|
IT was
good of Sen. Mar Roxas, one of those drawn into the fray
involving those Senate “insertions,” to make a clean
breast at the weekend of his own insertions in the 2008
budget; with a challenge for everyone else to do so,
before the “showdown” on the floor that was expected
yesterday (Monday).
In doing
so, Roxas helped remind everyone that, as Sen. Joker
Arroyo had been reminding some hypocrites, the
insertions had long been a practice in Congress and,
despite their obscene connotation, were accepted as
legal by both the lawmakers and the Executive. It helped
remind everyone that, as Roxas explained, the
“insertions” sometimes are resorted to in order to cover
for some contingency that had not been factored in when
the budget deliberations were ongoing. This is what
happened, he added, in the case of the cheaper-medicine
law, for which he made a request for an “insertion” with
the bicameral conference panel on the budget, if only to
make sure implementation of a law that was crafted with
such great pains—and acrimony—won’t be derailed by
funding problems, just because it came after the budget
process was completed.
Roxas
admitted he sought a P500-million realignment in the
2008 budget to fund the acquisition of cheaper medicine,
but the additional funding for the Department of Health
was not acted upon by the bicameral conference
committee.
In a
letter to Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, Senate finance
committee chairman, he asked them to consider realigning
P500 million from the P3-billion Kilos Asenso Fund as
additional budget for the health department’s Medicine
Procurement Program under the Cheaper Medicines Act.
The same
conference committee only approved, upon his
recommendation, P50 million as budget for the
reintegration of returning overseas Filipino workers
under the Social Protection and Welfare Program of the
Department of Labor and Employment; and another P10
million for the Bureau of Food and Drugs to buy
laboratory equipment for the implementation of the
cheaper-medicine law. He added that his request was also
approved for P90 million under the Department of Public
Works and Highways for the widening and improvement of
the heavily congested Manila-Cavite Road.
On its
face, such action by a senator cannot be painted as
ill-motivated or anywhere near malicious or selfish. He
did not stand to gain in any way from having those
requests fulfilled; not a single centavo would go
through his office. The only gain he would get, if ever,
would be political—from the goodwill ensuing from having
pushed such initiatives.
In the
same vein, therefore, the other “insertions” made by
other lawmakers may be viewed as having been made to
meet certain perceived needs of constituents. But that
assumes these insertions may be explained clearly and
simply, as Roxas did with his. Still, he has opened one
can, and it is hoped it is not overflowing with worms.
Since lawmakers have year in and year out professed good
intentions in making insertions, there should be nothing
wrong with them publicly listing and explaining them.
That way, perhaps we can find out if all the attention
and media mileage generated by Sen. Ping Lacson’s
“exposé” on the double entry of the P200-million outlay
in the 2008 budget for the C5 extension road in
Parañaque City is worth all the exertions and
aggravations. Or, whether these manifest chronic
inefficiency among congressional staff, in which case
remedial measures may be done. Or is this just a prelude
to intramurals among 2010 wannabes, with some
trigger-happy kibitzers like Sen. Jamby Madrigal thrown
in?
Meanwhile, the one good thing about this controversy is,
beyond putting all political aspirants on notice that
their public and private dealings will henceforth be
scrutinized for minutiae, it could provide civil society
some leverage in pushing budget reforms.
Last
week in this same space we praised the good, hard work
done by the Alternative Budget Initiative (ABI), a loose
coalition of various private groups that have been
watching the budget process the past three years and,
more important, truly engaging lawmakers on every aspect
of the appropriations. Such interaction has, beyond
forcing lawmakers to do their homework, heightened
public awareness about the need to make sure every
budget entry may be easily explained and is beyond
misuse.
Meantime, the controversy over the “insertions” may
temporarily derail or distract the work of some
politicians, like Senate President Villar. As he aspires
for higher office, Mr. Villar should be able to take
these on the chin and prove that he never had a hand in
any chicanery or benefited from any government
transaction. One hopes this episode is not a signal
that the rest of the season will be expended for useless
intramurals. As some senators have asserted, whistle
blowers like Senator Lacson must prove their point, not
light a fuse and then hide behind loudmouths like Jamby
Madrigal, who seems too easy to set up for these things.
In the
final analysis, the “insertions” brouhaha would be
useful only to the extent that it uncovers a genuine
scam, or, at the very least, forces all concerned to be
more circumspect in planning where tax money should go
first—and be able to explain anything they endorse for
funding. But if it is part of some political game, the
Senate should quickly resolve this matter here and now,
or risk being ambushed by some devious agenda while it’s
too busy putting out the fire. |
