Tinkering with the Charter
It is indeed a great wonder that members of Congress entertain the weird idea of tinkering with the Constitution when it’s clear that the people don’t clamor for revisions or amendments.
Changes are being proposed by both chambers to amend economic provisions on the pretext that these would spur economic growth. However, the problem does not lie in the Charter but the failure of government to craft economic policies that are simple and workable.
Why have other countries achieved economic growth without tinkering with their Constitution? Let us be careful about attempting to amend or revise the Constitution especially through the mode of a constituent assembly. The temptation of inserting a provision that will serve their own interests is great.
I propose that if we amend the Constitution, let us call a constitutional convention and elect delegates with the specific mandate only to review and revise the Charter. This way, at least the delegates can focus on the task and not have to divide its attention with the duty of making laws.
The output of a constitutional convention would be more reflective of the sentiments of the people rather than leaving it to congressmen, who have their own interests to pursue.
We need people with passion and vision with the welfare of the public at heart. We don/t need politicians who are often the root of many of our problems.
If indeed we are to revise the Constitution we may as well look into political reforms like shifting the system of government from unitary to a federal system, where powers of the local government can be enshrined in the Constitution and their autonomy ensured.
Let the government nearest to the people decide on the many concerns the people need answers to, not a centralized government that’s remote.
Another political reform to look into is a shift from a presidential to parliamentary system where both the executive and legislative branches are held accountable to the people.
Third is the issue of language. I think the Constitution should not be used to impose a specific language in the country as the national lingua franca but should encourage the development of various languages in the Philippines.
There rare many things to consider.
What I am saying is that we shouldn’t rush into making changes but there is a need to seriously study and review the Constitution before we attempt to revise it.
President Aquino himself is not totally in favor of amending the Constitution today because many of the country’s woes can still be fixed by government.
* * *
The work stoppage by members of the Philippine Airlines employees that caused the cancellation of several domestic and international flights and untold inconveniences to the riding public should be examined carefully and dispassionately.
The PAL employees are protesting the move of management to outsource some of business functions like catering, thus causing the termination of about 2,000 employees, many of whom have been with PAL for more than 20 years.
PAL management offered the affected employees to be absorbed in the outsourcing firms except that they are to be hired like new employees who go through probation. The scheme has been opposed to by some employees who don’t see why they have to undergo probation when they’ve been in the business for more than 20 years. In fact, they should be the ones training employees of these companies.
PAL management countered that the outsourcing scheme is one way to keep the airline afloat. The way I see it, PAL is so packed with employees that much of its earnings are eaten up by payroll and benefits for employees.
PAL has to be competitive to survive, ranged against airlines in other parts of the world. Unfortunately the present PAL management inherited problems from a PAL that was run by the government and was filled with employees recommended by politicians. It is about time that PAL has the political will to decide something for its own survival.
