Tuesday, September 05, 2006 [ 5:50 PM ]
PREVIEW OF THE PARLIAMENT
The lower house is serious with their quest to change the form of government from presidential to parliamentary. Just this day they passed a resolution aiming to make the congress a constituent assembly, and they are doing that without soliciting the help of the senate. Obviously the House of Representatives knew that the senate wont be as cooperative as they wanted them to be or as the president wanted the senate to be.
There have been many arguments and debates on the issue of forming a constituent assembly, and one of them is whether the lower and the upper chamber of congress should be voting as one or voting separately. Clearly with all the points laid down the latter is more logical for the simple reason that congress is voting separately on the most irrelevant law, how much more if the concern is the entire constitution?
The move of the house wanting to act on their own is the very same thing that we could expect if the parliamentary government they wanted takes place. No senate, no checks and balances and the only thing that will happen are the desires of the house. Just imagine the scenario, if the house is doing that kind of attitude in the present form of government how much more if they will be given the full control of the parliament?
Others may argue that people may change members of the parliament if they are not satisfied with what their representatives are doing but is that really possible? Maybe in the imperial manila that is possible but I doubt if it is in other parts of the country where patronage politics and political warfare is very much evident. Granting that the members of the parliament in the greater manila are changed constantly, still that cannot be assured in distant provinces. In the provinces, most of the public facilities such as hospitals and schools belong to the incumbent politician. And unless the people support that politician they can never use those facilities without any unwanted hindrances. It is a given fact in the land that in the rural areas politicians is giving the needs of the people but only some of them is giving it without expecting any in return, and that return will only be acknowledged if it is given in a form of a vote. Do the people there have a choice? Of course they don’t unless they are willing to sacrifice the lives of their children. Even if how much wicked their politician is, they wont dare challenge him if they don’t want to suffer any unwanted consequences. So in the end the parliament will be the having the same people again and again until the time we’ll never know when.
If there are people to blame here it is not the people, they have no choice. If there are people to blame here it is non other than the proponents of Charter-Change in a very untimely period. The only responsible for this is the politicians who don’t want to give up power come what may and politicians who are willing to sacrifice the people for more power no matter what. A parliamentary government is a thing wanted badly by people who wanted to be the top official of the land who cannot win by a popular vote.