Gov. LRay Villafuerte to Harvey Keh: Kaya Mo Ba?

Mr. Harvey Keh can you set the record straight? Can you be objective and not be biased?

It’s understandable that you are acting as the lawyer, defender, spokesperson of Sec. Jesse Robredo because he is part of your Kaya Natin Movement. However, as a journalist, you are obligated to be fair, objective , balanced and not be one-sided. It’s very obvious that after talking to Sec. Jesse Robredo, your friend and co-convenor on the Kaya Natin Movement, you just decided to malign my reputation through your article in the Manila Times dated March 10, 2011, without even attempting to get my side.

Setting The Record Straight

My question to you is, Did you actually read the Memorandum Circulars that Sec. Robredo issued that is the subject of the Supreme Court Case I filed? Did you actually read the petition and case I filed before the SC before you made a conclusion and accusation that I am trying to block the transparency and full disclosure policy.

To set the record straight and make it clear to you, I filed the case as Governor of the Province of Camarines Sur and filed it against Sec. Jesse Robredo, in his capacity as secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government. Kindly note we filed the case against Sec. Robredo in his capacity as Secretary of DILG. Nothing personal here contrary to your insinuation that this is political. If he is replaced as DILG Secretary, the case goes on.

Also, we feel that the best venue / forum to settle a question of law is through the court. I have quietly filed the case in the Supreme Court without any announcement or media fanfare even in the local media. I have not told anyone in Camarines Sur nor did I have myself interviewed in local and national media about the filing of the case. I did not even tell my fellow governors about this because I firmly believe in settling the case in court and not engage in trial by publicity which you are obviously guilty of. Instead of letting the court decide the case, you have unfairly accused me of trying to gain national exposure, whereas it is you who is guilty of trying to get support and sympathy for Sec. Robredo at my expense. You have cited alleged accomplishments of Sec. Robredo and portrayed him as a champion of transparency, accountability and people participation. Whereas you failed to also be balanced and cite our actual tangible and concrete accomplishments in my less than 7 years as Governor compared to Sec. Robredo’s stay as mayor of Naga City for almost 20 years. Why didn’t you mention the numerous awards I have been accorded to? It seems that the only legacy Sec. Robredo accomplished when he was mayor of Naga City was only his personal accomplishment, which was to get numerous awards for himself. I ask you, have you been to Naga City? Compare it to Legaspi City and decide which is more progressive and developed? I ask you, what tangible and concrete projects did Sec. Robredo implemented to the City of Naga as mayor for 20 years? Kaya mo ba sagutin Ito? Tangible and concrete not just plans and policies. What job-generation programs did he directly implemented that resulted in direct, actual and quantifiable nos of people employed?

Pogi Points For Robredo?
After bungling the Luneta incident that resulted in in the death of Hongkong/Chinese nationals, the Ramon Magsaysay Awardee’s abilities have now been revealed. His poor handling of the inccident and succeeding fiascos at the DILG only proves that trying to be “POGI” in the Media is not enough to be an effective Secretary of the DILG. From being Mayor of Naga City with only 27 barangays, now he has to handle 80 provinces, 122 cities, 1512 municipalities and 42,000 barangays. Obviously, Hindi Kaya ni Robredo!

To cover up his incompetence, he tries to make up by again trying to resurrect his claim to fame as a “champion of transparency and accountability”. By issuing “DILG MEMO Circular nos. 2010-138, 2011-08, 2010-83.

Unconstitutional Circulars
Instead of being transparent and consultative, Sec. Robredo issued circulars without consulting local executives. As a former mayor he should promote local autonomy and decentralization. Instead, he issues DILG Circulars that shows his propensity to arrogate upon himself powers he cannot validly exercise.

MR. Keh, You Are Misinformed !
Contrary to your claim in your article that “many national organizations such as the League of Cities of the Philippines, League of Municipalities and League of Provinces strongly supported and hailed this move by the DILG “. The League of Provinces of the Philippines in our general assembly meeting last Jan 25, 2011 unanimously approved and passed the LPP Resolutions nos, 2011-005, and 2011-006″ calling the DILG to Recall Memo circulars 2011-08, 2010-83 and 2010-138 issued by Sec. Robredo as being unconstitutional ( herewith attached LPP Resolution for your info)

Also, in our most recent ULAP (Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines) meeting last March 4, 2011, Mayor Strike Revilla, the president of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines questioned and assailed the Memo Circulars of Sec. Robredo. Mr. Harvey Keh, what is your basis in saying that the local officials supported and hailed the move of Sec. Robredo? Obviously your claim have been debunked. Kaya mo ba mag apologize publicly?

Also read this article at http://www.gmanews.tv/story/212338/dilg-on-full-disclosure-13-of-lgus-complied . The DILG admits that only 13% of LGU’s complied with Sec. Robredo’s “Full Disclosure” circulars. A strong sign that local officials are questioning Sec. Robredo’s intention, credibility and leadership. Kindly note that Naga City itself did not comply with the Memo Circulars issued by Sec. Robredo.

Sec. Robredo vs. Local Autonomy
The case at hand is not about transparency and full disclosure. Please don’t confuse the issue. The case I filed against Sec. Robredo in his capacity as DILG Secretary is about Memo Circulars he issued that we feel violate the constitutional provision that “shall ensure the autonomy of local government”. In addition, we felt that, the DILG Secretary invalidly and unlawfully assumed legislative powers in promulgating the assailed Memo Circulars which went beyond the clear and manifest intent of the 1987 Constitution and Local Government Code of 1991.

Mr. Keh, before you make false conclusions, insinuations and accusations, you should have thoroughly read the Circulars in question and more importantly the petition we filed. We will provide you a copy our petition in the hope that you will be fair and not biased and conclusive.

In your article, you posed the question ” is it unconstitutional to ask our government leaders to tell us how they are spending our hard earned taxpayer’s money?”. If you are open minded and after you have read our petition, you will be enlightened to know that the case we filed was not about ” the right of the people to information” . Again, it is about DILG Memo Circulars issued by Sec. Robredo as being violative of the constitutional provisions on Local Autonomy ( not the right to information) and for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess or jurisdiction.

As mentioned earlier, if there is a question of law, the perfect and only venue is through the court. Not through blogs and trial by publicity which you are guilty of. Shame on you!

Lastly, on the issue of transparency and accountability. Are you saying that without the circulars issued there is no full transparency and accountability in place for local government? Please read and study carefully Republic Acts 9184 otherwise known as the Government Procurement Reform Act and Section 352 of the Local Government Code of 1991 which will guarantee full disclosure, transparency and accountability and full disclosure in Government. Over and above the Procurement Act and Local Government Code, various DBM and COA circulars have to be complied with to assure transparency and accountability. I am sure you also don’t know that there are additional measures implemented by the Commission on Audit (COA) to guarantee transparency and accountability and sound financial transactions. There is a COA process called Pre Audit, which guarantees that no amount of money is disbursed without passing through rigid COA Audit. Every PESO spent in government have to pass through pre audit by COA.

In conclusion and based on all the above information we gave you, you have no right to accuse me of blocking the full disclosure policy. Every citizen including myself, have the right to question and file petitions where there is a question of law or abuse of authority. Mr. Keh, You should listen to the voice of the people not just Sec. Robredo. If Sec. Robredo is indeed the champion of transparency and full disclosure policy, then you should ask Mr. Robredo why he did not file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities as mandated and required by law for four (4) consecutive years when he was mayor of Naga City, which was a subject of a case against him before the Ombudsman. I’m sure you did not know about this or else you probably would not have included Sec. Robredo in your Kaya Natin Movement.

In my case, we hope you will recognize that I was elected in 2004 with 52% votes in a 3 way fight. In the 2007 elections, 72% of the electorate voted for me and last 2010, I got over 209,000 lead over my opponent. This overwhelming show of support and confidence towards my administration is a sign not only of our transparent, accountable government but of the tangible and concrete achievement directly felt by our people.

Your accusations therefore are baseless. It’s very obvious Mr. Keh, you are the one guilty of playing politics and engaging in trial by publicity. You posed the question in your article that my filing of the case against Sec. Robredo “is a way of trying to gain national exposure for a reported plan to run for the Senate in the 2013 elections? This is definitely a BIG JOKE. My question to you is, Why should I try to gain popularity hitting on an already unpopular person? Sec. Robredo has lost his luster , his credibility diminished, abilities in question, Nationally, he is widely known as the cabinet secretary who bungled the Luneta incident that caused the death of innocent people and caused embarrassment to the nation.

It is not yet too late for Sec. Robredo to be man enough to accept his shortcomings and take full responsibility for the fiasco. He should stop making excuses. He should take the signal from P-Noy when he was only appointed in acting capacity and not submitted to the Commission on Appointments. He was appointed Secretary of The Interior and Local Government but publicly known as pronounced by P-Noy that he has no say in police matters. Should we call him the Secretary of the Local Government only? He should save himself from further embarrassment at least to his fellow Bicolanos and resign and not hang on to the position and be branded as “Kapit-tuko”

KINAYA NAMIN!
If ever I aspire to run for higher office, it will definitely be based on sound, tangible, concrete accomplishments from the time I was in the private sector as an entrepreneur and now as Governor. It has always been my practice to present my vision whether in business or in politics and more importantly how to put that vision into action. Track record for achieving the vision through concrete action will be my battle cry not media hype or shallow national exposure as you accuse me of engaging into. You probably refuse to recognize my personal achievements as you only like to brag about and recognize Sec. Robredo’s awards.

We hope that you do recognize that at the age of 34 I was chosen and accorded as one of Ten Outstanding Young Men of the Philippines (TOYM) on Entrepreneurship and The World Young Businesses Achiever Award. In recognition for my achievement as a Private Sector Entrepreneur and introducing Entrepreneurship in government I was also chosen as The Outstanding Young Person of the World (TOYM) last 2008.

And despite all the odds and challenges with minimal support from the National Government and armed only with vision, commitment and strong will. We have managed to turn around CAMSUR. From a province in 2004, with prevalence of poverty, alarming malnutrition rate, typhoon and disaster prone, unstable peace and order, high migration rate and lacking in opportunity. In less than 5 years, we have achieved the following:

1.Reduced Malnutrition rate over 45%. From having the highest malnutrition rate in the Bicol region, Camsur now has the lowest number of under weight children from 0-5 years old and also now the 3rd in the region (despite being the biggest province) out of six (6) provinces for underweight children 6-10.

Source: 2008 National Nutrition Survey, Food and Nutrition Institute (FNRI), DOST.

2. From 39th to 10th richest province in the country. CAMSUR is no. 1 in the Bicol Region. No. 10 in the country out of 80 provinces in terms of net income and total equity.
Source: Commission on Audit (COA) Financial Statements highlights of LGU’s Fiscal year 2007.
3. CAMSUR is now the no.1 Tourist Destination in the Philippines.
Source: Table 1 Tourism Research and statistics Division, Department of Tourism.(see attached table)
4. Bicol Region Economy Grows by 8.2% in 2009, the highest in the country because of Tourism (CAMSUR).

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) posted August 6, 2010.

5. 6 out of 10 Tourists who come to the Bicol region visit CAMSUR.
Source: Dept. of Tourism, Region V. (Posted:December 14, 2009, NSCB – Reg. Div. V)
6. CAMSUR Watersports Complex (CWC): A break through in the Tourism industry
Source: Bicol Dev’t. updates, Vol II issue 2 RDC Council, NEDA, Reg. V.

7. The Province of Camsur, is the only province (LGU) awarded the Presidential Citation for Best Practice in Creating a Business and Investment Environment.
8. The Province of CAMSUR is the first LGU in the country to run and manage a PEZA approved, Information Technology Park, Tourism Economic Zone and an Agro-Industrial Economic Zone.
9. CAMSUR was awarded by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI) as the Most Business Friendly Province in the country for 3 consecutive years (2004, 2005, 2006).

10.CAMSUR now is the 7th Top Rice Producer in the Country. (We also
achieved the highest growth rate for Palay Production for 2010.
Source: Dept. of Agriculture (DA and National Food Authority (NFA)
11. CAMSUR has the highest revenue from Economic Enterprises, region wide, amounting to Php170.1 million with a collection
efficiency of 137% for CY 2009.
Source: Certification signed by Regional Director Florencio Diño II
Bureau of Local Government Finance, dated March 8, 2010.
12. CAMSUR has the 3rd highest life expectancy in the country and
having the largest gains in life expectancy between 1980- 2006.
Source: p.102 Philippine Human Development Report 2008/2009,UNDP
13. CAMSUR cited as MOST Improved Province base on GINI Indices
(2003 and 2006).
Source: Statistical Annex 8, p.102, Philippine Human Development
Report 2008/2009, UNDP.
14. CAMSUR among the only six (6) LGU’s in the country accorded the Seal of Excellence Award given by the Civil Service Commission.
15. CAMSUR undoubtedly is the Sports Tourism Capital of the
Philippines. We have hosted the Wakeboarding World
Championship, 70.3 Ironman, International Triathlon, the Biggest
International Marathon in the country and more.
16. CAMSUR and Caramoan is the favorite film destination of the
Survivor Series in the World. We have hosted Survivor France,
Serbia, Sweden, and Israel and 10 more countries lined up.
17. CAMSUR has been selected as the site for the 22nd AD Congress.
We beat Cebu and Baguio in the Bid.

All of the above are tangible, concrete achievements and all of the data and statistics are accurate and verifiable.

We hope you do not turn a blind eye to all of the above laudable achievements. You insinuated in your article “that the money that tourism is generating for the Province isn’t being used properly by the leaders of the Province”. The above accomplishments mentioned definitely rebuffs your insinuations in your article.

We are proud of all our achievements we have accomplished only in the past 4-5 years. We have turned around the economy of CAMSUR and you have to at least recognize that we have put CAMSUR in the Global Map of Tourism and Business. Because of Tourism Income we have over 300,000 scholars in Elementary, High School and College yearly. We can provide you the names of those scholars to convince you that we spend money wisely and they directly benefit and trickle down to the poor people of CAMSUR.

NSCB Poverty Data

You mentioned in your article that based on the NSCB Report, poverty incidence in CAMARINES SUR has grown from 36.6 percent in 2006 to 38.7 percent in 2009. However you did not state and turned your blind eye again in the same NSCB Report Table 3 (http://www.nscb.gov.ph/poverty/2009/table_3.asp) it stated that the estimate magnitude of poor families in 2006 was 54,968 and in 2009 went down to 45,234. In the same NSCB report, it clearly stated that the magnitude of poor families from 2006 to 2009 has been reduced by 17%. A contradiction in the same report which leads us to think in the accuracy of the report. Kindly note that the NSCB is only one type of report that measures the poverty incidence. For your information, to give you insight on the manner in which they derive their data or report is through a household survey from that is more often just left in the household for the family to fill up which has a high risk of deriving inaccurate answers from the family. You cannot clearly measure the poverty incidence and get accurate data by simply filling up a form with no guidance and explanation. A more accurate measure that is clear and mapped out and updated regularly is the Community Based Monitoring System (CBMS) which is the accepted tool being used buy the United Nations in measuring poverty.

The NSCB report can be used as a guide but if we want to get an accurate report we should get from various tools, /reports and data from various sources and agencies and collate them.

Granting that the NSCB is 100% accurate since this has been your basis to malign me. Again you should have cited table 3 in the same report which reported a 17.7% reduction in the magnitude of poor families for the 2006 and 2009 estimate.

Also you mentioned that CAMSUR ranked third in the whole country in terms of total no. of poor families. How come you did not mention the 2nd and 1st in terms of the highest no. of poor families in the country ? In the NSCB report you are using as the basis to attack me, you failed to mention CEBU province as having the most no. of poor families which has an estimate of 213,162 and Negros Occidental, the 2nd most no of poor families in the country with 144,828. Based on your analogy and reasoning, are you also saying that CEBU and Negros Occidental are also one of the worst governed provinces and they are not spending their money wisely as what you accuse me of ! What about Pangasinan (4th) Nueva Ecija (5th) and Leyte (6th) as having the most no. of poor families too based on the report.

How come you did not mention them in your article? How come you just singled out Camarines Sur? Did you even bother to take time to think and analyze, that the above mentioned provinces as having the most no. of poor families are the biggest and most progressive provinces in their own region, that is why they have become the magnet in attracting poor families from other less progressive provinces in the region because of the opportunities they offer. Cebu is the biggest and most progressive province in Region 7 that’s why families from neighboring provinces within that region migrate to Cebu to look for work and opportunities.

The same is true for Negros Occidental. They are the biggest and most progressive province in region 6, CAMSUR obviously is the biggest and most progressive province in Region 5, Pangasinan in Region 1, Nueva Ecija Region 3 and Leyte in Region 8. Again as you mentioned that the share of poor families in Camsur has risen, in the same table and data you have used to put us in a bad light it said we had 3.3% in 2006 and the same figure of 3.3% in 2009.
Meaning no change, please be more objective in analyzing data before making any false judgments. Since you use raw data as a basis for your accusations. You should carefully study the margin of error of the data before you malign and attack people.

By the way if you are really not biased, you should have mentioned in the same NSCB report table 3 ,a glaring figure which you obviously overlooked , is the magnitude of poor families in Pampanga which more than doubled (222% from 2006 to 2009, from 1,756 to 3,895. The Governor of Pampanga from 2007-2010 is one of your co-convenors in your Kaya Natin Movement. How come you never mentioned the worsening poverty situation in Pampanga from 2007-2010.

COA Reports
You mentioned that anomalies found in official COA Reports in Camarines Sur. Again you are being judgmental. The COA report mentions observations not anomalies. When one of your co-convenors, former Gov. Grace Padaca of Isabela, is accused of Malversation of Public funds ( http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/regions/view/20110309-324440/Ombudsman-eyes-malversation-case-vs-Aquino-ally-Padaca ) and the Ombudsman recommends a filing of a case , your automatic comment is she is being harassed. In our case, where there is a COA observation for some transactions but with no money lost to goverment nor graft and corruption proven. You scream big time that there are anomalies in Camsur.

To further convince you that you are wrong. Allow me to explain to you the COA observations/findings:

a.) Collections in the Sports Center (Camarines Sur Water Sports Complex – CWC ) were not turned over to the treasurer/cashier within the period stated under section 29 of the Manual on New Government Accounting System (NGAS) volume 1, thus exposing government funds to possible use, misuse or misappropriation.

If you read the observation it clearly stated that “collections in the CWC were not turned over within the period stated.” The mistake of the treasurer/cashier made was not to turn over the collection within the period which clearly shows that no money was lost. COA wanted to turn over collections before office hours end daily (5pm) whereas CWC operates and have sales until 12 midnight daily. This has been corrected and clearly NO money was lost, it was a procedural misunderstanding committed by the cashier not me and was already corrected. Employees who committed delays in remitting collections were given disciplinary actions and /or terminated.

b.) Cash advances to officers and employees amounting to P23.96 million remained unliquidated at the end of the year.

Kindly note that the total of P23.96 million were unliquidated cash advances from employees that were accumulated for more than 20 years. Cash advances that were made even before I was governor. What is important is we have filed cases to employees who have unliquidated cash advances and the amount have been reduced because of our firm action. For the record I have no unliqudated cash advances and as the Governor we acted through the filling of cases to employees involved.

c.) Donations amounting to P132.50 million were incurred for programs and activities undertaken by the Provincial Social and Services Office (PSSO) without approved program/activity designs and established criteria.

We contested this observation and approved programs/activity designs were provided as required. Again all the money was fully accounted and no anomaly and money lost to the government.

d.) The province paid P6.71 million for security services without public bidding, contrary to the provisions of Republic Act (RA) No. 9184, thereby raising doubts on the propriety and economy of this transaction.

This has been contested and no anomaly occurred since no money was lost from the government.

e.) The province incurred and overdraft of P168 million as of December 31, 2009.
This was simply an accounting adjustment. No money lost. This was already corrected as of December 31, 3009. Again contrary to your false insinuation there was an anomaly committed.

Hopefully by now we have already enlightened you based on the facts, figures and explanations we have provided you.

We are fully committed in the case we filed against Sec. Robredo for being unconstitutional, we have proven to you that your allegations are wrong especially on your claim that local government organizations supported the actions of Sec. Robredo. Please don’t claim that both houses of congress support the DILG secretary. Why is he is not being submitted for confirmation in the commission on appointments before congress? Did you hear the complaints of congressmen and senators after the Luneta tragedy and the budget hearings towards Sec Robredo ? Or are you being deaf and blind again.

We are not afraid to show the general public how we govern, on the contrary we are very proud of our accomplishment. I am willing to face you or anybody anytime. I am willing to pay for your ticket and accommodations so you can visit CAMSUR and see for yourself what we do and what we have done in Camsur.

Public office is a Public Trust
Your co-convenors in the Kaya Natin Movement apparently did not uphold the public trust as all of them failed to be re-elected and lost in the 2010 elections. The voice of the people have spoken and you should respect their resounding statement Sec. Robredo himself have numerous Ombudsman cases. Pls also allow me to name a few Commission on Audit (COA) observations when Sec Robredo was still Mayor of Naga City:

1)Based on the state auditors report “Inventories and Property, Plant and Equipment accounts valued at P3,135,099.19 and P819,272,920.36, respectively could not be ascertained.This is such a big amount Mr Keh. What Can you say about this ?

2)The Accounting Office did not transfer the accumulated amount of P37,158,901.22 from General Fund (GF) to Special Education Fund (SEF), which pertains to the 1% share of the SEF in the Real Property Tax, contrary to Art. 363 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 7160. The deficiency resulted in the overstatement and at the same time understatement of the cash position of the GF and SEF, respectively as of December 31, 2007 by the same amount.

3)Cash advances amounting to P1,896,885.55 were granted without first settling or a proper accounting thereof was made of the previous cash advance, while cash advances totaling P8,168,269.61 were not liquidated within the prescribed period, contrary to Sections 4.1.2 and 5.1 of COA Circular No. 97-002, respectively. These defects created doubts on the validity and regularity of the grant and liquidation thereof.

4)Procurements of goods worth P50,000 and below falling under the condition set in Negotiated Procurement were undertaken using the shopping method contrary to Section 52 of RA 9184, and Sections 53 and 54 of Resolution No. 04-2006 amending the Implementing Rules and Regulations-A (IRR-A) of Republic Act No. 9184.

5)The City could have saved the entire amount of P6,133,049.52 representing interest expense had it self-financed the buy out of the PREMIUMED II loan balance to the Department of Finance instead of securing a loan from the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) in the amount of P21,822,634.80.

6)The City was not able to provide adequate measures to protect the grants to NGOs/POs for CY 2007 amounting to P11,775,944.47 contrary to the provisions provided by COA Circular No. 96-003 dated February 27, 1996.

7)The 20% Local Development Fund (LDF) could have been appropriated and utilized for programs and projects that partake the nature of investment and capital expenditures that would directly generate jobs and livelihood opportunities for the constituents of the city, rather than for other expenses appropriately chargeable against Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE), had the City Government adhered strictly to the general policies and guidelines on the appropriation and utilization of the 20% LDF.

Mr Keh, pls take note of the no. 7 COA observation, Sec Robredo now issues DILG memo circular 2010-138 reminding all LGU’s not to utilize the 20% LDF for administrative expenses, salaries and wages , whereas when he was mayor he violated this principle, thats why he was given the COA notice.

I hope finally the alleged champion of transparency and the Ramon Magsaysay awardee have been unmasked. Sec. Robredo owe it to the people what he is hiding all along? Sec. Robredo should explain why during his term as mayor, he spent hundreds of millions to build the Naga coloseum that was not completed for over a decade and up to now the people of Naga are paying for it. Sec Robredo has to explain to the people , why Naga city has the worst drainage system in the country? with only a small amount of rain, the city gets flooded.

Mr Keh, kaya mo ba to expose Sec. Robredo’s anomalies and lies? You owe it to the people .

Lastly, Kaya mo ba mag admit mali mga sinabi mo against me?