Vizcaya board rejects gov’s veto on vehicle acquisition

BAYOMBONG, Nueva Vizcaya — Provincial board members railroaded the other day the veto of Gov. Rodolfo Agbayani for the purchase of their "luxury" vehicles, insisting that they also have the right to own one.

Last month, Agbayani vetoed the provincial board’s ordinance appropriating P7 million for the purchase of 13 vehicles for its members, saying such a procurement at this time was "prejudicial to the public welfare."

But the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, acting on a motion by board member Edgardo Balgos, rejected Agbayani’s veto, arguing that owning a service vehicle is a matter of "necessity" for them to function more effectively.

"Now it’s up to him (Agbayani) if he wants to implement the (appropriation) ordinance. I hope he will do it," Balgos said.

"If he (Agbayani) has the right to own one (a Nissan Safari), we also have the equal opportunity to own even second-hand (vehicles)," said senior board member Jose Gambito, who chairs the board’s appropriations committee.

Days before Agbayani’s veto, the local Regional Trial Court issued a temporary restraining order, preventing the board members from implementing their ordinance on the vehicle purchase.

The court acted on the separate petitions filed by board member Leonardo Perez Jr., who solely opposed the ordinance, and human rights lawyer Ernesto Salunat.

Perez and Salunat both argued that buying luxury cars at this time is also a "blatant disregard" of President Arroyo’s call for all public officials to initiate belt-tightening measures amid the present economic crisis.

Perez said his colleagues could be held liable for spending such an amount amid the economic crunch. The province, he said, is still under a state of calamity because of the long dry spell that has destroyed more than P80 million worth of crops.

For his part, Salunat, a former Northern Luzon governor of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, described the move of the provincial board, led by Vice Gov. Luisa Cuaresma, as an example of "thoughtless extravagance."

He questioned the "constitutional soundness" of buying luxury vehicles, which he said is "contrary" and repugnant to the provision of the Constitution on the disbursement of public funds."