Earning or Learning: What is UP Striving For?

            Kapekonomiya: Probing the UP Land Use was a very relevant and timely discussion about an issue the state university is currently facing: the privatization and commercialization of UP. Professors Ruperto Alonzo and Judy Taguiwalo, along with prominent student-leaders from the Diliman campus were invited to share their opinions and stands and express their concerns regarding the matter at hand. From their speeches, I was able to gain several insights and ascertain my stand on the issue.

            Professor Alonzo’s discussion was entitled, “Harnessing UP’s Assets To Serve UP Objectives.” He mentioned that private sector participation is nothing new for the university and is actually beneficial. In fact, public-private partnership would enable UP to focus on its core mission, which is the pursuit of academic objectives and the pursuit of excellence. Back then, many could attest to the numerous inefficiencies in UP-run activities such as its food service, printing office, security, and the PCED hostel; but ever since UP has allowed private sector participation, the UP community has been able to enjoy more variety and better service. With the arguments he raised, Professor Alonzo seems to be supportive of the privatization of UP, explaining that it is favorable to the UP community.

           

            Following Professor Alonzo’s speech was Professor Taguiwalo’s, which was entitled, “UP Diliman Land Use Plan: A Blueprint for the Further Erosion of the Public Character of UP.”  The title alone says a lot about her stand on the matter—that privatization and commercialization diminishes the university’s public character. Given that it is owned and run by the government, UP is and must remain as a public university. With the recent developments just outside the Diliman campus, namely the UP-Ayala Land TechnoHub and the UP Town Center, as examples, Professor Taguiwalo sarcastically called UP the Ayala University of the Philippines. Furthermore, she let the audience ponder on why public universities are being privatized, then answered by saying that the usual reason given is that the government does not have enough money to sufficiently fund social services, including public universities. This reason, in my opinion, is unacceptable. The recent PDAF scam and the proliferation corruption within the government prove that it does have money; the problem is that the country’s money is given to the wrong hands or is spent inappropriately. To conclude, Professor Taguiwalo by said that because of the privatization and commercialization of UP, “ang serbisyo ay nagiging negosyo.”

            After Professor Alonzo’s and Taguiwalo’s speeches, student-leaders Alex Castro, Darrell Magsambong, and Christa each gave their reactions to the arguments presented. With obvious frustration, Ms. Castro revealed that UPIS was asked to leave their location in order for UP Town Center to be built and that Ayala Land compensated for this by offering 220 million pesos for the construction of a new building for UPIS. She said that the money offered was not enough to cover the building expenses. Knowing this, I understood why Ms. Castro was very much opposed to the idea. I could not help but wonder why UP would allow UPIS to be removed and replaced with some kind of mall or recreation center that does not seem to promote academic growth in any way, the same goes with the UP-Ayala Land TechnoHub. She also mentioned five safeguards regarding establishments to be developed on UP property: They must (1) be allotted for academic purpose, (2) involve student consultation, (3) not be used as a substitute for state subsidy, (4) be environmentally sound, and (5) have transparency and accountability with regards to its funds. She claimed that none of these—or at least not all of them—were met when the two aforementioned establishments were built. Ms. Castro’s points were reiterated by the next two speakers. They mentioned that although selling UP properties to private companies were income-generating, they were only one-time deals. Once they are sold, UP loses control over them. “In the end,” as stated by Mr. Magsambong, “Sino ang makikinabang?”

            Before coming to this forum and listening to the opinions and sides of the speakers, I was not aware that the public-private partnership was a heated topic among the UP community. There are people in favor of it; however, most of the speakers during this forum have raised reasonable points on why we should be against the idea. For me, public-private partnership indeed has its own advantages and is, to some degree, beneficial to the UP community. For one, having commercial establishments around the campus provides a variety of leisure activities and food choices for students, faculty members and staff. But I have learned from Professor Taguiwalo and three of our student-leaders that  because of privatization and commercialization, UP’s goal of nurturing learning is gradually being replaced with generating income. This should not be the case, especially being the nation’s premier university, known for the excellent quality of education it provides to its students. As Iskolar ng Bayan,  UP students, including myself, are to make decisions not for the sole benefit of our own career paths, rather our ultimate goal must be to be of service to our countrymen. In all its future endeavors, UP, along with everyone in the UP community, must always consider its mission, which is perfectly summed up in a quote by Ms. Alex Castro, “It is not UP’s goal to facilitate earning, but to promulgate learning.”