ron canimo |
lick to add headline
BulSUans outburst to annoyance as another clarificatory memorandum was released again by Commission on Higher Education (CHED) contradicting its previous note clearing the legalization of Development Fee months after the announcement of its abolishment on June 13 through resolution 221 series of 2012. Nuisance to be told as the change of declaration caused confusions to student masses. “Napakagulo lang, dapat kasi kapag mag-re-release ng statement e dapat final na, kasi kumalat na ‘yung balita e, nag-expect na ang mga estudyante. False hope, pandagdag na rin sa tuition ‘yon at panggawa na rin ng project, parang pinaasa kami. Kung ipantatayo man ‘yun ng building dapat sigurado, may mga building nga dito na hindi pa tapos e,” exclaimed 4th year Psychology student Angel dela Cruz. CHED’s Clarificatory Statement on the Matter Development Fees and Conditions for its Implementation by the Governing Boards of State Universities and Colleges cleared that Development Fee accumulated for 2013-2014 will not be returned in spite of Resolution 221 issued September 2012 which proclaimed that collecting Development Fee is illegal. Moreover, the follow-up statement from CHED explained that the charging of development fee is on the decision of the university’s administration. If the collection proceeds, the fee will be treated as fiduciary fund that will state a specific and estimated project then undergo in the right process before usage. The outbreak So much for resolutions and memorandum agreements, BulSUans got fed up to the abrupt change of memos between the Bulacan State University (BulSU) and CHED that leads to the range of doubts and misinterpretation among the students. “Pinagulo nila ‘yung sitwasyon, dapat kasi sa CHED bago maglabas ng reso sinisigurado muna nilang hindi pabagu-bago, ang nangyayari. Dapat hinahandle nila nang maayos ang sitwasyon hindi ‘yung nagkakagulo ang estudyante kung ano nga ba talaga ang totoo” expressed Liezel Camua of BeEd Generalist 2A. However, the administration gave consent to the unresolved issue of Development fee by stating the clarificatory note from CHED with clear emphasis of its reliance in agreement with the university whether it shall be implemented or junked. Furthermore, President Mariano de Jesus himself declared that even without development fees, the university can survive due to the economic activities and income. “Ang sabi kasi sa Clarificatory statement e nakadepende sa’tin kung itutuloy natin o hindi , pero ang sabi ko sa mga Vice President ko, parang hindi pa ito final kaya dadalhin ko muna sa ating board of regent, pero kung ako nga lang personally ang masasabi ko ay tanggalin nalang since we do have other income.” Refund, no more The verdict has already been final. After their long journey of battle against the abovementioned fee, Partido-Pagkakaisa ng Demokratikong Mag-aaral (PDM) failed to push the refunds of the development fees due to its legalization and its non-viable ability for compensation. “Ang gulo-gulo ng CHED dahil matagal nang inisyu ang mga memorandum na ‘yan pero ngayon lang lahat lumilitaw, at isa pa, una na nilang sinabing illegal ang paniningil ng fee tapos babawiin din nila. Repleksyon siya ng magulong pulitika na nangyayari rin sa labas,” stated Brian Carpio, former student regent. Yet, PDM appeals to the unquestionable approached of the administration on the issue of development fees urged the clamour to refund the collected amount as of 2013 up to the first semester of 2014. On the other hand, some BulSUans wish to compensate for what they were called illegal through the false hope of refunding. “Umasa na kami na may pag-asang maibalik sa’min ‘yung pera. Lalo pa’t ang hirap hirap ngayon humagilap ng pera. Ta’s kung hindi na talaga s’ya maibabalik, e sana naman mapakinabangan natin yung bagay na paglalaanan nila ng pera namin,” said Camua. While the administration continues to hear the cry for refund of the students they clarify that they are more willing to conduct compensation but that would be another long journey for the students for there is no fixed pronouncement of the board yet. “Ididiscuss muna rin sa meeting, pero wala naman kasi tayong problema sa pera kaya project nalang talaga ang kailangan. Kaya kung itatanong niyo sakin kung tuloy ba o hindi [refund], e hindi ko pa masasabi dahil wala pang fixed decision,” utter de Jesus. Future’s call Even through the plea for refund, administration propose to use the development fee fund for infrastructural purposes that can be used by all students instead of paying back and see the fund go to misuse. Board of Regents (BOR) Chairman Sanggalang suggests putting up a structure essential for student organizations. “May punto naman ang ating Commisioner Sanggalang na kapag nirefund natin ‘yun, ‘yung 500 pesos, e isang loadan lang ng cellphone ‘yun e, samantalang kapag pinagsama sama, e mas malaki, why not put up a structure? Gawin niyong center for student organization na du’n mo ilalagay lahat ng student orgs,” added de Jesus. However, de Jesus clarifies that the project is not yet confirmed. The board will first study and talk about the process before declaring their final decision. But PDM stick to their perspective as they wanted to bring back the money of mass student. Believing that even without CHED Memorandum, the university has the power to deduct and remove fees, considering the 2013 Memorandum no. 1 which deducted a 100 PhP on the Dev’t Fee by just the power of its own BOR. “Ang call ng PDM sa admin, 2013- 2014 naningil kayo ng walang clarificatory statement, naningil kayo ng alam niyong illegal, gamitin natin ang power ng board. Kung talagang gusto niyong ibalik yan, maibabalik niyo yan kahit pa sinabi ng CHED na walang manyayaring reimbursement,” dared Carpio. Furthermore, students from satellite campus speak out as Dev’t Fee payer; have the guts to request for their benefits on whatever the decision will be. “Bilang estudyante pa rin ng BSU at nagbabayad ng Dev’t Fee, kailangan makinabang din kami sa anumang magiging desisyon. Kung building man ‘yan o kahit mga bagong electric fan lang, kailangan mararamdaman din namin dito sa campus namin,” requested Angelica Canimo, 3rd year BSED, Bustos Campus. Pro’s and con’s Opposing PDM’s statement regarding chunks of disadvantages of development fees to students, the administration mentioned its favour towards BulSUans through its visible outcome such as new building and drainage construction. However, De Jesus mentioned the might disadvantages of the matter adjusting to the program for the next 5 years and its compulsory resolution to lessen the projects and expenditures. “Ang advantages niyan e it could be use for development. In other words, that could be use for providing more services to the students. Kapag may dev’t fee, may additional na pera to provide more services and to have more structures,” De Jesus boast. As long as there is progress and the result is evident, some BulSUans still believed that the administration is performing their duties to the university despite the change of resolutions. “Kung totoo man talagang may advantage sa aspetong ‘yon, mainam. Dahil may mga proyekto naman palang pinatutunguhan gaya nitong kasalukuyang drainage na ginagawa at ‘yung iba pang sinusulong na gawing buildings, library at ‘yung balak na ampitheater,” explained John Paulo Teodoro, BLA 3A Tracking back history, the campaign against the former Php 600 Development Fee started since its implementation on year 2004. Partido-Pagkakaisa ng Demokratikong Mag-aaral (PDM) initiated the advocacy joined by thousands of BulSUans with a petition signing followed by the historical rally on March 2005. On June 2013, development fee was decreed to be chunked by Php 100 closing it to Php 500. Recently, Dev’t Fee was suppose to be totally abolished by Resolution 221 series of 2012 but suddenly a Clarificatory Statement reveals that Dev’t Fee is not illegal and can be implement by decision of administration.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Ron Canimo18 years old. Archives
May 2015
Categories |