Punchline
LTO’s insider-fixers
By Ermin Garcia Jr.
“NO fixers allowed inside this office” that’s the sign posted outside the Land Transportation Office Dagupan District. I surmise the same is posted in other districts in Pangasinan because the intent for pubic consumption is clear – to protect the public and stop corruption.
But two car owners who had their car registrations renewed in Dagupan last week, took a different view of that sign upon leaving the LTO building. One quipped that the sign should be truthful and should actually read: “No fixers inside this office because we have our own.”
They said it took them more than 3 hours to complete the process. They started the procedure (as posted inside the reception area) at around 9.30a.m. and managed only to get their stickers at 1:25pm! They noted there were applicants who started much later than them but completed the process in less than 2 hours. Anyari?
* * * * *
BIG MISTAKE. They realized as an afterthought that their biggest mistake was they didn’t choose to be guided by the “fixers” seated behind the glass windows. Firstly, they didn’t have their cars tested for emission in the place that fixer “recommended”. Each was given a piece of paper that bore the name of the emission tester which was supposed to be submitted to the tester prior to the testing. (Little did the duo realize that the small piece of paper that had the penmanship of the “fixer” was the code for entitlement for a commission). Neither did they agree to have the inspection of the EWDs inside their cars waived for P100! The duo was even puzzled when told of a new requirement about the need to inspect their units’ car air-conditioning. No dice, there.
To their consternation, they only began to realize their mistake after they were finally seated in the lounge waiting for a call from the cashier. They noticed that others who came after them were being called one after the other yet their names were never called even by mistake. It dawned on them that there was no such thing as “First–in-First-Out” rule for the cashier. Pending documents just kept piling on top of other documents that were submitted earlier. In some cases, documents were seen being pulled out from under and rearranged for a new line of priority. By 12 noon, they realized they were made to suffer for refusing to abet the corruption system in that office when the cashier left her post for lunch albeit a short break.
* * * * *
PROOF. Of course, they have no proof that money changed hands to have priority. Who would? But a mere comparison of the efficiency of the office with other district offices is enough indication whether fixers’ rule the office. To see others finish much earlier than those who came earlier is proof. To be made to wait for 3 hours that should only take 90 minutes max is best proof!
Is it possible that Mr. Hilario Sabado, head of the Dagupan LTO office, is not aware of the “fixers” inside his office? Assuming he doesn’t have an inkling (a sign of serious incompetence and naivety), I invite him to learn a thing or two from the Makati District Office not only about stomping out corruption in his office, but to see how courtesy and professional conduct can lift the image of his office, and give meaning to his sign – “No fixers allowed inside this office”!
And if it’s happening in Dagupan, I can imagine how it is with some of the districts in the region. This is also a reflection on the poor and lax management of the regional office headed by Atty. Teofilo Guadiz III. Is it possible that he, too, is in the dark?
If Mr. Guadiz is wont to kick out the fixers, he should require district offices to install a time stamp machine to be used on documents for processing to determine the flow of documents vis-à-vis the established time allocation for the whole process. The results alone will save him time from sleuthing.
For instance, LTO has established that to get a new driver’s license, it is estimated applicants will have to go through a process that requires maximum four hours inclusive of seminar/lectures, examination and actual driving tests. If an applicant is finished in 30 minutes, one need not wonder and say “Anyari?”
* * * * *
DISCRIMINATORY POLICY. The provincial board and the organization of licensed gun owners in Pangasinan should consider filing a case against the PNP leadership for its discriminatory policy, banning carrying of firearms in the province, and nowhere else.
If the reason being foisted on gun owners here is the campaign to check the rising criminalities involving the use of firearms, then it should not have limited the ban to Pangasinan alone. Why isn’t it being enforced in Metro Manila? In Cebu City, etc.?
The PNP rubs insult to injury by making Pangasinan licensed gun owners pay a lot more for the permit to carry firearms outside the residence then prevents from exercising their right granted by the permit.
The least the PNP can do now is to extend the period of the permit equivalent to the months the permit could not be used by its order.
Curiously, how does the Pangasinan PNP treat licensed gun owners armed with PTCFOR who are not Pangasinan residents who happen to travel to the province with their guns, not realizing there is a ban here? Are they exempted from coverage? If so, there’s the discrimination right there. Then, consider a hitman carrying two guns, one licensed and the other unlicensed making it possible for him to use the licensed firearm as a cover for his unlicensed firearm to make the kill in the province.
* * * * *
HELP FOR THE LGBT. Remember all the hullabaloo about the planned provincial ordinance requiring all private establishments to construct a third toilet for the LGBT (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender) sector? That is patently discriminatory for all sectors.
But the Quezon City government has a better approach to address the claimed discrimination by the LGBT. It has an ordinance that protects members of the LGBT against all forms of discrimination directed solely at them. And mind you, the absence of a separate comfort room for them is not considered discriminatory.
In fairness to the LGBT, there are indeed, discriminatory practices felt in many situations, among them, no equity in salaries in their work places, preventing their participation in social and physical activities, bullying them in public places, etc. This is an area that the provincial board can look into to protect the LGBTs among us. Without a doubt, they are a minority and must be protected from any form of discrimination without any semblance of provocation on their part.
The QC ordinance should be a good study. But enough of the third comfort room!
Share your Comments or Reactions
Powered by Facebook Comments
