Our homeless population deserves priority

The word squatter has been translated into a softer word to mislead our people. They are now called informal settlers who live in shanties on stilts in waterways and river banks. And what’s the difference between squatters and informal settlers? Sociology has a more appropriate definition that is easily seen and understood – they are the homeless people we see in rags in Metro Manila, and in other big cities and towns nationwide.

Our homeless neighbors It is doubtful if the questions asked by our census takers have reached the countless number of the homeless nationwide. Manila has the most visible homeless population on sidewalks, under the bridges, in old buildings, and under the trees near the Post Office, City Hall and other public buildings.

Candidates’ masterplan

for squatters?

Have our candidates for president, vice president, senator, representatives, and city mayors included the millions of homeless and informal settlers/squatters in their master plan to abolish poverty? How can the homeless be covered by basic education? They are not thinking of education but of survival. We see them sitting on sidewalks and street corners waiting for cargo trucks to stop and under cover of darkness they unload (yes rob) any useful item of value and run to their nearest hideout.

Fence-sitting politicians We see the homeless violently defying court orders to vacate commercial/home lots in favor of landowners after squatting on the land for years without rent. On TV we see police officers implementing the court’s order are defied, stoned, and barricaded. But our politicians prefer the role of fence-sitters.

Some city politicians, according to reports, help the informal settlers to build their shanties and leantos for a clear purpose, getting their votes. The squatter vote in one city like Manila or Quezon City can elect a city official.

No partial aid to poverty When PDAF was in abundance, with Congress shelling out about P28B yearly, it did not occur to our politicians that this amount could partially alleviate poverty. In ten years P280B in PDAF could give our informal settlers nationwide small comfort denied them for decades.

Our priorities? But our politicians have their own priorities: 1) spending so much for reelection, 2) building family mansions, 3) buying homelots for their children, 4) investing in real estate sold at cheap prices, and 5) other questionable investments far from helping their less fortunate constituents.

For example, how many poor Filipinos have benefitted from the P10-B PDAF that was freely distributed to bogus foundations? Properly managed this amount could build the lives of 100,000 of our homeless population. And the P28-B PDAF released without fail yearly could benefit 280,000 of our poor population.

Spending tax money foolishly

But PDAF was meant to be spent foolishly like giving its recipients a better shot at reelection. This form of corruption is well-known to all classes of voters.

When accountability is ignored or taken for granted tax money irrevocably leads to deeper pockets. Between now and May, 2016, all of us, without exception, wish to hear from our politicians their firm guaranty: 1) to spend tax money for items people can see and compute, What’s the true income? 2) require politicians and government executives to disclose their true income without help from COA auditors, 3) let DPWH publish reports on progress of work in multibillion projects, 4) let the importers of 700,000 metric tons of rice from Thailand and Vietnam strictly report on the people’s corruption and wastage in warehouses, and 5) let COA auditors plant their red flags as close as possible to the time of losing public funds to save losses by the tens of millions. (Comments are welcome at roming@pefianco.com).