THE House of Representatives has vowed to prioritize the review of the build-operate-transfer (BOT) law.
Majority leader, and PDP-Laban Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas of Ilocos Norte said the BOT law, which govern the public-private partnership program, should undergo a thorough review amid concerns related to an airport project and railway station deals that are allegedly “disadvantageous” to the government.
Fariñas said they will review and question the constitutionality of some provisions on the BOT law, which, he said, seems to violate the Constitution.
“We met with our Senate counterpart [recently] and we categorize several bills…the lower chamber is the one that will amend the BOT law,” he said.
“During the meeting between the Senate and the House, we were looking at being expressive about the securing of a franchise for railway. The BOT law seems to have given the DOTr [Department of Transportation] a carte blanche authority on concession agreements without legislative franchise,” Fariñas said.
Earlier, Speaker Pantaleon D. Alvarez asked officials of the DOTr to review their agreements with private concessionaires and big businesses, and ensure the deals are advantageous to the government, or the public officials could face serious consequences.
Alvarez was referring to the deal to build a common Light Rail Transit (LRT)-Metro Rail Transit (MRT) common station between SM North Edsa and TriNoma in Quezon City, and several airport-project deals.
Last week Alvarez questioned the legality of the memorandum of agreement (MOA) signed by the government and private players for the common terminal linking LRT Line 1 and MRT Lines 3 and 7.
According to Alvarez, private companies involved in the project have to secure legislative franchise from Congress before they could be allowed to operate.
Alvarez also questioned the announcement of the DOTr inviting bidders for the development, operations and maintenance of five unbundled airport projects, namely, Bacolod-Silay, Davao, Iloilo, Laguindingan and New Bohol (Panglao) under the PPP scheme.
Alvarez said the winning bidders won’t have to spend much to maintain and develop these airports built using government funds, especially those which are still relatively new.
However, according to the Public Private Partnership Center web site, “Republic Act [RA] 6957 as amended by RA 7718 [commonly known as the BOT] and its implementing rules and regulations is the legal framework when the government enters into PPP.”
“These are the reasons we want to revisit the PPP law, because this is disadvantageous to the government,” Alvarez said.
He added that the scheme would grant winning bidders the exclusive right to operate and maintain the airport for 30, and even up to 35 years, which is much longer than the 25-year franchise granted by Congress.
Alvarez also reiterated that the winning bidders must secure a franchise from Congress to legally operate the airports, brushing aside the contention of the DOTr that under the BOT law the grant of such franchise is deemed automatic.
Article XII, Section 11 of the 1987 Constitution provides that “No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years.”
Alvarez said the longer period granted to winning bidders would practically tie the hands of the government.
Majority leader, and PDP-Laban Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas of Ilocos Norte said the BOT law, which govern the public-private partnership program, should undergo a thorough review amid concerns related to an airport project and railway station deals that are allegedly “disadvantageous” to the government.
Fariñas said they will review and question the constitutionality of some provisions on the BOT law, which, he said, seems to violate the Constitution.
“We met with our Senate counterpart [recently] and we categorize several bills…the lower chamber is the one that will amend the BOT law,” he said.
“During the meeting between the Senate and the House, we were looking at being expressive about the securing of a franchise for railway. The BOT law seems to have given the DOTr [Department of Transportation] a carte blanche authority on concession agreements without legislative franchise,” Fariñas said.
Earlier, Speaker Pantaleon D. Alvarez asked officials of the DOTr to review their agreements with private concessionaires and big businesses, and ensure the deals are advantageous to the government, or the public officials could face serious consequences.
Alvarez was referring to the deal to build a common Light Rail Transit (LRT)-Metro Rail Transit (MRT) common station between SM North Edsa and TriNoma in Quezon City, and several airport-project deals.
Last week Alvarez questioned the legality of the memorandum of agreement (MOA) signed by the government and private players for the common terminal linking LRT Line 1 and MRT Lines 3 and 7.
According to Alvarez, private companies involved in the project have to secure legislative franchise from Congress before they could be allowed to operate.
Alvarez also questioned the announcement of the DOTr inviting bidders for the development, operations and maintenance of five unbundled airport projects, namely, Bacolod-Silay, Davao, Iloilo, Laguindingan and New Bohol (Panglao) under the PPP scheme.
Alvarez said the winning bidders won’t have to spend much to maintain and develop these airports built using government funds, especially those which are still relatively new.
However, according to the Public Private Partnership Center web site, “Republic Act [RA] 6957 as amended by RA 7718 [commonly known as the BOT] and its implementing rules and regulations is the legal framework when the government enters into PPP.”
“These are the reasons we want to revisit the PPP law, because this is disadvantageous to the government,” Alvarez said.
He added that the scheme would grant winning bidders the exclusive right to operate and maintain the airport for 30, and even up to 35 years, which is much longer than the 25-year franchise granted by Congress.
Alvarez also reiterated that the winning bidders must secure a franchise from Congress to legally operate the airports, brushing aside the contention of the DOTr that under the BOT law the grant of such franchise is deemed automatic.
Article XII, Section 11 of the 1987 Constitution provides that “No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years.”
Alvarez said the longer period granted to winning bidders would practically tie the hands of the government.
