{"id":147579,"date":"2018-01-19T21:15:25","date_gmt":"2018-01-20T02:15:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=147579"},"modified":"2018-01-19T21:15:25","modified_gmt":"2018-01-20T02:15:25","slug":"farinas-claims-of-railroaded-con-ass-resolution-unfounded","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/01\/19\/farinas-claims-of-railroaded-con-ass-resolution-unfounded\/","title":{"rendered":"Farinas: Claims of &#8216;railroaded&#8217; con-ass resolution unfounded"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_109100\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-109100\" style=\"width: 3010px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-109100\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31.jpg\" alt=\"FILE: House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fari\u00f1as (PNA photo)\" width=\"3010\" height=\"2665\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31.jpg 3010w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31-300x266.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31-768x680.jpg 768w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/farinasambushjuly31-1024x907.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 3010px) 100vw, 3010px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-109100\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">FILE: House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fari\u00f1as (PNA photo)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0&#8212; House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fari\u00f1as has dismissed as &#8220;false, unfounded, and unfair&#8221; the claims of progressive lawmakers from the Makabayan bloc that the adoption of a resolution convening Congress into a constituent assembly to revise the Constitution was railroaded by the supermajority.<\/p>\n<p>In a statement issued Thursday night, Fari\u00f1as said the adoption of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) No. 9 was duly done in accordance with House rule with a quorum of 186 members.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It is a product of democratic and exhaustive debates not just in the plenary hall of the House of Representatives, in the several committee hearings conducted by the committee on constitutional amendments, but also in nationwide public consultations in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao,&#8221; Fari\u00f1as said.<\/p>\n<p>Fari\u00f1as cited that the initial committee deliberation was held on Oct. 12, 2016 and the resolution was adopted on Oct. 19, 2016.<\/p>\n<p>He said public hearings were held with representatives from the business and finance sectors, academic and research institutions, local government organizations, constitutionalists, basic sectors, and related government agencies.<\/p>\n<p>He further noted that the committee report was filed on Feb. 15, 2017, included in the calendar of business on Mar. 1, 2017, and only sponsored to the plenary on Dec. 13, 2017.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Clearly, this afforded members time to consider the pros and cons of the measure,&#8221; Fari\u00f1as said.<\/p>\n<p>The resolution was sponsored by House constitutional amendments committee chair Roger Mercado together with vice chair Vicente Veloso and Deputy Speaker Gwendolyn Garcia, followed by interpellations by Representatives Antonio Tinio, Lito Atienza, Carlos Zarate, and Ariel Casilao.<\/p>\n<p>The debate resumed on January 16 with Mercado sponsoring and Casilao interpellating.<\/p>\n<p>Fari\u00f1as recalled that the House members were in the process of debating on the resolution when a member of the Magnificent 7 bloc, Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice, sought to prevent the discussion by questioning the quorum.<\/p>\n<p>Fari\u00f1as said the roll was called a second time during the same session with 186 members in attendance.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;HCR No. 9 has been exhaustively discussed in the plenary. The House members decided it was time to vote on it after hearing the discussions and debates on the measure,&#8221; Fari\u00f1as said.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The desire of many of the members to close the debate which led to the adoption of HCR 9 finds basis in the rules of the HOR,&#8221; he added.<\/p>\n<p>He cited a House rule providing that &#8216;a motion to close the debate on a measure shall be in order after three speeches in favor and two against, or after only one speech in favor and none against.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Fari\u00f1as reminded critics that the charter change issue is not new as it had been\u00a0introduced and discussed in previous Congresses.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The clamor for Charter change had long been there. It is time we seriously consider it for the benefit of our country and people,&#8221; he said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA\u00a0&#8212; House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fari\u00f1as has dismissed as &#8220;false, unfounded, and unfair&#8221; the claims of progressive lawmakers from the &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":109100,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,95],"tags":[15250,13370,42736,44030,44031,18565,2772],"class_list":["post-147579","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news","category-news-ph","tag-antonio-tinio","tag-ariel-casilao","tag-carlos-zarate","tag-gwendolyn-garcia","tag-lito-atienza","tag-makabayan-bloc","tag-rodolfo-farinas","mauthors-filane-mikee-cervantes","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147579","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=147579"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147579\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/109100"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=147579"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=147579"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=147579"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}