n Service to the Filipino Nation

A reaction to the debate about the implementation of public service among graduating UP students

Personally, I am not at all in approval nor in disagreement of the implementation of public service work to graduating UP students. Nonetheless, I have inferred a lot from the recent debate that made me think twice about my views about the topic.

At the outset, I can somewhat appreciate the point asserting that a year of public service is a way of giving back to the nation, knowing that UP students are subsidized by the Philippine government. The affirmative side also mentioned the percentage of the educational budget allotted to the UP, and this act made their motion rather more convincing. I immediately recognized that UP students are funded by taxes for four years at minimum, and consequently, in one way or another, we are necessitated to give something back. Conversely, I believe that UP students should not be at all confined to a year of involuntary public service. I mean, there are surely a lot more ways to exhibit gratitude for the nation other than the suggested constrained work.

Moreover, I had thought upon the resentment of some students to “give back”, bearing in mind that this aforementioned public work will be obliged (therefore, constraining), and an uprising to this obligation will be foreseeable (considering the liberal nature of UP students). Furthermore, I thought of the possibility that students may oppose the implementation by stating that we UP students somewhat deserve to be subsidized, as the nation will inevitably benefit from us in the future. UP students are perceived as people of the higher intellect, and are supported financially by the nation in the hopes of producing credible future leaders and highly-knowledgeable workers of the nation.

A significant point was raised in the class about the definition and stricture of Public Service. I deem that the sole nature of public service is being able to serve a multitude (as form of gratitude, to say the least). Hence, I contest the opposition’s belief that public service should be solely of service to the government. I believe that the government per se was not the one who funded the allotted subsidy, but instead, the taxpaying nation as a whole. Thus, if UP students shall be compelled to give back, I suppose that they may do so not only by working in the government, but also by working in jobs that will outwardly benefit the taxpaying nation. Therefore, I opt to be transparent on the issue concerning the jobs in public and the private sectors (on whether which jobs are considered “public service”). I fairly believe that one can serve the public even in independence, or in accordance to a private sector.

Lastly, I do not see the significance of enforcing a fine to the violators of the implementation of this obligatory work. The fine, as recommended by the affirmative side, shall be equal to the amount a UP student was subsidized throughout his stay in the campus. Well, I have some particular question concerning this proposed fine. Where will the budget go? How would it benefit or aid the public in replacement of public work? And how sure are we that this fund will not be corrupted by officials in charge of this public service program? (Here, I rather empathize with the opposition on their point on corruption).

Word count: 569 words