Skip to main content

How a Parliamentary Philippines Setup Would've Better Discussed Economics and Agriculture

No gossip, no hearsay, face-to-face debates,
liars are slapped in the parliamentary system!

Right now, I'm still a member of the CoRRECT Movement Moderated Public Forum. For me, I'm really "trolling" the boomers since they're the ones spreading disinformation. Facebook has some interesting fights such as Diehard Duterte Supporters (DDS) vs. Dilawan (Yellow). Today, we have the whole Marcos vs. Robredo dichotomy. Some Dilawans (now termed as Kakampinks, a combination of kakampi meaning comrade and pink). Fortunately, CoRRECT Movement now has some Kakampinks for constitutional reform. I'll never forget how a blatant Yellow, Charles Edward P. Celdran aka Carlos Cedran, had been an advocate for constitutional reform. Meanwhile, some Kakampinks still need education as to how a parliamentary system will work. Previously, I wrote an article on that which discusses why the Philippines should become a parliamentary republic.

Some say that we can just focus on better economic policies but not a change in governance. Some cite that the Philippines can remove the economic restrictions and still boom. They cite South Korea (where presidents only serve one term for five years) and Taiwan (which is semi-presidential). However, I aim that the Philippines, to become another Singapore, should really shift to a parliamentary system. A certain bitter Kakampink still think it's just a "pipe dream". Other Kakampinks are whining and saying that things would be "much better" if former Philippine vice president, Atty. Maria Leonor Sto. Tomas Gerona-Robredo, was the Philippine president right now. If they wanted to give her a chance, a parliamentary system would be better because it's not a winner takes all scenario. Instead, we would have a better representation. 

Economist Andrew James Masigan makes his political views no secret. Masigan and I belong to different spectrums (and I personally want to meet and talk with him). Masigan mentions the following regarding charter change and why a parliamentary system would make it better:

FEDERAL-PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT

As mentioned earlier, the Duterte administration plans to a shift our form of government from a Unitary-Presidential form to a Federal-Parliamentary form. To better appreciate how a Federal-Parliamentary system works, it s best to look at it in contrast to a Federal-Presidential system.

A Federal-Presidential system offers no change to the current system where the President is elected through a national election and heads the executive branch. He has no sway on the judicial or legislative branches except through party-line influence. The United States operates under a Federal-Presidential framework.

A Federal-Parliamentary system , on the other hand, encourages people to vote according to political parties. Here, the citizens elect their Members of Parliament (their representatives), most often, based on the ideology of the party they belong to, not on their personalities. The party with the most number of elected representatives is declared “the parliament.” The parliament elects its Prime Minister (PM) from among themselves. The PM, in turn, selects the members of his Cabinet (his ministers) from among the members of the parliament.

There are multiple advantages to this. First, the system does away with expensive and divisive presidential elections. It puts an end to the vicious cycle of presidential candidates resorting to corruption and incurring political debts just to raise funds for their campaign.

Even the poor can run for office so long as they are capable. This is because elections are funded by the party. In a federal-parliamentary system, we do away with people who win on the back of guns goons and gold.

Moreover, since the members of parliament selects the Prime Minister, they can easily remove him through a vote of no-confidence should he fail to fulfill his mandate. We do away with the tedious process of impeachment. And since the ministers are selected from the Parliament, no one gets a free ticket to the Cabinet just because they are friends with the President or nominated by a political ally. The ministers all have mandates and are accountable not only to the PM but to their constituents.

The parliament is a unicameral legislative body. Thus, bills can be made into law faster and cheaper.

A parliamentary system is one where a “shadow Cabinet” exists. A shadow Cabinet is the corresponding, non-official Cabinet composed of members of the opposition. Each Cabinet minister has a shadow equivalent who is mandated to scrutinize every policy done by the official minister. The shadow minister may offer alternative policies which can be adopted if it is deemed superior.

In the end, the systems allows policies to be better thought out with appropriate safeguards to protect the interest of the people.

Among the seven wealthiest democracies (the G7 nations), only US and France follow a presidential system. the rest subscribe to a parliamentary system.

The intentions of charter change is good. Done right, it could be a game changer for the nation.

How will a parliamentary system make discussing the current economic issues easier?


This is an illustration of what should've been. The colors here made me imagine the Government section is held by Prime Minister Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. and Deputy Prime Minister Sara Z. Duterte-Carpio. Meanwhile, the colors pink and blue should've represented Opposition Leader Maria Leonor S. Gerona-Robredo and Deputy Opposition Leader Francis Pangilinan. The Government is ran by Uniteam. The Opposition is ran by the Liberal Party of the Philippines. It's never a winner takes all scenario. Sticking to the presidential system means sticking to a scenario where winner takes all. Instead, it wouldn't be a winner-takes-all scenario.

How will the pink opposition work? Mrs. Robredo is given the task of scrutinizing the Marcos Jr. Not only that, Mrs. Robredo has the entire Liberal Party of the Philippines with her to serve as her cabinet. Marcos Jr. will have his own cabinet of appointees. Each of Marcos Jr.'s appointees will be mirrored by Mrs. Robredo. Every minister of a specific function will have a shadow minister of a specific function. The scrutiny will be done on a weekly basis. The job of the Opposition is to offer alternatives that will be adopted if deemed superior. It means that the Opposition isn't going to be, "They make the solutions, not us!" Instead, the Opposition is, "Instead, we propose we do this instead."

The weekly question hour is aired live every week. It means screwing up on live television can be very embarassing. Looking at the news with Marcos Jr. makes me wish, "If only we were a parliamentary system." If only more Kakampinks will realize that a parliamentary system would've given them a better chance. Mrs. Robredo would have her mandatory duty to scrutinize Marcos Jr. because she's the Opposition Leader. Marcos Jr. would have the responsibility to show the Opposition that he's fit to be the prime minister of the Philippines. If a member of the Government fails to uphold confidence, the solution becomes to host a motion of no confidence on live television. That would be more efficient and effective than the tedious impeachment trial. Watching the impeachment of former Philippine president Joseph Marcelo Ejercito aka Joseph Estrada was very tedious. It would've been easier if Estrada was removed by a vote of no confidence. 

We can think of Marcos Jr.'s failed promise of selling rice at PHP 20.00 per kilo. It's just absurd to aim for it but some people bought it anyway. It's stupid how some Kakampinks decided to sell at a loss instead of proposing solutions. In a parliamentary system, Mrs. Robredo would have her Shadow Minister of Agriculture scrutinize the Minister of Agriculture. The Minister of Agriculture may propose this plan to import. However, the Shadow Minister of Agriculture will say, "We can import but that is short-term. We must open agriculture to more foreign investment to learn new technology." We can make it so that importation will be done while we implement accepting more foreign investment to improve farming in the Philippines. 

I could imagine what if Mrs. Robredo finally opened her superior solution. In a sense, the result of the debates can be in. We can have the best of Uniteam and the best of Kakampink sorted out. As mentioned earlier, importation will be allowed while new technology will be adapted. Maybe, the Philippines can learn from India's agriculture. I did write about if whether or not it was a coincidence that FDI-friendly countries sell cheaper onions. Maybe, one can learn from India's and Vietnam's pro-FDI agriculture stance to develop Philippine agriculture. India is a land that uses more onions than the Philippines yet they could fill the supply and demand. The Philippines can learn from it. The Opposition can throw that in as a better alternative than just importing onions. 

Right now, I want to invite the pro-reforms. I don't care if they voted for Marcos Jr. or Mrs. Robredo. What I want to see is there would be better discussion. It would be better to have opposing parties settle things in a weekly question hour. Weekly questioning will force politicians to do better. It will build up for more long-term thinking. Economics and agriculture aren't exempt from the weekly questioning. That's why I want to shift to a parliamentary system. 

References

Websites

"Understanding Charter Change" by Andrew J. Masigan (January 22, 2018)


Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

The Irony the Philippines Starts the Christmas Season in September BUT Many Filipinos Love Last-Minute Christmas Shopping

  Uproxx As Christmas is just around the corner--I feel more stress coming in! It doesn't help when people try to use the late Andy Williams' "It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year" to try and skip the problem. It's already known that most Filipinos love to start Christmas in September . However, the irony is that Filipinos start Christmas early but do their Christmas shopping late. If they began the Christmas Season early, shouldn't they think about what to do before December strikes?  Two years ago, I wrote a post discussing last-minute Christmas shopping . Many Filipinos tend to do last-minute Christmas shopping. They had all of November (when the Christmas sale usually begins) but why do the Christmas shopping in December ? One of the things I blame is the one-day paycheck lifestyle (see here ). It can be observed that many Filipinos never learn to prioritize more important things . One can get their stars when they see their paychecks. However, the...
Read more

Is Christmas Toxic Positivity a Cause or an Effect of the Philippines' Lack of Progress?

Lessandra When it's Christmas, it's so easy to think of the song of the late Andy Williams, "It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year". The music itself reeks of toxic positivity,  whether one likes it or not. It's a shame, really, because December 20 was also the anniversary of Asia's Titanic, the sinking of the Doña Paz ! We live in a society that somehow never learns from its mistakes, like a person who's stuck in gambling debt, is still hoping to get rich gambling . Despite all that, Christmas toxic positivity still abounds in the Philippines. We still have a lot of ongoing bad habits, such as starting Christmas in September and then doing last-minute Christmas shopping during the week of Christmas. That's why every time I drive on the road on Christmas, I tend to shout, "Isn't it any wonder why the Philippines never improves?" The term Noche Buena has evolved over time . For some, it's simply the Christmas dinner. However, so...
Read more

Christmas Toxic Positivity May Be Your Biggest Holiday Financial Killer

Christmas is just around the corner, isn't it? It's easy to tell me, "Stop being a Scrooge! Lighten up! It's Christmas!" Some people can't tell the difference between positivity and when positivity becomes toxic . If you think about it, toxic positivity is defined as: ...the belief that people should maintain a positive mindset no matter how dire or difficult a situation is. While there are benefits to being optimistic and engaging in positive thinking, toxic positivity rejects all difficult emotions in favor of a cheerful and often falsely positive façade . Every time I talk about Christmas foolishness (read here ), it's always pointed out that I love being negative. Honestly, there are times I'd rather be negative than to be overly positive. I always talk about mentioning the silly notions that my countrymen have like, "If the situation is bitter, just add sugar (read here )." In Cebuano, it's said, "Kung pait, butangi lang ug asu...
Read more

Can Anti-FDI Proponents Prove Their Claim That Economic Liberalization Will Just Benefit the Filipino Oligarchs?

The same old narration has been made over and over again . I'd dare say that the narration out the Facebook pages of the likes of Atty. Teddy Casiño, Atty. Neri Colmenares, Kabataan Partylist, League of Filipino Students, Migrante International, IBON Foundation, etc. are more or less the same. It's already a broken record based on the facts that they've been refuted. I've read the book From Third World to First . I guess Migrante International hates that book because Singapore is often associated with the execution of Flor Contemplacion, at least on their watch. What they're doing is nothing more than still hating Japan, Germany, and Italy because of the Second World War. I'm not surprised at another lie that's often repeated--economic liberalization (or 100% FDI shares ownership) will only  benefit the oligarchs . I guess it'll be easy to nail on me because I'm not a summa cum laude and Rep. Raoul Abellar Manuel is and he's a graduate of the Uni...
Read more

It's UTTER IGNORANCE to Say that the Philippines Needs to Self-Industrialize First Before Allowing FDIs to Own 100% Equity

It's often said by idiots on Facebook that allowing FDIs to own 100% of their shares is just going to leave the Philippines with nothing. I don't know how long I can keep my patience with such fools. To explain it, FDIs get rich based on net profits after taxes (read here ). FDIs will still end up paying VAT and income taxes if they want to continue investing in the Philippines. It's like if you want to continue doing business in the commercial space--you need to pay the rental fee to your lessor. The idea of 100% FDI ownership should be spelled out as, "Allowing FDIs to own 100% of their shares." They wouldn't need to find a Filipino partner before they can do business in the Philippines. They may not be allowed to own land  but they can operate without a Filipino partner. The even bigger stupidity is when FDIs are required to split 60-40 of the partnership. Meaning, that they must split 60% of the net income after taxes with the local Filipino partner. That...
Read more