Invitation to a ball

Well, it is not exactly a ball but something close to it. The invitation comes from Senate President Franklin M. Drilon, who is poised to cut a glamorous figure as host to the 112th Inter-parliamentary Union General Assembly in the coming days. I hear he has shed a few pounds to be fit for the event. I wish him all the luck. After all, throwing a party costs money and can be very strenuous.

Mercifully, the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD) will be paying, I mean playing host to the dinner in the ballroom of the Century Park Hotel. It is touted as a reception for delegates from liberal and democratic parties to Manila. I can only be grateful for an invitation for the "distinguished members of the press". Unfortunately, I have prior commitments. By the time this column comes out the party would have been over.

Having dispensed with the niceties let me be frank (excuse the pun) why this column is not enthusiastic about the IPU general assembly in Manila. It is so ill-timed. Perhaps if it had happened after the Senate had passed the VAT bill, then it might have made a difference. But as it is, Filipinos (I do not presume ‘the nation’), but a good number are so incensed that the Senate is unable to pass its version of the much needed VAT bill. I do not accept the excuse that it is because VAT is so difficult to understand, that is why it is taking time. That justifies even more the public mood that we are better off abolishing the Senate so the nation can move forward.

But some, not all members of the Senate are so insensitive to public opinion they do not see the dissonance between hosting a party for parliamentarians and failing to do its homework as a legislature. This is not to say that they have not worked or that they or their staff have not spent long hours studying VAT which is so "difficult to understand". They may have. But the bottom line is that the Senate version is simply not there to be able to help the government implement its fiscal reform when it is most needed.

In my book, it is embarrassing to hold a party when the coffers are empty. The VAT bill was meant to raise funds to allow the government to govern, let alone hold a party. I must add that it is not the fault of the Senate if Manila has been chosen as the venue. But the Senate should be more circumspect about boasting that it will be an occasion to show off our parliamentary ‘sophistication’. It grates.

It reminds me of Imelda days when parties with high powered visitors were the measure of good governance because it promoted tourism. When the World Bank held its annual meeting in Manila during the Marcos watch, hotels were built, roads were fixed, slums walled out of sight – all for the sake of ‘what the visitors will say’ about the country. It was hoped then as it is hoped now that tourism will receive a boost after the parliamentarians as tourists would have come and gone and have had a nice time for a few days at their government’s expense.

The World Bank bash did not bring in the expected tourists’ dollars even if the visitors had a nice time while in Manila. Everything may have been newly painted and sparkling clean but it is remembered as the occasion when some bankers used the occasion to befriend Imelda and get ahead in the queue of lenders who wanted to unload their bloated petrodollars on this pristine third world country which wined and dined bankers on borrowed money.

This time it is not about money. Parliamentarians will be here to take up valid issues like terrorism, AIDS, debt or indeed any issue that can be said to be relevant to the parliamentarians. We are grateful that our lawmakers opened their purses to spruce up the PICC. One report said Drilon used his pork barrel funds (I thought he had given this up?) for the occasion. Another report said he was using office funds.

But to come back to the IPU party, I would put a wager that tourists will not come because of it. Tourists come not because their lawmakers enjoyed themselves. They come because of the consistency of what is on offer, either in value for money, or for something unique to a country. Unless we get our infrastructure right and updated, able to compete with other destinations in the area, we cannot expect a surge of tourists.

The clash between a Senate that has failed to pass an important component of fiscal reform and acting as host to parliamentarians is, to my mind too jarring. I am afraid the IPU meet, no matter how much we wish it to be successful, fails in the overall picture of what this country can and should be. In my opinion, it is not about tourism or the potential to attract tourists that this country needs so badly. It is respect and self-esteem. It is not helped by occasions which flaunt the trivial rather than what is essential. Neither do I believe that such a party will boost investors’ confidence. The more legislators boast about their preparations for the party while the VAT languishes on their desks, the worst for the image of the Philippines. I don’t know what Sen. Pangilinan means when he says "investor confidence will still be there, unshaken, whether we pass it in three days or three weeks." An analyst from one of the credit rating agencies told me – it is the fundamentals that are lacking. The fundamental in this case is the truncated perspective of lawmakers, unable to distinguish between party giving and the seriousness of lawmaking especially with the government in dire straits.

I am appalled that there should be so much care and concern for the party while the President’s fiscal program hangs in the balance. Senator Drilon has put a ‘moveable’ deadline about passing VAT. I am not sure just what he is for – to increase or not to increase. He seems to depend on other views rather than his own conviction. That cannot be good leadership.

It remains true that it would be wrong to blame senators as individuals for this sorry mess. They behave this way because that is what the structure of government demands – not to agree with either the executive or the Lower House. The structure lends itself to this one-upmanship. The Senate wants to prove they are better than the House by taking time to deliberate the issue. Here it is black and white – the impossibility of good governance with a structure that is cut out for gridlock. The much delayed Senate version of the VAT bill is powerful proof of the need for constitutional reform that would avoid or end such gridlock once and for all.

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]