Another Senate Hearing, another day of pointing fingers and endless lies tossed carelessly in the wind. Cabinet Secretary Mendoza has finally spoken, but I find no truth in his words. What good will lying do to anyone at this point? Okay fine, let’s say that he is telling the truth and the Blue Ribbon Committee isn’t, then how come he cannot explain and defend the true nature of the NBN deal? Is it an executive deal or just a contract?
Apparently, an executive deal is between governments (China and Philippines). And unlike a contract, it isn’t open for public bidding. So being an executive deal, AHI couldn’t have possibly been eligible for even making a proposal for the NBN, much more have Joey de Venecia III (JDV3) be a ‘proponent’ for the deal. And being an executive deal, it has to satisfy the following requirements:
1. After the executive agreement is signed, the Department of Budget and Management will issue a forward obligation authority (FOA) saying the government has the resources to pay the proposed loan.
2. Having received the FOA, Malacañang gives the go-signal to the Department of Finance (DOF) to negotiate a loan for the project.
3. The DOF talks to its foreign counterpart to finalize the loan.
4. The Monetary Board reviews the loan agreement.
5. Congress then approves the budget for the loan.
The keyword here is ‘loan agreement’; if the government did sign any, then the NBN is indeed an executive deal. But the thing is, there is/was no loan agreement at the time PGMA signed it in China. So NBN is a contract.
But Mendoza stays firm in saying that it is an EXECUTIVE DEAL. Now, the other confusing thing about this is that based on the contract, there was an executive agreement but the DOTC claimed there was none.
So who is telling the truth here? Do we believe what the documents say or do we put our confidence in what Mendoza and other cabinet secretaries are telling us?
If NBN is indeed a contract, then JDV3 could be telling the truth. If NBN isn’t, then JDV3 is lying. But since Mendoza couldn’t defend the NBN’s nature, then I’ll have my money on JDV3.
9 Comments
September 21, 2007 at 7:32 am
[...] student Nina Bumanglag, in her blog Underside was not convinced that Transportation Secretary Leandro Mendoza was telling the truth: If NBN is [...]
September 21, 2007 at 9:34 am
People can assign whatever labels they want. What matters are the intent behind it and what’s supposed to “happen”.
Unfortunately they know it’s going to take someone to force the issue in Court. As if we’ve got enough problems already.
September 21, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Hey, thanks for further enlightening me with what’s going on out there regarding this matter. I’m now really confused about the nature of the bidding process for this system, whether it was open competitive or, as some say, an executive agreement.
September 21, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Do we really need this network? It’s alot of money and would only serve a fraction of the population.
Rmada
September 22, 2007 at 5:14 am
September 22, 2007 at 7:15 am
————————————————————————–
I could call a contract a mutual agreement, an executive pact, whatever label I fancy. The real question is what are its terms, and if they’re legally enforceable.
————————————————————————–
First off, my intent wasn’t to call you out on the semantics of the contract. I was thinking out loud about the nature of the transaction myself. I was addressing the blog post itself– not your response.
I do agree though. It makes me wonder about the level of transparency that the results were arrived at. If this was meant to be a contract, wouldn’t the gov’t have accepted and eventually awarded the bid if an independent cost estimate was quoted? Also, what happened to the formal procedure of contesting the award to the apparent lowest and responsible bidder?
If this was an executive agreement, wouldn’t there at least have been a public hearing regarding the agreement itself?
September 22, 2007 at 3:51 pm
I’ve been hearing negative feedback about WiMAX worldwide. One of them will be on:
http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/media/podcasts_transcript.cfm?ObjectID=6
September 23, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Rmada:
having this kind of technology can be helpful. re: we are living in a ‘modern world’, full of new innovations and technology so if we want to be competitive or at least come close to our asian neighbors, in terms of economy and in science, this should be a step into that direction. it can help centralize management and hopefully, it will help unclutter the messy business of shady politics in this country (sana).
the cost is so freaking high because of over-pricing and kick-backs. if JDV3 is correct, installing a broadband network for 80% of the country/government offices should cost a little over 162 million (i forgot if it was in US dollars or in peso).
Daaviiiid and Volume addict:
you know what whatever they want to call this deal (executive or a mere contract), fact is, NBN is tainted with so much crap and irregularities. If it was an executive deal, so be it; as long as the requirements were meant. If it was a contract, then a public bidding and it’s results should have been made known to us. They say so much technical stuff but in essence, the idea behind the NBN isn’t the one in question: its about how it was handled and hussled through approval. Abalos, I think, would soon do a Garci and Bedol disappearing act.
Mark M.V. Salin:
thanks for sharing the link!
Guys, thanks so much for dropping by! =)
September 23, 2007 at 6:31 pm
it looks like abalos will accompany neri to the senate hearing after all. this is probably to ensure that neri will tell the truth as the administration sees it.