Ledac to lessen vetoes—Koko

CLOSER coordination between the legislative and the executive branch is expected under the Duterte administration, so that there would be fewer bills vetoed and the time, effort and resources spent to pass these would not go to waste, according to Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III.

Pimentel, who is expected to be the Senate President in the 17th Congress, said he would push for better communication—formally or informally—between the two branches in to legislative matters.

Pimentel said there were people who brought up the revision of the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (Ledac), which was hardly convened during the Aquino administration.

The lack of Ledac meetings has been cited as one of the reasons for President Aquino’s veto of numerous bills.

“We can have a formal Ledac or an informal Ledac,” Pimentel said in a phone interview.

Although he favors the regular convening of the Ledac, what is more important is the regular communication between lawmakers and the President’s camp on pending bills, he said.

“The House Speaker, the Senate President and the President must be in constant touch, and the Senate President must also be in constant touch with the House and with fellow senators,” he said.

He would personally see to it that he would know the President’s views on pending bills so as not to waste time and resources, he said.

“Even if there’s no formal meeting, if I become Senate President, I will be a frequent visitor to Malacañang,” he said.

If the President is not available, he could talk with the executive secretary, the presidential management staff chief or the legal counsel to pass on information about pending bills and to get the Chief Executive’s feedback, he said.

This way, any differences or concerns that would have caused the veto of the measure could be resolved, he said.

Under the current administration, Pimentel said there had been times when he wondered why certain bills were vetoed when no feedback was given to lawmakers that the President was not inclined to approve them.

“Our efforts went to waste. In the case of the SSS (Social Security System) pension increase, the political capital of both camps went to waste,” he said./ac