Alvarez floats ‘No-El 2019’ scenario

SPEAKER Pantaleon Alvarez yesterday raised the possibility that no election would be held in 2019 because of the proposed shift to a federal form of government, which is the top priority of the House of Representatives this year.

Alvarez said the proposed changes to the Constitution as approved by Congress sitting as a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) may be submitted to the people in a plebiscite in May, simultaneously with the barangay and the Sangguniang Kabataan elections.

“Anything is possible if we’ll just work on it,” he told ANC. “Let’s be practical. Once nag-shift into a different form of government, unitary to federal, you need a transition government.”

The Speaker, however, said everything depends on what will be agreed upon by congressmen and senators once they convene as a Con-Ass.

“There will be a transitory provision. It will provide when the terms of incumbent officials will expire and when they will be due for elections (under the new federal setup),” he said.

Alvarez said it is just “incidental” that incumbent elected officials would benefit from the possible election postponement because of the transition phase.

The terms of 12 senators will expire in 2019 while the rest will be in 2022, Alvarez noted, adding that it will be better to just have all their terms expire in 2022 for a smooth transition.

“I think it will be best if all the terms will expire in 2022 so that there will be no more unused terms anymore,” he said.

The administration gave up on the proposed election of delegates to a constitutional convention (Con-Con) in favor of convening Congress as con-ass because con-con will require a huge funding, ranging from P6 to P7 billion, on top of the budget for the salaries and office maintenance.

The administration was initially eyeing to hold the plebiscite simultaneously with the 2019 midterm elections, with the end in view of shifting to a federal-parliamentary form of government by 2022.

President Duterte has already created a 25-man consultative committee to review the 1987 Constitution to pave the way for the eventual shift to federalism.

Rep. Karlo Nograles (PDP-Laban, Davao City), chair of the House committee on appropriations, said the top priority of the 17th Congress “is to usher in a federalized Philippines in 2018.”

“Over 16 million Filipinos gave their stamp of approval to this endeavor when they elected President Rodrigo Duterte, who has championed federalism since Day One,” he said. “The con-ass is designed to maximize the output of legislators while focusing on a specific goal, which is to federalize the government.”

NOTHING TO FEAR

Alvarez acknowledged the concerns of senators who are against the possible dissolution of the Senate under a federal setup, saying they could still run for the new legislature.

He also reminded the senators that the country used to be under a unicameral system and will only be returning to it under a new and improved system.

“Let’s revisit Philippine history. Originally, we were under a unicameral setup so what are we worried about? They (senators) can still run. Can they only run for senators? They can run as members of whatever legislative branch that will be created under the new Constitution. They can even run for President or whatever (position),” Alvarez said.

Alvarez is confident of the support of the supermajority for con-ass but said he has no idea if majority of senators are for it, too.

“This is a question of patriotism. Let’s do what is right and what the country needs now,” the Speaker said.

Alvarez, likewise, recognized another road block in the proposed shift to federalism which is the manner by which the two chambers of Congress will vote on the changes – either jointly or separately.

While he believes the assembly should vote jointly, Alvarez said the matter may reach the Supreme Court once the constitutional issue becomes “justiciable.”

‘CAT IS OUT’

But Rep. Tom Villarin (PL, Akbayan), a member of the seven-man opposition bloc, said: “The cat is out of the bag. It reveals the true intentions of the Duterte administration to perpetuate themselves in power.”

“It speaks volumes of how they have arrogated power unto themselves and instilled fear upon the people who oppose their position,” he said.

Villarin questioned the timing of the Speaker’s statement, saying it “provides shock value that Speaker Alvarez hopes will pan out and be accepted by the public – this is totally unacceptable in a democracy and people must resist this public pronouncement.”

“This is self-serving and blatantly undemocratic. Amending our Constitution to extend the term of politicians acting as a sovereign body to tinker with our charter leads us to unchartered waters. It is very dangerous and will lead to political instability,” said the opposition lawmaker.

Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III dismissed the possibility of a no-election scenario next year.

“That is not an “either-or” situation. We can shift to federalism and allow all scheduled elections under the existing Constitution to go on and be held. What is important are the transitory provisions which will govern the terms and duties of those elected in the last election under the 1987 Constitution,” he said in a text message to reporters.

Pimentel explained that before a new Constitution becomes operational, the provisions of the existing one must be followed.

“Hence, if there are scheduled elections under the existing Constitution, then this must be followed,” he added.

Pimentel said President Duterte’s six-year tem may be extended by three years “if really necessary during the transitory period” under the shift to federalism.

“We can extend the President’s term if really necessary and if he is amenable to it and since the extension will be part of the new constitution, the new constitution should be approved by the people themselves,” he said.

He said if the new Constitution will be approved next year, the next three years will be the transition period.

Duterte’s six-year term will end in 2022. – With Ashzel Hachero

Pancake House Classic Pancake and Max's Fried Chicken

Things seem to be looking up in 2018…but don’t hold your breath

Let’s take stock of what are lined up to be achieved to make travelling or commuting around, to and from the metro and to other areas in the country before the term of this administration comes to an end—successfully or disastrously.

In line with the government’s Build, Build, Build program to usher in the “golden age of infrastructure” aimed to provide connectivity of the rural areas to key cities and to ultimately solve the perennial traffic in the metro, several projects, some mega in size, have been lined up by the Department of Transportation (DOTr).

Considered one of the most effective means to transport people, goods and services from the countryside to the metro and back, the railway system has taken center stage with the DOTr’s launching of the project to extend the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system to nearby areas in Metro Manila.

The LRT Line 1 Extension has started construction, extending the rail line from Baclaran to Niog in Bacoor, Cavite and aims to serve 300,000 riders per day from Parañaque, Las Piñas and Cavite once completed by the fourth quarter of 2021.

Meanwhile, the LRT Line 2 East Extension Project involves the construction of a four-kilometer extension of the existing system from Santolan, Pasig to Masinag, Antipolo. It is expected to reduce travel time to Recto, Manila from three hours by 30 to 40 minutes once completed by August this year.

Simultaneously, the DOTr also signed an agreement with Mitsubishi Corporation for the purchase of 120 new light rail vehicles for the railway system, with each train having a minimum of 1,388 passengers.

Then, there is the very ambitious Mega Manila Subway Project (MMSP), which is a 25-kilometer subway system envisioned to be an underground mass transportation system connecting major business districts and government centers. It is expected to serve 370,000 passengers daily in its opening year and targeted to start its partial operations by fourth quarter of 2027.

The construction of the first phase of the MMSP, which is expected to start as early as the third quarter of this year would cost P355.6 billion. Financed through an Official Development Assistance from Japan, it’s designed to have 14 stations from Mindanao Avenue, QC to the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.

Things are looking up for 2018?

Having been where I am for the past three decades, broadcasting and writing about motoring issues that involve transport and traffic management since the revolutionary government of President Cory Aquino to the present regime, I can’t help the feeling of déjà vu whenever a new administration takes over and announces the litany of things that are targeted to be done.

Having seen many promises ending by the wayside destined to be empty political stances or failed efforts due to nuisance TROs or government oversights in working out the rights of way, I have learned not to hold my breath lest I suffocate myself waiting for promised deeds to see their fruition.

All I do now, which I also urge everyone to do is to hope and pray always for our country’s best—great way to manage our expectations.

But let’s give it a chance!

They didn’t know what hit them!
Through the many years working closely with the automotive industry, I have inevitably established close professional and personal friendships both with its short-term expats and more so with career employees, most of whom I have seen grown from mid-level managers to top rank executives. As two-way trust has been established conversations need not be discerned between what’s on and off the record. And some of such conversations centered on the recently approved TRAIN (Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion), the final and approved version of which came as a surprise (that’s putting it mildly) to many in the automotive industry.

Industry observers who are not from within were also close to being aghast to what finally came out—what was seen to be a tax reform law that was designed to heavily tax luxury vehicles came out seeming to slash prices instead. On the other hand, prices of basic utility vehicles, which more of the car-buying public could afford are expected to go up.               

Many that are within the automotive industry who are negatively affected by the newly approved tax law are understandably mum about what they feel but instead are coming out with motherhood statements for their full support. I mentioned the trust that I have earned from many of my friends in the industry and I don’t intend to compromise my long-established relation with a lot of them by naming names. But I feel as a friend and a journalist, whose main concern is to bring out what’s true, it is my obligation to ventilate some of their feelings, major of which is, “They didn’t know what hit them.”

I understand that during the early deliberations, when major vehicle manufacturers and importers were being consulted by the legislators, the tone of the discussions was more of protecting the prices of vehicles that are affordable to those who buy for their necessity and heavily tax models that are considered as “toys of the rich.” What seemed to be approved was a law that would result to exactly the opposite.

I have asked my staff to come up with simulations of how the new tax law would impact on the future prices of automobiles and compare them with other published ones to see the common grounds. The combined simulations simply show that the more expensive the luxury vehicles are, the bigger the price reduction, while those models that are more affordable for the less affluent or the common motorist would have their selling prices going up.

I’m not saying that the law is flawed. I’m not in a position to come out with such a judgment. I can only ask if this is indeed the purpose of reforming the present tax structure.

And for my friends engaged in premium luxury vehicles, please bear with me. Knowing your business ethics, I’m more than convinced that you are not at all gloating over the misfortune of those who have been negatively affected by your “manna from heaven.” And of course, understandably, why should you ask or complain?

What I understood—and of course I could be wrong—was that the government wanted to unburden the less affluent of the populace of income taxes and in order to offset the government income lost from this laudable exercise, the government would burden the more affluent with additional taxes. But economic experts who are saying that the newly approved law is not going to achieve that are currently not few in numbers. And doing the simple math for the auto industry shows that’s not what’s going to happen.

Anong nangyari?

I can only ask, I cannot judge.

Happy Motoring!!!