JOURNAL NO. 19
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
CALL TO ORDER
At 4:00 p.m., Deputy Speaker Eric D. Singson called the session to order.
NATIONAL ANTHEM AND PRAYER
Pursuant to Section 71, Rule XI of the Rules of the House, the Members sang the National Anthem and thereafter observed a minute of silent prayer and meditation.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Thereafter, on motion of Representative Albert S. Garcia, the session was suspended at 4:02 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:21 p.m., the session was resumed.
Subsequently, on motion of Rep. Albert S. Garcia and upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary General called the Roll and the following Members were present:
Abaya
Ablan
Agbayani
Aggabao
Agyao
Akbar
Alcala
Alfelor
Almario
Alvarez (A.)
Alvarez (G.)
Amante
Amatong
Angara
Apostol
Aquino
Arago
Arenas
Arroyo (I.)
Arroyo (D.)
Balindong
Barzaga
Bautista
Beltran
Bichara
Binay
Biron
Bravo
Briones
Bulut
Cabilao
Cagas
Cajayon
Cajes
Cari
Casi?o
Castelo Daza
Castro
Cayetano
Celeste
Cerilles
Chatto
Chavez
Chiongbian
Chipeco
Chong
Chungalao
Clarete
Climaco
Codilla
Coquilla
Coscolluela
Cua (G.)
Cua (J.)
Cuenco
Dangwa
Dayanghirang
Daza
De Guzman
Defensor (A.)
Defensor (M.)
Del Mar
Del Rosario
Diasnes
Dimaporo
Dominguez
Domogan
Due?as
Dumpit
Durano
Dy
Ecleo
Emano
Enverga
Ermita-Buhain
Escudero
Estrella (C.)
Estrella (R.)
Fabian
Fernandez
Ferrer
Fua
Fuentebella
Garay
Garcia (A.)
Garcia, Pablo P.
Garcia, Pablo John F.
Garcia (V.)
Garin
Gatchalian
Gatlabayan
Go
Golez
Gonzales (A.)
Gonzales (N.)
Gonzalez (R.)
Guingona
Gullas
Hataman
Hofer
Hontiveros-Baraquel
Ilagan
Jaafar
Jala
Jalosjos-Carreon
Jikiri
Joson
Kho
Lacson
Lagbas
Lagdameo
Lagman
Lapus
Lim
Locsin
Lopez
Macapagal Arroyo (M.)
Madrona
Magsaysay
Malapitan
Mamba
Mandanas
Mangudadatu
Matugas
Mendoza
Mercado
Miraflores
Nava
Nicolas
Noel
Nograles
Ocampo
Ola?o
Ong
Ortega
Pablo
Padilla
Pancho
Pancrudo
Piamonte
Pingoy
Pi?ol
Prieto-Teodoro
Puentevella
Puno
Ramiro
Remulla
Reyes (C.)
Reyes (V.)
Robes
Rodriguez
Rodriguez-Zaldarriaga
Roman
Romarate
Romualdez
Romualdo
Romulo
Roxas
Salimbangon
Salvacion
San Luis
Sandoval
Santiago (J.)
Santiago (N.)
Seachon-Lanete
Seares-Luna
Silverio
Singson (E.)
Singson (R.)
Solis
Soon-Ruiz
Susano
Sy-Alvarado
Sy-Limkaichong
Tali?o-Mendoza
Tan
Ta?ada
Teodoro
Teves
Tieng
Tupas
Umali (A.)
Ungab
Uy, (E.)
Uy, Reynaldo
Uy, Rolando
Valdez
Vargas
Velarde
Villafuerte
Villanueva
Villarosa
Vinzons-Chato
Violago
Yap
Yu
Zamora (M.)
Zamora (R.)
Zubiri
With 199 Members present, the Chair declared the presence of a quorum. (See Appendix I)
The following Members appeared before and/or after the Roll Call:
Abante
Albano
Angping
Antonino-Custodio
Arnaiz
Asilo
Bagatsing
Bondoc
Bonoan-David
Cojuangco
Crisologo
De Venecia
Gunigundo
Javier
Maza
Mitra
Suarez
Umali (C.)
Villar
Zialcita
DEFERMENT OF THE APPROVAL
OF THE JOURNAL
At this point, on motion of Rep. Garcia (A.), there being no objection, the Body deferred the approval of the Journal of the previous session.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS
Thereafter, Rep. Garcia (A.) acknowledged the presence in the Session Hall of the following guests:
1. Students of the Apayao State College, headed by Dr. Angel Rey?anosa, chairperson of the Department of Agriculture, Josefina B. Batugal, chairperson of the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration and Dr. Orlando D. Batugal, dean of Graduate Studies;
2. Employees of the City Environmental and Parks Management Office, headed by Mr. Ruben Cervantes.
Subsequently, the Body proceeded to the Reference of Business.
REFERENCE OF BUSINESS
Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary General read on First Reading the titles of the following Bills and Resolutions, including Communications which were referred to the appropriate Committees hereunder indicated:
BILLS ON FIRST READING
House Bill No. 2257, entitled:
?AN ACT TO AMEND PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NINE HUNDRED FIFTY SEVEN (PD 957) TO INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF?
By Representative Gunigundo
TO THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
House Bill No. 2258, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING AN EXTENSION OFFICE OF THE LAND TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) IN THE CITY OF TANAUAN, PROVINCE OF BATANGAS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Reyes (V.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2259, entitled:
?AN ACT CREATING TWO (2) ADDITIONAL REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS IN THE PROVINCE OF NUEVA ECIJA WITH SEATS AT THE SCIENCE CITY OF MU?OZ AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF RIZAL, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE PARAGRAPH (C), SECTION 14 OF BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980?
By Representative Violago
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2260, entitled:
?AN ACT EXEMPTING POOR LITIGANTS FROM POSTING BAIL WHEN CHARGED WITH NON-CAPITAL OFFENSES FOR THE FIRST TIME AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Violago
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE
House Bill No. 2261, entitled:
?AN ACT RENAMING VALENZUELA GENERAL HOSPITAL (VGH) TO DO?A EVA MACARAEG-MACAPAGAL WOMEN?S MEDICAL CENTER AND TO INCREASE ITS PERSONNEL COMPLEMENT TO SERVICE 200 BED CAPACITY?
By Representative Gunigundo
TO THE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2262, entitled:
?AN ACT RE-INSTITUTING ROTC AS A MANDATORY COURSE FOR ALL COLLEGE STUDENTS, REVIVING THE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7077 AND COMMONWEALTH ACT NO. 1 AND AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9163 FOR THE PURPOSE?
By Representative Solis
TO THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SECURITY
House Bill No. 2263, entitled:
?AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING THE CRIME OF ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCE?
By Representatives Ocampo, Casi?o, Beltran, Maza, Ilagan, Del Mar, Datumanong, Singson (E.), Fuentebella, Villarosa, Defensor (A.), Gonzales (N.), Zamora (R.), Antonino-Custodio, Villafuerte, Defensor (M.), Padilla, Zialcita, Villar, Ta?ada, Yap, Uy (R.S.), Locsin, Cayetano, Plaza, Vinzons-Chato, Rodriguez, Escudero, Lopez, Guingona, Pichay, Mitra, Villanueva, Tupas, Chipeco, De Guzman, Binay, Solis, Romarate, Fernandez, Angara, Suarez, Coquilla, Alfelor, Aggabao, Alcala, Albano, Biazon, Hataman, Cerilles, Kho, Mandanas, Gunigundo, Daza, Gullas, Apostol, Remulla, Biron, Lapus, Silverio, Umali (A.), Joson, Asilo, Estrella (R.), Alvarez (A.), Roman, Umali (C.), Angping, Nicolas, Malapitan, Garin, Miraflores, Crisologo, Emano, Jaafar, Akbar, Valdez, Velarde, Diaz, Domogan, Mamba, Diasnes, Lagbas, Amante, Chungalao, Garcia (A.), Clarete, Singson (R.), Lacson, Romulo, Roxas, Ungab, Cagas, Piamonte, Susano, Cajayon, Magsaysay, Bagatsing, Bravo, Tali?o-Mendoza, Mercado, Nava, Ong, Abaya, Gonzales (A.), Mendoza, Tieng, Gatchalian, Romualdo, Pancrudo, Aquino, Cari, Codilla, Soon-Ruiz, Salimbangon, Sy-Limkaichong, Dumarpa, Zamora (M.), Yu, Amatong, Bondoc, Castro, Cabilao, Garcia (P.), Garcia (P.J.), Garay, Fua, Coscolluela, Puno, Gatlabayan and Ferrer
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE
House Bill No. 2264, entitled:
?AN ACT TO REGULATE AND MODERNIZE THE PRACTICE OF INTERIOR DESIGN IN THE PHILIPPINES, REPEALING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NUMBER 8534 (RA No. 8534) KNOWN AS ?THE PHILIPPINE INTERIOR DESIGN ACT OF 1998?, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Silverio
TO THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL SERVICE AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
House Bill No. 2265, entitled:
?AN ACT GRANTING CASH INCENTIVES TO DIFFERENTLY-ABLED ATHLETES, COACHES AND TRAINERS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9064 OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ?SPORTS BENEFITS AND INCENTIVES ACT OF 2001? ?
By Representative Lacson
TO THE COMMITTEE ON YOUTH AND SPORTS DEVELOPMENT, THE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES, AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2266, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING SECTIONS 91 AND 97 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8550, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ?PHILIPPINE FISHERIES CODE OF 1998? ?
By Representative Villafuerte
TO THE COMMITTEE ON AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES RESOURCES
House Bill No. 2268, entitled:
?AN ACT STRENGTHENING THE POLITICAL PARTY SYSTEM AND PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Locsin
TO THE COMMITTEE ON SUFFRAGE AND ELECTORAL REFORMS
House Bill No. 2269, entitled:
?AN ACT CONVERTING THE BANYAGA-BILIBINWANG-SUBIC ROAD ALONG THE TALISAY-LAUREL-AGONCILLO ROAD IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF AGONCILLO, PROVINCE OF BATANGAS INTO A NATIONAL SECONDARY ROAD AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Reyes (V.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2270, entitled:
?AN ACT SEPARATING THE KAMORA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL - ADAOAY EXTENSION IN BARANGAY ADAOAY, MUNICIPALITY OF KABAYAN, PROVINCE OF BENGUET, FROM KAMORA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, CONVERTING IT INTO AN INDEPENDENT NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS THE ADAOAY NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE?
By Representative Dangwa
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2271, entitled:
?AN ACT SEPARATING THE BUGUIAS NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL - SITIO BOT-OAN EXTENSION IN BARANGAY CATLUBONG, MUNICIPALITY OF BUGUIAS, PROVINCE OF BENGUET, FROM BUGUIAS NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, CONVERTING IT INTO AN INDEPENDENT NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS THE CATLUBONG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE?
By Representative Dangwa
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2272, entitled:
?AN ACT PUNISHING CULPABLE INSOLVENCY AND JURIDICAL PERSONS?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE
House Bill No. 2273, entitled:
?AN ACT DECLARING THE CELEBRATION OF NATIONAL CHILDREN?S DAY IN THE COUNTRY?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES
House Bill No. 2274, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC NO. 8545, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ?EXPANDED GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE TO STUDENTS AND TEACHERS IN PRIVATE EDUCATION ACT? PROVIDING FOR AN EXPANDED VOUCHER OR COUPON SYSTEM IN SECONDARY AND TERTIARY EDUCATION, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
House Bill No. 2275, entitled:
?AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING PREPARATORY EDUCATION AS COMPULSORY PART OF BASIC PRIMARY EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2276, entitled:
?AN ACT DISENGAGING PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS FROM COMPULSORY ELECTION DUTIES AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 13 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6646, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ELECTORAL REFORMS LAW OF 1987?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON SUFFRAGE AND ELECTORAL REFORMS
House Bill No. 2277, entitled:
?AN ACT TO HELP IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION IN THE COUNTRY BY ALLOWING PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS TO CONCENTRATE ON THEIR TEACHING DUTIES, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 13 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6646, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ?THE ELECTION REFORM ACT OF 1987,? AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Reyes (C.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON SUFFRAGE AND ELECTORAL REFORMS
House Bill No. 2278, entitled:
?AN ACT RATIONALIZING THE GRANT AND ADMINISTRATION OF FISCAL AND NON-FISCAL INCENTIVES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Javier
TO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
House Bill No. 2279, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, AND PROVIDING FOR THE RATIONALIZATION OF WAGE-FIXING ALONG NATIONAL AND INDUSTRIAL LINES?
By Representative Hontiveros-Baraquel
TO THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
House Bill No. 2280, entitled:
?AN ACT EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM LAW OF 1988?
By Representative Singson (R.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON AGRARIAN REFORM
House Bill No. 2281, entitled:
?AN ACT DECLARING THE FILING OF A CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY FOR ANOTHER OFFICE A VOLUNTARY RENUNCIATION OF THE ELECTIVE OFFICE PRESENTLY HELD?
By Representative Aggabao
TO THE COMMITTEE ON SUFFRAGE AND ELECTORAL REFORMS
House Bill No. 2282, entitled:
?AN ACT CREATING THE PENAL CODE COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND CODIFY ALL PHILIPPINE PENAL LAWS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Cuenco
TO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF LAWS
House Bill No. 2283, entitled:
?AN ACT CONVERTING THE FORTUNATO F. HALILI NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SCHOOL IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF SANTA MARIA, PROVINCE OF BULACAN INTO A STATE COLLEGE TO BE KNOWN AS THE FORTUNATO F. HALILI POLYTECHNIC STATE COLLEGE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Nicolas
TO THE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2284, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY CATMON, MUNICIPALITY OF STA. MARIA, PROVINCE OF BULACAN TO BE KNOWN AS THE CATMON NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Nicolas
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2285, entitled:
?AN ACT RECLASSIFYING THE CRIME OF STEALING INSTALLED ELECTRIC POWER EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS FROM ELECTRIC POWER UTILITIES AS QUALIFIED THEFT AND INCREASING THE PENALTY THEREFOR?
By Representative San Luis
TO THE COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF LAWS
House Bill No. 2286, entitled:
?AN ACT CREATING AN ADDITIONAL REGIONAL TRIAL COURT BRANCH IN DANAO CITY AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Durano
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2287, entitled:
?AN ACT TO STRENGTHEN THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES AS THE PREMIER STATE UNIVERSITY?
By Representative Cua (G.)
TO THE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
House Bill No. 2288, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY SAN RAFAEL, MUNICIPALITY OF PILAR, PROVINCE OF SORSOGON TO BE KNOWN AS THE SAN RAFAEL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Escudero
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2289, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY TINANOGAN, MUNICIPALITY OF DONSOL, PROVINCE OF SORSOGON TO BE KNOWN AS THE TINANOGAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Escudero
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2290, entitled:
?AN ACT ADDRESSING THE SYSTEM OF PROSTITUTION, IMPOSING PENALTIES ON ITS PERPETRATORS, PROVIDING PROTECTIVE MEASURES AND SUPPORT SERVICES FOR ITS VICTIMS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representatives Maza and Ilagan
TO THE COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF LAWS
House Bill No. 2291, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8972, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE SOLO PARENTS? WELFARE ACT OF 2000, BY PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND PENAL PROVISION FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ACT?
By Representatives Maza and Ilagan
TO THE COMMITTEE ON POPULATION AND FAMILY RELATIONS
House Bill No. 2292, entitled:
?AN ACT CONVERTING THE PROVINCIAL ROAD FROM THE SCIENCE CITY OF MU?OZ AND MUNICIPALITY OF TALUGTUG IN THE PROVINCE OF NUEVA ECIJA INTO A NATIONAL ROAD AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Violago
TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2293, entitled:
?AN ACT IMPLEMENTING THE FREEDOM OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN GUARANTEED UNDER SECTION SEVEN ARTICLE III OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION BY REQUIRING ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION OF ALL GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES? RESOLUTION, REGULATION, CIRCULARS, DECISIONS, AND CONTRACTS, AND THE LIKE?
By Representative Pablo
TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC INFORMATION
House Bill No. 2294, entitled:
?AN ACT CREATING THE MOVIE AND TELEVISION CONTROL COMMISSION, ABOLISHING THE MOVIE AND TELEVISION REVIEW AND CLASSIFICATION BOARD, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSE?
By Representative Abante
TO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC INFORMATION
House Bill No. 2295, entitled:
?AN ACT CONVERTING THE ACCUMULATED VALUE ADDED TAX (VAT) PAYMENTS OF LOW-INCOME WORKERS INTO CREDITS FOR THE COMPENSATION-BASED INCOME TAX, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE CHAPTER VII, SECTION 35 OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1997, AS AMENDED AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representatives Casi?o, Ocampo, Maza, Ilagan and Beltran
TO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
House Bill No. 2296, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING SECTION 58(A), SECTION 77(A), AND SECTION 81 OF REPUBLIC ACT 8424, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ?TAX REFORM ACT OF 1997?, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Domogan
TO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
House Bill No. 2297, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING TWO ADDITIONAL BRANCHES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT IN THE CITY OF DAVAO, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ?THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980,? AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Ungab
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2298, entitled:
?AN ACT EXEMPTING THE SALE OF DRUGS OR MEDICINES FROM VALUE-ADDED TAX, AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NUMBERED EIGHTY-FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FOUR, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ?THE TAX REFORM ACT OF 1997? ?
By Representative Roxas
TO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
House Bill No. 2299, entitled:
?AN ACT REQUIRING ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES THE TEACHING OF BASIC COMPUTER PROGRAMMING AS PART OF THE CURRICULUM OF ALL SECONDARY LEVEL STUDENTS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Susano
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE
House Bill No. 2300, entitled:
?AN ACT GRANTING ADDITIONAL INSURANCE BENEFITS TO ALL PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS, PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT OF ITS PREMIUMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Susano
TO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
House Bill No. 2301, entitled:
?AN ACT EMPOWERING THE LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS TO SCREEN AND RECOMMEND THE APPLICANT TEACHING POSITION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Susano
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE
House Bill No. 2302, entitled:
?AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9257, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ?EXPANDED SENIOR CITIZENS ACT OF 2003?, THEREBY EXEMPTING FROM THE EXPANDED VALUE-ADDED TAX (E-VAT) THE SALE OF GOODS AND SERVICES TO SENIOR CITIZENS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Miraflores
TO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
House Bill No. 2303, entitled:
?AN ACT CREATING THE MINDANAO DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DEFINING ITS POWERS AND FUNCTIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES?
By Representative Romualdo
TO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES AND PRIVATIZATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON MUSLIM AFFAIRS
House Bill No. 2304, entitled:
?AN ACT ESTABLISHING AN ADDITIONAL BRANCH OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT FOR THE PROVINCE OF SURIGAO DEL SUR, TO BE STATIONED AT THE CITY OF BISLIG, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 14, PARAGRAPH (L) OF BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980, AS AMENDED BY R.A. 7154, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR?
By Representative Garay
TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTIONS
House Resolution No. 174, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE TO INVESTIGATE, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, THE ALLEGED ABUSES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9344, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT OF 2006 AND FORMULATE THE NECESSARY PROVISIONS TO AMEND THE LAW?
By Representative Ungab
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 175, entitled:
?RESOLUTION URGING THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM (SSS) AND THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS) TO UPGRADE THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND PENSION OF RETIREES, TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9257?
By Representative Mara?on
TO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES AND PRIVATIZATION
House Resolution No. 176, entitled:
?A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS (DPWH) IN COOPERATION WITH THE ROAD BOARD TO REHABILITATE THE TWO (2) DECADES OLD ASPHALT NATIONAL ROAD HIGHWAY IN EASTERN SAMAR, WHO AT PRESENT IS AT THE STATE OF DECAY AND DETERIORATION?
By Representative Coquilla
TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS
House Resolution No. 177, entitled:
?A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (DA) THROUGH THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES AND AQUATIC RESOURCES (BFAR), TO ESTABLISH A MARICULTURE PARK IN SAN MIGUEL BAY WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE 2ND DISTRICT OF CAMARINES SUR PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 132, ADOPTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF SPECIFIC AREAS IN EVERY REGION IN THE PHILIPPINES FOR DEVELOPMENT INTO MARICULTURE PARKS TO BE CONSIDERED SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES ENTITLED TO INCENTIVES UNDER EXISTING LAWS WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TERMS OF REFERENCE?
By Representative Villafuerte
TO THE COMMITTEE ON AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES RESOURCES
House Resolution No. 178, entitled:
?A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (DA) IN COOPERATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR) TO IDENTIFY PLANTS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR USE AS SOURCES OF BIOFUELS OR ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND TO RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE MEASURES FOR THEIR INCLUSION IN THE BIOFUELS PROGRAM AS MANDATED BY REPUBLIC ACT 9367 OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ?BIOFUELS ACT OF 2006? ?
By Representative Villafuerte
TO THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FOOD, THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
House Resolution No. 179, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE APPROPRIATE HOUSE COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY IN AID OF LEGISLATION INTO THE NEED TO EXTEND THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM (CARP)?
By Representative Puentevella
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 180, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ABDUCTION OF MARIA LUISA POSA-DOMINADO IN CABANBANAN, OTON, ILOILO, ALLEGEDLY BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES (AFP) AND RECOMMEND MECHANISMS TO IMMEDIATELY LOCATE AND RELEASE HER FROM THE PERPETRATORS AND MEASURES TO ADDRESS SIMILAR INCIDENTS OF ABDUCTION AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES?
By Representatives Maza, Ilagan, Ocampo, Casi?o and Beltran
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 181, entitled:
?A RESOLUTION TO CONDUCT AN IMMEDIATE CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY THROUGH THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSEAS WORKERS AFFAIRS INTO THE ALLEGED INVOLVEMENT OF SOME GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO APPARENTLY INFLUENCED THE LIFTING OF THE PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION ORDER BY THE PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT AGENCY (POEA) IN FAVOR OF SENTOSA RECRUITMENT AGENCY CHARGED BY 27 FILIPINO NURSES AND PHYSICAL THERAPIST (SENTOSA 27) OF VIOLATION OF CONTRACT AND ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT IN NEW YORK AND RECOMMEND MEASURES THEREOF?
By Representatives Ilagan and Maza
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 182, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, ON THE RULINGS AND OTHER ISSUANCES REGARDING THE CLASSIFICATION OR RECLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN BRANDS OF CIGARETTES IN VIOLATION OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8240, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9334?
By Representative Domogan
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 183, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE HOUSE COMMITTEES ON AGRICULTURE, AGRARIAN REFORM AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS TO LOOK INTO THE BENEFITS OF ESTABLISHING REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs) IN THE COUNTRY, WITH THE END IN VIEW OF GIVING FARMERS AND FARMING COMMUNITIES AN ALTERNATIVE PLATFORM TO BOOST THEIR INCOMES AND ECONOMIC WELFARE, AND FINDING PRACTICAL YET VIABLE OPTIONS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM (CARP) WHICH IS SET TO EXPIRE NEXT YEAR?
By Representative Mitra
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 184, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, INTO THE ABDUCTION AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE OF MA. LUISA POSA-DOMINADO AND NILO ARADO, AND FRUSTRATED KILLING OF JOSE ELY GARACHICO ON APRIL 12, 2007 IN OTON, ILOILO, ALLEGEDLY BY ELEMENTS OF THE 3rd INFANTRY DIVISION OF THE PHILIPPINE ARMY?
By Representatives Ocampo, Casi?o, Beltran, Maza, Ilagan, Defensor (A.), Garin, Javier, Castro and Tupas
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 185, entitled:
?RESOLUTION URGING PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO TO IMMEDIATELY ADDRESS THE PLIGHT OF OVERSEAS FILIPINO WORKERS (OFWs) WHO ARE IN DEATH ROW AND LANGUISHING IN JAILS ALL OVER THE WORLD BY ALLOCATING ADEQUATE FUNDS FOR THEIR LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND SERVICES, URGENTLY ASKING HOST COUNTRIES TO PUT INTO HALT THE EXECUTION OF THEIR DEATH SENTENCES, AND WORKING TOWARDS THEIR VINDICATION OR THE COMMUTATION OF THEIR SENTENCES TO A LESSER DEGREE?
By Representatives Ilagan, Maza, Ocampo, Casi?o and Beltran
TO THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSEAS WORKERS AFFAIRS
House Resolution No. 186, entitled:
?RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE HOUSE COMMITTEES ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL DEFENSE TO CONDUCT A JOINT INQUIRY INTO REPORTS THAT THE UNITED STATES IS BUILDING A MILITARY BASE AND OTHER MILITARY FACILITIES ACROSS IN JOLO, TAWI-TAWI AND MAGUINDANAO FOR ITS TROOPS AND TO DETERMINE THE EXACT STATUS OF US TROOPS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND THE EXTENT OF THEIR ACTIVITIES GIVEN THAT THE MATTER HAS SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS ON NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND INDEPENDENCE?
By Representative Beltran
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 187, entitled:
?RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES? SUPPORT FOR THE PHILIPPINE SENATE?S INTENT TO IMMEDIATELY CONDUCT A FULL INQUIRY INTO THE REVELATIONS OF T/SGT. VIDAL DOBLE REGARDING THE SUPPOSED INVOLVEMENT OF PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO IN THE ?HELLO, GARCI? 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION FRAUD SCANDAL AND ENJOINING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO INITIATE COUNTERPART MOVES TO SERVE THE SAME PURPOSE OF FINDING FULL AND JUST RESOLUTION TO THE SAID CONTROVERSY?
By Representative Beltran
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 188, entitled:
?RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CALL OF PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO FOR A NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER, CONVERSION, REPARATION AND CONSECRATION FOR OUR NATION?
By Representatives Defensor (A.), De Venecia, and Almario
TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
House Resolution No. 189, entitled:
?RESOLUTION URGING THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO PROVIDE THE REGULAR ALLOCATION OF A MAINTENANCE FUND FOR FARM-TO-MARKET ROADS FOR THE MUNICIPALITIES OF BAROBO, HINATUAN, LINGIG AND TAGBINA, IN THE PROVINCE OF SURIGAO DEL SUR?
By Representative Garay
TO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS AND THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
COMMUNICATION
Letters dated August 15 & 24, 2007 of Juan De Zu?iga Jr., Assistant Governor and General Counsel, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, furnishing the House of Representatives a copy of the following:
1. BSP Circular No. 576, series of 2007 dated August 8, 2007; and
2. BSP Memorandum No. M-2007-021 dated August 15, 2007
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BANKS AND FINANCIAL INTERMEDIARIES
ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS
With the permission of the Body, the following Members were made coauthors of the Bills and Resolutions hereunder indicated:
Rep. Teodoro A. Casi?o for House Bills No. 1113, 1114, and 1115, and House Concurrent Resolution No. 1;
Rep. Luzviminda C. Ilagan for House Bills No. 1113 and 114, and House Concurrent Resolution No. 1 and House Resolution No. 197;
Rep. Antonio A. Del Rosario for House Bill No. 1199;
Rep. Orlando B. Fua for House Bill No. 2266, 2277, 2279, 2280, 2285, 2299, 2300, and House Resolutions No. 175 and 188;
Rep. Liza L. Maza for House Resolution No. 197;
Rep. Eufrocino M. Codilla Sr. for House Bill No. 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 146, 147, 151, 165, 168, 176, 177, 181, and 182; and
Rep. Mary Anne L. Susano for House Bill No. 2287.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS
At this point, Rep. Garcia (A.) acknowledged the presence in the Session Hall of the following guests:
1. Barangay officials and CIBAC coordinator from Guagua, Pampanga, headed by Mr. Joel J. Cruz, CIBAC coordinator, who were guests of Rep. Emmanuel Joel J. Villanueva; and
2. Students of the Bachelor of Arts, Major in Sociology from the Mt. Carmel College, Baler, Aurora province led by their teachers, Mrs. Elsa Mortega, Ms. Shiela Cayap and Mr. Rolly Franquia who were guests of Reps. Teodoro A. Casi?o and Satur C. Ocampo of Bayan Muna, Liza L. Maza and Luzviminda C. Ilagan of Gabriela Women?s Party List, Crispin B. Beltran of Anakpawis and Juan Edgardo M. Angara.
Thereafter, the Chair recognized Rep. Teodulo M. Coquilla for a parliamentary inquiry.
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
OF REP. COQUILLA
Rep. Coquilla inquired as to why Mr. Jose Tan Ramirez of his own district is occupying a congressional office at Room 619 of the House of Representatives building. He said that the illegal and unauthorized occupancy of said office is undoubtedly at the expense of 88 million Filipinos including the Congress of the Philippines. Per the information given to him, he said that the office is being used by Mr. Ramirez to promote his own religious fanatical demagoguery with all the ingredients of a cultist belief and satanic arrogance.
As he had spoken to some Members who still do not have a decent office, Rep. Coquilla asked that the Sergeant-at-Arms be delegated to immediately remove Mr. Ramirez from the House premises.
REMARKS OF REP. DEFENSOR (A.)
Rep. Defensor (A.) stated that the leadership would not only look into the matter with a sense of urgency but would act on it also with dispatch.
On another matter, Rep. Defensor (A.) informed the Body that the House of Representatives had just constituted the Rules Rewriting Committee which will work on the Rules of the House of Representatives of the Fourteenth Congress and possibly rewrite also the Rules of Procedures Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation and the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings. Furthermore, he said that the Rules Rewriting Committee will start working the following week even as the House had already received and had acted upon and forwarded and transmitted to the Plenary - certain House resolutions which may need action of the Committees conducting investigations in aid of legislation. Moreover, he said that the Members are not discounting the possibilities of filing an impeachment proceeding before the House.
Before they could be charged for negligence or nonfeasance, Rep. Defensor (A.) invited the attention of the Members on the need for Provisional Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings and Provisional Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation.
ADOPTION OF THE PROVISIONAL
RULES OF PROCEDURES OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Defensor (A.), there being no objection, the Body adopted the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings and the Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation of the Thirteenth Congress as the Provisional Rules of Procedures of the House of Representatives of the Fourteenth Congress.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS
Rep. Defensor (A.) also acknowledged the presence in the Session Hall of the SK Chairman from North Cotabato who was the guest of Rep. Bernardo F. Pi?ol Jr.
MOTION OF REP. DEFENSOR (A.)
Thereafter, Rep. Defensor (A.) moved to recognize Rep. Edelmiro A. Amante on a question of personal and collective privilege.
However, before the Body could act on the motion, the Chair recognized Rep. Salvador H. Escudero III for a manifestation.
MANIFESTATION OF REP. ESCUDERO
With the permission of Rep. Amante, Rep. Escudero requested the Secretary General for copies of the newly readopted rules and regulations before starting on new proceedings on impeachment and other related matters.
Rep. Defensor (A.) reminded Rep. Escudero that during the opening of the Fourteenth Congress, the Members were furnished copies of the Rules of the House of Representatives. Contained therein, he said, are the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings and the Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation. However, in the event that only the copies of the Rules of the House of Representatives of the Thirteenth Congress were furnished some Members of the House, he requested the Secretary General to furnish all the Members of the present Congress with copies of the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings and the Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation.
The Chair then directed the Secretary General to comply therewith.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Luis R. Villafuerte, the Chair suspended the session at 4:56 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:57 p.m., the session was resumed.
MANIFESTATIONS OF REPS. VILLAFUERTE
AND AMANTE
At this point, Reps. Villafuerte and Amante simultaneously sought recognition from the Chair.
MANIFESTATION OF REP. VILLAFUERTE
Upon recognition by the Chair, Rep. Villafuerte stated that he would have wanted to file a motion to reconsider the approval of the Rules on Impeachment; however, Rep. Defensor (A.) gave the assurance that there are ongoing proposals for its revision. He maintained that he would submit his own recommendation at the appropriate time.
Thereafter, the Chair recognized Rep. Amante on a question of personal and collective privilege.
QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE
OF REP. AMANTE
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a question of personal privilege to save whatever little name I have because it appears on the front page of Manila Standard today - thank God it is the Manila Standard and not Mindanao Standard ? ?Lawmaker Accused of P4 billion plunder.? There was a President charged of plunder. I am only a little president, so maybe they reduced the amount. But, nonetheless, it says it is plunder.
Let me tell you a background of this and I hope the 10 minutes granted to me would be a little more. It says here, ?Agusan Congressman faces P4 billion plunder case.? You know how reckless the charge is? Even my name has been wrongly spelled. Instead of Edelmiro, it is Adelmiro. Maybe the ?A? is already the amount of plunder that they are talking about.
The whole thing is, when I was out of this Congress, I wanted also to make Mindanao share in the glory and growth of the Filipinos.
Former Rep. Edgar Erice and I were featured in the Free Press cover entitled ?Poverty Fighters.? We wanted to fight poverty in order that other people will smile and laugh again because millions of people could not laugh nor smile. The only thing they do is cry, whine and pine because they have nothing much to hope for.
So, I invited him to Agusan. I said, ?We are poverty fighters. Why don?t you come to Agusan, Rep. Erice, so that we will not just be a cover in the Free Press? We will also cover the problems in the Philippines, beginning in Agusan because this name means ?fountain? where water will spurt to satisfy the people?s thirst.?
Thank God, Rep. Erice was kind enough to go to Agusan. When they were in Agusan, he saw that the province was rich in mineral resources, and realized that they too can learn as much as the Zamoras in developing nickel. Agusan, particularly Caraga, is one of the richest areas.
In fact, when I was the Executive Secretary, according to a satellite information, Caraga is even richer in gold deposit than South Africa and China. China, with its 6.9 billion hectares, has only 103,000 ounces of gold deposit as compared to the Philippines? 30 million hectares and Caraga?s more than two million hectares, which has 333,000 ounces. Thus, I am wearing this gold not as a propaganda but to document the validity of what I am saying. A lot of columnists took note of this.
Carmen Pedrosa thus said: ?When mining is done correctly, the real people who live in the midst of poverty shall be grateful.? It means jobs, it means schools to enrich the minds of the children so that they could have better ideas for ideas are the best capital, and are forever available and inexhaustible. Ideas will also cause economic upliftment so that there will be millions and not just a few potential congressmen, not just Edel Amante and the others. But we have stopped the growth of mining because of economic and political conflicts, of which this Representation is a victim. But Carmen Pedrosa said: ?To use conflict as a weapon to condemn mining is another matter altogether. It is shortsighted and forecloses a better future for our millions of poor.?
The mining industry in my district employs 1,500 workers, that now their children have milk to drink and are no longer sickly. They go to school, walking happily, rising with the morning sun that brightens the country, particularly that part of the world, under a gleaming light that enables people to reach their destination and fulfill their dreams.
But here I am, an ordinary man initiating this effort, only to be charged with plunder. Why? Because I was elected Congressman again? I do not hate these people but I warn them that they should not repeat the sins in the Garden of Eden. For among the first sins committed in the Garden of Eden was envy, that even caused a brother to kill a brother. Just a reminder, Cain killed Abel. The most important thing that these people want to kill is my name. The only name that I have. If we go back to my history, I was a farm boy plowing the fields at the age of nine, walking 10 kilometers a day to reach Butuan City and attend the elementary school, working during high school and college in Siliman University, taking the bar examination five days before in order that I could be of help to my neighbors and friends. Now, I am a Congressman but now some people envy me ? not only those who lost the elections, but even those who lost their sensibilities as well.
I am sorry to say this, but because of their envy, these people have forgotten to help develop the country.
Professor Alex Magno thus wrote in his column: ?There are a lot of things going for our economy despite the propensity of some of our politicians or militants to create destructive sideshows. We have identified mineral deposits amounting to trillions of dollars that we have long neglected to exploit to national advantage because of archaic notions about mining. Hopefully, Secretary Lito Atienza, from where he sits at the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), will unleash that great driver and trigger the fastest economic growth of this country.?
The people in Mindanao are crying for growth. We are crying for liberation from poverty. That is why I am not surprised that in Mindanao, we are fighting, sometimes against the government, not because we hate the government, but because we hate poverty, we hate not being able to eat properly everyday, of not being clothed properly, not being able to go to the hospital, and for all of the difficulties and inadequacies of life. Until today, one respectable member of the New People?s Army (NPA) told me that there are people who are inclined to become NPAs because the acronym stands for ?no peso always.? I told them we will develop Mindanao, you will still be an NPA but it will now mean as ?new peso always.? He told me, ?You know Edel, you are the only lawyer from Ampayon ? my barrio ? since liberation time.
When shall we be liberated? Newspapers such as this using the wrong standard can even misspell my name and advocate a wrong cause. You might say, ?But Edel, you are a lawyer.? I will ask one of my colleagues here and one of the most brilliant lawyers I know, Rep. Ronaldo B. Zamora, to help me seek payment for damages arising from libel. But he is not looking at me now because he does not believe I earned these P4 billion unnecessarily.
I have a lot of documents to prove that we are doing our best to make Agusan the fountain of a beginning. That kind of fountain will sprout and quench the thirst of billions of people so that someday, after I have gone to the grave, some of them will become a congressman of Agusan.
I am only given 10 minutes. Thank you for giving me 10 minutes. I hope your feelings for me will be more than a century. Your love for truth will be beyond us even in this House. Your love to build this country shall be as consistent as the morning sun, rising in the evening from the darkness of the night, to brighten the day and vanish the darkness away.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker; my brethren.
MANIFESTATION OF REP. CERILLES
At this point, Rep. Antonio H. Cerilles sought recognition to interpellate Rep. Amante.
REMINDER FROM THE CHAIR
The Chair reminded the Body that the time of Rep. Amante had already expired.
EXTENSION OF REP. AMANTE?S TIME
Thereupon, on motion of Rep. Cerilles, there being no objection, the Body extended Rep. Amante?s time by 10 minutes.
The Chair subsequently recognized Rep. Cerilles for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. CERILLES
At the outset, Rep. Cerilles admitted that he is not aware that Rep. Amante is now a billionaire, as alleged in the newspapers. He said that the day before, he tried to exchange his watch with that of Rep. Amante?s, only to be refused by the latter. After reading the Manila Standard, he stressed that he now understands the reason for Rep. Amante?s refusal. He thereafter opined that the article was politically motivated, and inquired on the basis of the newspaper?s accusation that Rep. Amante has committed plunder when he has reentered Congress after a lull of many years.
Rep. Amante answered that he is not bothered by the charge of plunder, because the accusation is a mere blunder. Since the charge was published in the newspapers, he said that he would go home to the province the following day because people always believe that anything written in the newspapers is true. He quoted her daughter, former Rep. Rosedell Amante, that he should go home because if he fails to do so, people will look at him in a different light, and that despite his condemnation, his roots are in Agusan, where he was once elected a Governor and Congressman. He said that when Rep. Cerilles and himself were comparing watches the previous day, he was informed by the former that his watch was a sample. As he disclosed that said watch was a gift from Speaker Jose De Venecia, he said that the watch that he is now wearing symbolizes his involvement in some gold mining activities, with the desire to show to the people that there are lots of gold in Agusan.
Rep. Cerilles emphasized that the issue of plunder is usually connected with the office that a government official occupies, and inquired as to when the plunder case was filed against Rep. Amante.
In response, Rep. Amante referred to newspaper reports claiming that it was only lately that the matter was brought to the attention of the Department of Justice (DOJ), and not during his term as Executive Secretary or when he was a mere civilian. He noted that some people envy him, this as he explained that he wears a wristwatch with a chain as part of his proganda to entice his friends to go to Agusan and engage in gold mining. He maintained that such activities will liberate his people from poverty, and thereafter requested Rep. Cerilles not to interpellate him further as they can just sit down and talk to each other.
While Rep. Amante?s answers in private will satisfy him, Rep. Cerilles stressed that the House will not be so satisfied, and that he took the floor so that their colleagues will still hold Rep. Amante in respect. He added that the House is an institution that all the Congressmen should protect so that all of them can be called honorable Members.
On whether there is a legal basis for the plunder case against him, Rep. Amante answered that there is no case of plunder because there is a no cash involved, and that the allegation was a mere fabrication. He stressed that the allegation is not plunder, but a blunder. He however conceded that the case might affect the integrity of the Members because their public office is a public trust, thus he took the floor to make some efforts at correction.
Rep. Cerilles next inquired whether the issue raised against Rep. Amante by his detractors has something to do with the mining operation in Agusan del Norte.
As he clarified that there are mining activities in his district, Rep. Amante stressed that he is not a part of the mining industry in Tubay. He added that he had given some assistance because the industry employs some 1,500 workers.
He added that in the last seven months, the company has been paying excise, barangay, municipal and provincial taxes in the total amount of P237 million. He however stressed that he is not an owner thereof as had been alleged in the newspapers.
Rep. Cerilles inquired whether there is therefore no legal basis for the allegation of plunder.
Rep. Amante emphasized that there are no factual and legal bases. He surmised that his rise from poverty and his and his children?s election to public office, have incurred a lot of envy among some people. He expressed hope that his speech would move their conscience and renew them.
Rep. Cerilles opined that there is no legal basis for the charge against his colleague because he was not yet a public official when the incident happened. He also said that as a citizen, Rep. Amante can do business as he wishes because the Philippines is a free country.
REFERRAL OF REP. AMANTE?S SPEECH
On motion of Rep. Cerilles, there being no objection, the Body referred Rep. Amante?s speech to the appropriate Committee.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS
Thereupon, Rep. Defensor (A.) acknowledged the presence of Rep. Diosdado Macapagal Arroyo?s guests, namely: Mayor Geminio Imperial, Messrs. Cruz, and Dolor of Pampolona, Camarines Sur; and Rep. Ana Theresia N. Hontiveros-Baraquel?s guests, Mr. Patgrik Kjellin and Ms. Ida Eliasson, from the Swedish Social Democratic Youth.
BUSINESS FOR THE DAY:
COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 1
ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2417
On motion of Rep. Defensor (A.), there being no objection, the Body then considered House Bill No. 2417 as embodied in Committee Report No. 1 and reported out by the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms.
Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary General read the title of the Bill, to wit:
?AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9340, RESETTING THE SYNCHRONIZED BARANGAY AND SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN ELECTIONS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.?
As copies of the Bill had been previously distributed to the Members, upon Rep. Defensor?s (A.) motion, there being no objection, the Body dispensed with the reading of the text thereof without prejudice to its insertion into the Records of the House.
On motion of Rep. Defensor (A.), there being no objection, the Body recognized Rep. Teodoro L. Locsin Jr. to deliver his sponsorship speech.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH OF REP. LOCSIN
Republic Act No. 9340, entitled, ?AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9164, RESETTING THE BARANGAY AND SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN ELECTIONS? requires that elections be held on the last Monday of October 2007. This amendatory piece of legislation resets the synchronized barangay and SK election from its former schedule of July 15, 2002 and every three years thereafter as stipulated in Republic Act No. 9164, amending the Local Government Code of 1991. It was prior to the supposed July 15, 2005 barangay and SK elections that the law was amended to its present form.
This means, therefore, that our incumbent barangay officials have been in office for over five years already. Five years, not 13 or any other bigger number. Because previous to that, they were in office by right of election and reelection to terms to which they were perfectly entitled. In other words, the long years they have been in office is not an indication of overstaying their welcome but of their repeated welcome by their election and reelection by their very satisfied constituents. The comparatively few who are complaining about their overstaying are probably those who were rejected by the same constituents, and who hunger for another, probably forlorn attempt, to take their place.
Thirteen measures were filed and referred to the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms for purposes of postponing the said synchronized barangay and SK elections on the last Monday of October 2007. The proposals range from a deferment of one year, two years, and three, synchronizing them with the national elections in 2010. Two papers were received from the Liga ng Mga Barangay and from the National Youth Commission, the first proposing postponement by one year, the second by three years or in 2011. The SK Federation itself proposed 2008. I think it is only right that we heed the sentiments of those directly affected by this issue ? the barangay captains, officials and their constituents, as represented by the Liga, the Federation and the Youth Commission.
In last Monday?s Committee hearing, the proponents of postponement cited the following reasons: The need for more time to heal the wounds of the last electoral fight and to cool passions. The need to resolve pending election protests on the local level which are tying up ballot boxes. The need to consolidate the proliferation of underpopulated barangays in places like Manila which may be violating the minimum population requirement.
While the Commission on Elections (Comelec) told the Committee that it is prepared to hold barangay and SK elections as scheduled, its commissioners voted four to one for postponement. There is the question of funding. The Comelec would like the LGUs to shoulder a fourth of the expenses. The honorable Mayor of Makati opposes it and so do I.
And finally, there will be, despite the supposed nonpartisan character of barangay and SK polls, the need to help out the candidates financially in their campaigns which neither LGU executives nor Congressmen are capable of doing at this time. And that is putting it mildly. Indeed, the fact that there is a gap of merely a little over five months between May 14, 2007 midterm elections and the October 27, 2007 synchronized elections has been the primary consideration for this call for a postponement. I put the blame on this unholy scheduling on the previous Congress, though I do remember that the House had then proposed a later date to give time for passions to cool and cash resources to be built up again between elections. But somebody insisted that the two elections be held as close to each other as his notorious peevishness required.
Indeed, local chief executives have just begun organizing their ranks. The dust has yet to settle from the last elections. Liga ng Barangay President Mary Lim reported that barangay captains are still being shot. And the Committee learned from Representative Gullas that ballot boxes are not yet available in Cebu as electoral protests keep them from being emptied and readied for the next election, next month.
To hold said elections as scheduled, the Committee unanimously believes, is counterproductive. This and the fact that it actually costs over a billion pesos convinced us to attend to the matter soonest since budget deliberations for 2008 are in progress.
Three dates have been proposed ? 2008, 2009 and 2010. A wise Congresswoman told me that if we were to hold it in 2008, we may as well hold it next month because we still won?t be able to help the candidates but we won?t have the excuse available today ? we just spent a lot of money on our own elections.
The barangay and SK elections, if held in 2009, shall be the pilot for automating our elections in preparation for the 2010 national elections, thereby imparting the long desired yet perpetually elusive sense of indubitable legitimacy that has eluded the electoral process since the mysterious defeat of Miriam Defensor-Santiago in the 1992 presidential elections.
The year 2009 gives enough time to prepare for automation. And it leaves enough time for improvements to be made where the adopted system fails, and well before automation is comprehensively implemented for the 2010 presidential elections as the Automated Election Law mandates. It is important that there be no more question as to the integrity, at least, of the election of the next president that democracy will again inflict on our country.
A committee report postponing/resetting the said elections to the second Monday of May 2009 was prepared and filed by the Secretariat. The bill has gone through the Bills and Index Service and copies of this one-line bill have been made available to all the Members of the House and the press corps.
It is said that the Senate is sending mixed signals on this purely local measure. That may be so. But it is not the function of this House to guess what the Senate is thinking but only to do what it believes is right. And it is the consensus of this House, unless minds have changed since then, that postponement will be in the best interest of the nation.
Indeed, all these efforts may come to nothing if the Senate shoots down this measure. But, what the heck! It is a one-line bill and we finished the work in one afternoon.
On the other hand, two can play that game and the Senate has many bills made up of thousands of lines, which must be approved by what could be a deeply disenchanted House. At any rate, we have many friends in the Senate.
Postponing polls always sounds bad. But nothing is lost in this case and a lot can be gained if we use the intervening period for essential reforms in the barangay and SK structures and to prepare for automation.
The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) says the elections should not be postponed because the incumbent SKs are not just overstaying but grossly overage. That is true. But, there are two bills restructuring and/or abolishing the SK - which is the prevailing view and overarching desire of all local government officials. The Youth Commission has a draft in search of a sponsor to the same effect. We should not only postpone the elections but hold only barangay elections in 2009.
Furthermore, the DILG budget is also under consideration by the Committee on Appropriations. So it could be a toss-up: abolishing the SK or the DILG budget.
I would have wanted to go around the country and conduct consultations on the barangay level to directly gauge the sentiments there. But nothing would have been served by that except public awareness of myself in anticipation of the 2010 elections. At any rate, the Liga, the Federation, and the Youth Commission, as well as the overwhelming number of local government officials and members of this House, want the postponement and they shall get it.
I trust that my distinguished colleagues appreciate the urgency with which we have to address this issue ? one way or the other. Thank you.
REMARKS OF REP. DEFENSOR (A.)
At this point, Rep. Defensor (A.) remarked that no other Member had registered to deliver a sponsorship speech.
MANIFESTATION OF REP. RODRIGUEZ
Whereupon, Rep. Rufus B. Rodriguez sought recognition from the Chair.
However, the Chair recognized Rep. Luis R. Villafuerte for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. VILLAFUERTE
Rep. Villafuerte initially pointed out that the Constitution provides for a three-term limit for local officials including barangay officials and that this has been implemented in the Local Government Code. He then inquired whether the Bill?s proposal to extend the terms of barangay officials circumvents said term limit unless the extension is construed as service for another three years.
Rep. Locsin said that according to the DILG and Comelec, no constitutional issue is involved because the term limit refers only to elected Representatives (three terms) and Senators (two terms ) and to an elected President (one term). He added that the law fixing a term limit can be amended. He opined that how to treat barangay officials is Congress? discretion.
Rep. Villafuerte inquired whether the Constitution mandates that barangay officials must also have a three-term limit as shall be provided by law. He also asked whether it can be concluded that the statute implicitly violates the constitutional intention as it is merely an implementation of the constitutional mandate.
Rep. Locsin cited Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution which reads, ?The term of office of the elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three consecutive terms.? He explained that this means that the term and any term limits, only if any, shall be determined entirely by Congress. He pointed out that the Body could meet the term limits for said officials.
Turning to another matter, Rep. Villafuerte sought clarification on an executive order issued under President Corazon Aquino, which effectively states that a barangay captain automatically forfeits his position if he runs for another position. He inquired whether such involuntary renunciation of office is to be deemed as an interruption of the three-term limit.
Rep. Locsin clarified that they are dealing with an executive order (EO). He added that whatever those executive orders may be and they are deemed to be part of the law, were also preceded by each law that kept extending the term of the barangay captain.
Rep. Villafuerte stated that the 1987 Constitution did not anymore alter the provision on the term of barangay officials. In fact, he added that it was reenacted in the first Election Act as some kind of a rider that if an incumbent runs for a position different from what he or she holds and should lose, he/she has a right to go back to his/her old position. He then inquired whether in the forthcoming barangay elections, such local officials could run for office because they have not completed their third term considering that their first term was interrupted not by a voluntary renunciation. In other words, he clarified that despite the fact that the barangay captains won in three elections, they should be considered only to have served two terms.
Rep. Locsin however stated that the issue at hand is not relevant to House Bill No. 2417.
Rep. Villafuerte maintained that the issue is relevant because it is a fact that one barangay captain in his district ran for mayor but lost and did not get back to his old position as barangay captain and had therefore served only two consecutive terms. He added that said barangay captain is saying that he could run for a third term in spite of the fact that he had won in three elections, except that the interruption was not voluntary but by operation of law.
Rep. Locsin pointed out however that the effect of the bill would be to delay until 2009, the resolution of the case of the barangay captain in the district of Rep. Villafuerte. He opined that said barangay captain could not even go to court nor run in the elections because he/she has already passed the three-term limit.
Rep. Villafuerte stated that the extension of the barangay elections, which should have been held in July 2005, would not be construed as a full term service during the extended period. Therefore, he pointed out that even if the particular barangay captain would already have served, including the extension, more than nine years, he/she is still entitled to run for another term because the interruption that was made during his first term was only by operation of law and not because he/she voluntarily resigned.
Disagreeing therewith, Rep. Locsin stated however that the previous bill extending the barangay elections to October should be applicable to the issue at hand. He maintained that said extension of the term of the barangay captains would not constitute another term.
Rep. Villafuerte maintained however that the interruption of the term was not by voluntary act but by operation of law. He further maintained that a barangay captain could run for another position and return to his old post even if he/she had lost. However, he stated that there are barangay captains who could not return to their old post because of a subsequent amendment under the Fair Election Code. He then inquired whether an interruption by operation of law is not an interruption of a term because it is not a voluntary act.
In reply, Rep. Locsin expressed belief that the issue at hand is not relevant to House Bill No. 2417. However, he stated that it is an issue that the courts would have to resolve.
In his rejoinder, Rep. Locsin opined that it is the barangay captain?s choice to step down from his position and that the operation of law did not force said barangay captain to run in the first place.
Rep. Villafuerte pointed out however that it is a fact that by operation of law, the term of the barangay captain was interrupted because he/she could not return to his/her old position.
Rep. Locsin opined however that if there is a doctrine and practice that said barangay captain could return to his old position, he/she could run for another term.
As there was a case of an incumbent local official who ran but had to forfeit his seat when he lost an election protest which was construed not as a voluntary renunciation but a forceful ejection of an incumbent official, Rep. Villafuerte stated that the Supreme Court had upheld said case and allowed said incumbent official to run again for another term because the interruption was construed not as a voluntary renunciation of his position but by operation of law that forced said incumbent local official to vacate his position because he had lost his election protest.
At this point, Rep. Locsin inquired whether the Supreme Court had considered the context of said incumbent local official?s decision to run and whether it is in the legal context that he/she could return to his/her old position. He pointed out however that there is another Supreme Court doctrine which says that ?nobody has a vested right in keeping the law as it is.?
Rep. Villafuerte inquired whether extending further the term of the SK officials would, in effect, allow them to continue to serve even if they are no longer qualified because of the maximum age requirement under the law. Assuming that some SK officials have already exceeded the maximum age requirement, he further inquired whether the extension of the barangay election would include allowing these SK officials to continue their term. He emphasized that there is a distinction between extending an election and forcing an incumbent SK official to step down because of the age requirement. He then inquired on the application of said principle in House Bill No. 2417.
Rep. Locsin replied that said principle is actually appropriate to the previous barangay election extension when overage SK officials were allowed to sit and the government did not act to remedy the situation. He pointed out however that the Fourteenth Congress has seen the error which is why Rep. Lorna C. Silverio had filed a bill calling for the abolition of the SK.
On whether the earlier extension of overaged SK officials legitimizes their continuing in office even if they had already exceeded the maximum age requirement under the law, Rep. Locsin disagreed thereto, pointing out that the reason is the failure of the government to remedy the situation and allow the terms of the overaged SK officials to continue. He expressed belief that tolerance does not confer legitimacy.
On whether there is a potential challenge to overage SK officials when the Bill calling for the postponement of the barangay elections becomes a law, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative, adding that it would be the same challenge that would have been launched in the previous extension but may be however preempted by the House by passing the bill of Rep. Silverio abolishing the SK.
Rep. Villafuerte inquired whether the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) has already released to the Comelec the amount of P200 million to fund the initial requirements of the barangay and SK elections in October 2007 and whether said fund was already spent. If it was, he further asked what would happen to the equipment that may have been procured if they approve House Bill No. 2417.
Rep. Locsin replied that Comelec Commissioner Tuazon had confirmed that P200 million was released by the DBM and that the Comelec is starting to spend said amount to buy paper to be used as ballots but they are not printing anything on the ballots because they could be used in the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) elections. He stated that the Comelec would start receiving the names of the barangay and SK candidates on September 29, 2007 and that they would be printing the names by the first week of October. He pointed out that from the present date to the first week of October, no money is wasted.
Considering that funds were released and expressly earmarked for the barangay elections, Rep. Villafuerte inquired whether there would be no technical malversation or diversion of funds if they would be used in the ARMM elections without amending the law.
Rep. Locsin replied that the government cannot have an expenditure without an appropriation by law and that the House may be requested to use instead the P200 million allotted for the barangay elections for the ARMM elections.
Rep. Villafuerte stated that Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay had said that there are reports that the extension of the barangay election may be used to coincide with a proposed Charter change that may be launched in January and emphasized that many of the Senators may not go along with the proposed extension. He then requested Rep. Locsin?s reaction to said issue.
Rep. Locsin in reply said that Mayor Binay is not only his city mayor but also his party chief and that he supports the extension of the barangay elections. He is even warning them, Rep. Locsin added, that they be alert in the interregnum between the postponement and forthcoming election, which may be used for Charter change issues.
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Defensor (A.), the Chair recognized Rep. Rufus B. Rodriguez for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. RODRIGUEZ
Rep. Rodriguez initially inquired whether Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides that the Philippines is a democratic and republican State and that sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.
Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
On whether under Article X, Section 1 of the Constitution, the political and territorial subdivisions of the Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
On whether he agrees that republicanism connotes regular elections so that the sovereignty of the people would be determined, Rep. Locsin clarified however that republicanism requires periodic elections that cannot be altered, only if they are provided in the Constitution and not by law enacted by Congress. In the case of the barangay elections, he opined that Congress could dictate the frequency or even the existence of elections for the barangay level.
Considering that the proposed bill would extend the term of the barangay and SK officials to May 2009, Rep. Rodriguez inquired whether those elected in 2002, under the synchronized law, would have a term of seven years.
Rep. Rodriguez noted that under the Bill, the term of office of the incumbent barangay and SK officials would have been extended for a total of four years since the end of their three-year tenure is 2005.
Rep. Locsin affirmed the observation of Rep. Rodriguez.
Rep. Rodriguez concluded that under the Bill, the barangay officials would therefore have a total tenure of seven years which would be longer than the six-year term of the President, the Vice President and the Senators.
In reply, Rep. Locsin stated that Rep. Rodriguez?s analogy is like comparing apples and oranges not only with regard to the extent of the powers of the President and the Members of Congress but also to the miniscule responsibilities and dignities of a barangay official whose term of office, he opined, could be entirely at the pleasure of Congress. He noted that there was a time when Congress granted the barangay officials a tenure of five years and if Congress so desires, it could also lift the term limits of said local officials.
Rep. Rodriguez inquired whether Rep. Locsin was belittling the barangay and SK officials by citing their ?miniscule duties? to which Rep. Locsin maintained that compared to the President, it would be insane to put said officials on the same level.
Rep. Rodriguez stated that the barangay officials are at the forefront of grassroots democracy. He inquired whether Rep. Locsin had heard of ?grassroots democracy? as part of the country?s system.
Replying in the negative, Rep. Locsin then asked Rep. Rodriguez to point out the constitutional provision which provides that the grassroots are the foundation of democracy in the Philippines.
Rep. Rodriguez stated that there was none.
In reply Rep. Locsin stressed that the foundation of Philippine democracy is the law and the Constitution, adding that the Constitution defines what a democracy is. He added that the word ?democracy? will mean nothing until it is given content by passing a Constitution.
As a rejoinder, Rep. Rodriguez said that the meaning of ?grassroots democracy? is simple, which Rep. Locsin refuted.
Rep. Rodriguez pointed out that ?grassroots? cannot be ?uproots? or in reference to the presidency. He underscored that grassroots means the barangay which he said is the very foundation of grassroots democracy.
Rep. Locsin replied that at the Harvard Law School where he attended, ?grass has nothing to do with law? but ?with agriculture.?
Further pursuing his point, Rep. Rodriguez expressed the view that the 42,000 barangays and their officials would not like what Rep. Locsin had said that ?they are miniscule, that their duties are not as important as the Presidents.? He also took note of Rep. Locsin?s remark that one cannot compare apples and oranges.
Rep. Locsin agreed therewith.
Rep. Rodriguez remarked that while the President has many duties, the barangay also exists and barangay officials give support and assistance to the people on a 24-hour basis. He maintained that unlike the barangay officials, the President cannot be approached 24 hours a day.
In response, Rep. Locsin stated that the President could be approached if she cared to be approached in the same way that any barangay official can refuse to be approached. He however pointed out that Rep. Rodriguez was trying to scare him of the backlash from the barangay officials. He however assured Rep. Rodriguez that he is indifferent to said repercussion and emphasized that his duty is to serve Congress and he is not afraid of anything else.
Rep. Rodriguez clarified that they were not concerned with any backlash.
Rep. Locsin further reminded Rep. Rodriguez that the last person who tried to rely on the grassroots was at the moment facing charges in the Sandiganbayan. He maintained that the foremost foundation of permanency in politics is law, not popularity.
Rep. Rodriguez said that he would rather not engage in discussing the person alluded to by Rep. Locsin. This, as he explained that he was only trying to see the merits of extending the term of office of the barangay and SK officials. He then urged the Sponsor of the instant Bill to limit his comments to his interpellation in relation to the scheduled barangay elections.
On whether periodic elections are held under a republican State, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
In this regard, Rep. Rodriguez inquired whether it is high time for the barangay officials to get a fresh mandate from the people wherein sovereignty resides. He commented that there is no problem if one honest barangay official is reelected while an abusive, corrupt official should be removed from office. The power to do this, he said, should be given to the people on October 29, 2007, as originally scheduled.
The Sponsor maintained that Rep. Rodriguez gave an interesting point of view. He however averred that it was the sense of Congress, which creates and discreates barangays, to extend the term of office of the barangay officials because the proximity of the national elections last May and the barangay elections in October was very ill-advised by the previous Congress. He emphasized that the national interest would be best served if the tenure of the barangay officials are extended and the extension is used to prepare for the computerized elections.
Rep. Locsin further opined that holding the barangay elections the next day would produce the same results. Even as he would agree with Rep. Rodriguez that the Members should attend to grassroots democracy, he remarked that the two years extension is the time to prepare to challenge the traditional politicians on the barangay level, in line with the intent of civil society to make profound changes on the national level.
In reaction, Rep. Rodriguez inquired whether there was a failure of wisdom on the part of the Members of the House under the Thirteenth Congress when they decided to schedule the barangay and SK elections in October 2007 even if they were aware that national elections would be held in May of the same year.
Rep. Locsin replied in the negative. He pointed out that the House version of RA No. 9340, which he deemed as the wiser version, proposed the resetting of the barangay and SK elections for 2008 thereby giving a decent interval between the national and local elections. He said that unfortunately, there is still a bicameral legislature which he hoped will be changed to a unicameral system so that the wisdom of the House will not be diluted by the recklessness of the upper Chamber.
Rep. Rodriguez said that the Senate is needed to check on the House, to which Rep. Locsin uttered that it is because of the Senate that they now find themselves in a dilemma that the House seeks to resolve.
Rep. Rodriguez thereafter inquired whether no public hearing was really held on House Bill No. 2417.
Rep. Locsin maintained that there was no public hearing but the measure was widely debated with the Members of the House bringing the matter to the attention of their respective barangay officials. He assured Rep. Rodriguez that none of the Members would dare to support the Bill, which they had asked him to sponsor, unless they have the support and encouragement of their barangay officials.
On whether he had requested the views of the barangay officials, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative. He disclosed that he had requested the views of his colleagues in the House whose views he said he respects because of his belief that as victors, and not losers in the last election, they have the best gauge of the pulse of the barangay officials.
To another query, Rep. Locsin affirmed that the president of the Liga ng mga Barangay had expressed the favorable position of the league on the Bill.
Rep. Rodriguez surmised that the favorable position of the Liga was because it is the tenure of the incumbent barangay officials themselves that will be extended.
Rep. Locsin averred that he did not ask their motivation but affirmed that it was the sense of the Liga.
As a rejoinder, Rep. Rodriguez opined that the Liga ng mga Barangay will be giving a self-serving recommendation if it will be the one asked because the extension of two years will benefit its barangay official-members.
Rep. Locsin said that if he had really wanted to spend the money of the House, he would have gone directly to the barangay officials thereby getting better known for the 2010 elections. He however surmised that he would be meeting only the incumbent barangay officials and not all those who aspire to become barangay officials themselves; but still, he would get the same response as what he got from their elected Representatives in the House. He stressed that it was the broad consensus of his colleagues to postpone the barangay and SK elections. He disagreed with Rep. Rodriguez that the Liga ng mga Barangay would be giving a self-serving opinion.
Rep. Rodriguez however pointed out that had Rep. Locsin gone to Cagayan de Oro and met with the former?s constituents, the Sponsor would have known their desire for an election in October.
Rep. Locsin surmised that based on Rep. Rodriguez?s critical stance towards the Bill, it would seem that the latter represents ?disgruntled losers? or those who lost in the last barangay elections. He nonetheless advised Rep. Rodriguez to vote based on what his losing barangay candidates would want him to express in the House.
In reaction, Rep. Rodriguez clarified that there were no disgruntled losers and he was simply referring to his constituents. He then asked for ways to determine whether or not the people are in favor of extending the tenure of the barangay officials for another two years.
Rep. Locsin stated that if Congress had followed the wisdom of the previous House rather than the previous Senate, the incumbent Members would have one year to go to Cagayan de Oro City to solicit the wisdom of Rep. Rodriguez?s constituents. He remarked that it was just unfortunate that without Charter change, they are bedeviled by a bicameral Congress.
Rep. Rodriguez next inquired whether the Sponsor had consulted other local officials above the level of the barangay. In particular, he inquired whether Rep. Locsin had heard the position of the League of Provinces.
Rep. Locsin replied in the negative to the last query. He however admitted to having consulted various local government officials who had signified their satisfaction over the proposed measure. He emphasized that because he had insisted on sponsoring the Bill not at the last minute but as the first business of the House, the LP would now have enough time to protest the extension of the tenure of their barangay officials.
Rep. Rodriguez inquired whether Rep. Locsin was aware that the LP was busy with the forthcoming barangay elections.
The Sponsor replied that the issue should be taken into consideration although he must consider first the views of his colleagues who create and abolish barangays.
As a rejoinder, Rep. Rodriguez expressed the hope that the sponsoring Committee was given more time to conduct public hearings on the Bill. He informed Rep. Locsin that the League of Cities and the LP had published in the newspapers their respective positions on the issue, which indicated their desire for the barangay and SK elections to proceed as scheduled in October 2007 to give a fresh mandate to the barangay officials and to elect a new set of real, young SK leaders. He disclosed that at present, many SK officials were already 23 years old and extending their tenure for another two years would mean that they will already be aged 25 in 2009. He inquired anew whether Rep. Locsin had consulted with the league of Cities, League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) and the LP.
In reply, Rep. Locsin underscored that he had consulted with his freshly elected colleagues in the House, whom he considered the true representatives of the people from all the provinces. Even as he recognized that some governors and mayors might have contrary views towards the Bill, he surmised that they would express their sentiments to their respective Representatives who would vote on the Bill contrary to their wishes.
Furthermore, Rep. Locsin observed that majority of the Members of the House are confident that postponing the barangay and SK elections was a wise proposal. He also expressed hope that the Members had one year to consult with the people regarding the matter but he opined that Charter change is needed to end the Senate so that only wise measures from the House would be enacted.
On whether the 2007 national budget already contains the amount of P2.7 billion as allocation for the October barangay and SK elections, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
In view thereof, Rep. Rodriguez held the view that the said elections were really expected to take place because it passed the regular process of appropriations and was approved by the Thirteenth Congress.
Rep. Locsin averred that the appropriation of funds for the elections was not in anticipation of the elections being held as proposed but more so because it was the wisdom of the previous Congress that the Fourteenth Congress would not see the necessity of postponing the October 2007 election of barangay and SK officials. He however pointed out that the Fourteenth Congress had seen the wisdom to propose its postponement. Its effect, however, is not a waste of P2.7 billion but more of a savings that could be used more wisely for automated elections in anticipation of the 2010 presidential polls, he opined.
On whether he does not see the wisdom of spending P2.7 billion for the October elections, Rep. Locsin stated that he does not see the wisdom of spending money that can be saved to achieve the same effect in 2009.
Rep. Rodriguez took exception to the view of Rep. Locsin that money would be saved by postponing the October elections. He however inquired whether P2.7 billion was miniscule as compared to the P16 billion National Broadband Network contract and the P26 billion Cyber Education Project, especially in the light of the fact that they were discussing republicanism and the democratic state of the country they call the Philippines which they love.
In response, Rep. Locsin maintained that just because the government chooses to throw hundreds of billions of pesos in corrupt contracts does not authorize the House of Representatives to sanction the throwing of more good money after bad.
For his part, Rep. Rodriguez opined that P2.7 billion is a small price to pay to implement the constitutional mandate that sovereignty resides in the people and that the Philippines is a republican State. He added that it is a small amount to pay to be able to give the barangay officials a fresh mandate and to elect good, efficient and younger leaders in the barangays.
Rep. Locsin replied that he had already explained that ?there is no constitutional issue raised on this matter and that grass has nothing to do with law.? He added that the framework of republicanism in the Philippine system of government is defined by the Constitution and the constitutional offices it creates from the President down to the Members of Congress and the provincial officials. He underscored that it does not include barangays which are, according to the Constitution, creatures of law that is enacted by Congress.
To a related query, Rep. Rodriguez asked what would happen to the tenure of the barangay officials if House Bill No. 2417 becomes a law. He noted that the measure appears to be silent on the matter. He inquired whether the government will revive officers-in-charge (OICs), like what happened during the change of administration in 1986 when barangay officials were ?massacred? with the appointment of OICs, or whether the tenure of the incumbent would simply be extended.
In reply, Rep. Locsin stated that no massacre will take place and that the term of office of the incumbent will be extended.
He added that the incumbent would stay in place until the elections are held either in 2008 or 2009, depending on the final outcome of the Bicameral Conference Committee meeting.
Rep. Rodriguez said that it is already bad that Congress was able to extend the terms of bad officials but it is even worst if cronies of mayors and of the DILG would just supplant people without any mandate. He then inquired whether the Bill creates problems that it hopes to solve.
Replying in the negative, Rep. Locsin said that he does not see cronies in his own district or in the City of Makati but he believes that some of the Members have and they would stand up like Rep. Rodriguez because apparently his district is full of cronies -- the reason he is opposed to the extension of their term of office. He however said that not until the other Members of the House stands up as Rep. Rodriguez did to denounce their ?crony? barangay officials, he would defer to the opinions of his colleagues who apparently love their barangay officials. He noted that apparently, Rep. Rodriguez has a problem with his barangay officials and that something must be done about it.
In response, Rep. Rodriguez said that his barangays are not ridden with cronies and he does not have any rancor against any barangay official. He said that what he would like to point out is that the people of the Second District of Cagayan de Oro deserves to be given the right to choose again their barangay officials after so many extensions of their term of office.
In ending his interpellation, Rep. Rodriguez thanked Rep. Locsin for his patience although some personal comments had been attributed to him and other persons. He stated that he would just like to register his strong objection to the Bill and expressed hope that the Members who are present in the Session Hall would be able to decide what is right for the people, for the Republic, for democracy and sovereignty.
At this juncture, the Chair recognized Rep. Bienvenido M. Abante Jr. for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. ABANTE
At the outset, Rep. Abante said that in the previous election, 80% of all the barangay kagawads supported him while the Mayor of Manila won without the support of the majority of the barangay officials. He cited that this was the main difference between both of them. He underscored that he is not against the postponement of the barangay elections, in fact he was included as one of the Sponsors of the Bill. Pointing out that what he is against is the date of the election, he then explained that his district alone has 139 barangays which is too many that is why the City Council of Manila has passed an ordinance providing for the consolidation and merger of the 897 barangays to 120. This, he said, will be submitted to a plebiscite which the Comelec will schedule at the appropriate time. He added that this is one reason why he is for the postponement of the barangay elections. He then asked why May 2009 was the proposed date for the forthcoming barangay elections.
In response, Rep. Locsin explained that the proposal was actually November, but they have observed that November is a rainy season and the month of May would be better. As to why 2009, he expressed belief that the House should proceed to legislate as it feels right for the nation. Moreover, he said that they also have to consider dealing with the Senate. He pointed out that one of the reasons why the Senate may support the Bill is that the Senators wanted to coincide the election with a very extensive implementation of a Computerized Election Law. He said that when the Committee had asked Comelec Commissioner Tuazon whether the Comelec can implement a computerized election by 2008, the reply was that the Comelec could do it in two years time. He said that he likewise needs the support of authors from the Senate on the automation law and underscored that the real intention is to have a fully automated barangay elections in two years.
Rep. Abante inquired on whether in 2009, the Comelec will be prepared for the computerization of the barangay elections. He noted that it was the Senate that has actually stopped the full computerization of the Comelec. He then asked how sure is Congress that by 2009, the Comelec has totally computerized all elections.
Rep. Locsin replied that they cannot be sure of everything in life, but certainly said date is the best estimate of the Comelec. He said that one of the reason it should be in 2009 is that there is a rather powerful bill to move it to 2010, to coincide with the national elections. He pointed out that one of their objectives in holding it in 2009 is that should there be any glitches encountered in the computerization, the Comelec would still have one year to remove whatever defects there are for the crucial presidential elections of 2010. Otherwise, he said that if the Comelec would not be given leeway to do its best by 2009, the country may have once again a very contentious and disputed presidential elections in 2010. He expressed belief that the previous Congress has passed a law that mandates the computerization of elections.
Rep. Abante said that he would really like to see that the Comelec is totally computerized. He however recalled that the Thirteenth Congress had already amended and changed the barangay elections from September 22, 2005 to the last Monday of October 2007 and now Congress seeks to again amend the dates and change it to May 2009. He cited for instance that if the incumbent barangay officials have won two terms and this is now their third term, it means that by 2009, they shall have won for three terms and shall have been barangay officials for 11 years.
Rep. Locsin pointed out that a great bulk of that term was earned by these barangay officials in elections and that they had been elected. He said that the extra term can be seen as an extension only if one wishes this to be counted against the term of the barangay officials. This question has already been asked, he said, and that his answer was ?yes?, the previous Congress had fixed the date but the present House of Representatives has the wisdom to propose an interval of one year between the two elections. Unfortunately, he said that this is not a unicameral system so that the measure has to be sent to the Senate for their consideration.
Whereupon, Rep. Abante said that he would like to fully understand the wisdom of holding the elections in May 2009 because he noted that there are more charges filed against barangay officials in the Office of the Ombudsman than any other officials of the land. He opined that the people might not be able to understand the wisdom of what they have done if the elections will be held in May 2009.
Rep. Locsin stated that the presence of criminal complaints in the Ombudsman against barangay officials is far from detracting from the right and the worthiness of barangay officials for an extension of their term. He said that the fact that only a handful are being charged in the Ombudsman shows that the vast majority of the barangay officials has successfully resisted the temptation to commit graft. This only means, he said, that by and large, a very good crop of barangay officials deserves an extenstion not just as a favor to them but really an imposition of additional duties so that they will continue to do the good job they have done.
Rep. Abante said that this might be in a way prolonging the agony of the people in their clamor for change.
Rep. Locsin stated that it does not prolong anybody?s agony because he assumes that the barangay officials who have been criminally charged had been removed. He stressed that these corrupt barangay officials are now in agony because they are in jail while their constituents have been relieved of their predicament without the benefit of an expensive election.
Rep. Abante said that he is no longer referring to those charged by the Ombudsman but to the fact that barangay officials, like the Congressmen need a fresh mandate. He maintained that Congress might be prolonging the agony of the people calling for change.
Rep. Locsin countered that Congress may also be prolonging the pleasure of the present crop of very wonderful barangay officials whom they feel do not need to spend so much money to be reelected. He said that they cannot tell whether it is pain or pleasure they feel, but they will know in 2009.
On whether it is true that the barangay was organized to be apolitical, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
On whether he believes that at present, the barangay officials have been highly politicized and no longer apolitical, Rep. Locsin replied that this is possibly true.
Therefore, Rep. Abante said, that if there is any change, it should be transforming the barangay into an apolitical leadership and machinery that would literally provide the necessary services to the grassroots.
To begin with, Rep. Locsin said that the vast majority of barangay officials are apparently taking care of the grassroots. He said that this is why they were elected the previous time and that they have no proof to the contrary that they are still delivering basic services to the grassroots. However, he said that they really do not know whether or not the people are unhappy with the situation but it is certainly the sense of the Members of the House who are in touch with the people that they would not mind an extension of the term. He agreed with Rep. Abante that if these elections are held next month, they would have more of the same barangay officials that they both love and dislike. He said that there will be more of this political barangay officials.
Rep. Locsin pointed out that the elections would not be held next month so that the political barangay candidates will win for sure. Instead, he said that Congress and the civil society are given two years to mobilize their communities and challenge the political barangay candidate, whereas, if the election is held next month, the civil society would not even have a chance.
Rep. Abante said that he appreciates Rep. Locsin?s response to his query. However, he said that his queries would not even be in good terms with the barangay officials who have supported him because many of the barangay captains would like to remain as barangay officials until 2009 and therefore, this is not a very good political stand.
Rep. Locsin said that he respects Rep. Abante in speaking against his own interest.
Rep. Abante noted that Rep. Locsin had made mention of the statement ?in the sense of Congress.? He then asked how the Members could be able to balance the sense of Congress with the expectation of the majority of the people who would like to seek changes in the barangay.
Rep. Locsin replied that if the matter is brought right now to a vote, they would know what the sense of Congress was. He said that they still have to determine this and that is why they need to put the matter to a vote. He said that there is no proof that the public is outraged with the performance of the incumbent barangay officials because they will only know this when elections are held in 2009.
At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Singson relinquished the Chair to Rep. Jesus Crispin C. Remulla.
In ending his interpellation, Rep. Abante expressed hope that he would be able to get the answer that would be able to change his conviction. He then asked Rep. Locsin whether he would, in a sense, agree that elections should be held in May 2008.
In response, Rep. Locsin said that they can bring up the matter during the period of amendments.
Whereupon, the Chair recognized Rep. Teodoro A Casi?o for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. CASI?O
Rep. Casi?o initially noted that during the earlier interpellations, Rep. Locsin was patronizing, almost derogatory, in the way that he looks upon the barangay officials. He inquired whether this view is shared by the majority of the Members of the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms.
Rep. Locsin however stated that he deeply resents the description of his attitude towards barangay officials as derogatory. He continued that based on what he has said, it was a very scholarly distinction that he tried to make that one cannot compare the powers of the President and the need for the Constitution to control his term of office and to make it impossible to extend him beyond what the Constitution allows and a creation of such as the barangay. Far from derogating the intelligence of barangay officials, he however stressed that he holds them in high esteem and that he knows that the cheap tricks that would make him look like a villain against the barangays will be seen through by those that the Members seek to serve today.
Rep. Casi?o explained that the reason he asked that question was that during the previous interpellations, the word ?miniscule? was used to refer to barangay officials and then later on, in the interpellation by the Majority, the word ?wonderful? was used for the barangay officials. He stated that he wanted to be clarified on what is really the attitude of the Sponsor and the Committee with regard to the barangay officials.
While he conceded that the Members cannot compare the powers of the President to the powers of a barangay captain, it does not mean however that the Members should hold the barangay captains in less regard insofar as being public officials are concerned. He inquired whether this observation is correct.
Rep. Locsin replied that there is no question that the powers of the barangay captains are miniscule and that their dignities are small, as there is also no question why this Bill is before the House of Representatives. He subsequently expressed his belief that it is the estimation of the Members that the barangay captains have served the people despite their limited powers and their small dignities, with the most extraordinary fidelity and energy. Thus, he pointed out that it is the Committee?s intent to extend the terms of the barangay captains and to save P2.6 billion to test what the people know in their hearts and have seen with their eyes that the barangay officials have served the people well despite their miniscule powers and modest dignities.
Rep. Casi?o however replied that with the recognition and respect given to all elected public officials, whether big or small, they are still subject to the same principles of accountability and mandate from their respective constituents.
Rep. Locsin concurred therewith and cited that Presidents, Senators and Congressmen are subject to fixed term limits. In the case of barangay officials however, he recalled they have been given once a five-year term and there was also a time when Congress did not even impose term limits on them because they are wholly creations of the law, enacted by Congress. Nonetheless, he underscored that barangay officials are ultimately accountable foremost because they face criminal charges when they fall short of doing their duties and are brought before the Office of the Ombudsman. He added that barangay officials will be subjected to elections in 2009 or whatever date is finally adopted by the House. Most importantly, he cited that under the measure, there is no suggestion that barangay officials will serve their terms in perpetuity.
For his part, Rep. Casi?o argued that if barangay officials are indeed accountable and elections are the manner in which they are to be held accountable ? whether they will get a fresh mandate or get replaced ? is the measure under consideration, in effect, postponing the accountabilities of the barangay officials and likewise postponing the chances of the electorate to either give them a fresh mandate or to replace them.
Rep. Locsin conceded that the House will be postponing their accountabilities until the barangay officials face the electorate again. However, he underscored with the postponement of the elections, the Members are prepared to pay the price of that postponement because one year after the elections are held in 2009 for barangay officials, their constituents will equally hold the Members to account for having voted for or against this measure.
In his rejoinder, Rep. Casi?o averred that the postponement of holding the barangay officials accountable may lead to abuses and further loss of accountability in government in general. He inquired whether the measure provides for any safeguards to ensure that the postponement of accountability will not lead to greater problems.
In response, Rep. Locsin explained that the first safeguard would be addressing the outstanding anomaly that is the SK. This would be possible, he said, with the passage of the measure proposed by Rep. Lorna Silverio abolishing the SK. With regard however to accountability per se of the barangay officials, he cited that the laws on graft and corruption hold them accountable. He subsequently explained that in postponing the elections of barangay captains for two more years, the Committee feels that the interregnum can be used to coincide with other worthwhile projects one of which is the restructuring of the barangay electoral system. He then cited examples to illustrate his point.
Rep. Casi?o thereafter argued that however miniscule the functions of the barangay officials are, the issue of postponing the barangay elections and the corresponding accountability of the barangay officials are not trivial matters as they involve the mandate that the people have given these public officials. He underscored that the reasons for the postponement of the barangay elections should be of great import and enough to justify by not giving the people the chance to give a fresh mandate or replace their barangay officials.
Rep. Locsin agreed therewith. He added that the extent of the powers of the barangay captains would determine to a great extent whether or not the House should pass the measure in the first place. If, he said, the House is talking about an extension of term perhaps by some anomaly in the scheduling of Members who can enact laws, or of the Executive Department, or of the provincial governors, then he would hesitate in sponsoring such measure. Considering that these notable barangay officials who, with such miniscule powers and such modest dignities, have nonetheless performed well in their duties that the vast majority of the Members are satisfied with their performance and likewise, considering the other more important considerations such as reforming the Barangay Law, amending the SK structure or seeking its abolition, and working for a full automation of the 2010 elections, then postponing the barangay elections is well worth the exception that the House is making. It is no question, he said, that the postponement is an exception.
Rep. Casi?o however noted that when he read the fact sheet of the measure, he did not find that the notable performance being attributed to the barangay captains is the rationale for the postponement of the barangay elections. Moreover, he said that he does not know whether such matters were even really discussed during the hearings of the Committee on Suffrage. Nonetheless, he stated that he is willing to take Rep. Locsin?s word for that.
At this point, Rep. Casi?o adverted to a particular phrase in the measure, to wit: ?Postponing the synchronized barangay and SK elections from the last Monday of October to the second Monday of May 2009 would effectively save the government valuable funds currently pegged at over a billion pesos.? This, he said, is the one and only reason that is being put forward in the fact sheet provided by the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms. He then inquired how much will the government save if it postpones the elections.
Rep. Locsin replied that it would be a little over a billion to P2.6 billion. Nonetheless, he underscored that the complete justification for the postponement is the sponsorship speech that he has just delivered on the measure.
Given the annual inflation rates, Rep. Casi?o inquired on the amount that the government would spend for the barangay elections in 2009 if it proceeds with its plans.
Rep. Locsin replied that he would not know. He however stated that inasmuch as the proposed 2009 barangay elections would be absorbed by the pilot automation of the elections, then the amount would be determined by the expenses for the new mode of a fully automated voting.
In his rejoinder, Rep. Casi?o explained that the expenses for the barangay elections in 2009 would be more expensive considering that the government would be acquiring new hardware and software and would be training new personnel for the fully automated electoral system. Nonetheless, he cited that the argument that the government would be saving its funds by postponing the barangay elections would not hold water inasmuch as the government would still be spending a far more greater amount for a new electoral system come 2009.
Rep. Locsin concurred with this observation and cited that this is the reason why he had to add other rationales for the postponement of the elections, to wit: more time to heal the wounds of the last electoral fight; to cool electoral passions, resolve pending electoral protests, and to consolidate underpopulated barangays in Metro Manila in compliance with the minimum voting population requirement.
Rep. Casi?o thereafter stated that he finds it ?funny? that the Committee is using the argument that the barangay elections come close to the 2007 elections when, in fact, by postponing the same elections to 2009, the House is putting it close to the presidential, senatorial, and local elections in 2010. Thus, he asked whether the same argument of putting the barangay elections too close to the presidential elections of 2010 defeats the purpose of having the barangay elections in 2009.
Rep. Locsin replied in the negative. He argued that if there was really a one-year interval between the last election and the supposed barangay elections this year, then the Committee would be hard put to make such an argument. He subsequently noted that in the previous Congress, the House of Representatives had indeed proposed a one-year interval that is why under the time frame for the measure, it involves a one-year interval between 2009 and the presidential elections. He opined that under the ?mistaken? system of bicameral system of government, the Members are forced to dilute the wisdom of the House that has provided a five-month interval which, is wholly inappropriate for holding meaningful barangay elections.
Rep. Casi?o next inquired whether the postponement of the barangay elections need not necessarily result in savings on the part of the government but more importantly, in savings on the valuable funds of local politicians.
In response, Rep. Locsin replied that this could also be another reason considering that the local politicians, unlike their national counterparts, have to support their respective barangay officials who most often than not are driven by a sense of service rather than political ambitions. Moreover, providing funds for barangay officials would enable them to meaningfully participate in this democratic exercise and not just engage in the elections having no means to bring their message across. He stressed that democracy is not only revolution; sometimes it is as plain and simple as campaigning and getting the attention and affection of the neighborhoods that they serve.
In this regard, Rep. Casi?o asked how big a motivation this was for their fellow Representatives that with the postponement of the barangay elections they would not have captains soliciting from them this year but which would happen in 2009.
Rep. Locsin replied that this is a wrong way of putting it suffice it to say that the Members are not going to be imposed upon. However, if more time will be given to the Members they shall more generously help the barangay candidates regardless of affiliations who wish to take part in democratic exercises. He affirmed that the local politicians are financially depleted and that in holding the barangay elections next month, they would not be able to help the barangay candidates.
In his rejoinder, Rep. Casi?o argued that it would be better to hold the barangay elections this year so that the locally elected officials, on the account of financial constraints, will have a good excuse not to give in to the demands of the barangay officials. Moreover, this would also ensure that the forthcoming barangay elections will not be based on money or at least the involvement of financial contribution coming from the Representatives.
In response, Rep. Locsin said that he does not think that the Members who had fiercely fought for their electoral seats would want to begrudge the barangay officials of what the former could possibly give them at the given time. He surmised that the Members would not like to give the barangay officials less financial help and that they are grasping for excuses to treat them so badly, it is only that in the end ?people need money to advance their causes, whether social, political or economic.? Thus, he added, it augurs well for the Members to provide for the needs of the barangay officials because they would not want them to put an electoral campaign and put across their message without the necessary funds. He reiterated that the postponement of the barangay elections would help the Members to rebuild their resources in order to help, at the appropriate time, those who would like to serve the needs of the barangay.
Rep. Casi?o, in reply, however pointed out that the postponement of the barangay elections for the second time only shows a very low regard for the barangay officials. This attitude was brought about, he said, by the fact that they are just barangay officials with miniscule function in the bureaucracy and unimportant mandates and thus, their elections can be postponed on the whims of Congress. This also reflects, he added, how Congress treats democracy in the country. He explained that democracy and election is good if it is for the benefit of the high officials but for the lowly barangay, Congress can do without their democracy. He then inquired whether it is appropriate if Congress postpones the barangay elections twice thereby thwarting the people?s right to select or reject their local officials.
Rep. Locsin however argued that the postponement of the elections is far from denigrating the important contributions of the barangay officials. He explained that however miniscule their powers are, the barangay officials exercise great responsibilities that by and large, the law subjects them repeatedly to electoral exercises.
Thereafter, he emphasized that except those Members who really have powers, the House should give the barangay officials the term so that they would not wonder whether they will be subjected to a three-year election just like the Members of the House. He pointed out that the bill is a recognition of the wonderful work the barangay officials have done while in office and that the time between the two elections could be used to recognize their contributions and enhance those minuscule powers, their modest dignities and entrust them with more powers and possibly a longer term. He underscored the need to address the barangay law in order to abolish what has become the early learning center for corruption of the SK.
In ending his interpellation, Rep. Casi?o stressed that the House had failed to do its duty when it postponed the 2005 barangay elections and to postpone it again would be very unfair to the barangay officials. Thereafter, he thanked Rep. Locsin for answering his questions.
Since both of them also came from the Thirteenth Congress, Rep. Locsin said that they themselves have to be blamed, but in this Fourteenth Congress, the august Body has more enlightened legislators WHO will use the time wisely.
At this juncture, Reps. Hontiveros-Baraquel and Raul T. Gonzalez Jr. simultaneously sought recognition from the Chair.
Considering that Rep. Gonzalez was ahead in the list of Members who have registered to interpellate the Sponsor, the Chair recognized him to interpellate the latter.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. GONZALEZ
Initially, Rep. Gonzalez stated that he was neutral in this issue considering that the postponement or the pushing through of the barangay elections have certain advantages and disadvantages. However, he pointed that in the case of the lone District of Iloilo City, most of the barangay officials can be relied upon and that he would be happy if their terms will be extended precisely because this will unburden him of financial assistance to certain people in his district. He then asked whether, in the event that the House will extend the term of office of the barangay officials and Sangguniang Kabataan officials, it is also automatic that the term of office of the ex-officio members in the different local sanggunians would also be extended, or would the Body have a certain compromise so as to appease certain Members of the House who would want democracy to still proceed as earlier scheduled by RA No. 9340 which is to hold the barangay elections this year.
In this regard, Rep. Gonzalez further inquired whether it is possible to insert certain provisions in the Bill such as the resetting and sychronizing of the barangay elections to another date and that said extension shall not apply to the ex-officio members of the local sanggunian. He added that these ex-officio members would still have to undergo elections in order to find out whether they still have the mandate of their peers.
In response, Rep. Locsin opined that the Members' satisfaction towards their barangay officials would not extend to the aforementioned officials. In this case, he said that if Rep. Gonzalez would propose this matter during the period of amendments, the Committee will consider the same.
In ending his interpellation. Rep. Gonzalez stated that he will propose certain amendments at the proper time and then thanked Rep. Locsin for answering his interpellations.
Thereafter, Rep. Locsin suggested that Rep. Gonzalez prepare the necessary language of his proposal so that when the appropriate time comes, the Body could put it to a vote. Rep. Gonzalez agreed therewith.
INTERPELLATION
OF REP. HONTIVEROS- BARAQUEL
Upon recognition by the Chair, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel affirmed Rep. Locsin's statements that the House should also heed the sentiments of those who are directly affected. However, she pointed out that this should be done through proper consultations not only with the National Federation of Barangays and the National Youth Commission (NYC) but also with their constituents at the grassroots level in order to encourage more participation from the people. Otherwise, she noted that if only the incumbent officials would be asked with regard to this issue, in case of conflict of interest, they might just consider their own sentiments thereby disregarding the interest of many in the grassroots level.
Whereupon, Rep. Locsin stated that he did also consider extensive consultations with regard to this Bill. However, he added that he deemed unnecessary to spend the money of the House when he could very well consult the district representatives who could tell him exactly the sentiments at the grassroots level. Moreover, he pointed out that the proposed bill is not his idea and that there is nothing self-serving about this matter because in his case, he has no problem in Makati City, if indeed the elections would push through since the same people who are so devoted to the government of Makati will be the ones running for positions in the barangay election. Thereafter, he stressed that he has no more time to conduct extensive consultations at the grassroots level due to time constraint. He then maintained that during the Thirteenth Congress, the House had the wisdom to push through with this proposal but the one-year interval was rejected by the foolish House and this should not be the case under the Fourteenth Congress.
However, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel stated that although it is impractical for Rep. Locsin to personally go around the country to conduct enough ground level consultations, the Committee should have provided certain processes through the National Federation of Barangays and the NYC to have immediate access to the local folks. While she affirmed Rep. Locsin's statements to spend wisely the money and the time of the House, at least, the latter should have also equally considered the importance of ensuring that the money and the time of the House would be spent for certain important political exercises like the barangay elections which have been provided for earlier by law. Stressing further the Sponsor's statements with regard to the need for sufficient time to heal the wounds of previous elections, the resolution of electoral disputes and to consolidate under-populated barangays, she asked why the House was raising these arguments only now, considering that the Members knew beforehand the scheduled barangay elections after the May 2007 elections.
In reply, Rep. Locsin explained that the Members of the Thirteenth Congress were very much aware of the needed time and this was the reason why he wanted a one-year interval between the two elections, but that due to the peevishness of certain Senators, the Members have been denied of the said one-year period. Moreover, he stressed that all these outstanding problems regarding this issue would still be taken up on the floor because within a few days, the Committee will present the Bill for plenary consideration and that the Members will have to decide whether or not they will correct the previous mistake of the Senate.
At this point, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel underscored that it would have been peevishness on the part of the Thirteenth Congress for not considering this issue, that every law being passed by the House may contain that positive element of wisdom that the Members could not easily reverse by just passing a new law, without considering the basis on which the previous law was passed. She added that this is now sought to be overturned by the Bill.
Stating that the Bill is essentially a local bill because it is crafted to express the views of those who are in the grassroots, Rep. Locsin stressed that the Members are grassroots politicians who came out with the best version of the law but unfortunately, they suffered under the tragedy of a bicameral system of government and of those who do not have a direct experience of being grassroots politicians. Considering that this issue is again now within the purview of the House, he pointed out that the Members would have the opportunity to decide whether or not to reject the measure. He added that he would have not done this if he did not have the sense of the decision of the House as to what should be the right thing to do for the country.
Thereafter, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel noted that while the measure is a local bills it is also considered a national bill because of its national importance. Even the provision for local government and local governance are enshrined in the Constitution, she added. She then expressed hope that the Sponsor was just emphasizing that the Bill was crafted by those Members who have direct participation in local politics and the value that they bring to the process of legislation and not to suggest that the Party-List Members do not have some sense of exposure in the grassroots despite the fact that they also have constituents in the national and local levels.
Subsequently, Rep. Locsin pointed out that he was not referring to the Members of the Party-List, but to the Senate. He added that the measure that emanated from the Thirteenth Congress was the wise version of the bill because the same provided a one-year interval but unfortunately, it suffered a contraction in the Bicameral Conference Committee.
Stating that the Party-List Akbayan consistently voted against the postponement of these elections and the Comelec voted 4 to 1 in favor of postponement, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel asked who was the lone Comelec Commissioner who voted against the postponement of barangay elections was.
Rep. Locsin replied that it was Commissioner Tuazon who told the Committee that one Commissioner voted against the postponement of barangay elections but the latter did not mention the identity of said Comelec official.
At this point, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel inquired about the identity of the lone Comelec official in order to find out the grounds or reasons for his lone dissenting voice.
Thereafter, Rep. Locsin pointed out that he just wants to show his respect to the members of a constitutional body like the Comelec by not asking the identity of the lone dissenter. He then said that the opinion of anyone of them may not outweigh the opinion of other members and it is the respect that the House wishes to convey to a constitutional body.
Agreeing therewith, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel stressed that in any democracy, a majority vote is being carried over even in a constitutional body like the Comelec. However, she added that she was just very interested to learn what a high official of the constitutional body charged with the implementation of election rules and championing electoral reforms might have thought about the Bill. Considering that according to Rep. Locsin, part of the problem of pursuing the incoming barangay elections is the financial help of candidates, she inquired on the importance of financial assistance to the candidates in the barangay elections because this problem indicates the crying need for one particular electoral reform which is the campaign-finance reform even down the barangay level.
In response, Rep. Locsin explained that in the previous Congress, the Members have fought for campaign reforms, but this has again perished in the upper Chamber. Perhaps, he said that he and her wish for a unicameral Chamber would be realized.
Stressing that this is another very interesting debate which she hopes that the Fourteenth Congress would be able to face positively, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel inquired whether the postponement of the barangay elections to 2009 will pave the way for automated elections despite the fact that, although the Automated Election Law had already been passed, the Comelec failed to implement this during the last elections. Moreover, she added that the law further provides a total of 12 pilot areas all over the Philippines. In this regard, she asked whether it is possible to pilot the automation of the upcoming barangay elections in at least 12 areas.
Rep. Locsin replied that this is possible because the Comelec would have been able to partially computerize the May 2007 elections.
He said that that is the problem with a Bicameral House, recalling the agony that Senator Richard Gordon went through in trying to get the Members of the Senate to pass said reform but which they just held up until the last minute when nothing more could be done.
On the issue of a certain barangay or village SK grassroots, very political and nonagricultural grassroots, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel inquired whether Rep. Locsin would agree that the Members should respect the principle of democracy involved which simply posits the idea, which was also expressed earlier by a Member of the Minority, that elected officials serve for a definite term which delimits their popular mandate and their legitimate claim to the position they occupy, and that beyond that term, they should get a new mandate from the electorate and their constituency to legitimize their continued stay in office.
Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel also inquired whether Rep. Locsin completely disagree that Congress cannot substitute for the need for said democratic mandate by a mere legislative action of extending their term of office as if Congress were merely appointing the barangay and SK officials. She also inquired on the right to political participation by the people as provided for in the Constitution and even in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Moreover, she asked how about those who want to be candidates and those who wish to vote for new officials.
In reply, Rep. Locsin stated that civil and political rights, especially in international documents, would not cover said case because it would only cover a case for national offices under the Constitution. He pointed out that barangay officials are not covered by the Constitution since they are creations of law.
Rep. Locsin expressed hope that Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel would believe him in saying that in the next two years, if elections would be held in the coming month, it would be more of the same. Although he was happy with ?more of the same,? he underscored that a part of him also shares Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel?s dream of a grassroots politics. He maintained that if there would be no one-year or two-year interval to prepare for grassroots election, then those who have great but misunderstood social causes would never have the chance to bring their cause down to the grassroots level.
Now that there is a chance to bring politics away from just sectoral representation which is already overdue, Rep. Locsin said that all sectoral representatives should do is to use the next two years to bring their advocacies down to the grassroots level and capture the barangay level so that they could finally tell Congress to abolish the sectoral representation and they would fight on a one-on-one district election.
Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel conceded to Rep. Locsin?s sincerity belief that would result in the outcome that he is contemplating although she did not share the same. She said that Party-List Representatives hope that sectoral representation would finally materialize at the local level and that this would lead not only to electoral reforms but also to other developments in the political system.
Thereafter, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel underscored that she did not think that they could push the issue of political participation as guaranteed by national and international instruments to any violative extremes. She added that it is very surprising to hear that the ICCPR does not cover such case because that might be an interesting and fruitful area for further legislative research and perhaps drafting legislation.
ELECTION OF MEMBERS
TO CERTAIN COMMITTEES
At this point, before recognizing other Members who would like to interpellate Rep. Locsin, on an omnibus motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the following Members were elected to the committees hereunder indicated:
To the Committee on Natural Resources
1. Rep. Antonio T. Kho vice Rep. Faysah R.P.M. Dumarpa
2. Rep. Joseph Gilbert F. Violago vice Rep. Reylina G. Nicolas
Additional members to the Committee on Appropriations representing the Majority Coalition:
1. Rep. Victoria H. Reyes
2. Rep. Danilo P. Lagbas
3. Rep. Oscar G. Malapitan
4. Rep. Guillermo P. Cua
5. Rep. Maria Isabelle G. Climaco
6. Rep. Sally S. Ponce-Enrile
7. Rep. Jeffrey P. Ferrer
8. Rep. Ma. Carissa O. Coscolluela
9. Rep. Alvin S. Sandoval
10. Rep. Narciso D. Santiago III
11. Rep. Rex T. Gatchalian vice Rep. Abraham Kahlil B. Mitra
12. Rep. Mark Llandro L. Mendoza vice Rep. Conrado M. Estrella III
13. Rep. Adelina S. Rodriguez-Zaldarriaga vice Rep. Joseph A. Santiago
14. Rep. Carmen L. Cari vice Rep. Jocelyn Sy-Limkaichong
To the Committee on Tourism
1. Rep. Thelma Z. Almario
2. Rep. Sharee Ann T. Tan
3. Rep. Ma. Carissa O. Coscolluela
4. Rep. Jocelyn Sy-Limkaichong
5. Rep. Florencio C. Garay
Additional Members to the Committee on Natural Resources representing the Majority Coalition:
1. Rep. Conrado M. Estrella III
2. Rep. Ronald V. Singson
3. Rep. Maria Mitzi L. Cajayon
4. Rep. Alvin S. Sandoval
5. Rep. Mark Llandro L. Mendoza
6. Rep. Datu Pax S. Mangudadatu
7. Rep. Arnulfo F. Go
8. Rep. Nelson L. Dayanghirang
9. Rep. Philip A. Pichay
WITHDRAWAL OF REP. PABLO?S
MEMBERSHIP TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body approved the withdrawal of membership of Rep. Ernesto C. Pablo in the Committee on Appropriations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS
At this point, Rep. Gonzales (N.) acknowledged the presence in the Session Hall of members of the Soroptimist International, Caloocan City Chapter, namely: Misses Bernardo, Torres, Martinez, Montano, Repuno; Siya, Jo Iki, Kawachi, and another Kawachi who were guests of Rep. Maria Mitzi L. Cajayon.
Rep. Gonzales (N.) noted that the Soroptimist International, Caloocan City Chapter recently received the following awards in the Convention of the Soroptimist International of the Americas in Philadelphia, PA, USA on August 25-26, 2007, to wit: First Place ? Celebration of Success in Global Community for the project ?Guinsaugon: The Resurrection?; and Second Place ? Celebration of Success in Human Rights of Women and Girls for the project ?Rights and Relationships: The Dreams of Equality.?
ELECTION OF REP. COSCOLLUELA
TO THE COMMITTEE ON INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
With the indulgence of Rep. Joson who was first on the Minority list to interpellate Rep. Locsin, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body elected Rep. Ma. Carissa O. Coscolluela as member to the Committee on Information Communications Technology vice Rep. William Irwin C. Tieng.
ELECTION OF REP. PABLO TO THE
COMMITTEE ON SUFFRAGE AND
ELECTORAL REFORMS
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body elected Rep. Ernesto C. Pablo as member of the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms vice Rep. Pangalian M. Balindong.
Thereafter, the Chair recognized Rep. Joson for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. JOSON
Initially, Rep. Joson inquired on the category of House Bill No. 2417 whether it is an urgent bill, a certified bill by the President, a quickie bill, a short-time bill, or a railroad bill to which Rep. Locsin replied that the bill is not railroaded that is why he insisted on being the first in bringing the measure immediately to the floor. Out of deference and respect to the new Members of the House, he said that it was best to bring the measure to the floor at the earliest opportunity. He maintained that the bill can be considered as urgent but not certified since there would be elections in the coming month.
With regard to its urgency, quoting Section 51 of the House Rules, to wit: ?On motion by the Committee on Rules, the House may declare urgent a bill or a joint resolution and consider it in accordance with the time table,? Rep. Joson inquired whether this has been done to which Rep. Locsin replied in the negative.
On whether the rules of the committee have been approved, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
As to whether it was in accordance with the committee?s rule that only one hearing would be sufficient to have a committee report on said bill, Rep. Locsin likewise replied in the affirmative since the measure is easy to understand.
On another point, Rep. Joson recalled that when he was a member during the Eighth Congress, the bill or the portion that should be amended should be incorporated in the committee report, otherwise one would not know what is being amended. He said that under the proposed bill or committee report, Section 1 of Republic Act No. 9340 should have been included and the amendatory portion which is being discussed at the moment should be in capital form and that the deletions should be placed in the sections being amended.
In response, Rep. Locsin stated that amendments as to form could be made later on during the period of amendments.
Moreover? Rep. Joson said that if the portion being amended is not placed in the bill itself, then there would be no intelligent participation or deliberation on the matter. He added that pursuant to his first question, there should be a procedure and that he was asking whether First Reading would mean only one public hearing or three public hearings.
On another point, with regard to the substantive portion, Rep. Joson stated that savings was the only reason mentioned yet previous interpellators have stated that there is already a budget provided for in the present budget and that the funding required by law is there. He then asked what savings Rep. Locsin was talking about when it is very clear that what would not be spent at present would still be spent later on. Thereafter, he asked what is more important, the functioning of democracy or savings in terms of pesos.
Whereupon, Rep. Joson underscored that when he mentioned the function of democracy versus savings of pesos, he said that he was also referring to Article XI, Section 1 of the Constitution which provides that public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people. He said that to his understanding, this is the second time that the barangay officials? term would be extended.
Thereafter, he reiterated his question as to what is more important, the functions of democracy or peso savings.
Rep. Locsin surmised that after the interpellations of Reps. Rodriguez, Hontiveros-Baraquel and Casińo, he had already made it clear that democracy is not endangered by the extension of the barangay officials? term of office. As for further accountability, he referred to Rep. Abante?s observation that quite a few barangay officials have been brought to the Ombudsman for their abuses.
With regard to accountability in terms of a new mandate as mentioned by Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel, Rep. Locsin agreed that every extension of office takes an official away from accountability. He however expressed the sense of the House that postponing electoral accountability if only to take advantage of computerized elections does not endanger democracy nor really save the officials from accountability because they will face that reckoning in a time that the House itself will set.
Rep. Joson thereupon opined that in effect, the measure is a substitute bill because it is a substitution of judgment ? substituting the judgment of the House with that of the people.
If barangay elections will be held according to a schedule provided by the Constitution, Rep. Locsin said that he would agree that any attempt by the House to extend the term would be unconstitutional as well as a substitution of the Members? judgment against that of the people. However, he explained that in the case of a creation by Congress like the barangay where it can set the terms it wants, then it can also remove term limits because of certain exigencies, like its proximity to the previous elections. Such a decision should be left for the House, in its wisdom, to vote upon, he added.
Rep. Joson next focused on Section 2 of the Committee Report on the term of office of SK officials. He noted that prior interpellations pointed out to the fact that SK members will no longer be qualified to hold office. By extending their term of office, he pointed out that Congress is now giving them a new term of office, yet they are not even qualified to hold said office. He asked how this issue will be resolved.
The issue, which is not an excuse, is that the House is giving them the last extension, Rep. Locsin answered. He said that they are overage and this can be resolved through an election that will disqualify them from running; an Executive action by the DILG to remove them from office; or as proposed by Rep. Silverio; adopt her bill abolishing the SK. He added that there is another bill proposing the restructuring of the SK.
The term of office should come from an election for the purpose, Rep. Joson pointed out.
Rep. Locsin maintained that if they are unqualified, they would not even be entitled to a new term. He observed that in the last 10 years, Congress has been extending their term, and with the DILG raising its objection to the extension, then the House can also pass a bill to abolish the SK, with the hope that this proposal will be supported by the Senate who feels that the SK has become an early learning center for graft and corruption.
While he conceded that Rep. Locsin has sufficiently answered the questions, Rep. Joson expressed apprehension that the passage of the Bill can later on be questioned in the courts.
Agreeing therewith, Rep. Locsin said that even before the extension of term of office, those individuals who had reached the age limit should have already been removed. However, he stressed that the Legislature is not the body who removes officials, as the DILG is the appropriate office who should have filed the appropriate cases, or perhaps the removal could have been done through a Memorandum of Agreement.
Rep. Joson thereupon referred to the opinion of people in the barangays that the barangay elections will be too close to the last elections, that the politicians still have to steal money to be able give money to the barangay leaders and inquired on the validity of this observation.
Rep. Locsin answered that the barangay officials in his District and City do not believe that elected officials are thieves. He said that he feels sorry that there are parts in the country where barangay officials feel that any help extended by their Congressmen or Mayors comes from stolen money, because in his place, the people know that the money comes from their own pockets. He said that they do this in appreciation of the help given them during their own elections and in the performance of their tasks as Congressmen, Mayors and Councilors. He thereafter agreed that any help extended to barangay officials should not come from corruption.
As he lamented that all politicians are usually placed in a very negative light, Rep. Joson concluded that this is the reality that they have to face.
Thereafter, the Chair recognized Rep. Salvador H. Escudero III for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. ESCUDERO
To the initial queries raised by Rep. Escudero, Rep. Locsin clarified that the proposed date of the new barangay elections will probably be held on the second Sunday of May 2009. He affirmed that if approved, the Bill will become a law in October, and therefore, the law on recall can still be used for a period of six months.
Rep. Escudero thereupon referred to Section 74, Chapter V of the Local Government Cod on Limitations on Recall, and emphasized that certain barangay officials are really detested by their constituents. He maintained that should the measure become a law, the door is not closed for a possible replacement of some officials as there is still a period of six months to avail themselves of the aforestated Code provision.
Rep. Locsin affirmed Rep. Escudero?s statement, and thereafter clarified that the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms held its last hearing on Monday, September 3, 2007.
As he noted that by September 5, the Bill was already being debated on the floor, Rep. Escudero underscored that if the House wants to approve any law, it can do so in a matter of days. He recalled that in the Thirteenth Congress, one of the most damaging blackeyes suffered by the Members was the failure to muster a quorum such that three important bills ? the bills on human rights, the UP Charter, and inexpensive medicines were almost at the finish line. He expressed hope that any desire to craft a law can be easily done through the collective efforts of the House, with the determination to attend to bills that were not approved because of lack of quorum a few days before the adjournment of sessions.
The Chair thereafter recognized Rep. Antonio T. Kho for his interpellation.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. KHO
Rep. Kho initially inquired how the House can convince the Senate about the resetting of the barangay elections on the second Monday of May 2009 instead of October of the same year.
In reply, Rep. Locsin said that the House will have an easier time with the Senators who came from the House because they understand the needs of the Congressmen and the particular problems of the barangay elections. He expressed hope that the House can convince some of the Senators on the need for a computerized elections, this as he recalled that in the previous Congress, Senator Richard Gordon had supported the bill for the purpose. While other Senators will view the measure as a local bill and may choose to respect it or not, he said that the Members can only do what they believe should be rightfully done in the House and bring it to the Senate. He said that this is with the hope that the Senators will understand the measure because similarly, they also have bills that the Members do not understand but which they nevertheless bring to the House in the hope of getting understanding or sympathy.
Rep. Kho thereafter referred to Rep. Rodriguez?s opinion that for a Member to represent his District is not sufficient such that there is a need for the conduct of a public hearing, as well as Rep. Villafuerte?s view that there must be a time limit to the term of an SK official that an extension of two years may be a violation of the Constitution. He subsequently manifested to include a section in the Bill stating that the purpose of resetting the date of elections is to provide for an automated elections as part of the modernization program of the electoral process.
Given this aspect, Rep. Kho expressed hope that the Senate, particularly Senator Aquilino Pimentel will agree because automated election will no longer allow the manipulation of election results.
Rep. Locsin said that during the period of amendments, he will ask the Committee to study the possibility of immediately implementing the Automation Law. He thereafter affirmed that Congress had already passed the Automation Law, with him as the author thereof.
Rep. Kho surmised that under the law, the Comelec will be forced by the second Monday of May 2009 to have an automated elections.
Replying in the affirmative, Rep. Locsin clarified that the law mandates the full automation of the 2010 presidential elections. He said that 2009 will be a good time to test the law because any failure in the barangay elections can be easily remedied within the communities involved.
Rep. Locsin said that the government could not afford a failure of computerized elections for the first time in 2010 without trying it out first in 2009 as it would mean a failure of authority in the highest office of the land which is the Presidency.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. DIASNES
Thereupon, the Char recognized Rep. Carlo Oliver D. Diasnes who initially stated that he himself wants to change the barangay captains in his district and observed that the timing of the election is quite close to the very active organization of the House. He then pointed out that although barangay elections are supposed to be apolitical, Congressmen are expected to intervene and help especially their alliances in whatever way they can. He added that although he wants to give some projects to some barangays that really need help, he is tempted not to do so because the barangay captains thereat were not aligned with him in the last elections and are not that friendly and cooperative.
Rep. Diasnes then opined that based on a random sampling, the changing of the date of barangay elections might pass in the Chamber. He however inquired whether the Sponsor would be amenable to May 2008 if the proposed schedule of 2009 would not be approved.
Rep. Locsin explained that he was pressing for 2009 because the Comelec needs two years for the effective implementation of the computerized elections and because he was trying to get the support of his counterpart chairperson in the Senate. He said that the latter is also very committed to computerized elections and does not want to postpone the barangay elections unless it will be used as a vehicle for computerization.
Rep. Diasnes said that he wanted the new barangay captains to be aligned with him so that projects could be easily implemented in their barangays even as he expressed some doubt on the computerization program because it had not been pilot tested in Batanes as previously planned. He then inquired whether the Comelec would be ready by May 2008.
Rep. Locsin relayed a Comelec Commissioner?s remark that if Congress wanted a so-so job, the agency could conduct the program after one year; but that if it wanted a fine job, two years would be required. He qualified that the official was actually targeting not just the barangay elections but the barangay elections as a pilot stage which could pave the way for computerization for the presidential elections.
Rep. Locsin also opined that barangay officials would resist any reforms if they get a fresh mandate within a month but that because they currently sit in office due to Congress? tolerance of their extended terms, they will not resist any reforms Congress wishes to make in barangay and sanggunian structures within the proposed one- to two-year window.
INTERPELLATIONOF REP. GOLEZ
Upon recognition by the Chair, Rep. Golez initially said that he agrees in principle that holding the election the following month may be a little to close to the elections just held. Nevertheless, he pointed out that this was mandated by the previous Congress of which he and Rep. Locsin were Members. He inquired why the House version of the Bill was not carried in the Bicameral Conference Committee considering how persuasive the Sponsor was during the time.
Rep. Locsin explained that he simply could not sway the Senate and the House panel yielded to the Senate panel.
Rep. Golez asked whether the Sponsor could guarantee that such capitulation will not be repeated when the House faces, based on the pronouncements made by some Senators in television, a recalcitrant Senate.
Rep. Locsin committed to do his best, saying he will not agree to a monthly extension. He said that the House bills propose from one to three years. He reiterated that the game is one that two can play at and that while the House has a modest proposal to present to the Senate, the latter has far more ambitious proposals that they need to present to the House.
Noting that the schedule is October 29, Rep. Golez recalled Commissioner Tuazon?s pronouncement in a hearing the previous Monday that the proposal must already be approved before the start of the election period in September 29. He also said that the agency wants a clear signal in 10 days from the previous Monday that the elections are going to be postponed or not because there will be a chain of events already that will entail major expenditures on the part of the government
Rep. Locsin said that he had told the Comelec Commissioner not to let Congress derail its preparations and to proceed the minute it already knows who the candidates are in order to use the ballot paper that had been purchased. He concluded that everyone just has to do what they can and hope for the best.
Rep. Locsin added that he had already sent a clear signal that half the job was done. He said that the agency was very pleased because it wants a postponement as had been approved unanimously in the Committee. He opined that the Senate will not be remiss in its duties but that in anticipation of getting in their way, he will not withdraw the Bill but will bring it as far as he can which is the Senate because the House needs to know how the Senate will regard it.
On when the House will approve it on Third Reading, the Sponsor said that he has deliberately kept himself ignorant so as not to be accused of railroading it. He stressed that he has followed the procedure step by step and that he refused to follow it up in the Committee on Rules after it left the Committee.
Rep. Golez said that some, such as he, might agree to an extension of the barangay elections but sometime only in 2008.
Rep. Locsin stated that the proposal of postponing the barangay elections to 2008 has been brought up in the Committee deliberations. However, he stressed that said proposal only came in second as the proposed date of 2009 came up with the most votes and which was a majority decision of the Committee.
Assuming that he would propose an amendment and the same would not be acceptable to the Sponsor, Rep. Golez inquired whether the Members would vote on his unaccepted amendment.
Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
On whether there will be a requirement that it would be published prior to its effectivity if it becomes a law, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative, adding that it would be published 15 days before its effectivity.
Assuming that the Bill would be approved by the House next week and that the Senate would approve the same within seven days, Rep. Golez inquired whether the publication requirement would take beyond September 29, 2007 which would already be an election period and whether the point of no retreat will be reached when the Bill is passed.
Rep. Locsin said that they should not retreat and will not retreat. He opined that once the Senate approves the measure, the Comelec will realize that Congress has already decided and will stop its preparations.
On whether the plan will be feasible even sometime in October, Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative and said that he finds nothing objectionable in it.
At this point, Rep. Golez remarked that if the Chamber wanted to persuade the other House, it should use kinder and more diplomatic words as he said that he was a little uncomfortable with some words such as ?foolish House.? He opined that they will be looking at the transcript of the debate and will be disturbed by such terms.
Rep. Locsin said that he will try to be as diplomatic as he can.
Thereupon, Rep. Golez asked whether his colleague would mind the striking out of references to the other House which are not complimentary.
Rep. Locsin remarked that he found it strange that a Member can stand up for the honor of another House.
Rep. Golez clarified that he was not fighting for the honor of the other House.
Rep. Locsin stressed that that if it will help the passage of the Bill, he will agree to strike out the same. Nevertheless, he reiterated his previous remark. He pointed out that none of them had yet spoken that they found the words offensive.
Rep. Golez explained that it was not a matter of defending the other House and that it was only a practice of the golden rule. He opined that the Chamber did not want to be referred also in a very uncomplimentary way.
Rep. Locsin subsequently stressed that the other House has insulted the Chamber no end and has made fun of local bills such as a bill which names a street in honor of his/her mother who had contributed so much to the community. He added that they laugh at the Bill because their mothers never even took care of them. He said that he was swallowing his hurt and pride for the sake of his colleagues and that he bows to those who wish to champion the Senate.
Rep. Golez said that he was not familiar with the mothers being referred to. He then recalled that some Members had mentioned that the barangay elections seem to be trivialized with the repeated postponement of the elections. He agreed that such is a violation of the principle of grassroots democracy wherein the grassroots is the most important level.
Rep. Locsin opined that this was tautological. He remarked that to say that the grassroots is the most important level is obviously true because they were talking about the grass. He however said that he was talking about the principle of republican government which is governed only by the Constitution. It is a fact, he continued, that the barangay is the smallest part of government and that it is a repeated creation of the House.
He maintained that the measure extending the terms of incumbent barangay officials is in fact, a tribute of the House to the very good barangay officials and that he does not think that any Member would want to perpetuate in office an abusive barangay official. He stated that some Members, who do not like their barangay officials, are very open about it and that he is sure that the leftist finds it insulting to keep an official in office unless he/she is repeatedly beaten up in an election. He added that for some of them who are not leftists and are just pure democrats and people lovers, they take care of their barangay officials who are doing well.
Rep. Golez pointed out that in his experience, the word ?grassroots? is not in any way connected with agriculture.
Rep. Locsin countered that it is definitely not connected with constitutional democracy as he has never found it in any legal text.
Thereupon, Rep. Golez recalled that the word ?grassroots? was first used sometime in 1912 by Senator Beveridge of Indiana, referring to the practice of democracy and not to agriculture.
Rep. Locsin stated that 1912 was indeed a great period in American history where there was an attempt to break the power of the oligarchs. He stressed that they had great champions like former United States President Theodore Roosevelt, who wanted to reach down to the people to give them more power than the monied sectors of American society.
Rep. Golez pointed out however that Mr. Roosevelt was already a former President in 1912 and has nothing to do with the matter.
Rep. Locsin stated that he thought that Mr. Roosevelt was more than just an aristocrat and a rich man and was the enemy of plutocratic wealth.
Rep. Golez maintained that Mr. Theodore Roosevelt never represented the oligarchy but it was former US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Disagreeing thereto, Rep. Locsin stressed that Mr. Theodore Roosevelt was the first of the Roosevelts to fight American plutocracy as he was against concentrated wealth and that the latter also writes good adventure books.
Rep. Golez stated however that Mr. Theodore Roosevelt was more known as a police commissioner rather than an intellectual, an Indian fighter, a man who survived the so-called ?the dark places of South Dakota.? He said that it is in that period that Mr. Theodore Roosevelt became very famous but not really in politics.
Disagreeing thereto, Rep. Locsin held that Mr. Theodore Roosevelt was regarded by literary critics as one of the best writers of American prose as he had written about the American Wilderness, the Cuban War and the Spanish-American War.
Going back to his previous query, Rep. Golez reiterated whether Rep. Locsin would accept a much shorter period of the extension of the barangay elections that instead of 2009, the said elections could be held in 2008.
Rep. Locsin reiterated however that neither he nor Rep. Mar-len Abigail S. Binay has any problems with their barangays. He stated that they are only doing this for the sake of their colleagues in the House. More so, he stressed that he wants to make a case with Senator Richard Gordon that the extension of the barangay elections would be used to prepare for computerized elections. He said however that they would put the matter of shortening the period of extension to a vote and that it is fine with him if it would be held in 2008. He then confirmed that he would authorize the Chair to remove his remarks that might be offensive to the Senate as he just really wants to help his colleagues.
REMARKS OF THE CHAIR
Thereafter, the Chair directed the Secretary General to strike from the records Rep. Locsin?s remarks that might be offensive.
INTERPELLATION OF REP. GOLEZ
(Continuation)
In conclusion, Rep. Golez emphasized that he is not defending the Senate but the correct parliamentary procedure.
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), the Chair recognized Rep. Darlene R. Antonino-Custodio.
OMNIBUS MOTION OF REP. ANTONINO-CUSTODIO
On an omnibus motion of Rep. Antonino-Custodio, there being no objection, the Body elected the following as members of the Committees hereunder indicated, on the part of the Minority:
Committee on Natural Resources
1. Rep. Salvador H. Escudero III
2. Rep. Teodulo M. Coquilla
3. Rep. Teodoro A. Casi?o
Committee on Public Order and Safety
1. Rep. Teofisto DL. Guingona III
2. Rep. Teodulo M. Coquilla
3. Rep. Benjamin DR. Asilo
4. Rep. Mujiv S. Hataman
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
At this juncture, the Chair motu proprio suspended the session.
It was 8:27 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 8:27 p.m., the session was resumed.
OMNIBUS MOTION OF
REP. ANTONINO-CUSTODIO
(Continuation)
Committee on Higher and Technical Education
1. Rep. Teodoro A. Casi?o
2. Rep. Luzviminda C. Ilagan
3. Rep. Ma. Laarni L. Cayetano
4. Rep. Salvador H. Escudero III
5. Rep. Teodulo M. Coquilla
6. Rep. Teofisto DL. Guingona III
TERMINATION OF THE PERIOD
OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE
There being no interpellations and speeches en contra, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body terminated the period of sponsorship and debate.
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), the Body proceeded to the period of amendments.
TERMINATION OF THE PERIOD
OF COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
There being no Committee amendments, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body terminated the period of Committee amendments.
PERIOD OF
INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENTS
Thereafter, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the period of individual amendments.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
OF REP. VILLAFUERTE
Rep. Villafuerte proposed on line 5, starting from the word ?second? to change the year 2009 to 2008.
With the permission of the Chair, Rep. Locsin stated that he cannot accept the amendment as he has to stand by the Committee Report.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
At this point, the Chair motu proprio suspended the session.
It was 8:29 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 8:30 p.m., the session was resumed.
QUERY OF REP. GONZALES (N.)
Thereupon, Rep. Gonzales (N.) inquired whether Rep. Locsin is willing to accept the individual amendment of Rep. Villafuerte.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Thereafter, the Chair motu proprio suspended the session.
It was 8:30 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 8:33 p.m., the session was resumed.
WITHDRAWAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT
OF REP. VILLAFUERTE
Upon recognition by the Chair, Rep. Villafuerte withdrew his proposed amendment until Rep. Locsin shall have discussed further clarifications with the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms.
AMENDMENT OF REP. JOSON
Upon recognition by the Chair and with regard to form, Rep. Eduardo Nonato N. Joson stated that the sections being amended should be incorporated in the Committee Report.
With the permission of the Chair, Rep. Locsin replied that the Committee would comply with the form suggested by Rep. Joson.
As proposed by Rep. Joson and accepted by the Sponsor, there being no objection, the Body approved on line 8, to change the word ?Assumption? to the word EXTENSION, subject to style.
Thereafter, the Chair recognized Rep. Antonio T. Kho.
AMENDMENT OF REP. KHO
Rep. Kho stated that there would be another insertion of sections after Section 2 that to synchronize the barangay and SK elections, they shall be fully automated in accordance with the Election Automation Law.
As proposed by Rep. Kho and accepted by Rep. Locsin, there being no objection the Body accepted said amendment, subject to style with the proviso that the Committee could consult the Election Automation Law and make sure the provision dovetails with it.
Rep. Kho inquired whether the succeeding sections would also be amended.
Rep. Locsin replied in the affirmative.
OBJECTION OF REP. RODRIGUEZ
Rep. Rodriguez pointed out that the additional insertions would mean that the synchronized barangay and SK elections are tied up to an automated election and that if there would be no computerization, the elections would be further delayed.
With the permission of the Chair, Rep. Locsin stated that it is the reason why he wants to consult the Election Automation Law. However, he said that the mandatory fully computerized election of 2010, nonetheless, provides that there would never be a failure of elections. He added that if they could not conduct computerized election, they would revert to the manual elections.
WITHDRAWAL OF
REP. RODRIGUEZ? OBJECTION
At this point, Rep. Rodriguez withdrew his objection.
TERMINATION OF THE PERIOD
OF AMENDMENTS
There being no Committee and individual amendments, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body terminated the period of amendments.
APPROVAL ON SECOND READING
OF HOUSE BILL NO. 2417, AS AMENDED
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body approved on Second Reading House Bill No. 2417, as amended.
BUSINESS FOR THE DAY:
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 78
On further motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the consideration of House Resolution No. 78 as reported out by the Committee on Rules.
Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary General read the title of the Resolution, to wit:
?RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONGRATULATING FORMER SENA-TOR JOVITO SALONGA FOR BEING A RECIPIENT OF THE 2007 RAMON MA-GSAYSAY AWARD FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE.?
As copies of the Resolution had been distributed to the Members, on motion of Rep. Gonzales, there being no objection, the Body dispensed with the reading of the text of the measure without prejudice to its insertion into the Records of the House.
ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS FOR
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 78
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, all the Members of the House were made additional coauthors of House Resolution No. 78.
ADOPTION OF HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 78
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body unanimously adopted House Resolution No. 78.
BUSINESS FOR THE DAY:
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 188
On further motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the consideration of House Resolution No. 188 as reported out by the Committee on Rules.
Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary General read the title of the Resolution, to wit:
?RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CALL OF PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO FOR A NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER, CONVERSION, REPARATION AND CONSECRATION FOR OUR NATION.?
As copies of the Resolution had been distributed to the Members, on motion of Rep. Gonzales, there being no objection, the Body dispensed with the reading of the text of the measure without prejudice to its insertion into the Records of the House.
ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS FOR
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 188
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, all the Members of the House were made additional coauthors of House Resolution No. 188.
ADOPTION OF
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 188
On motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Body unanimously adopted House Resolution No. 188.
ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION
After commending the Members of the House for having approved the first Committee Report of the Fourteenth Congress and there being no other measures to discuss, on motion of Rep. Gonzales (N.), there being no objection, the Chair declared the session adjourned until four o?clock in the afternoon of Monday, September 10, 2007.
It was 8:42 p.m.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I hereby certify to the correctness of the foregoing.
(Sgd.) ROBERTO P. NAZARENO
Secretary General