Bad education

Such incredible grit and resolve. Despite the ferocious onslaught of questions surrounding her use of hundreds of millions in confidential funds, our vice president and former Education secretary is adamant in refusing to share even a tiny little juicy bit about the tantalizing mystery.

Her legal advisers must be working overtime in trying to think of plausible reasons why a public servant (that’s her, in case we forget) should keep her trap shut regarding funds that came from taxpayers (and that should be you, unless you’ve been naughty with the taxman, and you want to forget).

Never mind that the populace is agog and fairly gaga about the real identities of the recipients of those funds. With junk food names like Piattos, Chippy, and Oishi, and with the economy as it is, it’s very hard to ignore the clamor surrounding accountability for public money.

Unless of course, you are Sara without an ‘h’. In a quick press huddle, Sara Duterte blew off questions about these precious millions with such explanations as “I cannot explain confidential funds because it will entail explaining intelligence operations and there is a law that prohibits officials who gathered information because of their office to divulge it in public.” Hmm. Then perhaps you can divulge it in private? Just between us girls.

She also said, “there are still so many threats to education, not just insurgency” and “we wanted to target projects of the Department of Education as well in the most vulnerable areas and schools, that is why we needed confidential funds.”

So thrilling trying to think of what these threats could be. Was this about schoolchildren being threatened by pervs, and hence, informants would need to be paid secretly? Or perhaps, this involved a scenario where school teachers were threatening to sabotage their crappy curriculum, and importing dangerous ideas like “accountability” and hence, spies on such teachers would need to be employed?

Maybe, some grammar Nazi is out there butchering school textbooks, and publishers needed to be grilled in a torture chamber about where they find these horrible writers and proofreaders?

Did someone blow the whistle on who it was that penned those awful Malakas at Maganda comics where Mr. and Mrs. Marcos (circa the ‘70s) stepped out smiling from a bamboo stalk in our very own origin story? Or, were they intent in solving the decades-old mystery of who designed those awful uniforms for school teachers and worse, paid triple the price for coarse schoolmarm-dresses?

But that’s really as far as my imagination can go. I must have exhausted the possibilities. Call me ‘limited’?

Perhaps, in view of the pressing need of citizens with limited imagination such as I for clarity, it might be truly necessary for her to just spill the beans on why the Department of Education would be spending hundreds of millions to meet these “threats”. And what are these vulnerable areas that she is referring to?

It would be wonderful for her to include the reasons why our Department of Education should be concerned about insurgency. Was she worried about rebels infiltrating the faculty, and indoctrinating school kids about such revolutionary principles as the Bill of Rights?

And why won’t she answer the questions of Congress? Shouldn’t an official, to whom Congress entrusted funds, explain where and how she spent those funds? Just like my mom when she gave me my allowance. Or an agent when entrusted with funds by the principal. Or a company who took investors’ money during an IPO. So many analogies she can choose from.

Sara argues that she only has an obligation to explain to the Commission on Audit (COA), and no one else. Would it be possible then for Congress and COA to sit down together and simultaneously grill her? That should give her what she wants.

But of course, we can expect her legal team to find some other obstruction to forestall any quick answers. At least, someone in the room is receiving a good education.