SR E P REENT A T I S V E PLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17th ... · Letters dated August 23, 2018 of...

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 2:00 p.m., the session was resumed with Deputy Speaker Raneo “Ranie” E. Abu presiding.

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

The Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we now proceed to the Additional Reference of Business.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). 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, and Communications, and the Deputy Speaker made the corresponding references:

BILLS ON FIRST READING

House Bill No. 8304, entitled:“AN ACT DEFINING AND PROHIBITING

OBSTRUCTION AND SLOWDOWN OF TRAFFIC WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ROAD RAGE, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representatives Nieto, Maceda, Martinez, Sandoval, Malapitan, Olivarez and Calixto-Rubiano

TO THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

House Bill No. 8305, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A UNIVERSAL

NEWBORN HEARING SCREENING PROGRAM FOR THE PREVENTION, EARLY

DIAGNOSIS AND INTERVENTION OF HEARING LOSS AMONG CHILDREN”

By Representative Sy-AlvaradoTO THE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

House Bill No. 8306, entitled:“AN ACT RECLASSIFYING THE SALARY

AND QUALIFICATIONS OF CERTAIN EMPLOYEES IN THE JUDICIARY AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representative SaloTO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

House Bill No. 8307, entitled:“AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT 7432,

AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NOS. 9994, 9257 AND 10645 OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘AN ACT TO MAXIMIZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF SENIOR CITIZENS TO NATION BUILDING, GRANT BENEFITS AND SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES’ ”

By Representative NietoTO THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON SENIOR

CITIZENS

House Bill No. 8308, entitled:“AN ACT REQUIRING THE INTEGRATION

OF BASIC COMPUTER LITERACY AND ADVANCED COMPUTER EDUCATION AS ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE CURRICULA OF GRADES 3 TO 12 OF THE ‘K TO 12’ (K-12) EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representative NietoTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

House Bill No. 8309, entitled:“AN ACT PROVIDING FOR PENSION AND

HEALTH BENEFITS TO COMFORT WOMEN, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

Congressional RecordPLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17th CONGRESS, THIRD REGULAR SESSION

House of Representatives

Vol. 2 Tuesday, October 2, 2018 No. 23d

1907PHILIPPINES

HOU

SE O

F REPRESENTATIVES

2 Congressional Record • 17th Congress 3RS v.2 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2018

By Representative NietoTO THE COMMITTEE ON WOMEN AND

GENDER EQUALITY

House Bill No. 8310, entitled:“AN ACT PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE

IN THE SALARY OF, AND ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES FOR, GOVERNMENT PHYSICIANS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE”

By Representative NietoTO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

House Bill No. 8311, entitled:“AN ACT CREATING THE SOLAR ENERGY

D E V E L O P M E N T C E N T E R A N D APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative NietoTO THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY

House Bill No. 8312, entitled:“AN ACT GRANTING DULY APPOINTED

JUDGES OF THE METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT AN INCENTIVE REMUNERATION, HEREIN KNOWN AS HAZARD PAY, EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERCENT (20%) OF THEIR BASIC MONTHLY SALARY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representative NietoTO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE

RESOLUTIONS

House Resolution No. 2208, entitled:“RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE

UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES TO RENEW ITS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND LEASE WITH THE QUEZON CITY POLICE DISTRICT OVER A PARCEL OF LAND OCCUPIED BY THE QUEZON CITY POLICE DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS NOW KNOWN AS CAMP TOMAS B. CARINGAL IN DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY”

By Representative Belmonte (F.)TO THE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND

TECHNICAL EDUCATION

House Resolution No. 2209, entitled:“A RESOLUTION HONORING FILIPINO

TEACHERS ON THE OCCASION OF THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS’ MONTH (NTM) -- GRATITUDE IN10SIFIED”

By Representative Durano

TO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION AND CULTURE

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

Message dated September 27, 2018, informing the House of Representatives that on September 26, 2018 the Senate approved the Conference Committee Report of the Bicameral Conference Committee on the disagreeing votes on House Bill No. 5556, entitled:“AN ACT RENEWING FOR ANOTHER TWENTY-

FIVE (25) YEARS THE FRANCHISE GRANTED TO ISLA COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, INC., PRESENTLY KNOWN AS INNOVE COMMUNICATIONS, INC., AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7372, ENTITLED ‘AN ACT GRANTING THE ISLA COMMUNICATIONS CO. A FRANCHISE TO INSTALL, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND INTERNATIONAL POINTS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES’ ”

TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

COMMUNICATIONS

Letters dated August 23, 2018 of Salvador C. Medialdea, Executive Secretary, Office of the President, Malacañang, transmitting two (2) original copies each of the following Republic Acts, all of which were signed on even date by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte:1. R.A. No. 11064, entitled:“AN ACT RENAMING PANGLAO ISLAND

CIRCUMFERENTIAL ROAD TRAVERSING BARANGAYS TANGNAN, BIL-ISAN, LOOC, POBLACION, DANAO, TAWALA, B O L O D A N D L I B A O N G I N T H E MUNICIPALITY OF PANGLAO AND BARANGAYS TOTOLAN, SONGCULAN, TABALONG, BINGAG, DAO, SAN ISIDRO, BIKING 1, BIKING 2, CATARMAN, MAYACABAC, POBLACION AND UNION IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF DAUIS, AS ANOS FONACIER CIRCUMFERENTIAL ROAD (DAUIS-PANGLAO)”;

2. R.A. No. 11065, entitled:“AN ACT CONVERTING THE LAND

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N O F F I C E (LTO) LICENSING CENTER IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF KAWIT, PROVINCE OF CAVITE INTO A REGULAR LICENSING CENTER TO BE KNOWN AS THE LTO

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2018 17th Congress 3RS v.2 • Congressional Record 3

CAVITE LICENSING CENTER OF KAWIT, CAVITE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;


TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) LICENSING CENTER IN THE CITY OF BATANGAS, PROVINCE OF BATANGAS INTO A REGULAR LICENSING CENTER TO BE KNOWN AS THE BATANGAS CITY LICENSING CENTER OF BATANGAS CITY, BATANGAS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;


TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) LOCATED IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BALAYAN, PROVINCE OF BATANGAS, INTO A REGULAR LTO DISTRICT OFFICE TO BE KNOWN AS THE LTO DISTRICT OFFICE OF BALAYAN, BATANGAS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”; and


TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) LICENSING CENTER IN THE CITY OF SAN PABLO, PROVINCE OF LAGUNA INTO A REGULAR LICENSING CENTER TO BE KNOWN AS THE SAN PABLO CITY LTO LICENSING CENTER AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”.

TO THE ARCHIVES

Letter dated September 14, 2018 of Salvador C. Medialdea, Executive Secretary, Office of the President, Malacañang, transmitting two (2) original copies of Republic Act No. 11069 which was signed on even date by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, entitled:“AN ACT AMENDING SECTION 1 OF REPUBLIC

ACT NO. 9727, REAPPORTIONING THE PROVINCE OF CAVITE INTO EIGHT (8) LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS”

TO THE ARCHIVES

Letter dated August 23, 2018 of Salvador C. Medialdea, Executive Secretary, Office of the President, Malacañang, transmitting two (2) original copies each of the following Republic Acts, all of which were signed on even date by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte:1. R.A. No. 11070, entitled:“AN ACT SEPARATING THE HERACLEO CASCO

NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL ANNEX IN BARANGAY SAN ISIDRO, MUNICIPALITY OF STA. MARIA, PROVINCE OF DAVAO

OCCIDENTAL FROM THE HERACLEO CASCO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, CONVERTING IT INTO AN INDEPENDENT NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS PEDRO MARISCAL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;

2. R.A. No. 11071, entitled:“AN ACT CONVERTING THE MAMAGUM

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN BARANGAY M A M A G U M , M U N I C I PA L I T Y O F SULTAN NAGA DIMAPORO, PROVINCE OF LANAO DEL NORTE INTO AN INTEGRATED SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS MAMAGUM INTEGRATED SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;

3. R.A. No. 11072, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL IN BARANGAY PAN-AY DAKO, MUNICIPALITY OF CLARIN, PROVINCE OF MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL TO BE KNOWN AS FELINA SEVILLA OAMINAL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;

4. R.A. No. 11073, entitled:“AN ACT CONVERTING THE MABUHAY

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN BARANGAY M A B U H AY, M U N I C I PA L I T Y O F SULTAN NAGA DIMAPORO, PROVINCE OF LANAO DEL NORTE INTO AN INTEGRATED SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS MABUHAY INTEGRATED SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;

5. R.A. No. 11074, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL

HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY BIGNAY, VALENZUELA CITY, TO BE KNOWN AS DISIPLINA VILLAGE-BIGNAY NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”;

6. R.A. No. 11075, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL

HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY TIBLAC, M U N I C I PA L I T Y O F A M B A G U I O , PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA TO BE KNOWN AS TIBLAC NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”; and

7. R.A. No. 11076, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL IN BARANGAY 184, ZONE 19, MARICABAN, PASAY CITY TO BE KNOWN AS PRESIDENT CORAZON ‘CORY’ C. AQUINO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”.

TO THE ARCHIVES


Letters dated September 24, 2018 of Salvador C. Medialdea, Executive Secretary, Office of the President, Malacañang, transmitting two (2) original copies each of the following Republic Acts, all of which were signed on even date by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte:1. R.A. No. 11077, entitled:“AN ACT REAPPORTIONING THE PROVINCE

OF AKLAN INTO TWO (2) LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS”; and

2. R.A. No. 11078, entitled:“AN ACT SEPARATING THE CITY OF CALAMBA

FROM THE SECOND LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT OF THE PROVINCE OF LAGUNA TO CONSTITUTE THE LONE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF CALAMBA”.

TO THE ARCHIVES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Before I recognize the Majority Leader, I would like to acknowledge the presence of our former colleague here in the House of Representatives and former Executive Secretary of the Republic of the Philippines, Executive Secretary Eduardo “Ed” Ermita.

Welcome to the House of Representatives, my kababayan and father of the former Accounts Committee Chair Eileen Ermita-Buhain. (Applause)


CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 8169Continuation

PERIOD OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I now move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 8169 and request the Secretary General to read the title of the measure.

I so move, Mr. Speaker.


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

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 8169, entitled: AN ACT APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES FROM JANUARY ONE TO DECEMBER THIRTY-ONE, TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

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

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the session.

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

It was 2:04 p.m.


At 2:16 p.m., the session was resumed.



BASES CONVERSION AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I now move that we proceed with the period of interpellation and debate and begin the consideration of the budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.




REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, before we proceed, may we acknowledge the presence in the gallery of BCDA President and CEO Vivencio Dizon, and the rest of the officers of the BCDA.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We welcome the family of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority headed by its President and CEO Vince Dizon. Welcome to the House of Representatives.


REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, we now move to recognize the Hon. Joey Sarte Salceda to sponsor the budget of the BCDA and to answer questions, if there are any, from our Members.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The distinguished Member and our colleague, the Hon. Joey Salceda, is recognized to sponsor the budget for the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, the first to interpellate


is the Hon. Carlos Isagani T. Zarate of BAYAN MUNA Party-List.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative from BAYAN MUNA Party-List, the Hon. Carlos Zarate, is recognized to interpellate the good Sponsor.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Magandang hapon ho sa ating lahat. Puwede ho bang magtanong sa ating Sponsor?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Maraming salamat po, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. Your Honor, ang BCDA ay isang government-owned and controlled corporation?

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po.

REP. ZARATE. Tama po. Unang tanong ko po, hindi po ba ang GOCC ay hindi na dapat humihingi ng budget sa Kongreso o sa gobyerno, tama po ba iyon?

REP. SALCEDA. Kapag binasa mo po iyong lahat ng GAA natin sa halos 20 taon, laging may makikita tayo po doon na item na Budgetary Support to GOCCs.

REP. ZARATE. Okay.

REP. SALCEDA. Hindi naman po fiscal rule o ibig sabihin fixed rule pero kung may kinikita sila, kalahati nito ay bumabalik po sa gobyerno. Marami nga po diyan na mga GOCC, kung saan ang kanilang dibidendo, na kalahati ng kanilang kinita, ay mas malaki pa po kaysa doon sa ipinasok ng gobyerno. Dumarating din po iyong ganoong panahon. Iyong BCDA, sa ngayon po, ay nagkakaroon ng masasabi nating new investment cycle kung saan nag-i-invest po ang ating national government pero alam natin na hindi kalaunan ay sila po ay magre-remit ng dibidendo pabalik sa atin.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat, Your Honor. Tama po naman iyon, na sa bawat taon na pinagdedebatehan natin ang ating budget ay mayroon talagang entry doon na Budgetary Support to GOCCs. In fact, part iyan ng Special Purpose Fund. Matanong ko lang, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, for next year, magkano po ang kabuuang budget bilang suporta na binibigay ng national government dito ho sa BCDA?

REP. SALCEDA. Ito ay humigit-kumulang na P17.2 billion po.

REP. ZARATE. So, ito ay P17.2 billion for 2019. Okay.


REP. ZARATE. Bago po ako magpalawig diyan, for 2017, magkano po ang kinita ng BCDA at magkano naman ang ibinigay nito sa national government?

REP. SALCEDA. Noong 2017 po, ang kinita po ng BCDA ay—negative po sila. Net loss po sila noong unang taon ng atin pong administrasyon subalit nagbayad po sila ng income tax na P270 million, at nalugi po sila ng P444 million. Noong sunod na taon, ngayong taon po, ang nakikita ko po ay malulugi uli sila ng P2.5 billion.

REP. ZARATE. Malulugi po ng P2.5 billion, iyon po ba ay for 2018?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Sa 2017 po, magkano iyong net loss nila na naitala?


REP. SALCEDA. May we request for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker.


It was 2:21 p.m.




The distinguished Sponsor is recognized.

REP. SALCEDA. Ang sinasabi ko po, Mr. Speaker, lugi sila pero dahil po sa perang ipinasok natin na ginugugol naman po nila sa pag-acquire ng mga assets, actually, net po sila ngayong taon. Noong 2017 po, kumita po ng P1,043,000,000 at nakapag-remit po sila sa national government ng P6 billion. Ito ang pinakamataas po sa talambuhay po ng BCDA.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, nakapag-remit sila ng P6 billion in 2017?


REP. ZARATE. Pero ang kabuuang kinita nila sa taong iyan ay P1.04 billion. Tama po ba iyon?

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po, P1 billion.


REP. ZARATE. So, P1.04 billion. Ang mandato po ng BCDA ay, of course, from the name itself, i-convert itong mga base militar para ibenta at ang pagkikitaan mula dito, saan po ba dapat mapupunta base sa mandato nito?

REP. SALCEDA. Dalawa po. Iyong mga base militar po na nandito sa Metro Manila, ang kalahati ay mapupunta po sa AFP Modernization Program pero mayroon pong ibinigay tayo, ang Kongreso, sa BCDA. Ito po iyong kabuuan ng Clark o iyong buong base militar ng Estados Unidos na nasa pamamahala po nila. Samakatuwid po, ang tagubilin natin sa BCDA ay palaguin ito upang po hindi lang po ito makapag-promote ng investment, mag-generate ng trabaho, mag-produce ng gross value-added, pero para makapagbigay mismo sa gobyerno ng dagdag na kita na puwedeng gamitin naman ng buong national government para sa development plans po ng ating national government.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor. Tama po, iyon po ang kanyang mandato dahil sinasabi noon na sayang ang mga lupaing ito at ang iba nga ay nakatiwangwang lang kaya kailangan na itong i-privatize at ibenta. Ang sunod na katanungan ko, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, ilan po ba lahat o mayroon ba tayong itemized na listahan noong mga base militar na ito na sakop sa mandato ng BCDA na kailangang i-privatize na o ibenta?

REP. SALCEDA. Puwede ko po kayong bigyan noong lahat po—Clark, John Hay, Poro Point. Puwede ko po ito ibigay sa inyo mamaya.

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. SALCEDA. May pito po na major Metro Manila small camps—Villamor Air Base, Fort Bonifacio, Bataan Technology Park, John Hay Reservation Area, Clark Special Economic Zone and Poro Point Freeport Zone, iyan po.

REP. ZARATE. We will appreciate it, Mr. Speaker, if this Representation will be given a copy of that particular list. Now, my next related question, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, dito ho sa listahang ito, magmula noong mabuo ang BCDA, ilan na ang na-privatize or naibenta or na-develop nito at sa kabuuan, habang nag-uusap tayo ngayon, magkano na iyong kinita nila at saan ginugol iyong kinitang ito?

REP. SALCEDA. Ang naibenta ay 601 hectares na po at karamihan po niyan— ang 512 noong 601 hectares ay iyong nasa Fort Bonifacio, at nakapag-raise na po sila ng P95 billion para po sa ating gobyerno. Kalahati po nito ay napupunta sa AFP Modernization Program at

iyong kalahati po ay napupunta sa atin at nire-reinvest o binibigay bilang pong dibidendo na, sabi ko nga, na last year ay nakapagbigay po sila ng P6 billion.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, nabanggit ninyo na kalakhan dito o kaya itinayo itong BCDA ay para ang mapagkitaan nito ay para sa AFP Modernization Program. At this particular point, Your Honor, habang nag-uusap tayo, magkano na po iyong naibigay natin para sa AFP Modernization Program?

REP. SALCEDA. Ang karamihan po ay—ito ay P39.7 billion.

REP. ZARATE. So, P39.7 billion went to the AFP Modernization Program?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo. Tama po.

REP. ZARATE. Kabahagi ba sa mandato ng BCDA na tingnan kung ang P39.7 billion na ito ay nailagak nga doon sa AFP Modernization Program?

REP. SALCEDA. Wala ho sa mandato na ibinigay natin.

REP. ZARATE. So, wala sa mandato nila?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Ang kanilang mandato lamang ay ibenta ito at magbigay ng pera para sa AFP Modernization Program.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo. Tama po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Wala ho bang report na ibinibigay ang DND or AFP?

REP. SALCEDA. Mga resibo po.

REP. ZARATE. Resibo lang?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Sige po. Kaugnay po na tanong—sinabi ninyo na sa taong ito o sa susunod na taon, P17.2 billion ang magiging subsidy na ilalaan ng pamahalaan sa BCDA. Saan po papunta ang P17.2 billion na ito? Anong mga proyekto ang popondohan nito sa BCDA?

REP. SALCEDA. Ang P17 billion po ay para sa development ng New Clark City, P3.963 billion; construction of sports facilities—ito po iyong para


sa SEA Games na sa ngayon po ay halos 60 percent complete na, P9.5 billion; pagkatapos, iyong paunang equity po doon sa Subic Clark Cargo Railway Project at para po lang ito sa right-of-way acquisition, P2.914 billion; at iyong replication po ng sports facilities, ng Air Force facilities sa Clark, na aabot po ng P500 million.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor. Again, Your Honor, this Representation will appreciate it if we will be given a detailed list of those projects to be funded from the P17.2 billion. So, ang kalalabasan po nito, Your Honor, nag-remit ang BCDA ng P6 billion noong nakaraang taon or this year pero bibigyan naman natin sila ng P17.2 billion. Ganoon po ba?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. So, lugi na naman. Ganoon ba ang kalalabasan noon? The mandate of the BCDA is to earn money for the national government but here we are, nagbibigay tayo ng mas malaki pang pondo kaysa kinita ng BCDA para sa mga proyekto nito. Paano po nagkaganoon iyon, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SALCEDA. Unang-una po, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, nasa imprest system po tayo. Lahat po ng pumasok ay ibu-book na pumasok bilang NG subsidy. Iyong lahat pong lumabas ay ibu-book din bilang remittance po ng BCDA sa national government bilang dibidendo o mga buwis, at isa sila sa talagang sumusunod po sa mga tax laws natin. Iyong P17 billion at saka iyong P6 billion po, Your Honor, ay hindi ho comparable. Although masasabi natin—kasi ngayon ka pa lang maglalagay ng P17 billion for next year, so, papaano siya makakapagbigay ng P6 billion? Iyong P6 billion po, iyon ay bunga noong mga marami po na sunud-sunod din na na-invest ng national government sa BCDA, na ngayon po ay nagbunga in terms po na masasabi nating kita na nire-remit po sa national government. Iyong P17 billion ay isang bagong investment ng BCDA. So, makikita po na doon sa P17 billion, halos o karamihan po niyan ay hindi pa ho iyon mga proyekto na, sa hinaharap po, magpo-produce ng income streams kung saan po iyong katulad noong P6 billion ay manggagaling.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. Sinabi po ninyo itong mga popondohan ng P17.2 billion and in fact, some of these projects ay patapos na. Ang ibig pong sabihin nito ay may mga pag-aaral naman na ginawa. Mayroon ho ba tayong projection dahil sinabi ninyo na ito ay investment. So, ano po ang projection natin kapag natapos na ang mga proyektong ito? Magkano naman din ang kikitain ng mga proyektong ito para sa national government, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SALCEDA. Marami po tayong datos pero sa suma total po, halimbawa, dahil po sa mga ginugol ng gobyerno bilang investment sa Subic, lalung-lalo na sa imprastraktura, iyong presyo ng lupa doon ay tumaas na po ng halos 10 times. So, doon po sa 36,000 hectares natin ho ay masasabi natin—ito ay hindi pa ibinebenta kaya hindi naman puwedeng i-book bilang income at hindi rin puwedeng dibidendo, pero ito ay isang indicator na nagpo-produce po o nagkakaroon ng wealth-creation para sa national government ang atin pong mga investment diyan po sa Clark mula sa BCDA.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor. Tinatanong po natin ito, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, dahil bilyon ang ginugol natin dito at siyempre kailangan masiguro natin na hindi ito masasayang, especially with the limited resources that we have now. Sa ating taunang budget, sa susunod na taon, ang daming mga ahensiya na tinapyasan natin ng budget, halimbawa, para sa DOH, para sa pabahay at iba pang frontline services dahil nga dito sa Cash-Based Budgeting na ito. Now, Your Honor, I will appreciate it if, again, mabibigyan ako ng mga pag-aaral dito.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo, kasi bago inaprubahan iyong mga proyekto, dumaan din po sa Board at dumaan din sa NEDA.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Sir.

REP. SALCEDA. So, dahil lampas po ng P2.5 billion ang karamihan po ng mga proyektong ito, kailangan dumaan ang mga ito sa Investment Coordinating Committee po ng NEDA.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor.

REP. SALCEDA. So, bilang isang indikasyon po, kapag diyan ay nag-go po ang NEDA, ang ibig pong sabihin niyan, lampas po sa social discount rate na 10 percent, pero ang computation po nila ay lampas po sa 16 percent ang kikitaain ng gobyenro. Ito po iyong tinatawag na “economic internal rate of return” noong mga proyekto.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Your Honor. Now, Your Honor, for my last series of questions.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Naitanong ko na rin ito sa kagalang-galang na Sponsor ng SBMA, Mr. Speaker, patungkol ho ito doon sa usapin ng ating mga kawani sa pamahalaan. Ilan po ang kawani ng BCDA as of this time, Mr. Speaker?


REP. SALCEDA. Tres cientos y trenta.

REP. ZARATE. So, 330. Ito iyon mga plantilla o regular positions po, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SALCEDA. That is 148 and so, may 182 po na masasabi natin, sa idea o sa konsepto ng kontratwalisasyon, na nakapaloob po doon.

REP. ZARATE. Tinatanong po natin ito dahil nga paulit-ulit na sinasabi natin dito na sa darating na January 1, 2019, base sa Joint Circular No. 1 ng DBM, Commission on Audit and Civil Service, ang bawat ahensiya o ang lahat ng ahensiya ng pamahalaan, maging national o local man, ay pinagbabawalan nang mag-hire through job orders or contracts of services except if galing ang mga ito sa agencies. So, ano po ang magiging plano ng BCDA dito ho sa ating 182, more or less, na mga contractual workers, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SALCEDA. Iyong pinaka-substantial na ginawa po nila ay may sulat na po sila para sa creation ng 150 permanent positions at bibigyan po namin kayo ng kopya.

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. SALCEDA. Dahil bilang isang GOCC—it is a monitored GOCC ng GCC po—kailangan po sila ay makapagpaalam. So, iyon ay para sa creation of new permanent positions para doon sa 150 of the 182. Samantala po, iyong natitirang 32 ay magkakaroon ng masasabi nating temporary arrangement dahil sa kakulangan po ng Civil Service eligibility. So, iyon po talaga iyong, as usual, magiging problema po natin dahil nga po may mga patakaran naman po tayo sa Civil Service Commission na kailangan pong sundin ng isang GOCC.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat, Mr. Speaker, at binigyan ng tuon din ng BCDA ang problema ng ating mga contractual workers. We trust that this commitment of the BCDA made on record in the Plenary, na itong 150 ay gagawan nila ng paraan na maipasok na mga regular, maging iyong 32. Talagang iyon naman ang problema ng karamihan ng ating mga job orders at contractual workers dahil wala silang Civil Service eligibility.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. ZARATE. Iyong nabanggit ko nga noon, sa SBMA, mayroon tayong panukala na magbigay ng substitute Civil Service eligibility.

…REP. SALCEDA. Opo, eligibility. Puwede naman

po at tutulong po ako doon dahil, bilang isang tao na galing po sa LGU, isa po iyan sa hinarap ko po na malaking problema— bakit hindi ho namin nare-regularize kahit may mga bakanteng posisyon kami. Binibigyan po namin ng tsansa iyong aming pong mga tumanda na mga kawani sa provincial government subalit po, hindi ho sila nagkakaroon ng CSE kahit ang daming beses nag-exam, dahil po ang CSE ay, actually, ang pinakamahirap na examination sa buong Pilipinas—8 percent lang po ang pumapasa. Dahil sa mayroon na hong sila muscle memory o alam na nila ang kanilang ginagawa at naintindihan na nila po ang goals ng provincial government ay minabuti po namin na bigyan sila ng tsansa kahit sa isang masasabi nating pansamantalang arrangement po, basta lang huwag silang mawalan ng trabaho.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, at kayo ay nagpahayag ng suporta. Gaya ho nang nabanggit ko noong nakaraan, tayo ho ay naghain ng isang panukalang batas, House Bill No. 7145, para mabigyan ng substitute eligibility itong ating mga kawani ng pamahalaan na hanggang ngayon, pagkatapos ng maraming taon, ay casuals pa rin, contractuals at job orders pa rin.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, we will send you a copy of the letter.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Your Honor. With that commitment that from the BCDA, ako po ay nagpapasalmat sa inyong pagpapaunlak sa aking mga tanong sa BCDA. Salamat, Your Honor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Maraming salamat po, Kinatawan Zarate.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, for our next interpellator, I move that we recognize the Hon. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao of the ANAKPAWIS Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative of the ANAKPAWIS Party-List, the Hon. Ayik Casilao, is recognized.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Magandang hapon, distinguished Sponsor.

For two consecutive budget deliberations, this Representation has consistently written a letter, and has been expressing this during Committee deliberations, the intention of this Representation to be updated, to be apprised of the efforts of the BCDA with regard to military reservations with existing land disputes,


such as, to name a few, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, Fort Magsaysay and the Clark Green City. Clark Green City and Fort Magsaysay, dalawa po ang mga issues diyan. In Clark Green City, there are Aetas and farmers living within the 36,000 hectares which are currently occupied and of course, because it is a military reservation, there have been disputes time and again. However, in the recent pronouncement of the NEDA in a resolution of the Investment Coordinating Council, sinabi po nila dito na they will pursue developing these military reservation sites for income generation and will enter into different private-public partnerships. But I have not heard any mention of the efforts to resolve existing land disputes. Now, may I know this from the distinguished Sponsor because, during the interpellation of my colleague, Congressman Zarate, he said there was P9.6 billion for Clark Green City allotted for road right-of-way. May I know if that right-of-way appropriations included resolving or addressing the issues of land disputes?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Your Honor, P597 million.

REP. CASILAO. Now, may I know if there is an ongoing effort to conduct a census and verify the occupants who could avail of any government programs for those affected communities?

REP. SALCEDA. The answer, of course, Your Honor, will be a yes but what I am asking specifically ay, kung sino po ang kinakausap sa opisina nila. The name is Jane Maloc and she heads the department handling right-of-way problems, Your Honor—no, not problems but right-of-way issues.

REP. CASILAO. Precisely, the intention of this Representation, distinguished Sponsor, to be asking for documents is for me to connect the people affected because there are organizations there, and for them to know if there will be a series of dialogues to be conducted.

REP. SALCEDA. Your Honor, we will produce the list of dialogues to be conducted by the BCDA with the organized landowners, the settlers therein to be affected.

REP. CASILAO. Yes, because we do not want the Fort Magsaysay incident to be repeated. I presume that the distinguished Sponsor knows about the shooting incident almost a year ago, involving security personnel in Fort Magsaysay, which claimed the lives of four farmers inhabiting the area.

REP. SALCEDA. We sympathize, Your Honor, but Fort Magsaysay is not under the BCDA; it is under the AFP.

REP. CASILAO. So, it is not part of the BCDA.

REP. SALCEDA. No, Your Honor.

REP. CASILAO. So, for Clark Green City, distinguished Sponsor, please provide this Representation the documents so that we can verify and we can communicate directly with the BCDA for proper help that would be necessary to assist our affected communities, especially the Aetas and the farmers living therein.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you very much, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SALCEDA. Thank you. Salamat po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Maraming salamat po, Kinatawang Casilao.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez from the Third District of Quezon, for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Our distinguished Minority Leader from the Quezon Province, the Hon. Danny Suarez, is recognized to interpellate the good Sponsor.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, when was this office of the BCDA conceptualized? In what year, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SALCEDA. One year after ho lumayas iyong mga Kano, noong 1992 po, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Noong 1992?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, because the treaty was not renewed in 1991. Noong 1992, Ramos pa po.

REP. SUAREZ. So, under President Ramos pa po?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo. Actually, under President Cory pa po pero the bulk of the activities were done during the term of President Ramos.

REP. SUAREZ. But dur ing the t ime of the late President Aquino, there were already movements inside Fort Bonifacio and Villamor Air Base.


REP. SALCEDA. Iyong Fort Bonifacio po, kasi nasa stock market po ako noon, ay 1995 po ito nabenta sa Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation o sa Metro Pacific Group.

REP. SUAREZ. So, the physical movement of land distribution and division was made in 1992?

REP. SALCEDA. Ito iyong creation noong BCDA po pero iyong pagsimula ng pagbenta ay noong 1995 na po, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. 1995?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo. Iyong pinakamalaki, siguro, ay noong panahon na iyon, na umabot po ng P36 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay.

REP. SALCEDA. I think P36 o P39 billion po ang binayad po ng Metro Pacific Group para sa Fort Bonifacio.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, were the proceeds from the sale of this land used in the modernization of the AFP?

REP. SALCEDA. That is correct po, Your Honor. Umabot po ng P95 o P98 billion po pero iyong napunta po sa AFP modernization ay P51 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. So, P51 billion?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. Kabuuan na po, iyong kasama ho iyong sa Clark at saka…

REP. SALCEDA. Wala ho silang share sa Clark dahil base po sa batas, mga Metro Manila camps lang po.

REP. SUAREZ. So, ito hong P51 billion, proceeds iyan from Bonifacio and Villamor?

REP. SALCEDA. Villamor, tama po.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, I passed by there and I saw those structures. Are these titled lands already, or is it a concession for the next number of years?

REP. SALCEDA. Titled po iyong pagkabenta sa Fort Bonifacio po.

REP. SUAREZ. So, iyong may hawak ngayon ho ng titulo are the developers?

REP. SALCEDA. Ang Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation po, noong una, ay pag-aari po ng Metro Pacific Group na ibinenta po sa mga Ayala, at doon po sa FBDC, 45 percent po noon ay hawak pa po ng national government through the BCDA. So, kung mayroon ho tayong kailangan para sa atin pong continuing AFP Modernization Program, puwede ho nating ipanukala na ibenta iyong 45 percent share ng national government.

REP. SUAREZ. So, there are still…

REP. SALCEDA. May 45 percent tayo sa FBDC, at developed na ngayon iyong lupa. Noong ibinenta po iyon, it went for P30,000 per square meter.

REP. SUAREZ. But the money is with them and it is no longer…

REP. SALCEDA. No, Mr. Speaker, these were shares. The money had been distributed either to the AFP or as dividends to the national government.

REP. SUAREZ. So, as they get paid, they also remit, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Your Honor. There is a temporal difference but it is very minor. It is only with respect to income recognition principles, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. How about the condominium unit owners? What title do they get?

REP. SALCEDA. CTC po.

REP. SUAREZ. CTC?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. So, it is a question of acres and square meters?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Do you also denominate the number of—on the land?

REP. SALCEDA. Basta naibenta na po, hindi na po iyon pag-aari ng FBDC.

REP. SUAREZ. No. I am just talking about the piece of land kasi mayroon ka hong vertical structure, hindi ho ba?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.


REP. SUAREZ. So, iyong vertical is owned by condominium owners?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. Iyon hong lote, kanino nakapangalan iyon?

REP. SALCEDA. There is a condominium corporation po, Your Honor, kung saan…

REP. SUAREZ. So, nandoon po iyon?

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. And the unit owners are part and parcel of…

REP. SALCEDA. Well, kapag nagkaroon po ng residual, parang dissolution noong condominium corporation, siguro it stands to reason po na mayroon silang share.

REP. SUAREZ. Is the ownership by the condominium owners for life or there is a shelf term for a number of years?

REP. SALCEDA. During the life of the corporation, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, there are lot of improvements in the area, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. For instance, Resorts World is there pero wala pong profit-sharing ang BCDA mula dito.

REP. SALCEDA. Your Honor, kasi may profit-sharing tayo sa FBDC. Iyong kinikita po ng FBDC ay net po at after all the multilayered corporate ownership structure, mayroon silang 3 percent share sa Resorts World. Hindi ba, 45 percent lang sila sa FBDC? Ito, hindi sa FBDC; sa Resorts World, may 3 percent po sila.

REP. SUAREZ. That is petty cash.

REP. SALCEDA. Ayan po, Mr. Speaker, may kaunti po. Gusto po ninyo ng aggregate amount? Umabot din po ito ng P350 million, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Magkano na po iyon—so, it is not petty cash, it is also big, Your Honor.

REP. SALCEDA. Ay opo, Your Honor, kaya nga isa

sila sa pinakamalaki after the PDIC and the PAGCOR. Ang sumunod na po na nagbibigay ng malaking remittance ay ang BCDA sa national government.

REP. SUAREZ. So, the BCDA earns money, collects the money and deposits the money under their name.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. So, technically, they do not need any money from the GAA.

REP. SALCEDA. In the sense, Your Honor, na iyong mga bagong proyekto ay kailangan po ng funding at saka, number one po, Your Honor, para ho itong LandBank. Ang LandBank po, nagre-raise pa ng capital sa credit markets. Bakit po? Kasi mandato sa kanila na kalahati ng kanilang income, imbes na iwanan po doon sa LandBank, kailangan po isauli sa atin para po sila makapag-compete ang LandBank po. Kailangan laging bumalik-balik sa equity markets para po makapag-raise ng tinatawag po natin na “mezzanine” level na mga instruments kasi ang mga kalaban nila ay BPI, Metrobank. Hindi sila makalaban dahil kaunti po ang capital nila dahil kalahati ng capital nila ay isinasauli sa atin. Ganoon din po dito sa BCDA. Lahat po ng kinita nila, kalahati ay isinasauli kaagad sa atin.

REP. SUAREZ. Outside of their earnings, distinguished Sponsor, they also remit to the National Treasury?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Your Honor, dividends. They remit today a fee for the Modernization Program but that is only from the Metro Manila camps, and they also remit to the national government with respect to their dividends.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay. Your Honor, I am looking at the proposed project of SCRP, the Subic-Clark Railway Project, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. Is this on the drawing board or are you…

REP. SALCEDA. Come again, Your Honor?

REP. SUAREZ. Is this still in the drawing board?

REP. SALCEDA. Naaprub po iyan ng NEDA, ng ICC, at nasa level na po ito ng potential exchange of notes either with China or with Japan—with China daw po.


REP. SUAREZ. But this is a directional rail from Subic to Clark.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo, cargo.

REP. SUAREZ. One only, wala hong stationary …

REP. SALCEDA. Siyempre pagdating po sa Subic, connected na po siya, pa-Metro Manila na dahil po sa railways mula doon sa Tutuban, then Malolos, then Clark.

REP. SUAREZ. That is futuristic, Your Honor.

REP. SALCEDA. Actually, it is long overdue, Your Honor, so, I see the future.

REP. SUAREZ. Now, if you want to be connected to the Tutuban railway, then, you are going to use the old rails, the narrow gauge one.

REP. SALCEDA. Hindi po. The JICA is building new rails po.

REP. SUAREZ. Is it wide gauge na?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo, standard gauge.

REP. SUAREZ. Hindi ka nga operational dito sa PNR. Narrow gauge rail ho ang nasa PNR.

REP. SALCEDA. Kaya nga ang ginawa po ay sinimulan po doon sa Tutuban, para iyong papunta doon sa amin, kung saan nakikidaan po ako sa inyo pag-uwi ko sa Bicol—hindi muna ginawa iyon kasi napakahaba noon. So, iyong inuna po ay mula po doon sa Tutuban papunta po doon sa Clark, at mula Clark, papuntang Subic naman. This is Chinese pero iyong mula Tutuban papunta po ng Clark, iyon po ay Japanese, JICA po.

REP. SUAREZ. So, what you are stating, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, is that you are also upgrading the Philippine National Railways as well.

REP. SALCEDA. In effect po, Your Honor, pero siguro, kapag na-create na po natin iyong Philippine Railway Corporation, tiyak po na ipapailalim po ng Kongresong ito ang lahat po ng railways na iyan sa iisang bubong.

REP. SUAREZ. Including the one going to our province?

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po, Your Honor, iyong atin pong mahal na probinsiya.

REP. SUAREZ. Up to Bicol?

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po. Salamat nga pala sa pagpadaan sa Quezon.

REP. SUAREZ. Where do you get your water? Where do you get your fresh water?

REP. SALCEDA. Ito ay ground water po sa ngayon…

REP. SUAREZ. Lahat ho ground water?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo, pero pinag-aaralan na po nila ang surface water kasi mukhang—if you look at 10 years henceforth, Your Honor, iyong populasyon ng Clark—it is actually the future of the Philippines. I personally estimate that the Clark development is worth, in terms of gross value added to the Philippines, about P1.3 trillion, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. So, P1.8 trillion?

REP. SALCEDA. It is P1.3 trillion.

REP. SUAREZ. So, 1.3 trillion

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. In pesos?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, in trillion pesos, Your Honor. Ganoon po siya kalaki dahil po agresibo ang national government sa pag-invest sa infrastructure, Your Honor. Makikita mo kaagad, halimbawa po, Your Honor, marami po tayong naibigay na kakayahan na wala ho sa ibang korporasyon ng gobyerno katulad ng kakayahan po na gawing mabilisan po ang kanilang imprastraktura. Karamihan sa atin ay hindi pa nakakabisita doon, pero halos tapos na po iyong SEA Games facilities at napakalaki po ng pagdadausan po, iyong kanilang napakalaking stadium po na hindi natin ikakahiya.

So, Your Honor, actually, para sa international investors po, ang buzzword po para sa Pilipinas ay Clark.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, if the Japanese is willing to fund the Subic-Clark Railway System, they see the potential in the viability of the project.

REP. SALCEDA. Tama po, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. I just have a question—the runway in Subic, can it handle wide body jack, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. SALCEDA. Sa Subic po o sa Clark?


REP. SUAREZ. Clark can handle, I am sure of that, but how about Subic?

REP. SALCEDA. Kailangan ho ng extension, parang kailangan gayahin iyong sa Chek Lap Kok sa Hong Kong, Your Honor, kung saan po iyong runway ay nag-e-extend po sa …

REP. SUAREZ. So, the extension is in the water?

REP. SALCEDA. Kailangan pong mag-reclaim, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Because bundok na ho itong nasa likod ng Subic. Hindi ba, Your Honor?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. So, Mr. Speaker, the Sponsor, outside of the “de kahon” na trabaho ng isang Sponsor, you have the sincerity and belief that what you are sponsoring really would be a viable contribution to our economy.

REP. SALCEDA. Ay, opo, kasi po ang lahat po nang ginagawa natin dito sa gobyerno, kailangan may pupuntahan.

REP. SUAREZ. No, I am talking about this Subic-Clark Railway System.

REP. SALCEDA. Ikaw po, Your Honor, halimbawa…

REP. SUAREZ. Marami ka kasing ini-sponsor, Your Honor, and you do not sound enthusiastic, pero dito ay mukhang enthusiastic ka.

REP. SALCEDA. Enthusiastic naman po ako sa lahat. Kaso dito po, mas enthusiastic lang po ako kasi, sa lahat ng ginagawa natin bilang isang gobyerno, may papupuntahan po itong sa Clark. Kitang-kita na po natin iyong mga bagong locators, iyong mga nag-invest po sa mga malalaking parsela ng lupa na magiging New Clark City, at hindi ho mali na sabihin natin na malaki po ang iaangat nito, na halos puwedeng itapat sa second lang siguro, sa Makati Central Business District itong New Clark City po, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, when there was this serious intention already of the government of getting back these bases, there was official information this Representation received that the Americans are willing to give up Clark, but they were asking if they could retain Subic because of its docking facilities that can match those in Virginia which

can dry dock an aircraft carrier. Is that still existing, the dry dock, or no more?

REP. SALCEDA. Pasensiya na, Your Honor. May Hanjin doon involved in ship building.

REP. SUAREZ. It is being used now as a ship building facility?

REP. SALCEDA. Hindi ko alam kung iyon ang ginagamit po ng Hanjin. Tthe largest ship in the world was actually built in Subic.

REP. SUAREZ. That is what I am saying, so, it is being used right now.

REP. SALCEDA. Mukhang iyong Hanjin po ay kailangan i-repair ang kanilang ginagamit kasi you can only build ship on a dry dock, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, with my knowledge of the personality behind the Subic-Clark development, a good friend for a long time— nice to see you again—on the part of the Minority, we do not have any more questions on the proposed budget of the BCDA. Therefore, we move that we terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the BCDA.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). What is the pleasure of the Majority Leader?

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, on the part of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the BCDA.



The period of interpellation and debate on the budget for the Bases Conversion and Development Authority is hereby terminated.

Congratulations to the family of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority. (Applause)



REP. PALMA. I move that we suspend the session, Mr. Speaker.



It was 3:01 p.m.





PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS OPERATIONS OFFICE

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the period of interpellation and debate and begin with the consideration of the budget of the Presidential Communications Operations Office.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Would it include its attached agencies?

REP. PALMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, including its attached agencies.



REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, before we continue, may we acknowledge the presence of Secretary Martin Andanar, Undersecretaries Apacible and Badoy, the assistant secretaries, the bureau heads of the attached agencies, and all the other officers of the GOCCs attached to the office of the PCOO.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). To the family of the Presidential Communications Operations Office, including its attached agencies, headed by Secretary Martin Andanar, welcome to the House of Representatives. (Applause)


REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I now move that we recognize the Hon. Eric L. Olivarez from the First District of Parañaque City to answer questions, if any, on the budget of the PCOO.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Sponsor of the budget of the PCOO, the Hon. Eric Olivarez, is recognized.

REP. OLIVAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A pleasant afternoon to everyone.

The Presidential Communications Operations Office is mandated to serve as the premier arm of the Executive

Branch in engaging and involving the citizenry and the mass media, to enrich the quality of public discourse on all matters of governance and build a national consensus thereon. To enable the PCOO and its attached agencies to deliver on its commitments in 2019, it is proposing a P1.474 billion budget. My most esteemed colleagues, we have the assurance of Secretary Andanar that its resources shall be judiciously and creatively used to communicate the messages of the President and his government to the people. Thank you.

I am now open to questions from my distinguished colleagues.


REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, the first to interpellate is the Hon. France L. Castro from ACT TEACHERS Party-List. May she be recognized, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative from ACT TEACHERS Party-List, the Hon. France L. Castro, is recognized.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Marami pong salamat, Mr. Speaker. Magandang hapon po sa ating lahat, sa pamilya po ng PCOO at sa inyo po, honorable Sponsor. Matanong ko lang, Mr. Speaker, noong nakaraang deliberasyon ng budget ng PCOO dito po sa Plenaryo, hiniling ng Kinatawang ito ang presensya ng ating Assistant Secretary Mocha Uson. Itatanong ko lang, Mr. Speaker, nandito po ba si Asec. Uson, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. OLIVAREZ. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, in the three times that Secretary Andanar wrote a letter to Asec. Mocha requesting her presence here today, there was no response coming from her. At present, Assistant Secretary Mocha is in transit, coming from the US and going back to the Philippines, and shall be back tomorrow. But there is no definite time yet on when she will be arriving tomorrow.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, ibig po sabihin po, Mr. Speaker, si Asec. Mocha Uson ay wala pa dito sa Pilipinas?

REP. OLIVAREZ. That is correct, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.


REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Mr. Speaker, iyon nga po ang isa sa kahilingan ko, ang presensya niya.

Puwede po ba ako humingi ng ilang minutong suspension of session, Mr. Speaker?




It was 3:08 p.m.





REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the PCOO, and open the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Agriculture.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Before that, may we first dispatch the motion to suspend the deliberations on the budget of the PCOO.

REP. PALMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker.



REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Department of Agriculture and its attached agencies, including the National Irrigation Administration.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, before we recognize the honorable Sponsor of the budget of the DA, I would like to acknowledge the presence of the officials of the DA family led by the honorable Secretary Emmanuel F. Piñol, and the family of the National Irrigation Administration, with its Administrator, Ret. Gen. Ricardo R. Visaya.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). To the family of the Department of Agriculture headed by Secretary Manny Piñol and the National Irrigation Administration with Administrator, General Visaya, welcome to the House of Representatives.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Arthur C. Yap from the Third District of Bohol to sponsor the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including its attached agencies and the National Irrigation Administration.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Our Deputy Speaker from the Third District of Bohol, the Hon. Arthur C. Yap, is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including its attached agencies.

The Hon. Arthur Yap, you now have the floor.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the session for a few minutes.

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

It was 3:15 p.m.




Our Deputy Speaker is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including its attached agencies and corporations.

REP. PALMA. And the National Irrigation Administration, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Cecilia Leonila V. Chavez from the Party-List BUTIL for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Lady Representative from BUTIL Party-List, the Hon. Cecille Chavez, is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, may I know if the distinguished Sponsor would yield to questions on the Department of Agriculture, its attached agencies, and the NIA.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, to all our colleagues, good afternoon. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Sponsor will yield.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, may we know from the honorable Sponsor the status of the P1.8 billion ACEF for 2018. How many farmers groups and associations


benefitted in terms of actual numbers, and in pesos, how many youths benefitted from the scholarship grants and how much went to research and development?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, distinguished interpellator, may I just please have a few moments to get the list from the agency.

Mr. Speaker, while the Department is looking for the exact number, the P1.8 billion ACEF has been divided into 80 percent for loans, 10 percent for scholarships and 10 percent for research. So, we are just waiting to get the information on the number of students whose scholarships were funded from the 10 percent allocation of the P1.8 billion fund.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, may we just request for a copy of the status of the fund to be submitted to the Committee on Agriculture.

REP. YAP (A.). We will do that, Sir. That is about 2,784 fully paid graduates. We will submit this report to the honorable interpellator but before we do that, the total number of ongoing scholars would be 2,417.

REP. CHAVEZ. That is from the start of the ACEF month?

REP. YAP (A.). Cumulative, Your Honor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Okay. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I have read the implementing guidelines of the ACEF and the administration of the fund was, based on the guidelines, very tedious. The application, the selection, and the passing back and forth of the documents to the DA, the CHEDRO and the higher education institutions, if all of these would take their maximum time allotted, would be at least 21 days. I would like to know from the honorable Sponsor if there is a way for the Department of Agriculture to minimize the tedious documentation procedure?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, I am sure, there is a way. We would definitely ask the Department to streamline the 21 days, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I would just like to point out the fact that, in the compendium of our ease of doing business laws, the timeline for definitive action on business application is one week on the maximum. Can we not use this as a model, a pattern so to speak. Getting kids to college via the grant-in-aid programs, is as important as approving business applications. This is the same as well for credit applications, most especially for production loans as timing is very crucial during the planting season. The

release may be too late, the farmer may not have use for it, or they may have used it to pay their initial debt, but the question is, would the fund be enough?

I am going to move on to my next concern. Mr. Speaker, may we know from the honorable Sponsor the status of the P1.1 million appropriated for 2018 for the Buffer Stock Program. How much of the money has been used? How much more do we have in stock, given that we are already in the last quarter of the year?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, point of clarification. Is it the buffer stock for seeds or the buffer stock for rice under the National Food Authority?

REP. CHAVEZ. The buffer stock for seeds.

REP. YAP (A.). Let me inquire. I got the specific number on how much was left, and their report to me was 20 percent. The use thereof was exacerbated due to the series of calamities and typhoons where the Department was challenged to immediately send assistance in terms of seed support so that our farmers can plant again and save what is left of the planting season.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we know the Department’s data on how many typhoons and calamities we have encountered for the current year? How many have caused much damage to the crops and what locations were greatly affected? Also, how was the seed buffer stock allocated and distributed to the areas affected by typhoons?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we have taken note of the inquiry. Considering that it would take a substantive report, we will ask that the report be sent to the honorable interpellator.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we then request the Department for a copy of their work plan and schedule for the proposed Seed Buffer Stock Program for ear 2019 as well.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, we will send to you the work plan for the CQRF for 2019.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I asked these questions because I believe that the Seed Buffer Stock Program should be readily available after a calamity, to make seeds readily available for the much- needed replanting because the Seed Buffer Stock Program should serve as a quick response mechanism in times of calamities and disasters.

I now move on to my next concern. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we be apprised on the actual status of the Agricultural Machineries Equipment and


Facilities Fund. As of date, how many farmers were given the grants and was the fund appropriated for 2018 fully utilized?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we are just getting the utilization rate. The initial report was 62 percent as of June and so, that is guaranteed to go up because that was in June. I think they have not come up with the latest figure as to the utilization, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor. We would wait for the complete data, and I am just asking this because I believe this is of paramount importance, given the fact that the Philippines is an ASEAN lagger in terms of farm mechanization. Thailand has the highest concentration of modern farm implements and that is part of the reason it is a prodigious producer of agricultural goods. We lack everything from modern farm tractors to modern silos and dryers. We need to play catch-up on this crucial field and yet, the government seems to be reducing funds, instead of increasing and propping-up the funds for mechanization.

Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, last year’s budget for farm machineries was P4.2 billion and now, it is being reduced to P1.7 billion. May we know from the Department, what kind of adjustments are they planning for the reduced budget to work. Does this mean that the full grants will no longer be given, and is this part of the Department’s strategic shift from subsidy to credit?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department greatly appreciates her point of view, especially on mechanization. This is the direct point—when she said that in comparison, Thailand is a country that has made great strides in agriculture because of mechanization. We share her concern when she said that the budget has been reduced to one percent, to P1 billion for the Mechanization Program. So, to be specific, the agriculture and fishery machinery equipment and fast facility support services in 2018, as she had correctly pointed out, were at 4.6 and the National Expenditure Program right now puts it at 1.9. The drop is an alarming 58 percent, Mr. Speaker, so, in this respect, the Sponsor is more than happy to receive whatever suggestions you have that we can insert in the period of amendments. At the rate that we had cut the budget for mechanization, equipment, facilities, and infrastructure, then this is hardly a budget that we can be proud of when it comes to moving our agriculture forward.

So, on the issue of whether there is a strategic shift to credit, yes, apparently, because of all the agencies that received increases, it is the Agricultural Credit and Policy Council that has benefited greatly from the increase. So, if we are to take a look, part of that P3.5

billion being set aside for the ACPC is credit of about P1.1 billion, signaling the strategic shift from a dole out to a credit system. So, out of the P3.5 billion that went to the ACPC from the other programs, P1.1 billion is being set aside for machineries, Your Honor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the honorable Sponsor for sharing the sentiments of this Representation but later on, I will manifest why as representative of the farmer sector, we are in a limbo and we are afraid of this strategic shift.

I am going to move on to my next concern. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor. What type of small-scale irrigation projects were accomplished from 2017 to the present, and when we say small-scale, what does it mean in terms of cost and coverage of lands?

REP. YAP (A.). You are talking of communal irrigation systems, Mr. Speaker?

REP. CHAVEZ. Yes.

REP. YAP (A.). Basically, the service area as of December 2017, for communal irrigation systems, is about 6,000 hectares, for privately-held areas, that is 184,869 hectares, and for other government agency-led, that is about 171,983. The effective operating area for other government areas would be 128,595 while for the private sector-led, that is about 155. So, Mr. Speaker, if we are to add all together the total number of irrigated areas—according to the National Irrigation Administration, these are effective operational areas— it is 1.4 million hectares, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, thank you for that answer. Can we have the data that would show what you just said on the number of the fully functional and fully operational areas and can we have the numbers relative to the areas we still need to irrigate? May we ask the Department of Agriculture to submit to the Committee on Agriculture and furnish a copy to this Representation of the report on the status of the small irrigation projects?

I am going to move on to my next concern, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor. The Department has ventured into the establishment of solar powered irrigation systems. May we know how many of the systems were already created and how much money was spent? Were these systems created to work as replacement or in conjunction with another system? Will these systems work even when the sun is not out? And will it be able to harness energy? If yes, will its efficiency in giving out energy be the same?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we take note of the question but if you could give us a little


time because the budget of the National Irrigation Administration was supposed to be defended by another Sponsor. So, just please give us a little time and we will get the data now—we can give it to you now.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I am asking the Department of Agriculture on the irrigation projects because in their briefer, it says therein that they had ventured into solar powered irrigation systems and that was what I am asking about, not the projects of the National Irrigation Administration.

REP. YAP (A). Forgive me, Mr. Speaker, let me get the data. There are 169 units, Mr. Speaker, irrigating an average of 60 hectares per unit. That number is for this year and is carried in the National Rice Program for Irrigation Network Services, carrying a budget of P1.9 billion, Your Honor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, 116 units, as I heard. There are 116 units for the solar-powered irrigation system.

REP. YAP (A.). No, it is 169 units, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we know the cost effectiveness of the solar-powered irrigation system. Was there a study undertaken by experts in the field, before the start of the program, that the solar-powered irrigation system is disaster- resilient? If there was, could this Representation have a copy of the study?

REP. YAP (A.). Experts were able to make an assessment of the system, Mr. Speaker, and the effective cost is less than P200,000 to irrigate one hectare. Today, depending on the terrain, we are looking at P500,000 to P600,000, possibly P800,000 per hectare if it is the traditional system. If it is restoration and repair—we have renovation—we are possibly looking at P80,000 to P150,000, but I guess that is not a fair comparison because for the P80,000 to P150,000 for restoration and rehabilitation, we are talking of existing service areas. The system that we are talking of involves the use of solar-powered drum pumps watering totally new areas. So, the proper comparison would be P150,000 as against, possibly, P400,000 to P800,000 per hectare. So, it is about four times cheaper, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I would just like to be reassured and so, can this Representation ask to be given a copy of the study. The reason I am asking this is I am having a hard time imagining how this kind of system will work here. I am not an expert but from what I had noticed in my travels

in the United States, this kind of system is normally placed in areas where the climate is hot and dry like Nevada, Arizona and Los Angeles. There is one in Hawaii, but the difference is that in Hawaii, they do not have typhoons or calamities such as the ones that we have here in the Philippines. So, if we may ask for the study in order that we will know and we can be reassured that we are getting our money’s worth out of this project.

You know, I am all for a modern, eco-friendly irrigation system but, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I cannot comprehend why we are venturing into solar irrigation instead of providing our country with small water impounding systems that are easier to maintain, cheaper to construct and entirely compatible with our physical make-up.

I would like to move on to my next concern. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we know the work plan and schedule for the P12 billion budget for the national programs of the Department of Agriculture and in brief, may we know how the agency plans to go about the programs given the scenario we are faced with— the rising prices of goods and fuel, a reduced budget and the never-ending policy changes?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, I am sorry, what is the first part?

REP. CHAVEZ. The work plan and schedule for the national programs—the road map for the national programs of the DA for the different sectors—for rice, high-value crops and livestock.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, I understand that for rice, the National Food Authority had been allowed to bring in, possibly 750,000 metric tons. I think that would be the total, 750,000 metric tons. The NFA is here and we can get the confirmation from them later on. Be that as it may, the private sector will also import rice, will bring in rice to tide us over and address the issue of spiking prices of rice. We are also entering the main harvest period. By October 15, the main harvest of the country will be coming in, although there was information to suggest that, because of the succession of typhoons, there will be hit on the projected target of 400,000 metric tons. That is why it is critical, Mr. Speaker, that as the national harvest comes in this October, that has to be supplemented by the correct arrival of rice stocks. Aside from that, as we move towards the dry cropping season, it will be a good time, Mr. Speaker, to maximize this. Since we are going into the summer cropping period, this is the period of less rain, less typhoons, and less diseases, a time when we can maximize the yield per hectare of our rice fields. So it will be a combination—as we harvest the main crop, we have to prepare for the summer crop, and also


prepare for the importation that is being done by the National Food Authority.

As for the other commodities, Mr. Speaker—the National Corn Program, the Livestock Program, the National Value Crop Program—the DA is doing all the different interventions and it is going to be lengthy to explain line by line, but we are willing to explain line by line but it will really take—it is going to be a line by line explanation for every province. We are willing to submit this to you, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. I believe you were asking for the actual work plan and so, if she will allow, we will submit the work plan to her later.

REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor. I would wait for the plan in writing because I want to know if they have short and medium-term goals in this, and I want to see what they plan to achieve with their goals. If I may also request for the detailed master plan, different from the one that they had handed out in the past, can it please be concise and self-explanatory to the reader.

I am asking this, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, because when we are given the big picture, we are always presented with very optimistic scenarios. The problem is in the details, for example, how the rice and other crops, the different sectors, are given focus and attention. We want a clear picture given the context that we now have a rice crisis, probably the worst crisis in our generation. We had the great drought of 1998, but still the rice crisis then did not reach the current full-blown level that we have now.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, I was informed that there is a work plan in progress, so, the basic draft will be sent to your office for your review, but the AFMP, the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Plan for all the commodities will be done by December. So, that also will be sent to you. But the work plan in progress will be sent to you, Mr. Speaker.

Before that, at least we know that the Department is working very hard on the short-term plan. It has actually advocated and sought executive permission from the President to allow the tariff-free importation of certain commodities, and that is, of course, to address the issue of spiraling prices for food. So, it is doing that. The Department, Mr. Speaker, is also, of course, being very careful because it is easy, during a temporary period of rising prices, to advocate the massive importation of food products to bring down prices. Unfortunately, as you know, Mr. Speaker, to do that irresponsibly is going to possibly damn us more in the future because, maybe in the short term we will be able to address the spiraling prices but after that, we would have damaged the farm sector irreparably.

So, there are moves, Mr. Speaker, and we will send the work plan to your office.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, may we just request the Department not to be too complacent anymore. The problem is here, the crisis is already here and yet, we are still in the drafting mode. Can we please urge the Department to take up the farmers’ concerns with urgency because, you know, there might not be tomorrow, I mean that we should act on this now. Our farmers, our countrymen are suffering even as we speak and, you know, to hear that the Department is only at the drafting stage, I find that very, very sad.

I would like to then move on to my next concern. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, based on the response that the Department of Agriculture had submitted regarding the update of the Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture or the RSBSA. I find that there is a lot to be done and I would like to know if the Department can submit an update that would show specific numbers—how many were removed and how many were added? If there is one, may I request for a copy?

REP. YAP (A.) Mr. Speaker, the registry was just recently turned over to the Department of Agriculture this year. There are 13 million registrants in the registry and so, the Department of Agriculture is doing its best right now to add and remove, to clean up that list.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, yes, I read the report that was submitted to my office by the Department and today, the status is that the Department is still validating and updating the RSBSA, which are the funds proposed for 2019 that will be approved. My question now is, why should we insist on using the RSBSA when it has not been cleaned yet? In last year’s budget deliberations, I appealed, and this is on record, that we include the farmers’ associations, cooperatives and other organizations in identifying the beneficiaries. I was assured that it will be taken into consideration; however, it was not. I want to know if we can consider including them now.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the efforts are continuing and that is going to be a cornerstone, pillar program of the ACPC right now, because as we move strategically and shift from a dole-out system to a credit system in helping our farmers’ sector, the registry is going to be a critical part of that program. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, we cannot just stop. So, we are doing our best to address this by trying to clean up this list.


REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I read from the DA report that it had already taken initiatives in updating the list, however, such efforts are constrained by the availability of financial and human resources. If the Department would consider inviting the legitimate coops, associations and other organizations in the process of updating and verifying the list, do you not think they can contribute a lot to the dilemma the agency is faced with now? I feel that there is a need to ask them as most of the beneficiaries of the programs being implemented by the Department are based on the list. I feel that if we do not correct this now, a great number of farmers who need help would not benefit because they are being excluded by the limitations we have set in the provisions of the law.

REP. YAP (A.). We agree, Mr. Speaker, that this is very critical in all our programs. The integrity of the future programs as well as the assistance to be given the farm sector would be based on this list. We share your concern, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, it is my hope that we carry out two things about the registry: First is to purge the names of fictitious and undeserving names of supposed beneficiaries in the registry; and the second is to have legitimacy, as much as possible, by listing the genuine farmers, the genuine farm coops and the genuine farm organizations. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, if you notice the questions I have raised this year, they are no different from what I had raised last year. It is my hope that the above concerns will be seriously taken into consideration.

The Agricultural Competitiveness Enhancement Fund needs to be reviewed as there is a major gap in its implementation. The documentation process I had mentioned is too tedious. Our problems will not be resolved if we do not give the proper solutions. Implementing the Seed Buffer Stock Program will not work in its current state if we do not accept that there is a need to capacitate our regional offices with the right facilities that can store the seeds for a very long time. We keep on promoting the importance of shifting to mechanization when we cannot even provide majority of our farmers with easy access to them. We keep on ignoring the problems presented to us. For example, the AFMA reports stated that the reason for the flawed irrigation system is the lack of technical manpower and yet, we go into programs that are highly sophisticated. The solar-powered irrigation system maybe good in principle, it may be affordable to create, but the question there is, can we afford it or is it even practical to maintain?

The constant shift in policies, particularly the shift from subsidy to credit, is to some nature, a blow to the sector. Not only is it unfair, but the timing is very cruel.

Credit is good, but we have to accept that majority of the farmers to whom we are providing credit do not have the capacity to comply with the requirements, and it is not only being able to comply with the requirements, but there are not enough financial conduits to channel the funds to them. The farmers have been used so many times to justify the programs of government. They are a major part of our society, and I believe no one here does not have a bloodline without or does not have a farmer therein. We are an agricultural country, and I hope our economic managers are hearing this. Our natural resources are our people, and our culture can attest to that. So, why? That is my question. Why?

I would like to state categorically that it is my ardent desire to provide more budget for agriculture. However, I cannot remain silent if we keep on using our resources on flawed plans and programs. I am raising these issues for them to be understood by us; I am not merely standing here to criticize as I stand here not in my own capacity. It is the farmers who brought me here, and the words that I had uttered from day one since my first seat last 2016 were theirs and no one else’s, and that is why I appeal again to everyone concerned, especially to the Department of Agriculture, that if we can do something now, please, let us do it now. The road to food security as the goal of government, the goal of consumers and the dream of the farmers for generations, will be hard and torturous and in danger of getting waylaid if we do not do the programs right, if we do not clean up the basic list of beneficiaries or do it right, and unless we put in workable strategies that will develop and modernize Philippine agriculture.

I would like to move on, Mr. Speaker and honorable Sponsor, to my questions for the National Food Authority. The subsidy for the NFA is P7 billion and it shall be used for the implementation of the buffer stock program, and it says here that the NFA shall buy directly from the farmers, except in cases of calamities, fortuitous events or shortfall in production, where the NFA may be authorized to import rice upon recommendation of the NFA Council with the approval by the President of the Philippines. The above statements were also the same provisions in the 2018 budget but unfortunately, this was not realized. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, my first question is, with the NFA under the jurisdiction of the DA, what positive or major changes can we expect from the agency? Do you think that, with the DA coming in to the Council, there will be a better chance of increasing the buying price of palay? If no, why?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, the short answer is yes. We can expect that the NFA will be doing a better job in this respect now that it has returned to monitoring and supervising, and having partnership in terms of work with the Department of Agriculture.


Your specific question is whether we can foresee an increase in the buying price of palay. Of course, we have to be careful on how we implement any increase in the buying price of palay because we also know that when we increase the buying price of palay, it will also have an inflationary impact on the price of rice in the market. Be that as it may, we cannot allow that our farmers are not addressed especially in terms of profitability. It is in that regard, Mr. Speaker, that the NFA has already been given an approval through the Council, to increase the buying price of palay to P20 per kilo. Clean and dry, but that is in the form of a P3.00 incentive. In that way, at least, Your Honor, we can have the flexibility to move the buying price from the base of P17. The most important thing, beyond the distinction, is the fact that we are now moving the buying price of palay, and the NFA is committed to be the buyer of first resort rather than the buyer of last resort. It is now moving to buy palay aggressively, but in the event that it cannot buy locally, then, to fulfil its mandate, to maintain the buffer stock of the nation, then it must import rice if it has to.

REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, for that answer and I would just like to be reassured. I understand your answers, but now that the NFA is under the jurisdiction of the DA, do you think they can consider addressing the other issues—issues such as capacitating the agency by rehabilitating the warehouses so these can accommodate more stocks for longer periods; investing on mechanical dryers, millers and the like; investing on hauling equipment, facilities, manpower, et cetera; and expediting the process, lessening the burden of tedious documentation, putting a ceiling on the amount when issuing check payments, for example, for small amounts; also considering cash payment, but not for all? May I know if the NFA Council considered all of the above and if not, did they even say why?

REP. YAP (A.). I am happy to answer, Mr. Speaker, that it is all positive, that the Department of Agriculture is committed to extend all these kinds of support, especially on the area of warehouse repair, renovation and restoration and purchasing dryers. The Secretary of Agriculture has just confirmed to me right now that they are going to be spending and those will be part of their contributions to the effort.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, thank you for that answer. I raised these questions because if we really intend to buy the produce of our local farmers, then, we must make it possible for them and entice them so that they will opt to sell to the NFA. If we can also capacitate the NFA to have the facility to process the palay being bought from the local farmers,

not only will they be able to buy the palay from them but they can sell the rice at a lesser amount because they would not have to outsource its processing.

I would like to move on to my next concern, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. I would like to know, right off the bat, their policy in making use of the funds being appropriated to them for 2019. Do they have a mapped-out plan in case a calamity happens or a shortfall in production ensues? When do they schedule the importation? How long do they wait to decide?

REP. YAP (A.). I have the assurance of the National Food Authority that with the authorization that they had received from the Office of the President, the NFA Council now, working together with the Secretary of Agriculture, will be more pro-active in importing at the right time. Having that said, it does not mean that the importations would be allowed to arrive and clash with the local harvest, to clash with the local price, that will not be allowed.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, thank you for that answer. I would like to move on to my next concern. I would like to be clarified if what you buy from the farmers is solely palay?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. So, what do you do with the palay that you buy from the farmers? Do you process it and sell it as rice? Do you buy it and sell it as palay to rice millers?

REP. YAP (A.). It is not sold as palay to rice millers, Your Honor. It is milled and the bran is sold, the husk is used for fuel or sold as well, and what is sold to the public would be the milled rice, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Where does the NFA mill the palay to become rice— do they outsource everything?

REP. YAP (A.). The NFA mills it, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, either in their own warehouses or subcontracts the milling to the available millers in the area.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, if I may request the NFA if they can show to this Representation the list of their warehouses, it would really be a big help.


REP. CHAVEZ. Distinguished Sponsor, my question last year is, bakit hindi bumibili ng itim na palay ang NFA? Nagbebenta ba ang NFA ng itim na


bigas? Ngayon naman po, gusto kong itanong mula sa NFA—dahil alam ko na ito din ang gustong itanong ng maraming magsasaka—bakit hindi natin ibigay ang panawagan ng mga magsasaka na itaas ang presyo ng palay, baguhin ang pamamaraan ng pamimili? Ginagawaan ba natin ng paraan pag-ubrahin ang bigas na binubukbok?

REP. YAP (A.). I have been given the assurance, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, that the much-publicized rice with weevils had been addressed, and according to the NFA, if there were weevils found in the rice, the quality was still within the allowed health standards. When you transport hundreds of thousands of sacks, especially through seas, it is impossible not to have these insects in the rice, but the NFA assures us that it is within the health standards that are imposed, and in terms of selling black or rotting rice, that had been already corrected for many years now, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. The NFA is also willing to submit their quality standards and their quality ratings and their records to her to assure her of the quality standards of the rice being sold by the NFA.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I would trust you with that answer, and I would just like to close with this appeal to the NFA, now that it has its roots back to the DA. Mr. Speaker, the NFA should now operate outside the mindset and basic beliefs of the economic team of the administration that agriculture should be low priority because we are now a service economy, that we can now all relegate agriculture to a low priority because it is already a sector of very little consequence and with very little effect on the broader economy.

As the current crisis has graphically demonstrated, any short supply to the overall food security will create problems of great magnitude with impact on the economic and political spheres. The NFA should operate as an adjunct, and I would like to state that I am not for the abolition of the NFA, but it should operate as an adjunct, as a support structure to the overall food security programs that are pro-farmer, and not anti-farmer; pro-agriculture and not anti-agriculture. The country and our people will be better off if the NFA weans itself away from the flawed beliefs and concepts of the economic managers and recapture its original mandate as a support entity to the country’s overall agricultural objectives and pursuits.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you very much, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. We accept those comments gladly. Thank you.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, thank you, honorable Sponsor. Mr. Speaker, may we know if we would

have the same sponsor for the National Irrigation Administration, so, I can go on with my questions.

NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, allow me to please yield the floor to Cong. Michael John “Jack” R. Duavit who will be the Sponsor for the budget of the National Irrigation Administration.

REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Jack Duavit to assist the Hon. Arthur Yap.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The distinguished Representative from Rizal Province, the Hon. Jack Duavit, is recognized to answer the questions of the Representative from BUTIL Party-List.

REP. DUAVIT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, the NIA is mandated to investigate, study, improve, construct and administer all irrigation systems in the Philippines. To investigate all available and possible water resources in the country for the purpose of utilizing the same to plan and construct irrigation facilities in the country, that is stipulated in Republic Act No. 3601. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would like to clarify from the agency if there is an area here in the Philippines without any irrigation facility constructed by the National Irrigation Administration, does that necessarily follow that the farmers thereat are not entitled to any subsidy or any form of support from the NIA that could help them temporarily access water for their fields?

REP. DUAVIT. The process, Mr. Speaker, is that, if there is an area that is currently unserved, it would have to go through the formal process of actually becoming served. In other words, if I understood the question correctly, should there be or if there is no NIA project thereat at a particular time and they do require irrigation, then the feasibility study and the detailed engineering shall be made, and they will actually go through the entire irrigation process. There are currently no stop-gap measures, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, my question is very simple, and I would just like to ask, basically, your understanding in behalf of the National Irrigation Administration—If there is none at all, if there are farmers in the area and they have irrigable lands and they are farming there and they need support, does the NIA provide that support to them? If they cannot


provide the necessary support—there is water near their farms that only needs shallow tube wells, will they or can they be included in the program?

REP. DUAVIT. May I just ask for clarification from the honorable Gentlelady—what type of support is she referring to? It used to be a GOCC, actually still is, but it just receives a subsidy now, but it still operates in the way a corporation should, and their mandate must not overlap with the mother agency. That being said, there are very narrow targets for that, I have been told, Mr. Speaker, and their primary mandate is really to provide them with the water and just the water.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I would not belabor anymore the question because you already have given me the answer. I am asking this because subsidy and support, the way I understand them, are encompassing and should be granted across-the-board. So, if the farmers in the areas serviced by irrigation get support and assistance, there should also be a special program for farmers in areas not served by irrigation, to level the playing field so to speak.

I am going to move on to my next concern. Out of the proposed budget of the P45 billion appropriated for agriculture-related agencies or GOCCs, the National Irrigation Administration got the biggest portion, and out of the P36 billion appropriated for the NIA, P18.4 billion will be allocated for the two major programs of the NIA and these are P16 billion for irrigation systems development and P2 billion will be for restoration.

Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, may we know the figures from the agency, to date, on how many irrigation systems had been installed relative to the number of how many areas need to be irrigated? How many of those installed need to be rehabilitated? How many need to be constructed?

REP. DUAVIT. Would the Gentlelady like a written report, Mr. Speaker, or would she like me to read all of these out?

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, a written report would suffice for now.

REP. DUAVIT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We will provide you with the same.

REP. CHAVEZ. I would like to move on to my next concern, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Can you please help us understand why a greater portion should be given solely to development and a meager amount is spent for rehabilitation?

REP. DUAVIT. That is an issue that has often come up in the Committee, Mr. Speaker. To be sure, the

House has had the same concerns regarding the ratio in the 2019 NEP physical targets. There are two ways that the Committee intends to deals with this. The first would be, either to adjust the ratios between new and those for restoration, and the other is to maybe find a way to bolster the Quick Response Fund which, as we know, if we lose irrigation, it will affect the crop, the crop cycles, and basically, the production. But, yes, the Committee does feel that it is lopsided right now and it is in favor of new irrigation programs.

REP. CHAVEZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I am asking these questions because I have been going around the rice-producing areas in Luzon to get a first-hand view of the problems and worries of our rice farmers. The top priority of farmers everywhere, their main complaint, is their underperforming irrigation system. Across the major rice-producing areas of Central Luzon, we see deteriorating and ravaged irrigation systems that had lain wasted by natural degradation, long years of use with very little rehab work. We see canals and ditches with serious physical breaches, perhaps due to shoddy maintenance.

I think that the funds should be focused on rehabilitating the irrigation systems we have, including the restoration of the watershed areas that generate water for the dams during the dry season. There is a neglected environmental component that should also be funded by the rehabilitation and maintenance work. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, so, I suggest a shift in priorities: rehabilitation should come first and new construction should now come second.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). May I inform the Lady that you have only four minutes remaining on your time.

REP. CHAVEZ. I am going to my last question. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would like to follow up the status of the IRR for the Free Irrigation Service Law. I would specifically like to know how the P4.71 billion will be utilized because the last I have heard of it, there is that matter or difficulty in determining which will be included in the 8 hectares below? What will be their basis?

I would like to raise this issue because it is our hope, as coauthors of the Bill, that the target beneficiaries would benefit from it. So, I strongly appeal to my distinguished colleagues that we should be very vigilant in following whether what we helped to create will be realized and not become a waste because of our indifference.

REP. DUAVIT. The IRR will be taken up and hopefully approved in the next board meeting which will be on October 9. The Committee will request a copy and will furnish the same to the honorable Gentlelady.


REP. CHAVEZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

With that, I end my interpellation.

REP. DUAVIT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Thank you very much, Cong. Cecille Chavez.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to request that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including its attached agencies, as well as the National Irrigation Administration.


The deliberation on the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including attached agencies and corporations, and the NIA, is suspended.


REP. ANTONINO. Before we continue, Mr. Speaker, I move that we acknowledge the presence of the guests of the Hon. Mark Aeron H. Sambar in the gallery. They are the Zone 14 Chairmen of Sta. Quiteria, District 1, Caloocan City: Chairman Tess Go, Chairman Wilfrido Mañacop, Chairman Danilo Dominado, Chairman Jimmy Labing-Isa, Chairman Dave Alonzo, Chairman John Carlo Caiña, Chairman Ronald Nagusara, Chairman Yong Barnachea and Chairwoman Mila Uy.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The guests of our energetic PBA Party-List Representative, the Hon. Mark Sambar, please rise. Welcome to the House of Representatives. (Applause)


REP. ANTONINO. I would also like to request that we acknowledge the presence of the guests of the Hon. Jeffrey D. Khonghun, the Barangay Council Members and other officials of Barangay Calapandayan, Subic, Zambales.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The guests of Rep. Jeffrey Khonghun, please rise. Welcome to the House of Representatives. (Applause)


PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS OPERATIONS OFFICE

REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we continue the period of interpellation and debate on

House Bill No. 8169 and resume the consideration of the budget of the PCOO and its attached agencies.


We now resume the deliberations on the budget of the Presidential Communications Operations Office, including the attached agencies and corporation.

REP. ANTONINO. We would like to recognize, again, the honorable Sponsor, Rep. Eric L. Olivarez from the First District of Parañaque City.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative from the First District of Parañaque, the Hon. Eric Olivarez, is recognized to sponsor the budget of the PCOO.

REP. ANTONINO. We would like to also recognize the Hon. France L. Castro of ACT TEACHERS Party-List to continue her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative from ACT TEACHERS Party-List, the Hon. France Castro, is recognized. May I remind you that you already consumed 10 minutes—8 minutes last two days ago and 2 minutes now. So, you have 50 minutes remaining.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Maraming salamat po, Mr. Speaker. Sandali lang po ito. Kanina po, Mr. Speaker, tinanong natin sa ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor, tungkol sa presensiya po ng ating Assistant Secretary Mocha Uson, pero mukhang nagkaroon po ng miscommunication at conflict ng information dahil sa ang naunang kaalaman po namin ay naririto na po si Asec. Uson—in transit ba o hindi?—dito sa Kongreso. Kanina po, Mr. Speaker, sa pagtatanong natin ay in transit pa daw mula sa ibang bansa. So, hindi natin maintindihan, Mr. Speaker, alin nga ba iyong totoo? Which is which? So, ito pa naman ang ahensiya ng komunikasyon at impormasyon at nag-e-expect ang Representanteng ito ng accurate information.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, it is obvious na wala dito si Asec. Mocha Uson. Ginagawa naman lahat ng mga opisyales ng gobyerno, lalung-lalo na po ng Ehekutibo, na sa panahon ng deliberasyon ng budget ay naririto ang Kongreso, ang Representatives ng mga mamamayan, at ang Ehekutibo para pag-usapan, i-deliberate at aprubahan ng Kongreso ang budget. Hindi exempted dito si Asec. Uson sa ganitong proseso pero sa halip na pumarito at sagutin ang lahat ng mga gusto nating ibatong mga tanong sa kanya sa paggampan niya ng kanyang tungkulin ay hindi niya sinisipot ang Kongresong ito mula


noong Committee hearing, unang Plenary hearing at hanggang ngayon, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor. Dapat maging accountable si Asec. Uson at humarap dito sa Kongreso tulad ng ibang mga opisyales sa mga ahensiya ng gobyerno, at huwag magtago sa kanyang personal o private blog kuno. Nakita ko po sa kanyang private blog na sinasagot niya po iyong aking mga tanong at marami po siyang sinasabi. So, bakit hindi po siya humarap dito sa Kongreso, Mr. Speaker?

Napakalaking insulto sa taumbayan at sa buong Kongreso ang sinasabi ni Asec. Uson na sa FOI na lang kung may mga tanong tayo sa opisina niya. Nais kong ipaalala sa Assistant Secretary na ito na coequal branches ang Executive at Legislative, at trabaho ng Kongreso na ipasa ang budget, kasama na dito ang pag-alam kung paano ito ginagastos. Tila ipinapahiwatig ni Asec. Uson na dapat na lang ipasa ang kanyang budget nang walang accountability kung saan ito napupunta. Ano ba ito, Mr. Speaker, immunity from accountability? Ang ginagawang ito ni Asec. Uson ay lantarang pambabastos sa Kongreso na binigyan ng Konstitusyon ng natatanging kapangyarihan na usisain ang budget ng lahat ng ahensiya ng gobyerno. So, lumalabas, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, na special or untouchable ba siya sa gobyerno at hindi puwedeng ipatawag sa Kongresong ito? Sa kadahilanang ito, Mr. Speaker, itinutulak ko po, and I move to suspend …



It was 4:22 p.m.




The Hon. France Castro is recognized.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Maraming salamat po, Mr. Speaker. Muli, nililinaw ko lang doon sa aking panghuling salita kanina na tine-terminate ko na po ang interpellation ko sa mga attached agencies ng PCOO at dini-defer ko ang aking interpellation sa PCOO proper.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Harlin Neil J. Abayon III of the AANGAT TAYO Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Harlin Neil Abayon is recognized.

REP. ABAYON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Majority Leader.

Distinguished Sponsor, on behalf of the Minority, there being no other Member who wishes to interpellate, I move that we terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the attached agencies of the PCOO, excluding the PCOO proper.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). What is the pleasure of the Majority?

REP. ANTONINO. The Majority Leader joins the Minority in their motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the attached agencies of the PCOO, excluding PCOO proper.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the budget for all the attached agencies and all corporations of the PCOO is hereby terminated, except the Presidential Communications Operations Office proper.


REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the Presidential Communications Operations Office.




REP. ANTONINO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session for a few minutes.


It was 4:27 p.m.






FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

REP. HERRERA-DY. Mr. Speaker, I move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 8169 and proceed with the discussion, the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Food and Drug Administration.


The consideration of the budget of the Food and Drug Administration is hereby resumed.

REP. HERRERA-DY. I would like to acknowledge the presence of Director General Nela Charada Puno; Atty. Ronald De Veyra, Deputy Director General; and Atty. Emil Polig, OIC Deputy Director General of the Food and Drug Administration, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The family of Food and Drug Administration headed by Director General Puno, welcome to the House of Representatives.


REP. HERRERA-DY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize the Sponsor, Cong. Arthur C. Yap, and at the same time recognize Cong. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD from the COOP-NATCCO Party-List for his manifestation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The honorable Deputy Speaker Art Yap is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Food and Drug Administration and we also recognize Deputy Minority Leader Tony Bravo to interpellate the good Sponsor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon. I will not anymore take much of our Sponsor’s time because we will be focusing our debate on the budget of the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Speaker, during the deliberations on the budget of the Department of Health, there were issues also raised by this Representation on the commitment of the FDA to provide a comprehensive report and today, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, they were able to comply with that requirement of this Representation. With that, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my motion to defer the budget of the Food and Drug Administration and instead, move for the approval of the same.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). What is the pleasure of the Majority?

REP. HERRERA-DY. On behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in the termination of the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Food and Drug Administration.


The budget of the Food and Drug Administration is hereby approved. Congratulations to the Food and Drug Administration family. (Applause)



REP. HERRERA-DY. I move for a suspension of the session.


It was 4:31 p.m.





REP. HERRERA-DY. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I move that we resume the consideration of the budget of the Department of Agriculture and its attached agencies, including the National Irrigation Administration.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


The period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Agriculture, including its attached agencies and corporations, and the National Irrigation Administration is hereby resumed.

REP. HERRERA-DY. I move that we recognize our Sponsor, Deputy Speaker Arthur C. Yap, and at the same time, Rep. Estrellita B. Suansing from the First District of Nueva Ecija, for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We recognize Deputy Speaker Arthur Yap to sponsor the said budget and recognize also the Chairperson of the Committee on Ways and Means, the workaholic


Representative from Nueva Ecija, the Hon. Ging Suansing, to interpellate the good Sponsor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, will the Sponsor yield to some questions?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, yes, it would be the honor of the Sponsor to yield to your questions.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you, Mr. Sponsor. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I would like to know why in the 2019 National Expenditure Program, the figures for the Staffing Summary for 2018 and 2019 are not the same? In the 2018 Staffing Summary, the 2018 total number of authorized positions is 8,565 and in the 2019 Staffing Summary, the figure is 8,611?

REP. YAP (A.).Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, please allow us a few minutes to confer on how we can harmonize the figures. Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, I am reading from page 10 of the Staffing Summary for Fiscal Year 2019 and it says here that for 2018, the number of total permanent positions for the Office of the Secretary is 8,611 with an amount of P2.9 million. For 2019, it is still 8,611 but it takes wage increases into consideration, for which reason, the P2.9 million has been increased to P3.12 million, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I am referring to the total authorized positions—permanent.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, can we please ask the staff to look into it. Now, what is the discrepancy, Your Honor? How many numbers are we looking at?

REP. SUANSING (E.). In the 2018 Staffing Summary, it is 8,565, which was the same number as 2017. In the 2019 Staffing Summary, both figures for 2017 and 2018 changed. In 2017, it increased to 8,613 and in 2018, it decreased to 8,611. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, while the staff is looking for the answer to the question, may I move now to my second question.

You have a total number of unfilled positions of 2,276 in 2018, which is 26 percent, and your projected total filled positions for 2019 is the same as the one in 2018. My question is, does that mean that you do not have plans of filling up your unfilled positions in 2019?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we are at the moment filling up those positions up to December. There is an intention to fill them up.

REP. SUANSING (E.). How come that in your 2019 Staffing Summary, your projected number of authorized positions, permanent, is still 8,611?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, these are merely projections and the Department of Agriculture yields to the possibility of certain errata along the way.

REP. SUANSING (E.). So, meaning that …

REP. YAP (A.). There could be discrepancies, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, but there is every intention of the Department of Agriculture to fill these up. In fact, if we look at the general budget for the item “Support to Operations,” it is actually increasing. In that respect, the Department has every intention to field more people into operations.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you for that answer. I just want to be assured that you will fill up the unfilled positions. May I now go to my second set of questions.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is Mr. Enrico Garzon connected with the Department?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes.

REP. SUANSING (E.). How is he related to the Secretary?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the answer we received is that he is not related to the Secretary.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is he a member of the Bids and Awards Committee?

REP. YAP (A.). He is the Vice Chairman of the Bids and Awards Committee.

REP. SUANSING (E.). What is his position right now?

REP. YAP (A.). He is the Assistant Secretary for Livestock, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is the position of Assistant Secretary for Livestock included as a member of the BAC?

REP. YAP (A.). He is the designated its Vice Chairman via a Special Order from the Office of the Secretary.


REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, may I follow up on the status of the inquiry of Cong. Charlie Cojuangco regarding his citizenship.

REP. YAP (A.). May we ask for time, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. Per information, he is a Filipino.

REP. SUANSING (E). Can the Department furnish this Representation with copies of his travel record, be it personal or official?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we will do that.

REP. SUANSING (E). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I would like to go to the main issue. Is the Sponsor familiar with Special Order No. 260, series of 2012?

REP. YAP (A.). I will ask the staff to get a copy of the Special Order. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, while they are looking for it, if it is not too much to ask of the Lady, may we please be referred to the pertinent sections of the Special Order.

REP. SUANSING (E.). This Special Order pertains to reorganization of the Bureau of Plant Industry Task Force Allium. So, are you familiar, Mr. Sponsor, with this Special Order No. 260? I want the Sponsor to explain this Special Order, and I would just like to know the function and purpose of this Task Force Allium.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, that Special Order refers to a special task force created by the Department of Agriculture to monitor the planting materials, the volume of production, the state of inventory of the onion sector or the onion crop.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Sponsor, what triggers the importation of onions?

REP. YAP (A.). Basically, when the prices set by the Department together with the private sector are breached, then that is the time that its importation is ordered, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is there a need for consultation with the onion farmers before we import onions?

REP. YAP (A.). There is a need, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). What should be the stock level of the onions that will signal importation?

REP. YAP (A.). Basically, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, the triggering event will be the prices.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is it not the current inventory of the onions?

REP. YAP (A.). It depends, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. One way of looking at it would be the inventory, but the more important trigger factor for the importation would be the prices in the market.

REP. SUANSING (E.). What is the lead time to import onions?

REP. YAP (A.). It depends on the source, but the more important thing is, if a certain price, which has already been set together with the private sector and the consumers, is breached, the Secretary of Agriculture must order the importation of onions.

REP. SUANSING (E.). So, meaning, the onion farmers should be consulted but that we do need approval from them before we can import?

REP. YAP (A.). The minimum requirement, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, is consultation. But if it is a question of permission, the Department of Agriculture does its best to explain the situation because, as much as we are trying to protect the interest of our onion farmers, millions of consumers are also on the line and sometimes, we have to make sure that the inventory of the onions is with the farmers. The moment the onions are out of the farmers’ hands and in the cold storage of the traders, then that is one signal to the Secretary of Agriculture to watch very closely the prices because when the prices are breached, then he must order the importation.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, you mentioned cold storage.


REP. SUANSING (E.). So, does this mean that once the onions are not anymore in the hands of the onion farmers and are already inside the cold storage, do you consider these as not the inventory of the onion farmers even though they are the owners of the said onions?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, I stand corrected. There are situations when the onions are harvested and even if they are placed already in the cold storage, the ownership remains with the farmers.


REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you very much for that answer. May I ask—what is the monthly consumption of onions in the country?

REP. YAP (A.). We consume 15,000 metric tons monthly, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor..

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is it not 14,500?

REP. YAP (A.). It is 14,877 metric tons to be exact. I believe the information given to me was a rounded figure, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Okay. I was informed that it is 14,500 metric tons.

REP. YAP (A.) Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Sponsor, are you aware that there was a consultation that happened on August 2 between the Task Force Allium and the onion farmers?


REP. SUANSING (E.). What was the result of the consultation? Do they still have enough stocks of red onions?

REP. YAP (A.). I have just been informed that there is still 30-days’ worth of inventory owned by the farmers, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Can you tell how many metric tons are available at the time when the consultation happened?

REP. YAP (A.). Allow us to check, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. Let me read the pertinent portion of the report submitted to the OIC Director of the Bureau of Plant Industry. Based on the average consumption, this is dated September 26, 2018, the consumption per month is 14,550 metric tons for red creole—these are locally produced creole onions in Region III— and 14, 830 of that figure would last for 30.5 days. That is a portion of the memo.

REP. SUANSING (E.). I have a copy, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, of a letter from the onion farmers that during the consultation on August 2, there were 55,455 metric tons available and considering that the consumption is only 14,550, I would like to correct the honorable Sponsor that the current inventory will last for 3.8 months and not 30 days. Will the Department confirm these figures?

REP. YAP (A.). Allow us some time to confirm, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, as the Department is still

verifying at this point in time. We are also trying to see if there can be an updated figure from the PSA or the Philippine Statistics Authority at that point in time. That being the case, I think the Lady is pointing out that the farmers are saying that our inventory is good for three months, whereas the Department seems to be saying that it is only 30 days.

REP. SUANSING (E.). May I ask, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, if Director Culaste of the Bureau of Plant Industry is present in the hall?

REP. YAP (A.). He is present, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). May I know if he was present during the consultation?

REP. YAP (A.). He presided over the consultations.

REP. SUANSING. So, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, he should know how many metric tons were available at that time.

REP. YAP (A.). I am clarifying with him, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, and they are trying to source out the minutes. Would she accept a formal memo from the Department of Agriculture on that issue, in setting the records straight? They are trying to source out the minutes right now.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I was able to talk to Director Culaste and he confirmed that there are 55,455 metric tons to carry our supply through 3.8 months.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, even as they are trying to source out the figure, I think the important issue at that point in time was whether the price as set, the special safeguard price set, was breached or not, and according to the Secretary of the Department, the retail price for onion was breached at that time, triggering the need for the importation to protect our consumers.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I believe that the factor that will trigger the importation is not the price because we have available stocks of red onions in Nueva Ecija. So, I would just like to know how come that we already imported red onions when we still have stocks with the onion farmers?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, according to the Department, right now, as we have clarified, the volume of stocks is not the triggering event for an importation. Once the prices are breached, there


is already damage in that our consumers are affected; then, it is incumbent upon the Department to order an importation to protect our consumers.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, that is not the way we were doing things before. The reason we have the Task Force Allium is to help the onion farmers. So, since we have still 3.8 metric tons, given the current stock level of the red onions still in the custody of the onion farmers and meeting our monthly consumption, we should have not opened the importation.

May I now move on to my next set of questions. When did you open the application for the importation of red onions?

REP. YAP (A.). August 22, 2018, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). So, despite the 3.8 months which can carry the stock level of red onions, we opened the importation on August 22. Who is in charge of the issuance of the import permits?

REP. YAP (A.). The issuances were made by the Bureau of Plant Industry. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at that point in time, allow us at least to state that although the cold storage prices were at P65 per kilo, the retail prices were already reaching P120, even reaching P180 per kilo, which necessitated the Department to act.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Honorable Sponsor, the prices can be manipulated, so, we should not consider prices here. We should consider the stock level of the onions with the farmers and this is very important because this is how we help the onion farmers. May I ask again who is in charge of the issuance of the import permits?

REP. YAP (A.). The Director of the BPI, Ma’am. It was an online release, the system was online.

REP. SUANSING (E.). But before we open the application, there is somebody who will instruct the InterCommerce Network to open the application. Hindi iyon automatic na nag-o-open. Mayroon isang tao po na magsasabi na dapat i-open na natin, Mr. Sponsor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). May I remind the Lady and the Gentleman to please address the questions to the Chair.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Sorry po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of Agriculture confirms that he did give

the green light to the BPI head to allow the online registration of the applications to import. The situation is akin, Mr. Speaker, to a situation when it comes to rice that sometimes, when the NFA conducts warehouse inspections, the private sector may have stocks but chooses not to release them even if the farmers own the stocks. This also happens to the rice farmers. This is very similar to the situation you mentioned about onion farmers having their onions inside the cold storage.

Under the NFA, there is a program called the “Farmer’s Option to Buy Back” or FOBB, wherein farmers can first receive the payment for the support price and their rice stocks are deposited inside the warehouses. Technically, Mr. Speaker, they still own them because they have that piece of paper that says that they still own these and they have the option to withdraw the stocks. It is very akin, it is very similar to the situation of the onions—the NFA Administrator sees that there may be stocks in private warehouses but the prices are shooting up and so, it is the responsibility of the NFA Administrator to either seize the stocks and release these to the public, or to order an importation to bring down consumer prices. I believe the Secretary of Agriculture confirmed to me that that is the situation right now—that even if the stocks are in the cold storage, which stocks are owned by the farmers, as long as the price is breached and there is damage to the consumers, damaged, it is incumbent upon him to act to protect the consuming public.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, thank you very much for those statements. We also have to consider that we have to protect the onion farmers as well.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, definitely.

REP. SUANSING (E.). The onion industry in Nueva Ecija is already dying not only because of calamities, but also because of the worm infestation. Once the onion plants are attacked by the army of worms, wala na kaming maha-harvest. This is a different situation and so, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, we have the Task Force Alum and the Department of Agriculture that should assist and help the onion farmers.

May I now go to my next question. Is it true that somebody or isang tao called “the Secretary” instructed BPI Director George Culaste and gave him instructions through his mobile phone to call InterCommerce to open the application for import permits or the SPSIC for the importation of red onions, but not because of the breach in price that triggers the importation.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of Agriculture said that he does not just call his Director but he personally meets with him especially on sensitive


cases like this. He denies these allegations, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, how many import permits were issued and how many were used?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, let me confirm the figures. There were 1,436 permits, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, and these are small tranches

REP. SUANSING (E.). Again, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). There were 1,436 permits issued, as of September 10, for red onions.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, so you are now correcting the statement of the Secretary when I asked this of him and he answered that there were only 40 import permits issued.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, the Secretary is saying that he has never issued such statement—these numbers.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I talked to him personally and he said there were only 40 import permits. Now, you are saying there were 1,436 import permits. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, how many were approved but still in the process?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, out of the approved 1,436 permits, only 76 had been used.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Please state that again, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Out of the 1,436 permits, Mr. Speaker, only 77 permits had been used.

REP. SUANSING (E.). How many imports have arrived, and how many more are expected?

REP. YAP (A.). There were 3,839 metric tons that had arrived as of September 28, Mr. Speaker, and the estimated volume was 71,800 metric tons.

REP. SUANSING (E.). With 71,800 metric tons, when divided by 14,500, then that will almost be five months to carry, plus the 3.8 months with the onion farmers and so, we now have a supply of red onions for 8.8 months. That means that we will not plant onions anymore because 8.8 months will run until June 2019. September is the planting season of the onions, and February is the harvest season, and we still have

imported onions. What will happen to the onion farmers, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, based on the discussions that we have had, it seems that the 3.8 months of supply is not what is left in the storage, but just about a month’s worth.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, I spoke to Director Culaste and he confirmed that it is 3.8 months to carry and not 30 days.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, based on the evaluation that was conducted on the present volume, the Bureau of Plant Industry is saying that there is just one month of supply left.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I am sorry but I am not accepting that. May I now move to my next question, Mr. Speaker. Is the Sponsor in any way, aware of the big three in the importation of onions—Toto Albano, Nina G. and G. Shepard Tan?

REP. YAP (A.). We are not aware, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). You mean to say, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, that the Secretary is not aware who is Toto Albano?

REP. YAP (A.). They all go through the InterCommerce Network, the online site for applying and releasing import permits, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I am asking if the Secretary knows Toto Albano.

REP. YAP (A.). The Secretary confirms that he knows Mr. Toto Albano, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, because I saw him with Toto Albano in Facebook. Is Toto Albano also in the importation of cattle and goats? Why is he with the Secretary in his trips to the US for cattle and goats? Is he a consultant or an adviser in any way?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, he is the president of a livestock group, so it is very much possible that he is in that trade.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Meaning, he is an importer of onions and also an importer of cattle and goats.


REP. YAP (A.). Very possible, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you for that answer, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

With the volume that you are expecting to arrive as per your record, and the ones that already arrived, if we compare these figures with our daily consumption, until when do you expect them to be consumed?

REP. YAP (A.). As a computation is being done, Mr. Speaker, the BPI is stating that based on their records, in terms of onion importations, there is no Mr. Albano who imported onions, that is according to the records of the BPI.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, are you saying that in the list of importers, there is no Toto Albano because he is using a company name, not Toto Albano himself?

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker, we will ask the BPI about that. From end of December to January the following year, Mr. Speaker, is the projected period for consumption of the imported onions.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Based on my computation, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor, setting aside the current level of inventory of the local red onions, this will be until February. That is five months. So, the Sponsor is sure that the 71,800 metric tons will arrive?

REP. YAP (A.). That is the estimated volume, Mr. Speaker, because even as the permits had been issued, there is a possibility that the importers will not push through with the importation.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Thank you for that answer, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. Is it true that you suspended the issuance of import permits and is this, in a way, an acceptance of an error?

REP. YAP (A.). We gave way to our farmers’ request, Mr. Speaker, that is why the importations had been suspended.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Puwede pala naman iyon, na kapag nag-request at nag-alboroto ang onion farmers, ihihinto iyong issuance ng import permits?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, the prices have gone back to P65 per kilo, that is one; and two, part of the process is the continuous consultation with our farmers.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, is it true that you suspended the special safeguard duty on

the incoming importations of red onions? May I know the purpose of the special safeguard duty.

REP. YAP. (A.). Basically, Mr. Speaker, under the WTO, the special safeguard measures are duties set to protect the farmers upon the application of the country involved. So, it is actually used as a guide when there is breach price, upon which the state acts to protect its consumers and farmers. In this case, since the price is already at P65 per kilo, that is the reason the Secretary lifted the order to import. That is why it stopped.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Is it not that if you suspend the SSG or the special safeguard duty, the prices of imported onions will go down?

REP. YAP. (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, because the special safeguard duty is basically imposed to assist the local farmers. When that is lifted, basically, that is in recognition of the fact that the prices have reached such a level that the special safeguard duty is not needed to assist the local farmers anymore. In this case, Mr. Speaker, the prices were breached and that is the reason the special safeguard duty was lifted and importation was allowed.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, in suspending the special safeguard duty, who will benefit—is it the onion farmers or the importers?

REP. YAP. (A.). The objective is, as much as possible, we try to favor everybody, but in this case, clearly the immediate beneficiaries are the consumers, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUANSING (E.). My question is, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, who will benefit here, the onion farmers or the importers?

REP. YAP. (A.). The consumers first, Mr. Speaker, because the prices of the onions are going down and so, the consumers will benefit. In this case, the prices that were shooting up to P180 per kilo have now leveled to P65. As to the importers, Mr. Speaker, they are on their own lookout. If they can make money at P65 or lower, we leave them to their business decision on whether they should import or not.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, if we were for the welfare of the consumers, let us not only suspend but remove the SSG, because my question was who will benefit, the onion farmers or the importers?

REP. YAP. (A.). Mr. Speaker, as we had explained earlier, the special safeguard duties can be removed at the appropriate time. As long as it is the belief and


the estimation of the Department that the farmers are not going to be affected, then the special safeguard duties which were erected to protect them, may be suspended at that point in time. We cannot remove these forever, Mr. Speaker, because to do that, we will handicap the Department’s ability to protect the farmers at a time when they would need such protection.

REP. SUANSING (E.). May I know, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, what is the circumstance or event where we need to suspend or lift the SSG?

REP. YAP. (A.). When the prices are so high, we need to encourage people to import to temper the spiraling prices of domestic food. In this case, the prices of the onions are too high and so, that is the signal that we lift the special safeguard duties to allow importers to import.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I would like to request that this Representation be given a complete list of those import permits, with complete details as to whom these permits were issued, the date of issuance, and who issued them. I would like to request that these documents be authenticated by the president of the InterCommerce Network.


REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, do we really aid our onion growers by importing a huge volume of red onions while there is still a surplus, thereby killing the potential of our farmers and preventing them from expanding because there is no market for locally produced onions? How are we supposed to solve poverty if we do not help our farmers and instead, we are supporting a few moneyed importers and the foreign exporters? Worst of all, how can our farmers trust our government, our own government, if the Bureau of Plant Industry and the Department of Agriculture are employing doublespeak on the former, telling our farmers one thing and then, turning around and doing the exact opposite? Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I firmly believe that the importation of red onions is quite premature at this time since there are still 55,455 metric tons, which is more than enough supply of locally produced red onions available in our cold storage facilities.

I rest my case, Mr. Speaker, honorable Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, allow us to assure the Lady that we appreciate the passion that the she is showing us, knowing that many of her constituents are onion growers. But allow us to assure her that this is not the intention of the Department of Agriculture. In fact, under the auspices of the Department and because

of the programs that it has implemented, the number of areas planted to onions continue to grow. In 2017, it was 18,258 hectares; in 2018, it rose to 19,611; in 2019, it grew to 20,281.65. Allow us, Mr. Speaker, to assure the Lady of the Department’s commitment through expanding the areas for planting, conducting market price monitoring, conducting training and technology demonstrations, conducting research and development when it comes to good planting materials, intensifying quarantine support and food safety, as well as providing post-harvest facilities. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department is putting its money where its mouth is. The Department now has a loan program of P140,000 per hectare to our onion growers and garlic farmers, Your Honor.

REP. SUANSING (E.). Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, thank you very much. I really encourage the Secretary—because last year, our onion plants were attacked by an army of worms and I did not see the face of the Secretary himself visiting and extending help to the onion farmers.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Your Honor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Thank you very much, to the Hon. Ging Suansing.


REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, we now move to recognize the Sr. Dep. Minority Leader, the Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Sr. Dep. Minority Leader from BUHAY Party-List, the Hon. Lito Atienza, is recognized to interpellate the good Sponsor.

REP. ATIENZA. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Salamat po, Mr. Majority Leader. With the kind indulgence of the honorable distinguished Sponsor on the floor, we would like to ask very, very simple, direct questions.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we yield to your questions, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Magkano po ba ang total amount na pinag-uusapan natin for the budget of the Department of Agriculture?

REP. YAP (A.). Ang total amount po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, is P55 billion po.


REP. ATIENZA. It is P55 billion. How much of this will go for developing further our agricultural capabilities sapagkat tayo po ay nabilad sa mga iba’t ibang krisis na, hanggang ngayon, ay wala pa tayong paraan. Primarily on rice, pababayaan na lang ba natin na tumaas ng tumaas ang presyo ng bigas? Kailan po ba titigil ito? I am speaking for and on behalf of our people who are sick and tired of story telling with no ending. We want a happy ending to all of these. So, kailan po kaya matatapos ang problema sa bigas at babalik ba tayo sa normal prices which are affordable to the great masses of our people.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, hopefully po, kung pumasok po ng tama ang schedule ng importation ng NFA, kasabay po iyan ng pag-ani po natin ng ating national harvest this coming October 15, at papasok din naman po tayo sa panahon po ng summer crop, ay umaasa po tayo, at least, na ma-stabilize po natin iyong presyo po ng bigas. Nakikiisa po kami sa opinyon ninyo na this is not exactly the kind of budget that we would like to leave—if the national budget, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, is an articulation of a legacy that we would like to leave behind, this is not the kind of budget that we expect in the Department of Agriculture. Ang P64 billion po na budget ng DA, bumagsak na po sa P55 billion.

Noong 2008 po, iyong budget po ng Department of Agriculture as a percentage of the national budget, naglalaro po sa 6 to 7 percent pero ngayon po, mas mababa pa po sa 1/2 percent. Kaya nga po nakikiisa po kami sa inyo that seems that we keep on subsidizing the consumers, but we are not subsidizing the Filipino farmers.

REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker, sana ay hindi makiusap ang ating distinguished Gentleman sponsoring the budget of the Department of Agriculture. Hindi po ito pakiusapan. Ang akin pong tanong ay tanong ng bayan—Bakit po tayo nagkakaproblema sa ating agrikultura? Kanina po, ang pinag-uusapan ay iyong sibuyas. Kailan po tayo nagkaroon ng problema sa sibuyas? Ngayon, alam ko ang presyo ng sili, na paborito nating lahat, ay napakamahal na rin. Palagay ko ay darating ang araw mag-i-import din tayo ng sili.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Hindi po ito pakiusap. This is the demand of the times and our people at the Agriculture Department must react properly; otherwise, the voices of the people may turn into something else. Remember that a hungry man is an angry man.

Ang rating ng ating Pangulo, I am sure, is going down precisely because of the food problem. The rice prices are going up and the stories on the continuing

problems that we hear, as we are hearing it from the distinguished Sponsor, we have had enough of story-telling. We need action now. Again, let me reiterate—puwede po ba tayong bumalik pa ulit sa estado na ang Pilipinas ay mayroong supisyenteng bigas na kakainin? You have the National Food Authority and at one point, the distinguished Gentleman was heading that agency. At one point in time, the Gentleman headed the Department of Agriculture. So, we want definite answers that I can relay to our people, that these are the answers that we have gotten from the DA today from this distinguished sponsoring Gentleman who, himself, is an experienced agriculturist.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, like you, I share the frustration that you had articulated. Pero ano po ang gagawin natin kung year after year, lumalaki po iyong populasyon ng bansa natin at hindi naman po natin binibigyan ng sufficient support ang agriculture? Tingnan po ninyo ang national rice program. Last year po binigyan natin ito ng P11.8 billion. This year, we cut its budget by 37 percent, bumagsak po. We are complaining about meat. We are complaining about our livestock and poultry. Ang pinaka-kritikal po diyan ay iyong mais po pero iyong budget po natin sa mais, binagsak po natin ng 48 percent.

Kaya nga po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, as I said a while ago, noong panahon po noong 2008 at 2009, ang budget po ng Department of Agriculture na nasa 6 percent po ay ngayon po below one and a half percent. Kaya nga po, Sir, we join you in your frustration. Give us your comments, give us your ideas, and we will include them as we go into the period of amendments. As I said, if the budget is the articulation of our hopes, of our dreams, of the legacy that we are leaving behind, for the protection of the food security for our people and the protection of the farm industry, this is not the budget that we can be proud of.

REP. ATIENZA. Kung hindi po sapat ang budget, Mr. Speaker, sana ay nagwawala na kayo ngayon. Hindi sapat iyong depensa kayo ng depensa ng budget na sa tingin pala ninyo ay kulang. Why do you not raise hell? Our people must eat affordable food—that is the issue today

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Sir, opo.

REP. ATIENZA. There is no amount of words and no amount of storytelling that can change that picture. So, I reiterate my question, Mr. Speaker, tayo po ba ay makakapag-stabilize pa ng supply ng bigas na galing sa ating lupa na isa sa pinakamayaman sa buong mundo?

REP. YAP (A.). If you want a direct action, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, I am sorry to say that we have to


import right now. Iyon po talaga ang masakit at masaklap na sagot—we have to import on the short term po.

REP. ATIENZA. If we did not …

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, dagdagan na po natin itong budget ng P20 billion, at least. Ibalik po natin, we should give it back to all the commodity groups so that they can dispense this assistance directly to our farm sector and our farm producers.

REP. ATIENZA. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the Gentleman is not willing to even assure the nation today that there is a solution, a light at the end of the tunnel.

REP. YAP (A.). There is a solution, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, but what can the Department and its partners work with if we continually cut the budget. In 2008, when the population of the country was only at about 90 million, we were at 6 to 7 percent, and now na nadagdagan po iyon populasyon natin to 105 million, the budget that we are giving to agriculture is less than one and a half percent. That is my frustration, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to hear the Gentleman, put the blame again on the growing population. Ang bilang ng tao ay biyaya ng Panginoon.

REP. YAP (A.). Biyaya po ng Panginoon, I agree with you.

REP. ATIENZA. If you do not agree with me, I am willing to debate with you on that issue alone.

REP. YAP (A.). I will yield to you, Sir. Biyaya po iyan ng Panginoon. As I said, I am not blaming the population increase, I am blaming this budget, Sir. We must not allow this budget to pass. If the Gentleman shares my frustration and outrage, join me, Sir, and let us add to this budget.

REP. ATIENZA. But, please, Mr. Speaker, if the Gentleman will just merely say that the growing population is the problem, palagay ko ay wala tayong pag-asa dahil sa talagang dadami ang Pilipino.

REP. YAP (A.). It is not the problem, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Kailangan nang gobyerno na matuto, kailangan nang gobyerno na magbigay ng paraan upang makakain ang dumaraming tao.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. We will never accept that kind of an alibi for failure. If the Gentleman thinks that the

growing population is the problem, Mr. Speaker, he is way off target. Kung ang problema ay ang pondo, mag-usap kayo sa Executive—malapit po naman ang ating Sekretaryo ng Agrikultura sa ating Pangulo—sabihin niya ng ito hayagan sa kanya. Hindi dito sa Kongreso dahil wala po naman kaming magagawa. We cannot double your budget, we cannot even add one centavo, but the Department of Agriculture can do something about it, and we would expect them to do something about it. So, my question is, are we still going to go hungry, with our people begging for action from government?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, no, we will not allow that. Even with this limited budget, we are going to make sure that our people will not go hungry.

REP. ATIENZA. I accept that particular statement as it is accurate. Huwag ninyong payagang magutom ang tao sapagkat, ang sabi ko nga sa inyo, a hungry man is an angry man.


REP. ATIENZA. Kayo po ay magpapasensiya kung medyo napapataas ang boses ko.

REP. YAP (A.). Hindi po.

REP. ATIENZA. Sinasalamin ko lang, dinadala ko rito ang mensahe na galing sa lansangan. Kung maririnig po ninyo ang mga usapan ng mga tao ngayon, siguro ay hindi lamang galit ang makukuha ninyo. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, let me go back in time. Sometime in 2008, we launched efforts to liberate our water bodies from illegal structures, fish pens which are monopolies of the rich and the powerful. Ang mga mangingisda, Mr. Speaker, today is the poorest sector in the Philippines. Our country, which is blessed with waters all around and inside our islands, were rich with aquatic life at one time.

Ako po ay ipinanganak at lumaki sa Maynila, at sa mga ilog nito ay may isda. Ngayon po ay nag-i-import tayo ng isda. Ano ang plano ng Department of Agriculture dito? At one time, narinig ko po sa telebisyon, na sinabi po ng Sekretaryo—and I hope he is here—na wala raw tayong magagawa sa importation ng isda sapagkat gagawin na natin ito regularly. We will become regular importers of fish? Is that the answer, is that his assurance—I would like to officially get that in this interpellation—are we going to be a regular importer of fish or are we going to develop aquaculture and fisheries in our country?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at the time that you were a member of the Cabinet under the


present Speaker, we were able to show, from 2001 to 2010, that by expanding mariculture parks, we can increase domestic production and supply. In 2001, the domestic supply production was about 2 million metric tons. When we ended in 2010 with 68 mariculture parks all over the country, we were able to bring domestic fish harvest to 5 million metric tons and so, we have shown the way, Sir, nakaya natin. Ang kailangan lang po ay suportahan natin ang ating mga agencies that are working, especially with the National Fisheries Program.

Ngayon po, sa punto ninyo na pag-a-angkat po natin ng isda, that is only seasonal, Sir. It depends on the fish na gustong kainin po ng mga tao, ng ating mga kababayan at that point in time, depending also on the seasons po and the catch. That is the reason po bakit po tayo nag-a-angkat. But to say, Sir, that we are bound by importation, hindi po totoo iyon. We have been able to show that with our coastlines, the fourth longest in the world with a lot of protected coastlines, we can be self-sufficient in fishery products, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Before I continue listening to the fairytale being told by the Gentleman, I would like you to ask the Secretary of Agriculture who is here now—tama po ba iyong sinabi niya na tayo ay mag-i-import na lamang ng isda tuwi-tuwina, o gumagawa tayo ng paraan upang tayo naman ay mabuhay muli ng bunga ng ating mga katubigan?

REP. YAP (A.). Sir, according to the Secretary of Agriculture, that is also part of our restocking program because we only import during periods of lean months when there is a closed season to protect our marine resources. Iyan po ang sagot ng ating Kalihim.

REP. ATIENZA. Then, let me go back in time. As I was saying, in 2008, we launched a very aggressive clearing-up of our water bodies. We were trying to clean up Laguna de Bay, we were trying to clean up Manila Bay. If the Gentleman would remember our figures then, almost 70 percent of our water bodies were occupied by illegal fish pens. So, let me ask him, as he took a very strong position at that time, even in front of the Cabinet, saying that the fish pens are necessary because it is a temporary solution to the problem of the yesteryears. Ten years had passed, Mr. Speaker, and let me ask the Gentleman now—iyong sinabi niya noon na hindi niya puwedeng ipaalis ang mga fish pens sapagkat iyan ay solusyon daw at hindi problema, sa ngayon ay wala na pong mapangisdaan ang ating mga mangingisda. So, are you still maintaining that fish pens are the solution to the fish supply problem of the nation?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, I was informed by the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic

Resources that your advocacy at that time, the Gentleman’s advocacy had actually been complied with when he liberated a lot of our water bodies of all those illegal structures. They are still doing it today, Sir, and the fisheries programs that we are doing right now—what we are feeding our people right now are coming from the mariculture parks in different parts of the country, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. I would like to react to that by saying that the Gentleman is obviously misinformed. The water bodies of today are even more occupied by fish pens. Baka hindi po niya alam na pumupunta kami sa Manila Bay. Bukas na bukas at punong-puno na po ng fish pens ang Manila Bay. Bukod sa nabubulok na ang tubig ay nabubulok at nakukulong pa ang pangingisdaan ng ating mga mahihirap. I would like to invite him to Laguna de Bay and check for himself, so that he cannot claim these fantasies in Congress. Ang Laguna de Bay po ay hindi nababawasan ng mga fish pens na hindi lang sumisira ng tubig, kung hindi ay nag-aalis ng karapatan sa mga mahihirap na makapangisda sila ng malaya sa Laguna de Bay. Ngayon, 80 percent po ng ating water bodies are occupied by the rich and the powerful, kaya huwag na po tayong magpaligoy-ligoy kung wala kayong programa to clear the water bodies. The Pampanga River, Bulacan River and even the Taal Lake are getting full of fish pens. Even the Sampaloc Lake and the other beautiful lakes in the country are all occupied by illegal fish pens. If the government does not accept the challenge of removing all of these fish pens, we will never get a solution from any government or administration.

We were on the way to providing a solution then. The Gentleman sponsoring the budget was one of those who obstructed our efforts kaya hindi po namin nagawa ang dapat gawin. Kung mayroon po akong pinanghihinayangan, the administration of the President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo could have solved the problem before 2010, but no, the Gentleman said this was a temporary situation as they were producing more fish with their program. There will come a time when we will have no more fish pens in the country. Nanaig po iyong kanyang gusto, at nabalam po ang aming kampanya. Now, I am asking him—is he still of the same opinion that putting up fish pens is the solution to the fish supply of the country? Or is he now willing to accept that we have to remove this obstruction on the activities of our fishermen so that they can freely fish and produce fish for our tables, affordable fish that is not imported from China.

REP. YAP (A). Mr. Speaker, the honorable Gentleman is correct in saying that I was one of those who stopped that program in 2008 and 2009. At that point in time, the consumer situation was also very


fragile, Sir. If we just allow an unabated clearing of all the fish pens at that time, 40 percent of the fishery products in Metro Manila coming from Laguna de Bay would be affected, and consumer prices would be affected. At that point in time, Sir, if you will remember, the world was going through its worst depression since the Great Depression. In 2008 and 2009, we were reeling from a global financial crisis that was also followed by speculative prices in grains. If you think that the price of rice today is high—the international price of rice today is $450 per metric ton—the price of rice up to as high as more than a thousand dollars at that time. We were in a very fragile situation and that is why you are correct, Your Honor, when you said that at that time, I said that this was the temporary solution. Like you, I also believe in clearing the waterways and giving these waterways back to our fishermen, pero ang hinihingi ko lang po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ay intindihin po natin iyong context noong panahon na iyon.

I will admit to you, Your Honor, that I was one of those who did not agree for the untrammeled clearing of the water bodies at that time. That is why, tama po kayo noong sinasabi ninyong temporary lang po ang tingin ko noong panahon na iyon. Ang tanong ninyo po ngayon ay, kung iyon pa rin po ba ang paniniwala ko? Ang paniniwala ko noon at hanggang ngayon is to clear the waterways and if we can build in other places, because marami naman po tayong mga coves na puwede pong mag-host ng mga fish pens na ito, ay mas mabuti pa na doon po natin gawin ang mga ito sa mga mariculture parks po natin.

I hope, Sir, I have been able to clarify this, and I do not agree with the strong language that was used, that I obstructed. I did not obstruct it, Sir. It was in a Cabinet meeting where we had a chance to discuss it, and I did give my position as to why we had to do it, and you are correct on that, but it was a temporary position at that point in time.

REP. ATIENZA. Let me reiterate my question, therefore. To date, would the Gentleman support the concern of this Representation and that of our party? The BUHAY Party-List stands four-square in providing our fisherfolk the livelihood that they have been deprived of. Wala na pong pangingisdaan ang ating mga mangingisda sapagkat iyong ating lawa, ang pinakamalaking lawa sa Asya, malaki pa sa Westwater Lake na 99,000 hectares, the biggest lake in Asia used to provide food for Metro Manila and the Filipinos in general. Since the fish pens occupied the water body, nawala po ang isda sa kamay ng mga mangingisda. Pati po itik, wala na po roon. Pati balot, wala na po roon sapagkat iyong tubig ng Laguna de Bay ngayon ay heavily silted, heavily polluted na. Ito ay isa sa mga kasalanan ng nakaraang administrasyon na hindi po natin dapat patawarin.

Therefore, I am asking the Gentleman, is he with me now in demanding for the government’s positive and definite action to liberate, not only Laguna de Bay, but also Manila Bay as it is also full of fish pens now. Nakakita na ba kayo ng isang dagat na ibinigay ng Panginoon—katulad po ng San Francisco Bay where it has a Save My Harbor project, even Singapore River at Hong Kong Harbor—nakita ba ninyo diyan that a single fish pen was allowed by their government? Siguro ay wala sapagkat matino ang gobyerno nila. Ang sinasabi ko po, kung may problema tayo sa pagkain ay nagkukulang ang gobyerno and please, let us not blame the number of people requiring food on their table. The more people, the easier for the economy to grow. That is the example of China and India. Huwag na ninyong ipilit iyong theory ninyo na ang bilang ng tao ay pabigat lang. Kung tama ang pamamahala ng gobyerno ay hindi magugutom ang mga tao.

Sa ngayon, kapag hindi natin inalis iyong mga fish pen na iyan, ang mayayaman ay yayaman pang higit at ang mahihirap ay magugutom pang higit. Sapagkat simpleng-simple ang kadahilanan, ang mga may-ari ng fish pens, ang mga isda nila riyan, ang karamihan sa kanila ay ini-export at ang kumakain po ay ang ibang bansa. Does the Sponsor have a figure on that? Ano ang percentage ng nahuhuli sa mga fish pen na ini-export at wala po sa ating mga palengke? Mayroon po kaya silang figure diyan?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Sponsor, Your Honor, up to now, I am with you in clearing the waterways. As I explained a while ago, the decision at that time not to clear the waterways was merely temporarily but today, I am with you, Sir. We are on the same page on clearing the waterways.

On the issue of population po, as I had said a while ago, allow me to clarify. Hindi po natin sinisisi ang populasyon ng ating bansa or the proclivity of our people to grow in population. Hindi po iyon ang problema. Ang sinisisi ko nga po ay iyong budget natin. Kung bakit po noong panahon dati, umabot po tayo ng 6 percent at nabibigyan po natin ng importansya ang ating budget. Ngayon, hindi natin mabigyan po ng importansya ang agriculture budget natin sa panahon na 105 million na po ang ating mga kababayan. Hindi po iyon indictative of our population level.

I believe you and I was with you, Sir, when we voted out all of these measures about contraception, about controlling births. I was with you and we voted together on the floor in support of life. So, then up to now, I am with you in supporting life.

REP. ATIENZA. Thank you for that assurance, Mr. Speaker, because our people are our resources. The number one resource of any nation is its people.



REP. ATIENZA. Kung mas maraming tao ay mas mayaman ang resources ng isang bansa.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. ATIENZA. Ang kailangan lang ay good and effective government. Kapagka gobyerno ay gumanap sa tungkulin nito ng tama, ang tao ang magpapalago pa ng ating ekonomiya at hindi na kailangan lalabas ng bansa upang magtrabaho ang Pilipino. Iyan po naman ay isang bagay na hindi na puwedeng pagdebatihan sapagkat napatunayan na ng katotohanan. People are born na hindi lamang puro bibig iyan, mayroon pong utak, mayroon pong galing at mayroong kakayahan. Kaya the more people, the faster the economy will grow under the effective leadership of the government and with good people running the administration. I hate to be pointing out this truth in our midst because the Secretary of Agriculture is a good friend of mine and he will always be a friend of mine, but also as a friend, I am reminding him that he is sitting on a social volcano. Ang mga tao ay baka hindi po makatiis sa gutom at hapdi ng sikmura nila.

As I had mentioned our water bodies, let us do something about restoring the right to fish of each and every Filipino. Iyon pong tanong ko, iyong mga nagnenegosyo ng isda, palagay ko ay sila ang nagmamay-ari ng mga fish pens sa Bulacan River, Pampanga River and all rivers in the country. Ano ang percentage ng kanilang ini-export because then, we can prepare a law that should ban the exportation of fish. Ipakain na lang natin sa ating mga kababayan ang bunga ng ating kalikasan, hindi iyong inilalabas natin sa bansa at pagkatapos ay mag-i-import naman tayo. Talo tayo sa kaliwa, talo tayo sa kanan at gutom ang inaabot ng Pilipino. Mayroon po ba kayong figure? Kung wala po ay papasahan ko na lang kayo ng nasaliksik ko. How much of what is produced by the fish pens is actually exported, and how much is provided in our public markets for the consumption of the Filipinos?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, please give us time to look at those figures. We believe those are important figures, and we will look for them. We do not have these at this point in time, but we will look for them, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Wala kayo ngayong figure?

REP. YAP (A.). Wala po.

REP. ATIENZA. And the Sponsor is committing that he will look very seriously on that matter.


REP. ATIENZA. That is an assurance, Mr. Speaker, that the Sponsor understands what we are trying to point out.

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, it is an assurance, Sir.

REP. ATIENZA. Let us think in terms of what is good for the Filipino. Kung ano ang makakabuti sa atin at hindi iyong para sa negosyante.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. ATIENZA. Ang kailangan natin ngayon ay pagkakaisa. We will offer our support to the government in whatever way we can help.


REP. ATIENZA. But definitely, we will also point out when we see that they are going in the wrong direction. Importation of food should be a no-no in any administration. Importation of onions, importation of garlic, at importation of rice—kailangan ang lahat pong ito ay matigil na sa lalong madaling panahon. Tayo po ay pinagpalang tunay dahil mayaman ang ating lupa, mayaman ang ating katubigan, maganda, masipag at matatalino ang ating mga mamamayan. Wala na po tayong hihingin pa sa Panginoong Diyos at ang kailangan lang ay mahusay na gobyerno. Uulit-ulitin ko po iyan—the key is effective leadership and good management of our resources. Kung maliit ang pondo ninyo, humingi kayo ng mas malaki, we do not grant it here. Magkakampi tayo. But if you are happy with whatever they are giving you—kaya ako ay pagbigyan ninyo kung ako ay nakapagtataas ng boses sapagkat iyan din ang tinig ng Pilipino when it comes to food such as rice and fish, the basic staples of our everyday lives. Kailangan pong bigyan ng higit pang panahon ang aking kaibigang Secretary Emmanuel F. Piñol upang magtagumpay siya, at kung ano ang maitutulong namin ay hindi namin ipagkakait sapagkat gusto namin siyang magtagumpay.

Salamat po, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Maraming salamat po. Kagalang-galang na Representante ng BUHAY Party-List.

REP. ATIENZA. Thank you, Mr. Majority Leader. Thank you to the Gentleman on the floor for his candid answers. Thank you.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker.



REP. PALMA. Mr. Speaker, I now move to recognize the Hon. Rosanna “Ria” Vergara of the Third District of Nueva Ecija for her interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Representative from the Third District of Nueva Ecija, the Hon. Ria Vergara is hereby recognized.

REP. VERGARA. Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. Will the Honorable Sponsor, the former Department of Agriculture Secretary and a dear and kind friend, allow me to raise pertinent points affecting the Department of Agriculture? I would like to raise the concerns of farmers and fisherfolk not only in my province, but also in the other parts of country as well. I believe that the meager budget of the Department of Agriculture, coupled with the manner by which this budget is allocated, managed and distributed, aggravates the myriad problems facing the agricultural as well as the fisherfolk sector. Rice sufficiency and food security, these are issues that are often mentioned in our Committee hearings and budget hearings. The primary issues affecting the agricultural and fisherfolk sector are the low income of farmers and fisherfolk, high cost of inputs, low price of palay, lack of capital and access to reasonable credit, lack of post-harvest facilities, pest infestation and disease occurrence, and inadequate crop insurance. All these are indicative of lack of government support for the agricultural sector.

The budget of the Department of Agriculture at P49.8 billion is only 1.37 percent of the total budget. Do you concur with these observations, honorable Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, I concur and I accept her statements.

REP. VERGARA. Mr. Speaker, the meager amount allocated for agriculture is worrisome. The reason is one sack of rice today costs P2,500 pesos in Nueva Ecija, the rice granary of the Philippines—this is a result of misguided management decision in the Department of Agriculture because, instead of importing to maintain the 15-day buffer stock required by law, it opted to retire some NFA debts. This is the kind of mismanagement I refer to. Rice, the basic staple of Filipinos, is no longer affordable. In Congress, our response to these high prices was to pass the Rice Tariffication Act and that, once approved by the upper house, this will remove the quantitative restrictions on imported rice, thereby making rice from overseas available to Filipinos at more affordable rates, and the tariffs or taxes levied on this

imported rice will hopefully be used for the benefit of our farmers.

My first question, distinguished Sponsor, what is the overall policy of the Department of Agriculture with respect to rice production? Will this policy change if the Rice Tariffication Act, a priority measure of our President, becomes a law? What will it be?

REP. YAP (A.). We are pushing, Your Honor, the Rice Tariffication Bill in the hope that we can temper the domestic prices of rice but that does not mean that we are going to give up on our interventions to expand Philippine agriculture. Neither does it mean that we will be very quick in deciding to abolish the National Food Authority because at the end of the day, considering the very unique terrain and situation of the Philippines being an archipelago, and being at the forefront at the receiving end of the climate change, there will always be a need for an agency that will maintain the buffer stock and keep the government security buffer stocks for our consumers. So, the thrust is still increasing and growing agriculture production, for which reason, Your Honor, since you come from the Philippine rice granary, we share your objections and your frustrations as well on how our budget had been slashed.

REP. VERGARA. So, distinguished Sponsor, you are assuring me that even with the passage of the Rice Tariffication Bill, we will still talk about rice sufficiency, we do not talk about just making sure we have rice from anywhere. We are still aiming for rice self-sufficiency where we will be sourcing rice, at least a good portion of it, from our country and not importing it. Is that correct?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. That is why it is very critical as well to keep the National Food Authority in play because the objective of the Rice Tariffication Bill is to tarrify, that means to allow rice to come in. But we always ask ourselves the question, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, if the Rice Tariffication Bill pushes through, to what extent are we going to allow or welcome cheap rice which will kill our local farmers producing rice? That is the reason, Mr. Speaker, the National Food Authority will be critical. We are trying to say that “let us do away with all the permits of the NFA and just allow anybody to import,” but when that happens, Mr. Speaker, and nobody is monitoring the importations and the prices do collapse, do we trust that the traders are not going to find a way to restrict the market to allow prices to go up again? At that time when we do not have the NFA anymore, we also have given up on all our rice production, resources and facilities here, we have given up on the millions of farmers who have left the fields, what then will happen to the Philippines?


Therefore, we give you our assurance, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, that even as I am an author of the Rice Tariffication Bill, we will only welcome importation to a certain level, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, only for the purpose of managing stocks. It is just to manage the stocks so that we can protect our consumers, but the intention is not to kill our farmers and if at all, it is meant to strengthen our farmers.

REP. VERGARA. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor. In the presentation of the Department of Agriculture to the Committee on Appropriations, they said one of their key achievements was the Production Loan Easy Access or PLEA. Would it be possible for this Representation to request for the results of that pilot study? Because if you read it, like Congressman Atienza had said, it is like a fairytale as everything looks rosy. But I know for a fact that, when we implemented this PLEA in my district, in the municipality of Bongabon, the target was P20 million but they only released P2 million and none of the farmers were able to repay it, so, the entire amount of P20 million was no longer released. So, I would just like to know how successful the PLEA was in other areas of the country.

May I proceed with my next question?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, we will send that report to you.

REP. VERGARA. My second question is, distinguished Sponsor, we are all aware of the President’s goal to eliminate corruption. Institutionalized corruption is a reality we are all aware of and the Department of Agriculture is no exception. I refer specifically to government employees who collude with private individuals and cause artificial rice shortages, price spikes, issuance of import permits despite the ample supply of food products like red onions, to the detriment of the Filipino consumers. What is the DA doing with the issue of rice cartels? Time and time again, our President has mentioned these middlemen who hoard and control the supply and price of rice. Is our President’s call to bring these people to justice falling on deaf ears? What steps is the DA taking to address this problem?

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, under Presidential Decree No. 4, the regulatory function of monitoring the entire rice sector falls under the National Food Authority, and the powers vested through Presidential Decree No. 4, the NFA is allowed to call on other law enforcement agencies. To that end, right now, the National Food Authority is working together with the Philippine National Police to monitor all the warehouses that are licensed with the NFA in terms of releasing hoarded stocks, if there are any held by the private sector, Mr. Speaker. So, that is on the side of the NFA.

On the side of other importations of commodities, the Secretary of Agriculture has assured me that everything is being done through a digital onsite window and so, in that way it minimizes the point of contact with our stakeholders who are importing. That is the one way that the Department of Agriculture is trying to combat institutionalized corruption, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. VERGARA. Distinguished Sponsor, at this point, was there anyone brought to justice, any rice hoarder or middleman found guilty of hoarding, or right now, it is still in an investigative phase?

REP. YAP (A.). I am not aware of anybody who had been convicted or at least indicted as of date, like in the last two years. I am not aware, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. VERGARA. But our objective is to finally catch some of them, right, or all of them?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. VERGARA. And we will not stop.

REP. YAP (A.). We will not stop, Mr. Speaker.

REP. VERGARA. Mr. Speaker, in my district, the average age of farmers is between 55 to 60. I rarely meet young farmers as their parents prefer that they study to be teachers, policemen or they even go abroad as domestic helpers due to the unprofitability of farming as a means of livelihood. What is the DA doing to address this looming problem, the ageing of the Filipino farmers and the subsequent food insecurity that will be the end result? What are the steps that the DA is taking now to encourage the next generation to take up farming?

REP. YAP (A.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, it is not difficult to understand why nobody wants to stay in our farms. Farming has largely become unprofitable, and I believe that this is the reason the Department of Agriculture is trying to make it as profitable as possible right now. Despite reductions in the budget of the Department of Agriculture, the Secretary of Agriculture has made a strategic decision to support agricultural production through credit, and that is the reason, of all the agencies, the ACPC right now has received the biggest increase of 3.5 percent. This is also the reason he is pushing for programs like LEAP or SURE, these are production loan programs.

The Department of Agriculture understands, Mr. Speaker, in the entire value chain in agriculture, it is in the financing where we are weak. I understand, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, that you are one of those people


who understand that our financing is very weak, for which reason you are fighting for a better crop insurance program for the farmers in our country. That is the reason it seems that the stress of the Department right now is to make farming more profitable through direct credit programs.

I was just handed a report, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, by the Secretary that the Bongabon Municipal Employees Multi-Purpose Cooperative did, in fact, receive P20 million as a loan but apparently, the repayment is still within the period of two years. So, that seems to be the strategic shift right now of the Department.

REP. VERGARA. Thank you, distinguished Sponsor. This is related to Cong. Ging Suansing’s interpellation regarding the importation of the red onions. Would the Department of Agriculture be willing to issue a special order to suspend all unused import permits that had already been approved but are unused?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Agriculture confirms that. Once the price of the onions settled at P65 per kilo, they already started to cancel all those issued permits.

REP. VERGARA. Thank you, distinguished Sponsor. In closing, I would like to share what I learned during the Women’s Political Leaders Summit in Vilnius, Lithuania last July. We attended a seminar entitled: “Women and Terrorism.” The symposium shed light on why women were joining terrorists’ organizations like ISIS or ISIL. According to the guest speakers from the NATO who had studied this emerging phenomenon, women willingly join these terrorists’ cells not because of ideology or religion, but that they joined them as these terrorists’ groups provided them with the most basic needs: food, medicines and access to clean water.

This is the reality on the ground and unless the DA addresses this issue, we might find ourselves in the same position that these other countries have of terrorists’ cells sprouting in their communities. The spiraling cost of rice and the availability of affordable NFA rice are just the tip of the problem. It should be resolved immediately so that further problems similar to what is happening in the Middle East will not come to our country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Thank you, Representative Vergara.


REP. SALO. Mr. Speaker, we respectfully move that we recognize the Hon. Gabriel H. Bordado Jr. from the Third District of Camarines Sur for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Gentleman from Camarines Sur, Rep. Gabriel Bordado is recognized.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, Mr. Speaker, I will be directing my interpellation to the National Irrigation Administration.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). May I now recognize Rep. Michael John “Jack” R. Duavit to answer the interpellation of Representative Bordado.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will the Sponsor yield to some questions?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mr. Speaker, gladly.

REP. BORDADO. My good kumpadre here. Mr. Speaker, the honorable Administrator of the National Irrigation Administration was quoted as saying that “it would take 40 years to irrigate all the irrigable lands in the country.” Is this correct, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor?


REP. DUAVIT. May I ask for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker.


It was 6:11 p.m.


At 6:12 p.m., session was resumed.


The distinguished Sponsor is recognized.

REP. DUAVIT. It may have been hyperbole, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, but we will still confirm.

REP. BORDADO. Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate my question for the benefit of the Sponsor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). You may proceed, Gentleman from Camarines Sur.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, the honorable Administrator of the


National Irrigation Administration was quoted as saying that “it would take 40 years before the irrigable lands in the country can be supplied with water.” Is this correct?

REP. DUAVIT. That appears to have been the prior statement given, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BORDADO. So, the statement is correct, Mr. Speaker, in that it will take 40 years?

REP. DUAVIT. That could have been the rough estimate, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, but unfortunately, I am not in a position to actually confirm that statement.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Abu relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Rose Marie “Baby” J. Arenas

REP. BORDADO. I am just concerned, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, because irrigation is inextricably linked with food security. Do you agree with me, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. Definitely, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BORDADO. So, how I wish I could be given the necessary data on the total area of irrigable lands and what percent of these lands had been irrigated so far.

REP. DUAVIT. We will extrapolate the data.

REP. BORDADO. Okay, thank you, Mr. Sponsor. Let me just know, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor. Mr. Sponsor, has the National Irrigation Administration come across the study conducted by the PIDS or the Philippine Institute for Development Studies regarding irrigation systems? This was conducted in 2016.

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker, they are in the possession of the study and they have looked at it and it currently covers existing irrigation systems, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. The study is entitled: “Technical and Institutional Evaluation of Selected National and Communal Irrigation Systems and Characterization of Irrigation Sector Governance Structure.” Do you hold that, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. The administration has the study, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BORDADO. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, I asked that question because in the study, the PIDS

came up with three major recommendations: first, the development of a systematic approach to water allocation and distribution; second, an integrated development plan; and third, a review of existing policies and regulations that are hampering the growth of the irrigation sector, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. So, Mr. Sponsor, has the NIA considered these recommendations?

REP. DUAVIT. With regard to the third recommendation, especially when it comes to the review of the policies pertaining to the growth of the entire irrigation sector, the NIA has actually been going into this even before the passage of the Free Irrigation Service Law, Mme. Speaker. How that exactly jives with the recommendation in the PIDS report, I am not really sure about the correlation between the two but clearly, because of the legislation that had been in place since before last year, yes, policies have changed quite a bit, both financially and as far as the process for evaluation—as far as the integrated development plan, that is one in the existence. But as the honorable Gentleman knows, I have not been able to get this deep into the study, and I have just been looking at the implications for 2019; and I have not had the opportunity to look back into the past, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. So, that could be it for now.

REP. BORDADO. In other words, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, the National Irrigation Administration is actually considering these recommendations of the PIDS or are they already implementing these recommendations?

REP. DUAVIT. I believe they are running parallel with the same recommendations, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BORDADO. Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, if this is the case, I am wondering why just a couple of months ago, the Commission on Audit issued a report blaming the “inadequate planning and inefficient execution of surveys in engineering designs” for the noncompletion of 436 irrigation projects throughout the country, costing more than P11.9 billion in 2017. Mme. Speaker, what is the reaction of the National Irrigation Administration?

REP. DUAVIT. According to the Administrator, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, that this is the balance that did not go through the ICC that they had inherited, but, they are trying to correct all of these backlogs now, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

Going back to the PIDS report, as I had mentioned, they are moving parallel but the study that they are using was one they had commissioned the UP Los Baños to do, Mme. Speaker.


REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. So, in the case of the COA report, it indicated that there were 436 irrigation projects which were not completed in 2017. Now, what is the status of the projects, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker? Do we still have to contend with the 436 incomplete irrigation projects?

REP. DUAVIT. Please forgive the slight delay, Mme. Speaker. I am asking for the actual figures. Out of the 436, quite a few, the administration says, are ongoing. I am just requesting, Your Honor, for the number of these projects that had been completed since the COA report has been given.

REP. BORDADO. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor. I am just asking my good compadre, the Sponsor, how many of the projects have been completed this year out of the 436 incomplete projects?

REP. DUAVIT. To date, for this year 2018, the number of their completed projects was 399, Mme. Speaker, with 1,730 ongoing, and 229 still in the procurement phase.

REP. BORDADO. So, in other words, in the 436 incomplete projects of the NIA in 2017, Mme. Speaker, how many were completed?

REP. DUAVIT. For the completed projects in 2017, 399. But I imagine this number will include part of the targets for 2018 as well, given the carry-over nature of the multiyear programs.

REP. BORDADO. So, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, can we get the commitment that the National Irrigation Administration can complete these within the year?

REP. DUAVIT. Definitely, Mme. Speaker, there will be a balance, depending on the stage at which the construction of certain projects will be done, but we should be looking at the clearing of the backlog from 2016 to 2017 in this year.

REP. BORDADO. You know, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, I am concerned with the P11.938 billion cost of these non-completed projects. So, the NIA has the commitment to complete these in 2018. Is that correct, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. According to the timeline, Your Honor, they have a commitment to—again, I would like to reiterate that a number of these projects take more than one year to build, and in those cases where they happen to be particularly problematic, engineering-wise, or just happen to be larger in scope, some may be extended to 2019. But we have the assurance that

the majority of those projects that can be done within a two-year timetable will be accomplished this year.

REP. BORDADO. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. My last question is, we will be shifting to the so-called Cash-Based Appropriations System. How will this affect the implementation of the projects of the National Irrigation Administration?

REP. DUAVIT. Well, the immediate effect is, Mme. Speaker, the very obvious cut in the subsidies, so, we will have to see on an area-by-area basis. As the honorable Gentleman knows, the entire House has been at odds with Malacañang regarding the very abrupt shift, and that there was a prior agreement that some items should be done on an obligation basis. This is one such area that is going to be under study by the Committee, Mme. Speaker, especially given that quite a big bulk of the projects are multi-year programs. In the event that it is found, and we would like to thank the Gentleman for actually putting this on record, that adjustments should be made as far as the subsidy budget for the NIA is concerned, then the Committee will act accordingly and present it to the House accordingly.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you very much, Mr. Sponsor. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DUAVIT. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

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

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, the next to interpellate is Rep. Salvador B. Belaro Jr. of the Party-List 1-ANG EDUKASYON. I move that we recognize the Honorable Belaro.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Honorable Belaro is recognized.


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize the Hon. Cesar V. Sarmiento of the Lone District of Catanduanes in lieu of Congressman Belaro for his one-minute manifestation.

Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Cesar Sarmiento is recognized.

REP. SARMIENTO (C.). Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker, for the recognition. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, who is himself a former DA Secretary. I stand today to manifest my concern, which is still the same concern I have been raising over the


years and which you have heard from me countless of times. I am here to reiterate, to manifest again and again and again, the lack of budget and government support given to the abaca industry. Sa ano man pong hearing o meeting ako mapadpad, para na po akong sirang plaka, paulit-ulit ko pong ipinagmamalaki na ang Catanduanes ay siyang no. 1 producer ng abaca kaya po nagiging no. 1 ang Pilipinas sa buong mundo in terms of abaca production. Yet, despite the pride our small island province gives to the whole country, no support, no honor is accorded to us.

Historically, makikita ninyo po sa current NEP and for the past GAAs na meager po iyong budget given to the abaca industry sa Catanduanes at sa buong bansa. Ito po ay nakakadismaya. Ito po ay nakakalungkot dahil, locally and globally, abaca demand is huge and increasing, not to mention that this plant is indigenous to our country. We have an advantage in production, but we are wasting this tremendous opportunity. Because of the lack of support, we are losing the abaca industry not only to calamities but more so to viral diseases. Dahil po sa sakit, namamatay po ang ating mga abaka o hindi kaya bumababa ang quality, ani o laki ng halaman. Apektado din po ang kabuhayan ng libu-libo nating mga magsasaka at kinabukasan ng kanilang pamilya.

Honorable Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I am sure that the Department of Agriculture and the Philippine Fiber Industry Development Authority strongly support the abaca industry. In fact, they have submitted a big budget to the DBM for consideration in the 2019 NEP. However, their proposal of about P655 million was denied. It is in this light that I now appeal to my honorable colleagues. In fact, I am making my appeal official in a letter to be transmitted to the honorable Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and to our Majority Leader, a fellow Bicolano. We in in Congress have the power to appropriate funds to programs that really reflect the needs of our people, and our abaca farmers need our urgent help now before we lose all our abaca plants to calamities and diseases. They need the budget now.

I am making an appeal to our honorable Speaker, to our Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and the Majority Leader, and to my colleagues, please hear me out. Let us revisit the budget of the DA and PHILFIDA. This is already my last term as Congressman. This is already my last budget hearing. This is already my last opportunity to request for your support to allocate the needed funds for the abaca industry. Huling hiling ko na po ito, honorable Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Pagbigyan ninyo po kami. Ipaglaban po natin ang ating mga magsasaka. Itaguyod po natin ang abaca industry. Bayan po natin ang makikinabang. Bayan po natin ang panalo.

Maraming salamat po. Dios mabalos po sa indong gabos. That will be all, Mme. Speaker.


REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize the Representative from Party-List 1-ANG EDUKASYON, Rep. Salvador B. Belaro Jr. for his interpellation, rather for his five-minute manifestation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Honorable Belaro is now recognized.

REP. BELARO. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, first, I would like to extend my gratitude to the good Department for complying with my request for documents during the pre-Plenary deliberations. To the credit of the good Department, I believe that we have to give them accolades for the documents they have submitted to my office. Of the P31.7 billion in allotment releases for 2018, the utilization rate is 63.96 percent, which is very high. I think the good Department should be commended for it. However, there is one item in the report which made me think not only once, not only twice, but thrice, And I am afraid this might revolutionize my basic grounding in law. This is with respect to Special Provision No. 6 on the national programs of the Department of Agriculture. I believe these are flagship national programs of the Department such as the National Rice Program, National Livestock Program, National Corn Program, High Value Crops Development Program, and National Organic Agriculture Program. In short, ladies and gentlemen, these are the heart and soul of the Department as these would make a difference in the lives of millions of our countrymen.

Now, under the report, it is stated here that they have unreleased appropriations for all these, collectively, programs in the amount of P87,088,000. Accordingly, this P87,088,000 was authorized by the Department of Budget and Management to be realigned to the GASS, General Administration and Support Services, to cover the payment for Collective Negotiation Agreement or CNA Incentives pursuant to General Provision No. 71 of GAA 2017 and Budget Circular No. 2017-3. Now, the fact which made this Representation think several times and to doubt my knowledge of the law is the heading here, “Unreleased Appropriations.” If I remember under the DAP ruling, Araullo vs. Aquino, we can only have the savings if it is released to the Department. What happened to this word? I think this made me question my very knowledge of the law and I will resign as a member of the Bar if these unreleased appropriations would fall under the category of “savings” as defined in


the DAP ruling. May I request for an explanation from the good Department.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, just give us a little time to await the explanation of the Department. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department assures us that these unreleased appropriations, not savings, are taken from—the Department assures us that these were already released previously.

REP. BELARO. So, these were already released? Therefore, the possibility is that this is an error.


REP. BELARO. These should be released, is that correct?


REP. BELARO. Okay. Just be very careful, and may I just manifest that the good Department should be very careful about the words they use because this Congress scrutinizes every word that they give to the House of Representatives. Now, in any event, assuming arguendo that I would give them the benefit of good faith that, indeed, these are not savings, my question is, there is, in relation to the cited NBC circular, National Budget Circular No. 2017-3, on the guidelines on the Grant of the Collective Negotiation Agreement, a provision that states, if I may quote, ladies ang gentlemen, that “released allotments intended for acquisition of goods and services to be distributed/delivered to, or to be used by agency clients shall in no case be used as a fund source of the CNA Incentive.” Again, may I ask the good Department why they did not obey this explicit provision of the said Budget Circular?

REP. YAP (A.). The Department assures the Gentleman that the funds were sourced from the PMO.

REP. BELARO. Again, this Representation would like to extend the benefit of good faith to the good Department for making such a rather carte blanche, sweeping statement. However, it appears to this Representation, that as a member of the Bar, it is my duty to uphold the law. We have crucified the practice of the DAP, and now, again, I think this manifestation of a mini DAP within the Department which will be abhorred and if Congress would allow this and allow it to slip under our very own noses, then we will be blamed and we are courting questions on constitutionality if we approve this budget of the good Department. So, my manifestation is to be very careful about the words and

about the usage of funds, and if I may just continue my manifestation, Mme. Speaker, the practice of sourcing CNA incentives from a flagship program at this time that we are reeling from a shortage of rice is abominable. Ang problema po natin ngayon ay kakulangan ng bigas. Bakit ito titipirin natin, itong national flagship programs sa bigas, sa livestock, sa corn, sa high-value crops? This is not only a wastage in funding; this is also a wastage in ideas and the lack of creativity of our policy-makers. On the part of the union, hindi naman po dapat magalit iyong mga miyembro ng union kasi po mayroon namang source na minamandato ang batas to be used for CNA incentives. I believe that in the 2017 Budget, malaki rin po ang provision for General Administration and Support, Support to Operations, and Operations which puwede po itong pagkunan ng CNA incentive. Bakit po kinuha doon sa national flagship programs?

Finally, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, may I end this interpellation by making a request to the good Department that henceforth, and in the upcoming budget, they make a review, and not only a review but a thorough review of the funding source of the Department; otherwise, we allow under our very noses, we allow its proliferation, the mini-DAP practices which in the very first place are proscribed under the law.

Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker, and may I just press a commitment from the good Agency that we would really look into this so that this would no longer happen in the upcoming budget.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable Interpellator, we share the concern of the honorable Interpellator. We give the assurance that we are going to study it closely. But even so, at this point in time, the Department assures us that what was given to our employees by virtue of the CNA obligation is in the form of a performance payment to incentivize them coming from the PMO, the Project Management Office. These are not from savings of program funds; these are coming from PMO fund and the releases were by virtue of a DBM circular. Even so, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Interpellator, the Department gives the assurance that it is going to study this matter carefully.

REP. BELARO. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize the Representative from Party-List ANAKPAWIS, Rep. Ariel B. Casilao, for his interpellation.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Honorable Casilao is recognized.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Magandang gabi sa ating kagalang-galang na

Sponsor at sa buong pamilya ng Department of Agriculture at sa lahat ng aking mga kasamahan.

Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, sa mga kasamahan ko pong nauna nang mag-interpellate, may common po tayong nararanasan at nararamdaman. Iyong pagkaltas at paliit na paliit na budget ng Department of Agriculture gaya ng binanggit ng ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor—one-and-a-half percent of the total GDP.

REP. YAP (A). Budget po.

REP. CASILAO. The budget of P3.7 trillion is very far and, in fact, an abrupt negligence of the backbone of our economy. Agrikultura po ang sinasandigan at dapat pangunahing tinitingnan ng ating gobyerno para magkaroon ng kasiguraduhan ang pagkain.

Mme. Speaker, this Representation believes that the current capacity of our agriculture, if managed well, could provide food security for our population for the next 100 years. Pero kapag ganito po iyong lack of priority or foresight in prioritizing agriculture vis-a-vis other economic priorities, then we will end up with the mess we are currently facing, and this mess, I guarantee you, kung sa Tagalog pa po, Mme. Speaker, itaga ninyo po sa bato, mas lalala at mas lalala pa ito. In fact, kagabi lamang o kaninang umaga, kaharap natin ang Department of National Defense—they were saying that there is a Red October plot, there is a destabilization plot. In fact, out of an outrageous comment from the General, the rice crisis is artificial and is being produced or orchestrated by the left or the left-leaning groups. But my God, Mme. Speaker, the facts, the situation, the indicators are evident to prove that the rice crisis is real and not an orchestration, and not even a figment of imagination.

Tingnan na lang po natin ang haba ng pila ng mga palengkeng naghahanap ng murang bigas ng NFA. Ika nga, ang biro ko nga sa aking mga kaibigan at mga kasama—kanina dumaan ako sa isang MRT station, napakahaba ng pila kahit na umuulan. Bakit hindi natin ilagay diyan ang NFA stall, ang Lotto outlet, at iyong haba ng pila ng MRT para isang bagsakan na ang sakripisyo ng ating mga kababayan, dahil wala pong ipinag-iba ang haba ng pila sa mga palengkeng naghahanap ng murang bigas, at iyong mga nag-aambisyon o nagbabakasakaling tumama sa P800 million na Lotto, pahaba nang pahaba ang pila.

Now, let me go to my first question. Laying the predicate pa lang po iyon, distinguished Sponsor. I have been receiving from multiple sources of information that

tend to be conflicting, ilan na po ba talaga ang pumasok na imported na bigas for the year 2018 alone? Please provide clear statistics on this.

REP. YAP (A). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, ang G to G po natin, 250,000 metric tons as of September 25—ang government-to-government purchase po na 250,000 metric tons, 100 percent na pong dumating ito. Nakapasok na po sa bayan natin. Ang in-open tender po na 250,000 metric tons, ang nakarating po dito ay 237,191 metric tons. So, 95 percent na po ang pumasok doon sa pangalawang 250,000 metric tons tranche. Ang balanse na lang po ay 5 percent or 12,809 metric tons po.

REP. CASILAO. And when do we expect this to arrive?

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, ang 12,809 metric tons na balanse doon sa open tender, narito na po, nasa puwerto na po natin, ilalabas na lang po.

REP. CASILAO. Please clarify the information that I have. For January, may incoming na two million metric tons or two million bags of imported rice?

REP. YAP (A.). Two million bags po.

REP. CASILAO. It is not metric tons.

REP. YAP (A.). Hindi po metric tons. Bags po.

REP. CASILAO. But for the first half of 2019, because hindi naman po sa sinasabi nating advanced mag-isip, pero, of course, we foresee and we prepare for the next six months. Ilan po iyong expected natin na importation in metric tons for January to June of 2019?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, doon po sa 750,000 metric tons na additional importation po, ang pag-aangkat po niyan ay divided into three tranches. Iyong una po na 250,000 metric tons, ito po ay ibi-bid out ng October 18. Ang arrival po, ang tentative o projected arrival po ay November 30. Iyong pangalawang 250,000 na tranche po, ibi-bid out po iyon ng October 24. Ang arrival po noon ay December 15. Ang pangatlo po, 250,000 metric tons—to round out the 750—November 20 po ang bidding noon at ang projected arrival po ay December 31.

REP. CASILAO. May I request a copy of those facts being given by our distinguished Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.


REP. CASILAO. Now, during the Committee briefing, ang nakababahalang statement ng dating Administrator ng NFA, palugi iyong ating pagbabayad sa importasyon, meaning, mas malaki iyong ginastos dahil iyong fluctuating or iyong paggalaw ng presyo sa pandaigdigang merkado ay nagbago at iyong pagbaba ng currency ng ating peso. Is that true, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Totoo po iyon dahil ang mandato po ng NFA under Presidential Decree No. 4 is to release rice at an affordable price to the greater majority of our people. So, para sa mga naghihirap po, ang target po ng NFA, at least maabot po iyong presyong iyon. So, kahit mahal po ang pagbili niyan, hindi po siguro tama na gamitin iyong salitang “mahal” basta mas mataas po, kahit na po iyong presyo niyan ay at a certain level po. Iri-release po iyan sa mas mababa kung kinakailangan po.

REP. CASILAO. But in the financial parlance, lugi tayo, meaning, iyong value na binayaran natin at iyong itinakda nating presyo will incur deficit on the funds of the NFA. Am I correct?

REP. YAP (A.). Since it is a GOCC, government-owned or -controlled corporation, financially, yes, Sir, it is a loss. It is booked as a loss, but kami po ay naniniwala na even if you look at it as a financial loss, ano naman po ang nagagawa ng pag-angkat na iyan in terms of stabilizing supply and assuring food security sa mga kababayan natin? That is something that cannot be equated as a loss.

REP. CASILAO. Oo, pero sa nagdaang taon, sabihin natin, G. Isponsor, iyong target natin na magkaroon ng steady supply, hindi po iyan nangyari.

REP. YAP (A.). Hindi po nagawa?

REP. CASILAO. In fact, naghahabol tayo ngayon.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo, naghahabol po tayo.

REP. CASILAO. Kaya nga, may concern now on my next question, distinguished Sponsor, habulin na natin iyong naging desisyon ng NFA kung tama ba, legal ba ang usapin na iyong appropriated for 2018 ay ginamit doon sa pagbayad ng maturing loans. Ibang usapin na iyon. It will be in the hands of—of course, in interpreting whether or not it is malversation of public funds, may proper agency na magsasabi at magtatakda noon.

Ngayon, let us go to the reality.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. CASILAO. The 6.1 billion for 2018 was paid for the maturing loans out of the P7 billion appropriations under the GAA of the NFA. Itinanong ko po ito sa ating dating Administrador, “Iyong naiwan po ba, ibabayad sa utang o ibibili na lang ng natitira in favor of our local farmers?”

Now, may I know, distinguished Sponsor, ano po ang naging desisyon na ng NFA under the new leadership? I understand the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture is now the Chairman of the NFA Council. Prior to the statement of President Duterte to abolish, ano po ang naging plano na sa pag-upo ng bagong Chairman ng NFA Council doon sa natitira na lang na kanilang pondo? Naibayad pa ba ito o noong panahon ng budget deliberations ng Committee ay wala pang desisyon iyon? Ngayon, may I ask for an update on the decision with the remaining funds for 2018.

REP. YAP (A.). Ang naiiwan pong pondo ay ibibigay po sa local procurement. Uunahin po natin iyong mga magsasaka natin.

REP. CASILAO. How many metric tons could be produced or could be purchased out of the remaining funds?

REP. YAP (A.). Ang target po ay 380,000 metric tons. Iyon po ang mabibili ng naiiwang pondo.

REP. CASILAO. It is 380,000.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. CASILAO. So, this is over and above the expected entry of imported rice for the remaining quarter of 2018 and for the first quarter of 2019. This is over and above.

REP. YAP (A.). Ito po iyong target, opo.

REP. CASILAO. Now, na-mention po ng ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, kanina that may pinag-uusapan po ang NFA Council under the new leadership na magkakaroon ng adjustment sa buying price pero it will stick to P17 per kilo with additional incentives.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. CASILAO. Please educate and convince this Representation, bakit hindi po kayang desisyunan ng NFA Council to go to the maximum, to set a higher buying price or even a buying price that is fluid and considerate to the existing farm-gate price of each rice-producing province? Kasi po binanggit naman po ng NFA na even the Philippine Statistics Authority


in 2016-2017, they have set specific buying prices of each rice-producing province. Magkaiba po iyon—may P15, P16, P17; mayroon din pong mahal—P24, P23. Mayroon pong binitbit na panukala ang kinatawan ng mga magsasaka doon sa NFA Council that another formula is not necessary to fix the price of P22 but it can be considerate, hindi siya bababa sa P17 pero hindi rin siya lalayo sa P24. Meaning, the buying price could be within the price range of P17 to P24. Pero noong ipinalabas po na interview ng ating kagalang-galang na Kalihim, sinabi niya, P17 plus incentives.

In layman’s term, papaano po maiintindihan ng mga magsasaka na aking kinakatawanan na P17 pa rin pero may mga incentive that is equivalent to this?

REP. YAP (A.). Siguro po ang puwede nating ipaliwanag sa mga magsasaka natin, regardless of the structure of the pricing po, whether it is the support price of P17 plus incentive—the pricing is engineered to give as much as possible the correct amount of buying price.

Kaya nga po P20 ang net effect. Kung paaakyatin po natin iyan, nagbibigay rin ang NFA ng senyales kung P24, nagdoble iyong presyo, so at P24, that will be P48. Magbibigay din ng senyales ang NFA na ang correct retail price would be P48. Kaya ang NFA, hindi po basta-basta puwedeng mag-announce very vigorously na iaakyat at papantayan iyong traders. Ang trabaho po ng NFA is at least to be the support price, to provide the support price for our farmers na mabigyan po sila ng market in an event na walang merkado. Klaro po sa nangyayari na situwasyon ngayon, mayroong merkado. Ang importante lang, bigyan po ng ayuda ng NFA ang ating mga magsasaka na makabili, na maging buyer of first resort just to set the price to support them. But in this case, we should not be too worried because it is not a collapsing market. It is a market that is going up. As our distinguished colleague said, nasa P24 tayo ngayon. Importanteng mabigyan lang po ng immediate at early na ayuda iyong magsasaka natin. Whether it is p17 plus, three plus or two, basta ang importante, ang neto na ginagamit natin ay P20 per kilo pong bilihan.

REP. CASILAO. You mentioned, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, in the first interpellation na kung dadagdagan ng P20 billion ang currently P55 billion NEP of the Department of Agriculture, saan po sa tingin ng ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor mailalagak ang malaking bahagi nito?

REP. YAP (A.). Ang opinyon po ng Department of Agriculture, kung madadagdagan natin, ilalagay po ito sa portion ng value-chain kung saan nangangailangan po talaga ng suporta. Kaya mahal po ang ating agrikultura kung ikukumpara natin sa Thailand, sa Vietnam at sa Indonesia dahil mahina po tayo sa mechanization.

According to the Department, sinabi po ni Secretary Piñol that if we are going to add P20 billion, it is going more to mechanization like post-harvest facilities, storage and warehousing. Doon po natin ilalagay.

REP. CASILAO. I fully agree with augmenting the support provision to ensure the lowering of cost. Again, the consistent complaints of our farmers are that nakukuba sila sa gastusin, nangungutang sila at obligadong sumunod sa kondisyon ng mga kinauutangan. Kung hindi man sila makautang sa gobyerno dahil sa napakaraming requirements, napakakomplikadong proseso, doon sa trader sila nangungutang.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Arenas relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Sharon S. Garin.

Siyempre, kapag nangutang sila sa trader, may fixed arrangements na po. I will agree on that, of course, with a very cautious and a very strict provision in ensuring that it will be graft-free dahil nga, again, this will be a very inviting provision or an inviting item of the budget that can be circumvented and abused. At the end of the day, we will be at a disadvantaged position.

Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, nangyari po ang bagyong Ompong, at sa mga balita, malinaw naman na ibinahagi ng ating kagalang-galang na Kalihim ng Department of Agriculture ang naging epekto nito. For the record, please state the actual figure after the one-week assessment on the impact in agriculture ng bagyong Ompong sa rice, corn, vegetables and to other high-value crops. May I request that if a document is available, please furnish this Representation a copy. How much was used in the QRF of the Department of Agriculture after typhoon Ompong?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we can provide you with a copy of the interventions. Doon po sa damages, ang estimated ay around 400,000 metric tons ng bigas sa national harvest natin, mga 26 billion po ang damage sa atin. Nag-release na po ang Department ng tulong based on the Quick Response Fund or QRF at isasama ito sa report na hinihingi po ninyo.

REP. CASILAO. A few days after bagyong Ompong ravaged the areas of Northern Luzon, this Representation called for not only a price freeze but also for the loan payment freeze, meaning, although it is not solely under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, but those in Northern Luzon provinces—the rice-producing, the vegetable-producing, the corn-producing provinces ravaged by bagyong Ompong, those who availed of loans during the planting season and on its second cropping, could have called for a loan


payment freeze. May I know if this particular remedy is being considered by the Department of Agriculture, not only in responding to the Quick Response Fund but also in providing remedies other than releasing the QRF?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, the financial package assistance is concentrated on the insurance payments that are being done by the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation. But more important than that, in the survival and recovery assistance program, this is an emergency loan program na ibinibigay po natin sa mga nasalanta, at ang kautangan na ito, itong emergency loan, wala itong interes at puwedeng bayaran sa loob ng tatlong taon.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garin S. relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Rose Marie “Baby” J. Arenas.

REP. CASILAO. What I am saying is for those who had already availed of the loan pero tinamaan noong nanagasa si bagyong Ompong. Of course, the immediate or long-term efect is that wala silang pambayad sa inutang nila. Although there are force majeure provisions that could be invoked, pupuwedeng hindi muna sila magbayad or there is an extension, there is a consideration. But if it is true under the book na wala namang interest or zero interest iyong loan agreements na na-award sa grantees or sa mga accredited o mga nabigyan ng loan, other than those provisions provided, sa pagbayad, can they renew their loans or restructure the existing loans?

REP. YAP (A.). According to the Agricultural Credit Policy Council, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, they are given a one-year moratorium tapos nire-restructure po iyong utang nila.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you for that, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker.

On my next set of questions, dito po tayo sa kalalabas lamang na Administrative Order No. 13 and you are very familiar with this—Removing Non-Tariff Barriers and Streamlining Administrative Procedures.

Kanina po, ang isang kasamahan natin ay nag-interpellate tungkol sa ibang agricultural products, partikular sa usapin ng sibuyas. I will not anymore contribute to the extensive discussion and deliberation by our distinguished colleague.

Dito po ako sa sugar, sa asukal po, we are expecting 300,000 tons ng asukal na papasok. May I know when is the target date of the arrival of the 300,000 tons of imported refined sugar?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, 200,000 metric tons na po ang pumasok and wala nang royalties. For the first time po, pumapayag ang sugar industry na diretso po sa users natin.

REP. CASILAO. For the record, that is 200,000 and not 300,000.

REP. YAP (A.). Hindi po. Actually ang authorized ay 200,000; 150,000 po ang pumasok.

REP. CASILAO. So 200,000 ang authorized; 150,000 ang pumasok?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, I stand corrected; 300,000 po at 200,000 na ang nakapasok, plus may 150,000 pa.

REP. CASILAO. When will the 150,000 tons arrive?

REP. YAP (A.). The 150,000 tons has just been approved yesterday by the SRA Board, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker

REP. CASILAO. Mme. Speaker, I am in a quandary as to the objective of allowing 350,000 tons of imported refined sugar. The distinguished Sponsor mentioned that the sugar industry allowed such importation and, in fact, would be dumped directly to the market. What is the possible impact to our sugar workers? The sugar industry is composed not only of the sugar planters, the owner of the farms, but most especially of the low-waged or the slave-like, waged sugar workers and their dependents. Unlike the regular operation of the sugar industry, we have the SAP or the Social Amelioration Program. Dito po ba sa papasok na 350,000 tons, can we invoke the same provisions under the SAP?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, I have been informed that the SAP is only imposed on production. Since this is an importation, hindi na po subjected ito doon. Ina-assure po tayo ng SRA na wala nang child labor or slave-like type of employment or conditions that are prevalent in the sugar industry. Even as we are in the harvest period, the Secretary of Agriculture and the SRA assure us that kulang po talaga and the prices are steep. As we enter the period of greater consumption like Christmas, kakailanganin talaga natin ang volume na ito.

REP. CASILAO. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I invite the Administrator of the SRA to go with me to Negros, anytime, and meet with the workers under the National Federation of Sugar Workers in the


Philippines as an affiliate of Anakpawis, to directly hear their sentiments with regard to non-compliance or to the issues of labor standard compliance, and then she or he will decide upon hearing that the slave-like conditions are still very much alive.

My frustration, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, since we cannot invoke, because the primary objective of the provision of the SAP is to provide non-monetary assistance to the sugar workers most especially during tiempo muerto or the dead season, although we already passed that dead season, and we are now in the planting and the harvest season, precisely the purpose of the SAP is para mayroong tulong maliban sa sahod na tinatanggap at labor standard provisions na tinatanggap ang ating mga manggagawa. Mayroong obligasyon ang ating gobyerno, precisely the SRA and the Department of Labor and Employment, to ensure that the biases of the industry do not weigh heavily on our very productive forces which are the sugar workers. If we cannot invoke, because this is an importation, bababa, in the very immediate and urgent probability, bababa ang presyo ng asukal, pero in the long term, wala naman tayong makukuha dahil ni-lift nga ang tariffication nito. Maliit lang din naman po as the existing tariffication law will be invoked.

I am just expressing my sentiment because one of the biggest chapters of Anakpawis Party-List is of the sugar workers under the NFSW.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. Yes, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, the SRA is assuring us that kahit wala po tayong SAP dahil ito ay importation, iyong corporate earnings nila sa importation na siguro aabot ng P100 million, kaya nilang i-set aside ngayon at puwede po nating itulong sa mga nangangailangan at naghihirap nating sugar farmers.

REP. CASILAO. One hundred million.

REP. YAP (A.). One hundred million po.

REP. CASILAO. I will be active in monitoring that.

In the removal of the non-tariff barriers, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, there are five streamlined procedures and requirements in the accreditation of importers and minimized the processing time of applications for importation. Except for traders that are already accredited for registration requirements, dito po may agam-agam ang Kinatawang ito, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, because prior to

the lifting of these non-tariff barriers, everytime the government declares an open season for importation, traders must renew, must apply for and comply with all the requirements for them to be given importation permits.

With the lifting and the removal of the non-tariff barriers as prescribed by AO No. 13, as I understand, hindi na po ganoon ang proseso, meaning, iyong traders na nakakuha na po ng import permit need not comply or apply for a new import permit once importation is being opened. Will this not consolidate and contribute in an already cartelized rice industry that we are currently facing?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, honorable colleague, ang intensyon po ng Administrative Order No. 13, more than anything else, is to facilitate the importation in the hopes na mas maaga pong makakarating iyong atin pong inaangkat para makatulong po sa local situation. Hindi po intensyon noong Administrative Order No. 13 na ipabalewala na lang po iyong mga existing applicable laws. Kaya nga po nakasulat rin po sa Section 1 na “subject to conditions imposed by applicable laws and consistent with their respective legal mandates, the NFA, SRA, the DA, in coordination with the DTI, shall undertake the following immediate measures x x x,” iyon na po iyong mga nakasulat. So, we allay the fears, we are giving our assurance to His Honor, the honorable colleague, na hindi po natin pakay to just remove all of these laws and possibly, make it easier for cartel forces to operate. We are still going to respect the applicable laws consistent with the respective legal mandates. We expect the regulatory agencies to perform their functions still.

REP. CASILAO. Well, I fully trust the integrity and credibility of the distinguished Sponsor in articulating what is stated in the provision of the AO 13. What I do not trust is the track record and the system that has been consistently abused in the past and even at present. Again, in letter C of Section 1, removal of the authorized MAV, letter D, liberalized issuance of permits and accreditation of traders who want to import rice to break the monopoly of rice importation, I do not know, but this Representation—I am not a fear monger or a doomsayer, but again, we have a very rich experience of how the cartel works, how monopoly continues to exist in this field. But again, with the frustration that there had been identified personalities of our government, but I have yet to see concrete prosecution, concrete detention in the detention facilities of rice smugglers, big names in the industry that had been there for so long a time.

Let me give you a very old name, Binondo rice cartel. Paulit-ulit na po iyan, but within the Binondo rice


cartel, sino po ba diyan ang currently, nakadetina or in a particular detention because of a case of smuggling or because of violation of the existing criminal law under the Revised Penal Code? Nada.

May inanunsyo si Pangulong Duterte, may mga suspetsang warehouses, may pinuntahan ang CIDG, DA, NFA, Bureau of Customs, but I have yet to be convinced that this is not just merely media mileage, but a concerted, consistent and a long strategic effort to address smuggling, monopoly and cartel, to its very source.

Again, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, may mga na-identify po, ni-raid, mga warehouses na kinumpiska. In my understanding, it is supposed to be under the disposition of the government to sell it, if not, donate it for free to the hungry people. Not only to sell it in the price of P27 dahil wala ka namang in-invest diyan, wala ka namang capital diyan, naembargo mo iyan sa isang ilegal na pamamamaran na ginawa ng isang ilegal na trader o isang mapagsamantalang trader. You have zero capital on that, then, you can provide it or give it for free without loss for the government pero matutuwa po ang ating mga mamamayan.

I have yet to see that because I do not want to see— although I did not witness it personally, I just heard the stories. Governor Piñol, at that time, knew very well, in Kidapawan in North Cotabato, when farmers got hungry, went to the NFA and raided the NFA with their collective efforts. And, we do not want that to happen in a nationwide scale because the material condition is very much available for that to happen.

Sinabi nga ng ating kasamahan, it is a social volcano waiting to erupt. Yes, it is. And, if it will erupt in October, maybe, this is the Red October that the intelligence community is saying. But, do not blame a particular sector of destabilizers because the government itself is creating the very condition of destabilizing the economy that led to the hunger people across our country.

Now, I have no more questions for the Department of Agriculture but my remaining minutes, Mme. Speaker, will be spent for National Irrigation Authority. Thank you very much, distinguished Sponsor. I am one with you, your sentiment, my sentiment, the sentiment of our Secretary of Agriculture, and the undersecretaries, and the entire family of Agriculture. Some would say let us raise hell to augment the budget of Department of Agriculture. Again, we do not need to raise hell. We have the power of the purse. We cannot be dictated by the Executive Department. We can take their cue, their recommendation, their proposal, but, at the end of the day, it is the Legislative Department that has the sole jurisdiction if we intend to invoke that power.

Our distinguished Sponsor and our Speaker know very well the ins and outs of the economy. You are both very knowledgeable of the economy. You know

the need. You know the very and the urgency to address and augment the Department of Agriculture. With the collective unity and the collective effort of this House, probably, we can invoke that. But, much more importantly, the people outside of these halls of Congress, we do not want them to initiate independently their own action, because if we do not do anything about this, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I promise you, I will be, together with my colleagues, together with the Filipino-loving Representatives, in the streets marching towards Malacañang.

Thank you very much, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. Now, …

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Your Honor. Salamat po.

REP. CASILAO. … for NIA.


The Hon. Michael John R. Duavit is recognized.


REP. CASILAO. Now, for NIA, this Representation requested a lot of documents, especially the dam projects. The Chico River Pump Irrigation Project that I requested, I was given a very short reply, a letter from NIA. But, before that, may I know the reason, distinguished Sponsor, under our law, of the Free Irrigation Service Act, which states that the IRR should be available 90 days after the signing of the President. However, as of this very moment, I have yet to hear that the NIA already approved the draft IRR. May I know the reasons for the delay, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, in the release of the final and signed IRR.

REP. DUAVIT. As stated earlier, Mme. Speaker, the Board is to take up the final draft on October 9, but I have been informed that the reason for the delay was that there were some comments, specifically of the NEDA, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. CASILAO. Okay. But when will be the target date of the final approval of the …

REP. DUAVIT. October 9, …

REP. CASILAO. October 9.

REP. DUAVIT. … Mme. Speaker, at the very next Board meeting.


REP. CASILAO. In the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, I have yet to completely read the every provision of the ODA loan agreement, but may I know if there is a sovereign guarantee provision of the loan agreement.

REP. DUAVIT. There is, Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. There is. And will the terms of the ODA loan agreement for Chico River Pump Irrigation Project be the same and applicable to other China ODA-funded irrigation projects?

REP. DUAVIT. So far, there is only one loan from the Chinese government, Your Honor, but I have been told that it—well, there is a possibility that it would be the same, but as we know, each loan is negotiated separately. So, while there is a possibility, it is most likely that the terms and conditions would differ.

REP. CASILAO. May I request for additional documents with regard to the loan agreement of Panay River Basin Integrated Development Project, the Tumauini River Multipurpose Project in Isabela, the Gregorio Del Pilar Impounding Project, and the Ilocos Norte Irrigation Project – Stage 2 in Ilocos Sur. I am very interested in comparing the loan agreements of these projects because later, at the proper time, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, I will be putting a very comprehensive analysis of whether or not the Filipino people, the government, will be put in a very disadvantageous position.

REP. DUAVIT. At this phase, Mme. Speaker, all of the following projects, Chico, Gregorio Del Pilar, Panay and Tumauini have been submitted to NEDA. The NEDA actually has not undergone the loan negotiations yet, but you have the guarantee of the Committee that once this comes on line, the honorable Gentleman will be provided the data that he requests.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Now, my next set of questions will be in a technical part. But I am very interested because, again, the fears of the community within these irrigation projects, within these dam projects, one particular and major fear is—that can be answered by a technical description: Una, iyoon pong, siyempre, lulunurin sila. Kapag nagkaletse-letse po iyong dam, nagkaroon ng technical na problema, ang pinaka-immediate effect niyan ay babahain iyong pinakamalapit na mga komunidad. Now, gaano po kalawak ang reservoir, partikular ng sabihin natin at ang very interested po ang Kinatawang ito sa Chico River Pump Irrigation Project. For the Chico

River Irrigation Project, and of course, this is applicable to all other dams that I have made mentioned, gaano po kalawak ang reservoir, in terms of hectarage?

REP. DUAVIT. I was informed, Mme. Speaker, that the Chico River is a pump irrigation project and has no dam for that particular one. But there is another project that the distinguished Gentleman might need, might be curious about or might want to know about. We will request the honorable Gentleman to please specify which one.

REP. CASILAO. Okay. Ganito na lang po, doon sa mga binanggit kong mga dam projects kanina and the technical data that I require, ito po sa usapin ng lawak, in terms of hectarage ng reservoir, iyong flood projection ng mga dam, meaning, of course, when you construct this particular facility, mayroon po tayong tinatawag na absorptive capacity. So, for the projection of flood management, gaano po ang kinakailangang bigat o dami ng tubig to be considered in an alarming level? Pangalawa, sa datos po sa usapin ng river system na kung saan projected to be diverted or mada-divert iyong mga proyektong ito na probably posibleng magdudulot na sa isang bahagi ay makokonsentra ang tubig at pupuntahan at dadaluyan ng tubig, habang sa isang banda ay mawawalan naman po ng tubig. And lastly, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, impact areas in case of overflow. Ito na po iyong binabanggit ko kanina, or when a reservoir exceeds its limits, iyong sinasabi ko po kanina na absorptive capacity. Kailan po aabot sa alarming level at ano po iyong magiging posibilidad when the dam breaks? Of course, gaya ng binanggit ko kanina, flooding po iyan at hindi lang po simpleng hanggang tuhod, hanggang baywang na flooding, kung hindi lampas tao, lampas bahay po na mga flooding iyan.

So, these technical documents stating technical descriptions that this Representation requires, I request our distinguished Sponsor to provide me with a copy in the following days to come. I need not necessarily require it immediately. But we will be having a legislative forum on the dams and I require our technical description on specific issues, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. DUAVIT. We will secure the required documents for the honorable Gentleman, Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. I have no more questions for the Department of Agriculture and National Irrigation Authority, Mme. Speaker.

Thank you very much for the opportunity.



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

REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, I now move that we recognize the Hon. Victor A. Yap from the Second District of Tarlac for his manifestation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas.). The Hon. Victor Yap is now recognized.

REP. YAP (V.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. My questions are actually posed to the National

Irrigation Administration, but before that, I would like to make a statement that I am glad to hear that the Department of Agriculture has adopted a policy with regard to the pricing of rice that is not pegged anymore and much more conducive to market prices. In that way, we protect our farmers as well.

Given that, I think the Department of Agriculture is inherently in a situation that balances the interests of all Filipinos as well as a major sector of our population that is always in a situation of poverty. I think, given the new policies that I have heard, I think, we should give the Department ample time to respond to both short-term problems as well as the long-term ones.

May I ask the Sponsor of the National Irrigation Administration to yield to some questions?

REP. DUAVIT. It would be my privilege, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. YAP (V.). I refer to a project, a local one, but of national significance in terms of the magnitude of the project which is the Balog-Balog Dam. This project does not only affect my district, but it also stands to benefit other districts of the province as well as the province of Pampanga. This is a dream project that was envisioned since the 1960s. Somehow, I would like to ask the Irrigation Administration, how many project managers or current project managers have been handling the project since the first groundbreaking happened? Pang-ilan na po ba iyan?

REP. DUAVIT. Pangsiyam na po, Mme. Speaker.

REP. YAP (V.). Eh iyon na nga, sabi kung buhay ito ng pusa, panghuli na yata ito. Do not get us wrong, Mr. Sponsor, we are for this project to be finished. I would like to ask if the NIA is covered by the negative slippage policy of Malacañang in terms of exercising the action towards, you know, projects that are being held for whatever reason.

REP. DUAVIT. It would indicate in the budget, Mme. Speaker, that it is a continuing project. There has been no deduction in the allocation for the Balog-Balog

Multipurpose Irrigation Project Phase II in Tarlac. So, the indication would be that it has not been penalized for the slippage, Mme. Speaker.

REP. YAP (V.). I would assume that the project in toto or in totality, has not reached the threshold of, if I may ask, a certain percentage that the directive of the President said with regard to acting upon on projects that are in that arena of negative slippage, and should either be cancelled or terminated as stated in the policy of terminating contracts.

REP. DUAVIT. It has not reached that point, Mme. Speaker.

REP. YAP (V.). However, it may be true that the project, which has several components, would have one project or two that would be in that situation, Mr. Sponsor, and I would like to think not, but I am pretty sure that there is a total project that is already in that situation, Mr. Sponsor. Given that the administration has approached this Representation and somehow convinced me that indeed the project would now push through, then perhaps it is a good consideration that this Representation would like to withdraw or defer the imposition of the policy of the President in this case, in this project, Mr. Sponsor, given that with your affirmation as sponsorship of the NIA, I would like to put on record and request the administration or the highest official of the NIA to really concentrate and kung puwede lang, ilagay mo na iyong pinakamagaling na project manager ng Ahensiya dito sa ating proyekto na ito dahil ano na eh, matagal-tagal na rin talaga itong proyektong ito at gusto namin talaga.

Be that as it may, Mr. Sponsor, this is also of a significant—it is a 105-meter dam which is by no means practiced in the rest of the world. Wala na ho talagang nagpapatayo ng ganyan kalaking dam, and I am concerned na wala rin kayong QRF Fund. When the dam starts to rise, iyon importante iyon. So, I have mentioned five particular things and I would like the affirmation that the leadership of the NIA is in support of improving the project management of this particular project, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. DUAVIT. You have the affirmation, Mme. Speaker.

REP. YAP (V.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, for affirming the desire of the Tarlaqueños to see that this project is realized.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker.




REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, we now recognize from the AGRI Party-List the Hon. Orestes T. Salon for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Orestes Salon is recognized.

REP. VERGARA. I am sorry, Mme. Speaker, it is the AGRI Party-List.

REP. SALON. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, honorable Sponsor.

Actually, my questions will be addressed to the Department of Agriculture.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. Yes, thank you very much.May I cite first a few statistics with regard to our

poverty incidence. According to the NEDA, in 2016, based on the PSA, the Philippine Statistics Authority data, the poverty incidence or the national average is 21.6 percent and this administration would like to lower this to 13 to 15 percent by 2022. On the other hand, the rural poverty incidence where farmers and fisherfolk are, and whom I represent as a sector, the rural poverty stands at 29.8 percent and this administration would like to lower this by 20 percent by 2022.

Now, the guidelines for the 2019 Budget based on the budget call issued by the Department of Budget and Management, the expenditure management framework says that this administration is going to continue sustaining President Duterte’s 0+10 Socioeconomic Agenda and operationalize the goals, strategies and priorities as embodied in the Philippine Development Plan and the priority programs and projects contained in 2017–2022 Public Investment Program. In other words, the Department of Agriculture is guided by this principle—that we have an expansionary budgetary policy. Meaning, we will double infrastructure spending and increase social sector spending. My question is that, given the Department’s budget, how much is proposed for 2019?

REP. YAP (A). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, from last year’s P62 billion, it has gone down to P55 billion, Sir.

REP. SALON. P55 billion, and for 2019, based on the Cash-Based system?

REP. YAP (A). It is at P55 billion, Sir.

REP. SALON. Fifty-five?

REP. YAP (A). That is basically on a Cash-Based budgeting, Sir.

REP. SALON. Given this tall order to reduce poverty incidence, I remember two years ago, for example, may I just zero down to a statement made by the Secretary of Agriculture two years ago in a Committee meeting when he said that the backlog for farm-to-market roads is 13,000 kilometers. May I know if this is a correct statement made by the Secretary.

REP. YAP (A). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Secretary confirms that the backlog is 13,000 kilometers.

REP. SALON. He said that in 2016, may I know how many kilometers have been built since 2016?

REP. YAP (A). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the FMR developed from 2011 to 2017 is 7,355. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. the Secretary will stand by the figure of 13,000, and from 2011 to 2017, what have been built is 7,355. Apparently, there is a discrepancy. It seems like, at first instance, it seems like it does not make sense. You are saying that it is 13,000, then why 13,000 now when you have got 7,355? Apparently, Your Honor, the discrepancy is in the fact that many of the roads were built differently at that time—they were gravel roads. So, there are discrepancies on the harmonized figure. When you harmonize the number of roads that were built or were being addressed to be built, that were gravel roads today, the Secretary still stands on the figure of 13,000, despite the fact that 7,355 kilometers have already been concretized for the period 2011 to 2017.

REP. SALON. Thank you very much, honorable Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. Thank you.

The reason I mentioned that is, again, two years ago, the Secretary mentioned that he requested for a P220 billion budget for the Department. In 2017, I think the budget of Agriculture is P56—P57 billion, and a month ago when the Secretary was asked, “Why are you not proposing a bigger budget?” And he mentioned something to the effect that we will be—”We will make do with what was given to us.”

You know, I join my colleagues in Congress because of a dire state of our agriculture and rural poverty is rampant. You know, you have to put our money where our mouth is. This is only speaking of infrastructure and, we know for a fact that the farmers and fisherfolk have higher poverty incidence compared to the national average. May I know what strategies are being taken by the Department? We know that there are other agencies that have anti-poverty programs, but specifically, the Department of Agriculture, what specific programs do you have to reduce this poverty incidence?


REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, at the outset, the Department wishes to inform the honorable Interpellator how honored we feel that you share the same passion as we do, and maybe in the same level of exasperation. Just to show you, Your Honor, this is the original submission of the Department. A P123.7 billion was the budget and we were given—we ended up with 55—49. Initially, 49 and was raised to 55. If you take into consideration the farm-to market-roads, they asked for a budget of P21 billion, and they ended up with P9 billion which was last year’s budget as well. In media releases and in many of our meetings, the Secretary of Agriculture has been very vocal in his complaints about the fact that in the Department of Agriculture, the budget was being cut.

Sir, despite the fact that this is just the amount that they have been given and the entire afternoon, the entire evening, we have been talking about the lack of budget, the Secretary noting that it seems that the area of credit and funding domestic production is where the problem is, despite the limited amount of the budget, Sir, you were asking what they have been doing? For our farm sector, they have made a strategic shift of moving the subsidy and support from subsidy towards credit. That is the reason why despite the reductions in all the other Commodity Programs and the other projects, the ACPC received an increase of up to P3.5 billion, Sir.

REP. SALON. Thank you very much, honorable Sponsor.

Now, you know, it is one thing to have the budget, but it is another thing whether we are able to spend it. May I ask, about your absorptive capacity or how much of that budget in terms of peso range has already been used as of June of this year?

REP. YAP (A.). The Secretary assures us that the absorption capacity is at 66 percent by half of the year, as of August of this year.

REP. SALON. Yes, and you are confident that you will be able to spend the rest of your budget by the end of the year?

REP. YAP (A.). The Secretary is confident, Sir, considering that last year, they already reached 89 percent in terms of absorption, for cash disbursements—89 percent.

REP. SALON. Yes, thank you very much.My last question is with regard to the RSBSA. This

has already been raised by Congresswoman Chavez. What is the status of the cleansing of the RSBSA? Because, again, last year, from the Department of Agriculture, they said that by June this year, they should have done with the cleansing.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, let us again revisit the history of this Registry. This was originally a project of the DBM. At that time when the DBM was handling this Program, it had the funds to collate the list. When this Program was transferred to the Department of Agriculture, they simply transferred this Program without the support funds to update this Registry. So, what the Secretary is doing right now despite the very limited budget that it has received, is to source the funds to continually update this list from the different programs despite the fact that there had been reductions in their programs. It is very critical; this Registry is going to be very critical for the running of the programs today.

So, the Secretary has informed me just now that they are sourcing funds from all the major programs and projects like the National Rice Program, National Livestock Program, National Corn, and so on and so forth. So, allow me to assure you, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, that despite the limited funds, the Department is doing something to update this Registry, Sir.

REP. SALON. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker, honorable Sponsor. That ends my interpellation. Thank you very much.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Your Honor.


REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, we now recognize from the Party-List AMIN, the Hon. Makmod D. Mending Jr., for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Mak Mending is now recognized. Please proceed.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. As-Salaam-Alaikum and good evening.

I have questions for the National Irrigation Administration, but before that, gusto ko po munang batiin iyong mga dati kong katrabaho sa Department of Agriculture. Magandang gabi po sa inyo.

Mme. Speaker, would the dark, tall, and very, very handsome Sponsor yield to very few questions, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker, and thank you for not saying round Sponsor.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Tama po ba na walang QRF or Quick Response Fund iyong NIA for 2019 Budget?


REP. DUAVIT. That is correct, Mme. Speaker.

REP. MENDING. Para po sa kaalaman ng ating mga kababayan, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, for the past five years, a total of one million hectares have been affected by the damages of the typhoons on our irrigation systems. It would require a total of P18 billion to be able to restore this one million hectares. However, for the past five years, only a total of P3 billion was given by our government to repair or restore these irrigation systems. Tapos, nadagdagan pa ngayon for 2019, wala pang Quick Response Fund iyong NIA. So, ang panawagan po natin, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, kailangan pong magkaroon ng mas malaking pondo para sa restoration ng mga irrigation systems na ito, dahil po ang aim natin is to increase irrigated areas because it will increase production. Pwede nang gumamit ng hybrid at magkakaroon ng tatlong cropping season. So, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, pwede ko po bang malaman kung ano iyong gagawain natin para magkaroon muli ng Quick Response Fund ang NIA?

REP. DUAVIT. To have a brief, historical perspective on this, Mme. Speaker, in the past, before the Free Irrigation Service Law came into being, mayroon pong income on its own from collections. In effect, mayroon po tayong tinatawag na Retained Earnings na nagagamit po dati and that amounted to more than a billion a year. Eventually po, noong nagkaroon na ng free irrigation at naging subsidy, iyong—kumbaga self-generating income na lang po ng NIA, eh bumagsak na lang po ng 300. Ngayon, I made a little erroneous in saying that there is no QRF, but in fact, at least last year, it was embedded in the NDRRM, iyong sa disaster and risk.

I think, moving forward, as we have now passed the new Department for this management, we may again see changes. But we do, and the Committee does recognize the fact, you know, that these irrigation systems can be quite vulnerable whether it be induced by torrential rains or even worse, wreakage by natural calamities, earthquakes in particular. We will continue, the Committee will continue to do as it did last year to find a way to bolster the capabilities of the NIA to be able to respond should such calamities arise.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Would a P1 billion QRF Fund—Quick Response Fund be enough or would it suffice to address the coming calamities or these typhoons in the coming year of 2019? Because, as we all know, on a regular basis, we are hit by typhoons the effect of which damages our irrigation systems. Would there be enough under the NDRRM Fund to be earmarked for the NIA in the amount of P1 billion, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. I am sorry, but I cannot answer that, Mme. Speaker, because it would depend on the type of calamity that may or may not come. Be that as it may, an amount of P1 billion should be enough to get the ball rolling and should it not be sufficient, then we may go for supplemental funding. Perhaps, to ask for a supplemental budget which has been done in the past.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. At least, we would know na mayroon pang paraan para sa issue na ito. Ang pinatutunguhan po talaga ng pagtatanong ko ay iyong balance of budget ng NIA. Dahil dalawang klase po iyong sa infrastructure—mayroong New Irrigation Development Program at iyong Restoration Program. Based on my computation, lumalabas na 83 percent doon sa New Irrigation Development Program at 17 percent doon sa Restoration Program.

There is an imbalance to my mind, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, pero kung tititngnan pa nang mas malalim iyong budget, lumalabas na 75:25 iyong ratio. Kung ang aim po natin ay mag-increase ng irrigated area on a faster basis or on a faster mode, dapat po mas lakihan natin ang restoration ng irrigation projects. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. Mme. Speaker, the answer was given to an earlier interpellator. Yes, the Committee feels that the ratio is a little off and is biased a little too much towards new irrigated areas and does not sufficiently address the rehabilitation, especially moving forward or being perceptive, because as we all know, once you build something new, there is a maintenance and operating component that will be forever added to new irrigation.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Necessary also is to be able to distinguish restoration from a regular maintenance, because regular repair and maintenance entail not an increase in the irrigated area; whereas, a restoration of a damaged irrigation system entails additional irrigated areas because if it were damaged, there would be a reduction in irrigated areas.

So, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, would a 60:40 sharing between new irrigation and restoration of irrigation systems be a better proportion when it comes to budgeting, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. DUAVIT. The Committee cannot commit to that, but it is a starting point, from which the Committee would like to explore, Mme. Speaker.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker,


distinguished Sponsor. That would be all for my questioning for tonight.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker.



REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we now recognize the Hon. Arnel Ty of the LPGMA Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Arnel U. Ty is now recognized.

REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, in his absence, we now move to recognize the Hon. France L. Castro of ACT TEACHERS Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. France Castro is now recognized.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.

So, the DA—will the distinguished Sponsor yield to some of my questions?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mme. Speaker. Mme. Sponsor, it is an honor to yield.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). First of all, Mme. Speaker, I would like to thank the Department of Agriculture for sending my office a study which I asked for during the Committee hearing—the study about the shift from subsidy to credit. So, I appreciate it very much.

Mr. Sponsor, I raised this issue during the budget briefing at the Committee level of the Department of Agriculture. We received documents including three entitles: studies indicating farmers and fishers’ demand for credit; a study showing subsidies are ineffective and unsustainable; and a list of the description of, and planned and existing credit programs under the DA. So, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, napuna lang po natin sa studies na ito na sa halip na patunayan na dapat ngang tanggalin or tanggalan ng subsidiyo ang sektor ng agrikultura ay pinapatunayan ng pag-aaral na ito na kailangan pang buhusan ng suportang pinansiyal ang mga magsasaka, mangingisda, at ang sektor ng agrikultura.

Isa pong observation pa rin ay napuna rin natin na sa tingin ko po, maling pananaw ng ilang studies particular iyong galing sa PIDS na “Impact Assessment of the Agricultural Production Support Services of the Department of Agriculture (DA) on the Income of Poor Farmers/Fisherfolk.” So, una pong tanong, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, ano muna po iyong tinatawag

nating Production Support Service or iyong PSS? Sa GAB at NEP natin, mayroong production support NEP sub-program na may total na P3.891 billion, so ano po ba itong PSS na ito?

REP. YAP (A.). Kapag production support po, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, that has something to do with the direct input support po for the increasing of the volume of production for the crops concerned.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Salamat po, Mr. Sponsor. So, iyon na nga po, napuna natin po dito sa mga

item on the budget of Department of Agriculture na pulang-pula, ibig sabihin po, sa aming code ay kapag sinabi pong pulang-pula, ibig sabihin nito ay binabaan o nagkaroon ng decrease. So, tama po, itong mga product support services sub-program po ay napakalaki ng naging decrease na nagbigay ng daan para doon sa pagshi-shift o pagpo-program na ating Department of Agriculture from subsidy to credit.

So, ilan pa pong mga obserbasyon, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, iyong PSS po sa national rice program, PSS sa national livestock program, PSS on the national corn program, PSS on the national high value crop program, PSS on the national promotion and development organic agriculture program, and other PSS activities, mula po sa P9 billion sa kasalukuyang taon, tinapiyasan po ito ng P5 billion or 57.19 percent. Tama po ba ito? Kinukumpirma po ba ito ng ating butihing Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, iyong pagtapyas po, iyan nga po iyong inilagay sa credit, but huwag po sanang isipin na 100-percent strategic shift po to credit, dahil kahit po may decided shift na 43.5 billion, marami pa rin po sa ating mga programs, commodity programs po, mayroon pa pong direct subsidy po for production, hindi naman po tinatanggal lahat.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Ah, okay. So, maganda po iyong paglilinaw. Kasi, kanina pa po ako nakikinig sa mga interpelasyon at sagot po ng ating butihing Sponsor kaugnay noong mga subsidy and credit. Nakita natin sa mga model sa ibang bansa na umunlad ang production sa Thailand, sa Vietnam, at iba pa pong mga kapitbahay nating bansa dahil sa ang gobyerno nila ay nagsa-subsidize sa ating mga magsasaka.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, nakapagtataka lang po na tayo pa pong bansa ay bakit nagshi-shift doon sa credit.

So, ituloy ko lang po, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, sinasabi po ng PIDS, “public provision of private goods under subsidy can provide a short-term boost to


production and net income but it is not sustainable.” Inaral daw po ng PIDS at ng Department of Agriculture ang mga programang ito at sinasabing dapat ay bawasan ang pondo ng mga ito. Tama po ba, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Ang pangamba po ng PIDS, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, po, is kung babalik po tayo sa government-direct lending program, iyon po siguro iyong sinasabi ng mga pag-aaral ng PIDS na huwag na po nating balikan. Ang programa po ng ACPC ngayon ay idinadaan po sa mga rural conduits, so mga rural banks po at saka mga farmers’ groups. Basta mayroon pong proven track record at saka mga coops po, ito po ang mga ginagamit na outlets, pero hindi po iyong ACPC ang mismong nagpapahiram, at iyon po ang hindi babalikan ng gobyerno ngayon.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Maraming salamat po, Mr. Sponsor.

So, sa akin pong palagay, ay, una, mali po ang pagturing sa farm inputs at anumang suporta sa mga magsasaka at mangingisda bilang private goods sa halip na balik na batayang serbisyong mula sa buwis ng mga mamamayan, sa halip na mayor na tulak ng gobyerno para sa sustainable economic growth ng bansa at ang pambansang industriyalisasyon. Pangalawa po, mali rin ang pagkawing sa mga suporta sa produksyon ng rice, corn, livestock, at iba pa sa market at strategic investments o tinatawag namin na neo-liberal na tulak. So, naniniwala po ang Kinatawang ito na magiging epekto ng subsidy to credit policy shift na ito ay lalo pang maglulubog sa utang ang mga magsasaka at mga mangingisda, at hindi lang basta-basta utang, usura pa, Mme. Speaker.

Ayon sa mga studies na ibinigay sa atin, sa tingin natin ay konserbatibong figures pa nga ito. Umaabot sa average na nearly P38,000 ang mga utang, with 14 percent interest. Tama po ba iyong aking obserbasyon, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, humihingi po ako ng paumanhin. Iyong 40 percent, ano po ito? Ito po iyong …

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, based po dito sa sinasabi ninyong pag-aaral, umaabot po sa average na, iyong P38,000 na uutangin po ay magkakaroon ng 14 percent interest.

REP. YAP (A.). Iyon po iyong traditional lending avenues, conventional lending avenues po, pero iyong ipinapatupad po na programa ng ACPC ngayon ay nasa 6 percent po.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay, 6 percent po.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Simula binhi hanggang tools, hanggang pagproseso at pagbebenta ng ani, kailangan ng mga kababayan nating magsasaka na mangutang. Tama po ba ito, Mr. Sponsor? Kasi nakita ko po doon sa study ninyo, mula sa binhi hanggang sa pag-aani, talaga pong mapipilitan iyong mga magsasaka natin at ang mga mangingisda na mangutang, ayon po dito sa study. Totoo po ba ito?

REP. YAP (A.). Ito po talaga ang sistema, but iyong programa po na ipinapatupad po ng ACPC ngayon, not only 6 percent po iyon, wala rin pong kolateral, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Bawat pag-ani niyan, suwerte na kung may matira. Madalas ay hindi pa nga nakakaani, nakapangalan na sa usurero ang anumang kikitain. Kinukumpirma nga ng studies na ibinigay sa atin na nangungutang din sila—parang sariling subsistence ng kanilang pamilya, gastos sa pagkain, pagpapa-aral at pagpapagamot, at iba pa.

So, isa po itong porma din ng pribatisasyon sa sektor ng agrikultura. Naniniwala po ba ang ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor dito sa obserbasyon ng Representasyong ito, Mme. Speaker?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, kahit po siguro papunta po tayo doon sa privatization, ang pinakaimportateng obligasyon po ng Department of Agriculture ngayon ay siguraduhin po na kung puwede, kikita po iyong ating mga magsasaka sa farming at sa agricultural activity po nila. Lahat po ay ginagawa natin kahit na limitado po iyong budget, as long as we can assist farmers in planting and increasing productivity dahil po sa paglago po ng output niya, dito po natin inaasahan na madadagdagan po iyong kita niya. So, whether it is through privatization or through public means, as long as natulungan po natin siya and we make him more profitable. Iyon po iyong pakay natin at ating objective.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). For the record lang po, Mme. Speaker, so kinukumpirma ninyo po na papasok po ang private sector na malakalakhan mula sa production hanggang sa pag-aani based dito sa inyong proposal na from subsidy to credit? So malaki po ang papel ng private sector dito?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, ang ginagamit po natin dito ay government funds—iyong ginagamit po ng ACPC—pero dumadaan po sa mga rural conduits like rural banks.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Opo, totoo po iyon.

REP. YAP (A.). And…


REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, mula po doon sana ay subsidyo o public fund, pero dahil ito po ay hindi na gagamitin as subsidy, idadaan na po ito sa ating mga conduit or mga private sector na mga lending agency na kung saan doon ia-access niyong ating mga magsasaka.

REP. YAP (A.). Ma’am, I would just like to offer this point of view: we have a law, Republic Act No. 10000, which mandates that banks shall set aside 25 percent of their loanable amounts to the private sector. Despite this law, banks pay about P1.5 to P2 billion pesos every year in penalties. They would rather na magbayad na lang ho sila ng penalty kaysa magpahiram ho sa agriculture sector. Iyong AGFP po sa LandBank na nakadeposito na nag-umpisa po noong 2008 at P2 billion ay P11 billion na po ngayon. Lumago po iyong pondo na iyan sa mga penalties na ibinabayad po ng mga bangko. Kaya nga po minabuti po ng Department of Agriculture ngayon na magtabi po ng pondo ng gobyerno and to use it po para magamit po ng mga magsasaka, i-offer po sa kanila na magamit po nila at those low rates dahil nga po iyong private sector po, hindi na po pumapasok eh, ayaw po talaga.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, paano po makasisiguro, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, ang Department of Education na makababayad iyong ating mga magsasaka just in case na mangutang po sila?

REP. YAP (A.). Ma’am…

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). At kung ito po ay mamalas-malasin at magkaroon pa po ng disaster, bagyo o ano man pa pong kalamidad, so sira po iyong kanilang mga pananim, ano pong mangyayari sa inutang ng ating mga magsasaka o mangingisda? Mananatiling utang po ito, hindi po ba, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, not only is it at 6 percent, which is a very friendly rate; they are also given free insurance, and they are also given moratoriums kapag may calamities po. At according to the ACPC, ang kanila pong experience ngayon, napakataas naman po ng repayment rate—98 percent po ang repayment rate ngayon.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Nakalagay po sa briefing materials ng DA, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, ang planong idaan sa voucher ang farm implements and other tools. Tama po ba ito, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker? Naalala ko lang po ito ay ginamit sa education sector, sa Department of Education, kung saan masama ang naging experience ng ating private sector o hindi epektibo iyong paggamit ng voucher system. So, we are a few dangerous steps away from doing the same thing to hospitals and schools, for the health, education and

other sectors providing basic services for the people. We are, in fact, doing it to these sectors already using the very same reasons, anomalies in the programs.

Sinasabi din po sa pag-aaral na may mga anomalies doon sa mga programa na ginamit natin sa subsidiya—faulty design and execution of agricultural programs, laggard growth, inefficiencies, low absorptive capacity, et cetera. Sa palagay po ng Representasyong ito, Mme. Speaker, kagalang-galang na Sponsor, kung problema ay anomalya, hindi ba dapat panagutin ang may sala sa anomalya? Halimbawa, iyong fertilizer scam, iyong pork barrel scam at marami pang mga scam na bumibiktima sa sektor ng agrikultura, sa mga magsasaka at mangingisda. Naniniwala po ba kayo dito, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. YAP (A.). Ako po ay naniniwala that we have to keep it—at least, the program should be safeguarded. Kaya nga po ang ginawa ng Department po ngayon, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, they devised a voucher system. Iniiwan na po natin sa mga magsasaka, farmer’s choice po kung ano ang gusto niyang bilhin na machinery or inputs po, gagamitin na lang po niya iyong voucher, and that will be the key to unlocking the funds.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Kaya po, sa akin pong palagay, hindi po iyong sistema ng subsidiya ang may problema dito kung hindi iyong anomaly na hindi naa-address. Kung may inefficiency sa problema, sa absorptive capacity ng ahensya, solusyunan ang mga ugat ng inefficiencies, red tape, bureaucratic bottlenecks at iba pa. Isama na rito ang kakulangan sa mga staff ng mga ahensya, kontraktuwalisasyon at maliliit na suweldo nila, pinakaugat ng laggard growth, kawalan ng lupa ng mga magsasaka, kawalan ng sariling pangisdaan ng mga mangingisda.

Kaya huwag parusahan ang mga nangangailangan sa programa at mga subsidyo sa pamamagitan ng malaking tapyas sa budget. Kaya nga po ito po kaisa ninyo po ang Representasyong ito, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, doon sa isyu ng pagtapyas ng budget ng Department of Agriculture. Huwag natin pong parusahan ang buong sektor ng agrikultura, na pinagsasandigan ng milyun-milyong Pilipinong mahihirap for their daily subsistence, na sinasandigan ng buong bansa para sa matatag at nagsasarili pong ekonomiya.

Isa pa pong na-note ko dito, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, iyon pong S2C complements the lame justification for the so-called cash-based budgeting budget cuts. Tama po ba iyong aking obserbasyon? Kasi po iyong total cut is P13.6 billion, which is 30.98 percent. So, kung babanggitin ko pa po iyong mga budget cuts, nandidito naman po iyan, at alam naman nating pareho iyan, Mr. Sponsor.

Sa pagtatapos po, Mme. Speaker, nananatiling agricultural na bansa pa rin ang Pilipinas kontra sa


pananaw ng mga economic managers ni Pangulong Duterte. Nananatiling malawak na bahagi ng naghihirap na mamamayan natin ang nakaka-relate din ang sektor sa mga guro sa isyung ito. Marami din po sa mga guro ang lubog sa utang, pero ang sagot sa amin ay tambak na pampahirap, financial literacy kuno, at higit sa lahat, pagtatangging ibigay ang nararapat na makabuluhang salary increase.

Ang ugat ng problema ay kakulangan ng suweldo, suporta mula sa gobyerno, pero sa halip na ibigay ito, taun-taon na itinatanggi ang mga makatarungang kahilingan. Ganundin po sa sektor ng agrikultura, Mme. Speaker, kahilingan para sa land and agrarian reform and a stop to usury, et cetera, pero gaya ng ipinapakita ng budget na ito, ito ang tunguhin ng DA at ng administrasyon, ang mga kahilingan na ito ay malayong maibigay ng gobyerno.

That ends my interpellation, Mme. Speaker. Salamat po sa ating good Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Salamat, Mme. Speaker.


REP. YAP (A.). Salamat po.

REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, I now move to recognize the Hon. Arlene D. Brosas of the GABRIELA Party-List for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Arlene Brosas is now recognized.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Maraming salamat, and to the good Sponsor, are you willing to yield to a few questions?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, I will yield to your questions.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you.I also have a question for the National Irrigation,

but first, it is about the NFA. So, …

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Ma’am.

REP. BROSAS. According to the Special Provisions, as far as the mandate of the NFA is concerned, it shall buy directly from farmers, except in case of calamity, fortuitous events or a shortfall on production where the NFA is authorized to import rice upon the recommendation of the NFA Council.

Bigas po ang pangunahing pagkain ng karamihang Pilipino. Noong 2014, ang sektor ng bigas ay nakapag-ambag ng 30 percent sa gross value-added ng agrikultura

at 2.7 percent sa gross domestic product. Noong 2017, 25.3 percent ang ambag sa industriya ng bigas sa GVA ng agrikultura habang 2 percent naman sa GDP. Noong 1970s, ang NFA rice procurement ng local palay ay nasa 25 percent.

Ayon sa PIDS, mula 1980 to 1989, bumaba ito to ng 5.4 percent; and from 1990 to 1999, 2.6 percent; 2000 to 2009, 2.3 percent; at mula 2010 hanggang 2017, naging 1.6 procurement na lang, halos mag-zero procurement na tayo. Mula po noong 2005 hanggang 2007, ang presyo ng palay na binibili ng NFA ay mula P10 hanggang P11 kada kilo; 2008 to 2017, doon po nagbago ng P17 kada kilo ng lokal na palay ang binibili ng NFA. Napakaliit nito sa gitna ng ambag nito sa ekonomiya. Kung kaya, iyong marami pong magsasaka sa atin nagbebenta sa mga pribadong rice traders dahil una, kailangan mabawi nila iyong kanilang capital. Madalas utang. Sabi nga, 20 percent to 30 percent interest, hindi pa dito kasama ang mataas na gastos sa produksyon na kumakain ng mahigit 40 percent sa kabuuang gastos sa produksyon. Meaning, walang mainam na kondisyon na ibenta ito sa NFA.

Now, my question po ay, may statement ang NFA noong nakaraan from the Business Mirror, dated May 21, 2018, a source said that:

The NFA is pushing for the increase of its buying price for palay to P25 per kilogram to salvage its wiped-out stockpile, having been unable to purchase its much-needed buffer stock volume from farmers during the summer harvest owing to its uncompetitive pricing.

Ano po iyong effort ng ahensiya para i-assert na taasan ang buying price ng palay ng mga lokal na magsasaka?

REP. YAP (A.). Ma’am, it may have been P25, Mme. Speaker, but the Department is stuck with P20 po per kilo.

REP. BROSAS. So, ngayon po ang ginagawa ng ahensiya ay P20?

REP. YAP (A.). Opo, P17 po iyong support price, but iyong P3, incentive fee po iyon.

REP. BROSAS. So, P17 pa rin, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, as I explained earlier tonight, based on the questions of another interpellator, Your Honor, kahit na P17 po iyong buying price, iyong flexibility po na ibinibigay po ng P3, ang neto po noon, P20 po kada kilo pa rin.


REP. BROSAS. Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, hihihiling po ito ng mga magsasaka natin. Wala po bang paraan para mai-pursue ng NFA, NFA Council in particular, ang pagtaas ng buying price natin?

REP. YAP (A.). That is …

REP. BROSAS. Do you have plans, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?

REP. YAP (A.). I am sure Mme. Speaker, Mme. Speaker, the NFA Council is constantly evaluating. And, I am sure that, if in their estimate, makabubuti po iyong P20 to P22, kahit pa ho P25 iyan, kung kakayanin po ng sistema natin, sigurado naman po tayo na gagampanan at gagawin po ng NFA Council iyan.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, alam ninyo po, nakababahala—iyong importansiya po kasi ng pagbili ng bigas sa mga magsasaka, malaking tulong ito sa pagbalik din sa kanilang kabuhayan.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. BROSAS. Kaya po parang kapag itinataas natin iyong buying price, ibig sabihin, pagtaas din iyon ng kakayanan at kabuhayan ng ating mga magsasaka. Kung kaya iyon po ay paulit-ulit nating sinasabi sa Department of Agriculture, na iyong presyo ng palay, hindi po iyon kawalan eh kung tayo ay itataas pa natin ng kakayanin natin sa pagbili sa palay dahil bumabalik din sa atin iyong kailangan na tulong.

Iyong itinaas po ng NFA ang buying price nitong 2008 from P11 to P17, nakapag-procure ng 600,000 metric tons local palay. 2008 pa po iyon eh. Ang layo, P11 to P17 kaagad. Kinaya natin na ganoon, nagawa natin iyon. Ngayon, may experience na ba ang NFA na mag-raise ng palay price, at bakit hindi ito natin magawa ngayon? From P11 to P17, pero ngayon, parang sinasabi ninyo po, P17, mayroon tayong P3 na puwede pang itaas.

REP. YAP (A.). P20 po iyon.

REP. BROSAS. Oo. P17 dagdag ng P3, P20 siya aabot. Bakit hindi natin kaya na magtaas ng higit pa doon?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, kaya naman po pero kailangan po natin timbangin iyong impact. So, at P20 po, mata-translate po iyan na mga P40 per kilo. That is a signal also to the market that the floor price now of rice is a P40, so there is going to be a push doon po sa presyo. Puwede pa pong umakyat iyong presyo. So, instead of stabilizing the situation, baka maghabulan po sa presyo. Kaya tama po iyong

sinasabi ninyo. It is a signal if we buy higher, but we have to weigh and balance na hindi naman po maging runaway iyong prices.

At right now, with the situation right now, Ma’am, especially with the international prices of fuel now shooting up to P83 per barrel already, and the inflation rate is where it is, ayaw naman po natin itulak, bigyan po ng, kumbaga, mitsa o sindihan po iyong mitsa na sumipa nang sumipa po iyong presyo. So, we are trying to balance it out.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, iyong sinasabi po nating pagsipa noong presyo, actually, nasa gobyerno po iyong pagtatakda ng price control na tinatawag, lalo na sa mga panahon na ganito, hindi po ba mas favorable na tayo ay kumiling sa mga magsasaka natin kaysa sabihin natin na tataas kasi iyong presyo ng bigas? In fact, mataas iyong presyo ng bigas sa mga commercial rice, hindi ba po? Ang sinasabi po natin, pupuwedeng i-control ito ng pamahalaan. Puwede siyang mag-institute ng price control para hindi po sumipa ng ganoon pero malaki iyong ganansya ng mga magsasaka natin. So, sa pagbalanse po ng ganoon, hindi po ba iyon tinitingnan ng Department of Agriculture na makakatulong particular sa mga magsasaka natin na taasan ang buying price, pero i-price control ang bigas? Iyon po iyong….

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, ako po ay nanggaling sa NFA at saka sa DA kaya nakikita ko rin po or naiintindihan ko po kung saan po sila nanggagaling on this issue. Syempre ang DA, ang gusto nila, kumita nang kumita ang mga magsasaka. Kung puwede lang, hindi na po pakialaman ang presyo ang release price sa merkado. Ang alam ko po iyon ang pakay ng DA pero nanggaling din po ako sa NFA at nakikita ko rin po, para naman sa kanila iyong pangamba na iyong presyo po ng bigas, sumipa nang sumipa. Napakahirap po talaga. Para po talagang ano eh, you are being pulled from two angles. At the end of the day, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, ang kailangan pong sigurong bigyan natin ng pansin or importansya, iyong kalagitnaan po, na milyun-milyon po ng mga consumers po ang tinitingnan rin po natin. But hindi naman po ibig sabihin, Your Honor, na just because there are millions of consumers, we are also willing to sacrifice a few million farmers. We are not willing to do that. Napakahirap po ng landas na tinatahak natin, but kahit na po mahirap, choices have to be made. Just as we are not willing to sacrifice a few million farmers, we are also not willing to sacrifice tens of millions of consumers.

So, ang binago po natin, at least, para po just to assure you, the NFA originally operated as a buyer of last resort. Kung babalikan po natin iyong history ng Presidential Decree No. 4, the NFA was created to support the buying price of palay. Ang ginawa po ng


NFA ngayon, binago na po nila iyong sistema. They are now a buyer of first resort. They are trying to be first in the market. This was done a few years ago. And now the NFA is going back to the system being the buyer of first resort. Iniakyat na po iyong presyo nila through an incentive of P3. They are first in the market right now to influence, at least, the prices, so that iyong presyo po na nagiging benchmark po sa merkado, correct pricing po iyon, kung saan po iyong mga magsasaka, makababawi po sila sa kanila pong iginugol na pondo, ang kanila pong investment.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, sinasabi ninyo po kanina na iyong DA ay sinuportahan naman iyong mga magsasaka natin, pero sa history, kung totoo pong sinuportahan iyong mga magsasaka natin, hindi po ganito ang kondisyon natin. Hindi po ang mga magsasaka ang nagsa-suffer ngayon. At may P17 na binibili iyong kanilang palay. Tapos maganda po iyong makinarya natin. Tapos para sa mga magsasaka, hindi po kalabaw lang at marami po tayong subsidyo na naibigay sa mga magsasaka natin para umunlad iyong kanilang kalagayan.

Gusto ko lang sabihin, over the years, kahit po sinasabi ng DA na nagbibigay siya ng ganoong mga subsidyo, suporta sa mga magsasaka, ang tanong, bakit po hanggang ngayon, ang kondisyon ng mga magsasaka ay hindi naman umuunlad? So, ibig sabihin po, silang mga producer natin kahit po Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, tayo ang mag-usap. Kahit iyong producers po ng pagkain natin, sila po minsan iyong walang makaing bigas. Kaya po napakahirap lalung-lalo na sa Eastern Visayas noong nakaraan na tinamaan ng bagyo at kung anu-ano pa, na sila iyong kumakain ng mais tapos sila iyong producer ng bigas at producer ng palay, tapos naghahanap sila ng murang bigas para sa kanila. So, ang hirap po ng kalagayan na ganoon. Ibig sabihin, ang katotohanan po, sa mga ini-implement natin, ang kinalabasan sa mga magsasaka ay hindi naman nga naging paborable para sa kanila. So, ibig sabihin po, iyong ginagamit natin, iyong sinabi natin na iyong mandato ng NFA na ganoon ay ibinalik natin ngayon na dapat sila ay bumili ng palay bilang suporta, ano na lang po siya, stopgap measure na lang siya sa dinaranas natin. Dumausdos, hindi ba? Dumausdos po iyong kalagayan ng mga magsasaka. Kaya po napakahirap na sabihin na iyong DA ay nag-full support talaga and everything. Ganyan po iyong ano natin.

So, iyon lang naman po ang gusto kong sabihin na parang over the years, kung talagang minahal natin, pinaunlad natin ang kalagayan ng mga magsasaka natin, mayroon po tayong sufficient na supply ng bigas, sufficient supply hindi lang ng bigas, iyong palay nabibili natin at gumaganda at tumataas ang kalidad ng kalagayan ng mga magsasaka. Nagagawa na rin nila na magkaroon ng traktora. Nagagawa na

rin nila na magkaroon ng—hindi sila nababaon sa utang. So, there is something talaga sa ating sistema na hindi sila iyong nakikinabang. Iyong second ko pong tanong, sino po ang nakikinabang kung ganito iyong sitwasyon?

From 2011 to 2014 po, sinasabi na ang average of rice smuggled reached 2.44 metric tons ba iyan? Also, in 2013, an estimated 548,656 hectares of rice farmlands were affected by smuggling or 12 percent of the entire farm area planted with palay or 20 percent of the entire land area in the country intended for palay production. Eight billion to 10 billion of tariffs were lost in 2013 due to rice smuggling. Ngayon po, sabi ni Presidente noong nakaraan hinggil sa rice smuggling, kailangan po nating tanggalin ang mga rice smuggler.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. BROSAS. So, kaugnay po dito, mayroon na po ba—actually, marching order niya nga iyon eh.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. BROSAS. Ilan na po ba ang nasampahan ng reklamo hinggil sa rice smuggling at hoarding na tinatawag? Kasi nakailang hearing naman po tayo dito sa Kongreso tsaka sa Senate tungkol sa bigas, na lumalabas na tumataas iyong presyo ng bigas at ito ay dahil sa mga rice hoarder, et cetera. Mayroon na po bang ganoong resulta na maire-report ang DA?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, wala po. Basically, ang mandato po kasi ng DA is in agriculture. Ang mandato po to apprehend our rice smugglers will be on the Bureau of Customs. So, siguro po mamabutihin po nating itanong po ito sa Bureau of Customs. We will join you in that effort to pressure them in the area of apprehending smugglers.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, kung gayon po, kung nasa Immigration ang ating mandato, gaano po naaapektuhan ng rice smuggling ang DA sa kasalukuyan? Ano po iyong maisa-suggest ng DA kaugnay diyan? Kasi kada may rice smuggling po ay malaking kawalan para sa ating agrikultura. So, ano po ang mga plano, future plans ng DA para masolusyunan ito?

REP. YAP (A.). Ang ginagawa po naman, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the DA, dati pa hanggang ngayon po, has always partnered with the Bureau of Customs especially doon po sa integrating and harmonizing ng systems natin sa importation, sa permits, sa online connectivity po ng dalawang ahensiya, ginagawa naman po natin. But, at the end of the day, we can connect


our system, we can streamline it but apprehensions must be made and the agency that has been tasked by the government, the mandate belongs to the Bureau of Customs, and it must be tasked and challenged to make these apprehensions po.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor. Talaga namang, oo, this Representation agrees na talagang dapat may assurance talaga tayo na iyong mga kartel, iyong mga rice smuggler, we go after them. Kasi talagang mahihirapan tayo kapagka ganito ang sistema.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. BROSAS. Siyempre gusto rin nating sabihin na ang pinaka-bottom line naman talaga iyong support sa mga magsasaka.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. BROSAS. Iyong mga iba’t ibang paraan, paano po direct talagang nakakasuporta ang Department of Agriculture sa mga magsasaka natin sa kasalukuyan? Bukod po sa NFA na bumibili ng palay, ano pong suporta ang mayroon silang inaasahan ngayong 2019 na direkta talaga sa kanila?

REP. YAP (A.). Kahit po na-reduce po, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, and nabawasan po ang program fund, tuluy-tuloy pa rin naman po ang pagbibigay because ang atin pong National Irrigation Administration, malaki pa rin naman ang pondo kahit po nabawasan sa restoration, renovation, rehabilitation po ng mga agricultural area. Importanteng-importante po ang patubig. Patuloy naman po ang ating pamumuhunan sa irrigation natin pati sa mga communal irrigation system, patuloy po ang ating pamumuhunan sa CIPs. In terms of new areas, hindi naman po talaga tayo tumigil even if affected po tayo.

In terms naman po of inputs, patuloy naman po ang ating programa sa better quality seeds. Mayroon tayong Seed Exchange Program na ginagawa ngayon sa mga magsasaka natin dahil alam po natin na ang ating production po kada ektarya po ang ating average po ay nasa 4 tons per hectare. So, puwede pa po nating ma-improve ito dahil in some areas of the country it is 4, in some areas of the country it is 3.8, in some areas of the country it is actually 3.2 tons per hectare. So, because of better quality seeds, ang Seed Exchange Program na ginagawa natin, we are trying to increase the productivity of each hectare of riceland and after that we also have a program for extension and we also have a program for farm mechanization and post-harvest technology. So, lahat po iyan, kung sana nadagdagan lang po ang pondo natin, mas malaki po siguro ang

impact dahil nakakasa na po iyong programa. Ang kulang na lang po pondohan.

REP. BROSAS. Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, iyong direct po na tulong sa mga magsasaka natin ibig sabihin po iyong sa better quality seeds, ito po ba ay ibibigay nang libre sa mga magsasaka? Sa patubig, libre po ang ating patubig. Sa productivity ng riceland, iyong mechanization, gaano na po iyong ating inabot dito at iyong mga post-harvest mechanization na sinasabi ninyo?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, hindi po natin ikakaila na tinamaan po talaga iyong programa natin dahil nabawasan po iyong pondo natin. Kaya nga po na-move po natin sa credit support. But this thrust is still increasing competitiveness by increasing the yield. Sa totoo nga po, in terms of high-yield provinces, we have maybe 8 to 10 where the yield is more than 4 tons per hectare. But, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there are also provinces that are still below that and still others that are way below, nasa 3.2. So, there is really no way. Number one, land is very important. Kaya nga po kailangan importante iyong pamumuhunan natin sa irrigation. Why? It is because our cropping intensity is very low right now. Ang cropping intensity natin ang average nasa 1.6. So, it belabors the question why are we irrigating our lands when the cropping intensity is at 1.6. Siyempre ang gusto natin ang cropping intensity would be 1.8 to 1.9. Why are you going to irrigate a piece of land if you cannot use it twice? So, continuous investment in irrigation is very critical.

After you have the water and you have the land, the next most important is, of course, the seed. The average yield supposed to be for hybrid seeds is upward, 7 tons per hectare. In fact, in Nueva Ecija, there are many farmers who are even doing 10 tons per hectare. They can do it, it has been proven. So, moving more of our hectarages after mapatubigan po natin, into hybrid seeds, is very critical. But on the average po, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, hindi naman po kailangang lahat i-move natin sa hybrid seed dahil ngayon marami pa rin pong gumagamit ng farmers’ home-safe seed and this has to be brought up to certified seeds. Maiakyat lang po natin to certified seed iyong 4 tons, 4 to 5 tons per hectare, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, napakalaki po ng mababawasan po sa inaangkat po nating bigas. So, water and then seeds.

Pagkatapos po noon, we have to address the issue of post-harvest losses. Doon po ang sabi po ng PhilRice sa study nila, kung naghahanap po kayo ng kicker, iyong biggest impact po doon, 40 percent po ng increase ng yield nandoon po sa infrastructure. Water, we are talking about fruits, we are talking about post-harvest technology and that will also bring down the cost. Kasi po, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, iyon po


ang pangamba natin dito po sa tariffication. For sure, we will put a tariff on rice, and for sure, cheap rice may come in. But unless Philippine rice farmers can compete, the danger is we may eliminate them along the way. Kaya hindi puwedeng we will just accept this from one point of view, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the point of view that, yes, we are protecting millions of consumers without looking also at the concerns of our farmers. So, we are going to let rice in, we will hopefully stabilize prices but it cannot be na hindi natin pinapansin iyong concerns ng mga rice farmer po natin. That is why we are trying to increase their yield and we are trying to lower their cost. How do you increase their yield--water, land, increasing the seeds, lowering their cost, mechanization? Nakakamada po iyong programa ng ahensiya ngayon. This has been written together with the PhilRice. Unfortunately, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we suffer because of the reduction in our funds. I know this is a great concern of many of us here. We are crossing party lines of all colors and stripes. We are all together on one thing—to add to the budget of the Department of Agriculture to address these concerns, Ma’am.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Arenas relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Linabelle Ruth R. Villarica

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Speaker, totoo po iyan. Talaga pong nag-a-agree ako na kailangan talaga ng mga magsasaka ng tulong, pero over the years nga, sabi natin, history tells us na hindi nga napupunta sa mga magsasaka iyong tulong na sinasabi natin. Bilyun-bilyon, milyon, trilyon, iyon po iyong inano natin. So, iyong pag-e-ensure po na makatulong sa kanila at makapagpaangat sa buhay nila, iyon po iyong kailangang tingnan. Sabi ninyo nga comprehensive nating tingnan hindi lang iyong mga consumer, hindi lang iyong ano—alalahanin din natin iyong mga magsasaka natin primarily. Kung inalala po natin primarily ang mga magsasaka natin, hindi po ganito iyong kalalagyan natin. So, napabayaan po talaga siya for such a long time.

Ngayon, I would like to say na iyong mga programa sa lupa para sa mga magsasaka kasi baka po kailangang tingnan na iyong lupa na tini-till ng mga magsasaka natin—ilan po ba iyong mga magsasaka natin na iyon ang kabuhayan sa ngayon? Kanina tinanong ko po iyong direct subsidy. Halimbawa, umaasa ba iyong mga magsasaka natin sa kanina na pinag-usapan iyong credit o pautang lamang, hindi ba? Alam ninyo po iyong mga magsasaka natin wala silang papeles. Kapagka hingan mo pa sila ng collateral, hingan mo pa sila ng kung anu-ano at mga ganyan na mga requirement, hindi na lang po sila mag-a-avail. So, kailangan po iyong pamamaraan din ng Department of Agriculture para

matulungan iyong mga magsasaka natin ay flexible o sang-ayon sa kalagayan ng mga magsasaka at talagang may pagtukoy kung paano sila bibigyan ng lupa na kanilang masasaka.

Tingin ko po secondary na nga iyong patubig at saka iyong sinasabi ninyong mag-high yield iyong mga magsasaka ng produkto—iyong magsasaka kasi, ang unang-una talaga ay magkaroon siya ng kanyang lupang sinasaka, subsidyo, tulong para sa kanyang pagsaka tapos iyong sinasabi po nating teknolohiya—alam ko po iyon, minsan iyong mga magsasaka kailangan talaga nila na tinataas nga iyong kanilang karunungan para doon sa ginagawa nila at magagawa naman po iyon ng mga magsasaka. Kaya po iyong mga farmers cooperative, iyong mga association ay maganda pong mapayabong natin dahil iyon po, sila mismo may kakayanan naman silang paunlarin ang kanilang mga sarili.

So, ito pong mga programa, tingin ko po iyong ugat pa rin naman natin ay doon sa availability ng land talaga para sa mga magsasaka. Hindi iyong nakikisaka lang sila, hindi iyong nababaon sila sa utang, hindi iyong hindi sila makautang. Iyon po iyong mga reason na tingin ko kailangan ding tingnan ng Department of Agriculture, kung paano talaga siya direktang nakatutulong sa ating mga magsasaka para magkaroon po ng pagbabago. Kasi this will all be—parang papel lang siya tapos ang ganda ng mga sasabihin natin about the irrigation, about this, about ganyan pero kapag iyong tao sinasabi niya direkta sa iyo na hindi siya makabili ng bigas, mahirap po iyon. Gut level iyon eh. Ibig sabihin, iyong magsasaka mo cannot afford ng bigas na alam mo na siya iyong gumagawa at nagpo-produce. Iyon po iyong sinasabi natin. So, iangat po natin iyong kalagayan ng mga magsasaka natin. Iyon po iyong magandang pag-unlad na sinasabi na kailangan.

Ang third question ko po ay kaugnay doon sa golden rice. May programa po ba ang DA sa golden rice?

REP. YAP (A.). Mayroon pong programa ang PhilRice sa golden rice.

REP. BROSAS. Ano po ang status? May ini-implement po ba tayong production of golden rice dito sa ating bansa? Saan po ito?

REP. YAP (A.). According to the Secretary of Agriculture, nasa field trial and research pa po ito. Kahit mayroon nang program, hindi pa po ito for commercial release.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. Concern ko po ito, Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, dahil golden rice is a new type of rice that contains beta carotene, pro Vitamin A, which is converted into Vitamin E, as needed by the body and gives the grain its golden color. After decades of research, the efficacy, safety and viability of the golden


rice remain uncertain. The increased complexity of the gene extracts of the golden rice makes it even more hazardous. Ang sinasabi po ng ilang mga magsasaka sa atin, ang gold rice ay hindi sagot sa poverty and the people’s inability to avail of proper food and nutrition. Ang tingin po nila, dapat hindi tayo mag-implement ng tinatawag na commercialization of golden rice lalo na at wala tayong comparative studies between GI2E, golden rice and other varieties. Kaya ang pangamba ng mga kababayan natin, iyong GMO o genetically-modified organism na hindi tayo gumamit ay nandito sa pamamagitan ng golden rice. Kung may mga programa ang DA, nabalitaan ko po na ita-trial daw sa mga babae at bata iyong golden rice. Totoo po ba ito, sa Isabela, at ang balita ko po sa areas natin?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, thank you very much for the warning. The DA Bio Safety Committee is tasked to evaluate the applications per Special Order No. 256 and is closely monitoring this, and right now, ang permit ay pre-trial lang po. Hindi pa for direct and open commercial use. We accept your comments, warnings and cautionary remarks and we will do our best to follow them.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor.

Maganda pong mapag-aralan muna natin nang mabuti kung ano iyong magiging epekto sa ating mga kababayan ng pagkakaroon ng golden rice, lalo na kung ang mga nagpu-push po nito ay mga malalaking korporasyon. Mga corporation ng Syngenta at iba pang mga korporasyon na alam naman natin na maaaring ang iresulta ay hindi naman kalusugan para sa atin kundi pagkalason pa sa ating mga mamamayan. Sabi nga pinag-aalan pa ito. Iyong safety, efficacy at viability nito, nais ko lang bigyan ng diin na we should really look into this at hindi basta-basta na lang i-trial. Hindi natin basta-basta na lang payagan na gamitin ng mga mamamayan natin lalo na kung wala tayong enough warning.

Alam po ninyo dito sa Pilipinas, wala tayong labels na inilalalagay kapagka mayroong nakalagay diyan na GMO. Medyo hindi tayo conscious na gawin ito pero, in fact, dapat po mayroon tayong mga ganoong regulations kung saan makikita natin we have the freedom to choose kung ano sa tingin natin ang makakabuti sa ating kalusugan o hindi. Kaya paalala lang po sa Department of Agriculture, ang mga magsasaka, hindi sila papayag ng ganoon. Alam po nila what is best for them. Sa mga bungkalan na ganyan, tatanggalin po talaga nila iyong golden rice na trial kung magkakaroon man dito sa Pilipinas.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we accept the precautionary steps that we have to take.

But if we go through history also, we cannot hinder the science involved na sana pagbigyan po natin iyong siyensiya. Kasi ganito rin po iyong naging laban sa Bt corn. Iyong Bt corn po, matagal na hinadlangan ng maraming mga grupo, but when this was finally approved for general open commercial use in the year 2001, we never had any negative incident related to the use or the efficacy of the Bt corn. In fact, ito po iyong workhorse natin, especially in the areas of Region II. This is actually what made us self-sufficient in corn. Iyon lang po ang concern doon. Let us not allow science to be hindered, pagbigyan po natin.

REP. BROSAS. Yes.Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, actually iyong Bt corn

po ay umabot hanggang sa Supreme Court at pinatigil ito. Ilan sa mga resulta nito ay nasisira ang lupa para sa mga susunod pang paggamit ng lupa. I agree naman sa siyensya na kailangang pag-aralan ang lahat. Pero halimbawa, sa usapin po ng golden rice, sinasabi na ang golden rice ay nakakatulong o solusyon para sa pag-address ng Vitamin A deficiency sa Pilipinas, pero marami naman tayong pagkukunan ng Vitamin A natin. Bakit po kailangan nating mag-adhere sa golden rice in particular? Baka po mayroon ngang mga korporasyon, kumpanya na nagtutulak nito. Kaya iyong sinasabi nating warning, it is not only about science, it is about sa mga gustong magsamantala na malalaking korporasyon sa ating bansa. Ito po iyong sinasabi natin. Ang sabi nga:

A person would have to eat 4 kg (8.8 pounds) of cooked golden rice, (assuming it was fully absorbed and eaten immediately after harvest with minimal cooking) to get the same level of Vitamin A that one medium carrot or 1 tsp. of parsley would provide.

May carrot at parsley pa. Bakit tayo mag-a-avail ng golden rice kung alam natin na hindi pa nga napu-prove sa siyensya? Iyon lang po ang sa atin. Iyong pangamba po natin sa malalaking korporasyon na gustong pumasok sa ating bansa at magsamantala, when we have our own way, katutubong paraan at sa pakikipag-usap po natin sa organic farmers, mayroong malaking maitutulong sa atin na sila mismo sa siyensya, sa siyensya ng Pilipino ay pupuwede nating ayusin. In fact, ang problema pa nga natin sa Pilipinas, sa research, hindi nga tayo nagbibigay ng pondo diyan. Hindi nga tayo naglalagay ng malaking pondo para sa Filipino scientists natin which is very important. Iyon po ang sinasabi natin, and we listen, lalung-lalo na doon sa mga farmers organization advocating for this, na kung mayroong alternatives, lalung-lalo na kung taal sa atin, talagang iyon ang gamitin natin.


REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we accept your comments, but just to assure her, Mme. Speaker, no big business company is behind the move. The efforts are basically the development and involvement of PhilRice, IRRI and UP Los Baños. Wala pong malalaking kumpanya ang nagli-lead dito. Just to assure our distinguished colleague, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, ang pagkakaalam ko po ang mga nagpu-push niyan ang Monsanto, Syngenta at iba pang mga kumpanya. Anyway, pupuwede po ba akong makakuha ng kopya ng study na magmumula sa DA kaugnay sa golden rice.

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Is it possible, Mr. Secretary?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, iyon lang ang tanong ko tungkol sa NFA o sa rice. Tutungo na po ako sa mga katanungan sa irrigation.

REP. YAP (A.). Salamat po.

REP. BROSAS. Two questions lang po sa irrigation, Mme Speaker, G. Isponsor.

Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, my questions are about the major infrastructure investments, the P1.7 billion for the Chico River Pump Irrigation System. Sa background po nito, the project will irrigate 8,700 hectares of agricultural lands and should benefit at least 4,350 farmers in 21 barangays in Cagayan and Kalinga. However, this project raises the specter of the World Bank-funded Chico River Dam during the Marcos era in the 1980s, which threatened to flood thousands of hectares of Kalinga land. Being a mega dam, it will displace communities and flooding will occur. Some 25 hectares of rice paddies, coffee and other rice plantations will be affected. An indigenous burial site in Torak will also be disturbed. The irrigation project would also include impounding dams and tunnels that could affect the lands’ topography and aquatic life. Ngayon, bakit po tayo naglalagay ng chunk ng budget natin para sa isang destructive irrigation system na ito?

REP. DUAVIT. With the indulgence of our distinguished colleague, Mme. Speaker, may we please get the name of that particular dam project? Again, I was not able to hear it. I am sorry.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, ito po iyong P1.7 billion Chico River Pump Irrigation System. Ito ay loan agreement between the Philippines and the Chinese government.

REP. DUAVIT. As stated earlier, the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project, Mme. Speaker, does not have an impounding component and it is actually just a pump irrigation project, meaning, it will just be diverting the water from the said river. As such we should not fear anything to be submerged, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, may public consultations po bang naganap kaugnay dito sa proyektong ito?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Ano po ang outcome?

REP. DUAVIT. I was informed by the Administrator that the service area will be in Cagayan and it is just the source that is in Kalinga. There were no major issues either in Kalinga or Cagayan, Mme. Speaker, as a result of the public consultation with the stakeholders on those two areas.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, wala pong sinabi ang mga tao kaugnay sa epekto sa kanila ng Chico River Pump Irrigation System project?

REP. DUAVIT. I believe so, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. May kopya po ba kayo?

REP. DUAVIT. I believe that when they were informed that there would be no submersion or impounding, that it is just a matter of diversion, the major fears were allayed.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, may details po ba kayo ng report ng public consultations na naganap, when was that, tapos ano po iyong mga sinabi ng mga tao, sinu-sino po iyong nag-attend, para po makuha ko kung ano iyong mga detalye nito?

REP. DUAVIT. We can provide that, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you.

REP. DUAVIT. I was also informed that the only issue was the right-of-way, iyong dadaanan po ng tubig. That was the only issue that was really taken.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, ano po iyong issue sa right of way?

REP. DUAVIT. Iyon lang ang napag-usapan as far as the payment for the right of way which was agreed upon naman.


REP. BROSAS. May presence ng foreign investors dito ano?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, as asked earlier asked by one of those who interpellate from the Makabayan bloc. Yes, there is a loan from the Chinese government.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, did he ask for the details on the loan agreement also?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker, and we had promised the same.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker.

Doon sa pangalawa kong question, kukuha na lang po ako sa kanila ng kopya.

Ang pangalawa ko pong question ay tungkol sa P400 million Malitubog-Maridagao Irrigation Project Phase II in North Cotabato. It is one of the longest in the making, and biggest foreign-funded projects in the country which started in October 1989. This P2.5 billion irrigation project was supposed to be completed in six years, but has already outlasted five presidents and five administrations. The original cost was even revised to P3.4 billion because of various problems, most of which were delays and the accompanying price increases and peso devaluations. This project is way behind schedule, yet three decades later, the dam project under the direct supervision of the National Irrigation Administration remains unfinished. Some components of the project have not been actually completed despite the billions of pesos already spent by the government for the past few decades. Mayroon po ba kayong immediate audit on the project?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Ano na po ang progress ng decades-old project na ito?

REP. DUAVIT. I have been informed, Mme. Speaker, that the first part, the very difficult part that was delayed, is now finished and that we are now in phase II of the Malitubog-Maridagao Irrigation Project. We are now moving from the bulk supply and the impounding, and now entering to the phase of the actual distribution of the water where we are building the canals, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker.Sa Phase II po ng project, magkakaroon ba ng mga

madi-displace na farmers?

REP. DUAVIT. Wala na po, Mme. Speaker, dahil ito naman ay mga canal na lang kaya wala nang ilulubog.

REP. BROSAS. Wala po kayong resettlement action plan kaugnay dito?

REP. DUAVIT. Hindi na po kailangan dahil wala namang madi-displace, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Mayroon pong report dito, Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, puwede ako makahingi ng kopya?

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker, we will furnish the same.

REP. BROSAS. Mayroon po ba tayong counterpart funding for the maintenance of the dam when completed?

REP. DUAVIT. Mayroon po, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Magkano po ang counterpart funding?

REP. DUAVIT. I am sorry. I would like to retract that. It is all in the GAA and all local, Mme. Speaker, there is no counterpart.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, mag-a-allot pa tayo ng pera dito?

REP. DUAVIT. Kasama na po dito sa budget natin,

Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, magkano po ang allotment for this? Ito na ba iyong P400 million?

REP. DUAVIT. Ito na po iyong P400 million, MMe. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. The total cost of the project, I believe this is from the Japan International Cooperation Agency or JICA.

REP. DUAVIT. That was Phase I, Mme. Speaker. Phase II is now all local.

REP. BROSAS. Okay, sa Phase II.Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, siguro iyong immediate

audit of the project na lang na puwede ko sana makuha ang kopya.

REP. DUAVIT. Yes, Mme. Speaker. I think that would be better.

REP. BROSAS. Panghuli po, it is very important na matanong ito sa Chico River Pump Irrigation System


dahil alam natin ang kasaysayan nito. Sa kasaysayan nito ang pagpatay sa isa sa leaders na hindi pumayag na magkaroon ng dam project sa kanilang lugar, si Macli-ing Dulag. Si Macli-ing Dulag po ay pinatay ng mga militar. Kung maaalala ko po sa history books kapag binabasa ko, diyan po iyong sinabihan siya ng “rumwar ka” tapos saka siya binaril ng mga militar. Hindi po suspected, kundi militar mismo ang gumawa. Dahil ayaw niyang pumayag na magkaroon ng dam project sa kanyang lugar.

Ngayon, here comes the project of Chico River Pump Irrigation System. The importance of my question ay kung nakonsulta po ba ito sa mga tao dahil mahalagang-mahalaga po, lalung-lalo na sa Cordillera iyong mga Cordillerans, kung gusto nila o ayaw nila ang proyekto na ito, at kung sa tingin nila ay makakatulong ito sa kanila. So, sana po, makuha ko iyong ilang mga detalye kaugnay dito. It is not only our history kung hindi ito rin po ay future natin kung kaya kailangan po naming makuha kung ano iyong mga maibibigay ninyong mga details about this.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, G. Isponsor.

REP. DUAVIT. Thank you, Mme. Interpellator. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

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

REP. VERGARA. Mme. Speaker, I now move that we recognize our Deputy Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez, from the Third District of Quezon.

I am sorry, Sir, my mistake, our Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Villarica). The Minority Leader, Hon. Danilo Suarez, is recognized.

REP. DUAVIT. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, most of my questions about the rice had already been raised, so I just have some parochial concerns.

I am very fond of eating red rice or sometimes we call it “Inipot-Ibon” mostly from upland. Ang sabi nila, it has a better nutrient value. Is that correct, Your Honor?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, anti-oxidant features, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. So totoo ho na, although it is not as good to eat as compared to white rice, but sinasabi nila na it is more friendly to your health.


REP. SUAREZ. No fertilizer, no pesticide.

REP. YAP (A.). Healthy, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. There were statements regarding smuggling. Is there a way that the Department of Agriculture can identify a certain grain whether it is smuggled or locally produced?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, that has been a perennial question and problem. Unfortunately, there is …

REP. SUAREZ. No distinction.

REP. YAP (A.). Hindi po natin maaano. The same workhorse, jin and rice, used in the entire Southeast Asia, was developed by the IRRI 40 years ago or in the 60s. The same workhorses started as IR5, IR8, Your Honor. These became the workhorses for the rice seeds that were distributed to Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, and even China. So, it is very difficult, Sir, to …

REP. SUAREZ. Cannot distinguish?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. The only variety that we can say that is really different is the California rice, because they are bigger in grain, Your Honor.


REP. SUAREZ. So, I just would like some—I did make a comment on that importation of rice and without consulting the Secretary, though I hit NFA on that issue, the title of my weekly comments on the Manila Standard is that: “Pag May Importation, May Commission.” So, it just dawned on me that hindi naman natin masasabi na talagang kulang po ang ating production as to the consumption, hindi po ba? And I go back to history, there was only one time that we had the opportunity wherein what we consume is what we produce and that was during the Masagana 99 of the late President Marcos. Doon lang ho iyong nangyari sa atin na hindi ho tayo masyadong nag-angkat at tama po—but at a very expensive price which was subsidized by the government during that time, Your Honor. So, my point is this, kung tama po ang dating ng importation doon sa program ng pag-aani, paggigiling, pagpapatuyo at paglalagay ng merkado ng lokal, hindi po dapat nagkaroon ng spike ng pricing…


REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor

REP. SUAREZ. So bakit po tayo nagkaroon ng spike?

REP. YAP (A.). Tama po iyong opinion ninyo. It was a question of timing and the reason…

REP. SUAREZ. So, hindi ho ba we could have timed it na iyong importation, darating by the time na kinakapos na iyong locally produced…

REP. YAP (A.). Tama po.

REP. SUAREZ. …so walang spike, because spike in pricing is because there is a shortage…

REP. YAP (A.). Tama po, Your Honor, tama po.

REP. SUAREZ. …there was no shortage…

REP. YAP (A.). Wala naman po…

REP. SUAREZ. …may importation po tayo eh.

REP. YAP (A.). Wala po. Ang nangyari po speculation. Sa labas naman po, internationally, the situation was stable, Your Honor, the price of rice was $350 to $450 per metric ton. Dito naman po, mayroon naman pong bigas, iyong NFA lang po was not able to import on time for the buffer stocking kaya po ang nangyari, since we are really on a deficit position in the sense that we need additional rice stocks, ay ayun po, sumipa na po iyong presyo. So, tama po kayo, Your Honor, it was just a question of timing. Noong nawala po iyong NFA rice sa market, doon na po umakyat dahil gumalaw na po iyong speculators.

REP. SUAREZ. And accordingly, the cartel made money, because nandoon po iyong bigas, na-hold nila, noong tumaas ang presyo nilabas nila.

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, the traders made money and also the farmers according to the Secretary of Agriculture. The farmers also made money along the way.

REP. SUAREZ. In terms of comparative pricing, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, our price of palay cannot be compared with the Thai production, with Cambodia, with maybe Laos or—ito po bang mga bansang ito are self-sufficient in terms of their rice production?

REP. YAP (A.). They are not exporters, but they have enough rice—Cambodia…

REP. SUAREZ. Only Thailand and Vietnam exports, Your Honor?

REP. YAP (A.). Those are the big exporters, yes—net exporters—yes.

REP. SUAREZ. So, ang personal analysis ko ay they have the luxury and comfort of water supply.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. And you can attribute that to the Mekong River…


REP. SUAREZ. …which we do not have.


REP. SUAREZ. So, ang point ko ho, kung hindi ho natin maaayos ang irrigation natin at tayo ay aasa sa ika nga ay ulan, you are limited to your planting every year, unlike when you have this river that flows into your rice paddies, kuha ka lang nang kuha ng tubig and then pagkaani mo, tanim ka ulit, hindi po ba?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker. The Philippines is two-thirds…

REP. SUAREZ. So, ano ho ang—ano ho ang…

REP. YAP (A.). …Philippines is two-thirds mountainous…

REP. SUAREZ. …ginagawa ng Department to somewhat off-set this issue na mura iyong kanilang rice production, tayo po mahal. And that make us uncompetitive with our neighboring countries, but definitely, you cannot let down the farmers na sabihin natin pasensya na lang tayo—may pera po naman ang Department na sinasabi natin na there are minsan level of support to make sure that the farmers make money.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, yes, Your Honor. That is the reason why the Department right now is concentrating on water to increase the cropping intensity even in small farms. They are now using solar-powered farms, solar-powered irrigation systems, so that in that respect, hindi na po kailangang gumastos ang mga magsasaka for their irrigation apart from the fact that if it is national irrigated po, libre na po iyong patubig sa kanila. So, the reason why the Department is now concentrating on these small land holding, is because of our terrain, Sir, we are two-thirds mountainous, only one-third is arable. And the concentration of


the Department right now is to increase the cropping intensity and the productivity of our farmers, para madagdagan po iyong kanila pong ani.

REP. SUAREZ. So, in terms of percentage, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, ilan pong porsyento ang diperensya ng consumption against production? Within what percentage are our imports?

REP. YAP (A.). We are presently at 93 percent. We are at about …

REP. SUAREZ. Ninety-three.

REP. YAP (A.). Ninety-three, we are at about …

REP. SUAREZ. So, seven percent po ang kailangang angkatin.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. And that is how many hundreds of thousands of tons?

REP. YAP (A.). About a million—1 to 1.2 million metric tons per year.

REP. SUAREZ. 1.2 million tons of rice? Wala bang programa ang Department kasi baka ho tapos na ang learning curve nila at magtatatlong taon na sila dito? Is there any program of the Department to somewhat augment this predicament that we can, at least, living all these years na puro ho tayo mag-i-import kung may possibility po naman na what we produce is what we consume with government assistance?

REP. YAP (A.). Malaki naman po ang posibilidad na we can do it. In fact, tuluy-tuloy naman po iyong pagtaas ng production natin. In fact, we are targeted, Your Honor, to have harvested 94.4 million metric tons, but because of the storms, medyo nag-correction po ng kaunti.

REP. SUAREZ. So, iyong iiwang seven percent sa 2019, weather-permitting, without any destructive calamities on climate change, will that improve to what percentage?

REP. YAP (A.). Weather-permitting, Your Honor, 94 to 96 percent. That is the sufficiency target.

REP. SUAREZ. You are talking of a one percentage point, Your Honor.

I will just go back to this. Mayroon po kayong alarm belt from COA, but I am not faulting the incumbent Secretary, this is 2015 to 2016, somehow

it is 2017, almost a billion unfinished DA farm-to-market roads. Alam po ba ito ni Secretary Piñol, ito hong mga rehabilitation in Lucena, which happens to be my province, concreting of FMR in Mulanay, which happens to be my district, concreting of farm-to-market—and these are big thicker amounts, Your Honor, almost a billion, unfinished. Sino ho ang hahabulin natin dito, eh bayad ho ito?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, let us allow the Department of Agriculture to look closely. Since there is a COA Report and you are bringing it up right now, the Secretary is with us.

REP. SUAREZ. Three years na ho sila, distinguished Sponsor, they have not looked into this?

REP. YAP (A.). They were not furnished a copy of this COA report that you are referring to, Your Honor, but now that they have been apprised, they are going to look into it.

The Secretary will be honored to receive a copy of this, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay, thank you, distinguished Sponsor.

Can I go to a product that is very close to my heart which is coconut, Your Honor? 70 percent of our coconuts are senior citizens. Am I correct or am I wrong?


REP. SUAREZ. So, senior citizen na.


REP. SUAREZ. Ang senior citizen, mayroong benefits.

REP. YAP (A.). Definitely, Sir.

REP. SUAREZ. Ano ho ang magagawa natin para ma-replicate natin at mapalitan na iyong ating senior citizen na puno? Because, Your Honor, five to six years po bago magbunga ang isang niyog.

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Secretary of Agriculture informed me that the President will be signing on October 9 the coco levy fund releases. When we passed that law, Your Honor, that guarantees the coconut industry a P15 billion infusion every year. That is P5 billion from the coco levy trust fund and P10 billion from GAA support. So, I understand, Your Honor, that in a previous briefing, the Secretary of DBM said that it should be one of the reasons a supplemental budget may be released.


REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, is that our silver bullet, the coco levy? Marami hong pera iyong Department eh. As a matter of fact, to add it up, I mean, this administration is oozing with money that were not able to be spent. So, …

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, let us give the Department of Agriculture some time because the PCA has just been turned over to the DA 10 days ago.

REP. SUAREZ. I have the …

REP. YAP (A.). It used to be under the Office of the President.

REP. SUAREZ. I just have to back track a little. Let me congratulate the PCA. They were very cooperative. As a matter of fact, I have already received 10,000 seedlings that we have planted already. But, 31 percent of the country is coconut, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. Quezon is the biggest in Luzon but Visayas and Mindanao have a lot of these areas. And, if a poor farmer, bearing in mind, that coconut farmers are the lowest per capita income in the country, iyon pong kanilang aanihin, sa halip na itatanim na seedlings, ibebenta ho iyan sa hirap ng pera. So, kung gagamitin po natin ang coco levy through the intercession of the good Secretary, na may listening ear naman ang Pangulo, baka ho naman puwedeng gawin na lang ninyo na bukod sa magtanim, hanggang hindi namumunga, bigyan ninyo ng tulog, ng subsidy iyong magsasaka ng niyog.

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, the Secretary says that they can even be included in the loaning program of the Department of Agriculture.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, hindi po assumption iyong sinasabi ko. Ang sinasabi ko is the reality, na hindi lang ho sa probinsiya ko, but in the 31 percent of our agricultural land. Iyon hong sinasabi ko is happening, na ayaw na nila gawing seedlings at ipagbibili na nila. Ang sinasabi po ninyo, gagamitin po iyong levy, that is futuristic. How long will it take them to do that? One simple farmer or association, who will go to court and contest that to the Supreme Court on how you will implement the coco money, ay wala na naman tayong programa. And, that has been happening, Your Honor. Lahat ng magagandang program nila on the application of coco levy, nate-technical po sa court issue.

REP. YAP (A.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, now that the PCA is back with the Department of Agriculture, the Secretary is giving his assurance that the PCA and the coconut sector will be given the type––the same

attention the other commodity groups are getting and will now benefit from the loaning program of the Department of Agriculture.

REP. SUAREZ. Will the good Sponsor be on top of this?


REP. SUAREZ. With your word, magkakaroon ako ng lakas ng loob, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you very much, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Now, can I go to something that is––second to rice is fish. Hindi po ba?

REP. YAP (A.). Yes, your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. I have been trying to marvel what we have done in my province. Kasi po, Your Honor, ang fishing po noong panahon ng lolo mo, Congressman Yap, pupunta ka lang sa dagat at ihahagis mo ang lambat mo, may huli ka na.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. Fishing now is getting deeper, farther and more expensive.


REP. SUAREZ. You use radar, you use sonar, you use modern net, you use faster boat, you use refrigerated or what we call purse seine, kung anu-ano ho. But, there is another solution, the cage fishing. Meaning, a small group of barangay can set aside especially on those sweep area or iyon pong mayroong mga natural cove—on what I have done, 25 meters by 25 meters, Your Honor, nag-harvest po ako ng P175,000 worth of sea bass in 70 days.

We are not just going to concentrate on the galunggong, which we said is a poor man’s fish, but we are talking here of high-value species where ang market natin are the tourists. The tourists are very demanding, Your Honor, especially tourists from Tokyo, Hong Kong and China dahil ang gusto ho nilang kinakain nila ay buhay.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo, fresh fish.

REP. SUAREZ. Hindi ho iyan nila kinakain dahil gusto nila iyong huhulihin pa sa aquarium.

REP. YAP (A.). Opo.


REP. SUAREZ. So, what do we need? We need a regular supply of fingerlings.


REP. SUAREZ. Cong. Tony was with me then. And there was a time when we had to throw one million fingerlings of sea bass to the sea because wala ho kaming mapaglagyan. Now, I would like to find out—ano ho ang programa ng BFAR dito sa pag-o-organize so that we can help not just the fishermen but also the farmers, na habang naghihintay ng kanilang kita, puwede ho ba silang maging fishermen through aquaculture?

REP. YAP (A.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, even with the reductions that were received by the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, they are always constantly upgrading their fisheries centers, especially their fingerling centers, para makapagbigay po sila ng mga planting materials for fishery products. So, they are still concentrated on that. They have effectively modernized more than 16 growing mariculture parks and centers, and they are continually investing in expanding their ability to supply planting materials through fingerlings, Sir.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I will not debate with you on two species, iyon pong bangus at saka tilapia, at saka maaaring iyon pong carp dahil medyo na-perfect na po natin iyan. Wala ho tayong problema diyan. Ang sinasabi ko ho ay high-value species na napakaganda po ng market at napakaganda ng return doon sa mag-aalaga.


REP. SUAREZ. So, with those assurances, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, itong ating pinag-uusapan at pinagdedebatihan will be, maybe, a repetition of what I have been saying all along everytime I have this opportunity to discuss this particular program to the Department.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Villarica). Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. So, I hope the leadership of this House, working together with the Department of Agriculture, can seriously consider one focal point and that is food security?


REP. SUAREZ. With that, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, on behalf of the Minority, we do not have any more questions on the proposed budget of the Department of Agriculture, and we move to terminate its interpellation. (Applause)

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you very much.


REP. VERGARA. On behalf of the Majority, we respectfully join the Minority in closing the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Agriculture (Applause) including attached agencies, and the National Irrigation Administration, Mme. Speaker.

REP. YAP (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Villarica). Congratulations!


REP. VERGARA. We move for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mme. Speaker.

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

It was 9:44 p.m.



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


SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATIONOF H. B. NO. 8169

REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 8169.

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

The consideration of House Bill No. 8169 is hereby suspended.


REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the Additional Reference of Business.

I so move, Mme. Speaker.


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


ADDITIONAL REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

The Secretary General read the following Resolutions on First Reading, Communications and Committee Reports, and the Deputy Speaker made the corresponding references:

RESOLUTIONS

House Resolution No. 2210, entitled:“RESOLUTION CALLING ON THE HOUSE

C O M M I T T E E O N H I G H E R A N D TECHNICAL EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A N I N V E S T I G AT I O N I N A I D O F LEGISLATION INTO THE POLICY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES BOARD OF REGENTS LIMITING THE COMMUTATION OF FACULTY SICK LEAVE BENEFITS ONLY TO ‘SERIOUS OR SEVERE ILLNESSES’ IN CASES OF OPTIONAL RETIREMENT”

By Representatives Tinio and Castro (F.L.)TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 2211, entitled:“RESOLUTION ENJOINING ALL CRUCIAL

LINE AGENCIES OF THEIR STRONG COMMITMENT IN REBUILDING THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS IN REGIONS 1, 2 AND CORDILLERA ADMINISTRATIVE REGION (CAR), THE RESPECTIVE CITIES, MUNICIPALITIES AND BARANGAYS OF WHICH WERE HARD HIT BY TYPHOON OMPONG”

By Representatives Savellano, Ortega (P.), De Venecia, Vargas-Alfonso, Espino, Cosalan, Go (M.), Mangaoang, Ting, Go (A.C.), Eriguel, Aggabao, Ortega (V.N.), Panganiban, Bulut-Begtang, Bataoil, Dy, Cuaresma, Baguilat, Arenas, Chavez, Primicias-Agabas, Singson, Nolasco and Marcos

TO THE COMMITTEE ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT

House Resolution No. 2212, entitled:“A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE

ON ETHICS AND PRIVILEGES TO INQUIRE INTO THE INCIDENT THAT TRANSPIRED ON 29 SEPTEMBER 2018 AT THE NAIA TERMINAL 2, PASAY CITY INVOLVING THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SECURITY PERSONNEL OF THE AIRPORT”

By Representative BertizTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 2213, entitled:“RESOLUTION COM MEND IN G A ND

CONGRATULATING ALLAN REY ‘MIGZ’ SALAZAR FOR WINNING PRESTIGIOUS INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN ARTS AWARDS”

By Representative UmaliTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

House Resolution No. 2214, entitled:“RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE PROFOUND

CONDOLENCES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE FAMILY OF CIRIACO ‘ACOY’ S. CALALANG, KABAYAN PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVE DURING THE SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS”

By Representatives Macapagal-Arroyo, Andaya, Suarez and Salo


COMMUNICATIONS

Letter dated 07 September 2018 of Ms. Catalina G. Leonen-Pizarro recommending Mr. Ulysses G. Garces to replace Representative Eugene Michael De Vera.

Copy of COMELEC Document No. 18-6141 dated 19 September 2018 signed by Atty. Maria Norina S. Tangaro-Casingal, Director IV, Law Department, COMELEC, furnishing this office with copies of Annexes “A” and “B”, respectively, re: Certificate of Nomination and Acceptance of ABS Party-list Organization.

Copy of COMELEC Document No. 18-6283 dated 26 September 2018 signed by Atty. Maria Norina S. Tangaro-Casingal, Director IV, Law Department, COMELEC, furnishing this office with a copy of COMELEC Minute Resolution No. 18-0842 promulgated on 19 September 2018 entitled “In the Matter of the Comment of the Law Department on the Expulsion of Representative Eugene Michael De Vera from ABS Party-list.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Report by the Committee on Transportation (Committee Report No. 879), re H.B. No. 8322, entitled:“AN ACT REQUIRING THE MANDATORY

COMPLIANCE BY ALL MOTORCYCLE R I D E R S A N D O P E R AT O R S T O AUTOMATICALLY TURN ON AND RIDE WITH THEIR HEADLIGHTS ON AT ALL HOURS OF THE DAY AND NIGHT ON ALL ROADS”


recommending its approval in substitution of House Bill No. 1318

Sponsors: Representatives Sarmiento (C.) and Velarde


Report by the Committee on Transportation and the Committee on Appropriations (Committee Report No. 880), re H.B. No. 5111, entitled:“ A N A C T E S TA B L I S H I N G A L A N D

TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) DISTRICT OFFICE IN THE 2ND DISTRICT OF CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

recommending its approval without amendmentSponsors: Representatives Sarmiento (C.), Nograles

(K.A.) and Rodriguez (M.)TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Constitutional Amendments (Committee Report No. 881), re R.B.H. No. 15, entitled:“ R E S O L U T I O N O F B O T H H O U S E S

PROPOSING THE REVISION OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES”

recommending its adoption without amendmentSponsors: Representatives Veloso, Nuñez-

Malanyaon, Marcoleta, Cua, Andaya, Castro (F.H.), Benitez, Velasco-Catera and De Vera



OMNIBUS CONSIDERATION OF LOCAL BILLSON SECOND READING

REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, we move for the omnibus consideration of the following local bills contained in the Calendar of Business for Thursday and Friday: House Bill No. 8302, contained in Committee Report No. 878; and House Bill No. 5111, contained in Committee Report No. 880.

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


REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we open the period of sponsorship and debate by considering the respective Explanatory Notes of the said bills as the sponsorship speeches on the said measures.


REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, considering that there are no Members who wish to interpellate or speak against the measures, I move that we close the period of sponsorship and debate.


REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, we move that Committee amendments, if any, be considered and approved.



REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, there being no other Committee amendments and no individual, I move that we terminate the period of amendments.


REP. MARCOLETA. Mme. Speaker, we move for the omnibus approval of these two bills on Second Reading.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Objection, Your Honor.

REP. MARCOLETA. What is the objection?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Villarica). What is the objection?

REP. BRAVO (A.). We do not have any copy of the proposals being sought for approval.


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

It was 9:53 p.m.


At 10:08 p.m., the session was resumed with Deputy Speaker Raneo “Ranie” E. Abu presiding.

* See MEASURES CONSIDERED (printed separately)


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The session is resumed. The Majority Leader is recognized.

May I recognize the Deputy Minority Leader, Rep. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD.

REP. BRAVO (A.). With the commitment, Mr. Speaker, from the Chairman of the Committee on Legislative Franchises that the concerns of our colleagues here will be addressed relative to the issues raised, I withdraw my motion.


REP. NOEL. May I reiterate our earlier motion, Mr. Speaker, for the omnibus approval of the said local bills on Second Reading.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

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

SEVERAL MEMBERS. Aye.

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

OMNIBUS APPROVAL OF LOCAL BILLSON SECOND READING

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

The two bills are hereby approved.



REP. NOEL. Mr. Speaker, I move for a minute suspension of the session.


It was 10:09 p.m.


At 10:11 p.m. the session was resumed with Deputy Speaker Sharon S. Garin presiding.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The session is resumed.




REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 8169, and that the Secretary General be directed to read only the title of the measure.

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

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

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No.

8169, entitled: AN ACT APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES FROM JANUARY ONE TO DECEMBER THIRTY-ONE, TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Majority Leader is recognized.

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, the parliamentary status is that we are about to begin the consideration of the budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways, including its attached agencies and corporations. For this purpose, Mme. Speaker, may we acknowledge the presence of officials from the DPWH led by Secretary Mark Villar, Usec. Rafael Yabut, Usec. Maria Catalina Cabral, Usec. Dimas Soguilon, Usec. Emil Sadain, Usec. Ardeliza Medenilla, Usec. Roberto Bernardo; and the heads of the attached agencies: Admin. Jeci Lapus from LWUA; Admin. Reynaldo Velasco from MWSS; and Executive Director Luisito Clavario for the Road Board.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). We welcome Secretary Villar and the rest of the DPWH family to the House of Representatives.


REP. SALO. For this purpose, Mme. Speaker, may we recognize the Sponsor of the budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways, Rep. Celso L. Lobregat from the First District of Zamboanga City to sponsor the budget.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). I guess that is a motion. Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Honorable Lobregat is recognized to sponsor the DPWH budget.

REP. LOBREGAT. Mme. Speaker, I am ready to answer any questions that our colleagues may wish to propose.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable Lobregat.


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, may we recognize the Representative from the First District of Lanao, Cong, Mohamad Khalid Q. Dimaporo, for his interpellation.



The Hon. Mohamad Dimaporo is now recognized. Please proceed.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, is the honorable Sponsor willing to entertain some clarificatory questions and policy questions regarding the DPWH?

REP. LOBREGAT. Gladly, I will try to answer your questions to the best of my ability, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, to start with, I would like to request this from the honorable Sponsor so we can place it on the record. What is the budget of the DPWH for the region of Mindanao for the year 2019?

REP. LOBREGAT. The budget for the Mindanao—

when you talk of the ARMM, the regular budget in the ARMM is P4 billion; the Local Infrastructure Project or LIP is P556 million; when you talk of Region IX, also lodged in the ARMM is P1.5 billion; LIP- P280 million. For Region X, you have P1 billion and P145 million, respectively. Then, you also have Region XII, P1 billion for the regular budget and P131 billion for the LIP.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, I would like to know the total budget of DPWH funds for 2019 in the region of Mindanao?

REP. LOBREGAT. In the region of Mindanao, the total budget is P151.6 billion.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, moving forward, I would like to request from the honorable Sponsor the DPWH budget, not for the ARMM, but for Regions IX, X and XII, respectively.

REP. LOBREGAT. Can we submit that, Your Honor?

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). If you can give me a rough estimate, that would be fine, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LOBREGAT. The total ARMM regular budget is P4 billion and the LIP or Local Infrastructure Project is P556 million, for a total of P4.556 billion.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, I am requesting for the RDC-approved budgets for Region IX, Region X and Region XII. These are our respective regions, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LOBREGAT. If you talk of Region IX, it is P21.6 billion; Region X, it is P42.14 billion; Region XI, P47.12 billion; Region XII, P16.37 billion; and Region XIII, P24.7 billion.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and again I am just doing this to put things into perspective. The total budget for Mindanao, what was said by the honorable Sponsor is P151 billion, roughly.

REP. LOBREGAT. That is correct.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). If we go to Regions 9, 10 and 12, for Region IX, it is P21 billion, roughly; Region X, it is P42 billion, roughly; Region XII, P16.3 billion, roughly. As the Vice Chairman of the ARMM I hope that the Sponsor can confirm or at least just trust me that in the ARMM, inside the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, the DPWH infra budget is P10.1 billion, Mme. Speaker. I just want to put all of these on the record so we can have things placed in perspective. Now, Mme. Speaker, can I request the technical staff to place my presentation on the screen.

During the budget briefing, Mme. Speaker, I requested the honorable Secretary for some data and the good Sponsor actually beat me to the punch earlier. The policy issue that I would like to present are the two budgets that are being implemented inside the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao: one is a budget that we passed here in Congress for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao. The other is a budget that we passed here in Congress for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao through the DPWH. Now, in the data that was given to me by our good DPWH family, you can see there that for 2019,


the budget for Region IX is P2.28 billion; for Region X, it is P1.145 billion; and for Region XII, it is P1.131 billion, for a grand total—just like what our honorable Sponsor said—of P4.556 billion.

May I have this confirmed, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). So, again, there are two budgets being implemented for the ARMM. When I brought this up to the Budget Secretary, the answer of Secretary Diokno to me was, “No, that’s fake news.”

“You cannot implement a program through one region to another region.” And then, when I brought this up in the DPWH budget briefing, I asked Secretary Mark Villar, “You know there are two budgets here. Is this your prerogative, for the DPWH to implement for the ARMM? Because they have their own Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao DPWH. They have the capacity to implement these projects. Dagdag lang na trabaho ito for the DPWH.” Ang sagot ni Secretary Mark Villar to me was, “Well, as far as the DPWH is concerned, we leave it up to Congress to pass the budget and when the budget is passed, then the DPWH will implement it to the best of our ability, with transparency and efficiency.” That was his answer to me in the budget briefing.

I would like to move forward, Mme. Speaker. Can I see the next slide please. (Slide presentation)

This is the breakdown of the ARMM budget. In the ARMM in Region IX, which is Zamboanga Peninsula—Zamboanga Peninsula actually caters to Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. So for Region IX, roughly P500 million is placed in Basilan, P1 billion in Sulu, and P500 million in Tawi-Tawi. In Region X, the DPWH is being given a budget to implement projects inside Lanao del Sur and P1 billion is given to Lanao del Sur through DPWH Region X. In Region XII, I think P1.2 billion or P1.02 billion is given to Maguindanao through Region XII.

Again, Mme. Speaker, I just want to establish that what we are passing, included in the NEP, which is transparent and itemized for the DPWH budget, are projects for the ARMM downloaded to Regions IX, X and XII to be implemented in the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, and Maguindanao.

I would like to see the next slide please, Mme. Speaker. (Slide presentation)

I want to establish, Mme. Speaker, that this is also not new news. This has been a practice, I think, since the creation of the ARMM and I would like to thank the DPWH family for giving my office the data needed so that we can see the budget that is being given to the ARMM through Congress, and what is being given to the ARMM through the DPWH. These are all infrastructure funds. According to the data that I was able to get from our Regional Directors, from

2013, roughly P1.5 billion was given to the ARMM infra budget and P2.1 billion was given to the ARMM through Regions IX, X and XII. In 2014, it was P2.9 billion to the ARMM infra budget and roughly P3.9 billion to Regions IX, X and XII. Then, there was a jump in 2015. In 2015, P10.1 billion was given to the ARMM and through Regions IX, X and XII, P7.1 billion was implemented through the DPWH. In 2016, P10.1 billion was given to the ARMM and through Regions IX, X and XII DPWH, P9.9 billion was implemented for infrastructure projects.

So, again, I am saying this to establish that there are historical precedents; there is nothing new, there is nothing that we are trying to hide here and quite frankly, what I also want to establish is, you know, there is a misnomer when we say, especially when we had the debate on the Bangsamoro Basic Law, that the ARMM is only getting finance. The ARMM is getting their budget on top of that additional infrastructure funds through DPWH Regions IX, X and XII, which is actually very hard to catch unless you ask the DPWH directly, Mme. Speaker.

May I have this confirmed by the honorable Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Definitely, your figures are correct and definitely, historically, the DPWH has been implementing projects in the ARMM through Regions IX, X and XII. It was only, I think, last year or the year before when there occurred a problem when this was questioned in the Senate and after that, they have had difficulty in implementing projects because the ARMM Law states that the Regional Legislative Assembly has to be involved in the implementation of the projects and the projects should be done by the ARMM itself.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. I would like to move to my next slide. (Slide presentation) Now, it is hard to read but, basically, that is my basic understanding as a neophyte Congressman on how we do our budgets here. On the left side, it is the DPWH budget for any standard Congressman and my understanding—it is hard to read so I will just explain it, honorable Sponsor— is that all of our Regional District DPWH budgets start from the DEO; the DEO will put together the budget and they will submit it to the Regional Offices; the Regional Offices would then present it to the Regional Development Council; then the Regional Development Council will endorse it to Central Office; the Central Office will endorse it to the DBM; then the DBM will bring it here to Congress; and then here in Congress, we will approve it and it will be part of the GAA. That is my basic understanding of our process.

Now, to share with everybody, my basic understanding of the ARMM process is, in the


ARMM, it starts with the Infrastructure Convergence Committee, which is basically the municipalities’ and the provinces’ planning officers, and they come up with a three-year development plan. Then it goes to the Regional Infrastructure Development Committee, which are the ARMM line agencies, cross-checking each other and putting together a development plan for infrastructure. Then, it is turned over to the Regional Economic Development Planning Board which is, to my understanding, their equivalent of the RDC. Now, when the Regional Economic Development Planning Board approves the infrastructure budget, it goes to the DBM and the DBM brings it to Congress and we pass the ARMM budget here. When we pass the ARMM budget here, it becomes part of the GAA, then it goes back to the ARMM and the RLA passes the Public Works Act. And this is how they implement infrastructure projects.

Now my question, and this is the policy issue, Mme. Speaker: in the RDC, we approve our DPWH Projects. In the ARMM, I hope I have made it clear that they approved also their infrastructure budgets. Now, when I looked at the RDC budget, and I served as RDC Chairman INFRACOM, I served as RDC Chair of Northern Mindanao, I do not ever remember passing a budget to be implemented inside the ARMM. Then, when I serve here in Congress as the Vice Chairman of Appropriations for the ARMM, I looked at the budget of the Regional Public Works and I did not see these projects, like this P4.5 billion manifested inside the budget of the Regional Public Works. So, where does this emanate from? This is the policy question that I would like to ask, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LOBREGAT. My dear colleague, I think we have to look at the realities on the ground. We have Congressmen from the ARMM here in Congress, and they too are proposing certain projects to be implemented in their own respective districts. If you look at the historical performance of the ARMM, unfortunately, the implementation by the ARMM has really been found to be wanting. So, it is because of this situation that the Congressmen and Congresswomen from the ARMM, more or less, traditionally, historically placed the different appropriations that they have identified in the three regions.

So, that is the context, that is the situation. Of course, there is the ARMM Law and because of the ARMM Law, this was questioned, I think, last year or the year before in the Senate, and because of that, there was a shift in the manner of implementation. In fact, the ARMM Congressmen are also complaining that what was supposed to be given to their respective districts was taken out and was placed in the budget for free tuition. That is why you also have to understand while there are policy questions, you also have to realize the realities on the ground.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). I understand, Mme. Speaker, and in a nut shell, what I surmise is that this is basically political accommodation.

Now, I would like to move to my next slide, Mme. Speaker. My next slide, Mme. Speaker. (Slide presentation) I actually looked for the purpose of this P4.5 billion because all of us—as a Congressman of the First District of Lanao del Norte, I just want to support the DPWH family and their mandate, which is to make sure they maintain and we have nice national roads in the First District of Lanao del Norte, in Zamboanga City and all of the different congressional districts here. We leave it to them and their expertise to put together a budget so that they can properly fulfill their mandate. Now, if what is happening inside the ARMM for the projects or the budget that is being implemented through DPWH Region IX, X and XII, then that means that there should be an inventory of the highways or national roads being kept by the DPWH Central Office.

Now, Mme. Speaker, I would like to put on record that I asked—for example, pinapasok nila P2 billion or P1 billion in Northern Mindanao, so I asked Northern Mindanao Region X, “Do you guys have the national roads inventory of Lanao del Sur?” Ang sagot ng Region X DPWH is “No, we only maintain the national roads. We only have a database for the national roads in Region X.” I am guessing that is the same thing also in Zamboanga Peninsula, and that is the same thing also in SOCCSKSARGEN. The next question is, as we want to implement and support the DPWH family, so this has to be more than just political accommodation. This should be about fulfilling the promise of the national government that we will have clean, efficient and well-maintained national roads. For us to do that, we need an inventory of national roads.

I could not find it in Northern Mindanao, so I asked in the ARMM, and this is all they gave to me—you can barely read it. It is not even an inventory of national roads; it is a simple matrix of what they have accomplished, and it says here that they have accomplished or paved 943.36 kilometers and 49.5 kilometers are still unpaved. More or less, 95 percent of their “national roads” are paved and the remaining 5 percent are still unpaved. I have not seen the same inventory I saw when I requested a national roads inventory and database from the DPWH family in Northern Mindanao.

So, I would like to confirm this from the honorable Speaker—does that exist, a national roads inventory for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao being held by the DPWH?

REP. LOBREGAT. If you study the ARMM Law, Republic Acts No. 9054 and 6734, the ARMM has their own Department of Public Works and they have their own Secretary of Public Works and as confirmed


by the DPWH officials, they have no inventory of the roads in the ARMM.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. The purpose I am bringing this up is because the budget is not only being thrown in our region, like for example, Northern Mindanao, but along with the budget is the work, dagdag na trabaho. So, for me, as a Representative of Northern Mindanao, I want to make sure that my regional DPWH is not being abused. For example, when you say, in the ARMM they will take care of local roads, pagkatapos sa labas ng ARMM—Northern Mindanao, Zamboanga Peninsula, SOCCSKSARGEN—they will take care of national roads, the next question, if there is no inventory, how do you define national roads?

All of us here in Congress, when we want to have national roads in our districts, what do we have to do? We have to file legislation and create those national roads, but how is it being done inside the ARMM? It is unfair naman if it is just turo, turo, turo—itong area na ito national road, itong area na ito national road. Pagkatapos on top of that, dagdag ng trabaho sa Northern Mindanao. That is the policy question that I am asking, Mme. Speaker, and I would like to bring out here in the floor.

REP. LOBREGAT. That is why, my dear colleague, you and I were part of the Bicameral Conference Committee on the Bangsamoro Organic Law, and we have corrected the situation by putting the necessary provisions that allow the DPWH, I think, to even put an office inside the ARMM to implement national projects. So, let us move forward. Things have happened in the past that, more or less, were not to our liking, or the ARMM did not perform its task to the level that they should have, but with the passage of the Bangsamoro Organic Law, we hope we can correct all of these issues that you are bringing to the floor.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Can I have the next slide, please? (Slide presentation)

Mme. Speaker, and I would like to continue on the eloquent explanation of the honorable Sponsor, because this is my second or leads me to my second policy question, that is, Republic Act No. 6734, which is the Organic Law for the ARMM. Basically, in a nutshell, this requires a Public Works Act for the implementation of infra projects inside the ARMM, which will be established and also, inside that law, public works is an exclusive power of the ARMM government.

Can I get the next slide, please? (Slide presentation) Republic Act No. 9054, expanding the ARMM Law, this actually is strongly worded, Mme. Speaker. It says:

The annual budget of the Regional Government shall be enacted by Regional Assembly. Funds for infrastructure in the autonomous region allocated by the central government or national government shall be appropriated through a Regional Assembly Public Works Act. Unless approved by the Regional Assembly, no public works funds allocated by the central government or national government for the Regional Government or allocated by the Regional Government from its own revenues may be disbursed, distributed, realigned, or used in any manner.

Basically, it is saying, the latest law says, how important a Public Works Act that comes from the Regional Legislative Assembly is. You cannot simply implement infrastructure projects inside the ARMM without the approval of the RLA.

Now, Mme. Speaker, I would like to ask again this question to the honorable Sponsor: are we going to follow our own legislation, our own laws that we passed here in Congress? Will the 2019 budget for the ARMM, through the DPWH, require a Public Works Act for implementation, Mme. Speaker?

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garin (S.) relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Rose Marie “Baby” J. Arenas.

REP. LOBREGAT. Again, as I mentioned, when the ARMM budget was brought to the Senate, this was questioned precisely because of this provision. So, there was that year—like I said, P8 billion that was intended for the ARMM was removed from the ARMM and placed in the budget for free tuition. But it is also unfair for the Congressmen and Congresswomen of the ARMM not to have any allocation in their own districts since there are national roads also in the various districts in the ARMM. Like I said, there were discussions, in fact, there were heated arguments, debates. The Secretary and the legal department of the Department of Public Works tried to fulfill or find a way to implement this. They even talked to the ARMM Governor.

My dear colleague, I think, again, we are under a different regime. We will have a plebiscite soon on the Bangsamoro Organic Law and hopefully, all of these issues will come to pass.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and I would like to thank the honorable Sponsor for saying that yes, this is true, it is very unfair. When I spoke to the ARMM Governor when I was about to defend their budget, I actually talked to them, and I asked them, “Why not just give the infra budget or approve a


Public Works Act, at kayo na lang ang mag-implement para walang dagdag ng trabaho in Northern Mindanao?” You know what their candid answer was? “Hindi namin kaya. We do not have enough personnel.”

So, what is unfair is now that we have a Cash-Based Budgeting System and we are judged on our performance, but here comes the ARMM na, putting a ceiling saying that we can only do this much, otherwise, we cannot finish our budget. Pagkatapos, because they can only do that much, tinatapon nila sa Northern Mindanao. That is unfair, Mme. Speaker. That is unfair for us in Northern Mindanao.

So, I would like to move forward and show the next slide (Slide presentation) and, again, this is what our honorable Sponsor was referring to, under a new regime, under the Bangsamoro Organic Law, no longer will they require a Public Works Act for the implementation of national government projects inside the proposed Bangsamoro territory.

Ang problema, Mme. Speaker, is that it is very silent in its implementation. I will read it and it just says, “Public Works and Infrastructure. – The National Government shall fund and implement the construction and maintenance of national roads, bridges, water supply and services, and flood control and irrigation systems and for the maintenance of existing airports, seaports, and wharves in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region x-x-x.”—it does not say if they will have their own DPWH.— “All national roads and bridges in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region shall be included in the National Road Network Information System.”—which is a good thing—“Nationally-funded infrastructure projects shall be implemented by the National Government.”

The reason I am bringing this up, Mme. Speaker, is we had a long debate on this and the honorable Sponsor knows my position. I wanted a DPWH Regional Office to be established inside the Bangsamoro so they no longer have to piggyback the employees of the DPWH inside Northern Mindanao. Unfortunately—everybody knows this here—Mme. Speaker, the status quo was preferred and that was really unfair.

So, moving forward, Mme. Speaker, the reason I am bringing this up is I would like the support, not only of the honorable Sponsor but also of the House of Representatives, that when we implement projects inside the ARMM, they should not only benefit those inside the ARMM. If you are going to use Northern Mindanao, Zamboanga Peninsula, SOCCSKSARGEN, then you should also consider and consult the Representatives in those regions. That is what is fair, Mme. Speaker.

So, moving forward, just like what the honorable Sponsor said, I feel that the Bangsamoro Organic Law is an incomplete law because it does not give details on how the DPWH is going to implement national

roads inside the Bangsamoro and that we need to still do some legislative work on this. So, I hope and pray that the leadership here in the House of Representatives will support me if I file a resolution calling on the DPWH to assist us here in Congress so that we can put together a policy for the implementation of projects inside the Bangsamoro, or for the DPWH to recommend legislation for us to pass here in the Seventeenth or Eighteenth Congress. That is the way forward, Mme. Speaker, that I hope the honorable Sponsor is willing to consider.

REP. LOBREGAT. Definitely, we will ask the DPWH to study the matter and present to us their proposed legislation. The Sponsor would be willing to work together with the Representative from Lanao del Norte and all the other ARMM Congressmen to come up with a possible piece of legislation.

REP. DIMAPORO (M.). Mme. Speaker, I would like to thank the honorable Sponsor. To wrap it up, I would like to also appeal to the DPWH family. This has been happening since the creation of the ARMM in Northern Mindanao, and I am guessing, also in Zamboanga Peninsula and SOCCSKSARGEN. We want to be good neighbors and If they need our help, walang problema iyan, they have our help, but this has been going on for so many years, probably decades.

Now, with the Cash-Based Budgeting System, and with the very strict performance evaluation of Secretary Mark Villar, because he wants to show that the DPWH is efficient under his leadership, medyo damay, that is how I feel, damay ang Northern Mindanao because, unlike other DPWH regions, may dagdag na trabaho. So, I would like to appeal to Usec. Cabral and the kind Secretary Mark Villar to be also kind in evaluating my region that sana lang, when they do a performance evaluation system and they judge Northern Mindanao, it should be based on their jurisdiction, based on the projects they are mandated to implement and not to include the projects that are going to be implemented inside the ARMM.

That is my last manifestation, Mme. Speaker. Thank you so much for the time. Thank you, honorable Sponsor.


REP. LOBREGAT. Definitely, what you are asking for is reasonable, and I am sure that the DPWH, once they start analyzing the projects in Regions IX, X and XII, they should separate the projects that really belong to Regions IX, X and XII, those that are lodged in Regions IX, X and XII for the ARMM.

Thank you, my dear colleague.



REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize Cong. Makmod D. Mending Jr. of the AMIN Party-List for his interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Arenas). The Hon. Makmod Mending is recognized.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and distinguished Sponsor.

Assalamu alaikum and good evening.Iyong first question ko po is regarding savings.

Iyong declaration of savings ng DPWH, kailan po ginagawa?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong usual practice is after the second or third quarter, pagkatapos ng mga bidding.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. From what I know, on February 28, 2018, the declaration of savings and variance was submitted to the DBM by the Department of Public Works and Highways in the amount of P3.7 billion. Would the good Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, please confirm.

REP. LOBREGAT. Definitely, there was this amount, savings and variance, and for January and February, there was P3.7 billion Savings. This were from the projects that were bid out and when they bid out the projects and if the contracted price is lower, then there is savings. There was savings of P3.7 billion.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, because the honorable Sponsor answered that it was supposed to be for the second and third quarters.

REP. LOBREGAT. No, the general practice.

REP. MENDING. Yes.

REP. LOBREGAT. As the DPWH bids out the projects, many of the projects are below the ABC and so, the contract price, of the difference is the savings. That is why they declare it early.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and distinguished Sponsor. Ito po iyong resulta ng polisiya ng early procurement. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho, isang resulta.

REP. MENDING. Puwede po ba tayong mag-request kung para saan po itong na-declare na savings ng DPWH, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, iyong mga projects, sina-submit sa DBM.

REP. MENDING. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, from what I know, if you issue a certification of savings, you are supposed to state also for what purpose would this savings be. Would that be correct, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. According to the DPWH, they do not state what the savings is for. They will state where the savings came from.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Ang intindi ko po kasi, maraming kailangang i-augment na programa, activities or projects iyong bawat ahensiya. So, sa pag-declare ng savings, mayroon na dapat paggagamitan.

Anyway, if I move on to my next question, actually, ang una ko pong sasabihin dapat, Mme. Speaker, ay to congratulate the DPWH family for a quantum leap improvement in your Obligations from 70 percent to 92 percent for last. So, congratulations po, Secretary Villar. Napakalaking improvement, almost 20 percent. Ang question ko po, ano po ang nangyari doon sa utilization rate? Bakit bumaba slightly at 33.6 percent for 2017, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. That is iyong 23 plus percent current year ho.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Kung babasahin ho natin iyong findings ng COA in the 2017 Annual Audit Report, majority of the reasons for the delay, kung bakit nagkakaroon ng ganitong kababang utilization, which is 33.6 percent, ay poor planning. Laging recurring problem o paulit-ulit iyong poor planning. So, ang tanong ko po, mayroon proposed na P7.7 billion para sa FS at mga other preparatory works. Ito po ba ay naka-lodge sa Central Office?

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, iyong iba na-download sa Regional Office ay iyong FS fund.

REP. MENDING. Okay, Mme. Speaker, distinguished sponsor. Para po sa kaalaman natin, ito po ba ay iyong kinakailangan para makapag-prepare sa isang magandang implementation ng programa?

REP. LOBREGAT. Tama iyan.


At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Arenas relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Sharon S. Garin.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and

distinguished Sponsor.Lumalabas po na hindi yata tama iyong paggamit

o kulang ba iyong pondo kung bakit ang rason ay poor planning, ang reason for the delays at iyong poor utilization ng DPWH. Would the distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, comment on this?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes, aside from the issue that you brought up, may mga right-of-way issues, there are disapprovals and difficulty in securing approval, clearances or authorities and other agencies for big projects, sometimes may peace and order situations. So, these are some challenges that the DPWH is facing and these some reasons bakit mababa iyong utilization nito.

REP. MENDING. Yes, marami. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Na-specify ko lang po iyong issue on poor planning kasi paulit-ulit nga po. Every year, every audit report, lagi siyang lumalabas. So, babalikan po natin iyong pondo for feasibility study which is P7.7 billion. Ano po iyong proseso sa paggamit nito?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ito iyong feasibility study fund for 2017 is P5.6 billion; for 2018 is P7.3 billion; and the proposed for 2019…

REP. MENDING. It is 7.7.

REP. LOBREGAT. … is P7.7 billion. Iyong sinabi ko kanina, dina-download ito sa region para puwedeng gamitin sa mga projects, sa malaking project na nangangailangan ng feasibility study. Hindi naman lahat ng projects ay kailangan ng feasibility study. Iyong mga maliliit, hindi naman kailangan ng feasibility study pero iyong malalaki, kailangan ito.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Actually, ang title po dito ay Feasibility Study/Pre-Feasibility Study/Preliminary and Detailed Engineering.

REP. LOBREGAT. Engineering, iyan ho tama.

REP. MENDING. Yes, that is correct. So, that is P7.7 billion?

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho.

REP. MENDING. Ito po ay nakalagay sa Central Office.

REP. LOBREGAT. Pagkatapos niyang na-download.

REP. MENDING. The discretion lies with whom, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, when it comes to downloading these funds, to whatever office or region will it be downloaded?

REP. LOBREGAT. It is, more or less, already identified per region. It is the region that decides on this. Actually, if you want a detailed breakdown per region, we can provide that, we will just submit it.

REP. MENDING. Yes, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Ito po ay nakasulat dito sa GAB…

REP. LOBREGAT. Nasa NEP.

REP. MENDING. Sa GAB na po. So, ang tanong ko po kasi dito, ano po ang polisiya natin pagdating sa PPP dahil mayroon po akong nakitang perang nakalaan galing sa pondo na ito na P390 million para sa feasibility study ng probable PPP. Ang intindi ko po sa private-public partnership, ito ay income-generating for the business corporations or kung anong joint venture man mayroon para sa mga PPPs na ito. Bakit po gagastos ang gobyerno ng P390 million para sa negosyo ng private corporations, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong sinabi ho kanina na dina-download sa region, iba iyon sa pondo para sa PPP projects ho.

REP. MENDING. If I may invite your attention, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, nasa page 775 iyong Feasibility Study for Potential Private-Public Partnership (PPP) Projects. Ito po ay karugtong noong P7.7 billion na nasa page 770. May buong P7.7 billion sa Central Office, pagkatapos, naka-breakdown by region and suddenly, mayroon pong for PPP na P390 million, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong P390 million is for the solicited PPP projects po.

REP. MENDING. Solicited PPP projects, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. These are regular projects to be implemented by PPP. So, some of these projects, let say like DPWH PPP projects for feasibility study, you have the Delpan-Pasig-Marikina Expressway Project, the Davao-Digos Expressway Project, Tarlac-Pangasinan-La Union Project. Marami itong mga PPP projects na ito.


REP. MENDING. Opo, nakita ko po sa listahan, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, iyong Davao Bypass. Ito po ba ay kasali dito sa potential PPP projects?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyon ho, pati operation and maintenance of the Davao City Bypass ho.

REP. MENDING. Intindihin ko lang pong mabuti, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, ang titulo ng pondong ito ay Feasibility Study for Potential Private-Public Partnership, P20 million of which is for Davao Bypass. Ang tanong ko po, gagawa ng feasibility study para sa potential PPP noong Davao Bypass. Tama po ba iyong basa ko, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. For operation and maintenance ho. Basahin ko lang iyong description ho.

REP. MENDING. Okay.

REP. LOBREGAT. It says that “The proposed Davao City Bypass Construction Project which is located within Davao City has an approximate land of 44.6 kilometers length, including the tunnel section, which will start from Davao-Digos section of the Pan Philippine Highway in Toril, Davao City and will terminate intersecting the Davao-Agusan National Highway in Panabo City.” Iyon ang description of the project and it is for the operation and maintenance of that.

REP. MENDING. So, the Davao Bypass Project is a solicited PPP project. Tama po, Mme. Speaker, and distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. So, iyong operation and maintenance will be covered by the PPP.

REP. MENDING. The operation and maintenance of the Davao Bypass project will be under the PPP?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes.

REP. MENDING. What about the Davao Bypass Project itself, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Sa JICA funds.

REP. MENDING. So, JICA po iyong nagpagawa or iyong magpopondo doon sa kalsada.

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong magpopondo.

REP. MENDING. Pero iyong operation and

maintenance ay ipapasok sa PPP and the study, if it is feasible or not, will be the government’s expense?

REP. LOBREGAT. For operation and maintenance, kasi iyong sa Davao City Bypass Road will also include a tunnel.

REP. MENDING. Yes.

REP. LOBREGAT. So, malaking pondo ang kailangan nito, that is why JICA project iyan ho.

REP. MENDING. So, Mme. Speaker, and distinguished Sponsor, ang intindi ko po, kasi sa PPP is income-generating or magkakaroon ng income iyong private partner. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes, opo, kasi kung may private partner, hindi naman mag-i-invest iyong private partner na wala siyang kikitain.

REP. MENDING. Precisely, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Ang punto ko po is dapat iyong private potential partner, siya iyong mag-conduct ng feasibility study at siya rin ang magbayad noong FS kasi investment niya iyon on his part, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong binanggit ninyo is for unsolicited projects pero ito is a solicited project.

REP. MENDING. Sige. Let me move on, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Ang part po dito sa pondo na P7.7 billion ay in relation sa aming Ambal-Simuay River. Isa po akong Maguindanaoan at itong Ambal-Simuay River ay nasa Maguindanao. May I know the status of the Ambal-Simuay River and Rio Grande de Mindanao Flood Control Projects, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. It is still a proposal. It is for submission to the DOF to the China Exim Bank. So, proposal pa lang.

REP. MENDING. May I confirm, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Ito po ay proposal pa lang at wala pang naaaprubahan. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Wala pa pong approved loan ito.

REP. MENDING. Wala pa pong approved loan?

REP. LOBREGAT. Wala pa po.


REP. MENDING. Ito po ay dumaan na sa proseso. Sa current status nito, kailan po iyong projected time, kailan ito maaaprubahan, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Sa first quarter po ng 2019.

REP. MENDING. First quarter of 2019, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo, dalawang quarter. Isang quarter na lang, pagkatapos ay 2019 na.

REP. MENDING. Salamat po.

REP. LOBREGAT. Isang jingle bell na lang.

REP. MENDING. Part po nitong P7.7 billion na pondo ay P94 million na LAPRAP or iyong land acquisition and preparation. May P94 million po na inilagay para sa Ambal-Simuay River at sa Rio Grande de Mindanao. Ang tanong ko po, kung first quarter ang estimate na ang proyektong ito ay maaaprubahan, hindi ba dapat ngayong last quarter ng taon mayroon na tayong LAPRAP para ma-anticipate natin at mas mapabilis iyong pag-implement ng programang ito, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually nag-request na sila sa DBM and they even reiterated that request for the funding.

REP. MENDING. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, puwede ko pong balikan iyong declaration of savings. Mayroon savings na P3.7 billion. May we get a commitment from our distinguished Sponsor na iyong LAPRAP para sa Ambal-Simuay River ay dito na lang i-charge at huwag na lang sa General Appropriations Bill natin for 2019.

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong P3.7 na binanggit mo kanina, tama po iyon, pero ibinalik na ito sa DBM. Kung kailangan, siguro sa DBM tayo hihingi at hindi sa DPWH dahil wala na iyong pera kasi naibalik na sa DBM.

REP. MENDING. Yes, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, mayroon pa po bang available na pondo para ngayong taon para malagyan ng LAPRAP iyong Ambal-Simuay River Project?

REP. LOBREGAT. Puwede po humingi sa DPWH pero magre-request sila. May pending request na po.


Maaasahan po ba natin na magkakaroon ng LAPRAP para sa Ambal-Simuay River bago matapos ang taon?

REP. LOBREGAT. Kung ako ang tatanungin ay sasabihin ko na maaasahan, pero magpa-follow up ang DPWH, especially si Secretary Villar, pati na si Usec Cabral at lahat ng kailangang mag-follow up, mag-follow up na. Kung gusto mo, tutulong din ako.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. I believe that the word of our Sponsor is stronger than the oak tree. Balikan ko lang po iyong ating PPP.

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo, PPP.

REP. MENDING. Iyong findings ng COA for 2017, mayroon kasing rule na bawat kontrata ay kailangan mag-submit tayo ng copy sa COA after five days upon entering a contract. Ngayon, mayroon pong worth P98 billion na limang concession agreements na ipinasok ang DPWH pero hindi sila nag-provide ng copy sa COA. Puwede ko po bang malaman kung ano itong P98 billion na limang concession agreements, at kailan po na-comply iyong pag-submit ng kopya nito sa COA, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Makakatulong po kung ibibigay ninyo sa akin iyong limang proyekto para mas madaling i-follow-up, para madaling makita. According to the DPWH, hiningan sila ng mga dokumento ng COA, na-submit na lahat ang dokumento, pero kung maibigay mo iyong para sa limang project para they can even officially write sa opisina mo, magbibigay ng kopya sa Committee on Appropriations para may record iyong limang projects kung kailan nila na-submit.

REP. MENDING. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, baka po puwedeng baligtarin ko lang iyong mesa. This is an annual audit report where there was a management conference, so, the DPWH is supposed to know these five concession agreements worth P98 billion po lamang—maliit lang naman ito.

REP. LOBREGAT. Anong COA audit report? Anong taon po ba iyan?

REP. MENDING. Noong 2017 po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. 2017.

REP. MENDING. Ganito na lang po. Nagkaroon po ba ng management conference before inilabas itong annual audit report, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?


REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong mga projects dito are the Star Project Construction, Stage 2, Muntinlupa-Cavite Expressway, Daang Hari SLEX, NAIA Expressway, Tarlac-Pangasinan-La Union Expressway. Anyway, they will submit the list and they will give the exact dates they complied with the COA findings.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Alam ko naman po na nagko-comply ang DPWH, ang gusto ko lang malaman ay bakit po natagalan. Iyon lang po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, nag-submit po sila pero sa findings may kulang, kaya nag-submit sila ulit para sa doon sa kakulangan.

REP. MENDING. Mayroon palang kulang kasi nag-appear sa annual audit report na not submitted. Hindi ito na-submit kaya ganoon ang findings.

REP. LOBREGAT. Kulang lang po.

REP. MENDING. Nag-submit sila pero may kulang lang. Sige po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, aasa ako na mapadala ang kopya ng limang concession agreements. Thank you.

Moving on to my next question.

REP. LOBREGAT. Mayroon pa po?

REP. MENDING. We are moving to a regime of a Cash-Based Budgeting. Ang preparation ng 2019 proposed budget ng DPWH, ito po ay binase na sa Cash-Based Budget. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Tama po. Binase ng DBM ito as a Cash-Based Budget.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Paano po natin i-implement iyong road right-of-way fund sa isang Cash-Based Budgeting System na ito? Ito ay lump sum fund, tama po ba? Lump sum ba itong RROW na P28.899 billion?

REP. LOBREGAT. Lump sum po pero may listahan. Actually, itong mga kailangan ay pinopondohan nila.

REP. MENDING. Puwede po bang malaman kung mayroong listahan na nakalagay doon sa RROW pero hindi nakalagay sa General Appropriations Bill? Ganoon po ba ang pangyayari, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong bawat submission nila sa

DBM para sa right-of- way fund ay may listahan. Ano iyong kailangan bayaran—whether infrastructure, iyong lupa kailangan kumpleto—may parcellary survey, may parcel number, ganoon po.

REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Kasi nga po we are moving on to a Cash-Based Budgeting System pero ito ay naka-lump sum, pagkatapos ay gagawa pa lang sila ng listahan at isa-submit sa DBM. So, hindi po sigurado kung mabubuo iyong listahan o hindi.

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, ganoon po iyon. Ngayon na i-implement na ang Cash-Based Budgeting, dapat mauna iyong pag-identify nila ng mga daan na kailangan may right-of-way para matupad iyong Cash-Based Budgeting. I agree with my colleague na talagang lahat ng ahensiya ay mahihirapan sa Cash-Based Budgeting, especially in the first and second years of implementation. Lahat tayo ay medyo maninibago diyan.


May nakita rin akong mga infrastructure projects na nakalista at ang title ng project ay “Various Projects.” Kaya iniisip ko po, paano ka mag-i-implement ng various projects in a Cash-Based Budgeting regime na hindi po natin nakikita kung ano iyong various projects, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang sabi ng DPWH ay naka-identify po iyong projects.

REP. MENDING. I-confirm ko lang po. Mayroong P3 billion sa retrofitting for various buildings, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Sample pa lang iyon. Ano po iyong various buildings na iyon? Hindi ito nakalista kasi sa GAB. Gusto ko lang sana malaman paano tayo mag-i-implement ng retrofitting of various government buildings worth P3 billion, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Basahin ko lang iyong sulat ni Assistant Secretary for Technical Service addressed kay Usec. Cabral. This refers to a memorandum dated June 11, 2018, pertaining to the final list of buildings and bridges for retrofitting in preparation for the Big One. Okay, ano iyong Big One? Ito iyong earthquake na sana ay hindi dumating. It is stated therein: “In this regard, we recommend that out of the amount of P4.3 billion, for consulting services - P400 million; and civil works - P3,950 million for funding under the 2019 budget. Attached is a summary of buildings ang bridges for retrofitting in 2019.”

Nandito po, kumpleto iyong listahan.


REP. MENDING. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Iyong sulat na iyan ay hindi po magiging batas. Iyong General Appropriations Bill, magiging General Appropriations Act at ang nakalagay dito sa batas, retrofitting of various government structures or government buildings. Anytime, puwede mong lagyan ng listahan, Mme. Speaker, pero mawalang galang na po, we are not bound by that letter, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, because the letter of the law is written in the General Appropriations Bill which will become the General Appropriations Act later.

Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, inuulit ko lang po, in a regime of Cash-Based Budgeting, mahirap mag-implement noong various projects na nakalagay.

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo, pero nakalista naman po.

REP. MENDING. Yes, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, inuulit ko po, iyong listahan na iyan hindi magiging batas. Ang batas ay ang General Appropriations Bill pero ang nakalagay doon “various government buildings, retrofitting, P3.9 billion,” Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Anytime, kung anong gusto nilang listahan, iyon ang mangyayari pero iyong sulat na iyan ay hindi batas. Iyon lang ang point na I am driving at, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. We are not bound by that letter, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Siguro ire-refer natin ito sa ating Committee on Appropriations, dahil ang listahan ay, kung gaano kakapal ang listahan ay baka mas lalong kumapal iyong GAB natin.

REP. MENDING. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, ganito na po siya kakapal.

REP. LOBREGAT. Okay, ire-refer ko pa iyan sa Committee kung ano ang puwede nilang gawin, kung dapat e-itemize bawat isa.

REP. MENDING. Moving on, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. The danger of a Cash-Based Budgeting System in our infrastructure program is that it is not realistic. That is the truth of the matter. Magkakaroon po ng napakalaking problema next year at sa mga darating na taon. Anyway, marami pa po kasi ditong mga listahan ng mga naka lump sums, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, sa totoo lang, aminin na natin.

Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, in closing, sana po ma-notify naman tayo doon sa declaration of savings kasi first quarter pa lang, hindi po ba? Kung mayroon tayong early procurement, mayroon kaagad declaration of savings pero later on, magkakaroon pa rin

ng savings. Sana iyong utilization nito ay malaman natin para iyong mga pangangailangan, lalung-lalo na po ng mga district Representatives tulad natin, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, iyong parochial concerns natin ay ma-address.

Marami pa sana akong tanong, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, pero magandang gabi na lang. Maraming salamat po.

REP. LOBREGAT. Salamat din po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable Mending.


SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 8169

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 8169.

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


REFERRAL OF H. RES. NO 2212 IN AID OF LEGISLATION

TO THE CTTEE. ON ETHICS AND PRIVILEGES

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, in accordance with our Rules Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation, I move that we refer House Resolution No. 2212 to the Committee on Ethics and Privileges.




REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 8169.

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


REP. SALO. The parliamentary status, Mme. Speaker, is that we are in the period of interpellation


and debate on the budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways and its attached agencies.

Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we once again recognize Cong. Celso L. Lobregat from the First District of Zamboanga City to sponsor the budget of the DPWH.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Lobregat is recognized.

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize Cong. Antonio L. Tinio from ACT TEACHERS Party-List for his interpellation.


The Honorable Tinio is recognized for his interpellation.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker, kagalang-galang na Sponsor.

Mme. Speaker, of course, pinagmamalaki ng Duterte administration na ang pinaka-flagship na programa ng kanyang administration ay iyong tinatawag na Build, Build, Build Program—infrastructure. Ito talaga ang diin ng administrasyon dahil ayon sa kanila, ito daw ay isang susi sa lalong paglago ng ekonomiya, pang-akit ng investment, et cetera. Kaya po nakikita natin ang tuloy-tuloy na paglaki ng inilalaang budget sa DPWH, at least up to 2018. Ngayon, importante po na malaman din kung sa loob ng nakaraang dalawang taon, paano na-implement ng DPWH ang mga proyekto na pinaglaanan ng pondo ng Kongreso.

Kaya po nababahala tayo sa COA Report na lumabas, partikular para sa taong 2017, at nalathala ito sa media, kung saan napag-usapan na malaking bilang diumano ng mga proyekto ng DPWH actually ay delayed or hindi na-implement. For example, according to the COA Report for 2017, may natukoy ito na P388.2 billion worth of delayed or non-implementation of infrastructure projects. Sabi dito, only P222. 7 billion or 34.14 percent was disbursed of the P610.9 billion obligated for 2017.

Bagaman nabanggi t ko kanina na may signipikanteng improvement sa obligation rate ng DPWH noong 2017, tumaas ng something like 20 percent iyong obligation rate pero 34.14 percent lamang iyong na-disbursed sa pondong ito. So, mabigat po ang finding na ito ng COA na ang sinasabi, sa halip na may aktuwal na naitatayo ang DPWH, nasa more or less one third lamang ang naipatatayo nito. Ano po ang paliwanag ng DPWH dito?

REP. LOBREGAT. Tama ho ang sinabi ninyo. Of the total allotment received, P662 million for Calendar

Year 2017, only P619,933,192 or 92.19 percent was obligated. However, only P222,661,000 or 34 percent was disbursed due to the delayed or non-implementation of infrastructure projects. Ang sagot ho nila diyan, the DPWH acknowledged that COA observation on the unobligated balance as of December 31, 2017. Although the DPWH had not fully utilized the allotment, they had improved a lot from the 92 percent absorptive capacity for 2017 compared to 2016 which was 77 percent; 2015 at 83 percent and 2014 at 71 percent. As to the disbursement, if we include the prior years payable based on the past four years, the DPWH disbursed P372 million which was 56 percent. So, iyon ho ang explanation.

REP. TINIO. Ang explanation po, at inaamin ito ng DBM, may kakulangan sila sa disbursement pero bilang pambawi, may improvement daw sa obligation kumpara sa mga nakaraang taon at 92 percent ang obligation rate ngayon.

REP. LOBREGAT. Saka iyong disbursement rate ho, medyo tumaas din.

REP. TINIO. Okay, Para malinaw po, for the record at para malaman sa publiko kung ano ang pinag-uusapan natin kapag sinabing disbursement, iyan na po iyong aktuwal na pagbayad noong pondo sa mga contractor at ginagawa lamang ito kapag mayroon nang aktuwal na naipatayo iyong contractor. Kaya po mabigat iyong sinasabi na sa P610.9 billion na na-award sa mga contractor ay P227 million, parang roughly one-third nga lamang iyong aktuwal na may naipatayo na sa mga proyekto. So, ibig sabihin, iyong mga aktuwal na mga kalsada o building o tulay, isa sa bawat tatlo lamang na proyekto ang aktuwal na nagagawa para sa taong 2017.

Kumusta naman po sa 2018? Alam natin hindi pa tapos ang 2018 pero siguro may datos tayo ng disbursement for, siguro, up to June of this year.

REP. LOBREGAT. Totoo ho ito. As of August 2018, the DPWH received a total of P688 billion allotment and they obligated P566 billion which is 82 percent of obligation rate. The obligated amount of P566 billion is 44.8 percent of P1.75 billion, higher than what was obligated in 2017 for the same period. Also, iyong disbursement ho increased by 64.2 percent or P147 billion from P229 billion in 2017 to P376 billion in 2018 for the same period. So, tumaas din iyong performance nila. Iyong indicators both sa obligation and disbursement ho ay nag-i-improve naman sila.

REP. TINIO. Nag-i-improve naman po. Muli, puwede po bang mabanggit iyong mga pangunahing


dahilan kung bakit may delay sa implementasyon ng mga proyekto? Ano iyong number one po na dahilan—iyong mga pangunahing dahilan?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong binanggit ko kanina—may right-of-way issues; may paghihirap kumuha ng mga approvals, clearances sa mga awtoridad, sa ibang mga ahensiya; minsan, may problema sa peace and order. May problema rin sa government procurement—iyong pagbidding natin kaya pinag-aaralan kung paano puwedeng baguhin iyong procurement process dahil minsan marami iyong failure of bidding.

REP. TINIO. Okay. So, ang nabanggit po ninyo ay right-of-way, issuance of clearances, peace and order, at saka procurement o iyong procurement process mismo ngayon.

REP. LOBREGAT. At saka ho isa pa—Obligation-Based iyong budget natin. So, halimbawa, may isang proyekto na matatapos ng tatlong taon, and under the Obligation-Based, ibi-bid out iyan. Pero iyong pag-analyze natin diyan ay iyong pondo magagastos sa susunod na taon pa, iyong sunod na taon. Iyan nga ang isang rason bakit ginawang Cash-Based Budgeting para sa mga malalaking proyekto na kailangan multi-year kasi multi-year din iyong obligation. Ang ilalagay lang sa budget ay iyong magagastos sa current year ho.

REP. TINIO. Para sa taon na iyon?

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo.

REP. TINIO. So, well, ang concern lang natin, Mme. Speaker at G. Isponsor, iyong mga nabanggit ninyong mga pangunahing dahilan katulad iyong right-of-way, issuance of clearances, peace and order, et cetera, ay hindi po kaagad na malulutas ang mga iyan, walang simpleng solusyon diyan. Kung gayong sa Cash-Based Budgeting ang ginagamit na batayan sa paglaan ng pondo sa isang ahensiya ay iyong actual disbursements—essentially, iyong disbursement rate ng agency—hindi po ba na sa halip na dumami pa ang mga proyekto na napopondohan at maipapatayo ay mangangahulugan ito na mas maliit na bilang ng mga kalsada, mga classrooms, mga tulay, multipurpose buildings, and so on ang maaasahan ng taumbayan dahil sa Cash-Based Budgeting.

REP. LOBREGAT. In a way, I agree with my colleague dahil, siyempre, lahat ng ahensiya, kung i-determine iyong performance nila sa pagpapatupad ng Cash-Based Budgeting, ang tendency ho niyan is to become conservative in your projection of the projects. I fully agree with my colleague.

REP. TINIO. Well, opo, at ni-raise din po natin ang concern na ito sa deliberation natin sa budget ng DepEd na ang isang lumilitaw na problema ngayon—taon-taon ang projection ng DepEd, ang kailangan nila ay 10,000 new classrooms para lang makaagapay doon sa annual increase in enrolment due to, you know, population growth. Pero batay sa performance ng DepEd, historical performance ng DepEd, ang kaya lang daw nilang ipatayo na bilang ng mga classrooms sa isang taon ay nasa 7,000 classrooms per year, kaya para sa 2019, ang proposed budget ng DepEd for classroom construction is only 7,000 per year. In other words, dahil sa Cash-Based Budgeting, sa halip na matugunan iyong backlog ng mga classrooms, ay lalong lalaki iyong backlog ng mga classrooms.

Parang ganoon din ang naging issue sa budget ng National Housing Authority na pinag-usapan natin kahapon, na mayroong existing backlog of over 5 million housing units, at ang sabi ng NHA, ang target daw ng Duterte administration ay makapagpatayo ng 50,000 housing units annually until 2022. Again, sa track record ng NHA, hindi nila kayang magpatayo ng 50,000 units in one year at sinasabi nila ay hindi lang daw isang taon ang gestation period ng mga housing projects. Kaya lang dahil Cash-Based, in fact, P360 million lang ang ibinigay na budget para sa NHA at ang budget na ito ay para sa social preparation lang at ni hindi nga para sa pagpapatayo ng, kahit isa man lang housing unit.

So, idinidiin lang natin, Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, iyong mga problemang nakikita natin sa Cash-Based approach sa sitwasyon na pinanggagalingan natin, na may malaking shortage o mga backlog sa infrastructure, whether these are roads, bridges, classrooms or housing units. Sana po ay maunawaan ng ibang mga kasamahan natin ito at nang makahanap tayo ng paraan para mapondohan iyong mga natutukoy nating mga kakulangan.

Okay. Isa pang mayor na punto, at siguro marami ibang mga observations ang COA, pero isa pang mayor na punto ng COA Audit Report ay iyong inefficient or incomplete implementation of infrastructure projects for 2017. Ang sabi dito ng COA ay P80.1 billion worth of projects daw, to quote:

The DPWH was not able to efficiently implement its infrastructure projects as indicated by the following: 2,334 projects worth P62.6 billion were not completed; 135 projects worth P6.1 billion were suspended; 15 projects worth P2.1 billion were terminated; 815 projects worth P2.6 billion were unimplemented; and 120 projects worth P6.7 billion were delayed projects and have already incurred negative slippage of 15 percent but no liquidated damages were imposed on the contractors nor were the contracts rescinded or terminated.


So, iyon po. Ano po ang masasabi ng DPWH sa ganitong findings ng COA na hindi nakukumpleto o nasususpinde, hindi napapatupad ang mga proyekto?

REP. LOBREGAT. Okay. Actually, kapag may COA Report, may parang management conference, hindi ba, may exit report at pagkatapos ay mini-meet iyong ahensiya tungkol sa audit findings. Ang ginawa ng management ay ganito, the management has the following actions taken: 1. constantly reminded the implementing offices to fast-track the implementation; 2. issued memorandum to them to complete 2018 and prior years’ projects; and 3. Deducted liquidated damages from the contractor’s billing.

So, ito iyong ilang ginawa ng mga ahensiya tulad ng DPWH tungkol diyan sa kakulangan o delayed implementation sa mga proyekto ho.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Well, iyan po ang mga ilang mga mayor na concerns naming na nagmumula sa findings ng COA Audit na nais nating i-raise dito dahil nga itinuturing ng Duterte administration na flagship ng kanyang administrasyon ang Build, Build, Build. Nakikita natin na bagaman nandiyan ang pondo pero sa iba’t ibang kadahilanan ay hindi nararamdaman o hindi nakikita ng mga mamamayan ang mga aktwal na proyekto sa iba’t ibang kadahilanan.

Ngayon, nabanggit ninyo kanina na isang factor na nakakapagpabagal sa implementasyon ng mga proyekto ay iyong usapin ng right-of-way. Ngayong 2018 ay may pondo po na humigit-kumulang P50 billion para sa right-of-way. Noong nakaraang taon, may mga katanungan na ni-raise ako at ng ibang mga kasamahan natin kaugnay dito dahil nga tila isang malaking lump sum ito at in the past, may mga issues regarding corruption connected to the use of right-of-way funds. Maaari po bang magbigay ang Sponsor ng update kung paano na nagagamit ito, kung ano na ang status ng pondo na ito sa 2018 budget?

REP. LOBREGAT. Sa 2018, ang na-release ng DBM is P572 million ho.

REP. TINIO. Okay, so, just for the record, sa 2018 GAA, hindi po ba mayroong P50.7 billion na right-of-way funds?

REP. LOBREGAT. Twenty point six ho iyong right-of-way funds sa 2018.

REP. TINIO. Twenty?

REP. LOBREGAT. For 2018.

REP. TINIO. Twenty, okay.

REP. LOBREGAT. Twenty point six.

REP. TINIO. So, P20.6 billion, okay. So, hindi po P50.7 billion?

REP. LOBREGAT. Hindi ho, actually ho, it is P20.55 or P20.6 billion.

REP. TINIO. So, P20.555 bil l ion, okay. Nabanggit ninyo po kanina how much had been released.

REP. LOBREGAT. It was P572 million. Medyo mahal talaga ng kaunti.

REP. TINIO. Ito ay P572 million?

REP. LOBREGAT. Kaunti ho.

REP. TINIO. Ilang porsiyento po iyan?

REP. LOBREGAT. Kaunting–kaunti ho.

REP. TINIO. Kaunting–kaunti..

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo. So, dapat talaga mapabilis iyong pag-implement nila sa right-of-way. Actually ho diyan sa right-of-way, maraming problema rin dahil minsan ay magne-negotiate ka pa, pagkatapos, matagalan pa ito.

REP. TINIO. May mga legal issues and so on.

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo, may mga legal issues ho.

REP. TINIO. Okay.

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang isa pa, katulad doon sa nangyari sa Region XII ba iyon, naging very cautious iyong DPWH tungkol sa use of the right-of-way fund dahil nagkaproblema sa Region XII ho, so, siguro nag-react …

REP. TINIO. Iyong may whistle blower, ito po ba iyon?

REP. LOBREGAT. Nag-react ang DPWH at talagang binubusisi ang lahat ng requirements sa right-of-way.

REP. TINIO. Okay, so, mayroon P20.6 billion na halos hindi pa nagagalaw. In other words, almost intact pa ito.

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo.


REP. TINIO. May P20 billion pa rin na hindi nagagamit pero matatapos na ang 2018. Sa proposed budget ng DPWH, may pondo pa rin po para sa right-of-way?

REP. LOBREGAT. So, ang proposed budget at 2019 is P28.9 billion kaya talaga ho na may kailangan gawin iyong DPWH. Siguro, magdadag sila ng right-of-way agent o kung ano pa ang dapat gawin, pero iyon ang isang problema na dapat ma-address ng DPWH. Actually, kung sasabihin nila iyong allocation sa 2016 was 8.6, the payment released was 7.5; the allocation of 2017 was 19.6 and what was released ho was 18.5; for 2018, may allocation na 20.5.

Okay, iyong binasa ko kanina, P572 million was as of June 30. As of September, ang na-release ho was P3.5 billion na ho.

REP. TINIO. So, P3.5 billion.

REP. LOBREGAT. Pero malayo pa rin sa actual budget.

REP. TINIO. Opo, hindi kasing sama pero malayo pa rin itong P3.5 billion.

REP. LOBREGAT. Malayo pa rin, actually, so, dapat ma-addess ito ng DPWH.

REP. TINIO. Less than 20 percent

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Sa ganyang kalagayan po, pinaninindigan pa rin ba ng Sponsor ang request na hinihinging P20.89 billion ng DPWH para sa right-of-way?

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho.

REP. TINIO. Pinaninindigan pa rin ba ninyo? Dapat bang bigyan pa rin ng ganitong kalaking halaga ang DPWH para sa right-of-way gayong sa taong ito, mayroon silang P20.6 billion at P3.5 billion pa lang ang aktuwal na nagagamit nila. Marami pong ibang mga ahensiya na nabawasan ang pondo na maaaring makinabang sa pondong ito, kaya tinatanong ko po iyong Sponsor kung paninindigan po niya ang P20.89 billion right-of-way funding na ito?

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho, paninindigan nila ho. Susubukan nila.

REP. TINIO. Nila?

REP. LOBREGAT. Lahat nilang magagawa para …

REP. TINIO. So, pinaninindigan, okay, so, noted po ang inyong posisyon.

Huling topic po sa aking interpellation. Well, baka sabihin ito iyong elephant in the room dahil alam naman natin na na-delay ang konsiderasyon ng 2019 budget na pinag-uusapan natin ngayon ng ilang araw, dahil nga sa nagkaroon ng kontrobersiya na may kinalaman— dahil ang unang pahayag noon ay P55 billion daw ang insertions sa budget ng DPWH at ayon sa news reports ay ipinaloob daw ng nakaraang pamunuan ng House of Representatives sa iba’t ibang mga rehiyon. Initially, P55 billion daw ang sinabi, pagkatapos, alam din naman natin na nagkaroon ng Committee of the Whole at doon mayroong tinukoy na P51.79 billion sa iba’t ibang mga rehiyon, NCR, Region I, CAR, Regions II, III, IV-A, IV-B, V, VI, VII, VIII, X, XI, XII at XIII.

Bahagi naman po ng records ng House iyong mga ito, so, hindi ko na babanggitin iyong mga detalye. Alam din natin na sa Committee of the Whole ay naglabas ng resolusyon, ng Committee report ang Committee of the Whole ng Kongresong ito at na-realign iyong P51.7 billion na pondo mula sa proposed budget ng DPWH at inilagay sa iba’t ibang mga ahensiya. May inilagay sa DepEd, P3 billion; may inilagay sa DA, P5 billion; may inilagay sa State Universities and Colleges, P1.2 billion; at sa DOH, naglagay ng total of P6 billion. Kaya lang, ang kalakhan po ay nanantili pa rin sa DPWH at kahit noong panahon ng Committee of the Whole, ay ni-raise po natin it pero iyong Committee of the Whole ay inilagay lamang ang pondo sa tatlong mga tinawag nating lump sums. So, una, P10.8 billion para sa construction/improvement of access roads leading to tourism destinations; pangalawa, P10.79 billion para sa construction/improvement of access roads leading to trades, industries, economic zones and livelihood centers; at pangatlo, P10 billion ay inilagay sa construction of roads and bridges to decongest traffic.

Ang ni-raise po nating question noon ay iyong NEP, National Expenditure Program, na sinabmit sa atin ng Malacañang, including iyong budget ng DPWH, kasama na iyong P55 billion na naging P51.7 billion, at naka-line item na po iyon sa bawat rehiyon. Ngayon, ang ginawa ng Committee of the Whole ay pinull-out ang P51.7 billion na iyan at, iyong nabanggit ko nga na totaling around P31 billion ay pinanatili sa budget ng DPWH pero mga lump sums pa siya. Kinuwestyon po natin kung bakit lump sums ang mga ito at ang sabi po sa akin sa Committee of the Whole ay, well, itanong na lang po at the proper time at magkakaroon po ng line item breakdown para sa mga pondong ito.

Siguro naman po, ngayon na ang proper time kaya po tinatanong ko ang Sponsor—pananatilihin po ba na lump sums ang mga pondong ito? O kung


hindi, mayroon na bang itemized breakdown, line item breakdown kung saan ilalagay ang nabanggit nating P10.8 billion, P10.7 billion, and P10 billion? Iyon po ang tanong natin, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Unang-una ho, iyong pagsabi ninyo ng mga regions, nasabi mo ay NCR, I, CAR, Regions II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, pagkatapos ay tumalon ka ng Regions X, XI, XII, XIII.

REP. TINIO. Tama po, yes.

REP. LOBREGAT. Sinasabi ko sa inyo ho, iyong tinalunan na region ay region ko...

REP. TINIO. Alam ko po iyon. Tama po iyon.

REP. LOBREGAT. … at ako iyong dating chairman ng DPWH. So, at least, kaya siguro ako iyong pinatayo dito para mag-sponsor. Iyan lang ang nakikita kong dahilan. Ngayon, kung itatanong mo kung may line item, ang sagot sa inyo ay at the proper time. Sa tingin ko ho, pag-approve natin nito on Second Reading, in the exigency of time, naka-lump sum pa ho iyan but between Second and Third Readings, at dadalhin pa ito sa Senado, rest assured na ang mga pondong ito ay ibabalik at may line item.

At hindi lang iyong P30 million dahil ang sabi mo: P10.8 for improvement of access roads leading to tourist destinations; P10.792 for improvement access roads to trade, industries, economic zone; pagkatapos, construction of roads and bridges to decongest traffic; and P10 billion. Ito ay more or less P31.5 billion. Iyon ang ilalagay sa construction of tech-voc laboratories, ilalagay iyan sa DepEd, pero ida-download iyan sa DPWH dahil ang DPWH ang magko-construct. Iyong DA, alam naman natin iyong farm-to-market roads, P5 billion lang at kulang talaga iyong farm-to-market roads kaya nga dinagdagan pero ang mag-i-implement nito ay iyong DPWH din. Pagkatapos, iyong State Colleges and Universities, karamihin diyan, ay DPWH din ang mag-i-implement; pati iyong Health Facilities Enhancement Program ay ang DPWH din ang mag-i-implement.

Rest assured ho na kinausap ko ang Majority Leader at may instruction sa Speaker na lahat ito ay i-itemize iyan at the proper time. By tomorrow, hopefully, we will approve the budget on Second Reading but between Second and Third Readings, and between the time that it goes to the Senate at paglabas ng GAA, General Appropriations Act, lahat ito ho ay ma-a-identify into line items.

Dito lang kasi ay nagkaaberya lang tayo, so, try to understand the situation.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Well, my thanks for the frank and honest answers of the Sponsor as to the step-by-

step process that the budget will face between today and tomorrow when the Second Reading approval is expected to happen, and between then and the approval by the Senate and the Bicam. Ang sinasabi ninyo po, actually, iyong pagla-line item nito ay mangyayari pagkatapos na noong approval bukas.

Okay. Actually, dapat inuna ko po ang tanong na ito. Iyong P51.7 billion na ginalaw ng Committee of the Whole, iyon ay nagmula sa budget na sinabmit ng DPWH kasama ng budget na sinabmit ng Presidente sa Kongreso, at palaging sinasabi ng DBM na, actually, ang mga budget ng mga ahensiya katulad ng DPWH, ay nagdaraan po iyan sa mahabang proseso ng budget preparation. Lalo po na ang diwa ng Cash-Based Budgeting, supposedly, sa panahon pa lang ng budget preparation ay, para tunay na mapatupad ang Cash-Based Budgeting, actually, mayroon nang mga paghahandang ginagawa para sa mga proyekto such that kapag na-approve na ang proposed budget for 2019, immediately ay puwede nang ma-award ang mga proyektong ito. Hindi po ba ganoon ang paliwanag sa atin palagi ng DBM? Inihahanda pa lang iyong budget para sa susunod na taon, actually, ang mga ahensiya ay ginawa na ang lahat, fulfilled na ang lahat ng mga requirements at short of awarding the contract during an actual bidding process.

Okay. Ako po, ang assumption ko, dahil sinabmit ng DBM bilang bahagi ng kanyang kabuuang agency budget ang P51.7 billion worth of projects na ito, ay mayroon na pong kaukulang paghahanda na ginawa na para sa mga proyektong ito. Ngayon, nang galawin ng Kongresong ito through the Committee of the Whole ang P51.7 billion worth of projects at ilagay as lump sums, at ngayon, ang sinasabi ng ating Sponsor ay, sa mga darating na linggo at buwan, magiging line item ito, ang ibig pong sabihin niyan ay hindi po dumaan iyan sa sapat na proseso ng preparasyon. In other words, paano maipatutupad ang mga proyekto kung ngayon pa lamang magsisimula ang Kongreso sa pag-identify ng mga projects na ito?

Iyon po ang concern natin, G. Speaker—Mme. Speaker.

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually kung i-compare mo noong nagsimula itong budget process, may sulat na ang DBM sa DPWH at ang sinasabi ng DBM na based on Cash Budgeting, iyong Tier 1 Project, ang recommended level is P123,000,967. So, that was March 20. Sumagot ang DPWH sa DBM at ang hiningi ng DPWH was P123,000,967 for Tier 1, at pagkatapos ay humingi sila ng P527,082,000,000 sa DBM. Sumagot iyong DBM at ang sagot ng DBM ay ang Tier 1 ay dapat P123 million pero iyong Tier 2 will be P356,192,000 or P480,000,000 iyong budget ceiling. Noong lumabas iyong NEP, naging P555 million. Ngayon, kung i-compare mo iyong


NEP, iyong P555 million at pati P480 million level halos parehas lahat sa regular budget ng DPWH for asset preservation—exactly the same—preventive maintenance, rehabilitation construction—parehas na parehas—road network development/widening— parehas—construction of bypass road—halos lahat ay parehas. Ang nagkaiba lang ay para doon sa local programs na ang level ng hiningi sa P480 million was P31,000,000, at iyong level sa NEP was P83 million. Kaya nga ang diperensiya was P51,792,000. These are all local projects. So, kailangan siguro mag-double time iyong mga district engineering offices para maihabol. Hindi ito iyong mga malaki masyadong projects. Siguro, kaya ginawa ito ng House leadership ay para equitable iyong pag-allocate ng amount na ito. So, if all engineering districts will work overtime, maihahabol ho ito.

REP.TINIO. Okay. So, sa inyong pagtingin, ito ay maihahabol.

REP. LOBREGAT. Maihahabol ho.

REP. TINIO. Ang tanong ko po sa DPWH, in the first place, bakit po nag-submit ang DPWH ng budget na may ganitong kalaki at tila hindi pantay na distribution ng mga local projects, lalo sa ilang mga rehiyon. Katulad nga ng sabi ng kagalang-galang na Sponsor, sa Region IX mismo na pinanggalingan ng ating Sponsor ay walang natagpuang mga karagdagang proyekto, pero sa iba ay napakalaki. Palaging binabanggit po sa media iyong kaso ng Region IV-B MIMAROPA na mayroong karagdagang local projects na umabot sa P10.3 billion. Sinabmit po iyan ng DPWH.

REP. LOBREGAT. Hindi ho.

REP. TINIO. Well, iyan po ang nasa NEP.

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang sinabmit ng DPWH ay P480 million. Ang lumabas sa NEP siguro—itinanong ko na iyan kay Secretary, tinanong ko na sa mga undersecretaries, iyong dagdag, from P480 million ay naging P555 million, at ang sabi ay hindi ito galing sa kanila.

REP. TINIO. Okay, importante lang po iyan for the record. Ang sinasabi po ng DPWH Secretary Villar ay hindi nanggaling sa DPWH iyong karagdagang P51.7 billion na mga local projects pero nakapaloob ito sa original proposed budget ng kanilang ahensiya. Ang tanong ko na po ay paano naipasok iyan? Kasi ito iyong sinabmit na libro ng Malacañang. Kung hindi DPWH ang nagpasok niyan, ako po ay gusto kong malaman, sino po ang responsable sa pagpaloob ng karagdagang budget na iyan?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang sagot ko diyan ho, iyan nga rin ang gusto kong malaman pero ang budget na ini-sponsor ko ay iyong budget ng DPWH. Tinanong ko na ilang beses sa DPWH kung sila ba ang nagpalagay ng karagdagang P51.7 billion at ilang beses, paulit-ulit, ang sinasabi ng DPWH, lahat ng mga opisyal galing sa taas at pati sa baba, hindi daw galing iyan sa DPWH.

REP. TINIO. Okay. So, sige po, pinaniniwalaan po natin ang dati nating kasamahan na si Secretary Villar, malinaw ang kanyang statement na hindi galing sa kanila. Iyan ang dumating na budget mula sa Malacañang, so, kung hindi po sa DPWH, puwede po bang sabihing nanggaling sa DBM?

REP. LOBREGAT. Siguro.

REP. TINIO. Siguro.

REP. LOBREGAT. Kaya nga, pero at least, masasabi ko with a straight face, tingnan mo iyong region ko, ito ay walang kaltas, walang dagdag, walang bawas.

REP. TINIO. Opo.

REP. LOBREGAT. Ngayon, hindi galing ito sa DPWH. Kung hindi galing sa DPWH, siguro, tanungin natin sa DBM.

REP. TINIO. Well, itatanong nga po natin iyan, Mr. Sponsor at Mme. Speaker, may pagkakataon pa bukas dahil inaasahan natin na babalik dito ang DBM dahil may schedule pa po ng debate on General Principles. So, para sa akin, napakahalaga po noong statement ni Secretary Villar na hindi galing sa kanya pero napasok sa budget na sinabmit ng Presidente, this is the President’s budget that we received. So, kung naghuhugas ng kamay ang—well, kung hindi sa …

REP. LOBREGAT. Hindi naman naghuhugas ng kamay pero nagsasabi lang ng totoo.

REP. TINIO. Opo, hindi po naghuhugas ng kamay. Ang ibig kong sabihin lang, kung sinasabi niyang wala siyang kinalaman sa budget na ito, I apologize if, you know, I chose a phrase that has maybe a negative connotation, so, hindi po ganoon. Ang ibig kong sabihin, kung malinaw na sinasabi na walang kinalaman, aba ay kailangan malaman ng Kongresong ito kung ano ba talaga ang prosesong pinagdadaanan sa pagbubuo ng budget.

Ngayon, ang huling concern ko na lang po dito, G. Ispiker, ay iyong proseso nga ngayon na pagdadaanan sa mga lump sums na ito na P51.7 billion. Medyo concerned po ako na sinabi ninyo na, probably, mangyayari iyan pagkatapos na ng Second Reading approval bukas. Ang concern ko po doon ay hindi tulad


ngayon na nagdedebate tayo, nag-uusap tayo, at kapag humihingi ng datos ang nagtatanong, binibigyan siya ng datos. Iyong binabanggit po ninyo na pangyayari, hindi na po mangyayari sa mata ng publiko po iyan. So, my concern is transparency.

So, how will the P51.7 billion be reallocated, and you rightly pointed out na hindi lang naman pala iyong P31 billion ang nasa DPWH pero pati iyong mga pondo sa DOH, sa DepEd, sa SUCs. Actually, mga lump sums pa rin iyon dahil hindi pa na-identify per line kung saan, actually, ilalagay iyon. Ngayon, ang concern ko po ay baka mangyari iyan behind closed doors that, you know, even the Members of the House or not all Members of the House will be privy to this process. So, nais ko pong irehistro ang ganoong concern at panawagan sa Committee on Appropriations at sa pamunuan ng House na binabantayan na po tayo ng publiko dahil nalantad po na mayroong insertion na P55 billion. Kumilos ang bagong pamunuan ng House para baguhin ito. Binabantayan tayo ngayon kung saan ilalagay ang pondo na iyan at hindi po matutuwa ang publiko kung malalaman nila na—well, parang mga pet projects ng pinapaborang ilan iyong P51 billion na nakalagay diyan, paghahati-hatian lang ng iba rin pero hindi malinaw kung paano nangyari iyong ganoong hatian.

Iyon lang po ang nais nating ipahayag sa puntong ito. Binabantayan po tayo ng publiko. With that, Mme. Speaker, I end my interpellation.

REP. LOBREGAT. Maraming salamat po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable Tinio.


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we recognize Cong. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao from ANAKPAWIS Party-List for his interpellation.



The Honorable Casilao is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Most of my questions were already asked by my colleagues and other Members.

REP. LOBREGAT. And I suppose they were also answered.

REP. CASILAO. Yes, they were and I am satisfied with what I heard as the answers of the Sponsor.

REP. LOBREGAT. Thank you.

REP. CASILAO. I would just like to limit my questions to some items in the proposed budget. In the recent months, especially just this month, we had been ravaged by bagyong Ompong. The northern Luzon areas, the provinces in the northern Luzon areas were the mostly hit provinces and, in fact, during the deliberation of the Department of Agriculture budget, billions of pesos were declared as an aftermath effect of bagyong Ompong. Now, with regard to infrastructure, mayroon po bang assessment ang DPWH kung magkano po iyong damage to infrastructure brought about by bagyong Ompong?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ongoing pa ho iyong assessment sa infrastructure.

REP. CASILAO. May I get an initial report from the Department of Public Works.

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong actual ho na partial cost of damages ay nasa P6.9 billion broken down into roads, P1.5 million; bridges, P52 million; flood control, P5.278 million; and public buildings, P78 million, for a total of P6.9 billion as of September 26.

REP. CASILAO. May I get a copy of that list?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes, we will submit it.

R E P. C A S I L A O . N o w, i n t h e a n n u a l appropriations, the Department of Public Works and Highways a allotted specific amount for Quick Response Fund or QRF. In fact, for the 2019 proposed budget, I can only see P1 billion under item no. 17 on page 1071 of Volume 1-A. Now, with current P1 billion for the 2019, for the past two years, since the Duterte administration completed only two years in annual appropriations, may I know how much was for the 2016 and 2017?

REP. LOBREGAT. For 2016, it was P1 billion, and for 2017, it was also P1 billion.

REP. CASILAO. So, it was P1 billion for both 2016 and 2017. For the current year, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, how much?

REP. LOBREGAT. For the current year, 2018, it is P1 billion.

REP. CASILAO. So, still P1 billion.

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho.

REP. CASILAO. For the last two years.


REP. LOBREGAT. Yes, for the last three years—2016, 2017 and 2018 ho.

REP. CASILAO. Now, alam po natin na sa 2016 at 2017, may mga malalaki pong mga natural calamities na nangyari. In fact, iba pa po iyong nangyari sa Marawi, ibang kalamidad po iyon. Was the P1 billion QRF for 2016, 2017 and 2018 fully utilized?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes, it was fully utilized, may pending request, pero karamihan ho sa mga pondo na ginagamit para sa mga disaster, typhoon, at kung anu-ano pang nangyayari, nanggagaling iyan sa calamity funds ho.

REP. CASILAO. Calamity funds? Not necessarily or not solely...

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong NDRRMC.

REP. CASILAO. Iyon na nga. That will be my next question because we have the NDRRMC. We have also an appropriation for the DPWH. Now, for instance, if the LGU was hit by a typhoon or suffered a calamity at nag-declare ito ng state of calamity, iyong prioritization of utilizing the available funds, it is the calamity fund. Papaano po iyong tulong ng departamento? When at what instance will the DPWH take its role of augmenting such?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang priority ho kung saan ginagamit ang pondong Quick Response Fund ay para sa mga daan ho.

REP. CASILAO. So, may specific po?

REP. LOBREGAT. National road, oho.

REP. CASILAO. Description lang po...

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyon ang priority ho.

REP. CASILAO. Okay. May request na lang po ang Kinatawang ito, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, for a listing of the utilization for the 2016 and 2017 amounts para maikumpara ko po doon sa mga nakakausap natin na lokal na pamahalaan with regard to—of course, there are instances that LGUs are being passed to the NDRRMC and the DPWH with regard to, siyempre, aid. Tutulungan sila doon sa mga kinakaharap nilang mga nasalanta.

REP. LOBREGAT. Oho. Nag-commit ang DPWH na isa-submit ho nila Iyong sa 2016 and 2017.

REP. CASILAO. Maraming salamat po. My last question, as I promised I will be very brief because all my other concerns were already addressed.

REP. LOBREGAT. Salamat ho.

REP. CASILAO. Ito pong ano—nalilito lang po ako and I would like to be educated—mayroon po tayong item for PPP but at the same time, kanina iyong mga kasamahan natin sa Kongreso ay paulit-ulit na rin pong naitanong itong right of way. Now, dito po ba sa item ng PPP, sa Public Private Partnership, infra projects and the right of way, wala po bang redundancy because I know very well that the right-of-way is applicable to all other infra projects, be it local at lahat po iyon—sa trade, LIP at iba pang mga items dito. Pero sa PPP item amounting to P10,516,245, wala din bahagi diyan ang ROW—solely, wala pong kasama?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong pondo diyan sa PPP is for right of way, dahil iyong civil works ay gagawin ng private partner pero iyong bibili ng lupa ay ang gobyerno.

REP. CASILAO. Precisely, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, my confusion kaya ko po naitatanong ito— may redundancy dahil may separate item ka for right of way pero dito po sa PPP projects, mayroon din po. Again, my particular concern is, hindi naman po sa usapin na nagdududa tayo pero iyong utilization in the course of the implementation of the projects, whatever may be the nature of the projects—PPP or other projects basically na may right of way—iyong appropriation and allocation lang. In layman’s term, malilito ka kung ano ba ito? Pare-pareho ba itong pondo pero dagdag ito over and above the particular item appropriation. So, iyon lang, simpleng ano lang—may proper term ito. Nakalimutan ko kanina kasi na-low batt iyong cellphone ko. Iyon lang mailinaw lang po na hindi naman ito redundancy or hindi naman ito overlapping—for purposes of utilization.

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, hindi redundancy ito dahil diyan mismo sa NEP, mayroon iyong special provisions. Doon sa Special Provision No. 5, Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects, actually, sinasabi pa rito kung anong mga proyekto gagamitin ito kagaya ng Tarlac–Pangasinan– La Union Toll Expressway, Daang Hari—ang dami pang iba. Gnagawa ho ito para to ensure na iyong right of way problem sa PPP projects ay mapondohan, dahil kung isasama pati iyong ibang project ay baka maubos ito, wala ng matira, kaya nga naka special provision ho ang mga iyan.

REP. CASILAO. Well, in a particular item sa right of way, kasama po naman diyan, I understand, itong


masasagaan na mga informal settlers families o mga ISF and, in fact, during the budget deliberation of the National Housing Authority, mayroon pong tinatawag na Convergence Fund so that those who will be affected by PPP projects ay mayroon pong budget for relocation under the item on right of way.

Now, sa particular po na, I believe, the NLEX and SLEX Segment 8.5 connecting road, ang malaking major construction na ito, ang tatamaan po ay estimated 250,000 families. Mayroon naman sigurong paghahanda na po ang DPWH dito. Kaya nga lang po, nagtataka ako dahil maliit po iyong dineklarang census ng NHA. At the same deliberations, I think, yesterday, sabi lang nila is 18,000 lang, according to their census, ang makapag-avail ng on-site at in-city relocation with medium-rise facilities or infra. Ang nabanggit ng DPWH during the Committee briefing, if I can remember, ito ay 67,000. So, hindi ko po maipagtugma ang datos ng NHA at ang datos ng DPWH. Baka at the end of the day, ang magiging kawawa diyan ay iyong mga apektadong komunidad o iyong mga apektadong mamamayan. Ang sabi ng NHA, ang kaya lang nilang i-absorb ay 18,000 pero ang sinasabi ng DPWH ay 27,000. Saan po natin pupulutin iyong 9,000?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong magpi-prevail ho ay iyong actual census and tagging done by the NHA.

REP. CASILAO. Yes, again, ang sinabi ko nga po sa NHA, this Representation will be closely monitoring it because, again, uulitin ko po for the record, ang Kinatawang ito ay hindi tutol sa development, doon sa plano po ng pagtatayo ng NLEX and SLEX Segment 8.5 pero huwag lang po sanang maiwanan sa ere ang ating mamamayan. Dapat po ay nasa unahan sila at kabahagi sila sa anumang proyekto na ang layunin ay development. Dapat po ito ay people-centered development and not development that will only favor certain private business interests.

REP. LOBREGAT. Tama ho kayo at kailangan bantayan ninyo ho.

REP. CASILAO. May I get the commitment of the DPWH to apprise this Representation on a regular basis as to my basis for comparing notes with the National Housing Authority. I already requested a blueprint and the DPWH and DOTr were very accommodating and provided the necessary documents that this Representation requested. However, my future request is—because this project will be starting and in fact, there are reports from the locals na may mga clearing operations na in certain areas or parts and to me, because I am very willing to take an active part at hindi lang po active part sa implementation, but in overseeing the social concerns about the project, that is the interesting part for this Representation as that is what needs some intervention.

REP. LOBREGAT. May commitment ho sila, actually—hindi lang si Secretary Villar, pati si Usec. Cathy—lahat sila, they are committing to update you on a regular basis ho.

REP. CASILAO. Maraming salamat, distinguished Sponsor. I have no more questions, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LOBREGAT. Salamat.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable Casilao.


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, for the last interpellator, may we recognize Minority Leader Suarez for his interpellation.



The Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez, is recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Will the distinguished Sponsor yield to some very short questions?

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes. It will be my honor to answer the questions from the distinguished Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, using the Cash-Based Approach, the Department or the DPWH has total available appropriations of P555.7 billion. Is that correct, Mme. Speaker? This is higher by 113. What is the rationale behind the budget increase?

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually ho, iyong Cash-Based Budgeting ho, iyong objective niyan, is to only put in the budget what can be spent for that particular year. Medyo lahat tayo ay nabigla dahil hindi pa naipasa iyong Budget Reform Act—pumasa sa House at nasa Senado—pero ini-implement na iyong Cash-Based Budgeting. Frankly, maraming problema, at maraming departamento ng medyo nabigla dahil sanay tayo sa Obligation-Based Budgeting. Ang pinanggalingan natin ay may two years ang life span ng budget. Pagkatapos, ginawang isang taon at Cash-Based Budgeting. So, dito sa unang taon na ini-implement natin, talagang it is a very, very big challenge, not only to the DPWH, but to most departments of government that have infrastructure projects. Walang problema kung Cash-Based sa Personnel Services o sa MOOE, walang problema iyong Cash-Based doon, pero doon sa pag-implement ng Capital Outlays, iyong mga


projects, dito, ang lahat ng ahensiya are experiencing difficulties and challenges.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, gaya nga ng sinabi ng Amerikano, “If it ain’t broken, why fix it.”

REP. LOBREGAT. Tama ho, pero …

REP. SUAREZ. Hindi po ba?

REP. LOBREGAT. I fully agree with you ho. Kung hindi sira bakit …

REP. SUAREZ. So, bukas po iyong budget ng DBM, are we going to voice out our observation and concern? Parang sinasabi ho niya, “Kapag hindi mo nagastos, I will commandeer all of these. Kukunin ko iyong cash.” Maybe we should tell them how tedious and procedural is it to give back the money kung saan mo kinuha. Madali hong kunin pero ang question is, of bringing it back.

REP. LOBREGAT. Isa pa ho, iyong budget ng 2018 talagang malaki so nabigla lahat ang mga departamento, especially the DPWH, dahil malaki ang taas. Hindi sila nakapaghanda. Kaya ako, palagi kong sinasabi na kulang siguro iyong mga tauhan, kulang iyong mga engineers, kulang iyong district offices ng DPWH. Ang laki ng ibinigay para sa 2018 pero pagkatapos ay sinabi, “O, hindi ninyo nagamit kaya sa susunod na taon ay babawasan natin.” Dapat siguro may mas mahabang transition period.

REP. SUAREZ. During the budget presentation of 2019, I do not know whether you were there distinguished Sponsor, wherein parang sinasabi po natin sa Executive na “You solve your problem; it is not the problem of Congress.” Ang hindi ho siguro nila nakikita ay iyong meticulous procedures and local problems in awarding. The distinguished Sponsor and I, we are aware of this. For example, we have a very nice intention of realizing a farm-to-market road that is being asked from us and then suddenly, along the route, iyong barangay captain ay naging kagalit noong mayor. Sasabihin niya, “I will stop this, may right-of-way problem kayo. I will not give to you this parcel of land,” and the DPWH cannot implement the project just because of that. This is shown nationwide, Mme. Speaker. Napakarami po nating problems sa isyu of the mere right-of-way.

Maybe the idea of our good Secretary of the DBM is for a highly civilized and disciplined country. Medyo nagsisimula pa lang ho tayo and we are trying to come up with findings or solutions to problems. Anyway, we will take that up tomorrow.

Dito ho sa 2017, I had to commend the Department for their high utilization ratio, Mr. Speaker, of 90.3 percent. That is better than the Department’s average for the period 2013 to 2016 at 75.38 percent. However, sa 2017 po, mayroon pa po silang P67.1 billion unappropriated. Bakit hindi pa ho ito na-u-utilize, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LOBREGAT. Iyong dahilan ho sa school building at sa local infrastructure projects, about P30.5 billion ay dahil sa no buildable space or right-of-way problems. Then we had savings and variance of about P22.4 billion, so that will account for an unobligated allotment of P52.99 billion. Doon naman sa unreleased appropriations, it is P14.06 billion, for a total of P67 billion, pero iyong sa P67 billion, P22 billion is because of savings and variance; and then because there is no buildable space and there are right-of-way problems, P30.56 billion

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, this is a parochial experience that I have. Mayroon po tayong mga coastal barangays, coastal municipalities, na kapag nagkakaroon ng storm o unusually high tide ay binabaha po iyong coastal community. It also happens to you too because you have some coastal barangays. Suddenly, humingi po tayo ng project for flood control, lalagyan po natin ito pero mayroon pong mga bakawan na nakatanim and the DENR will say, “You cannot put those flood control walls because you have to cut the trees.”

Now, tell me your wisdom, Mme. Speaker. I can say I will replicate it, I will plant on a ratio of—sa isang pinutol kong bakawan, I will plant 100 new seedlings. Of course, it will take quite a long time for it to fully grow, but masi-save ko iyong community sa flood and its damages because of this unusual scenario. What will be your guidelines on that? Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, that scenario is common to everyone. Maybe about 50 percent of our Members here, marami po silang projects ngayon na natitigil because of this, dahil sasabihin po ng local DENR, ng provincial DENR, na hindi natin puwedeng putulin iyong kahoy.

REP. LOBREGAT. Actually, kung susundin natin iyong present na batas, kung susundin natin iyong sinasabi ng DENR, hindi talaga puwedeng putulin iyong bakawan.

REP. SUAREZ. Bakawan.

REP. LOBREGAT. Mangrove. Gaya noong irrigated rice land, talagang bawal mag-convert nito dahil sa batas. So, siguro ho, hindi dito sa budget hearing ng DPWH pero kailangan i-revisit natin iyong mga ibang


batas na kailangan siguro i-consider para may balance din. So, iyan lang ang masa-suggest ko dahil at present, wala silang magagawa ho tungkol sa mangrove at saka irrigated rice land.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, are you aware that ang sabi po ng Commission on Audit, mayroon po tayong 334 infra na mayroong defect? The amount is not really that big, it is about P40.9 million, but ang point ko lang ho dito is this may be an issue for future programs. Maaari ho bang ang problemang ito is, may fault ang contractor? May I know what the solution, as envisioned by the Department, will be on issues like this wherein there are findings by the Commission on Audit on faults in the construction process?

REP. LOBREGAT. Ang ginagawa ho ng Department actually, tinututukan iyong mga opisina, iyong mga district engineering offices or iyong mga regional offices na may project na may defects. So, kung may defect ho, hindi ito babayaran.

REP. SUAREZ. One main reason for the slow implementation of not just the DPWH, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, but common among other agencies katulad ho ng DOTr, DA, sabihin na po natin, ay human nature. Sasabihin, “Iyong ahensiya ko, mayroon ho akong ganitong kalaking budget. Hindi ko ho nakikita iyong importansiya o kahalagahan na dapat ito ay mailagay kaagad sa dapat paggamitan.” So it sits with the Department for months, they take a while with the designs, changes in the specifications. In the meantime, you have lost the luxury of time. So, maaari po bang ang isang amount, para mabawasan po ang burden ng central or even regional office, is downloaded either to the local government or district engineering office?

REP. LOBREGAT. I am with you on that dahil alam natin na sa implementation rate, ang nasa pinakamataas ay iyong district engineering office, and the second is the regional office, at iyong pangatlo ay iyong central office. So, mas maraming project na mada-download sa district engineering office, mas malaki ang implementation rate, mas malaki ang utilization rate, mas malaki ang disbursement rate ho.

REP. SUAREZ. You see, Mme. Speaker, when there are projects, then there is money that goes around in those local areas; and when there is money, there is spending; and when there is spending, there is business, there is growth, there is trade. That is how important a catalyst ang Department po na ito sa laki ng kanilang mga projects na puwedeng gawin. So, along that line, can we ask the Department to revisit the 2019 budget and then sa final version of the GAA,

kasi hindi pa ho naman final itong ating GAA, ay maglagay na po tayo ng delineation na iyong certain amount that can be implemented faster either by the local government or by the district office will be downloaded to them.

REP. LOBREGAT. Puwedeng ilagay iyan sa GAA. Actually, noon ang sinasabi sa implementation by the local government, “those that have the capability,” pero dapat by administration. Ngayon, pati bidding ay ina-allow ng local government ho.

REP. SUAREZ. Can I go into something that is parochial because this is a note from my son, a note from Governor Suarez, who happens to be my youngest son.

REP. LOBREGAT. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. There is a P200-million funding needed for the construction of the sports complex in Tayabas, and I believe that my son has communicated already with the good Secretary. Kasi ho, marami na hong activities na inilalabas sa Metro Manila and we need a complex. Napakaganda po noong nakita ko, this can be compared—maganda ho iyong racing oval, the swimming pool is olympic-sized, things like that. So can I, not because this is something parochial as this is my province, but kung valid naman po naman ang request, puwede po bang matulungan ito ng Department, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LOBREGAT. Sabi ho ni Secretary Mark, he will do his best po.

REP. SUAREZ. I used up 16 minutes na pala, ang pangako ko ho five lang. Huling-huli na ho ito.

Can we talk about what I conceptualized when I was still the economic adviser of President GMA? Ginawa ko po iyong KANAN, Mme. Speaker, “Kalsada Natin, Alagaan Natin” and we conceptualized the creation of funds and the Road Board, which I authored as well. For the information of my colleagues, Your Honor, that was initiated by the IMF-WB at ako lang po ang nag-implement, but that is a World Bank initiative. Dahil noong mga panahong iyon, kakaunti pa po ang source ng cash sa bawat departamento at very limited ang outline ng department, so we thought of coming up with the source of fund, the plate of the vehicle, to be used in road maintenance and in that concept, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, 80 percent will go to the maintenance of the national road. Sa laki po ng pondo, and I have been saying that, iyong pera ho ay natutulog lamang kaya dapat gamitin na po natin at ikalat sa bawat distrito. This will be of big help in terms of maintaining our roads, and it can even be used for FMRs, it can be used for


barangays because hindi na natin—although it is for the national road, they can come up with something because mayroon po tayong 5 percent for local roads or local government application.

So, ang isa pa hong punto dito is we suggested that there should be a maintenance worker for every kilometer and this worker will take care of the road maintenance, cleaning of drainage and canal on the left and right side of the one-kilometer stretch. Now, distinguished Speaker, Mme. Speaker, you know how long the national road and the secondary road are. Ang laki po nang employment nito and this will be an opportunity for the marginal residents of our barangay na alam naman natin hirap na hirap ho na makakuha ng trabaho, but here we are, billions of pesos not being spent and earning every year. So, puwede ho bang pag-aralan muli ng Kalihim sapagkat under po niya ang Road Board when it was conceptualized, na tingnan po kung puwede nating ibalik iyong kalsada natin, iyong alagaan natin and at the same time employ hundreds of thousands. Napakalaki po iyang tulong sa marginal residents sa ating mga barangay, considering that when we conceptualize that provision in 2004 ay ginawa po natin na iyong taga-barangay ang puwede lamang magtrabaho doon sa national road and it will be on a rotation basis.

REP. LOBREGAT. Sabi ng Secretary, pag-aaralan niya ho dahil talagang malaki na iyong pondo ng Road Board na naipon para diyan. Actually, iyong balanse ho is P42.6 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. My last concern, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, I noticed that the amount for the right-of-way support is growing, from 2014—P15 billion; 2015—P17 billion; 2016—P25 billion; 2017, about P40—43 billion; and in the proposed, P48 billion. Is this correct for the ROW? Well, I am happy, Your Honor, because that means we will be building more roads kaya maraming right-of-way. Is it complementary to say that the reason the right-of-way amount is increasing is that marami po tayong gagawing kalsada?

REP. LOBREGAT. Opo. Talagang nag-i-increase. Sa 2017—19.6; 2018—20.6; sa 2019, maski na Cash-Based Budget ay tumaas ng 28.9. So, talagang dahil sa Cash-Based Budget, dapat bago mag-start iyong project ay bayaran na iyong right-of-way para tuloy-tuloy iyong paggawa ng kalsada, kaya siguro tumaas iyong right-of-way fund po.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I committed to Senator Villar that I will not take more than 22 minutes and I am early.

So, on behalf of the Minority, Mme. Speaker,

distinguished Sponsor, we do not have any more question on the proposed budget of the DPWH.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you.

REP. SUAREZ. On the part of the Minority, I move for the termination of the period of interpellation and debate.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable Suarez. (Applause)


REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in moving for the termination of the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways, including the attached corporations and agencies.



We would like to congratulate the DPWH family, especially Secretary Mark Villar who is likewise celebrating his wedding anniversary. (Applause)

SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 8169

REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 8169.



The Minority Leader is recognized.

ELECTION OF REP. BELARO TO THE CTTEE. ON ETHICS AND PRIVILEGES

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that the Hon. Salvador B. Belaro Jr. be recognized as a new member of the Ethics and Privileges Committee vice Hon. Manuel Monsour T. Del Rosario III.






REP. SALO. Mme. Speaker, I respectfully move that we suspend the session until one o’clock in the afternoon today, October 3.



The session is suspended until one o’clock in the afternoon today, October 3.

It was 12:45 a.m., Wednesday, October 3, 2018.

Published by the Publication and Editorial Service, South Wing Basement • 931-7868; 931-5001 local 7602The Congressional Record can be accessed through the Legislative Documents of the official website

of the House of Representatives at www.congress.gov.ph ddc/ltn/gic/11152018/1758

Date post:	31-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times