“So, why are our senators and congressmen even asking questions? Didn’t they write that law?”
by Ducky Paredes
After the stirring words of the President’s State of the Nation Address (SONA), as the legislature returns to its main job of crafting our laws, perhaps our senators and congressmen ought to look at how they have fared as legislators.
The measure ought to be not on the number of laws they have crafted but on the quality and relevance of these laws. For instance, why are they complaining that the personnel in the Bureau of Customs are – undeservedly – taking home so much in bonuses just because the price of oil has increased. Actually, the reason that this is happening is because of a law that the legislature crafted and hurriedly passed, as it were – without thinking!
Under the provisions of this law — Republic Act (RA) No. 9335, or the Attrition Act of 2005 – personnel in our main tax revenue bureaus – Internal Revenue and Customs – will be fired or retained depending on their performance. The way that performance is measured is in pesos and centavos. The more one collects, the better one’s performance.
Thus, when the world market price of oil increased from less than $60 per barrel to over $100 per barrel, the collections of the Customs Bureau increased at the same rate. Thus, under the provisions of the Attrition Act, Customs performance was phenomenal.
There is as much smuggling going on; in fact, it may even have increased; there is as much misdeclaration of value (often done with the connivance of customs personnel; as much pilferage and whatever else goes on under the watch of the Customs Commissioner; still, all because the collections increased (not because the service has improved or has become more efficient) they are all legally entitled to millions in bonuses.
So, why are our senators and congressmen even asking questions? Didn’t they write that law?
* * *
Under the late unlamented rule of Ferdinand Marcos, there was a perfectly good mechanism for controlling the retail price of oil products. This was the OPSF – Oil Price Stabilization Fund. The way that this worked was that the government managed a fund for the oil companies.
The retail price of oil products is pegged at a certain level. When the world price of oil moves up or down, the price is maintained and the oil companies put excess profits into the fund when the set price is higher than the mandated price; when the reverse happens – the mandated retail price is higher than what it should be, the oil companies take money out of the OPSF to make up for the price difference.
Our legislature killed this goose when it deregulated the oil industry. Thus, now we have no mechanism that would moderate the movement of retail oil prices.
Can we go back to the old system? Not anymore. Can we trust the present leadership to set up such a system without their making some big bucks for themselves? While we may have had the same doubts about Marcos, there was really nothing that anyone could do about it because he was then dictator. It was, however, a good system that was adopted by other countries (after seeing how well it worked in the Philippines) and which they continue to use.
In our case, when the Marcos era ended, the big pile of money n the OPSF was too tempting for the next administrations . It was used to infuse money into the National Power Corporation. This only served to prolong the bleeding and delay the final solution which is still not over since the Napocor continues to operate in the red. Some of it was also used in the rehabilitation work after the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo,
The OPSF is gone forever. Yet, some congressmen will still make noises about repealing the Oil Deregulation Law – as if this would have any effect on the current high price of oil products. What should have been done much earlier was to go aggressively into alternatives to oil as fuel. After all, there have been many studies that indicate that oil as a fuel source will be gone before the mid-point of this century. Most of us will no longer be around by then but our grandchildren will still be here.
Maybe, though, our legislators cannot see that far.
* * *
Sin taxes, like the VAT, are money generators for the government. Thus, one would think that the sources of this money would be allowed to develop so that more and more funds can come from them.
So, if the government depends on sin taxes for a great portion of its tax collections, why is congress wiring laws that make it almost impossible for the companies producing sin products to continue in business.
Recently, the law that prohibits tobacco advertisements came into effect. Will this cut down the number of smokers? I do not see any advertisements for shabu; yet, the report from the police and the PDEA is that users of shabu, marijuana and heroin continue to increase by leaps and bounds. Thus, the ban on tobacco advertisements may have some effect on the number of smokers; but, not by much.
A prospective law would have cigarette packaging with gruesome pictures of throat cancer, patients dying of lung cancer and so on. Why not just make cigarette manufacturing an illegal activity? Or, if you want to be fair about it, why not also have victims of car accidents plastered permanently on car windows and windshields to remind us all how dangerous cars really are? Or, why not pictures of grossly obese persons over every MacDonald’s and Jollibee counters? Or, drunks sleeping on the sidewalk on beer, gin, brandy and whiskey labels; or, better yet, drinkers who can’t get it up after an all-night binge.
What our legislators want to do with tobacco companies is unconscionable, forcing them to buy new machines to print those gruesome photos on their packaging, Thus, they would be buying the machines whose purpose is to drive them out of business.
* * *
I am presently in Singapore for the 26th Asean Senior Golf Tournament under the Confederation of Asean Senior Golfers’ Association (CASGA). The Federation of Philippine Amateur Senior Golfers, Inc. (FPASGI) is one of the participating teams. Others are from Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore. The newer Asean countries are not yet part of the CASGA. We have a team of 37 who will compete in medal play and Stableford competition, team and individual.
# # # #
hvp 07.28.08)
Post a Comment