Congressional Record - House of...

Vol. 3 Tuesday, June 10, 2014 No. 69a

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 4:00 p.m., the session was resumed with Deputy Speaker Carlos M. Padilla presiding.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The session of the House is hereby resumed.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the Additional Reference of Business.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Secretary General will please read the Additional Reference of Business.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

The Secretary General read the following House Bills and Resolutions on First Reading, Messages from the Senate and Committee Reports, and the Deputy Speaker made the corresponding references:

BILLS ON FIRST READING

House Bill No. 4594, entitled:“AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING OCCUPATIONAL

HEALTH AND SAFETY OF WORKERS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY”

By Representative NogralesTO THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND

EMPLOYMENT

House Bill No. 4596, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A FISHPORT IN

THE MUNICIPALITY OF LOPEZ JAENA, PROVINCE OF MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative AlmonteTO THE COMMITTEE ON AQUACULTURE AND

FISHERIES RESOURCES

House Bill No. 4597, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A FISHPORT IN THE CITY

OF OROQUIETA, PROVINCE OF MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative AlmonteTO THE COMMITTEE ON AQUACULTURE AND

FISHERIES RESOURCES

Congressional Record16th CONGRESS, FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

House Bill No. 4598, entitled:“ A N A C T E S TA B L I S H I N G A P U B L I C

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN BARANGAY DIVERSION, MUNICIPALITY OF SAN LEONARDO, PROVINCE OF NUEVA ECIJA TO BE KNOWN AS DIVERSION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative Antonino-NadresTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

House Bill No. 4599, entitled:“AN ACT DECLARING THE STRETCH OF BEACHES

THAT LINE THE ALBAY WEST COAST IN THE 3RD DISTRICT OF THE PROVINCE OF ALBAY AS TOURIST SPOTS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative GonzalezTO THE COMMITTEE ON TOURISM

House Bill No. 4600, entitled:“AN ACT ADOPTING A FLAT NET INCOME

TAXATION SCHEME FOR INDIVIDUALS ENGAGED IN THE PRACTICE OF A PROFESSION, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1997, AS AMENDED”

By Representative CuaTO THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

RESOLUTIONS

House Resolution No. 1191, entitled:“RESOLUTION URGING THE EXECUTIVE

DEPARTMENT TO UTILIZE THE ENGINEERING BRIGADES OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES IN RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION PROJECTS OF THE GOVERNMENT”

By Representative BiazonTO THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENSE

AND SECURITY

House Resolution No. 1192, entitled:“ A R E S O L U T I O N C O M M E N D I N G

REPRESENTATIVE GINA DE VENECIA AND THE MEMBERS OF THE 12-WOMAN DELEGATION TO CHINA TO HELP AND

2 TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2014

PROMOTE BILATERAL RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO NATIONS”

By Representative OngTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 1193, entitled:“A RESOLUTION URGING THE COMMITTEE ON

AGRICULTURE AND FOOD AND THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FOOD SECURITY, IN A JOINT HEARING TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY IN AID OF LEGISLATION ON THE STATE OF THE PHILIPPINE DAIRY INDUSTRY”

By Representative GuanlaoTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 1194, entitled:“RESOLUTION URGENTLY CALLING ON THE

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION TO EXPLAIN THE DISPARATE DETAILS ON CLASSROOM SHORTAGES IN THE COUNTRY AND REPORT ON THE ACTUAL STATUS OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT’S SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM”

By Representative RidonTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 1195, entitled:“A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE PHILIPPINE

NATIONAL POLICE (PNP) TO STEP UP VISIBILITY AND VIGILANCE IN SCHOOLS IN METRO MANILA IN ORDER TO SAFEGUARD THE GENERAL WELFARE AND SAFETY OF ALL THE STUDENTS”

By Representative CasteloTO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ORDER AND

SAFETY

House Resolution No. 1196, entitled:“A RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE

PHILIPPINE COFFEE BOARD FOR WINNING THE ROASTER’S CHOICE COFFEE AWARDS AT THE THAIFEX FOOD EXHIBITION IN TWO CATEGORIES - ESPRESSO AND SIPHON COFFEE PREPARATIONS, SECOND AND FIRST RUNNER-UP, RESPECTIVELY, WHICH WAS HELD IN BANGKOK, THAILAND”

By Representative CasteloTO THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND INDUSTRY

House Resolution No. 1197, entitled:“RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE

ON AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES RESOURCES, AND THE COMMITTEE ON GOOD GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY, TO CONDUCT A JOINT INQUIRY, IN AID OF LEGISLATION INTO THE MARITIME INDUSTRY AUTHORITY’S (MARINA) AND THE BUREAU OF AQUATIC FISHERIES’ AND RESOURCES (BFAR) FAILED COMPLIANCE AND MATERIALIZATION OF

ITS MANDATE TO IMPLEMENT RA 9379, ALSO KNOWN AS ‘THE HANDLINE FISHING LAW’ AND CONSEQUENTLY ORDER BOTH AGENCIES TO STOP ITS APPREHENSION ACTIVITY”

By Representatives Colmenares and ZarateTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 1198, entitled:“RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE

ON GOOD GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION TO CONDUCT A JOINT INVESTIGATION, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, INTO THE MARITIME INDUSTRY AUTHORITY’S (MARINA) FAILED COMPLIANCE AND MATERIALIZATION OF ITS MANDATE TO IMPLEMENT AND ADMINISTER THE OIL POLLUTION COMPENSATION FUND UNDER REPUBLIC ACT 9483, ALSO KNOWN AS THE ‘OIL POLLUTION COMPENSATION ACT’ ”

By Representatives Colmenares and ZarateTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS

The list of additional coauthors is reflected in Journal No. 69, dated June 10, 2014.*

MESSAGES FROM THE SENATE

Message dated June 9, 2014 informing the House of Representatives that the Senate on even date passed without amendment House Joint Resolution No. 12, entitled:“JOINT RESOLUTION DECLARING 27 JULY 2014

AS A SPECIAL NONWORKING HOLIDAY TO COMMEMORATE THE FOUNDING ANNIVERSARY OF THE IGLESIA NI CRISTO”

TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Message dated June 9, 2014 informing the House of Representatives that the Senate on even date passed the following Senate Bills:

Senate Bill No. 27, entitled:“AN ACT TO EFECTIVELY INSTILL HEALTH

CONSCIOUSNESS THROUGH PICTURE-BASED HEALTH WARNINGS ON TOBACCO PRODUCTS”

Senate Bill No. 2211, entitled:“AN ACT STRENGTHENING CONSUMER

PROTECTION IN THE PURCHASE OF BRAND NEW MOTOR VEHICLES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

Senate Bill No. 2159, entitled:“AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO.

7721, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘AN ACT LIBERALIZING THE ENTRY AND SCOPE OF OPERATIONS OF FOREIGN BANKS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

* See ANNEX (printed separately)

TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2014 3

Senate Bill No. 2273, entitled:“AN ACT TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN THE ANTI-

DRUG CAMPAIGN OF THE GOVERNMENT, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 21 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ‘COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002’ ”


Senate Bill No. 1281, entitled:“AN ACT DECLARING AUGUST 18 OF EVERY YEAR

AS ‘JESSE ROBREDO DAY’ A SPECIAL WORKING HOLIDAY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

TO THE COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF LAWS

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Report by the Committee on Ways and Means (Committee Report No. 313), re H. No. 3675, entitled:“AN ACT REMOVING THE CONDITIONS FOR THE

CONDONATION OF ALL UNPAID TAXES DUE FROM LOCAL WATER DISTRICTS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 289-A OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, AS AMENDED”

recommending its approval without amendmentSponsor: Representative QuimboTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Justice and the Committee on Appropriations (Committee Report No. 314), re H. No. 586, entitled:“AN ACT CREATING THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS FOR

THE PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA SIBUGAY TO BE SITUATED IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF IPIL AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

recommending its approval without amendments and in consolidation with House Bill No. 1863

Sponsors: Representatives Tupas, Ungab, Hofer and CabilaoTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Foreign Affairs (Committee Report No. 315), re H. R. No. 1203, entitled:“RESOLUTION URGING THE DEPARTMENT OF

FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO ESTABLISH A CONSULAR OFFICE IN THE CITY OF CALGARY IN ALBERTA, CANADA TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE INCREASING NUMBER OF FILIPINOS LIVING AND WORKING IN NORTHERN CANADA”

recommending its adoption in substitution of House Resolution No. 1081

Sponsor: Representative BicharaTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

ADDITIONAL REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

RESOLUTION

House Resolution No. 1209, entitled:“RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE PROFOUND

C O N D O L E N C E O F T H E H O U S E O F REPRESENTATIVES TO THE FAMILY OF

MRS. VIRGINIA L. QUINTO, MOTHER OF THE HONORABLE LORNA Q. VELASCO, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AMA PARTY-LIST”

By Representatives Belmonte (F.), Gonzales and Zamora (R.)


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Asst. Majority Leader, the Hon. Monique Yazmin Q. Lagdameo, is recognized.

PRIVILEGE HOUR

REP. LAGDAMEO (M.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we open the Privilege Hour.


The Privilege Hour is hereby opened. The House is, therefore, ready for the Privilege Hour.

REP. LAGDAMEO (M.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Edgar “Egay” R. Erice to avail of the Privilege Hour.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The honorable Rep. Edgar R. Erice from the Second District of Caloocan City is recognized to avail of the Privilege Hour.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. ERICE

REP. ERICE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Today, I rise for the purpose of defending my party,

the Liberal Party, of which I am a proud member, from the malicious attacks being unleashed by forces committed to destroy the gains of President Aquino’s and the Liberal Party’s platform of Matuwid na Daan.

Last week, Vice President Binay was quoted by the Philippine Daily Inquirer as chiding LP officials for sowing intrigue between him and President Aquino. Our colleague, Rep. Mar-Len Abigail S. Binay, was quoted by the Tribune as pointing to Malacañang and DILG Secretary Mar Roxas as the brains of the black propaganda against the Binays. Likewise, UNA Secretary General. Cong. Tobias “Toby” M. Tiangco, was quoted as saying that the palace and the Liberal Party have started waging a demolition job against the Binays by linking them to the PDAF scam.

It will be recalled that a supposed “white paper” came out alleging that Rep. Mar-Len Abigail S. Binay used her pork barrel funds to finance political rallies and spent P16 million of her PDAF for vermiculture projects in Makati. She claimed that a “white paper” was being peddled to various media outlets to drag the Binays into the pork barrel scam.

Though Representative Binay claimed earlier that this was the handiwork of two brothers from the Global City, I am wondering why she and Representative Tiangco are accusing the LP and the palace as the source of the so-called demolition job.

As a member of the Liberal Party, I take exception to these accusations, they have no basis in truth and in fact, and I wonder why they are always accusing the Liberal Party whenever there are negative reports about the Binays and the UNA. Wala kaming alam sa “white paper” na iyan.


Nalaman lamang namin nang ito ay lumabas sa pahayagan at sinasagot ng pamilya Binay at ng UNA kaakibat ang malisyosong pag-aakusa sa Liberal Party. Kasinungalingan poito, walang basehan.

What the Binays must do is to explain whether there is truth to the allegations stated in the “white paper.” As public officials, they are duty-bound to answer valid issues and be transparent.

Mr. Speaker, I was able to get hold of the press releases from the camp of Representative Binay and I believe that instead of accusing Sec. Mar Roxas, the palace and the Liberal Party of a demolition job, it is advisable for our colleague to satisfactorily explain these transactions. After all, public service is public trust and transparency is always part of good governance.

Please allow me to explain, Mr. Speaker. The purported “white paper” allegedly details the anomalous transactions involving the PDAF in the Second District of Makati. So, as a fellow legislator, I gave Representative Binay the benefit of the doubt and did my own counterchecking of the details as reported in the newspapers.

First of all, it is not denied that based on a COA finding, she indeed significantly exceeded her PDAF allocation for the year 2008 by P47 million when she received P117 million in Priority Development Assistance Fund.

It is also not denied that in the years 2008 and 2009, Congresswoman Binay diverted a total of P12.6 million to an NGO by the name of Kasanib, which was co-founded by her father, Vice President Binay.

G. Ispiker, hindi rin po itinatanggi na noong 2009, si Congresswoman Binay ay nagbigay ng halagang P15 milyon sa Gabay at Pag-asang Masa Foundation, isang NGO na kabilang sa mga palpak at pekeng mga organisasyon na iniulat ng COA, at kamakailan lamang ay inalisan ng akreditasyon ng Department of Agriculture dahil hindi na-liquidate ang mga pondong natanggap nito. Lalo pong hindi itinatanggi na gumastos ng P16 milyon mula sa PDAF ni Congresswoman Binay para sa vermiculture project sa Second District ng Makati. Bagama’t wala namang masama sa vermiculture project, lubhang nakapagtataka na ang pag-proproseso ng mga bulate sa isang highly ubanized city ay gagastusan ng P16 milyon. Hindi ko po alam kung may sapat pang lugar sa Makati upang epektibong makapag-proseso ng bulate.

As an officer of the Liberal Party, I can categorically state that our grand old party has no participation in the supposed demolition job being claimed by Representative Binay. The Liberal Party’s obsession right now is to commit our fullest support to the philosophy of the Aquino administration which is Daang Matuwid. Our single-minded goal right now is to contribute to the realization of President Aquino’s legacy of good governance. We have no time to be preoccupied with useless black propaganda as the UNA accuses us of. Hindi ko po malalaman ang mga sinabi kong ito kung hindi po inakusahan ang Liberal Party na siyang nangunguna sa demolition job na ito.

Ngayon po, ito po ang mukha ni Congressman Erice, base po sa mga COA records, base po sa mga DBM records, palagay ko po, obligasyon na ito ay ipaliwanag.

G. Ispiker, kung susuriin po nating mabuti, sino na naman ang naiipit ngayon sa media? Sina Mar Roxas, Butch Abad, Jun Abaya, na mga pawang haligi ng Liberal Party. Ito ang mga taong wala naman talagang kinalaman sa mga iskandalong ibinibintang sa kanila. Walang mailabas na dokumento, walang mailabas na pruweba, puro galing sa bula ang mga paratang laban sa kanila.

O, hindi po ba iyan ang tunay na demolition job? Walang dokumento. Walang pruweba. Walang ebidensiyang makapagpapatunay na ang mga taong ito ay sangkot sa malawakang korapsyon o paglustay ng pera ng bayan.

Mga kaibigan ko po at kilala kong personal sina Mar Roxas, Butch Abad at Jun Abaya, at kaya kong sabihin, at ngayon nga ay tahasan kong sinasabi sa harapan ninyong lahat, ang mga taong ito ay trabaho lamang ang inaatupag. Sila ay nagpupursige upang matulungan si Presidente Aquino na malutas ang mga problema ng ating bansa. Malaki ang kontribusyon nila sa Daang Matuwid at sigurado ako na wala silang panahon para magkalat ng mga akusasyon at magtago sa likod ng “white paper.”

Mr. Speaker, please notice that while Representative Binay and Representative Tiangco are blaming the Liberal Party for this supposed smear campaign, Vice President Binay, as if on cue, has declared that President Aquino was not involved in all these. The suggestion is that the President is separate from, and not a part of, the Liberal Party. They are insulting the President, because both the government and the LP are being managed by the President. He is in complete control of the Liberal Party. Even si Secretary Mar Roxas, may delicadeza po kaya po nag-leave as LP President.

The obvious purpose, of course, is to allow Vice President Binay to continue enjoying the perks and privileges of being a Cabinet member while his family and party-mates are given the go signal to attack President Aquino’s political party and his political allies. Even Congresswoman Binay and the rest of the UNA Congressmen are members of the majority coalition except for one, but UNA keeps on hitting its coalition partner in the Lower House.

There is an old saying, ”You cannot have your cake and eat it too.” Hence, Vice President Binay, his family and his UNA party-mates cannot enjoy the benefits of being with the Aquino administration while at the same time having the privilege of maligning the Liberal Party, of which President Aquino is the titular head.

Panahon na po, G. Ispiker, upang ilabas ni Vice President Jejomar Binay ang tunay niyang kulay at huwag mamangka sa dalawang ilog. Kakampi ba siya ng administrasyon o pinuno ba siya ng oposisyon? Panahon na para ipakita niya ang kanyang ipinangangalandakang magaling na liderato. Kung siya ay tunay na kakampi ng administrasyong Aquino, dapat ay utusan niya ang kanyang mga anak at mga kapartido na tantanan ang pagbanat sa Malakanyang at sa partido ng ating Pangulo. Ngunit kung siya ay tunay na lider ng oposisyon, dapat ay panindigan niya ito, agad siyang magbitiw sa Gabinete, upang araw-araw niyang mabanatan ang mga nakikita niyang mali sa administrasyong Aquino at sa Liberal Party.

Si Congressman Tiangco po, hindi po tumanggap ng anumang puwesto dahil ayaw niyang sumama sa majority party. Hinahangaan ko po siya diyan. Pinaninindigan niya ang tunay niyang kulay.

Mr. Speaker, the time has come for the Liberal Party to defend itself from the two-faced attacks of Vice President Binay and his UNA party-mates. It is time to expose Vice President Binay for what he truly is, the epitome of the opportunistic trapo as best exemplified when he announced in Manila a ceasefire in Zamboanga, preempting and outstaging the President of the Republic of the Philippines, Pres. Benigno S. Aquino III.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, my dear colleagues.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. BINAY. Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of the Honorable Erice to the Committee on Rules.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). There is a motion to refer the privilege speech to the Committee on Rules.

Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

REP. LAGDAMEO (M.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the Privilege Hour.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the Privilege Hour is hereby suspended.

REP. BAGATSING. Mr. Speaker.

REP. LAGDAMEO (M.). Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila, the Hon. Amado S. Bagatsing, is recognized. What is the pleasure of the Gentleman from Manila?

REP. BAGATSING. I rise on a question of personal and collective privilege, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Please state the nature of the question being raised by the Gentleman.

REP. BAGATSING. Mr. Speaker, this has to do with the sinumpaang salaysay ni Ms. Janet Lim-Napoles, accusing this Representation of being part of the PDAF scam.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Gentleman has 10 minutes.

QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE OF REP. BAGATSING

REP. BAGATSING. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. After almost 11 months, Mr. Speaker, I finally decided

to file a perjury case against Ms. Janet Lim-Napoles. This morning, Mr. Speaker, I went to the Makati Prosecutors Office and filed a perjury case against Ms. Janet Napoles in her sinumpaang salaysay. Mr. Speaker, on page 6, and let me quote on the sinumpaang salaysay, “Mga Senador, Kongresista at ang mga ahente ng mga opisyales o kawani ng implementing agencies ng pamahalaan na nagkaroon ng kaugnayan sa akin at tumanggap ng bahagi ng pork barrel.” At dito, nasa number eight po si Amado Bagatsing, at ang nakalagay dito ang agent ko raw is a certain Mina Nieva.

Mr. Speaker, sa page 22 ng kaniyang sinumpaang salaysay, inulit niya rito, at ang sinabi niya rito, and I will just quote iyong sa aking parte lang: “Letter EE,” nakikita ninyo sa PowerPoint presentation, “No. 2, Amado Bagatsing.” According to Ms. Napoles; “Si Mina Nieva ang kumuha ng rebate para doon sa project na in-implement,” in-impliment, in other words, tapos na, “…ng TRC noong year 2007.” Mr. Speaker, itong salaysay na ito ay pawang kasinungalingan.

These are all lies, Mr. Speaker. How can someone, under oath, claim something that is not true?

Bakit po kasinungalingan ito?Let me walk you through, Mr. Speaker. Doon sa aking

salaysay, sinabi ko sa complaint: Ako po ay naging Kongresista ng June 30, 2007. Ang unang PDAF na na-release po sa akin ayon sa resibo na tinanggap ng TLRC, natanggap nila from the Bureau of Treasury ang halagang P1 million in January 2, 2008.

Ergo, Mr. Speaker, ang sinasabi ni Napoles na in-implement niya ang programa ko noong 2007, e wala pa po akong PDAF noon dahil hindi pa ako Congressman. Nang maging Congressman naman ako, na-release ang aking PDAF 2008 na. So, papaano niya susumpaan ang ganiyang klaseng salaysay? Papaano ako magkakaroon ng pork barrel e hindi pa naman ako Kongresman?

Pagkatapos, sinasabi niya na si Ms. Mina Nieva ay ahente ko daw. Mr. Speaker, hindi ko po kilala si Ms. Nieva. At sa mabuting palad naman po, itong si Ms. Nieva ay gumawa ng isang salaysay, gumawa ng affidavit at sinasabi niya sa kaniyang affidavit na, “Hindi ko kilala si Congressman Amado Bagatsing.” She never acted as my agent.

Mr. Speaker, the documents are all attached when I filed a perjury case against Janet Lim Napoles. I enclosed the affidavit of Ms. Nieva who vehemently denies having known me and having dealt with Ms. Janet Lim Napoles.

Saan nanggagaling ang mga paratang ni Ms. Napoles, Mr. Speaker? Puro kasinungalingan. Kung mayroon po siyang ebidensya na magsasabing ako ay may kaugnayan sa kaniya, ilabas po niya. Eleven months na, ang pangalan ko ay nadadawit. Lo and behold, by divine providence, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, I will explain to you this afternoon kung papaano po ang PDAF natin, or at least in my case, kung papaano minanipula ng mga sindikatong ito ang ating PDAF without our knowledge and participation.

Itatabi na po muna natin ang kay Ms. Napoles sapagkat mayroon ng kaso. So, ipakita niya ngayon na talagang ako’y kausap niya at na-implement niya ang project ko kaya lang ang sinasabi ko, imposibleng mangyari iyon dahil hindi pa ako Kongresman noong mga panahon na iyon.

Mr. Speaker, upon my perusal, 11 months akong naghahanap ng dokumento dahil nga nalalabas lagi sa pahayagan, mga ibang pahayagan ang pangalan, pangalan ko tungkol dito sa TRC na ito. By a stroke of miracle, Mr. Speaker, I was able to get all the files from the COA, a certified true copy of all my dealings with the TRC. Nakuha ko po ito noong November last year. Halos three feet po ang taas, ang kapal ng dokumento na sinuri namin, pinag-aralan naming isa-isa. Una ko pong natuklasan, isang endorsement ko daw para sa Masaganang Ani. I have designated Masaganang Ani Para sa Magsasaka Foundation to implement daw my project at pinirmahan ko. Pero tingnan po ninyo, it is on a plain bond paper. Tayo pong mga Kongresista kapag sumusulat sa any agency of government, we are proud of our letterhead, and in that letterhead kasama ang pangalan at address natin.

Ito dated October 15, 2007 but ang SARO ay lumabas sa DBM ng October 10. Let me inform my colleagues, ako po as Congressman, ito lang ang project ko sa TRC and other agencies na wala akong nakuhang SARO, I never received a SARO for that TLRC, I was never informed. I In other words, ang unang endorsement nila, nauna pa ang pag-transmit ng DBM ng SARO sa TLRC. Ibig sabihin, nauna ang endorsement wala pa ang SARO. So ang ginawa ng Masaganang Ani, nai-


withdraw ang first endorsement dated October 15 at gumawa ng pangalawang endorsement dated November 15 naman. As you can see sa ating screen, the second endorsement na ginawa ng Masaganang Ani mas iba ang pirma ko kaysa sa una, walang consistency at tingnan ninyo mabuti ang letterhead. The letterhead that was used was a plain generic Secretariat letterhead of the House of Representatives. Wala doon ang pangalan ko bilang Kinatawan at ang address ng aking tanggapan dito sa Kongreso. In other words, pangalawang letterhead na po ito na ginamit nila na hindi official. Ang tunay na letterhead ko po at letterhead ng lahat ng Mambabatas dito ay ganito, may seal ng Congress, may pangalan ng Congressman, mga committee at nasa ilalim ang address natin dito sa Batasan. That is our official letterhead.

Sa second endorsement ang ginamit nila ay plain generic House letterhead dated November 15. What happened after November 15? Hindi lumabas ang pondo nila at ang kanilang application ay ibinigay sa isang group manager ng TLRC para suriin, to be evaluated if complied with ang mga requirements ng Congressman at ng agency.I have here with me a marginal note or a letter from a certain Atty. Figura, who is the group manager, Corporate Support Service. Ano ang sinasabi ni Atty. Figura?

Let me read kung ano ang sinasabi dito: “This foundation, meaning Masaganang Ani, has previously executed a deed of undertaking to submit the certificate of good standing not later than January 18, 2008.” Yet, no such certification has been submitted. The legitimacy of this foundation is, therefore, a vital issue. Legal will not pass this in review without the said certificate as submitted.

Likewise--ito ang maganda—according to the group manager, the endorsement of Congressman Bagatsing is a xerox copy. Ang ipinadala ko daw na endorsement ay xerox. Bakit xerox? Kasi walang original, kaya xerox ang ipinadala. Kaya ang sabi ni Atty. Figura, we need the original endorsement of Congressman Bagatsing. In the last paragraph addressed to the agency, he said, “the TLIDSG is hereby advised not to process this foundation unless requirements are submitted.” This was signed by Atty. Figura in January 21, 2008. Na-hold ang pondo dahil umalma ang isang nagngangalang Atty. Figura.

So, nainis ang Masaganang Ani, gumawa ng paraan para makolekta ang pondo. Ano ang ginawa nila? They again made another letter. Gumawa ng panibagong sulat noong February 26, 2008. Gumawa na naman ng sulat ang Masaganang Ani at gumawa pa ng istorya.

Let me just read. This is addressed to a certain Mr. Ortiz, the Director General. “May I inform you that my staff,” staff ko daw, “apparently misunderstood my instructions, subsequently a wrong communication was sent to your office. May I, therefore, reiterate that your office dispense of the project at the earliest possible time.” Kinukulit ko daw for the third time na i-release na nila ang pondo.

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, look closely at the letterhead. Tignan ninyo ang seal na ginamit sa third communication. Seal ito ng Republika ng Pilipinas iyang nasa itaas, hindi po logo ng Congress ito. Logo ito ng Republika ng Pilipinas, pero nasa ilalim ng logo nakalagay “House of Representatives.” Again, this is not my official letterhead.

Ang unang ipinakita ko sa inyo na ginawa ko daw on a plain coupon bond, the endorsement for Masaganang Ani has been withdrawn . Noong nagkamali sila, it was withdrawn kaya naglabas ng pangalawang endorsement dated November

15, at ang ginamit naman ay generic letter head. Hindi ko na nga letterhead, kakaiba pa ang pirma. Sa pangatlong sulat, hybrid na ito, logo ng Republika ng Pilipinas pero may House of Representatives, at ang pirma ko na naman dito ay ibang-iba sa naunang dalawa.

What does this tell us, Mr. Speaker? Mukhang reckless na reckless na sila. Maski na pilipit

ginawa nila lahat para makuha ang kaisa-isang pondong inilaan ko. Isang proyekto lang po ang inilagay ko sa TLRC sa halagang P1 milyon. Pinakamaliit na pondo sa pork barrel scam ay ang kay Amado Bagatsing, pinaginteresan pa nila.

Just to show you na well-entrenched sila, tatlong letter head, tatlong pirma at mayroon pang observation na nanggaling sa isang group manager na sinabi na hindi puwede palusutin ito dahil ang endorsement ni Congressman Bagatsing na pinadala ay xerox. Kailangan ay original, e wala namang original. At hindi nagco-comply ang Masaganang Ani sa requirements.

So my friends, Ladies and Gentlemen, in spite of the denial, this group of Masaganang Ani got P900,000. Para bang alam nang mali, pinalusot pa din. Pagkatapos, marami pa silang ginawa na kabastusan sa inyong abang lingkod. Gumagawa sila ng communication using the letter head of Masaganang Ani, and making me sign or it was signed in my behalf. Para akong empleyado ng Masaganang Ani. Ewan ko lang kung makikita sa screen iyon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, lahat ito na-uncover ko because I was able to get a certified true copy from the COA. I and my staff worked long hours, pinagtahi-tahi namin ito, at dito nakita natin kung papaano nila minanipula ang ating PDAF, in my case, without my knowledge, without my participation.

Ang malungkot naman nito, sumulat kaagad ako sa NBI, sabi ko sa NBI last year, paki-check nga ang signatures ng mga dokumentong ito vis-à-vis my signature. Kasi last year ang alam ko lang na ang signature was not my signature. Pero noong makuha ko ang records ng COA, doon ko lang nakita na mayroon pa lang mga ginawang endorsement on a plain coupon bond, generic coupon bond and on a high breed letterhead na hindi ko alam.

Ito pang malungkot, Mr. Speaker, sana naman nakikiusap ako sa ating mga iilan sa mga kaibigan natin sa media, pinalalabas po ng ilan sa inyo na ako raw ay may dalawang transaksyon with Napoles. Dalawang SARO ang inilagay sa ilalim ng mukha ko, paki-correct po ninyo, isa lang po ang SARO na nailagay ko sa TLRC at ang pangalawang SARO na inilagay sa ilalim ng aking pangalan ay para bagang ipinalalabas po na ako ay umulit pa. That is farthest from the truth dahil ang pangalawang SARO na iyan ay pag-aari ng isang Congressman din na lumabas naman two days after, at ang numero na iyon ay nasa ilalim ng pangalan ng Congressman na iyon.

Ano po ang iisipin ng bayan? Si Amado Bagatsing nakipagkuntsaba kay Napoles.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is my sixth term here in this Congress. I have never been involved in any graft or corruption. I protected my name because that name was carved by my father and I have no right to destroy that name. Mine is to preserve, enhance, protect with my life that name. It pains me for the last 11 months that repeatedly, my name keeps on appearing when it is farthest from the truth. Ganoon na lang po ba ang magsira ng reputasyon ng isang kilala ng bayan? Kaya pakiusap ko po, ayusin naman at itama ninyo ang inyong inilalabas sa pahayagan dahil hindi lamang ako ang naaapektuhan. I can roll with the punches,


it is part of the territory. But my family, especially my wife who is sick, I cannot give her more agony. Cancer survivor po ang asawa ko and every time she reads my name, I know she dies a little and all for what? Do you want someone to be like Angie Reyes, who took his life only to find out that the case filed by Rabusa was dismissed by the Sandiganbayan? Please, pakiusap ko po sa mga ibang kaibigan natin sa media, huwag naman ninyo kaming tingnan na para kaming lahat ay magnanakaw, at the same time, wala man lang ebidensiya. Public perception ay napakasama.

Dito, I uncovered before you, I am not merely denying, I am showing you documents on how they manipulated my PDAF without my participation, without my knowledge. But in the last 11 months that I have been pilloried, what will happen? Ganoon na lang ba iyon? Matapos akong mayurakan at ang aking pamilya at ang aking constituents at ang aking mga kaibigan at mga naniniwala sa akin, ganoon na lang ba iyon, after 11 months, I am sorry, Amado? Ganoon na lang ba iyon? Please, let us all act responsibly. We want to jail the grafter, but let us be sure na tama ang ating paratang.

I hope, Mr. Speaker, na ma-address ang issues na ito. I only felt better in the last 11 months when I filed this case against Napoles at 11 o’clock this morning at the Makati City Prosecutors Office, para akong nabunutan ng tinik. When she filed a case against me, I had a chance to also rectify ang kanyang paratang sa akin.

So, Mr. Speaker, I hope for understanding from our friends in media and I hope for understanding from my colleagues if I had taken much of your time. I guess all of us would like to protect our own reputation.

Maraming salamat. Magandang hapon po sa inyong lahat.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Well-said and well-taken, Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila, the Hon. Amado S. Bagatsing.

REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). What is the pleasure of the Gentleman from the Party-List BUHAY, the Hon. Jose L. Atienza Jr.?

REP. ATIENZA. With the kind permission of the Gentleman from Manila, we would like to ask him some questions to further enlighten the nation and this Congress on what tragedy he has experienced in this particular ongoing pork barrel scandal.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila may do so if he so desires.

REP. BAGATSING. Yes, Mr. Speaker. With pleasure.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Please proceed, Honorable Atienza.

REP. ATIENZA. Salamat po.Distinguished Congressman from my home district, the

Fifth District of Manila, whom I have known all these past decades in the field of public service and politics, I would like to manifest initially my full understanding of what he is trying to deliver to the nation on the inclusion of his name

in an otherwise very destructive insinuation that he has been a part of the pork barrel syndicate that has operated in our system, plundering the public treasury of billions of pesos.

Distinguished Congressman, I understand from what you have narrated that the documents that you have now in your possession do not in any way, directly or indirectly, link you as participating in a syndicated effort to plunder public funds. Am I correct?

REP. BAGATSING. Definitely, Mr. Speaker. As I said earlier, they manipulated my very small, one-time P1 million PDAF without my knowledge and participation. Yes.

REP. ATIENZA. Malinaw po ang mga dokumentong nakita natin sa ating screen sa inyong presentation na ang mga communication materials obviously were manufactured by somebody. Hindi po naman puwede sigurong iyon ay maimprenta by itself. Somebody must have typed these documents. Somebody must have forged your signatures because you know that they are forged. The documents emanating from the offices concerned seem to be the only genuine documents that have been included in your case.

Samakatuwid, it is safe to presume, distinguished Congressman, that you have been a victim of a possible syndicate who had operated in the pork barrel funds of different Congressmen in this Chamber. Tama po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Safely, I would say a big yes, Mr. Speaker, to the Gentleman from BUHAY Party-List.

Hindi ko nga maintindihan e. Pati ba naman itong si Dennis Cunanan inakusahan pa ako na siya na ang nandidiyan sa TLRC na walong milyon daw ang aking inilaan. Iisang milyon nga lang ang inilagay ko doon e. Tapos naman, inilagay naman sa pahayagan, inilagay naman sa telebisyon, dalawang allies ni PNoy sangkot sa pork barrel scam, nandoon na naman ang litrato ko. E hindi naman totoo iyon.

Kaya tumayo rin ako dito at nakiusap ako kay Mr. Cunanan, bago ako mag-file ng perjury, dahil sinumpaang salaysay niya iyon, paki-check mo ang record mo. At after a few days, sumulat sa akin si Cunanan, nag-apologize, hindi po pala eight million, eight hundred thousand. Mali pa rin.

In other words, Mr. Speaker, ano ba ang nangyayari? Para naman akong sini-single out. Ako na nga ang pinakamaliit na nabiktima, ako pa ang tuwi-tuwinang nalalagay sa forefront.

Meron pang dalawa raw ang SARO ko e iisa lang naman talaga.

Para bang napakadaling sirain ang reputasyon ng isang taong inaalagaan at inaaruga ng mahabang panahon.

Rome was not built in a day, but it took a day to destroy Rome. I do not want that to happen, Mr. Speaker. So, I have to find the strength to file that case and to speak before you, and unveil and share whatever I know on how they manipulated my PDAF without my knowledge and participation.

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker, of all the documents that you have now in your possession, would you consider that the SARO covering such transactions were also forged or do they seem to be real?

REP. BAGATSING. Iyon nga ang pinagtatakahan ko, Mr. Speaker. Sa tanda ko na rito sa Kongreso, nakukuha ko ang


mga SARO ko. Sa DSWD o sa CHED, may infrastructure, nakukuha ko. Itong partikular na SARO na ito, wala po akong nakuhang SARO. Pati ang COA, wala silang files ng SARO. Para bang nauna pang malaman ng sindikato ang SARO ko na iyan kaya agad-agad gumawa sila ng endorsement sa TLRC, e wala pa ang SARO. Hindi pa dumarating ang SARO sa TLRC may endorsement na kaya na-withdraw kaagad nila nang mabisto nila. “Teka muna, nag-e-endorse tayo wala pa ang SARO doon.” So hindi ko alam, Mr. Speaker. Itong particular case na ito, I did not see my SARO. Neither did the COA see the SARO, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Sa madaling salita, Mr. Speaker, ang salapi ay nai-release nang hindi man lamang covered ng legitimate SARO. Iyon po ba ang ating maaaring maintindihan sa inyong salaysay, Kinatawan ng Ika-Limang Distrito ng Maynila?

REP. BAGATSING. Ang SARO po siguro ay dumating din sa TLRC dahil sumunod ang NCA. Ang Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA) po ay lumabas noong December 17, 2007. Pero ang pera from the Treasury ay dumating sa TLRC noong January 2, 2008. Ibig sabihin, noong dumating ang pera sa TLRC noong January 2, 2008 at saka lang sila puwedeng mag-umpisang magtrabaho sa project. Sinasabi ni Napoles nagastos na raw noong 2007. Na-implement daw ang project ko noong 2007. So either mali siya sa kanyang dates or ibang tao ang kanyang tinutukoy, but definitely hindi ako ang kanyang kaugnayan at definitely wala akong ahente, wala akong ni isang kusing na tinanggap sa ahente niya o sa kanyang project.

REP. ATIENZA. Sa madaling salita ay ang salapi ay nagamit. Totoo po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Nakuha nila ang P900,000 po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Ang walong milyon na tinutukoy ninyo kanina na binibigyan kayo ng sisi, nagamit po ba iyong walong milyon na iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Wala pong walong milyon. Guniguni lang po ni Dennis Cunanan iyon, alegasyon lang niya kaya nag-apologize siya sa akin in writing at sinabing siya ay nagkamali. Wala daw akong walong milyon na inilaan sa TLRC.

REP. ATIENZA. Nakikita po natin, Mr. Speaker, na ang pinanggagalingan ng dokumento, kung mayroon, subalit ang pinaggagalingan ng impormasyon, tiyak, ay ang Department of Budget and Management. Hndi po naman nanggagaling iyan sa tanggapan ng Congressman. Hindi po naman nanggagaling iyan sa tanggapan marahil ng ating pamunuan dito sapagkat ang may hawak ng record na kung sino ang Congressman na mayroong kredito pa doon sa dating sistema ng pork barrel o sino pa ang may balanse, wala pong nakakaalam niyan kung hindi ang Department of Budget and Management. Iyon po ba ay tinatanggap ninyo na katotohanan?

REP. BAGATSING. Mr. Speaker, ang SARO ay nanggagaling talaga sa DBM dahil sila ang nagse-certify

kung may pondo o wala. Iyon ang pagkakaalam ko, sa DBM nag-e-emanate ang lahat.

REP. ATIENZA. Tama po iyon sapagkat ang pork barrel, under the old malpractice, is fully controlled by releases or certification of availability of funds coming from the DBM. No other agency in government could be the source of all of these official records.

REP. BAGATSING. That is correct.

REP. ATIENZA. In your case, it is very clear. You have been credited with a certain sum of money that you are allegedly guilty of misusing when in truth and in fact, you did not know anything about the transaction, and you never even knew about the availability of such fund. E, sino po ba ang nakaaalam nito, hindi po ba ang Department of Budget and Management?

REP. BAGATSING. Yes, obviously, sila talaga ang makaaalam nito, pero, wika nga, ang sindikato is very well entrenched. as I narrated kanina, maski bara-bara lang para lang mag-comply sa mga documentation, maski na hila-hilaw, sala-salabat, okay nakakalusot lahat.

REP. ATIENZA. Iyon pong nakita natin sa record na ipinakita ninyo, distinguished Gentleman from the Fifth District, that there was a deliberate effort, and definitely a decided effort to take hold of the funds allocated, supposedly, for your office. Nakita nila mayroong available balance, pinag-interesan, niyari ang lahat ng mga records na kailangan, kasama na po ang pagpe-fake ng signature ninyo, sapagkat hindi po ninyo signature ang mga nasa dokumento e, at hindi nga po official letterhead ang ginamit kung hindi nag-manufacture po sila, hinabol, upang sumunod alinsunod sa alituntunin sa lahat ng reglamento upang ang salapi ay makuha nila. Iyon po ang malinaw na nakikita natin dito, kaya sa ganang amin po, ang lahat ng imbestigasyon ngayon, dapat ang puntohin ang ugatin ay ang pinanggagalingan ng lahat ng impormasyong ito. Ano ang salaping nakalaan? Magkano ang salaping nakalaan? Ang Department of Budget and Management, na sinabi po naman ni Gng. Napoles, ang nagturo sa kanya kung papaano paiikutin ang bansa sa daliri ng mga mangungulimbat upang ang salapi ay makuha nila. You are now an example of such dubious, nefarious, evil design to take hold of public funds immaterial of who gets implicated in the process. Hindi nila akalaing puputok ito e.

Kaya sa palagay ko ay maraming Congressmen, Members of Congress, who have also been similarly victimized. Kaya kailangan po ang dapat imbestigahan ngayon, ang Department of Budget and Management, more than individual Congressmen. Ang masakit na katotohanan ay hindi po nangyayari iyon, tila ang DBM ay exempted from any insinuation. Even insinuations are not entertained, but all documentary evidence prove and show that the source of all of these documents which may have been falsified is the source of the information, and the source definitely is the most interested party in the completion of the crime. Kaya, naniniwala po kami, Congressman from the Fifth District, you have been victimized, similarly as many of our colleagues in this Chamber may have been victimized, and we hope and pray that the real truth comes out of who


designed all of these syndicated crimes and who benefitted from all of the funds that have been gotten, plundered from our Treasury. We support you, Congressman and your efforts to clear your name, and we do hope every Congressman and Congresswoman implicated will be able to get the same justice, if not from media, from the courts where all of these cases should be discussed now so that the truth will come out and our country will benefit from this very tragic experience.

Congratulations, Congressman. We support your position.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BAGATSING. Salamat po, Gentleman from BUHAY. Maganda po noong sinabi niya na deliberately na-mastermind po ang kakapiranggot kong P1 milyon, pinag-interesan pa. By the way, I forgot to show you the affidavit of a certain Ms. Mina Nieva, who, according to Janet Lim-Napoles, was my agent.

Dito sa affidavit, sinasabi ni Ms. Nieva, “I am the one referred to by Janet Lim Napoles in her affidavit notarized on May 26, 2014.” That on paragraph EE 1, she alleged that “I was the one who took the rebate for my father,” she happens to be the daughter of former Cong. Ernesto “Banzai” Nieva, deceased, “for 40 percent rebate daw.”

Number 3, ito ang affidavit ni Mina Nieva that I am reading: “She further alleged that on paragraph EE 2, “that I took the rebate for the project implemented in TRC sometime in 2007 alluded to Congressman Amado S. Bagatsing.”

Number 4, sabi ni Mina Nieva, “I vehemently deny all these allegations by Ms. Napoles inasmuch as I do not know Cong. Amado S. Bagatsing.”

Fifth, ang sabi niya, “I did not receive any amount or its equivalent in any form for my father Cong. Banzai Nieva, deceased, and for Cong. Amado S. Bagatsing. I am executing this affidavit to the truth of the foregoing facts.” Notarized June 10.

So, Mr. Speaker, just for the record, salamat po. Magandang hapon muli.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla).The time of the Gentleman from Manila has expired.

REP. OCAMPO. Mr. Speaker, may I be recognized.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). What is the pleasure of the Lady from Manila?

REP. OCAMPO. This has something to do with the privilege speech of Congressman Bagatsing.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is the Lady going to interpellate?

REP. OCAMPO. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The time of the Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila has already expired. Unless there is a motion from the Dep. Majority Leader to extend the time, so we could accommodate the Lady from the Sixth District of Manila, the Hon. Rosenda Ann Ocampo.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, with the indulgence of our dear colleagues, before we proceed, may we first acknowledge the presence of the guests in the gallery.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). With the permission of the Lady from Manila, we will give way to the Dep. Majority Leader. Please proceed.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, we have here the guests of Rep. Herminia B. Roman from the First District of Bataan. We have here, Atty. Antonino Roman III and Sofia Isabella Roman, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The guests of the Lady from Bataan, the Honorable Roman, will please rise to be recognized. You are welcome to the House of Representatives.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, we also have the guests of the honorable Gentleman from ALAY-BUHAY Party-List, the Hon. Wes Gatchalian. We have here Barangay Kagawad Boy Pineda, Barangay Kagawad Joel Salonga, Barangay Kagawad Angie Rivera and Secretary Conchita Cleofas.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The guests of the Hon. Wes Gatchalian will please rise for recognition.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Including Barangay Captain Enrique Evangelista, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). You are all welcome to the House of Representatives. Thank you.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, we also have the guests of the honorable Rep. Joseph Stephen S. Paduano. We have here Santos Malinao, Allan Guzon, Florentina Aranguez, Ramel Farrol, Ana Carreon, Gilbert Arsenal, Reynaldo Ebon, Placido Perfas, Ricky Gozon, Veronica Tabara, Ben Solilapsi and Rolando Salutin, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). May we know again the name of the Member of the House?

REP. ORTEGA (F.). They are the guests of Rep. Joseph Stephen S. Paduano, from the ABANG LINGKOD Party-List, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The guests of the Honorable Paduano will please rise to be acknowledged. Nandoon po sila sa second gallery. Maraming salamat po sa inyong pagdalaw sa Kongreso. (Applause)

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, we also have the distinguished guests of the House of Representatives headed by the honorable Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. We have here delegates from the Senate of Kenya headed by Senator Mohamed Yusuf Haji who is the head of delegation, Chairman, Standing Committee on National Security and Foreign Relations. (Applause) We also have the Hon. Godfrey Gitahi Kariuki, Hon. James Orengo, Mr. Samuel Njenga Njuguna, Ms. Caroline K. Karwitha, Ms. Dorcas Nonguu Rukunga and Ms. Eunice Muia, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). On behalf of the Speaker of the House, the Hon. Feliciano Belmonte Jr., and the Members of the House of Representatives, we welcome the Senators from Kenya. Welcome to the House of Representatives. Thank you. (Applause)

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. May we now recognize the Lady from the Sixth District of Manila, the Hon. Rosenda Ann Ocampo.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The time of the Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila has already expired, so the Chair is waiting for a motion.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we extend the time of the Gentleman for another 10 minutes.


REP. OCAMPO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Lady from the Sixth District of Manila, the Honorable Ocampo, is now recognized for her interpellation.

Please proceed.

REP. OCAMPO. Mr. Speaker, sobrang nalungkot ang maraming mga Miyembro ng Kamara sa isyu ng Napoles. Kami po na hindi naman nasangkot doon sa listahan ay malungkot din dahil parang kami po ay kailangang magpaliwanag sa aming konstituwente na hindi kami kasali doon.

Ito pong kasamahan nating taga-Maynila at may ebidensiyang ipinakikita, maliit na halaga, P1 milyon, sana po ay gumawa tayo ng isang aksiyon dito sa Kongreso na sa loob ng panahon bago tayo magkita-kitang muli sa July, ay matutukan po ng COA at ng NBI iyong dokumentong ipinakikita ng ating kasamahang Kongresista ng Maynila na si Congressman Bagatsing para mapatunayan natin na mayroong isa doon sa listahan na idinadawit iyong isang katerbang mga kasamahan natin sa Kongreso, at mapatunayan natin na wala po siyang sala, na wala pong katotohanan iyong ipinaparatang na kasali po si Congressman Bagatsing. Gaano kahirap po ba na manduhan natin iyong dapat pong ahensiya ng gobyerno katulad ng COA para po sa audit, doon sa NBI sa falsification ng dokumento, para po patunayan iyong sinasabi ni Congressman Bagatsing na wala po siyang kasalanan at hindi po siya sangkot doon sa listahang sinasabing kasama po siya? Iyan po ang tanong ko sa inyo at tanong ko rin po sa ating mga kasamahan, nang sa gayon, mapatunayan natin na hindi lahat nag nandoon sa listahan na sinasabing magkakasama ay may sala po, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Mangyari pong sumagot ang ating Kinatawan from the Fifth District of Manila.

REP. BAGATSING. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I thank the Lady from the Sixth District of Manila. Talagang nakalulungkot po, Mr. Speaker, I had to gather enough strength. Alam naman po

ninyo, lahat na po ng tao, nagde-deny diyan sa pork barrel. Hindi ko malaman, ang sabi ko, baka ako ay tatawanan at sasabihan, nagde-deny ka nang nagde-deny. Pero, this time, Mr. Speaker, with the help of the Divine Providence, nakakuha ako ng mga dokumento that will prove that I was, as the Honorable Atienza said, a victim. Itong mga dokumentong ito, Mr. Speaker, wala po akong kopya ng mga dokumentong ito dahil I have no knowledge na ino-operate na pala iyong aking pondo. Wala akong kopya, so ang hawak ko lang ay isang forged signature, pero iyong mga endorsement ng NGO, iyong gamit na plain bond paper, iyong second endorsement na generic letterhead and the temerity, talagang ang lakas ng loob na pinaghalong logo ng national at pangalan ng House of Representatives pinagsama, at binaboy na ang tanggapan ng mga Congressman. At least, in my case, ginamit iyon. Wala naman pong Congressman na hindi gagamitin ang kanyang official letterhead especially for any form of communication. Nag-e-endorse nga lang tayo ng pasyente sa PGH, sa anong hospital, nag-e-endorse tayo ng scholar sa CHED, nag-e-endorse tayo ng projects sa DPWH at kung anong sangay ng gobyerno, naroroon ang ating letterhead. Iyan po ang puwesto natin kaya tayo ay Kinatawan, pagkatapos, makikipag-usap ka nang opisyal, walang letterhead na opisyal iyong Congressman na iyan. Hindi gawain ng Congressman iyan. We are proud of our letterhead. We are so proud that we even put all the committees as a marginal. Pero dito sa aking particular case, wala nga, puro plain at cross breed, hybrid, pero tinanggap ng mga opisyales sa loob ng TLRC.

Mind you, Mr. Speaker, ang aking nilaanan ng pondo ay TLRC. Hindi ko naman alam na biglang na-collapse iyong TLRC at ginawang TRC. Kaya ako naglagay ng pondo doon, dahil sa livelihood, hindi dahil sa research. In other words, Mr. Speaker, talagang walang kopya ang Congressman. Iyon bang ikaw ay ina-underground, alam mo ba iyon? Hindi mo alam iyon e. Pero nang makakuha nga ako ng kopya sa COA dahil wala na akong matakbuhan, mabuti na lang at ang COA ay may original at ibinigay sa akin lahat, certified true copy, pero wala ring SARO ang COA rito sa particular TLRC case ko na ito.

So, masyadong malinis at magulo ang trabaho ng sindikato. So, I hope, I already wrote to the NBI para sa aking signature verification and I am willing, because these are all public documents, na dito magsimula ang imbestigasyon sa mga hawak ng COA at hawak kong dokumento. Marami pa akong hindi ipinakita sa inyo dahil hahaba po ang aking speech. Ginawa pa nga akong empleyado ng Masaganang Ani e, pumipirma sa sulat at sa ilalim, ako, noted, letterhead ng Masaganang Ani. Gagawin ba ng Congressman iyon? Gagawa tayo ng endorsement using our letterhead pero hindi tayo pipirma sa letterhead ng isang NGO, e letterhead ng NGO, nakapirma ako? Of course, hindi ko alam iyon dahil sila ang gumawa, pero nakakuha ako ng record kaya ko nakita. But, no Congressman will sign in an NGO letterhead, endorsing it to any government agency. Ang SOP, ia-attach natin iyong request at sa letterhead natin, gagawa tayo ng transmittal or endorsement sa anumang agency of the government.

So, talagang garapal itong pagkakagawang ito, Mr. Speaker. So, tama lang si Congresswoman Ocampo po na talagang ito na, biktima po ang kinalabasan natin, contrary sa ipininta or nai-picture na tayo po ay kasabwat. I strongly deny that, Mr. Speaker, not merely denying, but the documents will set me free. Yes, Mr. Speaker.


REP. OCAMPO. So, Mr. Speaker, since we have only one day before we adjourn, is there a power of Congress that we can use to ask the NBI or the COA to investigate this particular case of Congressman Bagatsing? Kumbaga, ang ibig kong sabihin, i-separate natin, ihiwalay natin iyong kaso ni Congressman Bagatsing na ito, mayroon siyang dokumento na wala siyang sala, para po sa loob ng panahon na tayo po ay naka-break hanggang sa July, ay magkaroon na po ng imbestigasyon sa partikular na kaso niya. What power of Congress can we use to make the COA and the NBI investigate this particular case? What will it take for us, collectively, to make these agencies investigate this particular case, Mr. Speaker?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Gentleman will please respond.

REP. BAGATSING. Mr. Speaker, as far as I am concerned, I have already filed a perjury case against Janet Lim Napoles. Next week, I am also filing a civil case for damages because she really damaged me well. She did not only damage me, but also my family, my friends, and my constituency. Next week, I would be filing that civil suit against her.

So, siguro, kung sa legal side, aandar na po iyan; sa Legislative side, it is up to the leadership kung anong direksiyon po ang ating tatatahakin.

REP. OCAMPO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is exactly my point. As a matter of parliamentary inquiry, I am directing my question to the Chair. Those are the legal remedies or the remedies that the Congressman from the Fifth District has taken, but what about the House? What can we do, especially in this particular case, when our Member is clear that he is innocent of this charge?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Should there be an appropriate motion to be done by the Dep. Majority Leader, at the appropriate time, whether it will be referred to the Committee on Rules or not, the Chamber shall wait for the recommendation of the Committee on Rules.

REP. OCAMPO. So, Mr. Speaker, you are saying, there is no action that we can take. We have to refer to the Committee on Rules.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). We have a procedure, as the Lady from the Sixth District of Manila knows, and so, let us abide by the procedure of the House.

REP. OCAMPO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The time of the Gentleman has expired.

The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, the Gentleman from the Second District of Batangas, the Hon. Raneo E. Abu, wishes to be recognized,

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is the Gentleman going to interpellate the Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila?

REP. ABU. G. Ispiker, maaari po bang makapagtanong ng ilang mga…?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Puwede po bang hingin natin muli sa Dep. Majority Leader…

REP. BAGATSING. Opo, handang-handa po ako para sa magiting na …

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). …na gumawa ng motion para ma-extend iyong oras ng ating kasamahan?

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move to extend the Privilege Hour to another 30 minutes.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Gentleman is actually rising on a matter of personal and collective privilege, and he was only given 10 minutes. So, the 10-minute period has already expired, unless there is an appropriate motion to extend for another 10 minutes.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we extend the time of the Gentleman to another five minutes.


The Gentleman from Batangas has five minutes to interpellate the Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila.

REP. ABU. Salamat po, kagalang-galang na G. Ispiker. Salamat din po sa kagalang-galang nating Kinatawan ng Ikalimang Distrito ng siyudad ng Maynila.

Ang mukha po ng ating bansa, pag sinabi pong Maynila, ito po ay Pilipinas na rin po. Kayo po ay isa sa Kinatawan ng ipinagmamalaki nating lungsod ng Maynila. Siguro nga po ay pag nabatikan ang Kinatawan ng mukha ng ating bansa ay parang ang nabatikan na ay ang buong bansa. Tama po ba?

REP. BAGATSING. Tamang-tama po iyang sinabi ninyong iyan.

REP. ABU. Kagalang-galang na Speaker, ang inyo pong lingkod ay baguhan lamang pong Kinatawan. Bagama’t ako po ay baguhan, ako naman po ay siyam na taon na rin pong nagtrabaho dito sa atin sa Kongreso.

Noon pong nagtatrabaho po ako rito sa aking butihing dating Kinatawan ng Ikalawang Distrito, Kinatawan Dodo Mandanas, ay alam ko pong may proseso iyon pong paggamit ng Priority Development Assistance Fund. At alam ko rin po na kapag tayo ay naglagay at nag-nominate ng project na nai-submit natin sa Committee on Appropriations, nakalagay doon iyong implementing agency. At kung mayroon man po kung saka-sakali tayong mga programa, lalo na sa pangkabuhayan, at mayroon pong mga organisasyon na siyang mangunguna para iyon pong iimplementa iyong ating mga programang pangkabuhayan, tama po ba ako G. Ispiker, na iyon pong mga nongovernment organizations na iyon ay kailangang accredited muna ng mga implementing agency?


REP. BAGATSING. Tamang-tama po iyong binigkas ng Gentleman from Batangas. Tama po iyon. May mga ahensiya po tayo at mga sangay ng pamahalaan na sa kadahilanan na hindi po nila kayang i-implement ang programa ng, halimbawa, lahat ng Kongresman at Senador, talagang humihingi sila ng tulong sa mga NGO. Tama po iyon.

REP. ABU. At hindi naman po, G. Ispiker maa-accredit ito ng implementing agency kung hindi sila papasa sa kalipikasyon na isinasaad at ibinibigay ng ahensiya ng gobyerno, tama po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Tama po iyon, tama po iyon.

REP. ABU. At kahit na po anong sabihin, kahit po ang Kinatawan ay magsabing mas maganda siguro itong organisasyon na ito ang magsakatuparan ng aking proyekto, kung hindi papasa ito sa kalipikasyon at maa-accredit ng ahensiya ng gobyerno ay hindi po ito makakapag-implementa ng nasabing programa. Tama po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Tama po iyon.

REP. ABU. Kung gayon po, G. Ispiker, ang implementing agency o ang ahensiya ng gobyerno na magsasakatuparan ng programa ang siya talagang huling-huling tao na kailangang magbigay ng pagsang-ayon kung sino ang magsasakatuparan nito, at kung walang pagsang-ayon nila, hindi maii-release ang pondo para gamitin ng nasabing nongovernment organization. Tama po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Tumpak po kayo. Ang katotohanan po niyan, naisalaysay ko po kanina na doon sa TLRC, noong mag-file po ng endorsement ang Masaganang Ani, iyong isang group manager ng Support Service ng TLRC na nagngangalang Atty. Figura, ang nagsabi na, “Hoy, huwag ninyo munang ipasa iyan diyan sa Masaganang Ani dahil hindi pa siya nagko-comply sa requirement niya. Pangalawa, iyong isang requirement na kinakailangan, original endorsement ni Cong. Bagatsing ang ibibigay, eh xeroxed itong ibinibigay ninyo sa amin.” So, ang sabi niya, “Hold muna iyan hanggang sa mag-comply.” Eh, hindi po naman nag-comply pero nakuha pa rin iyong pera. Ganoon po kaganda ang samahan nila doon. Samakatwid, mayroon nang rekomendasyon na nanggagaling sa kasamahan na nila, eh parang na-ignore at itinuloy pa rin at nagkabayaran pa. Hindi na nga nag-comply pero natuloy pa rin.

REP. ABU. Tama rin po ba, G. Ispiker, na habang iniimplementa iyong programa ay partner lamang ang opisina ng Kinatawan at ang mismong nagsasagawa ng programa ay mismong iyong ahensiya ng gobyerno? Tama po ba iyon?

REP. BAGATSING. Tama po iyon dahil in-accredit nila iyong NGO, kung NGO man iyon, o sa kanila manggagaling talaga ang implementasyon.

REP. ABU. Tama rin po ba iyon, G. Ispiker, na matapos pong maimplementa iyong programang iyon, ang nagli-liquidate o ang mismong nag-aayos ng mga papeles para mabayaran ang nongovernment organization ay iyon mismong ahensiya ng gobyerno, at iyong accounting department ng

ahensiya ng gobyerno ang siyang mayroong internal audit para tingnan kung iyong mga proyekto ay naisakatuparan nang tama? Tama po ba iyon, G. Ispiker?

REP. BAGATSING. Tamang-tama po iyong sinabi ninyo kaya nga ang tawag sa kanila “implementing agency,” dahil sila po ang nag-iimplementa ng mga requests po natin, ng mga proyekto natin. Sa kanila po natin idinadaan, kaya tama po kayo doon.

REP. ABU. G. Ispiker, matapos po silang makakolekta at dumating na sa punto na i-a-audit, titingnan ng Commission on Audit kung tama rin ang papeles, kung naaayon sa batas. Kapag nakita nilang tama, okay lang sa kanila at kapag hindi nila nakitang tama, tuwing katapusan ng taon ay kakausapin nila ang implementing agency at sasabihin nilang hindi ito tama at dapat iayos nila ang lahat ng dokumento. Tama po ba iyon, G. Ispiker?

REP. BAGATSING. Tumpak po ang inyong obserbasyon dahil kapag sinabi ng COA, “Oy, hindi tama iyan. Hindi tama ang pagkaka-implement, o idi-disallow,” ay talagang nasa kanila, ‘ika nga, ang last say. See?

REP. ABU. Kung gayon po, G. Ispiker, tama rin po na ang Kinatawan ng Kongreso, na kung saan iyong mga tao ay lumapit na kailangang magkaroon ng ganitong programa, ay nagrekomenda ng ganitong programa, pero pagkatapos magrekomenda ng programa, ang lahat na ng paper works at ang lahat na ng kung papaanong proseso ang gagawin at mga pag-aayos ng papeles, hanggang tingnan ito ng COA, ang implementing agency ang gumagawa at hindi ang Kinatawan na nagrekomenda ng programang ito. Tama po ba iyon, G. Ispiker?

REP. BAGATSING. Tama po iyang sinasabi ninyo. Mukhang eksperyensiyadong-eksperyensiyado po kayo sa lakad ng mga papeles dito.

REP. ABU. Salamat po, G. Ispiker. Ang akin lamang, medyo kaya ho ako nagtanong ng ganoon ay baka nga ho ako ay nagkakamali, bilang ako ho ay baguhan na Kinatawan ng Kongresong ito. G. Ispiker, napakasakit ho sa amin na mga baguhan dito na pagtuntong na pagtuntong namin sa atin pong Plenaryong ito, dito po sa Kongreso, ay ganyan na agad ho ang bumulaga sa amin. Pagtuntong at pagyapak ho agad namin dito sa Kongreso ay sasabihin agad na kami ay mga magnanakaw.

G. Ispiker, napakasakit naman ho sa amin dahil nakikita naman ho natin, tulad ng nangyari sa ating Kinatawan sa Ikalimang Distrito ng Maynila na ang papeles ay sala, ang mga pirma ay sala, pinagbintangan, ginawaran na agad, at naging masama ang tingin ng mga tao tulad ng pagiging masama ang tingin din sa amin na mga baguhan dito sa Kongreso.

G. Ispiker, napakasakit sa amin dahil hindi ho mismo lamang ako na Kinatawan ng Ikalawang Distrito ng lalawigan ng Batangas, hindi lamang po ang Kagalang-galang na Kinatawan ng Ikalimang Distrito ng Maynila, Amado Bagatsing, hindi lamang po ang mga Kinatawan dito ng iba’t ibang distrito ang tinutuligsa at nagiging masama sa paningin ng mga tao kundi ang buong institusyon ng Kongreso ay nagiging masama sa tingin ng tao.


G. Ispiker, sa nangyayaring iyan, siguro naman po, kailangan namang ipakita natin kung ano po talaga ang tunay na larawan sa pagsasakatuparan ng mga programang iyan. Siguro po ay panahon na para ipakita rin natin ang tunay na liwanag ng Kongresong ito. G. Ispiker, panahon na po siguro, dapat na manindigan tayo na ang Kongresong ito ay hindi kung ano ang tinitingnan ng mga tao nitong nagdaan. Panahon na po siguro para ipakita natin na ang Kongreso ay hindi ho Kongreso ng mga magnanakaw kundi Kongreso ng mga Kinatawan ng mga Pilipino na naniniwalang may gobyerno na nagsisilbi sa tao.

Marami pong salamat, G. Ispiker. Marami pong salamat sa Kinatawan ng Ikalimang Distrito ng Maynila. (Applause)

REP. BAGATSING. Napakaganda po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Maraming salamat din, Kagalang-galang na Ranie Abu, mula sa Ikalawang Distrito ng Batangas. Well-taken, Honorable Abu.

The time of the Gentleman from the Fifth District of Manila has expired.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that the speech of the Honorable Bagatsing as well as the interpellation thereto be referred to the Committee on Rules.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we resume the Privilege Hour and for this purpose, I move that the Lady from the Party-List GABRIELA, the Hon. Luzviminda C. Ilagan, be recognized for her privilege speech.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Hon. Luzviminda Ilagan from Party-List GABRIELA has the floor to avail of the Privilege Hour.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. ILAGAN

REP. ILAGAN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Honorable colleagues, I would like to talk regarding

the worsening situation of peasant women under the CARP and CARPER.

Today, June 10, is the 26th year of the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program or CARP. This June 30 is also the fifth and last year of CARPER, the deadline for the completion of land acquisition and distribution of the program. I thus rise to share with our honorable colleagues the GABRIELA Women’s Party’s assessment of the situation of our peasant women after nearly three decades of the CARP.

Of all programs of past and present governments, no single program, other than the CARP, has given our farmers so many promises that, while remaining critical, stirred their hopes to own a piece of land. When its implementation was started 26 years ago, the CARP was dubbed as the cornerstone of the post-Marcos society, hailed as the great weapon in the fight against poverty in a countryside wracked by peasant

unrest and peasant-based insurgency. Today, no program of past and present governments, other than the CARP, has crushed those hopes in a field rendered barren by its failed promises. And its failure is the most vicious on our peasant women.

Our peasant women badly need genuine agrarian reform as much as their male counterparts. Sixty per cent of our poor are in the rural areas and half of these are women, mostly engaged in unpaid family labor or underpaid labor in the informal economy. With rising costs of living amidst recurring economic crisis and natural disasters, our peasant women bear the double burden of economic and household work. In our country today, many peasant women are heads of the household not only in terms of raising children but also in ensuring that there is food on the table. With these double burdens, they work longer hours than men.

This poverty and its attendant burdens on women are rooted in landlessness, joblessness and a feudal-patriarchal society that largely undervalues, or worse, does not recognize the productive role of women. But 26 years of CARP have not fundamentally altered the situation of our women. In fact, their situation has only worsened. Their labor participation and productivity continue to be accounted in official figures. In 2009, official statistics recorded only 3.1 million peasant women of the 12.04 million employed in the agricultural sector, although peasant women could be found in almost all sub-sectors in agriculture. The productive role of peasant women continues to be undervalued compared to men’s labor in agriculture. In 2011, BAS figures on wage rates in agriculture showed that peasant women were paid only an average of P196.31 a day while men received on the average, P209.97 a day.

A large number of peasant women are left out from the supposed benefits of the CARP. While the law does not discriminate in terms of ownership of land, the mindset of the implementors remains biased to the old habit that considers farmers basically male, thus, surveys target only males. Consequently, of the 3.8 million agrarian reform beneficiaries, only one-third are women. In this measly percentage, the security of their ownership and enjoyment of the land awarded them, like the rest of the farmers, has been subjected to various schemes of reversal. Kakaunti na nga ang mga kababaihang magsasaka na nakatatanggap ng lupa mula sa CARP, binabawi pa.

A case in point is the sad plight of some 200 women in Mascap, Montalban, Rizal. These women are part of some 1,030 farmer-beneficiaries who were awarded emancipation patents in 1974 under Presidential Decree No. 27. They religiously paid their amortizations with the LandBank and, in the course of time, they fully paid their lands. They took on multiple jobs just to be able to pay their amortization, combining farming with washing clothes, waiting in restaurants and karaoke bars, or street vending in Antipolo. These women are now between 60 to 70 years old. But all their hard work went in vain when the owner, the estate of Amado Araneta, filed cancellation proceedings against their emancipation patents without the women’s knowledge. The case was heard and went all the way to the Supreme Court without their participation because the case notices were merely dumped at the office of the barangay chairman who did not bother to inform them. On February 28 this year, they had the surprise of their lives when they received an order


from the Supreme Court declaring its decision cancelling their EPs as final and executory. The cancellation was based on Presidential Proclamation No. 1283, as amended by Presidential Proclamation No. 1637, declaring the lands from San Mateo through Antipolo to Montalban as resettlement reservation. They are now living like death row convicts waiting for their execution, waiting for the writ of execution to evict them from their land. Fortunately, AMIHAN, an organization of peasant women farmers, heard their plight and referred their case to Sentro Para sa Tunay na Repormang Agraryo, a legal servicing institution for farmers.

Mr. Speaker, the CARP has failed to help peasant women realize their right to own land. It has failed to empower the peasant women, much less achieve gender equality. The CARP has perpetuated and reinforced the subjugation of peasant women by a feudal-patriarchal system that puts “the rightful place of women in the home.” It has failed to distribute land, to employ the landless and displaced peasant women or to increase the wages of women agricultural workers. Peasant women remain unable to rise above their poverty. Instead, the Aquino administration implemented the Conditional Cash Transfer Program which gives dole outs and ties peasant women to the house, tasked to comply with the conditions attached to the program. The CARP also promoted Agrarian Reform Communities which are serving as conduits for contract growing that mainly relies on unpaid family labor or the pakyaw system which depresses the wages of peasant women and agricultural workers.

Mr. Speaker, honorable colleagues, because the CARP has spared big landed estates from distribution, it is carving the CARP-covered lands into small farm parcels that are not economically viable for rural families with an average size of six to eight members. Farms of less than a hectare, courtesy of the CARP, now dominate Philippine agriculture. This has turned farming into a losing business proposition, forcing a myriad of our peasant women to abandon the countryside to look for employment opportunities in the cities and abroad as overseas contract workers. The typical rural family today is no longer the family of old in which mother and father both worked in the farm and went home together. The typical family today is one whose father is in the town center working as construction worker and whose mother is in Manila working as a domestic helper or prostituting herself, so foreign tourists can have more fun in the Philippines, for what measly amount that could be sent home to hungry children.

The CARP is an epic failure. After 26 years, arguably the longest-running agrarian reform program in the world, it has not kicked rural poverty, unemployment and hunger. Landlessness has even worsened, such that in regions like the Calabarzon, Central Luzon, Western Visayas and Central Visayas, the sites of growth areas, landlessness has increased from seven out of 10 Filipino farmers a decade ago to the present eight out of 10 Filipino farmers.

Mr. Speaker, come June 30, our country will be at a crossroads and legislators will be put to make a hard choice. One road tempts us to extend CARPER. The other road beckons us to genuine agrarian reform embodied in House Bill No. 252 filed by the ANAKPAWIS Party-List. We, in GABRIELA Women’s Party, have long decided to cast our lot with genuine agrarian reform, and not to extend a law that is doomed to fail.

Good evening.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move…

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). I thank the Lady from GABRIELA, the Honorable Ilagan.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that the speech of the Lady from GABRIELA be referred to the Committee on Rules.


The privilege speech of the Lady from GABRIELA Party-List, Honorable Ilagan, is referred to the Committee on Rules.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, before we continue with the Privilege Hour, may we acknowledge the presence of some guests in the gallery.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Please proceed.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). We have here the guests of the Hon. Nicanor M. Briones, Representative of AGAP Party-List. We have here the officials from Batangas, particularly the Philippine Counselors League of Batangas Federation, headed by Board Member Kathleen Briones; Board Member Dexted Buted, Councilor Mildred Sanches, Councilor Ronald Apritado, Councilors Alvin Payo, Laarni Adia, Alberto Lat, Louise Malabanan, Reychelle Ogalinola, Robenson Sale, Kristine Balmes, Menandro de Castro, Peter Thomas Reyes, Gil Guerra, Efren Reyes, Brigido Villena, and their staff, Mr. Federico Reyes and Ms. Brenda la Roza.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Maraming salamat po sa inyong pagdalo, mga bisita ng ating Kagalang-galang Briones, mula sa lalawigan ng Batangas. Welcome. (Applause)

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, we also have the guests of Deputy Speaker Roberto V. Puno, but before we acknowledge their presence, the Deputy Speaker wishes to be recognized for a point of information.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Deputy Speaker, Honorable Puno, is recognized.

REP. PUNO. Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and thank you, my distinguished colleagues.

In fulfillment of a promise that was made in the Justice Committee, while it was considering House Bill No. 4084, granting Filipino citizenship to Andray Blatche, it is with great pride and pleasure that I acknowledge the presence here today of Mr. Andray Blatche. (Applause)

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Mr. Andray Blatche, welcome to the House of Representatives. (Applause)


REP. PUNO. Today, he sits in the gallery as an honored foreign guest, but soon he will stand proudly among us as a fellow Filipino.

I would like to thank my colleagues in the House, all of you, and our fellow lawmakers in the Senate, particularly Senator Sonny Angara, for swiftly acting to approve the bill that this Representation initiated last January seeking to grant Philippine citizenship to Mr. Blatche.

With our efforts to naturalize Andray Blatche, the possibility has arisen that the man the Fifteenth Congress naturalized to play for the Gilas Pilipinas last year, Mr. Marcus Douthit, would have to give way and pass on the torch to Mr. Blatche. Despite this, Mr. Douthit threw his full support behind the move to grant Philippine citizenship to Mr. Blatche. Marcus Douthit attended the committee hearings in both the House and the Senate when the naturalization bill was being discussed and has publicly declared that he was in favor of the measure. I thank Mr. Douthit for being a true Filipino.

Mr. Blatche, I know that in your desire to become a Filipino and play for our national team, you would be giving up the right to play in international competitions for any other country, including the United States. In his affidavit filed and sworn before the Philippine Consulate in New York, Mr. Blatche affirmed this, along with his intention “to mingle with the Filipinos and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipino people.”

He has done so in his brief stay here. To quote him in one interview, Mr. Blatche described his experience here as “amazing.” He found out for himself that Filipinos are, in his own words, “very generous, nice and caring.”

He will be playing only for the Philippines. This is the desire of Mr. Andray Blatche. This is his commitment. For that, we can for certain say that Mr. Blatche deserves the honor of being called a Filipino.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The manifestation of Deputy Speaker Puno is well-taken and noted.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). With that, Mr. Speaker, may we acknowledge the presence of the guests of the Deputy Speaker. We have here Mr. Andray Blatche …

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Please rise.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). … from the Brooklyn Nets, Executive Director Sonny Barrios, Ms. Yvette Cruz, Mr. Aboy Castro, Mr. Charles Pryor and Mr. Bryan Extra, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Welcome to the House of Representatives. Maraming salamat po.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, may we now recognize the Lady from the Party-List GABRIELA, the Hon. Emmi A. De Jesus, for her privilege speech.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Lady from the Party-List GABRIELA, the Hon. Emmi A. De Jesus, is recognized to avail of the Privilege Hour. Please proceed.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. DE JESUS

REP. DE JESUS. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker. Ikinagagalak ko na pagkatapos ng privilege speech ng aking kasama rito kaugnay ng mga manggagawang magbubukid, ang akin pong tatalakayin ngayon ay tungkol naman sa mga manggagawa rin na kalakhan ay kababaihan.

Binabatikos ng Representasyong ito ang walang katarungang pagsisante sa 24 na opisyal ng NXP Semiconductors Cabuyao Incorporated Workers Union (NXPSCIWU) noong Mayo 5. Ang naturang unyon ay kasalukuyang nasa proseso ng pakikipagnegosasyon para sa collective bargaining agreement o CBA sa ngalan ng 1,600 na manggagawang regular sa planta na dating kilala sa tawag na Philips.

Malugod na tumugon ang GABRIELA Women’s Party sa panawagan ng mga apektadong manggagawa na sila ay samahan sa kanilang paglaban sa mga sumusunod na dahilan:

Una, dahil sa maraming manggagawa sa NXP ay kababaihan.

Ikalawa, ang NXP ay isang larawan ng atake ng kontraktuwalisasyon sa paggawa. Ang Representasyong ito ay nagpasa na rin ng panukalang batas noong Mayo para masawata ang walang habas na kontraktuwalisasyon sa paggawa.

Sa ikatlong punto, ang matagumpay na pagsusulong ng karapatan ng manggagawa sa loob ng export processing zone ay mahalagang paalala para marepaso ang mga hindi makatarungang kalakaran na anti-manggagawa sa bansa, partikular sa loob ng export processing zones.

Ang EPZ na itinatag ng diktaturyang Marcos o mga engklabo ay bilang pang-akit sa dayuhang kapital na maengganyong mamuhunan sa murang lakas-paggawa ng mga Pilipino. Bilang insentibo sa mga kapitalista, tiniyak ng gobyerno noon na may espesyal na pagpapaliban sa mga batas na umiiral lalo na sa larangan ng mga regulasyon sa usapin ng pagbubuwis, empleyo at paggawa. Pinairal ng gobyerno ang No Union, No Strike Policy sa mga engklabo.

Animo mga military garrison kung saan ang iiral lamang ay ang mga arbitraryong patakaran ng mga administrador ng EPZs sa layon na gawing maamo ang mga manggagawa at walang reklamo na tiyakin ang mabilis na pagsampa ng super tubo sa mga kapitalista rito.

Sa kabila ng ganitong kalakaran, sa Light Industry and Science Park sa Cabuyao, naigiit ng manggagawa ang pagbubuo ng unyon sa NXP. Isa sila sa iilang independiyenteng unyon na nakapaggiit ng kanilang karapatan sa kabila ng maraming tangka ng management na buwagin. Umasa ang PEZA na mapanatili ang bentahing ganito, ang matahimik na investment climate, kapalit ang panunupil sa karapatan ng manggagawa.

Nagmukhang autonomous region ang EPZ at naging kabalikat pa nito ang Department of Labor and Employment sa pagkukunsinti sa mga kapitalista sa loob ng enclave sa kanilang paglabag sa mga batas na pambansa ang saklaw.

Nitong May 5, 24 sa hanay ng pamunuan ng unyon ng NXP ang hinarang sa bakuran ng LISP at sinabihang sila ay tanggal na sa trabaho dahil sila raw ay nagtulak na lumiban sa pagpasok sa apat na legal holidays—ang Araw ng Kagitingan, ang Huwebes Santo, ang Sabado de Gloria, at ang mismong mahalagang araw ng manggagawa, ang International Labor


Day or May 1. Ayon sa mga lider ng unyon, nakapaskil pa ang kanilang mga larawan na parang mga wanted criminals.

Pawang mga regular holidays ang nabanggit. Dati, ang kagawian ng management ng NXP, hinihingi ang permiso ng mga manggagawa na magtrabaho kapag holiday. Nitong mga nabanggit na petsa, hindi iyon ginawa ng management. Malabis na kaparusahan sa pag-absent sa regular holiday ang maramihang pagtitiwalag at pagkakaso pa sa kanila ng illegal na welga.

Wala ring ganitong ginawa ang management dati, patunay na ang gusto dahil nasa gitna ng labanan sa CBA ay ipatanggap ang gusto nila sa negosasyon. Ang DOLE na laging nangangakong ipagtanggol ang kanilang karapatan na mag-holiday ang mga manggagawa ay wala sa eksenang ito. Nilalabag din ng PEZA na parang may sariling mga batas na ang interes ng kapitalista ang tinutugunan.

Mr. Speaker, hindi na bago ang ganitong panunupil sa mga manggagawa lalo na kung nasasalang ang negosasyon para sa CBA.

Kasalukuyang ipinaglalaban ng unyon ang walong porsiyentong karagdagang arawang sahod o P52. Binabarat ang mga manggagawa ng NXP ng management at gawin na lamang daw 3.5 percent ang increase na siyang global standard daw sa buong mundo na ang katumbas ay P20 umento na kulang pa para pambili ng isang kilong bigas.

Ito ang alok ng kompanya na nagkakahalaga ng $7.26 billion ang kanyang asset dahil sila ang nagbubuo ng microchips para sa Apple, Nokia at ASUS, at nakabida sila sa Forbes magazine na tumubo ng 10.4 percent or $1.17 billion bukod pa sa inaasahang revenue na 1.13 bilyon noong 2014.

May kuwento rin ang presidente ng unyon na si Reden Alcantara na na-propaganda sa mga empleyado ng NXP na nalulugi ang NXP Philippines kaya hindi maibibigay ang kahilingan ng unyon na umento. Ito ay sa kabila ng annual corporate report na nagyayabang na ang planta nito sa Pilipinas ang nagpasok ng pinakamalaking bulto ng kinita noong 2013. Taliwas din ito sa naganap na pagbili ng kompanya ng mga bagong mamahaling makinarya para matiyak ang mga inaasahang tiba-tibang bentahan ng microchips na nakita rin ng Forbes bunga ng papalaking demand ng consumers sa Asia Pacific.

Bukod pa sa panggigipit sa CBA negotiations, ginagamit na rin ng NXP management ang labor contractualization para mabigo ang unyon at palakihin ang bilang ng manggagawa na mas kaya nitong kontrolin. Sa kabuuang mahigit na 5,000 empleyado, bumaba na lamang sa 1,600 ang regular at patuloy na pinapalaki ang hati ng contract labor na nitong huli ay umabot na sa 1,007. Pinapakalat din ng management sa mga contractuals ang mapanlinlang na usapin na hindi raw tumataas ang sahod nila dahil sinasabi na humihingi ng demand o may demand na hinihingi ang unyon na dagdag at apektado rin ang Asian workers. Ginagamit na ring sangkalan ng NXP ang planta sa Pilipinas para takutin naman ang mga unyonista sa Thailand na kung igigiit nila ang mataas na sahod, ililipat ng management ang investment sa Pilipinas. Maliwanag na ginagamit ng NXP ang “divide and rule,” hatiin ang hanay ng manggagawa sa iba’t ibang bansa at kung hindi man, para babaan ang kanilang suweldo, sa maximum ay makaltasan ang kanilang sahod at gawing sunud-sunuran ang mga manggagawa.

Sana hindi ito nagbabadya na maulit ang marahas na trato ng PEZA at mga kapitalista tulad ng nangyari noong 2009

na ipinatawag pa nila ang pulis at military para makialam sa mga welga at ilegal na nagdampot at nagkulong sa mga lider at unyon sa Cavite EPZ. Sa sobrang mga paglabag sa karapatang pantao sa ilalim ng dating panguluhan ni Presidente Macapagal-Arroyo, nagpasya ang International Labour Organization na magpadala ng high-level mission sa Pilipinas para pormal na masiyasat ang mga patakaran ng PEZA na gumigipit sa karapatan ng manggagawa na mag-organisa at sumali sa unyon at napatunayan na ayon sa ILO Convention ’87 at ILO Convention ’98, may karapatan ang mga manggagawa, maging sa loob ng enclaves ng EPZA, na mag-unyon at mag-negotiate ng collective bargain.

Nagpatawag pa ang DOLE noong 2011 ng mga konsultasyon kaharap ang pamunuan ng PEZA para sa paglutas ng mga labor conflict sa ilalim ni Presidente Aquino ngunit lahat ng mga napirmahang guidelines ay binalewala ng mga kliyente nitong mga dayuhang kapitalista na patuloy na umaastang isang nagsasariling republika ang enclave na may sariling batas na may kontra-manggagawa.

Nakikita naming malaking hamon ngayon kay Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz na siya pang nagpasinaya ng mga guidelines na ibalik ang mga natanggal na lider ng unyon at ipakita sa mga lumabag sa kanilang karapatan na may sinumpaan silang mga alituntunin na wala pang tatlong taon ang nakalipas na kanilang pinirmahan, at dapat din itong makita ng PEZA bilang babala at pagkilala sa karapatan ng mga manggagawa. Tigilan na nila ang anumang balakin na salakayin pa ang mga independiyenteng unyon sa enclave na naggigiit din ng kanilang karapatan.

Mga kasama dito sa Kapulungan, alalahanin natin na ang kagalingan ng manggagawa sa huling banda ay nasa kamay pa rin nila. Sa harap ng panggigipit, paniniil at malagim na pamamaslang ng mga lider na naganap noong panahong 2006-2007, patuloy silang mag-oorganisa, mag-iipon ng lakas para mawakasan ang pang-aalipin ng sahod at kapital.

Hanggang sa ngayon ay patuloy pa rin na lumalaban ang mga manggagawa sa NXP. Sa kabila ng panunupil ng mga security personnel sa LISP, patuloy na nagmamartsa ang mga manggagawa para ipakita ang kanilang pagkakaisa laban sa panlilinlang at paniniil.

Ano ang pwedeng gawin natin dito sa loob ng Kamara? Kami ay naghahapag ng ilang hakbang. Kailangan nating silipin na ang mga patakaran, nakasulat man sa dokumento o basta na lamang arbitraryong pinagpapasyahan sa paggawa na sinusunod ng PEZA at ng mga empresa sa mga engklabo ay dapat rebyuhin. Sila ba ay sumusunod sa Labor Code, sa international labor standards, o may sarili ba silang panuntunan na kahit ang DOLE ay hindi pwedeng makialam, o may kinalaman mismo ang DOLE? Ang pagtatanggal ba batay sa hindi pagpasok ng mga manggagawa sa pista opisyal ay isa lamang sa mga nakapagtatakang kaganapan na kailangan nating maimbestigahan?

Mr. Speaker, mga kapwa ko Mambabatas, napapanahon na ipatawag sa Komite ng Paggawa ang mga nasasangkot na mga ahensiya, ang mga pribadong partidong may kinalaman sa usaping ito, at maging ang manggagawa mismo na apektado, ang tingin ng Representasyong ito ay kailangang iharap at magkaroon ng opisyal na pagsisiyasat. Nakasalalay ang kinabukasan, kaligtasan at kalusugan ng ating mga manggagawa na dapat nating unahing paglingkuran sapagkat sila ang lumilikha ng yaman ng bansa.

Maraming salamat at magandang gabi.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Maraming salamat din, Kagalang-galang na Emmi De Jesus.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, the Gentleman from OFW Party-List, the Hon. Roy V. Señeres Sr., wishes to be recognized to interpellate the Lady from GABRIELA Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is the Lady willing to yield to the Gentleman from Abakada Party-List?

REP. SEÑERES. No, from OFW Family Club, Inc. Pary-List, Mr. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS. Gladly, Mr. Speaker, my dear colleague.

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you, Mr. Speaker; thank you, distinguished colleague from the GABRIELA Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Please proceed, Honorable Señeres.

REP. SEÑERES. Maraming salamat po, kagalang-galang na Representante ng GABRIELA Party-List. Napakaganda po ng inyong privilege speech at ako po ay tumayo para magtanong nang bahagya tungkol doon sa nabanggit ninyong labor contractualization.

Mayroon po ba tayong figure, at kung mayroon lang po, kung gaano na kalaganap ang labor contractualization sa ating bansa?

REP. DE JESUS. Bagama’t wala po akong absolute updated number, malinaw po, lalo na sa mga service workers, kung gaano kalaganap ang contractualization. In fact, among the industries that we have, talaga pong ito ay higit na makikita ang kontraktuwal na manggagawa sa industriya ng serbisyo. Sa bahagi po ng GABRIELA Women’s Party, kaya isa ito sa nilalaman ng aming panukala kaugnay ng kontraktuwalisasyon dahil kalakhan din po ng nasa service industry ay kababaihan.

REP. SEÑERES. Once upon a time, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague, iyong contractualization ay umiiral lamang dito sa Metro Manila dahil ang mga malalaking malls noon ay dito lamang nag-o-operate sa Metro Manila.

Pero sa kasalukuyan, mayroon nang mga mall na malalaki sa Caraga Region, sa Abu Sayyaf country, sa Davao, and they are all over the country. Iyong SM, babanggitin ko na, ni Henry Sy, iyong Robinsons ni Gokongwei, iyong mga mall ni Zobel de Ayala, iyong mga Gaisano, iyong Puregold, Junior and Senior pakuno-kuno—ang karamihang mga empleyado diyan ay mga contractual. Ang tawag din sa mga contractual, Mr. Speaker, ay iyong mga “endo,” mga “endo” or end-of-five-months contract employees. Noong kapanahunan ng mga Kastila, ang tawag sa mga ninuno natin ay mga “indiyo,” mga biktima ng mga pang-aabuso. Ngayon, wala na iyong mga Kastila ay mayroon pa naman tayong mga endo naman na pinagsasamantalahan ng mga may-ari ng mga giant malls in the country. Bakit po nangyayari ito, Mr. Speaker? Ito

po ay trabaho ng Executive branch. Pero bakit lumalawak nang lumalawak ang incidence ng contractualization in the country? Dahil nagbubulag-bulagan ang Executive branch especially the Department of Labor and Employment as well as the local governments.

Napakaliwanag po sa ating Saligang Batas, the Constitution of the Philippines, na ang mga manggagawa ng bansa ay dapat bigyan ng security of tenure, Mr. Speaker. Ano po ang ibig sabihin ng security of tenure? Ang ibig sabihin lang po niyan ay no worker in this country should be terminated from his or her work without a just or authorized cause. Ano po ang enabling law ng ating Saligang Batas? Iyong Labor Code, napakaliwanag. Sinasabi ng Labor Code, nakalagay diyan iyong four exclusive instances whereby an employer can terminate a worker for just causes. Ano itong mga just causes na ito? As far as I can recall, as a former labor official, ito ang mga sumusunod: 1) Serious Misconduct. Kapag iyong worker ay may serious misconduct ay puwede siyang tanggalin because that is considered as a just cause. However, take note, ang sabi ng batas ay serious misconduct. Ibig sabihin, kahit na misconduct iyan, kung hindi serious ay hindi sila puwedeng tanggalin. Marahil ay warning lamang. 2) Willful Disobedience on the Part of the Worker. Ibig sabihin, kahit na disobedient iyong worker na iyan, kung hindi naman willful ay hindi rin puwedeng tanggalin; 3) Gross and Habitual Neglect of Duties. Ibig sabihin po, kahit na habitual iyong neglect of duties, kung hindi naman gross ay hindi rin puwedeng tanggalin; at 4) Attempt on the Life of the Employer or his Relatives. Iyon lang ang exclusive, four instances whereby an employer may terminate an employment.

Bakit po ang nangyayari ngayon sa buong bansa, diyan sa mga factory, sa nabanggit ng kagalang-galang na Kinatawan ng Gabriela, kung makatanggal sila ng mga manggagawa diyan ay parang mga manok na ginagawang fried chicken ng McDonalds na isa pang malaking kumpanya sa ating bansa na nagpapairal ng contractualization? Iyong Jollibee, halos lahat ng mga business ngayon dito sa bansa ay mga contractualization business. Bakit po nangyayari ito? Dahil the Executive branch is turning a blind eye on the exploitation, abuse upon our labor force in this country.

Kaya, ako po ay sumusuporta sa panawagan ng aking iginagalang na Representante ng Gabriela na ipatawag ang Department of Labor dito sa Kamara at iyong iba pang mga ahensiya. Kung kailangang ipatawag natin iyong mga mayor ng mga cities and municipalities lalo na diyan sa Makati na naging pugad o di kaya karagatan ng contractualization, nandiyan iyong Ayala Malls, SM at Robinsons. Bakit pinapabayaan ng mga mayor iyan na mag-operate na nagba-violate sila ng ating Saligang Batas on security of tenure? Pati mga mayor, kagalang-galang na Representante ng Gabriela, ay dapat ipatawag natin dito at bakit pinapabayaan nilang mag-operate iyong mga mall na iyan na nagpapairal ng contractualization? Pati mga governor din ay ipatawag natin, what are they as governors for kung iyong napakaliwanag na paglabag sa ating Saligang Batas ay pinapayagan nila? It could be—it may not be a sin of commission, but it could be a sin of omission on their part. Dapat ipatawag din iyong mga local government


official para managot kung bakit lumalaganap ang labor contractualization in this country, which is against the Constitution and against the law?

Thank you very much to the Lady from Gabriela.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). So, what is the question?

REP. DE JESUS. Maraming salamat din po sa inyong pagsuporta at pahayag, at inaasahan din po namin na sa mga committee hearing, sa mga susunod na panahon ay kasama namin kayo sa paglilinaw.

REP. SEÑERES. Salamat po. Salamat, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). So, it was just a manifestation.

REP. SEÑERES. A manifestation and also an interpellation, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Okay. Noted.

REP. SEÑERES. …considering that I was asking, Mr. Speaker, if she has the figures on how widespread labor contractualization in the country has become.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Anyway, the point is well taken.

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of the Hon. Emmi A. De Jesus, as well as the interpellation, to the Committee on Rules.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I would like to move for the recognition of the honorable Rep. Pedro B. Acharon Jr., the Gentleman from the First District of South Cotabato and General Santos City, to deliver his privilege speech.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The Honorable Pedro B. Acharon Jr. from the First District of South Cotabato and General Santos City will now take the floor to avail of the Privilege Hour. Please proceed.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. ACHARON

REP. ACHARON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Good evening, everyone and to all the Members of

this House. I rise for the sake of the best interest of our constituents and for the future of local governance. May I delight your evening with a thought of revisiting the provision in Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of

the Philippines. Specifically, I wish to invite the attention of everyone to Section 470, which states:

Section 470. Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and Duties – a) The treasurer shall be appointed by the Secretary of Finance from a list of at least, three ranking, eligible recommendees of the governor or mayor, as the case may be, subject to the Civil Service Law, rules and regulations.

This provision, Mr. Speaker, is plainly directive but observably has been a source of argument invoking governing principles such as trust and confidence, checks and balances, and public interest. Again, Section 470 of Republic Act No. 7160 will be in the limelight, as the local government of General Santos is presented with a query whether or not to accept its new city treasurer.

Let me present to you, Mr. Speaker, the antecedent facts. Last 2012, the Office of the City Treasurer of the city of General Santos became vacant due to the mandatory retirement of the current office holder. As such, on that same year, then, the city administrator of that city, of our city, submitted his intention to apply for the vacated post along with two other applicants namely the assistant city treasurer and the assistant city accountant.

All the applicants complied with the documentary requirements as proof of their qualifications and their applications were duly endorsed by then city mayor to the Department of Finance for evaluation and appointment pursuant to Section 470 of the Local Government Code.

On June 2013, Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima appointed Atty. Jose Mariano Constantino Gonzales to the vacated office of the city treasurer. Likewise, on June 30, 2013, a new mayor took over the leadership of the local government of GenSan, having won in the last May 2013 local election. However, despite appointment by the Finance Secretary, the new treasurer could not assume office in view of the opposition by the Civil Service Commission.

On April 1, 2014, the Civil Service Commission finally confirmed and approved the appointment through Civil Service Resolution No. 14-00513, after the same commission initially questioned the appointee’s five years of treasury or accounting service experience as prescribed by the Local Government Code. Meanwhile, Mr. Speaker, the Bureau of Local Government Finance executive director wrote the appointee dated April 25, 2014 informing the latter, that is, Atty. Gonzales, that his appointment was already approved by the Civil Service Commission. Appointee then took his oath of office, informed the newly elected city mayor as well as other department heads relative to his assumption, and wrote the OIC regional director that he assumed office and requested the regional director of BLGF Region XII to facilitate the turnover of the post from the acting city treasurer. He then assumed office on April 24, 2014 while awaiting the proper turnover. But before any turnover could proceed, the incumbent mayor issued Memorandum No. CMO-05-2014-001726 informing all department heads, assistant department heads and employees, and I quote:


To detail Atty. Gonzales to other stations or if not, to allow the undersigned to transfer him to the hospital, so as not to unduly affect the regular order of business and transactions of the LGU, involving the Office of the City Treasurer, in view of the legal questions of his appointment.

Further, on the same memorandum, the incumbent mayor further stressed and I quote:

Let it be known that the undersigned, as the incumbent mayor, will not in any way honor or recognize Atty. Gonzales’ assumption and discharge of the functions of the said office.

From what I have learned, Mr. Speaker, this memorandum is still operative as I speak. Likewise, a petition for certiorari and prohibition was filed before the Court of Appeals against the commissioners, the Civil Service Commission, regarding the commission’s issuance of Civil Service Resolution No. 14-00513.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Carlos M. Padilla relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Sergio A.F. Apostol.

Looking now at Section 470 of the Local Government Code, my dear colleagues in this august Chamber, we are presented with a situation where a local chief executive collides with the mandate of the Secretary of Finance. Not so long ago, I think there were also two cities in the Philippines which figured in the same dispute with Department of Finance who had a falling off with the city treasurer but could not shake the latter off due to Section 470. All of the mentioned local government chief executives sought justification of their action on the premise of “trust and confidence.” In letting go or refusing to accept, it seems that our local chief executives are implying that the city treasurer could not enjoy the former’s trust and confidence and not of the Secretary of Finance.

Based on the petition for certiorari, the petitioner, of course the city of General Santos, as represented by the city mayor emphasizes that, and I quote, paragraph 81:

With the crucial functions that the city treasurer shall perform it is only fitting that the ones who will be appointed shall possess the trust and confidence of the local chief executive with whom he shall be under his administrative supervision.

Mr. Speaker, my dear colleagues, it is true that trust and confidence is essential between the mayor and some of his subordinates in the discharge of his duties. The city administrator or the city legal, for instance, are some of the positions which are inherently confidential in nature but not with the city treasurer. It is my humble opinion that beyond the point of trust and confidence, it bears stressing the respect of the process. Devolution of local government powers indeed empowers the local government in charting their own administration as they see fit free from national intervention.

Purposely, there are certain provisions in the Local Code that are deliberately provided to ensure that parameters are established; in other words, checks and balances. The Constitution itself is founded on this scheme and so with the features of Republic Act No. 7160 taking cue from lessons of the past. As a former mayor, which some of our esteemed colleagues are, or some former governors before we enter the House of Representatives, I believe that during our time as local chief executives, we wanted our department heads to be at ease in the discharge of our functions without however transgressing their respective duties.

As can be gleaned from our case in the city of General Santos, the incumbent mayor is hesitant to accept the treasurer of choice by the Secretary who was recommended by his predecessor and a political rival at that. On the other hand, in fairness to the appointed city treasurer, he underwent the scrutiny of the Department of Finance and the Civil Service Commission which he hurdled successfully, hence, his appointment. However, it is apparent that he is not welcome in the person of the new mayor.

As to whether or not the incumbent mayor is defying the order of the Finance Secretary is another matter but the prevailing sentiment to this Representation’s opinion is to give due course to the spirit intended in Section 470, sub-paragraph (a). Be this as it may, I am calling for a revisit of Section 470 of Republic Act No. 7160 in order to avoid an alarming situation where government officials unnecessarily clash over provisions of law that are susceptible to varying interpretations. For one, is it necessary that the recommending governor or mayor mentioned in Section 470, sub-paragraph (a), is the same governor or mayor that will accept the choice of the Finance Secretary?

Along this line, I wish to invite my colleagues in this Chamber to revisit and reexamine Section 470, sub-paragraph (a) of the Local Government Code in the light of prevailing conflicts. Time and time again, disputes arise on this matter unnecessarily disturbing the peace between local chief executives and the national government. Hence, an amended version taking into consideration the conflicting views will somehow ensure that the incidents in some major cities in the country will be hopefully avoided in the future. In the meantime, while the appointment of the new treasurer, Atty. Gonzalez, as the city treasurer of GenSan or General Santos City by Secretary Purisima and the Civil Service Commission hangs on the balance, the local government is at stake of losing revenues and the delivery of public service.

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, it is the people who are affected in the midst of legal and theoretical discord.

We hope that for the sake of our constituents, public interest will evidently prevail, ending a paralysis in government service.

Thank you and good evening everyone.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Apostol). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of the Honorable Acharon to the Committee on Rules.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Apostol). The speech of Congressman Acharon is hereby referred to the Committee on Rules.


REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Gentleman from the Party-List ANAKPAWIS, the Hon. Fernando “Ka Pando” L. Hicap, for his privilege speech.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Apostol). Congressman Hicap is recognized.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. HICAP

REP. HICAP. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker.Nais ko pong magpahayag kaugnay sa kalagayan ng

mga magsasaka at ng pangangailangan para sa isang tunay na programa sa reporma sa lupa sa bansa.

Mr. Speaker, ngayong araw, Hunyo 10, 2014, ang ika-26 na taon ng Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), ang huwad na programa sa reporma sa lupa na kinasusuklaman at itinatakwil ng mga magsasakang Pilipino. Ipinatupad ito sa panahon ng dating Pangulong Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, na ipinagpapatuloy at gusto pang palawigin ni Pangulong Benigno S. Aquino III.

Ang CARP na siyang legacy ng gobyernong Cojuangco-Aquino ay pagpapahirap sa mahigit 80 milyong magsasaka, pagpapanatili ng atrasadong agrikultura at ekonomiya, at pagsuhay sa interes ng mga lokal at dayuhang malalaking panginoong maylupa.

Sa loob ng 26 na taon, bigo ang CARP at ang ekstensyon nitong Comprehensive Agrarain Reform Program Extension with Reforms (CARPER) na bigyang solusyon ang suliranin sa kawalan at kakulangan ng lupa ng mga magsasaka. Maging ang mga magsasakang naging benepisyaryo sa ilalim ng CARP at CARPER ay binabawian at pinapalayas sa kanilang mga lupaing sinasaka.

Mr. Speaker, hindi na nararapat palawigin pa ang CARPER. Tama na, sobra na, dapat nang palitan ang pekeng programang reporma sa lupa na nagresulta lamang sa mas malawak na land grabbing, land use conversion at paglabag sa karapatan ng mga magsasaka. Hindi na dapat pang pondohan ng bilyun-bilyong piso ang CARP na ginawa lamang gatasang-baka ng mga panginoong maylupa at pondo ng korapsyon ng ilang tiwaling opisyal ng gobyerno.

Mr. Speaker, ipinakikita na mula 1972, sa panahon ng Presidential Decree No. 27 sa ilalim ng gobyernong Marcos, hanggang Hunyo 2005, sa ilalim ng CARP, ang kabuuang kompensasyon na inaprubahan ng LandBank of the Philippines sa 83,203 landowners para lamang sa 1.3 milyong ektarya ay umabot na sa P41.6 bilyong o aabot sa $783.2 milyon na cash at bonds, o average na hihigit sa kalahating milyong piso bawat landowner.

Ngayong buong buwan ng Hunyo, magsasagawa ng malawakang pagkilos ang mga magsasaka sa buong bansa na biktima ng CARP upang ipanawagan ang pagbabasura sa extension ng CARPER at itigil at igiit ang libreng pamamahagi ng lupa sa mga magsasaka. Dadagsa sa Kongreso ang mga magsasaka upang igiit ang tunay na reporma sa lupa.

Mr. Speaker, hindi matatapos ang pangangamkam ng lupa at mga sigalot sa lupa dahil sa CARP. Ang higit na 6,000-ektaryang Hacienda Luisita sa Tarlac ay sadyang in-exempt sa CARP ni Presidente Cory Aquino sa pamamagitan ng iskemang stock distribution option (SDO). Hanggang ngayon po, isang dekada na matapos ang Hacienda Luisita massacre,

walang tunay na pamamahagi ng lupa sa Hacienda Luisita. Ang panlilinlang ng DAR ay nagpapalakas pa sa kontrol ng Pamilya Cojuangco-Aquino sa lupa. Naging napakasalimuot na ang sigalot sa lupa sa mismong bakuran ng Pangulo, araw-araw ay dumaranas ng pandarahas ang mga magsasaka at manggagawang bukid na naggigiit ng karapatan sa lupa.

Ang 8,650-ektaryang produktibong lupaing agrikultural at coastal sa Hacienda Looc sa Nasugbu, Batangas na pinagkukunan ng kabuhayan ng mga magsasaka at mga mangingisda ay pinagpapartehan ng mga dambuhalang real estate developer. Itinatayo doon ang iba’t ibang commercial, residential at eco-tourism projects ng Manila Southcoast Development Corporation (MSDC).

Ang higit 2,000-ektaryang Hacienda Dolores sa Porac, Pampanga na produktibong tinatamnan ng mga magsasaka ay gustong bahagi ng Alviera Project ng Ayala Land. Mismong ang DAR ang nag-isyu ng exemption at conversion order na nag-e-exempt sa lupa sa saklaw ng CARP dahil ito ay hindi umano lupaing agrikultural. Ang lupain ay gagawing integrated mixed-used development project na may commercial business district, industrial park, university zone, retail center, country club, recreational areas at residential neighborhood. Dalawang linggo nang nagkakampuhan doon ang mga magsasaka upang ipakita na hindi nila isusuko ang lupa sa malalaking negosyo.

Ang bahagi ng 3,500-ektaryang Araneta Estate sa San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan na dating nasa ilalim ng CARP ay kinakamkam ng pamilya ni Kalihim Mar Roxas. Pinaboran pa nito ang DAR na nag-isyu ng conversion order. Ang lupang agrikultural sa Tungkong Mangga, San Jose Del Monte ay gagawing Altaraza commercial-residential project ng pamilya Araneta katuwang ang Ayala Land, Inc. Nitong nakaraang buwan, nagsagawa na ng survey ang Araneta Properties sa lupa.

Binigyang daan ng CARP at CARPER ang pangangamkam ng lupa sa 2,000-ektaryang lupain sa Mauban, Quezon ng isang real estate company. Iko-convert ng Achievement Realty Corporation (ARC) ang 1,987-ektaryang niyugan sa mga barangay ng Rosario, Santo Niño, San Jose upang gawing Funtastic Dream World at FunMily Dream City.

Hindi na saklaw ng land reform ang lupain dahil ito ay mabundok at nakadahilig ng 18 degrees. Ngunit nang ipatupad ang CARP, nasaklaw ng land reform ang lupain ngunit ngayon ay kinansela ng Department of Agrarian Reform ang mga Transfer of Certificate of Title (TCT), nagbigay ng Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA), naglabas ng Notice of Coverage (NOC) ngunit nang ireklasipika ng lokal na Sangguniang Bayan ang lupain bilang non-agricultural, naging mas madali para sa Achievement Realty Corporation na kamkamin ang nasabing lupain.

Ang lupaing dating binubungkal ng mga magsasaka at may nakatanim na libu-libong puno ng niyog ay inaagaw ngayon upang gawing eco-tourism project.

Mr. Speaker, malinaw na ang CARP ay ginagawang instrumento ng malalaking may-ari ng lupa upang makaligtas sa pamamahagi ng lupa.

Kahit matapos man ng DAR ang pag-isyu ng Notice of Coverage (NOC) bago ang nakatakdang pagtatapos ng CARPER ngayong June 30, 2014, alam ng mga magsasaka na ang NOC o ang Notice of Coverage ay hindi katumbas ng pamamahagi at ganap na pagmamay-ari ng lupa. Alam nila


na ang issuance ng NOC ay simula lamang ng napakahaba at masalimuot na pakikipagtunggaling legal sa mga malalaking panginoong maylupa at paggiit para sa lupa.

Ang CARP ang pinakamatagal, pinakamagastos at pinakamadugong programa sa reporma sa lupa hindi lamang sa bansa kundi sa buong mundo. Matagal nang hinusgahan ng mga magsasaka ang CARP bilang peke, anti-magsasaka at maka-hacienderong programa.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Sergio A.F. Apostol

relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Carlos M. Padilla.

Kaya ang panawagan ng mga magsasaka, buwagin na

ang monopolyo sa lupa, isabansa ang mga lupang agrikultural, at ipamahagi nang libre ang lupa sa mga magsasaka at manggagawang bukid na walang sariling lupa.

Ito lamang po at magandang araw. Maraming salamat.


Maraming salamat din, Kagalang-galang na Hicap.

REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of the Honorable Hicap to the appropriate committee.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none the motion is approved.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend

the session for a few minutes. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The session

is suspended.

It was 6:32 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION At 6:33 p.m., the session was resumed. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The session

is resumed. REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we proceed

to the Additional Reference of Business.


The Secretary General will please read the Additional Reference of Business.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCE OF BUSINESS The Secretary General read the following Committee

Report and the Deputy Speaker made the corresponding reference:

COMMITTEE REPORT

Report by the Committee on Agriculture and Food (Committee Report No. 316), re H. Jt. Res. No. 13, entitled:“JOINT RESOLUTION DEFERRING THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANDATORY FOOD FORTIFICATION OF REFINED SUGAR WITH VITAMIN A AS REQUIRED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8976, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ‘PHILIPPINE FOOD FORTIFICATION ACT OF 2000’ UNTIL THE NATIONAL NUTRITION COUNCIL (NNC) HAS DETERMINED WHETHER IT IS STILL NECESSARY OR NOT”

recommending its approval in substitution of House Resolution No. 966

Sponsors: Representatives Mendoza (M.), Teves, Acharon, Alvarez (M.), Arnaiz, Benitez, Caminero, Collantes, Castro, Cueva, Defensor, Del Rosario (A.A.), Durano, Evardone, Garin (S.), Garin (O.), Gomez, Gorriceta, Javier, Ledesma, Leonardia, Mercado (D.), Mirasol, Nava (J.), Nava (P.), Ong, Pernes, Quisumbing, Relampagos, Reyes, Sarmiento (C.), Sarmiento (M.), Salimbangon, Haresco and Treñas


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). To the Committee on Rules.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION REP. ORTEGA (F.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend

the session for a few minutes.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The session is suspended.

It was 6:33 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 6:33 p.m., the session was resumed.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The session is resumed.

The Majority Leader, the Honorable Gonzales, is recognized.

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we take up a bill on Second Reading.

I so move, Mr. Speaker.


CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 3675ON SECOND READING

PERIOD OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider House Bill No. 3675, contained in Committee


Report No. 313, as reported out by the Committee on Ways and Means.

May I ask that the Secretary General be directed to read only the title of the measure.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.*

The Secretary General is directed to read only the title of the measure.

With the permission of the Body, and since copies of the measure have been previously distributed, the Secretary General read only the title thereof without prejudice to inserting its text into the Congressional Record.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 3675, entitled: AN ACT REMOVING THE CONDITIONS FOR THE CONDONATION OF ALL UNPAID TAXES DUE FROM LOCAL WATER DISTRICTS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 289-A OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, AS AMENDED.

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Explanatory Note of the bill be considered as the sponsorship speech on the measure.


REP.GONZALES. I move that we close the period of sponsorship and debate, Mr. Speaker.


REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, there being no

committee and individual amendments, I move that we close the period of amendments.

I so move.


REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we approve House Bill No. 3675 on Second Reading.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). There is a motion for the approval of House Bill No. 3675 on Second Reading.

As many as are in favor, please say aye.

SEVERAL MEMBERS. Aye.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are against, please say nay.

FEW MEMBERS. Nay.

APPROVAL OF H.B. NO. 3675ON SECOND READING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). The ayes have it; the motion is approved.

House Bill No. 3675 is approved on Second Reading.

CONSIDERATION OF H. JT. RES. NO. 13ON SECOND READING

PERIOD OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider House Joint Resolution No. 13, contained in Committee Report No. 316, as reported out by the Committee on Agriculture and Food.





THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Joint Resolution No. 13, entitled: JOINT RESOLUTION DEFERRING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANDATORY FOOD FORTIFICATION OF REFINED SUGAR WITH VITAMIN A AS REQUIRED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8976, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “PHILIPPINE FOOD FORTIFICATION ACT OF 2000” UNTIL THE NATIONAL NUTRITION COUNCIL (NNC) HAS DETERMINED WHETHER IT IS STILL NECESSARY OR NOT.

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Explanatory Note of the bill be considered as the sponsorship speech on the measure.


REP.GONZALES. I move that we close the period of sponsorship and debate, Mr. Speaker.


REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, there being no

committee and individual amendments, I move that we close the period of amendments.

I so move.

* See MEASURES CONSIDERED (printed separately)



REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we approve House Joint Resolution No. 13 on Second Reading.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). There is a motion for the approval of House Joint Resolution No. 13 on Second Reading.

As many as are in favor, please say aye.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are against, please say nay.

FEW MEMBERS. Nay.

APPROVAL OF H. JT. RES. NO. 13ON SECOND READING


House Joint Resolution No. 13 is approved on Second Reading.

OMNIBUS CONSIDERATION OF LOCAL BILLSON SECOND READING

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, in accordance with our rules, allow me to put forward an omnibus motion for the consideration of the following local bills on Second Reading; to consider the respective Explanatory Notes as the sponsorship speech on the measures; to close the period of sponsorship and debate, there being no Member who wishes to speak against the measures; to approve the committee amendments, if any; to close the period of amendments, there being no committee or individual amendments; and to approve the aforesaid measures on Second Reading.

1. House Bill No. 834, contained in Committee Report No. 298;

2. House Bill No. 4605, contained in Committee Report No. 309;

3. House Bill No. 4608, contained in Committee Report No. 310; and

4. House Bill No. 586, contained in Committee Report No. 314.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are in favor of the approval of the local bills enumerated in the omnibus motion, please say aye.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are against, please say nay. (Silence)

OMNIBUS APPROVAL OF LOCAL BILLSON SECOND READING


The local bills enumerated in the omnibus motion are hereby approved on Second Reading.*

RATIFICATION OF CONF. CTTEE. RPT. ON H.B. NO. 4595 AND S.B. NO. 2046

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, we are in receipt of the Conference Committee Report reconciling the disagreeing provisions on House Bill No. 4595 and Senate Bill No. 2046.

May I ask that the Secretary General be directed to read only the titles of the measures.


The Secretary General is directed to read only the titles of the measures.

With the permission of the Body, and since copies of the Conference Committee Report have been previously distributed, the Secretary General read only the titles of the measures without prejudice to inserting the text of the report into the Congressional Record.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 4595, entitled: AN ACT PROMOTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES and Senate Bill No. 2046, entitled: AN ACT PROMOTING JOB GENERATION AND INCLUSIVE GROWTH BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES AND BENEFITS TO MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES.

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we ratify the said Conference Committee Report.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are in favor of approving the Conference Committee Report, please say aye.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). As many as are against, please say nay. (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Conference Committee Report is approved.









THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 4082, entitled: AN ACT STRENGTHENING CONSUMER PROTECTION IN THE PURCHASE OF BRAND NEW MOTOR VEHICLES and Senate Bill No. 2211, entitled: AN ACT STRENGTHENING CONSUMER PROTECTION IN THE PURCHASE OF BRAND NEW MOTOR VEHICLES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.


VIVA VOCE VOTING











THE SECRETARY GENERAL. Senate Bill No. 2159, entitled: AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7721, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS AN ACT LIBERALIZING THE ENTRY AND SCOPE OF OPERATIONS OF FOREIGN BANKS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES and House Bill No. 3984, entitled: AN ACT ALLOWING FULL ENTRY OF FOREIGN BANKS IN THE PHILIPPINES, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7721.


VIVA VOCE VOTING





CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. NO. 1182

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider House Resolution No. 1182.





THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1182, entitled: RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING AND COMMENDING NONITO “THE FILIPINO FLASH” DONAIRE JR. FOR BEING THE NEW WBA FEATHERWEIGHT CHAMPION.

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we adopt House Resolution No. 1182.

ADOPTION OF H. RES. NO. 1182


House Resolution No. 1182 is adopted.



CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. NO. 1122 REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider

House Resolution No. 1122.May I ask that the Secretary General be directed to read

only the title of the measure.




THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1122, entitled: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE COLLECTIVE SENTIMENTS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, CONDOLING WITH THE FAMILY OF ANTHONY N. VILLANUEVA, THE COUNTRY’S FIRST OLYMPIC SILVER MEDALIST IN BOXING.










With the permission of the Body, and since copies of the measure have been previously distributed, the Secretary General read only the title thereof without prejudice to inserting its text in the Congressional Record.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1133, entitled: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE PROFOUND CONDOLENCE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE FAMILY OF CLARA “NANAY NENE” DELA ROSA ASILO, MOTHER OF REP. BENJAMIN D. ASILO OF THE FIRST DISTRICT OF MANILA.


I so move, Mr. Speaker.





REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I now move that we consider House Resolution No. 1203, contained in Committee Report No. 315, as reported out by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.





THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1203, entitled: RESOLUTION URGING THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO ESTABLISH A CONSULAR OFFICE IN THE CITY OF CALGARY IN ALBERTA, CANADA TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE INCREASING NUMBER OF FILIPINOS LIVING AND WORKING IN NORTHERN CANADA.


I so move.












THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1209, entitled: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE PROFOUND CONDOLENCE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE FAMILY OF MRS. VIRGINIA L. QUINTO, MOTHER OF THE HONORABLE LORNA Q. VELASCO, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AMA PARTY-LIST.


I so move.

Published by the Publication and Editorial Service, Plenary Affairs BureauThe Congressional Record can be accessed through the Downloads Center of the official website

of the House of Representatives at www.congress.gov.phddc/08182014/1848




SUSPENSION OF SESSION

REP. GONZALES. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session until tomorrow at four o’clock in the afternoon.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Padilla). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the session is suspended until tomorrow, June 11, 2014, at four o’clock afternoon.

It was 6:42 p.m.

Congressional Record - House of...

Documents

Transcript of Congressional Record - House of...