The long hard climb of the Cooperative Bill into law

Politics is the battlefield of diverse interests. The clashes of opposing interests have made political activities, especially lawmaking, an arduous task. A bill may be meant for the public good but if it runs against the interest of some affected groups, expect those groups to give the bill a rough sailing in Congress. It is not surprising, therefore, that some lawmakers reluctantly agree to the watering down of their pet measures just to make sure that they become laws. After all, there is always the opportunity in the next Congress to give more teeth to the laws.

The bill amending the Cooperative Code of 1991, for instance, had to trek through tortuous terrain before it became a law. In the past 17 years, all attempts to amend it came to naught because of strong lobbying by those whose interests would be bushwhacked if it becomes a law. The Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth and Thirteenth Congress let the amendatory bill fall by the wayside even if it would contribute much to countryside development.

There have been charges that some monopolies were masquerading as cooperatives to escape their obligations to members, consumers and government. An amendatory law was needed to unmask them and stop the exploitation of members by officers who steal contributions and earnings. The main focus of the bill, however, is to make sure cooperatives built with the best intentions succeed.

Among the strongest critics of the bill amending the Cooperative Code are the electric cooperatives. Their opposition has betrayed them as being actually mere milking cows of politicians and powerful clans. Most of them do not want to register with the Cooperative Development Authority and share their profits with their supposed members who were never given any role in decision-making although they vote every two or three years.

Another equally powerful opponent of the bill is the national government, specifically, the Bureau of Internal Revenue. The amendatory bill primarily seeks to strengthen the tax-free status of cooperatives, and the BIR does not want any erosion of its tax collection base.

That the bill became a law during the Fourteenth Congress is a tribute to its proponents who went against their own political interests. Senate Majority Leader Migz Zubiri, chairman of the Senate Committee on Cooperatives and author of the Senate version, said that many electric cooperatives had warned him not to expect any support for him in the next election if he persisted in pushing for the measure. Their warning fell on deaf ears, like it did on the members of the House who shepherded the bill. Zubiri’s co-authors in the Senate were Edgardo J. Angara, Loren Legarda, Pia Cayetano and Nene Pimentel.

Surprisingly, the main proponent of the amendatory bill in the House is a party-list congressman representing the Association of Philippine Electric Cooperatives (APEC), Ernesto Pablo. Pablo said many leaders of electric cooperatives tried to disown him but he got the support of majority of the members.
Not surprisingly, the pseudo-electric cooperatives organized their own party list group in the last election but it fared miserably.

On February 2009, President Arroyo signed Republic Act 9520, otherwise known as the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008. The problem of the cooperative movement did not end with the enactment, however. The law still needed implementing rules and regulations, and it took the proponents almost one year to finalize instead of just 60 days from signing as provided by law. The main reason for the delay? The BIR’s continuing objection.

Migz and the members of the oversight committee on cooperatives had to appeal to Finance Secretary Gary Teves before the BIR gave in. Finally, in February 2010, the much-needed IRR was finalized. Migz and Pablo said that since then, 11 of the 119 electric cooperatives have registered with the Cooperatives Development Agency. I share their high hopes that the new law would herald a stronger cooperative movement in the Philippines. Of course, this presupposes that the next administration will make the implementation of the Philippine Cooperative Code a priority.

Incidentally, one member of the bicam that resolved the conflicting provisions of the House and the versions of the bill was Rep. Gil Cua. Migz said that the bicam would meet until about 2 a.m. with Cua in attendance. They never knew until much later that Cua was already suffering from terminal cancer and left his hospital bed against his doctor’s advice just to attend the bicam. It is no wonder that Migz dedicated his book on the Cooperative Code not only to members of his family but also to Cua.

Migz plans to give copies of his books to all cooperatives in the Philippines to make them aware of, and enjoy, their rights and privileges under the new law. –EFREN L. DANAO, Daily Tribune

efrendanao2003@yahoo.com