A este tipo no le envejece el cerebro. Cumplidos los 84 años, le sigue titilando a través de los claros, traviesos ojos azules de siempre. Si acaso, se toma más respiro entre párrafo y párrafo, escucha más pacientemente, se deja interrumpir. Pero sigue siendo el Jacques Delors químicamente puro. El que no para, el que acaba de publicar su enésimo libro, Invertir en lo social, el que predica con ocasión y sin ella por una Unión Europea (UE) más fuerte, más articulada, más unida.

…..

Click on the link to read the article

via “Si Europa no se integra, mandarán EE UU y China” · ELPAÍS.com.

Hablar de una Educación para Todos forma parte del discurso educativo en los últimos años. Sin embargo, es bueno revisar en qué consiste esa iniciativa en el lugar indicado. Puedes consultar mayor información en este sitio PORTAL UNESCO

Para ofrecerles una breve introducción al tema coloco la siguiente información:

El movimiento de Educación para Todos es un compromiso mundial de dar educación básica de calidad a todos los niños, jóvenes y adultos. Esta iniciativa se puso en marcha en la Conferencia Mundial de Educación para Todos celebrada en Jomtien, (Tailandia) en 1990, cuando los representantes de la comunidad internacional acordaron universalizar a la educación primaria y reducir masivamente el analfabetismo hacia finales del decenio.

Diez años después, muchos países estaban aún lejos de alcanzar ese objetivo. La comunidad internacional se reunió de nuevo en Dakar, Senegal, y ratificó su compromiso de lograr la Educación para Todos de entonces a 2015. Se definieron seis objetivos fundamentales con el propósito de llegar a satisfacer las necesidades de aprendizaje de todos los niños, jóvenes y adultos a más tardar en 2015.

Esos seis objetivos eran:

• Objetivo 1. Ampliar la protección y educación integrales de la primera infancia.
• Objetivo 2. Dar a todos enseñanza primaria gratuita y obligatoria.
• Objetivo 3. Fomentar el acceso de jóvenes y adultos al aprendizaje adecuado y a programas de preparación para la vida activa.
• Objetivo 4. Aumentar en un 50% el número de adultos alfabetizados.
• Objetivo 5. Suprimir las disparidades entre los sexos en la enseñanza de aquí al año 2005 y lograr antes de 2015 la igualdad de género en relación con la educación.
• Objetivo 6. Mejorar la calidad de la educación.

Première table ronde, ce soir, organisée dans le cadre du Conseil des Territoires du PS. Peu importe le fonctionnement de cette structure nouvelle, et qui relève de l’organisation interne du Parti socialiste. Le thème abordé, en revanche, importe : l’Europe, bien sûr… Et parmi les interventions, celle de Michel Delebarre mérite d’être soulignée. Le maire de Dunkerque a fort justement rappelé que dans cette Europe dominée par la droite, la vision qu’ont certains de l’aide aux régions est parfaitement cohérente avec la conception libérale du développement économique : les régions leaders doivent être davantage aidées pour aller plus loin… et on compte sur le développement économique qu’ils généreront pour que les plus faibles suivent. Inutile de préciser que le maire de Stuttgart, par exemple, dont le PIB par tête d’habitant est le plus important dans cette Europe des 27, est assez d’accord avec cette manière de voir les choses. Là où Jacques Delors créait le FEDER pour aider les régions en difficulté, pour mettre en place une solidarité à l’échelle du développement… la droite des Barroso et autres libéraux de tous poils ne voit dans le budget européen qu’un moyen de renforcer les inégalités. A terme, et si le résultat des élections du 7 juin n’y change rien, le Nord/Pas-de-Calais y perdrait des millions d’Euros chaque année.

Tout est là : aider, encore, toujours, les plus forts ; privilégier les priviliégiés, sciemment, consciemment. Continuer à appuyer le développement européen sur le mirage de la “main invisible du marché” qui résoudrait tout, partout. Livrer davantage les Européens aux financiers et libéraux de tous les continents, sans règles et sans lois… alors que l’urgence d’une Europe politique, sociale, équilibrée, solidaire crève les yeux.

Marc Vasseur a rédigé un article aujourd’hui à propos de Jacques Delors. Celui-ci, interviewé sur France Inter, doit finalement, vers la fin de l’entretien, répondre à la question “Vous voyez qui à la Présidence de la Commission ?”. Il est vrai que l’ancien Président de la Commission Européenne met quelques temps et bafouillements avant de répondre pour finalement admettre un Francois Fillon ou Alain Juppé.

Le buzz éclate, les socialistes ne sont même pas capables de s’accorder sur un candidat commun et qui plus est de gauche ! Et pourtant, il suffit de lire la presse et d’écouter en entier l’interview pour observer que même Jacques Delors est pour un candidat commun et a lui-même “longtemps plaidé pour un candidat commun“.

Mais attention, là où Marc Vasseur se plante complètement, c’est que Delors justifie son propos dans les secondes qui suivent lorsqu’on lui fait la réflexion “un francais de droite donc ?“… La réponse est clair et précise, par la-même très réaliste : “Je vois le rapport actuel des forces, si c’est la gauche [...] je vous donnerais le nom pour la gauche“.

Votez pour cet article sur

Indeed, Jose Barroso is no Jacques Delors…

Barroso hopes to become the second President of the Commission to serve a second term. For myself, unwanted and unlikely.

For the people who haven’t been knee deep in the European arena- it suffices to google: Barroso + scandal…
You’ll see plenty of results – including the following:

FT, EUX, EUObserver, EUReferendum, Daily Mail, New Europe 1, New Europe2, PSE

And let’s not forget… The several failed referenda to get the European Constitution, and later the Reform Treaty (cleverly renamed the Treaty of Lisbon - absolutely nothing to do with where the honorable president comes from!).

The failure to pass the Lisbon Treaty is a historic failure- and not one to be celebrated by the re-appointment of the man who led the failing campaign. The President might have a glimmer of hope that Ireland will somehow magically get another referendum voted before his term is up- but this seems highly improbable, if not impossible. Even if this were to happen, Barroso’s term would still be a failure! Europe has lost too much time to cite bad leadership as a reason.

Sadly, Barroso has failed as President of the Commission. And Sadly, there are indications that some leaders may back him for a second term. A ray of hope however came through my laptop screen this morning, as I read this article in EUObserver which has Sarkozy and Barroso going head to head.

Losing the French backing is going to be a huge problem for Barroso. And if I may add, a huge present from Sarkozy, to the Europeans looking for a brighter future.

Copyright: Courtesy of Erhard Busek

In April 1994, after the negotiations for Austria to join the EU were successfully completed, the campaign for the enabling referendum on June 12, began to heat up. At the height of the debate, Brigitte Ederer, the then Social Democrats State Secretary for EU Affairs and now CEO of Siemens Österreich, projected that joining the European Union, every Austrian family would save about 1,000 Schillings a month (about €75) in living expenses through more competitive pricing.

Despite the ongoing political campaign for the general election Sept. 28, 2008, and a busy schedule as a leader of political dialogue, Erhard Busek, former Conservative ÖVP party leader, took time for a discussion about fundamental European issues.

Ederer’s ‘Tausender’ is a promise that has been criticized by political allies and opponents alike, even earning it a Wikipedia entry. Among those critics – then as today – was Busek, at the time Austria’s Vice Chancellor.

“No one can sensually experience this ‘Tausender’,” Busek argued assertively. He is still in disbelief that anyone could seriously make such an argument.

“Everyone expected that they would be handed 1,000 Schillings when leaving a supermarket,” he said incredulously. Not without irony, he points to the current general election campaign, and the “nonsense” – this time, that the Social Democrats could propose to cut the 10% VAT rate on groceries by half – is being repeated almost exactly.

“The people won’t notice the difference. And that is why issues like this must be avoided; politics has to convey content.” After all, European Integration is a peace project that evolved first as economic integration and allowed for the largest single market, but evidently lacked a strong political component. The reduction of the European integration to what Busek calls those “primitive arguments,” is “a vilification of people’s intelligence.”

Since his departure from politics in 1995 – succeeded by Wolfgang Schüssel as party leader – Busek has chaired the Institut für den Donauraum und Mitteleuropa (Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe), an academic institute and think tank focusing its political research on European issues within the Danube region as well as within Central and Eastern Europe.

Although issues like the European Constitution or the expansion of the European Union further southeast seem dry to those not directly involved, these are clearly Busek’s passion. These are political issues rather than an economic one; and by opening a fundamental discussion, one senses the essence of how difficult it is to convey current processes to a wider audience.

We sit down on a morning in late-September at the Radio Kultur Café of the ORF Funkhaus in Vienna’s 4^th district – just days away from an election that even Busek had to admit he lacked enthusiasm for. Within in minutes, talk became animated, a lively to-the-point discussion undistracted by the interior, of this unassuming 1960s building. Nevertheless, a Grosser Brauner helped to create a more informal atmosphere and ventilated Busek’s word-flow.

Earlier this year, Busek published a collection of essays on European issues under the title Europa eine Seele geben (A Soul for Europe). The collection was inspired by a conference held in November 2004 in Berlin, the most important inspiration, however, coming from former EU Commission President Jacques Delors in 1992 that Busek reiterated in the opening essay.

“We are now entering a fascinating time – perhaps specifically for the young generation,” Delors had written, “a time when debate on the meaning of European construction becomes a major political factor. Believe me, we won’t succeed with Europe solely on the basis of legal expertise or economic know-how… If in the next ten years we haven’t managed to give a soul to Europe, to give a spirituality and meaning, the game will be up.”

Is the word ‘soul’ a useful choice of words in this context? Is it the right vehicle for European citizens to realize the importance and historic dimension of the European integration process? I raised my doubts.

“If you define ‘soul’ within a religious context, no,” Busek said. “But soul meaning enlivenment of content or ideas, then yes.”

The book itself was written from the deep sense that Europe in an economic sense works very well, while “the questions of the content of Europe do not work properly.” So, this book for Busek is a work in progress, “a snapshot of a process I have experienced myself.”

The rejection of the Lisbon Treaty during the Irish Referendum of June 13, effectively put a hold on the constitutional process. However much attention has been given to French President Nicholas Sarkozy’s effort to resolve the situation.

Busek remains skeptical. “Sarkozy has largely contributed to the defeat with his visit to Ireland prior the referendum,” he countered. Consequently, he rejects the pressure the French President tried to assert in July for a second referendum to be held in June 2009.

But there is a more fundamental question underlining the current debate, that each member country has little understanding of the others.

“Mr. Sarkozy does not know what to do with Ireland,” he commented, continuing, with an ironic smile, that he would love to test the French President’s knowledge of Irish history. “There is always the opinion or arrogance, that ‘we know everything about everyone else, but they don’t know anything about us.’ This way of thinking is consistent throughout the European integration process.”

It was time for a specific answer. What was the solution for Ireland and the European Constitution? A Europe of different speeds? Busek shook his head.

“I am not a particular friend of a Core Europe. It poses immediately the question who is part of it and who is not.” And he gave cause for concern that some of the older EU member states might exclude Austria, for example.

Instead, Busek proposed trying to find common grounds with Ireland and enable a second referendum when the time was right. The Irish have to define for themselves “the questions that are important to them and also where the EU would like their decision,” he said. “I don’t think we should dictate that. I would consider that a wrong approach.” In an era of globalization, and the related international political and economic problems, there is a serious issue of timing.

“Europe has a dilemma,” Busek concluded, “and this process of shaping opinions takes a long time. These are issues for generations to come.”

This is an excerpt, the full article will be published in October 2008 in The Vienna Review.

des médecins au chevet de l’ Europe

L’ Europe revient donc sur le devant d’une scène médiatique, comme si, dans ce qui semble être son agonie, les médecins à son chevet tentaient de la sortir de cette torpeur, lente décrépitude dans les esprits qui semble être la tendance depuis nombre d’années. Chacun y va de son diagnostic, de son pronostic et de sa prescription tandis que d’autres s’agitent dans une approche plus communicative que rationnelle ou constructive.

Des amorces de diagnostic et une ébauche de vision thérapeutique

• « il faut accepter que certains puissent avancer plus vite que d’autres » déclare Jacques Delors

• l’ Agence France Presse indique clairement : « M. Fischer a reconnu que la création d’une telle avant-garde serait possible si le traité de Lisbonne était finalement adopté, malgré son rejet par les électeurs irlandais, mais qu’elle serait plus difficile si ce traité restait lettre morte (…) Il a suggéré que lors de prochaines réformes des institutions, les populations ne soient plus appelées à approuver par référendum un traité compliqué, comme cela a été fait en France, aux Pays-Bas et en Irlande, mais à décider si elles veulent continuer à participer à l’intégration européenne (…) L’idée est que les électeurs disent: “nous participons, et c’est un oui, ou nous pensons que c’est trop d’Europe, nous n’en voulons pas et nous ne participons pas”, a-t-il expliqué. »

De son côté, Nicolas Sarkozy, à l’ aube de la Présidence française du Conseil de l’Union européenne, ne semble tenter de dresser aucun diagnostic mais fait à l’habitude preuve d’un volontarisme qui à certains égards peut faire peur. Ses multiples divagations dans les méandres d’un concept d’ Union Méditerranéenne dont on sent mal une logique compatible avec l’ Europe ; son apparente conception atlantiste d’une défense européenne arrimée à l’ OTAN – réactivant ainsi le virus qui, en 1954, a coûté la vie in utero à la CED ; sa conception d’une Europe qui laisserait la prérogative du social aux nations ; sa façon de personnaliser la politique : tous ces facteurs (et de nombreux autres encore) laissent hélas craindre non seulement un échec de la roide Présidence française, mais encore – et cela me paraît un fait très grave – une désaffection grandissante auprès des peuples de l’idéal européen.

rendre l’ Europe aux européens

Le « concept » Europe ne souffre pas aujourd’hui seulement de son manque de lisibilité, mais aussi de la certitude grandissante des populations que cette Europe s’éloigne de l’homme. La solution passera certainement par l’adhésion à un projet politique fort et universaliste. La proposition de création d’une communauté de l’énergie sera une aide mais apparaît hélas plutôt aujourd’hui comme un remède de confort.

Ce projet politique doit être simple, conceptuel ; c’est cette question là qui doit être posée aux européens, celle qu’évoque en partie M. Fischer : “voulez-vous oui ou non poursuivre la construction européenne et voulez-vous que des représentants démocratiquement élus conduisent ce chantier ?”. Cette Constitution doit régler le principe d’une vraie instance démocratique élue au suffrage universel (un Parlement) qui sera l’organe de construction de l’ Union. Seule une pratique active et résolue de démocratie sauvera ce beau, grand mais difficile projet.

Charles TOCANIER

L’esprit dans lequel nous abordons le congrès de Reims est à la fois humble, déterminé et résolument collectif comme l’illustre l’élaboration même de cette contribution : nous avons choisi de partager notre expérience et nos convictions avec loyauté, d’identifier les défis avec clarté et de chercher des solutions avec honnêteté. Nous n’avons pas d’adversaire dans le Parti. Mais nous avons un but : préparer le retour de la gauche au pouvoir, pour mieux servir les Français.

Téléchargez la contribution en cliquant sur l’image ci-dessous :

Last week, The Manila Times solicited the Freedom from Debt Coalition an article on the education sector for its Sunday Times special edition. The article we submitted explained the sorry state of our education sector due to Philipine governments’ non-compliance to an international standard on spending–the UNESCO Delors Benchmark. Said benchmark prescribes a government to appropriate 6 percent of its gross national product (GNP) on education. Unfortunately, only the intro part of the article was used and incorporated in the banner story.

The Sunday Times
15 June 2008, Banner Story

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/june/15/yehey/top_stories/20080615top1.html

SPECIAL REPORT: BASIC EDUCATION REFORM
Same old problems still
Time to pass a law in the order of Sen. Mar Roxas’ Omnibus Education Reform Act of 2008
By Rene Q. Bas, Editor in Chief

[Con't]

This made the Freedom from Debt Coalition, from whom The Times solicited an article about the basic education issue, to lead off with the statement:

“When classes formally opened last Tuesday, the entire nation was once again subjected to the same old problems besetting our education. From shortages of classrooms, teaching materials and instructors, up to unregulated tuition and other school fee hikes; students, parents and educators once more bore the burden of the yearly school blues like a deadbeat ritual imposed to an exhausted populace.

“Yet amid the political rhetoric and empty populism of our national leaders, little to none is [being] said about the grave wrongdoing of our government to education—the blatant non-compliance to international standards on social spending by the past and present governments.”

[READ MORE]

From SunStar Cebu

Tuesday, June 10, 2008
RP’s education budget lacked P1.66T: groups

IF a 1996 Unesco document were to be followed, the Philippine Government owes Filipino students P1.66 trillion to fund education.

This is according to a research found by the Youth Against Debt (YAD)-Cebu and the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC)- Cebu.

In a press conference yesterday, the group said that the Philippines signed the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (Unesco) Delors Benchmark that set the education expenditure of developing countries at six percent of the Gross National Product (GNP).
However, 12 years since the country signed the document, it has yet to actually use six percent of the GNP for education expenditure.

Based on statistics presented by YAD and FDC, the highest percentage of the GNP used for education expenditure was at 3.8 percent. This was in 1998 under the term of former president Joseph Estrada.

The lowest percentage was at 2.2 percent and was in 2006 under President Arroyo.

“That is why we have shortages of classrooms, teachers and teaching facilities,” said Jose Aaron Pedrosa of YAD.

Of the developing countries that have signed the benchmark, it was Grenada that spent the highest at about 10 percent of its GNP.

“This shows that there is no relationship with how much you spend for education and your economy,” said Pedrosa.

According to records from YAD and FDC, Swaziland , which has a GNP per capita similar to the Philippines , spends about 6.24 percent of its GNP on education.

YAD and FDC are dismayed that the country spends more on debt servicing than on education.

In 2007, the country’s GNP was P7.2 trillion, said Pedrosa. However, only P164 billion was spent for education.

Pedrosa said the six percent of last year’s GNP for education expenditure should have been P436 billion.

Instead, P627 billion went to payment of the country’s debts, he said.

Yesterday, YAD and FDC formally launched the “Six will Fix” campaign, which aims to urge the government to comply with the Unesco Delors Benchmark.

“We are calling the government to invest in education,” Pedrosa told reporters.

Meanwhile, Department of Education 7 Director Carolino Mordeno was happy to hear of the initiative of the students to lobby for the increase of the education budget. (EPB)

From GMANews.TV news: Group wants debt moratorium, 6% GNP education spending

MANILA, Philippines – With one week to go before classes start, militant anti-debt youths demanded that President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo follow the United Nations’ benchmark to spend six percent of gross national product on education.

The Youth Against Debt (YAD) also reiterated the call for a moratorium on paying “illegitimate” debts, instead of having President Arroyo calling for a freeze in tuition hikes.

“We want Mrs. Arroyo to put money where her mouth is. Her moratorium on tuition hikes is too little and too late. Instead, we demand a moratorium in the payments of all illegitimate debts,” the group said in a statement posted on the website of the Freedom from Debt Coalition.

YAD claimed government’s neglect to spend six percent of GNP for education in the last 12 years had robbed the youth and students of some P1.66 trillion.

It said that from 1996 to 2008, the administrations of Fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada and Gloria Arroyo “unashamedly disregarded a widely accepted and recognized international benchmark on education spending as provided by the 1996 International Commission on Education for the
21st Century of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headed by Jacques Delors.”

The youth group stressed that complying with the UNESCO Delors Benchmark may be the key to perennial problems besetting the education sector and to “give back what was lost from education.”

On Monday, it also launched its “Six Will Fix” campaign to demand the government to immediately implement the international benchmark by pegging our education budget 6 percent of the GNP.

“We will lobby our legislators to institutionalize the standard by passing a law giving automatic appropriations on education, not debt servicing,” YAD said.

YAD also lamented new and old students will again be subjected to the same old list of problems besetting the ever-dismal state of Philippine education.

“Amid the political rhetoric and empty populism of our national leaders, little if none is said about the blatant non-compliance to international standards on education spending by the government,” it said.

The UNESCO Delors Benchmark set the education expenditure of developing countries at six percent of GNP.

More than a hundred countries recognize this as the accepted standard on education financing, setting the demarcating contour by establishing the minimum level below which government subsidy on education cannot be neglected without causing serious consequences to our education’s quality, accessibility and sustainability.

For its part, the Freedom from Debt Coalition stressed that for almost 12 years, the Philippines is nowhere near achieving the 6 percent of GNP target.

“Education spending in our country as percentage of the GNP hovered no more than 3.8 percent. This wouldn’t be much of a dilemma if the trend of our government’s spending on education is nearing towards the fulfillment of the standard like that of other developing countries. But sad to say, the trend is anything but positive,” said James Miraflor, FDC public finance campaigner.

In their joint analysis, FDC and YAD revealed that the country’s education spending as proportion of the GNP never reached 4 percent.

From 3.8 percent in 1998 under Mr Estrada, education expenditure as proportion of the total national income drastically dipped to 2.26 percent in 2007 under Mrs Arroyo.

“In actual terms, as of 2007, the total loss or deficit in our education spending is a shocking P1.66 trillion! This is enough money to wipe out classroom shortages, augment diminishing state subsidy to public higher education institutions, and hire more teachers. The amount lost is so big that it can fund more than 100 Comelec-supervised national and local elections and yes, run the operation of the entire government for a year,” said Miraflor.

The two groups said that While succeeding governments are equally accountable for this mess, Mrs Arroyo’s term is the “most horrible” for education.

“Not even her newfound penchant for freezing tuition hikes of state colleges and universities or her flimsy appeal to private schools to have a heart will hide the fact that education suffered worst under her rule,” YAD said.

Miraflor said that of the total P1.66 trillion losses from education, the Arroyo administration contributed a deficit of P1.3 trillion in education spending making her the least spender on education.

“Not satisfied in being the biggest borrower and largest payer of debt, Mrs Arroyo broke another record this time in being the most indifferent in not only complying with the international standard but also in increasing education expenditure,” he added.

FDC said that from 1996 to 2007, total interest payments amounted to P2.2 trillion compared to the total gap or losses our education suffered through the years which totaled P1.66 trillion.

“We believe this is institutional robbery. Resources supposedly for increased social spending are being siphoned away by automatic debt servicing,” Miraflor said.

YAD disagreed with the argument that there is a scarcity of resources.

It said what is in place is a scarcity of democracy concerning budget planning brought about by institutional mechanisms that not only undermine international benchmarks on specific social services but also gives utmost priority to the religious payment of debts.

FDC and YAD reiterated their call on the legislative branch to repeal Sec. 31B of Presidential Decree 1177, which ensures the automatic appropriation of payments for principal and interest on public debt. – GMANews.TV

Last 2 June 2008, the Youth Against Debt (YAD) together with the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) organized a press conference which formally launched its Six will Fix! Campaign calling on the government to peg education spending six percent (6%) of the Gross National Product (GNP). The said call is based on a widely accepted international standard on education expenditure as recommended by the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-First century of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

In their joint analysis, YAD and FDC revealed that the country’s education spending as proportion of the GNP never reached 4%. The groups also explained that from 1996 to 2007, total interest payments amounted to P 2.2 trillion compared to the total gap or losses our education suffered through the years which totaled to P 1.66 trillion.

The youth group also castigated President Mrs. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s moratorium on tuition hikes and demanded instead an immediate moratorium on debt payments pending investigation, renegotiation and condonation.

The said press conference was covered by ABS-CBN, Net 25, Pinas Newspaper, ABC 5, RPN 9, Philippine Inquirer, Peoples Journal, GMANews.TV, Remate, DWIZ, DZAR, Sunshine TV.

YAD and FDC’s statement also landed on gmanews.tv highlighting its call for debt moratorium and for the government to comply with the 6% GNP benchmark on education spending.

In other news, YAD was quoted by a June 3 Business Mirror Newspaper Editorial on Education wherein the youth group lambasted the government’s simplistic solutions to education problems and asserted that the government should focus on strengthening existing state colleges and universities deemed as centers of excellence instead of building more public schools just to satisfy patronage politics.

GMANews.TV
03 June 2008

http://www.gmanews.tv/story/98619/Group-wants-debt-moratorium-6-GNP-education-spending#

Group wants debt moratorium, 6% GNP education spending
Article posted June 02, 2008 – 10:56 AM

MANILA, Philippines – With one week to go before classes start, militant anti-debt youths demanded that President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo follow the United Nations’ benchmark to spend six percent of gross national product on education.

The Youth Against Debt (YAD) also reiterated the call for a moratorium on paying “illegitimate” debts, instead of having President Arroyo calling for a freeze in tuition hikes.

“We want Mrs. Arroyo to put money where her mouth is. Her moratorium on tuition hikes is too little and too late. Instead, we demand a moratorium in the payments of all illegitimate debts,” the group said in a statement posted on the website of the Freedom from Debt Coalition.

[READ MORE]

by Youth Against the Debt

One week from now, classes will formally open subjecting new and old students to the same old list of problems besetting the ever-dismal state of Philippine education. Yet, we from the Youth Against Debt (YAD) said that amid the political rhetoric, the often-ritualistic protest actions, and empty populism of our national leaders, little if none is said about the grave yet unnoticed wrongdoing – the blatant non-compliance to international standards on social spending by our succeeding governments from the time of Fidel V. Ramos up to Mrs. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

From 1996 to 2008, the governments of Fidel V. Ramos, Joseph Estrada and most especially Mrs. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo unashamedly disregarded a widely accepted and recognized international benchmark on education spending as provided by the 1996 International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first century of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headed by Jacques Delors.

The standard, popularly known as the UNESCO Delors Benchmark set the education expenditure of developing countries at six percent (6%) of the total national income or Gross National Product (GNP). More than a hundred countries recognize this as the accepted standard on education financing, setting the demarcating contour by establishing the minimum level below which government subsidy on education cannot be neglected without causing serious consequences to our education’s quality, accessibility and sustainability.

However, twelve years have already passed yet, the Philippines is nowhere near that target. Education spending in our country as percentage of the GNP hovered no more than 3.8% This wouldn’t be much of a dilemma if the trend of our government’s spending on education is nearing towards the fulfillment of the standard like that of other developing countries. But sad to say, the trend is anything but positive.

Truth be said, our education spending as proportion of the GNP never reached 4 %. From 3.8% in 1998 during the time of Estrada, education expenditure as proportion of the total national income drastically dipped to 2.26% in 2007 under President Arroyo.

In actual terms, as of 2007, the total loss or deficit in our education spending is a shocking P 1.6 trillion! This is enough money to wipe out classroom shortages, enough money to augment diminishing state subsidy to public higher education institutions and enough money to hire more teachers. The amount lost is so big that it can fund more than 100 Comelec-supervised national and local elections and yes, run the operation of the entire government for a year.

This is clear and simple robbery. A robbery without end.

While succeeding governments are equally accountable for this mess, Mrs. Arroyo’s term is the most horrible for education. Not even her newfound proclivity in freezing tuition hikes of state colleges and universities or her flimsy appeal to private schools to have a heart will hide the fact that education suffered worst under her rule.

We say: of the total P1.6 trillion losses from education, the Arroyo Administration contributed a deficit of P1.3 trillion in education spending making her the least spender on education!

Not satisfied in being the biggest borrower and largest payer of debt, Mrs. Arroyo broke another record this time in being the most indifferent in not only complying with the international standard but also in increasing education expenditure.

So we ask: where did the money go?

Again, we say, finding light to this question can be seen by comparing the total debt Interest payments from 1996 to 2007 and the deficit on education financing earned by the Ramos, Estrada and Arroyo governments.

As of 2007, total interest payments amounted to P 2.2 trillion compared to the total gap or losses our education suffered through the years which totaled to P 1.66 trillion.

This is institutional robbery. Resources supposedly for increased social spending are being siphoned away by automatic debt servicing.

As a result, the argument that there is a scarcity of resources is a fat lie. What we actually have is a scarcity of democracy concerning our budget planning brought about by institutional mechanisms that not only undermine international benchmarks on specific social services but also gives utmost priority to the religious payment of debts.

Hence, we, youth and students from different schools and communities demand the government to immediately implement the UNESCO Delors benchmark by pegging our education budget six percent of the GNP. We also demand that this must be supplemented by a strong legislative effort to institutionalize the standard by passing a law giving automatic appropriations on education.

Lastly, we call on our legislators to repeal Sec. 31 (B) of Presidential Decree 1177 in Sec. 26 (B), Book 6 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1987, which ensures the automatic appropriation of payments for principal and interest on public debt.

Let us give back what was lost from education. We demand Mrs. Arroyo to put money where her mouth is. The Arroyo government’s moratorium on tuition hikes is too little and too late. Instead, we demand a moratorium in the payments of all illegitimate debts!

Mrs. Arroyo, abide with the UNESCO Delors Standard on education! Automatic appropriations for education not debt servicing!

#

Al igual que hacíamos en su momento con el denominado Informe Delors, y que sirvió de post introductorio en nuestro blog, si hasta ahora hemos ido leyendo los documentos propuestos en los distintos apartados, nos habremos encontrado, más de una vez, con la referencia al Proyecto DeSeCo (Definition and Selection of Competencies)  y a algunos de sus documentos de síntesis. Encargado por la OCDE para seleccionar y definir las competencias esenciales para la vida de las personas y el buen funcionamiento de la sociedad, el proyecto es otro buen punto de partida para iniciarnos, de forma actualizada, en el campo de las competencias básicas o clave, como encontraremos en más de una referencia. Un interesante resumen que nos aclara qué nos vamos a encontrar, podemos hallarlo en la página de José Joaquín Brunner por supuesto que existen muchas más. En ella podemos leer la referencia a una serie de documentos, de gran interés, obligatorios diríamos, para entrar en el mundo de las competencias básicas. Aquí traemos un par de ellos para su reflexión, y traducidos. En primer lugar, del año 1999, un documento con el título: Proyecto sobre Competencias en el Contexto de la OCDE. El segundo, se trata del informe de síntesis al que hace referencia Brunner y que citábamos como estructurador y referido en más de un documento de los que se manejan en la actualidad, se trata del resumen correspondiente a la definición y selección de competencias clave y su versión en inglés. Podemos asegurar que después de las correspondientes lecturas, la perspectiva del concepto de competencias básicas en la educación y en nuestra legislación, será diferente.

Una de las funciones de este blog es dotar al docente de herramientas de lectura, para una mejor comprensión del por qué de una educación basada en competencias básicas. Para ello no cabe duda que es obligatoria la lectura de documentos de toda índole. A muchos de ellos se les hace referencia en las numerosas publicaciones existentes en la actualidad y que nos sonará a la mayoría. Sin embargo, desde aquí y teniendo en cuenta nuestros objetivos, queremos recomendar aquellos que, a nuestra humilde opinión, deben ser de lectura obligatoria para enmarcar el tema que nos ocupa y preocupa.

Nos gustaría empezar, lo que deseamos que sea el primer post de un incontable número de ellos, con una referencia que consideramos obligatoria, así como su lectura. Tal vez porque pensamos que en la actualidad las reformas educativas nacen, se transforman y desaparecen casi por arte de magia, sin que el docente, verdadero protagonista y agente instrumental de ellas, reciba ningún tipo de explicación o justificación de los contenidos de las mismas. Lo cual sería deseable, sobre todo para potenciar la aplicación y motivación, en la defensa de un sistema con el que tenemos que convivir e impartir día tras día.

En 1996 vio la luz, en el marco de la UNESCO, el que se ha denominado Informe Delors. Titulado “La educación encierra un tesoro”, sirvió de punto de partida para afrontar la Educación del siglo XXI, proponiendo las reformas educativas apoyadas en cuatro pilares básicos: aprender a aprender, aprender a hacer, aprender a ser y aprender a convivir. Estamos seguros que su lectura es un buen punto de partida y que con ella podemos empezar a comprender, algunas cosas que ya nos son familiares en la actualidad. Su lectura es ideal para el inicio de lo que esperamos una fructífera y continua formación e información.