Arts & International Affairs Volume 5, Number 1, Summer 2020 | Page 62

WHOSE GOVERNANCE, WHOSE GOOD?
NCCA. In spite of this dependence, the NCCA follows a core priority or direction that
the President rarely changes. The core priorities or directions revolve around the seven
needs defined in the MTPDPCA, namely: culture and development, culture and education,
promotion of culture and arts, continued support for artistic excellence, conservation
of cultural heritage; culture and peace, and culture and diplomacy.
The NCCA identifies the themes, objectives, design, and activities of the institutionalized
programs. On the other hand, projects that are proposed to the NCCA for the competitive
grants are designed by their proponents who are members of the communities
or cultural sectors. Proposed projects must fall under the categories set by the NCCA
to ensure that they are anchored on the set goals; and follows bureaucratic rules, regulations,
and procedures. Despite this, Savior (2010), a member of NCCA’s National
Committee on Dramatic Arts, explains, “The goals or themes of the NCCA are only a
backbone. It can be interpreted in different ways. The theme can be fundamentally followed.
But it can also be metaphorically linked or interpreted to a specific localization of
a specific need of the committee. So it is the committee that will decide what its policy
will be at a given time.”
This duality can be very confusing, which can lead to various problems and misinterpretations
or misrepresentation. Although ideas from the national agency and from the
grassroots level eventually meet in the middle, and mediated by the National Advisory
Board (NAB), there still lies the concern about whether what is presented at the discussion
table truly represents the needs and concerns of the communities. Savior (2010)
shared, “In some of our meetings, we lobby our needs. That is why we can form our
programs. But this is tricky because the committee in Manila will push for something
which for us in Mindanao is not favorable, or it will put the communities in Mindanao
at a disadvantage.”
Another point of concern is precisely this. The committee in Manila or the National
Capital Region, which historically has clout on what gets approved or considered, might
treat other regions or clusters parochially. The beauty of the NCCA's framework is that
this concern gets to be checked to prevent having an imperialistic Manila. The NCCA's
framework is designed to have equal representation from the National Committees on
Northern, Central, and Southern Cultural Communities. But the problem is on who
sits in the National Advisory Board (NAB), who ultimately decides on this matter? Are
votes on the NAB equally distributed among regions? According to the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of the NCCA, the NAB is composed of the heads of the National
Committees under the four Subcommissions. Here lies the problem because there is
inequity in the number of representatives, which means inequity in the number of votes.
The SCH has six national committees, entitling it to six votes. The SCD and SCCTA only
have three national committees, thus they only have three votes. But the SCA has seven
national committees, thus it has seven votes, which means more voting power. These
numbers show us that votes are not equally distributed among regions or specialized
59