Why The Anti-Constitutional Reform People Are Guaranteed To HATE The Westminister Form Of Parliamentary System

The Anti-Constitutional Reform people are still trying their old fear-mongering tactics like they did in the 90s. I remembered the time that I dreaded the possibility that Fidel V. Ramos himself would get another term. It was because I thought that going beyond one term of presidency equals dictatorship. I remembered believing the lie that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's plan for parliamentary will be bad for the Philippines. This was all linked in the name of defending the defective 1987 Constitution. They say that it will make Philippine politics worse or that it's just about people but not the systems. However, the real problem lies within THE SYSTEM more than it is the PEOPLE.

So why would they hate the Westminster form of the parliamentary system? Let's give some valid reasons based on how this form of parliamentary system would work...


The parliamentary system has never been a winner-takes-all system or popularity based democracies

The problem of the presidential form of democracy is the popularity-based democracy. It hardly hears the minority. True, majority wins but it shouldn't be a winner take all. The anti-constitutional reform politicians just want to have it, "They get it all!" which results in butterflies. Why do you think so many people fly from Liberal to PDP to Lakas to etc. etc.? It's because it's all about popularity. Why do you think Antonio Trillanes IV begged both President Rodrigo R. Duterte and Manuel A. Roxas Jr. to be his running mate? Why do you think Paolo Benigno "Bam" A. Aquino may have thoughts on jumping on one party after the other? It's because of the winner takes all mentality that's promoted by the presidential system.

The parliamentary set-up has never been like that. The winners take the Government Seats. The losing party, however, is given the task of becoming the Opposition whose job it is to find flaws and give better alternatives to the Government. It's all about listening to the voice of the minority. It's not an issue of what the majority or minority believes in. It's an issue of who's right and who's wrong or who's got the better alternatives. It doesn't become a set-up where the majority will always be right even when it's wrong or where the minority will always be wrong even when it's right. Rather, it considers both sides -- something that hardly happens in the Philippines because of the presidential system.


The weekly, TELEVISED question hour will burn their asses unless they're well-prepared!

Can you imagine if the anti-reform politicians had to face the weekly question hour LIVE every week? It would really be a heavy thing because it's systematized. Can you even imagine politicians who love to sleep on their job attempting to sleep during the weekly question hour?

The Weekly Question Hour gives a time limit of 7.5 minutes per person. Can you imagine if Antonio F. Trillanes IV himself were in the Weekly Question Hour and he tried to do his Talk Ng Talk while he's only allowed 7.5 minutes of speaking time? Can you imagine if Trillanes himself had to worse, even prove his preposterous claims before the whole Parliament? Worse, can you imagine if he were the Opposition Leader right now and he had to debate Prime Minister Duterte EVERY WEEK? One could imagine the hilarious outcome that might come out with him trying to talk his way out. He can't walk out or he'd be held in contempt. He has to do 7.5 minutes ONLY for whatever privilege speeches he may want.

These question hours will really put anyone INCLUDING the parliamentary minister and deputy prime minister under huge scrutiny. Can you imagine if Prime Minister Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino III said, "Hindi ko alam." or his controversial statement about renewable energy at the weekly question hour? Can you imagine if right now Deputy Prime Minister Leni Robredo were subjected to it? You can imagine the intensity that it would create if they were caught unprepared?

Updated on: July 28, 2019