GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc, The Philippine Star, Friday, May 30, 2008
The entrepreneur in him makes Manny Villar see opportunity in crisis. The global cereal shortage and consequent surge in prices is the bane of consumers. But for the Senate President, it is a boon for Filipino farmers. Bright prospects await planters — what he calls “agricultural renaissance.”
Where farmers are coming from, rebirth may be hard to see. Decades of neglect of agriculture, food price controls, and consumer subsidies have debilitated farmlands. Low yield, depressed farm-gate prices and lack of wherewithal discouraged planters from plowing on. The best and irrigated lands have been converted into export zones and subdivisions. So, where to start?
Villar scans a roadmap out of the rut. Businesslike, he first lists down the strengths of the rural landscape. Rich soil, rain and rivers combine with hard-working rural folk, plus local and international rice research outfits. Villar then lists what more are needed. These have long been identified: more irrigation, better seed varieties, more potent fertilizers and pesticides, rural credit, far-to-market roads, grains dryers and silos, and technical info and training. What government has to do is put money into these.
Past administrations have tried to boost agriculture. Ramon Mitra Jr., as Speaker in 1987-1992, worked most of his time to “put more money in the pockets of farmers.” In 1995 President Fidel Ramos, Senate President Ed Angara and Speaker Joe de Venecia crafted an Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act. Their efforts didn’t go far because of fund shortage.
Reviewing his predecessors’ works, Villar plans an agricultural push where farmers already have a head start — in rice-producing Isabela, Nueva Ecija, Bulacan,
The renaissance doesn’t end there. “When rice farmers begin to earn a comfortable profit margin, not only will their disposable income improve,” Villar forecasts. “They also will become entrepreneurial in outlook because of their success.”
* * *
Apr. 28, Neri commented that the Senate misread the Court’s original ruling and so had no basis for the motion for reconsideration.
May 5, the Senate replied to the comment. Lamenting Neri’s silence, the Senate cited the people’s right to be informed of their government’s acts. From jurisprudence, such right outweighs mere privilege of confidentiality of presidential conversations. The Constitution is replete with provisions guaranteeing the right to be told, not of secrecy. It also specifically compels the President to report to Congress all foreign loans, which the $330-million telecoms caper would have contracted.
Since the people elected the Senate (and House of Reps) to represent them, their right to information therefore extends to Congress. The Senate stressed that Neri’s refusal to answer three crucial questions on the ZTE deal curbed Congress’ duty to craft good laws. Among the works affected was a proposal to delete executive agreements as an exemption from the Procurement Reform Act.
Neri had put on record in the Senate (and in the Court) that Benjamin Abalos offered him P200 million to endorse ZTE Corp. But he avoided three questions: did President Arroyo follow up the ZTE project with him, did she tell him to prioritize it, and did she tell him to approve the project even after he reported to her the bribe offer?
The Senate stated that since Neri admitted the occurrence of crime, all the more he must be compelled to answer. The Constitution requires accountability from public officials and transparency in their dealings. Allowing Neri to clam up breached these principles.
The Senate also lamented Neri’s doubletalk. At one point, he had told the Court that the information he was withholding easily could be obtained from NEDA documents. And yet he knew that NEDA and Malacañang had also invoked executive privilege to hide the papers. (It is in fact the subject of another Court petition filed by Sen. Mar Roxas.) Then, he flip-flopped anew and said there were no records or transcripts of the President’s instructions about ZTE as chairman of the NEDA Board.
A week after the Senate replied to Neri’s comment, the Solicitor General too opined on the Senate motion, taking Neri’s side. All parties have submitted their arguments and are awaiting the Court’s final ruling. Will it continue to defend Neri’s suppression of information on the ZTE deal, or search for truth?
* * *
