Rep. Ogo excluded from Manila fact-finding trip

By
|
Posted on May 08 2005
Share

Manila liaison office proponent congressman Crispin Ogo said he was not invited to join the Senate’s on-going fact-finding mission in Manila but he is happy that the senators are acting on his bill.

“I was not asked about that trip but it’s okay. I’m very happy that the Senate is looking into it,” said Ogo, chairman of the House Committee on Health yesterday.

Ogo’s proposal, House Bill 14-151, aims to set up a liaison office in Manila to attend to CNMI patients being referred to Manila hospitals.

“This would save us a lot in terms of referral costs. The government must look at it very seriously especially now that revenues are expected to decline with the pullout of some garment factories,” said Ogo.

Senate president Joaquin G. Adriano earlier confirmed that four senators are in Manila for a “fact-finding mission” in connection with the proposed liaison office.

He said the delegation includes senators Henry H. San Nicolas, chairman of the Senate Committee on Health; Joseph M. Mendiola, chairman of the Senate Fiscal Committee; Luis P. Crisostimo, and Thomas Villagomez.

Villagomez left for Manila last Thursday while the three had left two days earlier.

They are expected to be back on Tuesday.

The senators are believed to be using their committee funds on their trip.

The trip, according to Adriano, “is purely to find out if it’s feasible to open Manila liaison office.”

He said the fact-finding mission report is expected to be submitted by the group when they come back.

Further, Adriano said that the Senate would call on Department of Public Health officials to shed light on the proposed office in Manila.

The senate head said the government should make sure most CNMI patients benefit from the proposed measure.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.