government. That is what is contentious. Law Representative Tiu said that it is contentious because it is being interpreted as such a student is subsidizing a student rather than the government is subsidizing to pay for one’s tuition. Chairperson Garcia said that if that was the problem, then it should have been pointed out at the start of the discussion since the points of unity are already obvious. Councilor Ligsay said that Roman’s STFAP is different from the Comprehensive Assistance Program that is why we were able to hit a fourth point of unity. Councilor Fuentes said that she thinks, whatever the term used may be, whether a mechanism or assistance program, it would mean the same thing since the council has already agreed upon certain points. CONCLUSION: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Roll back tuition Scrap Roman’s STFAP and TOFI Fight for greater state subsidy Ensure the accessibility of UP education through a pro-student assistance mechanism funded by the state. Committee Reports Proper
The Freshmen Committee reminded the body of the 6am call time tomorrow for the Freshmen Welcome Assembly (FWAS). Call time for the local college councils is 6:30am. Morning FWAS will start at 7:30am and will end at 11:15. Afternoon FWAS (CSSP, CS, ENG’G) will start at 12:30pm and will end at 4:15pm. After the said welcome assemblies, the CHK Bus will just be outside the UP theatre for the freshmen tour. The Freshie Mobile will be going routes until 6pm. Schedule for the Freshie Week: July 4: Watchmen (film showing) at 6pm July 7: Super Isko (Quiz bee) July 8: Freshie Concert
ASPECT Freshman Welcome Assembly
FRESHMAN COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT NO. 2 PROJECT TITLE STATUS TO DO Freshie Booklet Done -
Freshie Week
Freshie Mobile
Done
-
Watchmen SuperIsko
Pending Pending
Doomsday
Done
Logistics and Publicity Questions, Publicity and Logistics -
The EdRes Committee followed after with updates on the concept of the ACLE teaser: Biggest Loser. Teasers will be released tomorrow (July 14, 2011) or on Wednesday (July 15, 2011)
Committee on Organizations, Fraternities and Sororities PROGRESS REPORT ASPECT
Capacity building
Others
PROJECT TITLE
STATUS
Leadership Training Seminar
pending
1. org database (name of org, point person and his/her contact details) 2. venues and equipments list and their reservation pending procedures + fees, if any 3. tambayan distribution and college recognition mechanism 4. tambayan status report
TO DO 1. Module review on June 13 2. Reserve Vinzons Hall Rooftop for venue format / guide to be uploaded in the USC mailing list tomorrow, June 9 at latest DEADLINE on June 18, 11:55 p.m.
Notes: The Leadership Training Seminar (LTS) is a requirement of the Office of the Student Activities (OSA) for the recognition of organizations, fraternities and sororities yearly conducted by the USC. It will be held on June 15 to 18, from 9 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. tentatively at Vinzon’s Hall Rooftop. Organizations, fraternities and sororities must send at least two to three officers as representatives in one LTS session to satisfy the recognition requirement. But it is encouraged that all officers attend the LTS.
PEOPLE’S STRUGGLES COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT (June 13, 2011) ASPECT PROJECT TITLE STATUS TO DO Framework Tribute to Young Continuing ; June 24, 2011, Venue Reservation setting Martyrs: Remembering CM Recto Hall Program Karen and Sherlyn and all Logistics the victims of human Publicity rights violation in our Tie up with NUSP, CAL SC country Preparation for SONA Continuing ; July 25, 2011 Tie up with KSUP and -1 yr Assessment (Aquino NUSP Administration) Program Logistics Publicity Deployment of Peoples’ Struggle Continuing Consultation Machinery Consortium -mass organization - Alliance building -existing alliance
Mobilization
ASPECT Data gathering
Communication
SONA Mobilization
Continuing ; July 25, 2011
STRAW COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT PROJECT TITLE STATUS Org Rights Pending Student Code of Continuing Conduct
Encourage students and other sectors to unite in this event through intense campaigns
TO DO Collect data from COFS Collect data and documents from Student Review Committee.
Student Representative in College executive committees Scholarship for members of Performing Orgs STFAP
Pending
Know stand of college SCs through LCC
Pending
Collect data from CCA, COFS
Continuing
Bantay Budget Campaign
Continuing
Assembly of STRAW Heads
Continuing
Know stand of students and college SCs. Get more data regarding bracketing in Diliman Study further differences of the 2011 and 2012 budget proposals for UP Convene STRAW Committee heads of SCs.
STRAW Consortium
Continuing
Convene Gender, COFS, BSS, SLAAC and Freshie Committee heads
BSS Updates Coordinated with the Dorm Managers regarding the dorm admission process. June 21 would be the release of all the appeal for dormitories as decided by dormitory managers and OSH. Law Student Government asked the help of BSS Co-Head Councilor Ligsay to forward a letter of appeal to OSH Officer-in-charge Noel Marquina regarding the law students who were not prioritized in the dorm admission process. The letter was successfully endorsed and forwarded by LSG Vice Chairperson Lamug and Councilor Ligsay. Schedule for dialogues and consultations will be fixed. NCPAG Rep Ongkeko contacted the University Health Service for the Blood Drive, and the UHS expressed their interest and offered UHS assistance and services for the said project. Councilor Ligsay is in the process of contacting other possible organizations for the tie up. BSS Committee will also be releasing health primers soon. SLAAC Committee with BSS Committee will be launching a free notarization project for the dormers. (Pending) STRAW and BSS Committee will be making a position paper on the current student services in the university. BSS Committee will be handling the consultation for the dorm admission and as a result, dorm associations, BSS, and ACD will be forwarding a comprehensive report to the Office of Student Housing and Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs and Office of the President. Planner Updates: A lot of people are still eager to buy the University Lifestyle Planner; it is recommended that all the USC members will help in selling the planners. Overall assessment of the sales: Slightly above average. In span of two weeks, we sold and distributed hundreds of planners. Recommendation: Room to room and another marketing plan for the planner. BSS and CRAW Committee will be having a meeting with the OVCCA regarding illegal laundry business in the campus Councilor Venturina takes the floor in delegating the tasks for the DZUP Launching tomorrow at the AS Steps (June 14, 2011)
SECRETARIAT COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT NO. 2 (June 13, 2011) BUDDY SYSTEM Gem Ace Dan Mike Cathy Martin Melvin Dan CSSP Heart Fra Jia Pau Aya Aman Apa Aleks Mara Kapao Mots Wes Tochi Kat Shaina Orly Tine TJ Simon Trisha Gail Rayson Markus Bea Santi Kelvin
STANDING COMMITTEES MASS MEDIA FINANCE Mots Aman Gail Wes Heart Kelvin Orly Santi Martin Bea Markus Melvin Kapao Santi Dan Apa
SECRETARIAT Jia Aya Tine Shaina Kat Simon TJ Pau
CRAW Orly Cathy Wes Bea Apa Fra
PeopStrugg Fra
EdRes Martin Cathy Rayson Kelvin Jia Fra
Freshie Santi
SPECIAL STANDING COMMITTEES SpoFiH StRAW COFS Simon Aya Gail Melvin Markus Aya TJ Heart Tochi Kat Santi Kapao Shaina Gail Jia Apa Kelvin Wes
Gender Heart
CCA Tine
WAYS AND MEANS Cathy Mara Ace Rayson Tochi Aleks Fra Trisha
BSS Tochi/Ace Aya Aman Pau TJ Kat
Envi HEAD
SpeC Mara Ace Mots Shaina Kapao Trisha
SLAAC Melvin
Martin Rayson Markus Kat Tine
Aman Wes Pau Mike Kelvin
ASPECT Sales
Admin-Related Matters
Mara Aleks Tine Mike Dan
Shaina Kapao Trisha Gail Aleks Mots
Pau TJ Rayson Bea Orly
Simon Mike Dan Aleks Apa
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT (GA 2) PROJECT TITLE STATUS TO DO Rummage Sale Continuing 1. Update CHK SC on final venue and time 2. Sort rummageables in TREC UP Merchandise Sale
Continuing
BCO Concern re: DHL space lease
Continuing (Accomplished response to letter)
1. Tie-up with printer to lessen costs 2. Meet with committee to finalize sale period and merchandise 1. Send letter to Chancellor re: request for space
SUMMARY OF POINTS: A. 1. 2. 3. 4.
Conclusion for the STFAP issue: Roll back the tuition Scrap Roman’s STFAP and TOFI Fight for greater state subsidy Ensure the accessibility of UP education through a pro-student assistance mechanism funded by the state
B. UP Lifestyle Planner is now out! C. Dates to Remember: June 14: Freshmen Welcome Assemble at the UP Theatre -
DZUP Launching at the AS Steps
June 21: Release of all the appeal for dormitories as decided by dormitory managers and OSH. July 4: Watchmen (film showing) at 6pm July 7: Super Isko (Quiz bee) July 8: Freshie Concert
Meeting adjourned. Time Ended: 8:24pm.