More pros and cons about parliamentary system
Posted on January 25, 2007 - Filed Under Punch Forum |
Rafael L. Oriel, Jr.
25 Jan 2007
Mr. Ramos, I am talking about Philippine system as a whole not just the system of governance or government that you claim is not broken despite of the many unfavorable happenings in the country that show otherwise.
Anyway, the system of governance, political maturity and responsibility that you are talking about are parts and parcel of the whole Philippine system. Fixing political maturity and responsibility, technically, you are fixing the broken Philippine system. Gridlock and blaming everything to the President instead of accepting full responsibility are seldom encountered in parliamentary system but are major problems of the Philippine system, specifically in the presidential system causing inefficient and expensive governance, near constitutional crisis and governmental breakdowns that reduce public confidence and morale.
Mr. Ramos, if you do not like disaster to happen then do not allow your 12-years old child to drive your Lexus car. Let somebody who is fully qualified to drive it. In the same token, nobody should be allowed to govern the country unless fully qualified. Qualifications are written in the constitution. If the constitution said that a 12 years old is allowed to become a President of the Philippines then it is out of the ordinary. What I am trying to point out is that the quality and efficiency of the Philippine system depends also on what is written in the constitution which includes the country’s system of government. There are excellent and time-tested government systems but there are also lots of very poorly designed systems that invite troublesome and disastrous consequences.
FYI, in comparison to many other countries, Canada is politically matured and responsible with strong political party system. It is apparent by the way they handle vital, sensitive and complex national and international issues and the way they hold elections. BTW, Canadian provinces have their own legislative assembly and taxation like a country within a country. Mr. Ramos, you are partly correct when you said that Canada is my vaunted country because my vaunted countries are Philippines and Canada. I like to add also U.S.A., having stayed in the country for 2 years.
Frankly, I am proud of my Filipino heritage. I am proud to be a natural-born Filipino, to be a Binalonian, to be a Pangasinense and to be a Canadian and Manitoban. I am amazed how some Filipinos can speak so badly about Philippines. There are scoundrels and scalawags in other countries that will not make any of their populace proud but I never heard their citizens regard their beloved country as a nation of scoundrels and scalawags. They will do whatever they can even risking their lives to fight back against these kinds of people. They will willingly help and fully cooperate with law enforcers and prosecutors get rid of criminals and other bad elements of society. There are millions of Filipinos who are like them but, unfortunately, there are some who just do not give a damn.
I like to remind them their solemn oath that says, “Sisikapin kong maging isang tunay na Pilipino sa isip, sa salita, at sa gawa.” Anyway, I am not here in the forum to brag about Canada. I am just trying to share whatever I know about the pros and cons of parliamentary system and presidential system particularly the parliamentary system of Canada which is similar to the English model being proposed by FVR but totally different to the French model being proposed by JDV. I like the parliamentary system of Canada better because I think it is more beneficial compared to the presidential system of the Philippines or the French model.
As you can see, I am not like the others who voice their opposition to adopt the Canadian parliamentary system simply because Quebec wants to separate. I am not also like the others who oppose Cha-Cha and the parliamentary system simply because they personally do not like PGMA.
Comments
Leave a Reply
