INQUIRER.net Eleksyon 2007

Benigno Aquino III, podcast interview transcript, part 1

INQUIRER.net

Editor's Note: What follows is the first part of a preliminary transcript of the Eleksyon2007 podcast interview with senatorial candidate Benigno Aquino III.

JV Rufino : Welcome to the Election 2007 podcast. Our guest for this podcast is Congressman Benigno Aquino III. Aquino is running for senator under the Genuine Opposition Slate.

Welcome to the show, Congressman.

Benigno Aquino III : Thank you for having me.

JV Rufino : Our first question will be from Maila Ager.

Maila Ager: Hi sir, this is Maila Ager, covering the House of Representatives. First question is what made you decide to run for the Senate?

Benigno Aquino III : The Senate is the one of two, I think, remaining institutions that have proven an effective check with the excesses that we feel the current administration is doing on the Filipino people.

The other institution, of course, is [the] Supreme Court--and there will be even if I don't run a new composition with regards to the Senate for Senate President Franklin Drilon will be ending his term come June 30; and, as you know he has been at the forefront of our party [the Liberal Party-ed] in trying to uphold our democratic principles and ideas during the spirit of crisis that our country is facing.

So, we feel that if we don't put up a fight for that position it might even change the effectivity of the Senate as an effective check-and-balance mechanism.

Maila Ager: Are there expectations from you because...being the son of a former president [Corazon C. Aquino-ed], the son of the late, martyred senator [Benigno Aquino Jr. whose assassination in 1983 led to the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship-ed], and, you know, from the Aquino clan.

Benigno Aquino III : Not only from the family--everything that we've done is assumed to have been a given--but more so from other people who...Others who find themselves--other politicians who find themselves--in my same situation...there have been several instances when their staffs--their staff rather--have mentioned that you are not an Aquino [and that] you don't have to go to that this extreme of fighting this current regime. And I was saying, is that--should that--be the case?

Am I something special, exceptional or the exceptions to the rule? There should be a fight, given the fact that it's in everybody's interest. Everybody should be participative in this current crisis that our democracy is facing.

So in terms of expectations...I have [said] long ago, I will not be able to surpass what my parents have accomplished, which frees me from the pressures that I would have had in trying to overcome their achievements, which in turn I think leads to an efficiency in terms of fulfilling my duties at this point in time.

I'm not concentrated or concerned with any other factors rather than just being able to do the best job that I can. I think I am a combination already of both the traits of my parents.

My father was...tended to be...Though he wasn't dictatorial, he was such a perfect convincer of people that everybody was persuaded as to the validity of his views. Even though he had decided beforehand on a question that he proposed to everybody, at the end of the session everybody felt that they were part and parcel in making that decision.

My mother's style has always been consensus-generating. And I think I'm somewhere in the middle of both, trying to get the best traits of both and trying to be even more efficient in terms of championing the advocacies that I have fought for all this time.

Again, I tend to be more--I'd like to be as thoroughly prepared on any subject, whereas my father seemed to be like, well, not the most intense expert of all subject matters, but he gave that impression to anybody.

So before I'm more deliberative and perhaps even more--how should I put it?--I want to be even surer of any position that I take before I start having an advocacy, on any particular issues.

So there are differences but at the same time there are, very great similarities amongst all of us, especially given the fact that a lot of my perspectives on the world, on this country, on these issues, system of government, were formed due their influences.

Maila Ager: What took you so long to run for a national post?

Benigno Aquino III : We had several problems in Tarlac. There are of course also the political mix that has existed from ‘98. The first person who was convincing me to run for the Senate was former president [Joseph] Estrada. And I told him that being a neophyte congressman, in fact I felt I wasn't ready. Come 2004, like a lot of the populace, we felt we had--'di ba?--parang choices that were not inspiring.

I somehow decided to choose the lesser of evils and I didn't want to be beholden to a group or a person that I wasn't exactly sure of.

Now I feel that with the current crisis, to do otherwise would be to be a traitor to the legacy of my parents and everybody who sacrificed for us to get to this stage, and it is high time that we continue again the effectivity of the Senate--to be an effective check and balance on the excesses that are being perpetrated now.

Maila Ager: So if you get elected in the Senate, how are you going to define your term?

Benigno Aquino III : Well, number one, I'd like to try and explore the possibility together with the allies in the House of going back into making the budgetary process an effective means in achieving that check and balance. 

Something as simple as, well, not really, simple in concept, but hard in trying to put into process. The idea of line-item budgeting. Whereas, as you know...intelligence funds for instance. The very first resolution I filed in the House was for us to have an intelligence oversight committee.

And after nine years we have to yet single hearing on that proposal. In order that we know...year in year out, we have to approve intelligence budget of over 20 different agencies and offices in government. And not one member in the House--not the chairman of appropriations, not the Speaker--would be privy to what these funds are going to.

And I felt that that was an indirect violation if not the letter--the spirit of the Constitution, which says that we are responsible directly because we are the only agency of government, the House of Representatives who is, where appropriation can emanate from.

But really again, any time a budget is proposed to us it will be as much as possible no lump-sum figures. We want to be able to specify exactly where everything is going. And in that sense, really support policies of government that we feel are worthwhile supporting and at the same time suppress activities that are detrimental to the people.

That is easier said than done--I realize that--but you know, in the Senate, you will have less people to convince. Of course, harder to convince, but definitely freer people than the House, which is subject to so many pressures from the Executive. That is one.

The other is, of course, the idea of continuing in the tradition of the Senate of enlightening the people, which is the first step towards organizing them towards concerted action for issues like the fertilizer scam.

I'm wondering if the bio-fuels program right now, which seems to be confusing a lot of people in the whole country, is the next version of the so-called fertilizer scam. And just to point out one thing, whereas you are embarking on the new strategy of addressing the energy question, you are embarking on several roads at the same time being that you are promoting several plants. When you say several, I understand that it is more than five. And of course, there is that truism that you cannot be master of all of these at the same time, if you embark on trying to learn all of them at the same time.

Also the idea of processing for all of these plants was not extant until about I think three weeks ago when somebody said that there are thinking of setting a processing plant in Davao. So at the end of the day by next year after, I understand there are several hundreds of millions in the budget this year ear mark for propagating all of these so called plants for bio-fuels. I wonder if next year they will be explaining why this bio-fuel program is not working out. We're in February now. I assume by March next year, there will be reasons of either a drought or typhoon, and so on and so forth.

So that would be something that, again, the Senate in its role as a means for checking the work of the Executive should be able to do. You know, and when going back to the budget, you know the choice before us this year was re-enacted budget or a budget that will give the executive practically everything they wanted, the way they wanted it. And that I think has to be really, we really have to work that out and also the CA [Commission on Appointments] is another issue.

It might--we might be in conformity with the letter in terms of those being bypassed, being reappointed. But the practice has been that people who have been bypassed continuously should not be entitled to that position --the spirit of the law is a secretary can sit only with concurrence by the Commission of Appointments. And being bypassed and getting the concurrence are not exactly the same thing. So one would want to see the CA be more effective. And again, that would be will closer cooperation with the House and try to explore how do you make these two main means of providing a check and balance effective.

Maila Ager: Since you are running under the opposition ticket and once you get elected in the Senate, you will be allied with the opposition, are we going to see you changing lanes along the road?

Benigno Aquino III : Well, if it becomes a different administration probably, at some point in time. But seriously, if the issue is that joining one group or another, I'm a candidate to the Liberal Party primarily. We find ourselves allied with those who are questioning the governance of the current administration, but at the end of the day, we are...we owe our primary loyalty to the people.

And whomsoever should be serving their interest best, will be those that we will ally ourselves with. And to a large degree the current composition of the Senate is that it cannot be considered in any way a pro-administration slate.

So, if at all we are all successful, we will be maintaining that facet of the Senate so that again there will be a need for the Executive to convince other branches of government as to the validity of its policies or programs.

Maila Ager: So as long as the President is there, you will be …

Benigno Aquino III : We're not making it personal. So long as they embark on the same method of governance, on this form of government--what does that mean?

After we left in July of 2005, there were emissaries that were sent and asking for reconciliation. And what the minimum that we asked was, we have certain issues? Why don't at least review whether or not our issues are valid? And at the end of the day, if you think we're wrong, then I think it should be intrinsic upon you to correct what we have been showing are valid issues.

Now, if in case after review we are proven wrong, then there are no more issues that are--should--separate us.

The sad part is they didn't even bother to review any of the issues. Specifically the North Rail was one topic that I discussed with one emissary. And I explained what our issues were. And in fact he practically agreed with everything I said. And he was trying to give me some justification for going on this route that is so detrimental to the people.

And I said, in final analysis, how can I be true to the people and agree with what you're doing to them? So up to this date, and that was like two years ago, we have yet to see them even attempting to review whether or not they are embarking on the right path.

In direct answer to the North Rail question, they will be, they're contemplating something like at least five new rails systems in addition to the North Rail; and I'm asking: If they're going to do the same method that they do to North Rail, then they did not only [not] try and listen to the validity and tried to determine whether we had a valid point, but in fact they will go even more headlong into activities that are clearly detrimental to the people, and in violation of so many different laws.

Maila Ager: OK, thank you sir.

Alex Villafania : Sir, good evening, Alex Villafania from INQUIRER.net.

Benigno Aquino III : Yes, good evening.

Alex Villafania : Sir, my first question: What Philippine laws do you think should be amended or repealed?

Benigno Aquino III : 'Yung wire tapping, for me, is one of the issues.

I think we should also review the mechanism for setting up wage increases through the Regional Wage Adjudication Board which has not pleased anybody, not the bosses nor the labor component.

I have a bill pending in the House right now which mandates a mandatory increase, I mean a mandatory profit sharing scheme. And various things here are auditors that will be outside or internal auditors selected by labor from a list approved by government; and then again, the basic concept is try to get everybody focused on trying to make the pie from which they share upon bigger.

There is of course the 'yung the whole issue of graft and corruption amongst other agencies sa AFP [Armed Forces of the Philippines] and DND [Department of National Defense].

For the past, I think, seven years already, I've had a special provision inserted into the general appropriations act mandating the bidding. And though there has been some movement already towards reforming distribution --for instance of their fuel, making sure that there's conversation and so on and so forth--they have not actually undergone bidding up to now. And of course, that is something that various other agencies of government should be looking into because I think there is a violation of a pertinent law, which is that special provision.

Again more checks for the intelligence funds and another thing: a review of the agrarian reform law. The agrarian reform programs are supposed to last for 10 years. By next year I think it will be 20 already--there's an extension.

DAR [Department of Agrarian Reform] is asking for another extension of at least five years. And I', worried...that land in the Philippines is supposed to be a finite element, but suddenly they have been saying that they have discovered--or recently discovered--more than should be subject to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, and this happens on the 19th year of the program.

And given the fact that land does not beget land. How can they have not put it in the inventory to begin with? That is one question. 

And of course, by extending it, all of the issues attendant to it ay 'yung mga so-called, scandals, scams regarding conversion issues of the retainment by farmer beneficiaries.

Insolvency of the lending institutions like the Land Bank who have advanced "x" amount of pesos already. See, if it's a success or failure--for generally it is perceived to be a failure--and then re-enact, come up with the new scheme embodied in a new law that will do away with the errors of the previous agrarian reform program.

So that at the end of the day, our farmers will really be able to benefit from it. As you know, lack of funding for things like forming their cooperatives. You have to spend two years of community organizing before you get a viable community organization. That didn't happen.

Things like 'yung massive technical support, or even 'yung credit support should also be put into--should also be reviewed and be made more efficient, is also another one.

But more so, I guess the primary work that I'll be doing in the Senate if elected will be to watch in all of these programs that are being undertaken by this government.

'Yung, the highlight of this year's General Appropriations Act is, seemingly the mess and the jumble that they're doing with it. For instance, under the DILG budget there is supposed to be a provision for capital outlay for equipment purchases. So I asked what equipment were envisioned to purchased, and they answered medical equipment.

So I was kind of perplexed why the DILG [Department of Interior and Local Government-ed] would be buying medical equipment, and anyway it is not an expert. I understand this it is partly a grant of from the Spanish government, but you go back to what is the expertise of the DILG with regards to medical equipment.

The DSWD [Department of Social Welfare and Development-ed] would be tasked to handle micro-financing, which again is not a core facility or core skill of the DSWD. The DepEd [Department of Education-ed] will be part of a feeding or tuition program, primarily rice, and you wonder whether that would be best left to the nutrition board for instance or the Department of Health.

So one is hard put to understand what exactly the scheme of governnance is. And that has to be looked into. As you know, the budget is a primary tool whereby you can withdraw or augment funds, augment for the things that you feel are worthwhile and withdraw from things are not good for the people. So that again would be our primary focus.

One would want to revisit a lot of our laws, and go into, for instance, a recodification of the Revised Penal Code (because even our lawyers are already confused), but there are more urgent concerns. Like 'yung the investigations of the fertilizer scam previously, the North Rail, the extra-judicial killings now, and with the end view of how you stop all of these things that are wrong.

So that will be--a lot of the focus will be on that.
Read Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6

Copyright 2009 INQUIRER.net and content partners. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.