Amidst 100% Payroll Vote, Espat Offers Rare Own-Government Critique

In a Parliament that has no political backbenchers on the government side, Cayo South Area Representative Hon. Julius Espat picked up—at least in part—the “backbench” mantle while critiquing an aspect of his own Party’s social policy.

While the critique was far from any Opposition-level disparagement, Espat’s comments deviated just enough from the usual intra-party endorsement of the Budget that viewers could hear the Prime Minister offering off-mic interjections as Espat pressed on.

Speaking during the final day of the 2025 Budget Debate, Espat noted that while the government had made positive strides in areas such as primary healthcare through NHI and education upliftment, it was not sufficient.

“It is not enough. Why am I saying this? Never enough. Never enough,” Espat said. “Our government should look out and prioritize helping the poor.”

He used the example of a campaigner who recently required heart surgery at a cost of $12,000 to propose a broader policy shift—one that would see the Social Security Board owning and operating a hospital to provide contributors with access to a higher tier of health services.

“NHI helps primary care health. That’s incredibly good. I am looking at another scenario… This would cover when you have accidents, emergencies, heart failure,” Espat said. “But if you are in a Social Security program that allowed for that, then you would be able to deal with another level of service.”

He concluded by urging the government not to become complacent: “What we have done in this government is extremely positive. But we shouldn’t be patting our shoulders. We should be catapulting to try to find solutions at a different level.”

Espat’s remarks come at a time when there are no remaining backbenchers in the governing side of the House. The April 2024 appointments of Jorge Espat, Marconi Leal, and Alex Balona to Minister of State roles meant that every elected government parliamentarian now holds executive office and is subject to what is commonly referred to as the “payroll vote.”

By convention, members of the payroll vote are expected to support government positions, given their executive obligations. In systems modeled after the Westminster tradition, backbenchers often provide a layer of internal scrutiny and independent perspective. Their absence effectively removes that layer from the lower chamber of Parliament.

The Political Reform Commission of 2000 highlighted this issue, with then-Commissioner Carolyn Trench-Sandiford cautioning that Ministers of State—by virtue of their roles and Cabinet participation—expand executive influence and diminish legislative independence.

Whether Espat’s remarks signal a broader willingness within the government to engage in internal self-examination remains unclear. But in a House where all government votes are executive-bound, even modest deviations like these now stand out.