Anong ipalit sa PDAF? BDAF

Kunyari lang "abolish."

Kunyari lang “abolish.”

Akala ng Malacañang naloko na nila ang mga tao, ano.

Noong Biyernes, kasama pa niya si Senate President Franklin Drilon at House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, inanunsyo ni Pangulong Aquino . Sabi niya “Panahon na po upang i-abolish ang PDAF.”

May ilan na pumalakpak kaagad.

Ngunit kung babasahin o pakinggan mo ng masinsinan ang sinabi ng Presidente, hindi niya aalis ang sistema ng pork barrel na ang paggastos sa isang proyekto at pagpalabas ng pera ay hindi sa paraan na ayon sa nasyunal na plano. Ang pork barrel ay depende sa mga senador o congressman at presidente.

Hahanap daw sila ng bagong paraan. Sabi ni Aquino:“Maghanap ng mas mainam na paraan upang siguruhing ang pera ng taumbayan ay mapunta sa taumbayan lamang.”

Ito pa ang sabi ng Pangulo:

“Ngayon, bubuo tayo ng bagong mekanismo upang matugunan ang pangangailangan ng inyong mga mamamayan at sektor—sa paraang tapat, gamit ang tama at makatuwirang proseso, at nang may sapat na mga kalasag laban sa pang-aabuso at katiwalian.

“Katuwang nina Senate President Frank Drilon at Speaker Sonny Belmonte, sisiguruhin kong bawat mamamayan at sektor ay makakakuha ng patas na bahagi ng pambansang budget para sa serbisyong pangkalusugan, scholarship, proyektong lumilikha ng kabuhayan, at lokal na imprastruktura. Makakapagmungkahi ng proyekto ang inyong mga mambabatas, ngunit kailangan itong idaan sa proseso ng pagbubuo ng budget. Kung maaprubahan, itatalang mga ito bilang mga line item, alinsunod sa mga programa ng Pambansang Pamahalaan. Mapapaloob ito sa batas bilang Pambansang Budget—hihimayin ang bawat linya, bawat piso, bawat proyekto, gaya ng lahat ng iba pang mga programa ng inyong pamahalaan.”

Naloko na. Pareho din pala. Manggaling din si Kongreso ang proyekto at siya ang aapruba. Di lalong mapunta sa kanya ang kapangyarihan sa pork barrel. Lahat ngayon yuyuko sa kanya para maparubahan ang kanilang mga proyekto.

Ang galing talaga ni PNoy at ng kanyang mga advisers. Naramdaman nila ang umiigting ang galit ng taumbayan sa pagwawaldas ng pera na dapat ay sa mga mahihirap. Sa Lunes, maigiipon-ipon ang mga taong sawa na sa panloloko sa kanila sa Rizal Park mula 9 ng umaga. Kaya nagpalabas ng ganitong anunsyo si Aquino.

Hindi naman lahat naloko nila. Sinakyan na lang nga ng iba at nagbigay pa sila ng bagong pangalan. Alisin na ang PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund). May suggestions ang Spinbusters: “House Allocation Mechanism (HAM)”. Pwede rin “ Senate Priority Assistance Mechanism (SPAM)” o Priority Initiative of Government (PIG).”

Si Lynda Jumilla ng ABS-CBN, humingi ng mga ideya sa Twitter ng mga pangalan na ipalit sa PDAF at sabi ng isa, BDAF (Benigno Aquino Development Assitance Fund). Mas bagay ito.

Click here for the
English version of the President’s announcement.

August 24, 2013 9:19 pm   Posted in: Abante, Graft and corruption

6 Responses

  1. chi - August 24, 2013 9:55 pm

    Naloko na. Pareho din pala. Manggaling din si Kongreso ang proyekto at siya ang aapruba. Di lalong mapunta sa kanya ang kapangyarihan sa pork barrel. Lahat ngayon yuyuko sa kanya para maparubahan ang kanilang mga proyekto. Ellen

    Ngitngit ni Barabas, mas dadami ang naglalakihang linta na magla-lobby kay Ochoa at Pnoy mismo na centro ng pork barrel aka BADF!

  2. manuelbuencamino - August 24, 2013 10:24 pm

    1. PDAF was a lump sum appropriation divided equally among congressmen and among senators.
    2. PDAF was discretionary on the part of legislators. They can avail of it or not, they can avail of part of it or all of it. They pick their pet projects, nominated beneficiaries, and had an input on the biddibg out of contracts.
    3. Under the new system, The discretion is gone.
    4. LGUs will tell their congressman what they need, the congressman in turn will work to have it included as an earmark in the GAA.
    5. The rationale of PDAF for congressmen has always been to fulfill the unique needs of each district, needs that could not be met by the national government guided by planning for the greater good of the greater number. Now the noble intention of PDAF was abused by thieves. We can abolish PDAF, the discretionary lump sum appropriation, but we cannot wish away the unique needs and demands of more than 250 congressional districts. Those needs, unique to each district, are there and they have to be met. So until a better system is proposed or invented congressional earmarks will be it.
    6. Senators have no basis to avail of PDAF because they have a national constituency. PDAF for them is a redundancy because it will cover the same the same thing that the national budget should cover.
    7. Partylist reps, like senators, also do not have a basis to avail of PDAF. Their constituencies are sectors. Those sectors are found in every society in every district so they can talk to their representative and ask him to carry their water for them.
    8. PDAF came from what was originally funds for Visayas and Mindanao. But congressmen from poorer regions in Luzon complained and so the Countrywide Development Fund was born, every congressional district could now avail of assistance. But congressmen found CDF too limiting, it did not address those needs that could directly be linked to development, like medical assistance, feeding programs, etc. And so assistance was added to the mix. This PDAF, Priority Development and Assistance Funds.

  3. olan - August 25, 2013 11:49 am

    If the president really wanted for the country to move on the principle of good government, then the more he should stop PDAF altogether in any shape or form. Congress has no business getting itself involved much more execute all the things that they said using PDAF I.e schools, roads, scholarships, etc. It is for the local government in the district or province that they represent to do those things. Congressional representative functions is to help the local government tie those links in budgetary or yearly appropriations. In addition, their main task collectively is to promote check and balance within the system and legislate laws, being a democratic country as formed by three institutions such as the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. If the president continuous this practice, it seems he is promoting bribery within the system. More likely to happen due to this wasteful pork barrel and the failure of the very essence of check and balance as experienced during last administration.

  4. olan - August 25, 2013 12:05 pm

    Pork barrel does not help the majority. It makes the tax paying majority victim of injustice and abuse. Our congress ended up becoming haven of criminals and opportunists whose sole intent is power and money because of pork barrel. Panahon na para itigil Ito. The president should really think hard on this. Whatever his decision will be will clearly define whether all the things he had said is for real or just another politician offering laway service!

  5. vic - August 25, 2013 5:03 pm

    One of the solutions for the executive to look after the concern of local issues is to have a regular consultations with the Leaders of every Province and figure out how the national fund be transferred to each provinces according to its needs and we call it transfer payment or Equalization downloads. This will help the National government in its national programs and with the co-ordination with the Representatives can formulate project and programs for their respective district and include it in a National budget…and it is time now to Abolish the Upper Chamber, the Senate as it does not Represent anyone, and the Party List system which is just a Duplication. You see, all Provinces of Canada used to have an upper chamber too, called the Senate, now they were all gone.

  6. MPRivera - August 25, 2013 7:09 pm

    being the highest elected official of the land, the president cannot decide by himself on what to do with anything he deemed appropriate with this specific public fund without any consultation from the people. it is the people’s mandate that enabled him to be in malakanyang to lead the country and it is his obligation to FOLLOW what the majority suggests. if he continues doing otherwise, he alone is answerable for his actions.

    someone must advise noynoy to stop listening and giving preferences to the bugaws and bubuyogs around him. they were not the ones who made him president.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.