Resolution of Both Houses No. 2 “Resolution of Both House Proposing Amendments to Certain Economic Provisions of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Particularly on Articles II, XIV and XVI”
Good afternoon to all of you, Mr. Speaker and distinguished colleagues of the 18th Congress House of Representatives.
Today, we stand at a defining juncture in our history because we have voted on a historic legislative measure that proposes amendments to the cornerstone of our laws and democracy – the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines.
For the record, Mr. Speaker, this Representation will submit to the Committee in Rules my full and detailed explanation of vote on Resolution of Both Houses No. 2 and I earnestly request that the same be inserted into the records of the House of Representatives as a testament of our stand on this critical measure. But for now, in front of my colleagues and the Filipino people, let me just state my brief manifestation why I voted NO to this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, this Representation recognizes the need to further liberalizing our economy to welcome foreign capital, but that said act should not be done haphazardly for reasons that must be understood by the Filipino people. Let me briefly state some:
ONE, according to established and published data of the World Bank’s “Global Investment Competitiveness Report 2017-2018,” foreign ownership is not a critical issue among foreign investors. In fact, the top 2 affecting factors are 1) political stability and security and 2) legal and regulatory environment.
Ang una, Mr. Speaker, ay nakakaapekto sa economic policies ng bansa. Kung ano ang pananaw ng liderato sa gobyerno, iyon ang direksyon ng mga batas na ipinapasa natin. Investors base their decisions on business forecasts and feasibility studies founded on present economic rules of the country; then suddenly, with the change of leadership, said rules and policies will abruptly change. Para pong nagpalit ng kabayo o ng sasakyan sa gitna ng laban. Lubhang hindi kaaya-aya para sa mga dayuhang namumuhunan.
The second factor speaks of the ease of doing business in the country. We have to examine and work harder to address our system’s propensity for corruption, our exorbitant energy costs and our abundance in red tape in the course of business processes. It usually takes months, if not years, to complete the paper works required of our foreign investors! This is a more urgent concern, if you ask me, and can be addressed by establishing a “one-stop-shop” system for foreign investors. Mas madali po itong pag-usapan, Mr. Speaker, at mas madaling solusyunan.
SECOND reason, Mr. Speaker: I believe that this legislation is anti-Filipino investors and entrepreneurs. Opening our economy to foreign participation must have a healthy balance between taking advantage of the availability and willingness of foreign capital to enter our economy at one hand AND safeguarding our national patrimony, security and interest on the other hand. In fact, economic superpowers such as the United States, Canada, and Japan have achieved economic growth while protecting their domestic entrepreneurs, even assisting them to thrive in their own territory.
Giving full foreign ownership to major industries in the country such as power, transportation, and communication is unpatriotic. This resolution is an unpatriotic policy that is tantamount to selling our country to foreigners and subjecting our citizenry to the authority of foreign institutions. Hind po natin dapat payagan ito.
THIRD, Mr. Speaker, let me state for the record that, for me, the catch phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” – which was inserted into certain economic provisions in Articles II, XIV and XVI of the 1987 Constitution – is fraught with danger and potential abuse. For this Representation, Mr. Speaker, it simply puts Congress over the Constitution rather than the other way around. Hindi kailanman dapat mas tumaas ang Kongreso sa Konstitusyon ng bansa. Hindi kailanman dapat mas tumaas ang posisyon ng Kongreso sa boses ng bawat mamamayang Pilipino. We must not add any provision in the Constitution that will give Congress a blanket power and prerogative to spell economic policies at its whims.
LASTLY, Mr. Speaker, and I close, if the intention is to provide for subsequent amendments of the Constitution, I believe that it is best achieved through a Constitutional Convention and not through congressional or legislative fiat. The former will allow its members to have the sole and solemn duty of reviewing and proposing amendments to the Constitution; while the latter will potentially pave the way for interests other than those beneficial to the Filipino people to creep and be engraved into the letters of the Constitution.
History has its eyes on us, Mr. Speaker. Kung tayong mga kinatawan sa Kongreso ay mag-iisip lang ng sarili nating kapakanan, napakadali pong mag-YES sa resolution na ito. We can jsut close our eyes and simply approve this resolution. Why? Because this gives unlimited power to Congress. Imagine, we can modify economic policies anytime without having to go through the scrutiny of a Constitutional Convention.
Pero pinaalalahanan ko po ang bawat isang bumoto ngayong araw na ito – kasaysayan ang sa ati’y huhusga, at ang mga susunod na henerasyon ng ating bayan ang magdudusa dahil maling-maling ibenta ang kapakanan ng bayan sa mga dayuhan.
Dahil po sa mga paniniwala kong ito, ako po ay bumoto ng NO sa resolusyong ito.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I will submit my thorough explanation of vote on this measure and I request that such be inserted into the records as an addition to this manifestation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
