The first time I heard of a government agency called a road board was from a speech delivered by the late, great co-founder and chairman emeritus of SGV & Co., the nation’s largest auditing firm. Speaking at a businessmen’s meeting, Washington Sycip said that Singapore had some of the best roads in East Asia and that the Singapore Road Board was entirely responsible for that state of affairs. I came away from that meeting thinking that this country would do well to emulate Singapore and create a Road Board.
Showing equal concern about the sad state of the nation’s road system, Congress subsequently enacted Republic Act 8294, the Motor Vehicle User’s Charge (MVUC) Act, which authorized the collection of a charge for the privilege of using a motor vehicle and created a Road Board to manage the fund generated by the charge. Motorists have been paying the MVUC at motor vehicle registration time.
R.A. 8794 set the following mandate for the use of the funds generated by the MVUC: “road maintenance, improvement of road drainage, installation of adequate and efficient traffic lights and road safety devices and road pollution control.”
That the MVUC has been a prodigious generator of funds for government operations – specifically the care and maintenance of this country’s road system—is shown by Commission on Audit (COA) data. COA has reported that from 2001 to 2012 the Road Board has reserved billions from the nation’s motor vehicle users.
Fast forward from the time of RA 8794’s passage. Today the Senate is poised to debate Senate Bill No. 1620, a public works committee-sponsored bill that consolidates three bills sponsored by Senate president Aquilino Pimentel III and Senators Miguel Zubiri, JV Ejercito and Sherwin Gatchalian. Road Board sentiment must be so strong if three bills have been filed against it. The public works committee is chaired by Senator Manny Pacquiao.
SB 1620 seeks the abolition of the Road Board and the transfer of its assets to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and the Department of Transportation (DTr). The Road Board’s personal would be absorbed by DPWH and the its funds would go into four special trust accounts—a special (national) road support fund, a special local road fund, a special road safety fund and a special vehicle pollution control fund—that would be set up in the National Treasury. The special vehicle pollution fund would be managed by DTr.
Why the 360-degree turn in Senate -—and probably Congress-wide—sentiment toward the Road Board?
One reason is the character of the Road Board’s legal mandate. Senator Pimentel has said the following: “The existence of the Road Board is redundant as its functions fall within the powers and jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works and Highways and Department of Transportation.” Which begs the counter-argument that this was an existing fact at the time of RA 8794’s passage.
SB 1620 stated in the clearest of terms that Road Board funds will be used only for the purposes originally envisioned, to wit, road maintenance and safety and road pollution control. Stated differently, Road Board funds will not be usable for any other purposes. Why this clear statement of the purposes for which Road Board funds will be usable? The answer: according to COA, Road Board funds have been used for “purposes other than those mandated by law.” To make matters worse, the Road Board had, according to COA, had yet to submit, as of 2016, liquidation reports covering the projects funded with Road Board funds.
A further reason for the deep Senate disenchantment with the Road Board is the high ratio of operating expenses – salaries, allowances and other personnel-related spending – to capital expenses. COA has placed operating expenses from 2004 to 2008 at no less than P515.5 million.
There is a right conclusion and a wrong conclusion to be drawn from this country’s experience with the Road Board. The right conclusion is that RA 8794 has not been implemented properly; there has been gross misuse of resources through corruption and unsound spending. The wrong conclusion is that the Road Board idea should be abandoned. The train has gone off the tracks, but the rail service is still a great idea.
A brief closing memo to Senator Pacquiao and his SB 1620 colleagues: Don’t abolish the Road Board; straighten it out with good, tight amendments to RA 8794. Just fix the shortcomings of the law.#
E-mail: romero.business.class@gmail.com
