GOVERNANCE MATTERS
Former Vice President Jejomar Binay
The speaker appears to have managed to quiet down the recent unrest among his peers in the House of Representatives, but not without again laying bare – like a gaping wound on our body politic – his long-held obsession with power and pork.
According to reports, the cause of the unrest was the lopsided distribution of infrastructure projects in the 2022 budget, heavily tilted in the direction of the speaker and his chosen allies. According to most accounts, the speaker was awarded with P8 billion in projects, while a trusted ally generously received P11 billion. The hefty sums dwarfed the allocations for other congressional districts, most of them bigger in size and population than the speaker’s.
But the ouster move did not push through. Backroom talks were reportedly hastily arranged and deals quietly sealed. For some observers, the speaker was never under any real threat of being removed. The irate congressmen merely wanted his attention. At best, the ”coup talks” were a stern reminder from his colleagues that he occupies the speakership because he has, so far, managed to make them fulfilled and content with his trademark generosity with taxpayers’ money. There should be no sudden favoritism in dispensing congressional earmarks, especially with the elections looming.
As expected, the speaker did not let a good crisis go to waste. He used this supposed challenge to his leadership as a pretext to accuse another solon, with whom he has entered into a term sharing agreement, of masterminding the plot. The speaker’s men have now aggressively mounted a call to scrap the term-sharing accord. The current speaker’s term is set to expire by end of October. But why replace the leadership, they argued, when the congressmen are “happy” with the current one. Never mind if the agreement, when it was brokered by no less than the national leadership, was presented to the public as a gentlemen’s agreement. But as partylist Rep. Lito Atienza sums it up pointedly: “Kung hindi ka tutupad sa usapang lalake, hindi ka lalake.”
While the honorable members of the House bicker and deal over infrastructure projects amounting to billions during a pandemic, the Education Department is saying that public school students would have to share printed learning materials next year because the department lacks the budget to print sufficient copies. The Social Welfare Department will not be able to provide cash aid for the poor next year because such an item was not included in the budget. And some officials have admitted that their respective agencies might not have enough funds to assist various sectors affected by the pandemic and the lockdown-induced economic recession.
During times of national crisis, public officials are expected to behave in a manner that elevates country and people above the personal and political. Their behavior should transcend the realm of rhetoric. The deeds of our officials during moments of crisis offer a greater window into their character.
The speaker has failed this test. Instead of helping the poor by recrafting the executive’s budget, he avails of the powers of his office to dispense billions in infrastructure projects for himself and his chosen ones. Instead of helping the country heal as one, he leads the lower chamber on a full assault on basic democratic rights. He transforms the chamber into a forum to intimidate and harass political enemies, a practice he perfected during his term as senator. The spectacle of the Speaker and his colleagues clashing over their share of taxpayers’ money is not a pleasant sight to behold, especially when the country is in the midst of a recession and millions are hungry and out of work.
Some observers point out that the speaker’s public career has been built on an outsized sense of entitlement and privilege, his unsurpassed mastery of duplicity and hypocrisy, double-talk and deception.
He quotes the Scriptures in a manner that will shame the most ardent preacher, yet his actions devalue the sacredness of the Holy Word. He does not represent or advocate deeply held convictions and values. His personal interests are his North Star. One thing that stands out is his devotional loyalty, if not outright sycophancy, to whoever political leader can best satisfy his needs and desires. But once the said leader has outlived his or her purpose – or finds his or her political star flickering – the Speaker has been known to drop his loyalty. He even publicly condemns or ridicules his former benefactors. This is the main argument, so say some informed sources, why he is looked upon with suspicion by groups within the present regime.
Such a political creature had never existed before. In this regard, the speaker is sui generis. And that should not be taken as a constructive remark.