|
THE grip
on the speakership of Lakas Rep. Jose de Venecia Jr. of
Pangasinan has never been threatened since he assumed
the post the first time. He has taken it effortlessly
four times.
He has
been unchallenged, indeed, until the 81-year-old
Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino Rep. Pablo Garcia of
Cebu came into
the picture. Garcia, whose grip on Cebu means he has
been critical in the making of presidents.
Seeking
his fifth term when Congress opens on July 23, de
Venecia and his allies have started to feel the heat so
that almost every day, congressmen loyal to him are
issuing statements praising him and most of the time
“hitting” Garcia, a move exuberantly reciprocated by the
latter’s camp.
The word
war recently took an uglier turn, prompting Liberal
Party Rep. Abraham Mitra of Palawan to call for a
“cease-fire,” and saying that if the mudslinging
continues, whoever wins in the end will be damaged
goods, his reputation destroyed in a contest that is
supposedly civil because it is among friends. Mitra,
however, belongs to the Liberal Party which has
apparently bolted the opposition after riding the anti-GMA
sentiment to victory in the last election, so as to join
the most stalwart of GMA’s supporters, the Garcia
dynasty in Cebu. In exchange, the Liberal Party expects
to receive the leadership of the minority in the next
Congress, although it is one of the smallest groups in
the United Opposition. In short, it will be gifted the
minority leadership by the majority victory, assuming
this will be a Speaker Pabling Garcia.
The
“psychological warfare” has become so intense that de
Venecia’s camp recently came up with full-page paid
advertisement virtually claiming the speakership race
over by publishing the signatures of an overwhelming
number of congressmen who will vote for him on the first
day of the 14th Congress.
Garcia’s
camp lamely said the advertisement was deceiving because
the congressmen who signed the advertisement were only
articulating their support for his 12-point economic
action plan, but not for his bid for the speakership.
The ad
of the Garcia camp said that many of the congressmen who
signed the manifesto did not fully read the declaration,
and missed that portion where they were supposed to
express “support” for de Venecia. This only confirmed
former Speaker Ramon Mitra’s famous quip that
congressmen will sign any paper shoved under their
noses, “even toilet paper.” The congressmen were
offended. Of course they meant their signatures as a
vote for Joe—but for how long? And will it hold in a
secret balloting for the speakership?
The
following is a report on a no-holds-barred,
free-wheeling interview with the “challenger,” Rep.
Pablo Garcia, conducted by BusinessMirror reporter
Fernan Marasigan.
It
appears that de Venecia’s camp has never been this
threatened, considering there was never so much noise
created when the speakership was contested in past
Congresses. Why is this so?
This is
because this is the first time that there is a serious
contender for the speakership. In the past the
speakership was challenged just for the sake of
challenging it. There were no serious contenders.
That’s
right. For instance, in the 13th Congress, Speaker de
Venecia actually picked the minority chief. It was a
toss-up between Chiz Escudero and Ronnie Zamora. He
picked Chiz because Ronnie’s brother, Manny, is awash
with cash, so Ronnie would be uncontrollable. That is
why the minority then was divided behind the scenes
between the “reasonable” and the “unreasonable” critics
of GMA.
Is that
a fact?
It is.
Okay, so how confident are you that you can beat de
Venecia?
If I
couldn’t make it, I’d have quit the race long time ago.
When I had a meeting with the President, I told her that
there is no turning back.
What
about the 177 congressmen whom de Venecia claimed are on
his side? We have seen the originals. They are a lot.
Only one withdrew his signature, Amado Bagatsing.
You know
this is just Joe’s psywar (psychological warfare). The
truth is he knew that he does not have the numbers, that
is why he is engaging in propaganda and mind
conditioning. It is also why he is afraid of secret
balloting for the choice of Speakership.
That’s
never been done, Joe says. It is antidemocratic.
Not
true. It is done in
Canada
and other modern democracies. It is only in popular
elections where balloting should be secret, to protect
the voter from retaliation.
But it
is the essence of democratic responsibility to vote
openly on all questions that come before the public and
there is no question more open than whom a
representative picks to lead the Congress as Speaker.
But you
don’t get the real choices that way given Filipino
attitudes. Filipinos are confrontational and friendship
is a very strong factor. It would be better to have
secret balloting so it is not personal.
But it
would be opportunistic. Those who vote against the
winner can still claim favors from him. Anyway, how
would your secret balloting work out. And what is its
impact on the so-called real minority, the anti-GMA
opposition. You know Joe de Venecia has given them the
assurance that no matter how the Speakership vote goes
on the first day of Congress, if he loses he will
surrender the minority leadership to the Genuine
Opposition and step aside completely. But you want to
assume the minority leadership.
I see
nothing wrong with that. But I am prepared to yield the
minority leadership to the opposition if I lose a secret
ballot.
That
would be a pity because if you lose and step aside, that
means the minority will be very tiny because the
electorate rejected all but a small number of
oppositionists for House seats. And if quorum ceases to
be a problem, then the minority will be completely
inconsequential. Wouldn’t it be better if you stuck it
out with the minority if you lost so that the minority
would not be so pitifully small?
Okay,
how is that secret ballot going to be conducted?
In all
party caucus.
Including the opposition parties? Do they get to vote
for you or Joe de V?
That’s
the idea. Everyone votes. Then whoever between us comes
out the winner, will be the only candidate of the
majority at the opening of Congress against the
candidate of the minority from the Genuine Opposition.
Let us
explore the idea of the minority voting with most of the
majority to elect the Speaker, leaving a part of
majority as the minority. Roilo Golez thinks it is
anomalous.
We
effectively had it in the time of Cory Aquino. I was in
the House. We belonged to her party. She sent us the
agrarian reform bill. We didn’t like it. We shot it
down. It happens in the US, too.
So the
minority in the House need not be the political
opposition to the administration. It is just the
opposition to the majority in the House, like the
Republican Right-wing voting down the Republican
president’s immigration reform legislation as too
lenient.
Correct.
But why
are you challenging Joe de V?
We need
change in the House, in the way the House is run. We
need more transparency, a serious approach to the way
the House is run. Look at the membership in each of the
key committees, almost as many as there are members of
Congress. Appropriations had over 150. How do you get a
quorum? And look at the number of committees.
How come
we question the budgets of all the departments of the
Executive, but no one is allowed to question the budget
of the House. We should constitute the House as a
committee of the whole and openly consider its budget.
Where the money goes, who it goes to. Where the money
went, who it went to.
Can’t
that be done in camera, in executive session, so the
public doesn’t know?
Okay, if
you want that but why hide it.
If the
House had fewer committees, as you propose, then fewer
congressmen would enjoy the additional power and perks
of heading a committee, which is a way of supplementing
both the income of the congressman and the staff he
needs to function well. And also making him more
important.
Then the
solution is to pay the congressmen better and give them
more staff. When I started in Congress, the House budget
was smaller than a billion pesos and the staff allocated
was just six. That includes your driver. Today, the
budget is over three billion pesos and the staff of a
congressman is still six. Out of the three billion over
a billion is unaccounted for.
Well,
all the more reason to divide and subdivide the
committees so as to get more positions and more income
for each congressman.
Why not
pay him more and increase his staff, to, say, 20? Be
open about it. It is what will make the congressman more
effective.
But
paying congressmen more and giving them more staff does
not mean equitably distributing the, you know, other
“stuff” that only chairmen get, especially in the
Committees of Appropriations and Ways and Means, where
they get more projects and more attention from
businessmen wanting to avoid taxes.
That is
for the chairmen and the committee members to work out
for themselves. But I am proposing not just fewer
committees but, to balance that, more subcommittees with
the kind of autonomy and power that Senate and House
subcommittees in the US Congress enjoy.
But no
matter how many subcommittees and subcommittee
chairmanships there are under fewer committees, it is
the handful of committee chairmen who will have the last
say on what a measure, for example, will finally
contain. So they will still be the only ones who will
count and will get to count the perks, so to speak.
Not if
we organize it like in the US where a subject matter is
broken up and each part is handled by a different
subcommittee whose recommendations are final and cannot
be tampered with by the mother committee.
Totoo?
That’s
how it is done there. The committee chairman cannot just
substitute his own ideas for the subcommittees’ final
contributions to the measure. Any changes need to go
back to the subcommittee concerned and decided on by
them.
Not
here. Even the draft of the proposed Constitution in the
13th Congress Cha-cha and People’s Initiative kept
changing from day to day depending on the literary mood
of Congressman [Constantino] Jaraula.
[Shakes
his head].
And only
the minority can question the budget or any measure
because if you are with the majority you are deemed to
be for anything the majority supports.
That’s
nonsense. Where did you get that?
The
House of de Venecia.
Is it in
the rules?
No. Now
you are asking me questions.
A
congressman must be independent. He answers to his
constituents. He can do what he wants; he can question
when and whatever he pleases. That is what a Congress is
all about.
And that
Cha-cha was a catastrophe. I told the President. I told
Joe de Venecia. This is wrong. It is a prescription for
the destabilization of the presidency. That is what it
is. And look at the constitutional changes Joe wanted.
The President would be transitional and must step down
in 2010 but the members of Congress can stay on until
they decide to step down. Meanwhile they can impeach the
President to compel her to devolve more and more
executive powers to the prime minister. That is why I am
challenging Joe, to clarify what is really the majority
administration party, who are for GMA? I worry about the
President. What will happen to her after she steps down?
Who will protect her from her enemies? The Lakas?
At the
cocktail thrown by Amado Bagatsing for you, you said
that the next president must be friendly to this
president, but you cannot depend on friendship or
gratitude. The next president must be powerless to hurt
her.
Your
words. And that is why we need to know who are the
majority who will stand by the President. We in
Cebu need to know
because we like this president. Did you know that we
bucked the trend throughout the country and the leading
opposition candidates trailed at the bottom in Cebu?
Let’s go
back to the way the House does business. In the last
days of the last Congress, there was a quorum to submit
the Cheaper Medicine Act, passed on second reading, to
the formality of a third reading. It was not submitted
until there was quorum. This was questioned. The
majority floor leader said it was his prerogative to
decide what bill goes for a vote and what doesn’t.
Wrong.
There is a priority to the submission of bills for
voting that does not depend on the whim of anybody. If a
bill is ripe for final vote, it takes precedence.
We’re
finishing up. How would you describe the ongoing
speakership race compared to the past Congress?
This is
a real battle. This is very exciting and interesting.
So if
you win the speakership, what do you intend to do? What
are your plans for the House of Representatives?
If
elected Speaker, my first agenda will be institutional
reforms. I’ll make the House of Representatives a more
transparent, responsive and responsible Congress. It
should truly be the House of the People. There are so
many things that need to be done like mending the
relationship with the Senate, solve the lack of quorum
in the House, ensure transparency and equity in
disbursements of funds and streamlining and
rationalization of committee chairmanships which was
bloated beyond recognition during Joe’s time.
Besides
these, if elected speaker, what will be your first order
of the day?
I will
lead by example. You see the Speaker should lead by
example—a practice that never happened during Joe’s
time.
What
makes you different from de Venecia?
I have
no personal and political agenda that is why I will be
open for public scrutiny.
How
would you describe de Venecia who like you is an ally of
Mrs. Arroyo?
I could
feel it in my bones, the adventures and misadventures of
Joe. As I said, when I advised him that Charter change
is a prescription for destabilization, he did not
listen. Did Joe think about this? Joe is not a loyal
ally of the President. Joe is for Joe. |