Senator Alan Peter S. Cayetano expressed reservations on the passage of the Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) bill.
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III also said his minority block would attempt to stop the passage of the MIF bill by the pro-administration Senate.
The Senate banks committee chaired by Senator Mark A. Villar began yesterday its public hearing on the Senate MIF Bill 1670 and House (MIF) Bill 1670 which the Lower House recently approved on this reading.
Instead of conducting a public hearing on the MIF measure, Cayetano wrote Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri and Senate Majority Leader Joel Villanueva that the Upper House should focus its attention instead on “pressing issues” such as inflation, food shortages, and the high prices of basic commodities.
“My personal view is that we should have a sense of urgency and prioritize pressing issues that affect people’s daily lives (presyo, trabaho, kita at kaayusan) - such as insufficient jobs available, low wages, inflation/high prices of basic commodities such as food and fuel, drugs and peace and order - that need both short and long-term solutions,” the independent senator said in his letter, which was put on record at the plenary session on Wednesday.
Cayetano also registered his objection to the primary referral of the MIF bill to the Committee on Banks, Financial Institutions, and Currencies instead of the Committee on Government Corporations and Public Enterprises that handles proposed bills covering Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCC) and which he chairs.
Had the MIF bills been referred to the Senate GOCC Committee, Cayetano said he would have immediately held hearings and given all sides the opportunity to be heard.
“If the MIF bill would have been primarily referred to the Government Corporations committee, I would have tried to find a consensus to be able to come up with the best possible legislation on the matter at hand,” he said.
Cayetano said a closer look at the MIF bills “would reveal an intention to create - first and foremost - the Maharlika Investment Corporation (MIC), a State investment body proposed to be responsible for the overall governance and management of the MIF. Thus, the creation and investment of the MIF are contingent on the establishment of the MIC.”
He said the process of establishing the MIC would eventually involve questions affecting government corporations since the capitalization and funding of the MIF would come from other government corporations.
“Such reasoning would result in the absurd situation wherein all bills creating government corporations would no longer be primarily referred to the Committee on Government Corporation and Public Enterprises,” the senator said, citing it as a violation of Senate rules.
He also said under the current wording of the bills, the MIF would source its initial capitalization from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), which is a Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC), and through the Land Bank of the Philippines, which is a GOCC/Government Financial Institution (GFI).
Subsequent annual contributions to the fund, he added, would be sourced from the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), Philippine Amusement and Going Corporation (PAGCOR), and other government-owned gaming operations.
Another observation by Cayetano is that the presently-worded bills involve amendments to the charters of LBP, DBP, BSP, and PAGCOR, which would be within the jurisdiction of the Senate GOCC Committee.
“These new provisions, if enacted into law, are not present in the Charters of the GOCCs and would effectively amend the same. Based on the rules of the Senate, the GOCC Committee has jurisdiction over “all questions affecting GOCCs including all amendments to their charters, the interests of the government in the different industrial and commercial enterprises, and privatization,” he reasoned out.
“When the law (or rule) is clear, there is no room for interpretation. This is basic!,’’ he added.
Cayetano closed his letter by reminding his colleagues to remain independent on the controversial issue.
“I understand that any administration would prefer that a member of the administration bloc, not an independent, be chairperson of the committee to which an administration-backed bill is referred to. But the Senate should be independent,” he said.
He also said there are “numerous remedies” available to the majority if an independent or an opposition chairperson “sits on the bill, sabotages it, or in any way delays hearing it.”
Still, Cayetano said he respects the vote of the majority and indicated that he is committed to performing his duty to participate in the hearings on the matter.