Street dwellers

No Baby Talk

By Georgene Rhena P. Quilaton-Tambiga

                Holy Week is supposedly a quiet time for meditation and prayer among fellow Catholics but here I am failing to hold back some thoughts.

                A couple of weeks ago, my colleague, Henry Sandoval, came storming in the office and rained down his irritation that the street sleepers (yes you read that right) are growing in number. True enough, as I passed by the dilapidated building fronting the City Auditorium one evening, I myself noticed that the family who used to dwell at the City Plaza have now transferred along that sidewalk and it has actually extended.

                Happily, Henry and I are not the only persons who have noticed. Alas! Not all people in San Carlos are blind! P/Supt. Harold Tuzon, San Carlos City Police Office Chief, told the Peace and Order Council last March 30 that there should be relocation for these people. His point was openly directed to Cynthia Mirande, City Social Welfare and Development Office Head.

                But Mirande quickly defended that these street dwellers that Tuzon described as eyesores had been beneficiaries of several grants, aids, and programs of the local and national government alike (they are 4Ps beneficiaries) but they keep returning to the streets after the programs. As if raising both her arms in surrender, Mirande said there seems to be nothing that could keep these people out of the streets.

                My imagination suddenly flew and I saw myself suddenly grabbing the microphone and joining the forum.

                "Don't you think that there is something wrong with the program that's why these families go back to the plaza and the streets?" My imaginary self asked Mirande.

                I do not claim to be a social welfare expert. I am not even a social worker at the least but the fact that the problem with these street dwellers is already a vicious cycle logically tells me that something is desperately wrong and the authority refuses to admit that a fault exists somewhere.

                Now, in order to answer the nagging accusation that NewsRecord is all about criticisms and does not actually contribute to the solution, let me sound like my colleague Arthur Keefe.

                The street dwellers get their income by peddling on the streets, begging from passers-by and more often from drug store customers. In sh ort, when you pull them out the streets, they consequently lose their source of livelihood; and let us remember the blatant fact that they have a hand-to-mouth existence. The answer to their problem, then, is not a dole-out program but a livelihood support project that will uncover their interest (aside from peddling, of course) and give them the opportunity to pursue that interest. We have to recognize that livelihood and career is not merely about cash capital but, significantly, it is about interest and love for what you are doing.

                Maybe they had been given capital to make baskets but they do not want to make baskets; they want to raise cattle. So there's the rub! Well, beggars can't choose but we don't want them to be beggars forever, right?

                Another factor is monitoring. In fairness to our government and several NGOs, many projects exist in different forms to help alleviate poverty in the Philippines. But many of these projects lack monitoring.

                Monitoring should be consistent and should be officially passed from one barangay administration to the next. Why barangay? It is because the barangay officials are seen not as mere bureaucrats but community leaders. Notably, what these people need is community integration since they are considered outcasts of the society for so long. For once, we have to accept that the discrimination with which we wantonly look at them is one fault that keeps them from moving out of the street.

                Next, their kids have to be placed in school. There is no more need to accentuate the importance of education. But education should not only be for kids. No matter how old they already are, even the parents should be placed in a program that will educate them not only on livelihood but parenthood, most importantly, because the way grown-ups parent their children pretty much determines the kind of person they will become.

                Finally, as in the suggestion of Tuzon, relocation. One family living at the plaza, though, had been relocated already but rumor has it that the mother and father sold their house in an upland barangay and went back to the street. There could be several reasons why they did what they did. For one, they did not have good enough reason to stay. An interesting and lucrative livelihood, education for children and parents alike, community integration, and a community that will embrace them sans discrimination, now these are reasons good enough to make them stay should they be relocated.

                In short, what I am saying is this: Relocation is not and should not be the only step to rescue them from their plight neither is resigning to the fact that they keep on going back anyway. Surrender is not an option here.