Another House of Representatives official slammed the recent committee approval of two bills granting legislative franchises to water concessionaires operating in Metro Manila, saying that the two measures lacked safeguards to protect the public against “abusive and questionable” practices of the two firms.
Deputy Speaker and Bagong Henerasyon partylist Rep. Bernadette Herrera questioned the approval by the House Committee on Legislative Franchises of the franchise applications of Manila Water Company Inc. (MWC) and the Maynilad Water Services Inc (MWSI) last week.
Earlier, Deputy Speaker and Buhay Partylist Rep. Lito Atienza and Deputy Minority Leader Carlos Zarate also decried the House panel’s decision, pointing out that there was “undue haste” in its action.
During the franchise hearings, representatives from the MWSS Regulatory Office also raised concerns about the approval of the franchise applications.
Herrera said House Bills 9313 and 9367, proposing to grant legislative franchise to MWC and MWSI, respectively, should have been subjected to closer scrutiny in order to protect public welfare.
“It is becoming apparent that these bills are lacking the safeguards that are in the RCA, and it is dangerous to allow these bills through the legislative mill without further scrutiny, as to amend or revoke the franchise would then require another legislation,” she said.
She noted that the two water concessionaires have operated without security legislative franchises.
According to her the two concessionaires are considered public utilities, thus, are required to secure legislative franchises as provided under Section 11, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, according to Herrera.
Herrera noted inconsistencies between the Revised Concession Agreement (RCA) the two firms entered recently with government and the legislative franchise bills.
She noted that while the RCA confirms the continuation of the concession until July 2037 or 16 years from now, the bills seek to grant a 25-year franchise to each water concessionaire.
“If the RCA shall be the underlying basis for the concession, then why a different term under the bills,” Herrera said.
“What will happen after 2037? Will these concessionaires bid again to get the concession? If yes, then this must be stated explicitly in the franchise contract,” she added.