MANILA, Philippines—Those advocating the parliamentary system ought to consider Senate President Manuel Villar’s handling of the plots against him. While it is true, as his friend and ally Jinggoy Estrada says, that the plots never cease, at the heart of the present controversy is the Senate president’s alleged responsibility for an insertion into the national budget allocating P200 million for a road project that already had funding elsewhere in the appropriations law.

It was a masterpiece of legislative sleight-of-hand: the original budgetary provision was to extend President Garcia Avenue “from SLEX to Sucat Road including ROW”; the insertion referred to C-5 Road extension from “SLEX to Sucat Road including ROW”— Garcia Avenue and C-5, of course, being one and the same. But that’s not all. The total congressional insertions are being touted at P4 billion—P3.916 billion of which, according to Sen. Panfilo Lacson, emanated from the Senate.

A legislative leader with parliamentary instincts—never mind the old-fashioned notions of delicadeza—would have taken such allegations as a challenge serious enough to merit an offer of resignation from him as head of the chamber. He might also consider having the ethics committee of the Senate undertake an investigation. If his resignation is accepted, he loses his Senate presidency; if rejected, his leadership would be revalidated and the question put to rest. Neither he nor any Senate president, past, present or future, can afford to have such heavy questions weighing on his shoulders.

Not least because what has been caught red—is the entire Congress—and the Executive Department.

We have said in the past that the president proposes but Congress disposes, as far as the national budget is concerned. The chief executive proposes the general parameters of the budget and the House, armed with the power of the purse, works within the ambit of that proposal, nipping and tucking as it sees fit, to trim executive bloating of the budget and to generally reappropriate funds to fortify certain programs and trim down others. The Senate, in turn, can do its own nipping and tucking but must work within the parameters established by the House, which has the exclusive power to initiate a budget law because it alone possesses the power of the purse.

Obviously, there is collusion between the executive and the legislative branches, regardless of formal party affiliation, all in the name of pork and patronage. The collusion goes all the way to the top, understandable between the President and her anointed Speaker, less so between the chief executive and a nominally oppositionist Senate president. Joker Arroyo, true to form in his political transformation from statesman to political hack, sniffs that P200 million is really no big deal. Which suggests that he has become thoroughly infected by the jaded, old boys’ club mentality of officialdom.

His present defense is to smear his chamber (with some justification) for “ineptness and indolence,” for unanimously approving the budget—with insertions, and then, to sneer at the sums being mentioned as paltry. But this is no defense: responsibility still rests on the desk of the Senate president, the relevant committee chairmen, and members of the Bicameral Conference Committee.

The double entry of P200 million is no small item, and it is the pretty big tip of a pretty big budgetary iceberg for which the current congressional leadership can’t evade responsibility.

The general idea is for Congress as a whole to trim and reallocate, not to substantially inflate, the national budget. A peso more for one project means a peso less for another; but never, ever, under any budgetary scheme considered democratic or lawful, should one peso for one item be accompanied by a peso for the same item—even if under a different name.

But there it is, and for all the thunderous speeches, the fact remains that the budget has been passed. It enjoys the presumption of regularity. There is hardly anything anyone can do about it. (Which strengthens the argument that exposing the insertions makes for maximum noise but a minimum of practical effect.)

It will be implemented as written. And it will allow the opposition to partake of it even while virtuously grumbling about it.