SP overrides latest Tupas veto
The 9th Iloilo Sanggunian Panlalawigan (SP) in a majority vote delivered its latest punch against the latest veto of Governor Niel Tupas Sr.
With a legislative challenge issued on the defense of said executive prerogative, the matter of Annual Investment Plan (AIP) Appropriation Ordinance once again fueled the brewing in-house Capitol battle.
Tuesday's session saw yet the expected SP comeback with the usual three votes for the Governor losing to the majority bloc.
And as expected, Vice Governor Rolex Suplico rallied the SP body in an override on last week's AIP Appropriation Ordinance veto of the governor.
The override came amidst the unresolved issue on the "mother" of said Appropriation Ordinance -- this year's budget of the Iloilo Provincial Government. A legal battle has since ensued blamed on the exit of Provincial Treasurer Melba Sullivan and the continued official leave of absence of Provincial Budget Officer Elena Lim.
Prior to Tuesday's override, Vice Governor Suplico dared his uncle-governor to "appear and defend personally the veto before the Sanggunian Panlalawigan (SP)."
The Vice Governor's dare came days after Governor Tupas slammed the earlier SP move that passed the made-over AIP Appropriation Ordinance 2008-01-B.
Tupas in exercising his Veto powers called the SP move legally and technically defective. And while at it, wrong English too.
"I allow Governor Tupas to defend his veto before the SP subject to its rules I will also deliver the usual sponsorship speech against the veto and in favor of the appropriation ordinance subject to the same rules," came the complete message vis a vis response now of the Vice Governor.
The override was presented to the SP body with the veto letters considered "Urgent Measures."
"Once again, I am constrained to exercise my veto power under Section 55 of Republic Act No. 7160 over Appropriation Ordinance No.2008-01-B in its entirety on the grounds that is ultra vires and prejudicial to the public welfare," the governor in his veto letter then wrote. "There can be no confusing about the meaning of the law. It speaks of "an ordinance" to enact the "annual budget". It does not contemplate the legislative authorization of the annual budget in piece-meal segments of ordinances. Hence the breaking up of the annual budget into two or more parts is clearly against the law," the veto letter continued.
Secondly, Tupas told the SP body, "a closer examination of this ordinance show that it is not an appropriation ordinance for the annual budget. The appropriation ordinance for the annual budget can only tackle only one subject – the annual budget. From the language used, Appropriation Ordinance No. 2008-01-B is a supplemental budget. It is also an amendment of the first ordinance, Appropriation Ordinance No. 2008-01-A."
Further still, the SP body according to the governor used new terms that "does not exist in local government budgeting lexicon. The Sanggunian is treading on dangerous grounds in adopting new terms not found in Section 306 of RA 7160 and the Updated Budget Operations Manual for Local Government Units."
Particular notice was called on section 1 that restored payment for the deleted item covering the Representation and Transportation Allowance of the Office of the Provincial Assessor.
"In simple English, this is called an amendment to the previous ordinance," Tupas wrote.
Last argument presented by the governor was that Appropriation Ordinance No. 2008-01-B was enacted by the Sanggunian without certification under oath by the provincial treasurer.
Copies of the veto letter were sent to Nilo Buot, Regional Director of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM)Regional Office 6 and Eliseo Orendez, Provincial Director of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG).