Press Release
August 6, 2019

WIN TRANSCRIPT | ANC Headstart interview on Greenhouse gas emissions, Death Penalty, PCSO and K-12

[start recording]

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION Q: Two days ago, you already called on the Senate to already probe the Philippine's greenhouse gas emissions because we promised to reduce 70% of the emissions by 2030. Where are we when it comes to the Paris agreement?

SEN. WIN: We have a commitment and this commitment is embodied in the conference of Paris 21 (COP21) wherein the Senate ratified the treaty in 2017 so from 2017 till now, we want to know exactly where we are in terms of greenhouse gases emissions but we also have to put our house in order because we found out that there is no inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and the last inventory was 2002 pa so medyo matagal na siya.

Q: Who is supposed to do that?

SEN WIN: The Climate Change Commission is supposed to come up with a benchmark and also a baseline and track this down all over the years. They are also in-charge of submitting our Intended National Determined Contributions (INDCs), these are the commitments that our country need to fulfil by 2020. We submit our commitment by 2020 and then the target is by 2030, dapat ma-reduce natin ang greenhouse gas emissions natin by 70%, in the US it is only 30%, sa advanced countries, it's only 20-30% so we really have to make sure that we are now putting in a strategy to reach that 70% by 2030. The most important part here also is we get some financial support, if we come up with a very credible strategy, the International Committee will give us some support to further reduce our greenhouse gases emissions.

Q: What is the largest cause of greenhouse gas emissions coming from the Philippines?

SEN WIN: The two largest will be energy-related and agriculture-related. Agriculture because we are large agriculture-based country so we have poultry and piggeries, lahat yun ay nag-e-emit ng methane eh. Another part which is about 40%, is energy-related like power plants as well as transportations because they use fuel. Actually, I have a bill that will push the adoption of electric vehicles in our country. Right now, there is a modernization program by the government. Pero ang kulang is, saan mo icha-charge ang electric vehicles mo? Cars are now available around the world, in fact, by 2025, electric vehicles will be at the same cost with combustion engine vehicles or the traditional vehicles. The problem now is the ecosystem, where do you charge it? The law will now prescribe a mandatory charging station in all buildings such as condominium, malls, and houses-they will now be mandated to put up charging stations.

Q: But this will take some amount of time? In President Duterte's SONA, he ordered the fast-tracking of renewable energy sources. I saw the pie earlier and it seems the Philippines is quite balanced?

SEN WIN: Actually, it was quite a surprise, the President mentioned it quite in the end, although every bit of concept and statement in the President's SONA forms part of the national policy so it now forms part of the national policy. You're correct that it's balanced right now, 50-50 tayo, fossil fuel and also renewable. The problem here is moving forward because if we don't do anything, fossil fuel will dominate our power mix, meaning it will eat up to as much as 80% so we have to do our part in terms of maximizing our RE-solar, wind, geothermal, hydro and we need to maximize every form of RE available in the country.


Q: How do you make it cheaper given that the Philippines has the highest energy rates in, I think, the whole ASEAN?

SEN. WIN: There are two pieces of legislation that we have to push. One, is the institutionalization of the competitive selection process. Ibig sabihin, all of these utilities like Meralco and other electric coops, before they can buy, they have to undergo bidding and it has to be transparent and accessible to all. Two, is institutionalization of Retail Competition Open Access (RCOA), wherein you and I can now choose where to buy electricity. For example, Aboitiz or San Miguel offered directly to us at a cheaper cost-

Q: But I've heard this like a few years back? Is there no movement?

SEN. WIN: There's a court case right now meaning there's a conflict in the interpretation of the law. What we want is to come up with a law that would clarify all the conflicts that are now being talked about in the Supreme Court.

Q: But then, given the energy needs of the country, the growing population, are you actually putting up more power plants that are coal?

SEN. WIN: In general, we need all forms of electricity. If you let the market forces decide right now, coal will win because it is cheaper, it's 24/7 and this is where we need policy intervention as well as we have to keep our eye on the ball because technology is always going down in terms of pricing. In fact, after this, I'll be heading to the British Embassy because they are launching a one-year research on how to transition away from fossil fuel into renewable without raising cost to our consumers. This is to look at all forms of technologies and what technology can be used in our country.

Q: Given that we do have energy needs, is it time to explore the Reed Bank given that Malampaya will run out in the few years?

SEN. WIN: Malampaya is in our EEZ, it is also in our encroached area and as a developing nation, we need to harness every form of energy that we can. This is a very sensitive issue but in my view, we have to assert our rights over the EEZ to explore oil and gas in that area because we need it. We cannot rely on importation forever. Every time there is commotion in the Middle East, there's a spike in our oil prices so we need those oil and gas in our EEZ so that we can stabilize the pricing of our domestic refined fuels and so we can be energy-secure.

Q: What was your reaction when the President said during his SONA that he spoke with President Xi and he said that we're going to have a problem there?

SEN. WIN: Well, the mechanism they're looking at is the joint exploration. For me, any country who will be inclined to do joint exploration with us, let's welcome them because we do not have the technology and it is very expensive. But, it has to be within our domestic laws and domestic framework. Shell and Chevron partnered with the Philippines and they complied with the domestic laws and framework.

Q: But they are third-party contractors, it's not a country deal.

SEN. WIN: It's not a country deal but eventually, these third-party contractors will come in because the countries will have to tap into private companies to come in whether it is state-owned or private companies. This type of organization has a capability of growing in but and importante rito ay it has to be our laws and framework because that is what it is being used to govern gas within our EEZ and territory. Q: So have you called on the Department of Energy to already lift the moratorium to already start exploring?

SEN. WIN: We are very aware of the relationship between the DFA and the DOE and also the complexities of this issue and we are constantly monitoring this issue and communicating with them. In fact, in one of our hearings on energy security, this is the topic-how to move forward, do we do it on our own, do we do it with another country and where do we lift the moratorium? Malaysia and Indonesia, in a year, explores about 200-500 times, tayo ay three lang in the last three years.

Q: What are we using to drill?

SEN. WIN: Normally, with foreign companies. Anyone who will want to explore these areas so we will give them the right to explore but the problem is, a lot of prolific areas are in that encroached area so now, DOE and DFA working together to make sure that we manage this properly without going into geopolitical problems.

Q: You have President Duterte saying China is in possession of West Philippine Sea? Of course, Senior Associate Justice Carpio does not agree, should we just drill without asking permission? Anyway, it is in our EEZ?

SEN. WIN: We have to keep on asserting our right over the EEZ especially when it comes to resources because we are a developing nation and we need food and energy-these are the things that are abundant in that economic zone. For my energy standpoint, we have to keep on pushing and say this is part of our EEZ, we need to harness oil and gas in that area because we need to be energy-secure. Again, DFA and DOE are managing the situation but we need to keep on asserting until we manage to drill in that area.

Q: There's always been a debate if the President can get into a verbal agreement with China over allowing them to fish at our EEZ. Do you need the Senate to actually agree to it because it is a treaty?

SEN. WIN: It's a very lively debate on the Senate and I really thanked Senator Tolentino for bringing this up because it is really an academic and important for all of us to learn the intricacies of international law. We would be discussing that in detail in the committee. Transparency is very important when it comes to these types of dealings. There are sensitivities in that area and for them to raise any notion of doubt, of anything, be transparent.

Q: So you need to see what's the verbal agreement?

SEN. WIN: Yes, whether it is from DFA, whether DFA is sending a special communication to the Senate, the principle here is transparency.


Q: You are pushing for the waste to energy bill, it is one of your priorities for the 18th Congress. Does it violate the Clean Air Act?

SEN. WIN: Those who applauded the Clean Air Act are the G20 countries, the European countries, as well as advanced countries like US, Japan and Korea. All of them used waste to energy technology. I went to Berlin, to Tokyo, to Korea-all of them used waste to energy technologies. So those who applauded our stringent Clean Air Act are the ones also using waste to energy. We studied the law very carefully, and what is prohibited? It's the incineration that emits pollution.

Their technology, yes it is thermal, and you can interpret that us incineration but it doesn't emit toxins because they use advanced technologies to eliminate toxins. Of course, there's also a process to do that - segregate, remove the hazardous materials. I've been to the one in Germany at ang ganda ng system nila, when you bring in your trash, they pay you and it's automated. They segregate the plastics and that's what they use to fuel the technology and the others, they use it for something else. So there are advanced technologies now that you can use that are not harmful to the environment. The one in Berlin, it's in the middle of Berlin, just imagine people living around a thermal plant and no hazardous emissions come out of that plant.

Q: What are the challenges that you face in passing this bill?

SEN. WIN: One, is appreciation and understanding of these technologies. Kasi kapag sinabing incineration, sinisunog yan, but then again, the law is very strict, it is allowed as long as it doesn't emit hazardous toxins. The technology now does not emit hazardous toxins. Two, we still need to do segregation. Hindi naman porke may ganito na tayong technology, we'll just keep piling up trash. When I was a mayor, meron akong segregation on the road and segregation at site meaning kapag kinokolekta ng garbage collector, sinisegregate na nila sa sasakyan because they can earn from that. When it reaches the site, the people there segregate it ulit because they can earn from that segregated materials. People don't know this but the ones that go to out landfills are super segregated already that's why as high as 70-80% our trash that go to our landfills are actually biodegradable already.

Q: If we have the waste to energy technology, will it be strong enough to actually support and help the energy needs of like, a small barangay?

SEN. WIN: Waste to energy technology is primarily an environmental technology rather than a power source technology. It's not as efficient as fossil fuel or other forms of technology. It actually generates a very few power to the grid but you have to treat this an environmental technology meaning, ano ba ang mas maganda para sa bansa natin? Landfills? And yung mga dumi, and if it's not properly constructed, it seeps thru our water table, yung mga iniinom natin. Or this type of technology that doesn't eat up so much space it permanently eliminates the garbage that we generate?

Q: Is that a priority for you? Do you have the support of your colleagues?

SEN. WIN: Yes, it is a priority. It's going to be a lively debate because we have to educate our colleagues in the Senate as well as the general public.

Q: Who do you think would be against the waste to energy?

SEN. WIN: All of us wants to protect the environment and we need to help our Senators appreciate this type of technology.


Q: Where do you stand on the death penalty? In the Senate you already have three that have filed I think their own versions, where are you when it comes to your own version?

SEN WIN: I have filed my own version of death penalty and this is limited to high-volume drug trafficking and my view on this, if we want to eliminate drugs a the lower level, we need to eliminate to eliminate drugs at the higher end of the spectrum which is the drug dealing and looking at it historically, and from my experience when I was in the LGU, drug lords have the money to have the best lawyers, they can corrupt government officials in and out of the system, inside the jail system natin kaya pa nila mag corrupt, hence we have drug lords dealing with drugs inside the new bilibid prison and these drugs seep into our societies and barangays, so my argument is, if you want to eliminate the drugs in the barangay you have to eliminate the source of the drugs which is the drug lords and that's why I limited my proposal to high-volume drug trafficking-

Q: What is high-volume under your bill?

SEN WIN: I have different levels but basically 1 kilo and above.

Q: 1 kilo that's trafficking?

SEN WIN: Correct, but I have different levels but in summary its 1 kilo and above and we're now under the death penalty.

Q: So you did not include plunder for example?

SEN WIN: No, I did not include plunder.

Q: Or other crimes, heinous crimes-

SEN WIN: No I didn't-

Q: Why not?

SEN WIN: Because the other heinous crimes can subject our poor constituents into our imperfect justice system.

Q: Let's say murder of the nakapatay?

SEN WIN: The difference between drug lords and poor constituents, the drug lords can hire the best lawyers, they have billions of cash going around in their pockets. Our poor constituents they either have to go through the PAO or through volunteer lawyers and this is where the unevenness comes in, so I'm not inclined towards the other heinous crimes because our poor constituents might be subjected to the imperfections of our justice system as to supposed to the drug lords, even though its imperfect, they have the lawyers that can help them out and protect them, hence, a lot of them can delay proceedings and even inside our jail system, they can still hire people and operate.

Q: I'm curious Senator Bato went as far as saying he wants a firing squad for those convicted with illegal drugs? Where do you stand?

SEN WIN: We're open to any of the modes, my view here is here is death penalty and we'll leave to our colleagues in the Senate to decide which mode they want it-

Q: What are the chances now you think?

SEN WIN: I think the chances are very good at this time-

Q: Consistently, well I do know you have Senator Risa Hontiveros, Sen Kiko that's against I can't remember where Senator Drilon stands but a lot of the new Senators are for death?

SEN WIN: The chances are very good, I cannot guarantee weather it will be passed or not but it has a better chance now compared to the 17th Congress and the reason for that is the dynamics have changed they have five PDP members are there which are very strong, very cohesive in unison regarding this measure and we have other independents there, other parties like myself who are supportive of this. I think from my count it's stands a better chance compared to 2017.

Q: What is the count? where is it now? I mean just off-hand, 16?

SEN WIN: I think off-hand lang I think mga 13 safely, and it's not even debated-

Q: but naka 13 na?

SEN WIN: But when you start debating it can go up and it can go down but as we stand right now and based on our own personal communication with our Senators, about 13 more or less.


Q: Divocre, interestingly is being discussed now, some Senators are saying it should be dissolution of marriage? What is the difference?

SEN WIN: First of all I'm not in favor of a drive-thru divorce-

Q: What is that?

SEN WIN: You drive thru-marriage and drive-thru divorce, this is what we see in Las Vegas, what you see on TV's and what we see in America-kasi ang bilis drive-thru ka kasala ka na tapos drive-thru ka divorce ka na, for me it lessens the sanctity and this destroys the sanctity of the marriage because now marriage doesn't mean anything. You get married now, you can get divorced tomorrow, so it doesn't mean anything but I do agree we need to have a mechanism at least to separate when violence specially when drugs are involved, we need to have have that mechanism-

Q: What about just unfaithfulness or psychological incapacity?

SEN WIN: As long as it is legitimate psychological incapacity because that's the most favorite and I have talked to many many practicing lawyers in the family court and sinasabi nila all of them are in agreement that is the favorite reason to file an annulment but that's also the most inaccurate reason-they just create a lot of lies to show that that they are psychological incapacitated.

Q: what would the difference be between a cheaper and easier annulment over frankly divorce or dissolution of marriage?

SEN WIN: Let me go back to dissolution of marriage and divorce, that's actually the same argument in the Sogie bill or the gender equality, the use of marriage and the use of union. Terminologies matter in the Philippines because if you talk to our ordinary constituents, kapag sinabing mong divcorce ang nasa isip nila yung nakikita nila sa TV kapag nanonood sila ng American shows, which drive-thru ones that's why in many many surveys, almost 60% of our constituents don't like divorce as a concept-

Q: Survey na kapag hiwalay? Ok ba yun sa survey?

SEN WIN: That one has not been tested yet that's why when you say divorce, ang dami nang tao na ayaw even millennials, I've talked to a lot of millennials because they know that marriage is very important that's why some of the Senators are now opening up to the idea to change the terminology because it matters to our constituents but the effect is the same so that's also being talked about in the Senate.

Q: What would the dissolution of marriage be like over the existing civil annulment process? If you were to pass it how will you make it more affordable frankly for the women who need to do it already, how can you make it more empowering for the children?

SEN WIN: what is important here it has to be less complicated, the safeguard should be there-

Q: wala nang psychological test na sa dissolution of marriage?

SEN WIN: We can consider that in the implementing rules, my view here is, it has to be simple and it has to be clear especially to our poor constituents because I have also talked to a lot of lawyers and they said you need at least 400,000 to 500,000 to hire a lawyer to go through the courts and annul your marriage. For poor constituents walang ganyan na capacity but our poor constituents are also subjected to the same problems as our richedr constituents face when they have marital issues so my concept here is it has to be really simple but the safeguard should be there but not simple enough na it becomes a drive-thru kind of divorce.


Q: You are proposing the PCSO should focus on collecting instead of running the gaming activity so you want STL and perya ng bayan privatized, and also lotto? What would the difference be if PCSO is just collecting?

SEN WIN: Again, my concept is to simplify the operations and also use existing government infra to manage this gaming operations. For Example, the DOF, alam mo magaling ang DOF, they are good at collecting so let them privatize the gaming operations, regulate and collect because that's where they are good at to collect and then the enforcement which is now under PCSO, in fact in the chart that there are 505 confidential agents in PCSO that serve as intelligence gatherers, enforcers, these are the people who enforce and gather intelligence against the jueteng operators, but sino ba ang magaling mag intelligence? NBI is the best agency to do intelligence and enforcement, so ibigay na natin yun enforcement sa NBI, when it comes to charity, the best agency there is DSWD so let's break it up and maximize the core competencies of our existing agencies so that the leakage will be minimal to 0 and that is my concept to simplify things and use existing infra.

Q: Right now the annual income of PCSO is at 60 billion pesos wherein is the 15 billion a year for financial aid? Is that the budget under the law?

SEN WIN: That is the budget for social services and charity-

Q: So what you want is for the 15 billiion-

SEN WIN: To go directly to the DSWD because the have the number of poor constituents in our country, number two, they have offices all over the nation and number three that is their core responsibility is to help our constituents.

Q: So its very parochial you end up going to PCSO office asking for support parang politiko rin sila-

SEN WIN: Correct, they go to DSWD then they go to PCSO, they go two times so dalawang pamaasahe yun. If you put everything now in DSWD and DSWD is now the central agency in terms of social services then you simplfy the whole concept.

Q: Will privatizing STL erase jueteng for you?

SEN WIN: It has to be a combination of strict enforcement and this is where NBI comes in not only intelligence, not only enforcement but also prosecution because if you don't prosecute hindi sila matatakot and the hay days will still continue- I'm trying to get the data on how many cases were filed in these 81 operators nationwide because again if you do not file cases and you don't prosecute, hindi sila hihinto they will just continue to under-remit.

Q: Under the law, a Congressman said shutting down STL is a violation of the PCSO franchise law, in other words a contract has been drawn up somehow and the PCSO under the law is independent enough to let it operate?

SEN WIN: Actually in my view that's 63 billion being collected is revenue for the government kahit na half that goes to the prices, that's still 30 billion that goes to the government, that's a lot cash that we can do a lot of things and if you shut down STL or shut down PCSOs operations what will rise again are juetengs, the illegal gambling all over the nation that do not pay taxes and do not help the poor so there is merit to let PCSO's operations continue but we need to simplify it because its very complex eh and ang daming personalities involved, ang nangyayari, ang daming corruption, we changed personalities, corruption ulit, then it doesn't do anything.

Q: So I wanna ask you Executive Sec. Medialdea spoke to PRRD about lotto and just overnight the President changed his mind that lotto can operate, they didn't even last a day so ang tanong ko should the President re-open already STL and Perya ng Bayan and if he doesn't what will the effect be?

SEN WIN: Based on my information the more portion of the PCSO is the STL games is being used as a front for illegal numbers game and it's not declaring properly as well the awarding of contracts arbitrary so we need to investigate that further. On top of that, we also need to, in my view, let's privatize STL, let's come up with very strict requirements, mag computerize kayo, everything should be linked to DOF para alam namin everyday what you are earning so we can impose very strict requirements and DOF will just be a collecting agent siya and that's the core competency of DOF to just collect, make it a revenue center.

Q: What will PCSO do part na lang sila ng under the DOF?

SEN WIN: In my model they are reduced to that operation to privatize, to regulate and also to collect.

Q: But the name itself is Philippine Charity Sweepstakes?

SEN WIN: We can always amend the name we can also amend the charter-

Q: Do you want them to keep a bit of charity or no more?

SEN WIN: Pwede naman but you can outsource that to DSWD.

Q: Did you file a bill?

SEN WIN: We are now in the process of amending the charter and again the concept here is to simplify by privatization.

Q: Yun ang main concept?

SEN WIN: Correct-

Q: Who supports you?

SEN WIN: This is a very out of the box solution but we cannot do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result because we keep on replacing the head, we keep on replacing the boards, we keep on expecting different results but we don't see any difference, every year na lang may corruption, every year administration nila may corruption so we need to reform the structure of PCSO.


Q: Now you called for an investigation for check and balance aif the K-12 actually works and is being implemented properly, what drove you?

SEN WIN: On the ground when I talked to the parents in Valenzuela they say Senator dinagdagan ng two years, that's additional baon, pamasahe and their children cannot work right away because they expect their children to help out right away. That additional two years, it should have better outcomes, our children should have jobs, they can enter colleges, but the design of that K-12 is either they go to college, they perform well in College, they land jobs, or they become entrepreneurs but based on the job survey that I saw, only 30% of our Senior High School gets hired, 70% walang ginagawa nothing happens to them so on top our national achievement course are declining, they are now sub-40 in Math and English-

Q: We're lower now?

SEN WIN: So this is a cause of alarm and we need to find out why we added two years but the outcomes are not there-

Q: Yes, because the two years are skill-related-

SEN WIN: And we have to remember that additional two years is additional cost to our government, our teacher's who pay for the vouchers, we pay for the expenses so the country should also benefit for that two years but from what I'm seeing right now based on the basic info is that it's not yielding the outcomes that are beneficial to our country-

Q: so you are not against K-12?

SEN WIN: I'm not against we will have more problems going back to the 10 year program-

Q: But what you do want is to adjust what is in K-12?

SEN WIN: What we want is number one, accountability from the DepEd, number two is adjustment and improvement in the delivery of K-12 because I still believe that K-12 is the right system for us considering that every single country in the world is already K-12 but we have to make sure that the outcomes are there-


Q: Are you open doctors are coming out now saying that there was just too much controversy brought to Dengvaxia but a doctor's group has come up saying that countries all over the world actually use Dengvaxia on students that had never had dengue and it could help prevent them have stronger resistance against the Dengue virus are you open I reusing dengvaxia in school?

SEN WIN: I was against Dengvaxia because it was not properly studied and vetted and after executing to millions of our kids the supplier, Sanofi, all of a sudden said we have to recall and this is a signal that it wasn't studied and vetted carefully but having said that what our country seeing is that there are two different groups; the one that are pro and the one that are anti and in this type of cases we need to get independent international experts to tell us kung talagang itong gamot na ito will be beneficial to our country.

Q: Pro kasi wants wit available to those who want it, no more mass vaccination, in other words if you want it for your child-

SEN WIN: For me, putting myself in the shoes of the parents, we have to make sure because right now we're torn e, we have to have that independent international organization, an expert to tell us what are the positive effects of this vaccine and what are the limitations of the vaccine because clearly there are limitations and we have understand carefully and make sure it is executed properly because what happened in the past there was a mass vaccination pati yung hindi nagka dengue sinaksakan ng Dengvaxia which is not the proper way so we have to review the execution of this medicine.

[end recording]

News Latest News Feed