Road showdown at Senate

MANILA, Philippines – It was a showdown among senators yesterday over the budget insertions in the 2008 national budget, with Sen. Panfilo Lacson confronting Senate President Manuel Villar Jr. over the double funding for the C-5 Road Extension Project.

Lacson’s privilege speech during the Senate session was aimed to shake the credibility of Villar, who earlier announced his plan to run for the presidency in 2010.

The former Philippine National Police chief confronted the Senate president and asked who among the senators had proposed the insertion of a redundant appropriation of P200 million for the C-5 Road to be extended from South Luzon Expressway to Sucat Road in Parañaque City in the 2008 General Appropriations Act and who among them had business and financial interests in the road project renamed President Carlos P. Garcia Avenue.

“I simply followed the narrow trail and it led me to you, Mr. Senate   President. No political motive whatsoever, it has nothing to do with plans to run in 2010 or with your Senate presidency,” Lacson said.

“And he who is responsible for attempts to defraud our taxpayers by a sinister insertion of second entry on projects already funded under the same budget book must stand by the side and spare this institution from the shame and disgust of our constituents – the Filipino people. Or just be man enough to admit his indiscretion then apologize to the taxpayers of this once great nation that put us all in this hall,” he added.

Lacson directly questioned Villar as to why the Senate president expressed fear “that my fellow Caviteños might not be able to benefit from it if full funds would not be released” after he exposed the double entry.

“He even wants to malign me before my provincemates (Cavite). The Senate President said he is open to an investigation on the project, which he said he was merely ‘advocating.’ But the Senate President, his voice raised for the most part of his press conference, made his own insinuation that he was linked to the mess because he announced early his intention to run for the country’s highest office in 2010,” Lacson said.

“There is a saying in Latin, ‘Excusatio non petita accusatio manifesta.’ An excuse that has not been sought is an obvious accusation. In simple English, he who excuses himself, accuses himself,” he stressed.

Lacson said he was not politicking but the issue was about corruption. “Corruption committed right in this hall, involving one of us, plain and simple. Everybody therefore, except that one among us, should be standing up to denounce and investigate this abominable act of corruption committed right under our noses during our budget deliberations; everyone, except that one who abused our trust and goodwill as fellow senators,” Lacson said.

“But why did the leader of this chamber react so violently to the discovery of the ‘double-entry’ in the budget book of 2008? Why did he conveniently accuse some of our colleagues of maligning him by insinuating that he ‘pocketed public money’? And, Mr. Senate President, do not act as if you are the victim in this whole exercise, because you are not. Huwag mong ipahatid sa mga mamamayang Pilipino na pulitika lamang ito (Do not convey to the Filipino people that is just politics), because it is not,” Lacson noted.

He said there were insertions amounting to P4.1 billion made in the Senate version of the budget, and aside from the double entry for line budget items, including for Aguinaldo Bridge in Cavite amounting to P50 million, there were also redundant entries for lump sum appropriations.

He cited in particular the P1.854 billion allotted for personal services by the Office of Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform that was proposed in the 2007 budget when there was also P1.89 billion separated from the regular budgets of line departments because these were funds earmarked for the Agrarian Reform Fund.

“But the Agrarian Reform Fund does not have staffing support, thus no employees. And who could be the lucky ones to benefit from this huge amount?” Lacson said.

He also hit Villar and his allies in the Senate for virtually declaring war against him and their other colleagues who called for an investigation into the double entry.

“Mr. Senate President, if you are telling us to bring it on, just like a confident poker player with winning cards would say – and I now say to you – all in,” Lacson said.

Twice the price

“I have no question about the relevance of the said road project, more so if it would indeed benefit the Filipino people. Questions may probably arise later on its actual cost. But the nagging question to me is: Why fund it twice?” Lacson asked.

Public Works Undersecretary Manuel Bonoan and former Cavite congressman Gilbert Remulla said the second P200 million was for the flyover from Sucat Road to Manila-Coastal Road.

But Lacson said “if we are to believe Congressman Remulla and Undersecretary Bonoan’s clarifications, why did the budget not specifically describe each of the P200-million entries as in the other appropriations for several projects in the same 2008 General Appropriations Act?” Lacson argued.

He also enumerated the other insertions made by the Senate in the 2008 national budget.

Take the case of the Department of Public Works and Highways, he said, where locally funded projects in the DPWH budget received a total appropriation of P52,648,923,000. But in another version, the appropriation ballooned to a whopping P65,461,538,000, with a difference of close to P13 billion.

In the Senate version of the bill, an increase of P3.95 billion was further proposed, he said.

Lacson continued with his tirade by naming some of the controversial projects that were passed with insertions.

“Over and above all these, Mr. President, without any specification and merely lumped as Various Infrastructure Projects, there is a lump sum of P1.760 billion. Where would this huge money go? And who will decide which project will be benefited by this lump sum?” he said.

“At the bicameral conference committee, the P3.95 billion proposed by the Senate became P4.1 billion. It became bigger. Why?”

Pecuniary benefit

Some sectors are now fidgety over the controversy.

Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV’s lawyer, Ernesto Francisco, said Villar could have violated some provisions of the Philippine Constitution and therefore must be investigated.

He said the law prohibits lawmakers from having any financial interest, directly or indirectly, in any contract with the government or any of its agencies during his term of office.

“Article VI, Section 14 further prohibits any Senator or Congressman from intervening in any matter before any office of the government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called to act on account of his office,” he noted.

Francisco, who is also representing Sen. Jamby Madrigal in a family civil case, said a probe should be conducted.

Francisco said Villar should not brush aside this request for investigation by the simple expedience of asking his critics to sue him in court, because this is a matter of public interest and concern, considering that constitutional prohibitions on senators and congressmen and use of public funds are involved.  – With Michael Punongbayan