Pia amends to broaden the Teaching Supplies Allowance Act to cover other expenses that teachers shoulder to improve learning delivery
Highlights of Senator Pia S. Cayetano's intervention on the proposed Teaching Supplies Allowance Bill (Senate Bill No. 1964)

Mr. President, my understanding regarding the amendments made on Section 3 is that this was qualified that the coverage would be consistent with the policy guidelines and delivery learning modalities recognized by DepEd. Is that correct, Mr. President? [Question directed to the sponsor, Senator Bong Revilla]

So my amendment may not be necessary depending on the answers of our sponsor. The objective here now with the amendment of Sen. Loren, is to ensure that... is it correct that the objective here is that the cash allowance will be used only in accordance with these guidelines? And taking into consideration the different deliveries of learning modalities. Is that correct?
*
Okay, so for the record, because anytime this involves the disbursement of cash, and this is cash that will be given to teachers, is that correct, Mr sponsor, this is cash?
*
How will this be disbursed to the teachers? On a monthly basis, on an annual basis? Annually. And do they have to give receipts for their purchase? [Sen. Revilla answers that the allowance will not be subject to liquidation] So once they have it...so how do we ensure that this is used for that purpose? It has a great purpose. But we want to ensure that it's used for that purpose.
*
But my question is how do we know it is used for that purpose? We do not know?

So because there is a shortage [of teaching supplies], we assume that the funding we make available will be used to meet that shortage? And I assume that for the general population. But I also assure you that there will be those who will not use it for that purpose.
*
I am getting there [proposed amendment]. I am just trying to set the basis to determine if there is a need for amendment. Would your resource persons, Mr President, know of any other allowance based, do I call this a subsidy, grant of a similar nature, that there is no need for liquidation? [Session is suspended]
*
Mr President, can I answer my own question? Because it is not this representation's desire to confuse or to make the issue complicated. I think everyone recognizes that the teachers are the first, after the family to...kumbaga sila ang nag-aambag, sila ang nagdadagdag sa kung anumang kakulangan sa classroom, alam naman natin yun. My question stemmed from the situation where what are the boundaries on how this is used.

So if I may go further, for example, ang isang teacher, walang malisya po ang tanong ko, kunyari ang isang teacher ginamit niya sa isang bata na nakita niyang laging gutom, laging kulang sa pagkain. And I have so much respect for the teacher who will use their personal money para tulungan ang bata. Meron pang magreregalo ng sapatos. Covered ba yun? Kasi baka naman mamaya, hindi yun covered, siya pa mapagalitan, siya pa masabihan na misused niya ang fund, and yet ginamit niya para sa ikabubuti ng bata. But I don't think that's covered by a cash allowance.
**
Yun nga ang point ko, Mr President. Ang hirap ng "siguro." Kasi we are governed by laws. And I will look at the Secretary of DBM, or COA.. ayokong may ma-COA dito. So sa akin, Mr President, paano ba, do I amend this? It's a genuine question. Do I amend this to include more than supplies, but to any expense that the teacher sees is needed by the child? Yun ba dapat ang scope natin?
*
Mr President, Majority Floor Leader, I don't intend to delay this. Our Secretaries [DOF, DBM, NEDA] have been here for more than two hours for another matter, for a very important bill. I think I have to consult the body.
*
The next Section, "all public school teachers shall be granted a teachers 'supplies' allowance..." O di yun na nga, na-limit natin yun, "for the purchase of tangible or intangible teaching supplies and materials, and for the implementation or conduct of various learning delivery modalities." Do I want to say, "and for any need a teacher deems suited for the benefit of the learner"? It's a question, your honor.

I am looking at the Minority Floor Leader because paano nga kung bumili siya ng pagkain para sa estudyante? Kunyari narinig niya may ubo, isang buwan na may ubo pa rin, siya nagpagamot. Teaching supplies ba yun? Hindi na siya teaching supplies.

But the truth is, and I ask his honor to ask his advisers, hindi ba't kasama yan sa ginagastos ng isang teacher? Kasama yun. Yung tsinelas ng bata, may bumibili. So that's the reality. And I don't want his honor to come back and amend this. Let's ask the advisers exactly what these teachers spend their money on. Is Congress willing to be clear about this expense so that we write into the law exactly the circumstances that we know occur?
*
Tanggalin na si teachers supplies... just a thought. "Teachers' allowance." Delete the word "supplies" and then in the definition, allowance means supplies and any...
*
[incidental expenses] I am very okay with that. I think that will cover the reality of what the teachers spend on. Yes. Subject to style so we can accept the... amendment to the amendment... if the sponsor will accept.
*
Mr President, I thank everyone on the floor because I feel this was an important amendment that will address the reality of teachers that they spend for anything and everything to assist their learners as if they were their own child. And I did not want them to be bound by our definition if in fact they are spending for something na ikabubuti naman ng estudyante nila. Maraming salamat po.