|
I don’t exactly recall when or where I first heard it, but
“Republika ng Pila-pinas” aptly describes our national
situation—thanks to the political gimmickry that the
administration has resorted to in the face of very serious problems.
In its bid to prevent the rice-price shock, the
skyrocketing fuel prices and exorbitant power rates from
degenerating into yet another political crisis, Malacañang has
resorted to several “impact” projects designed to portray itself
as a compassionate administration.
Rice priced artificially below market
levels—thanks to heavy state subsidies sourced from taxpayers’
money—is retailed in low-income communities. The authorities have
yet to give a full accounting of just how much of the people’s
money has been spent and continues to be spent for this project.
At many filling stations are public-utility
vehicle lanes that dispense diesel priced a few pesos lower than
exactly the same fuel sold to other motorists—again, thanks to
subsidies raised from the taxes the rest of us pay. Some P3 billion
in taxpayer pesos go to this diesel subsidy every quarter.
Consumers who used up 100 kilowatt-hours or less
in May bring their electric bills to Land Bank branches for their
one-time P500 handout. The administration claims that the P2-billion
earmarked for their handout comes from the P18-billion
“windfall” in oil VAT collections.
The officials in charge of these projects insist
that they give financial relief to the poorest of the poor. However,
the immediate effect of these undertakings are long queues of
expectant beneficiaries—who complain far more often about how
difficult it is for them to get their handouts than express their
gratitude to their benefactors.
These impact projects also have far-reaching
consequences, which only worsen rather than solve the root of the
problems they purportedly address.
The bulk of the cheap rice that the National
Food Authority retails in poor neighborhoods comes from countries
like Thailand and Vietnam, whose farmers grow rich from the grains
they export to the Philippines. Rather than support Filipino palay
growers, the government’s multibillion-peso rice importation
program merely enriches foreign rice producers and traders.
The diesel subsidies only encourage public
utility vehicle operators to hang on to their smoke-belching
engines, rather than shift to cleaner, more fuel-efficient motors.
Result: worsening air pollution, especially in urbanized areas.
The P500 handout to so-called “lifeline”
electricity consumers, as Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel
Jr. has pointed, all too often goes to other—sometimes
frivolous—expenses.
The opposition leader noted that there is no way
to ensure that lifeline consumers use the P500 dole for paying their
power bills. “In fact, they can spend the amount for anything
else, including liquor, cigarette or illegal drugs in the absence of
any clear-cut guidelines in the distribution of the money,” he
said.
Pimentel said that if President Arroyo is really
sincere in easing the financial burden of the poor, the better and
more practical approach is to suspend or scrap altogether the
12-percent value-added tax (VAT) on the monthly power bills of
residential users and the additional 12-percent VAT on the system
losses that are being charged against them.
He faulted Malacañang for its persistent
objection to a bill in Congress that seeks to lift the VAT on power
even if temporarily. Pimentel argued that since diesel fuel and
natural gas, which are used to run power plants, are already subject
to 12-percent VAT the power generated and sold to consumers should
no longer be levied the same tax.
Pimentel, however, raised a far more crucial
issue: the lifeline handouts were never approved by Congress, which
has the sole power of purse according to the Constitution.
Notwithstanding the administration’s compassionate posturing, the
President is not exempt from the constitutional rule that all public
expenditures should have prior congressional approval.
“Of course, the people in times of financial
difficulties may be happy for receiving the cash dole-out,”
Pimentel said. “But the President should be reminded that she
cannot play Robin Hood and disburse public funds just like that
without complying with the requirements of the Constitution and
appropriation laws.”
Earlier, former National Treasurer Leonor
Briones branded as illegal Mrs. Arroyo’s order to set aside P2
billion as subsidy for small electricity consumers. Briones, a
public administration professor at the University of the
Philippines, pointed out that the handout is not covered by an
appropriations law.
Briones warned that the President may be liable
for impeachment if she is found to have violated the constitutional
provision that all government disbursements should be covered by
national budget laws.
Mrs. Arroyo has survived several impeachment
attempts. Her political allies apparently still control the House of
Representatives, where by law any bid to impeach her must originate.
Threats of impeachment evidently do not bother her.
But as the economic situation worsens and as her
administration responds with gimmicks instead of long-term
solutions, how much longer can the President feel invulnerable?
As state funds are squandered in heavily
subsidized impact projects—and ultimately dry up, how much longer
can she keep her congressional alliances?
dansoy26@yahoo.com
|
