Parliamentary

I cannot understand our people. We are indecisive. Are we for presidential or for parliamentary government?

Since many years ago, I have always advocated for the parliamentary form of government. True, that a form of government does not matter because the one that is best administered is always the best.

And the U.S. with its presidential form is good. Because its leaders are good, its people are mature, and officials are not corrupt.

But many countries have preferred parliamentary to presidential because they found the former more advantageous. One advantage is with parliamentary government, there is no coup d'etat or government takeover by force.

When Parliament does not like the Prime Minister it just passed a vote of no-confidence. And the Prime Minister steps down.

Or if the Prime Minister believes the people are with him, he just calls for a new election, campaigns for his candidates and against those who do not like him and retains himself in power.

* * *

In the Philippines our biggest problem is not whether to have presidential or parliamentary but corruption.

We cannot have an effective government because in the estimate of many experts, nearly half of the government budget does not go to what it is intended for, but to private pockets of corrupt officials.

When the top is corrupt, all the way down becomes corrupt. Down to the barangays and even to the purok level.

Elected officials too are very sure of their tenure that they don't mind spending too much in the election because they can get back their expense any time. And the take can even be much bigger than the expense.

From the time an amount is released by Malacañang's budget management office the "cut" already starts, down to every government office the papers pass through.

And people do it with impunity. Meaning, without fear of being punished.

* * *

It has been proven that to run for President a candidate must spend billions and billions of pesos for the campaign. If he is an incumbent he diverts government funds. That's why re-election is not allowed.

But the Constitution has allowed a sitting President to run for election. This is what happened to President Arroyo being charged of spending for election the funds from the Marcos loot and the funds allotted for fertilizer of farmers.

Challengers get contributions from monied people and businessmen. And these people contribute in exchange for future favors at the expense of the public.

A big contributor may be allowed to smuggle goods and the Customs people are told just to close their eyes or look the other way. Or he gets appointed to a high lucrative position where he can easily get back his investments.

Or he gets sweetheart deals for his businesses. In the end they get back the amount many times over.

* * *

In the parliamentary government one runs in his district. He becomes prime minister if his fellow parliamentarians choose him to be the prime minister. They can also dismiss him if they don't like him anymore.

But if the prime minister calls for a new election, then they all run again. And because the election may be held any time, he will think twice before spending a big amount because without recovering his expenses there might be another election.

So, because the officials did not spend much, he will not aspire to get more. And the opportunity to steal is much less.

And there is no gridlock. Congressmen allocate for themselves a big amount of pork barrel and make it hard for the President in order to bargain for what they ask for. In parliamentary, the executive and the legislative are one.

With our top officials being corrupt, everybody down the line becomes corrupt too. And how can the top officials run after them because they themselves are doing it.

* * *

Of course, there are also corrupt people in the parliamentary form of government. No government is corrupt free. But in parliamentary, it is minimal.

When corruption seeps down into even the judiciary and the Comelec and Commission on Audit, the country is helpless. No election will be credible with a corrupt Comelec. That's where the problems start, from questionable election processes.

Let us all go for the parliamentary form of government.

* * *

Small Town Lottery will be back? This is a sure way of impoverishing the countryside. Our Church people must make a stand.

Because of a hard life, people resort to gambling in the hope of striking it rich. No, they will be impoverished because their chance of winning is very slim. STL is one way of robbing the poor. It is a highway robbery.

The way it looks Malacañang is bent on pushing STL through.*

back to top