REP. Sherwin Gatchalian first caught the attention of us pensioners on Oct. 16, 2013 when he declared like a wise old man that the performance of the Social Security System “must be measured by how well the pensioners and its other members get the benefits due them and how their needs are met.”
“Not just by how much profit the agency has made,” asserted this enlightened and trailblazing Chinese-Filipino politician.
Instantly, he earned our love and respect.
We have added him since then to our list of political champions, unique in building a bright future in Philippine politics through his own efforts and hard work unlike scions of political dynasties who rely on the past accomplishments of their distinguished parents and grandparents.
He was reacting at that time to the performance bonus of P1 million that SSS board members had awarded to each of them despite their agency’s unsatisfactory service delivery.
As he had observed, “members have had enough nightmares in availing themselves of loans or receiving their pensions on time.”
There was a national consensus that the board members didn’t deserve any bonus.
But the SSS head insisted that his agency had a sterling performance in the previous year, and that those bonuses were justified pursuant to the performance-based incentive system of the Governance Commission for GOCCs.
Besides, as disclosed by him, SSS regular “employees also got bonuses amounting to P276 million.”
A finance man who once worked as a stock analyst, trader and broker, Cong. Sherwin questioned the often-repeated statements of SSS officials about their agency’s much-improved profitability:
“If SSS is after profit, we might as well privatize social security and let market forces and the profit motive dictate the contributions and premiums.”
He was, of course, merely issuing then a sarcastic and rhetorical statement.
His real position was that “SSS can work on fiscal reforms without hurting the pockets of its members.” After all, “it is the SSS’ fault that it has failed to collect billions in unremitted premiums from delinquent employers.”
He even suggested that:
“We need fresh, doable and sustainable systems that would bring back the confidence of the people in the SSS, and perhaps motivate them more to save for their future.”
In particular, he cited Australia’s superannuation system as a good model.
But a consenting PNoy defended the SSS officials’ bonuses, which emboldened them to simply ignore the almost violent public objections, and proceeded with awarding themselves those fat bonuses that year and the year after.
Right now, SSS officials are again seeking permission from GCG to grant to themselves their last performance bonus during PNoy’s last two months in office.
Why would they not help themselves to a generous “pabaon” before exiting on July 1?
We find this callous and shameful because we have yet to forget their all-out opposition to the proposed P2,000 pension increase that Congress has approved. Warning a naïve PNoy that the increase would bankrupt SSS in year 2029—and offering no alternative—they had him vetoed it days before it was supposed to have lapsed into law.
Cong. Sherwin is now campaigning for senator, and it was while being interviewed last March 3 in a popular television program when he reacted to this “pabaon” bonus.
Very self-confident, he disclosed—without batting an eyelash—that he would privatize SSS once elected.
His reasons in privatizing SSS were noticeably focused on stopping those presidential board appointees from getting undeserved fat bonuses. He didn’t even hint, for instance, why our light railway transit system is best operated by a private company.
We therefore couldn’t agree with him until we have settled first more profound privatization issues.
For starters, SSS would cease to be a “bayanihan” or a social insurance scheme where contributors pay premiums according to their means, and beneficiaries— pensioners, especially—are paid benefits according to their needs.
It would be a “kanya-kanya” system with nobody being obliged to help the weak among us. The poor have to fend for themselves.
Privatizing SSS is like converting it into a national savings scheme from which everybody receive back only what they have saved. This is how Pag-IBIG or our national provident fund operates.
But a privatized SSS could still work if integrated with a much-improved social pension scheme. Instead of subsidizing the SSS directly, the government may simply increase to P2,000 the social pensions and entitle all senior citizens including those receiving SSS pensions of P3,000 or less.
This would create inequity if those receiving SSS pensions from P3,000 to P5,000 were not entitled to any social pension.
Government may thus decree—using the social pension scheme—to raise SSS pensions to a guaranteed P5,000 while providing non-SSS pensioners P2,500 instead of the present P500.
Cong. Sherwin is now a senatorial candidate running under Senator Grace Poe’s “Gobyernong may Puso” slate, which has been flooding us with paid television advertisements promising to improve everybody’s pensions once elected.
Cong. Sherwin must thus reconsider his privatization position. Closing his eyes and thinking deeply, he must realize that GP’s pension promise would never materialize under his privatized SSS.
