Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 3 minutes ago
What really shaped that 8–7 vote?

After the Cebu City Council rejected the ACTIEF Pit-os scholarship proposal, questions are being raised:
👉 What legal concerns led to the decision?
👉 How do conflict-of-interest rules apply in this case?
👉 And what happens now to students who were hoping to benefit?

We break down the facts, the process, and the implications.
💬 Was the decision justified? Join the conversation—we’re LIVE.

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:23good afternoon welcome to beyond the headlines i'm dj moises
00:28to though today we go beyond a vote and into what it reveals about leadership ethics and the cost of
00:37decision in real lives in a razor-thin eight seven decision the cebu city council rejected a
00:46proposed scholarship tie-up with the asian college of technology international education foundation
00:52pito's campus a move that could have brought education closer to students in cebu's mountain
00:59barangays the resolution authored by councillor albin arcilia sought to authorize mayor nestor
01:08archival to enter into a memorandum of agreement with acti ef those who opposed the measure were
01:17councillors michael rama paro goh june alcover jp labelia joel garganera philip zapra dave tumulak
01:28and harry erin and those who voted in favor of it includes jose abelianosa or councillor abelianosa
01:39the committee noted that acti ef is owned by the family of councillor jose abelianosa raising concerns
01:47under the local government code on entering into contracts with entities linked to sitting officials
01:54within the second degree of consanguinity another issue is the absence of official documentation from
02:01cebu city college scholarship program committee confirming that the school was accredited as a
02:08partner school there are two sides of the story on one side access students who would have saved
02:17time money and daily struggle just to go to school on the other hand is accountability concerns over
02:27conflict of interest missing documentation and the responsibility to protect the public funds
02:32and somewhere in between are young students in tears leaders divided and a city force to choose
02:39between compassion and caution so the real question is did the council protect the public or did it fail
02:49the very people it is meant to serve this afternoon we unpacked the decision what should come first
02:56this is beyond the headlines and let's get into it so just like yesterday for our viewers feel free also
03:06to
03:06share your comments in the comment section and we will do our best to read them while the show is
03:12ongoing but just in case you will still be able to catch up later when you watch this video after
03:19the
03:19telecast we would still respond to each one of them so now i have five comments on this particular issue
03:28first let's be clear now this is not a rejection of education and this is not a rejection of the
03:38students
03:39so if the observation of counselor michael rama was accurate bringing the students there
03:50under the premise that they were there for an orientation seminar a scholarship orientation seminar
03:58and they were brought on political setting is deeply concerning it's actually a super bad taste
04:07no for for whoever did that because students are not supposed to be used as leverage no they are not
04:15there
04:15supposedly for optics or pressure or to add emotional weight that will keep the discussion from being objective
04:25whoever is beyond this if this is true let me tell you this this is not advocacy this is bad
04:35politics
04:37and it has to stop immediately
04:42it was a rejection of a process at that point but it was also not yet complete in my opinion
04:52and that brings
04:53me to my second point the issue that was raised by cebu city council was valid and they and it
05:02was specific
05:04there was no formal certification from the scholarship committee confirming accreditation so that means that
05:10there was no like documents like a verified data on board exam performance and there were also gaps in
05:18terms of compliance documents that should have been completed before the endorsement and these are not small
05:25things no these are supposed to be the very safeguard that protects not just public funds but also the students
05:35no so my
05:37question here is for act ief pitos campus no can you clarify why the proposal moved forward with incomplete requirements
05:51i mean it's common sense no when we submit something for approval the requirements would have been
05:59complete and if i am to look at each of the requirements that at least mentioned in the report
06:05their common sense no so why was the endorsement pursued without completion
06:16the second also is i'm also curious about the mindset was it really about urgency or was it about overconfidence
06:28again i will have to note that counselor jose abelianosa was there in the session and he also voted in
06:37favor of it in spite of the council noting that the school was owned by the family or by his
06:46family
06:48so yes overall it is common sense like what i've stated you earn approval because the requirements are
06:58complete and they complied to the guideline now while the process is being questioned that's my third point
07:07now students in mountain barangay such as pitos are put in limbo so no wonder that the decision led them
07:16to
07:17tears because if you and i are in their shoes what would you feel what should we feel no now
07:26this is the
07:27part that hits hardest because again if these students were brought there with a false hope then the pain they
07:38feel or they feel no or they felt was not about not getting it actually being it is about being
07:46misled to hope and again
07:50that is concerning because these students deserve empathy they deserve urgency but on the other side i will have to
08:02say
08:02they also deserve honesty and they also deserve preparation hope is powerful but misplaced hope that can be dangerous
08:18now should this discussion end to a full stop and i'm now going to my fourth point
08:26in my view when something is urgent but incomplete leadership has a third option a controlled
08:36temporary compromise again i will have to emphasize controlled and temporary not a blind approval not a total
08:46rejection but a conditional pathway forward so how can this be done first there could have been
08:56a pilot implementation a pilot implementation and then when i say pilot implementation maybe they can
09:01pick a group of students and then the duration now i know that there are legal teams now in the
09:09city hall
09:09who are better than i am but the reason why i'm proposing this if this is legal because this will
09:16shift the conversation from the school to the students now the second is now let's go to the school
09:23the school act ief pitos campus there could possibly have been a provisional accreditation so that means
09:34it's still a temporary approval but subject to full compliance within a fixed outcome and within a fixed
09:43schedule and there needs to be a strict oversight and reporting requirements so that every peso is
09:50accounted for and every outcome is measured and i will have to add these will have to come with a
09:57concrete
09:58clear clause that failure to comply once again will mean suspension of the program immediately now my
10:09fifth and final point let me be clear conflict of interest is not a small technicality no given
10:19what's happening in the country right now conflict of interest goes to the heart of trust
10:27and once trust is questioned every good intention becomes harder to believe so this is not something
10:37that we will just have to set aside for the sake of urgency but here is where leadership is tested
10:44in managing this decisively without allowing without disallowing solutions to move forward so how can we do this
10:57first full disclosure on record again the committee noted that the school is owned by the family of
11:04counselor jose abelianosa so is this really true no let's put it on record and let's declare
11:13whoever is also involved in the school up to the second degree of consanguinity and in my opinion if
11:22these notes are true it was actually a bad taste also bad politics for him a bad decision for him
11:28to
11:29actually participate in the voting no second which is my second point no full inhibition of the officials
11:39with potential or proven connection so like counselor abelianosa for example it's better that he
11:48step away from the discussion the the endorsement the deliberation and more importantly the vote no and
11:58third the city council or the city city government can also consider independent review no a neutral body
12:08or a scholarship committee that can take control of the evaluation and the accreditation process
12:15and finally which is the same as my fourth suggestion a conditional approval that all comply our
12:22requirements will have to be met on a specified period otherwise the program is
12:30automatically suspended and this is not about weakening the safeguard this is strengthening it while
12:39keeping the door open no conflict of interest does not always mean wrongdoing but failure to address it
12:49properly means real damage and i will have to add because i've learned this also in my private corporate
12:56practice when we even talk about conflict of interest when we even talk about conflict of interest it even
13:00involves an impression of such and this is where i'm sorry i'm highlighting the engagement of
13:09counselor jose abelianosa in the process and also in the voting no because with the right safeguards in
13:17place the process could have remained clean and the path forward remains open and that is what i meant
13:25with controlled temporary compromise so now again for those of our viewers if you have uh if you have opinion
13:36about this if you have questions about this please share them in the comment section and before we close this
13:42episode let me bring this home now again this is not a rejection of education this is not a rejection
13:49of
13:49the students so at this point i'll just have to say that let's set aside the drama now so that
13:55we can keep
13:56the conversation and the decision objective it is a rejection of an incomplete process but in this process
14:06let's also say let's also take into consideration our students no marginalized students a lot of them are
14:14marginalized no and their future is at stake no so if we truly if we truly care about the students
14:22we just
14:23don't push proposals no we prepare them we complete them and finally given all the corruptions allegedly
14:31happening in the country today part of the process includes something we cannot ignore conflict of
14:40interest but leadership must find a way forward and protects both integrity and action not one or the
14:50other protect trust but don't place young students in the middle of something unfinished
15:00this is what leadership is now now the decision has already been made a razor-thin 8-7 decision but
15:08the
15:08opportunity to do better it is still very much alive this has been beyond the headlines i'm dj moises thank
15:19you
15:19for joining us this afternoon have a good weekend
15:22this afternoon
15:37so
15:39so
Comments

Recommended