Clutching at straws
Credit to Author: BEN KRITZ, TMT| Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:26:03 +0000
ANY hope that anyone had that the Philippine Senate would take on important issues now that the legislative session has begun was certainly not encouraged this week with two senators opting to wander off on political tangents of no particular value.
First, Senate President pro tempore Ralph Recto filed a resolution asking the Senate to investigate the apparent proliferation of counterfeit drugs in the country. Not to be outdone, rehabilitated
Sen. Bong Revilla filed a bill (SB 645) that would offer tax incentives to broadcast and print media, as well as advertisers and sponsors, for publishing “educational content.”
Recto was reacting to a recent UN report that described the Philippines as a “hotspot” for counterfeit medications. The fact that most people already know this of course does not make it less a problem, of course, but what exactly the Senate can add to the already clear laws making manufacture and distribution of fake medicines a punishable crime is unclear. In Recto’s own words, the Senate investigation’s aim “is to know the gravity of the problem and formulate remedial measures that will strengthen the capacity of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and all law enforcement agencies to defeat this problem.”
If the Senate has not been contacted by the FDA or any law enforcement agencies to change laws to strengthen their capacity to defeat this problem, then perhaps the Senate ought to turn its attention elsewhere, or Recto should at least re-angle his inquiry. A strongly worded letter from his office to the FDA asking what the agency is doing about the problem would probably do it, although with the trade-off of much less media attention.
While Recto’s resolution at least has a basis in an actual real-world concern, Revilla’s SB 645 deals with a complete non-topic, and does so in an almost incomprehensible way.
The proposed law would require print and broadcast media to give 10 percent lower airtime rates and cost of space for every paid feature of production or publication with educational content.
The net income from these programs and publications would be tax-exempt for five years, and “the excess of the net income shall be devoted for the enhancement of the educational program and publication and for other educational purposes.”
The bill further stipulates that “all expenses incurred in the production of advertisements with educational impact shall enjoy tax deduction of not more than 10 percent of the gross operating expenses of the advertisers or sponsors on the condition that these advertisements are delivered to the public.”
Assessing the proposed measure as fairly as possible, one is obliged to conclude that it provides something that no one asked for, and will pose a headache for company accountants in order to collect. Worse still, it is rather vague on what would seem to be the key aspect of the whole concept, the definition of “educational content,” as well as who, exactly, will be the judge of that.
For a body that considers itself so important to the well-being of the nation, the Senate’s appetite for irrelevance is by turns annoying and astonishing. These two nonessential matters are low-hanging fruit of the senators’ own creation, which they will spend valuable time and resources ineffectually swiping at, while in the meantime, more critical measures will continue to be delayed.
In the current Congress, several important bills are still awaiting passage, including the second package of the government’s comprehensive tax reform program (CTRP), the corporate tax reform package known as the Trabaho Bill; the National Land Use Act; critical amendments to the Public Service Act; updates to the Foreign Investment Act; the Retail Trade Liberalization Act; and two bills that would expand the funding and mandate of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA).
The senators might argue, of course, that they can and should maintain an independent stance from the legislative agenda of the administration, and in that they are not completely wrong. The Senate individually and collectively should, however, share the same principle that priority should be given to those initiatives which have the broadest and deepest impact on the country and its people. Those are not to bring the full machinery of the Senate to bear on what is a mere administrative performance issue, or to hatch an unnecessary tax incentive so convoluted that it’s reward is likely not worth the trouble to administer it.
If the Senate wishes to exercise its independence it should do so by properly debating and providing useful input to the serious legislative matters that are already before Congress. Clutching at straws to appear relevant is embarrassing and unproductive.
ben.kritz@manilatimes.net
Twitter: @benkritz