Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 11307

DENR targets El Nido’s Bacuit Bay for cleanup by May

THE Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) said that it hopes to make the waters of Bacuit Bay in El Nido, Palawan safe for swimming by May.
“We are confident we can present to the public an improved Bacuit Bay — safe and fit for bathing and swimming,” Executive Director Henry A. Adornado of DENR Region IV-B said in a statement on Tuesday.
The DENR is currently looking at the possibility of declaring Bacuit Bay a Water Quality Management Area (WQMA), which authorizes the implementation of an integrated water quality management system to protect and save bodies of water.
The DENR is currently rehabilitating Manila Bay, with the goal of making its waters safe for swimming this year by reducing its fecal coliform level, after the agency mounted a 6-month cleanup of Boracay Island.
Establishments found to be contributing to the pollution of Manila Bay are currently being issued cease and desist and ex-parte orders, and notices of violation, forcing them to comply with environmental laws particularly the Clean Water Act.
“Water quality management is one of the priorities of Secretary (Roy A.) Cimatu. The establishment of Bacuit Bay as a WQMA adheres to the thrust of his administration for clean water,” Reynulfo A. Juan, DENR Assistant Secretary, said in a statement.
“We look forward to having a sustained and collective action toward saving Bacuit Bay and the rest of our natural resources here in El Nido,” Mr. Juan added.
The DENR said that it is working on building an additional office in El Nido, as well as a bacteriology laboratory to help the DENR’s Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) evaluate water samples. — Reicelene Joy N. Ignacio

Weak investment climate main 5G risk, not security fears — Ericsson

BARCELONA — Europe risks falling behind other regions in rolling out 5G mobile services because of onerous regulation and weak investment rather than any security concerns about Chinese equipment, Ericsson Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Borje Ekholm said on Monday.
High spectrum fees, regulatory uncertainty and a lack of investment were more pressing concerns, Mr. Ekholm said, alluding to calls by the US to ban Chinese network vendors on national security grounds.
“The debate here often becomes: it’s the lack of technology for operators, that’s what slowed down Europe. And that’s not the case,” Mr. Ekholm said in an interview on the sidelines of the Mobile World Congress, the telecoms industry’s main annual gathering.
“The reality is that less than half of the countries in Europe have actually given out spectrum for 5G. It’s a big uncertainty how much it’s going to cost.”
Ericsson has forecast that 5G subscriber numbers could reach 1.5 billion worldwide by 2024 as consumers and businesses move to next-generation networks slated to bring super-fast connections for everything from computer gaming through to medical surgery.
North America and northeast Asia will adopt the new technology fastest, the company said in a report last year, but 5G is also expected to account for about 30% of mobile subscriptions in Western Europe.
Ericsson has signed 10 contracts for 5G with operators in countries including the US, Britain, Australia and Switzerland, Mr. Ekholm said, but still faces challenges in Europe around the large number of operators and high spectrum fees.
He said Europe had more than 200 operators to contend with, against only a handful in China and the US, and pointed to 5G spectrum auctions in Italy last year which raised 6.5 billion euros ($7.38 billion) in a ferocious bidding war
The prices in Italy, he said, were equivalent to almost two years’ capital expenditure for some operators.
“It’s a very heavily regulated sector, so overall the investment climate I think is the key reason why we have been slow,” he said.
SECURITY WARNINGS
Ekholm took no position on calls by the US for Western countries to bar China’s Huawei from their networks over allegations the company and its equipment could be used by Beijing for spying.
But debate is raging in Europe over whether to heed the US-led warnings, even as big telecoms operators say that such a move could set back the deployment of 5G by years.
Huawei has repeatedly denied the accusations of state-spying and no evidence has been publicly produced.
Nokia CEO Rajeev Suri told Reuters on Sunday any future decision to bar Huawei would not delay the rollout of 5G in Europe, pointing instead to delays in issuing spectrum to operators and high auction costs as the main obstacles.
Asked if he agreed with his competitor’s assessment, Ekholm said he was not willing to speculate and it was for individual countries to decide how they managed their national security policy.
Mr. Ekholm said Ericsson was preparing for any eventuality by investing in product development and having a supply chain which can ramp up 5G demand if needed. He highlighted his company’s announcement on Monday that it was buying the antennas and filter operations of Germany’s Kathrein.
“Let’s look at it when it comes down. We have to remember the operators … have a lot of gear in the network, they are financially under a lot of pressure, in Europe especially,” he said.
“They’re under a lot of pressure here, so how they are going to act if something happens or doesn’t happen I think is very hard to speculate.” — Reuters

Averting a poultry industry panic

The Philippine poultry industry again faces a challenge after the much-dreaded avian influenza outbreak, or “bird flu,” a few years back: the lifting of the price-based special safeguard duty imposition (SSG) on imported chicken meat and products, which led to a sharp increase in importation to the detriment of the local poultry sector.
LOCAL VS. FOREIGN PRODUCTS: CLOSER LOOK AT SPECIAL SAFEGUARD DUTIES (SSG)
In order to protect local industries, Republic Act No. 8800 or the “Safeguard Measures Act” provides for the imposition of special safeguard duties (SSG) to be undertaken in response to increased importation in the country. It provides immediate and temporary protection from import surge or cheap importation of SSG-eligible products, regardless of the country of origin.
In the case of price-based SSG duty, it can be levied when the actual cost, insurance and freight (CIF) value of the product is below the trigger price. As of date, the current trigger price for poultry imports is Php 93.96 per kilogram.
Further, SSG duties are imposed on imports outside the minimum access volume (MAV), which is defined by law as the amount of imports of an agricultural product allowed to be imported into the country at a customs duty lower than the out-quota customs duty.
Tariffs imposed on meat products range from 10% to 40%. Chicken imports are subject to a 40% tariff. The corresponding MAV for pork is 54,210 metric tons (MT) and 23,490 MT for chicken.
IMPORTATION INDICATORS AND IMPLICATIONS
In view of cushioning the rising prices and mitigating the impact of soaring inflation on the consuming public, the Department of Agriculture (DA) requested for the temporary lifting of the imposition of the price-based special safeguard duty (SSG) of imported chicken meat and products last August.
As a result, the levels of importation in the country soared. Latest data from the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) show that meat importation, namely beef, buffalo, chicken, duck, lamb, turkey and pork, shot up by 22.73 percent from 691,463 MT in 2017 to 848,648 MT in 2018.
For poultry products, importation rose by 18.06 percent from 244,104 MT in 2017 to 288,203 MT in 2018. Notably, these figures have already exceeded the MAV. At present, approximately two-thirds of the country’s total chicken imports are mechanically deboned meat (MDM), which is one of the primary raw materials used by meat manufacturers to produce processed meat such as hotdogs, sausages and chicken nuggets. BAI data likewise showed that majority of chicken products originate from the United States, followed by the Netherlands and Brazil.
In terms of the supply, data from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) regarding the performance of Philippine Agriculture last October to December 2018 demonstrates an expansion of production by 6.99 percent, accounting for 16.18 percent to the total agricultural output. From January to December 2018, poultry production increased by 5.75 percent.
While this is so, poultry demand in the Philippines is also accelerating at a rapid rate due to urbanization and the “fast food culture” which, in turn, facilitates the growth in the restaurant and catering industries.
According to the latest Food and Beverage Report, consumption preferences in the Philippines, Vietnam, India, and Indonesia have changed due to the growing acceptance of eating out and fast food deliveries attributable to convenience. This change of consumer behavior entails serious implications on the supply of meat products, wherein cheaper imports threaten the margins of the local producers and farmers.
REINSTATEMENT OF SPECIAL SAFEGUARD MEASURES
As a response to the over importation of chicken products, there are calls for the Department of Agriculture to reinstate the imposition of SSG duty as there was “no significant reduction on retail prices of chicken meat even after SSG was lifted” as wet market retail prices still ranged between Php 125 and Php 160 per kilo. Accordingly, the Bureau of Customs (BOC) issued Memorandum Circular No. 209-2018 on October 2018 in order to reinstate the price-based special safeguard duty imposition on imported chicken.
Although the original intention of the temporary suspension of SSG was commendable, its effects were much worrisome for the local broilers and farmers. Based on reports, farmgate prices of chicken fell to almost Php 38 per kilo, below the cost-to-produce of Php 80 to Php 85 per kilo live weight. As a consequence, majority of local farmers quit raising chicken due to big losses.
PAVING THE PATH FOR POULTRY
Now that the special safeguard measures are back in place and inflation is expected to ease by this year, the government must consider long-term policies, which could ultimately pave the way for the growth of the Philippine poultry industry. Such measures include balancing the growing demand of meat by the consuming public, promoting healthy competition of big and small players in the industry, and protecting the welfare of local producers in the agricultural sector.
A review of the volume of chicken imports is recommended to safeguard the local industries, instead of pushing for a total ban on importation, which can affect our commitments in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Accordingly, an independent regulatory council should be established to recommend the ceiling of meat importation and its minimum access volume (MAV). Another proposed solution is to provide government incentives and subsidies to help local feed millers and farmers become profitable and sustainable. Their produce, namely corn and soya, compose 70 percent of the feeds of chicken, which in turn help the poultry sector. Lastly, investment in research and development in the farming sector is needed to decrease our dependence on imported chicken products.
 
Hannah Viola is a lawyer, Energy and Infrastructure Fellow at Stratbase ADR Institute, and Convenor of CitizenWatch Philippines.

What is wrong with leftist thinking?

When I was a student, I heard an Englishwoman make a statement at a forum that I remember to this day. She said, “If you do not have leftist leanings before the age of 25, you have no heart; but if you still have leftist leanings after the age of 25, you have no head.” Why then does the chairman of our National Youth Commission demand that government scholars who become leftist activists be deprived of their scholarships? And why should uniformed officers go after students and teachers who espouse “leftist” ideologies, however they may define this?
We are supposed to be a constitutional democracy in which citizens enjoy freedom of beliefs and of speech. There is, of course, a red line. And that is, when they commit crimes that are demonstrably against the laws of the country.
I consider myself a left of center-liberal democrat. My response to some associates in the anti-Marcos Parliament of the Streets who saw me as a “leftist” was to say “you are so far right that you see me as a radical leftist.” Being a liberal democrat to me means respecting the right of citizens to freedom of thought and of speech, within the limits of the law.
During one overnight chat (often debate, really) at my house which he occasionally used as a safe house when he was still in hiding, my former boss and old friend Horacio “Boy” Morales said to me, “When you no longer have the support of the people, that means your politics is wrong.” At that time, Boy Morales was Chairman of the National Democratic Front, a post now occupied by Chief Peace Negotiator Fidel Agcaoili.
What is a leftist? I have just a general idea of what it is. I see leftists as those who think government policies should favor the underprivileged versus the privileged, as a matter of social justice. In a country like ours, where just a few families control the majority of the wealth of the country, where almost half of the families are living below the poverty line, and about a third suffer involuntary hunger, what can possibly be wrong with that? The status quo is certainly in need of radical change. Although we may be better off than we were in the 1970s, we are a long way from a socially-just economy. The fact is, the few rich are getting richer and richer. And the benefits of the free market economy are not trickling down, as free market economists theorize, to the majority. I do not believe that the free market, which I basically prefer to government control, should be unbridled.
Leftist activism, such as marching in the streets, and mouthing “leftist” slogans, making public statements against government policies and the status quo are functional because they help keep the politicians from being too nice to the economic powers who fund their campaigns.
The party-list system, which has been abused and needs to be reformed, has been functional nonetheless because “leftist” noises from Bayan Muna, Gabriela, ACT, and other “left-leaning” activist groups have tempered the tendency of corrupt politicians from moving too far to the right (or favoring the status quo concentration of economic and political power).
Thanks, it seems to me, to the “leftists,” we have more and more pro-people legislation that helps overcome the unjust social and economic structures that keep the underprivileged from bettering their and their children’s lot. We now have laws favoring universal health care, free college tuition in addition to free public and elementary and high school education. We also have cash assistance to families living below the poverty line in order to help them send their children all the way to high school, and to help ensure the health of mothers and babies. Of course, there is much work to do to improve the execution of these laws, but the laws are a good start.
Going back to the statement I cited earlier by Boy Morales, that when you no longer have the support of the people, your politics is wrong, it seems to me this is food for thought to radical communists like Jose Maria Sison and his fellow pensionado exiles in the Netherlands. I cannot believe the statement of former Jesuit Luis Jalandoni that “revolutionally taxes” (such as those extorted from mining firms and politicians who want to campaign in areas under NPA control) are “legitimate.” The NPA has clearly lost the support of the people and now resort to extortion under the gun in order to fund their activities.
The EDSA Revolution did usher in some innovations, such as the party-list system — with its shortcomings — which allows for Parliamentary Struggle, in lieu of Armed Struggle, which seems to me to be destructive of lives and properties, and no longer functional.
An election is coming up. Our choice of senators will make a big difference in national policies that hopefully will enable more and more pro-people legislation. We have “leftists” like Gary Alejano and Neri Colmenares who, I am sure, will make a social justice difference if elected. We also have “left of center” politicians like Bam Aquino, Chel Diokno, and Erin Tañada. Also brilliant men like Florin Hilbay, and competent leaders like Mar Roxas and Samira Gutoc who will certainly be assets to the incoming Senate.
Certainly, these candidates make more sense than non-performing senator Lito Lapid, comedian Bato de la Rosa, “utang na loob” presidential endorsees such as Freddie Aguilar, Bong Go, and Imee Marcos, and movie stars such as Bong Revilla and Jinggoy Estrada.
The business community which has, to be fair, been contributing more and more to social justice through their social responsibility programs, should certainly consider how they can help bring about a more just society by helping ensure the election of responsible and competent candidates to the Senate.
 
Teresa S. Abesamis is a former professor at the Asian Institute of Management and an independent development management consultant.
tsabesamis0114@yahoo.com

Is charter change the game changer in the next Congress?

(First of two parts)
On 18 January 2019, three days before the January 21, 2019 plebiscite for the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL), President Rodrigo R. Duterte alluded to pursuing charter change once the BOL is ratified. If ratified, the BOL creates the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) and replaces the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). Now that the BOL was ratified on 25 January, the path to charter change seems clear. Is it or is it not?
While the answer to the questions remain obscure, we may find some hints from the electoral acrobatics taking place right now for the 13 May 2019 midterm elections. But let us focus on the Senate race.
We focus on the Senate not because the House of Representatives is irrelevant or insignificant, but because we know from experience and the latter chamber’s political history about its membership’s propensity to gravitate towards the president-elect’s party and agenda even in cases where the incumbent president belongs to the “minority party.” The Senate, on the other hand, has significantly played the active president’s opposer or resister on critical issues including that of charter change.
With seven senators eyeing reelection (four of them allied to the President), seven former senators aiming to return to the chamber (at least three are political allies of the President or his daughter Mayor Sarah Duterte), and eight opposition contenders among 62 senatorial candidates, what are the chances of charter change gaining ground and supported in the next Philippine Congress? Will charter change be the game changer in the next Philippine Congress? Will the Senate remain anti-charter change?
First, we step back to examine the past charter change attempts and how the Senate opposed and reduced these into futile efforts of self-serving incumbents. Second, we examine how the midterm elections may impact on the power/party configuration in the Senate and, consequently, the fate of charter change in the Philippines.
CHARTER CHANGE NOT NEW
Charter change is not new, as it dates back to the Marcos regime in the early 1970s. In the post-Marcos era, as early as 1989 — barely two and a half years after the 1987 Constitution was approved in a plebiscite — calls for constitutional change gained momentum and received much media attention. The failed December 1989 coup had, in part, triggered the discussion on constitutional change.
In 1991, the House of Representatives adopted a unanimous resolution endorsing the shift to a parliamentary form of government. Had the Senate agreed to it, the shift would have been implemented in the 1992 elections.
In 1993, the House persisted and proposed a two-stage process. The first stage was to amend the Constitution in 1994 via a people’s initiative to install a unicameral assembly that would take effect on the date of its ratification in 1995. The second stage was to convene the unicameral assembly as a Constituent Assembly to draft the needed constitutional reforms including the shift to a parliamentary form of government in 1998 or before 1998. The Senate rejected the proposal.
The move to amend the Constitution was brought up again in late 1996. The People’s Initiative for Reform, Modernization and Action (PIRMA), the organization supporting charter change through a people’s initiative, was launched in December of that year. Three months later, however, the Supreme Court unanimously revoked the petition of PIRMA for a people’s initiative for lack of an enabling law.
In 1999, an amendment to the Constitution was introduced, aimed at removing restrictions on foreign ownership on land, public utilities, schools, mass media, mining firms, and advertising agencies. The Constitutional Correction for Development (Concord) was created to push for the lifting of restrictions on the foreign ownership of business. ConCord did not only fail but its mastermind was ousted from the presidency due to strong opposition from the Catholic Church.
Another attempt at a people’s initiative came in 2006. The Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines and Sigaw ng Bayan undertook a people’s initiative petition. The Supreme Court, however, ruled against its legality in November 2006. Meanwhile, major political parties in the House majority coalition created a multiparty working group to finalize the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution. The amendments included the shift from the presidential form of government to the parliamentary form, and from the bicameral to a unicameral one.
A month later, the House of Representatives approved House Resolution No. 167 convening Congress into a constituent assembly. The plan of the House majority coalition was to have key amendments to the Constitution approved before Congress took a Christmas recess, a plebiscite by February, and a new parliamentary government and constitution by the end of 2007.
In an attempt to hasten the process, the House approved another resolution amending its own rules. The resolution provided for the deletion of that specific section in the House Rules of the Thirteenth Congress that states: “Proposals to amend or revise the Constitution shall be by resolution which may be filed at any time by any member. The adoption of resolutions proposing amendments to, or revision of, the constitution shall follow the procedure for the enactment of bills.” The resolution was intended to bypass the three-reading procedure in each chamber of Congress that is followed for the enactment of any law.
At the same time, civil society groups and the media were closely monitoring the turn of events in the House, the Senate, and Malacañang. Public pressure on Congress and the Executive continued to build up.
As in the past, the Senate stood its ground and rejected the House’s resolution. Members did not allow themselves to be “coerced” by the 72-hour deadline set by the Speaker of the House then. Finally, on 12 December 2006, the House of Representatives voted to archive its earlier resolution of convening the Congress into a constituent assembly. Had the Senate agreed with the House of Representatives, Congress could have started to exercise its constituent powers to propose amendments to the 1987 Constitution by December 12, 2006.
Between 2007 and 2015, calls for charter change were muted or silenced, deliberately or otherwise, and temporarily tabled or shelved. Charter change, aimed at either shifting to a parliamentary form of government or amending the economic provisions in the 1987 Philippine Constitution, or shifting to a federal system, was not a priority agenda of the government. It seemed that Arroyo had “given up” her ambition to become the Prime Minister had the House succeeded in December 2006. The next President, Benigno Aquino III, on the other hand, was simply not interested in extending his term of office.
Attempts at charter change were resurrected after Duterte won the presidency in 2016. Determined to change the government into a federal system as he promised when he ran for the presidency, Duterte created the 25-member Consultative Committee (Con-Com) tasked to review the 1987 Constitution on December 7, 2016 through Executive Order No. 10 but whose work commenced more than a year later.
On 9 July 2018 the President received the draft Federal Constitution from the Consultative Committee. Former chief justice Reynato Puno, Con-Com Head, described the draft Federal Constitution during the turnover ceremony as seeking to “establish a distinct federalism in our country — a bayanihan federalism (that is) strong enough to hold together the various federated regions and establishes federated regions that are socially, economically and politically viable and sustainable.” The draft constitution also banned political dynasties and political turncoatism.
Charter change under Duterte took an ugly turn when the Speaker of the House, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo came up with her own charter change proposal, the Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) 15. It was not the first time that Arroyo “masterminded” charter change in the country. The year 2006 witnessed three futile attempts at charter change by the Arroyo administration including the creation of the Consultative Commission to study the 1987 Constitution and propose amendments to it.
The passage of RBH 15 at the House of Representatives after three session days spent for plenary debates becomes Arroyo’s other major coup after she successfully took over the Speakership in July 2018. RBH 15 contained the House’s proposed draft constitution that would shift the country to federalism and tampered with Duterte’s Con-Com’s draft Federal Constitution by removing term limits and rules prohibiting political dynasties.
The House voted in favor of RBH 15 on Second Reading on 4 December 2018 and on Third Reading on 11 December 2018. The Senate, on the other hand, could not care less.
Attempts at charter change will surely continue after the May 19 elections. Will charter change be the game changer in the next Philippine Congress? Will the new Senate be anti-charter change?
 
Diana J. Mendoza, PhD, is the chair of the Department of Political Science at the Ateneo de Manila University.

On Trump-Kim summit, implications for ASEAN and China

The second Trump-Kim Summit in Vietnam this week, February 27-28, points to many good and optimistic scenarios not only for both US and N. Korea but also for the ASEAN, East Asia and the rest of the world.
The first Trump-Kim summit last June 2018 was held in Singapore. Mr. Kim Jong Un (KJU) and N. Korea officials saw there that even a small country with just 5.7M people, very poor until the early ‘60s when it was kicked out of the Malaysia federation, and no nukes but market-and globally-integrated can become so prosperous and politically-respected worldwide.
KJU went to Vietnam (VN) last Monday or two days before the summit and had talks with officials there. VN is indeed a perfect venue for the summit and for KJU to learn lessons for at least six reasons.
(1) VN is politically socialist, a one-party state but economically capitalist, (2) VN was very poor until 1975 when the devastating Vietnam War ended then managed to grow fast via market-oriented reforms like privatization of many state enterprises and trade liberalization, zero tariff with ASEAN neighbors, (3) VN was a former US enemy and later embraced the US as economic and military partner, (4) VN has no nukes yet politically secure, (5) VN is not far from Pyongyang, perhaps only 4 hours by plane, and (6) VN is an ASEAN member like Singapore, the association is 3rd biggest consumer bloc in the world (about 650M consumers) with many friends all over the world.
Let us go back a few decades and see what N. Korea has missed all these years by being a hermit-like economy. A mid-point 1995 is included below because that’s the year where (1) Vietnam normalized ties with the US, and (2) WTO was created that year and global trade has improved. Data are from the World Bank’s World Development Indicators (WDI) and the IMF’s World Economic Outlook (WEO) but both institutions do not have data for N. Korea. The multiples are computed from the GDP size (see table).
GDP multiples and expansion over selected year
So what N.Korea missed: (1) Fast growth of S. Korea for 3.5 decades, economy expanded about 140x from 1960 to 1995, (2) From 1995 to 2010 or just 1.5 decades, China economy expanded 8.2x while VN economy expanded 5.4x, and (3) sustained growth until 2017, China and Vietnam economy expanded 2x in seven years.
So while N.Korea denuclearization will be the center of the Trump-Kim meeting, a second most important topic will be the transition of N. Korea to VN-like economy. And in the process, to reduce dependence from China which has growing toxic relations with many neighbors like Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea, India, Vietnam and Philippines.
Speaking of this topic, Stratbase-Albert del Rosario Institute (ADRi) organized a forum on “Corrosive Capital? The Political Economy of Chinese Foreign Investments in the Philippines” last week February 21 at the Tower Club, Makati. The speaker was Alvin Camba, a PhD Sociology candidate at Johns Hopkins University. Reactors were Dr. Rene de Castro of DLSU and myself.
Alvin said, “Current iterations of Chinese foreign capital is corrosive, bypasses and transforms pre-existing procedures, concentrates profits in specific groups, and strengthens and generates new patronage networks.”
I agree with that assessment. I cited the case of the Kaliwa Dam project, originally an integrated PPP but later converted to hybrid PPP by the Duterte administration upon the lobbying of China capital (China Eximbank) and contractors. Now Filipino taxpayers are indebted to China by at least P18B in this project alone when there should be no foreign loan if the original integrated PPP scheme was allowed.
I am not familiar how China companies, private and state-owned, deal with N. Korea enterprises but from various reports of how China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has trapped several poor countries to huge debt, it is safe to assume that N. Korea economy is controlled and restricted by China.
So a successful N. Korea transition to VN-like economy will see a good and promising outlook for the region and the world in at least three ways: (1) Soon Starbucks, McDonald’s, Marriott, Google, Apple and other American brands, also Toyota, Hyundai, Samsung and other Asian and global brands will be in N. Korea and its 26M consumers. (2) S. Korea with 51M consumers can then reduce its defense spending and use more public resources for inter-Korean industrialization, and (3) a N. Korea-ASEAN FTA may not be farfetched as KJU has become more familiar and comfortable with VN and Singapore.
 
Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is president of Minimal Government Thinkers.
minimalgovernment@gmail.com

PHL slams Washington Post story on drug war

By Camille A. Aguinaldo, Reporter
THE PHILIPPINE Embassy in Washington on Monday slammed an article by the Washington Post on the Philippine government’s war on drugs, saying its portrayal of the country’s capital was a “hasty generalization.”
Meanwhile, senators on Tuesday offered solutions to address the continued proliferation of illegal drugs in the country following President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s recent statements that the remaining years of his term would be the “most dangerous” for those involved in the illegal drug trade.
“We take strong exception to the article entitled, ‘This is Manila’ that appeared on the front page of the Washington Post on 25 February 2019. It is disappointing how this article hides behind the guise of journalism to advance an agenda that seeks to discredit the Philippines in the eyes of the international community,” the Philippine Embassy said in a statement.
“Contrary to what its title hopes to provoke, the article paints a picture not of Manila, but of a hasty generalization that has no foundation in reality,” the statement added.
The article featured the killing of a Filipino drug addict, whose body was found floating in a river in Tondo, Manila.
The Philippine Embassy pointed out that the news article failed to mention that majority of Filipinos support the government’s war on drugs, citing recent surveys.
It cited the June 2018 survey of the Social Weather Stations (SWS) which showed that eight out of 10 or 78% of Filipinos were satisfied with the war on drugs. Another June 2018 survey, this time by Pulse Asia, showed that 77% of Metro Manila residents believe the war on drugs is the government’s “most important achievement.”
The embassy also cited the reduced criminality in the country as well as disciplinary actions on erring police personnel.
It maintained that the Philippines continues to uphold the rule of law and human rights in its policies.
“As a nation that cherishes freedom, democracy and justice, and as a responsible member of the international community, the Philippines upholds the rule of law and human rights in all its endeavors,” the embassy said.
“We will continue to engage in sincere, constructive, and evidence-based dialogue with our international partners in the pursuit of common goals and mutual interests.”
In a related development, senators weighed in on Mr. Duterte’s recent pronouncements of an intensified drug war.
Senate President Vicente C. Sotto III, who once headed the Dangerous Drug Board (DDB), said Barangay Anti-Drug Abuse Councils (BADAC) across the country should be activated.
“Activating the BADAC would greatly help… DILG was saying they were activating some time ago but very few follow. In fact, the more important ones covering the islands are not activated,” he said in a mobile phone message to reporters.
Senator Sherwin T. Gatchalian said in a statement on Tuesday: “This harsher campaign should be focused on the drug lords — identify the heads of the drug cartels who bring in illegal drugs to our country, so that the full force of the law can be imposed upon them.”

Proof of Parking bill to be pushed as priority measure

By Camille A. Aguinaldo, Reporter
SENATOR Sherwin T. Gatchalian wants Malacañang to declare the Proof of Parking bill as a priority measure in the 18th Congress to address traffic congestion in EDSA.
In a statement, Mr. Gatchalian cited President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s recent admission that he has failed to address traffic in Metro Manila’s major thoroughfare, which was among his campaign promises.
“While Congress may not have granted the President’s request, there have been a number of bills filed in both Houses with the aim of decongesting our streets. One of these is the Proof of Parking Bill that aims to ease traffic by requiring those who want to purchase cars to have an appropriate parking space before being allowed to buy,” he said on Tuesday.
“We will continue pushing for this bill until this has become a law. I therefore humbly urge the President to declare this one off his priority measures for the 18th Congress to hasten its passage,” he added.
Senate Bill No. 201 or the proposed Proof-of-Parking Space Act, which Mr. Gatchalian filed, requires individuals and businesses to execute an affidavit confirming that they have acquired a parking space before being allowed to purchase vehicles.
The bill also mandates the Land Transportation Office (LTO), the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), and local government units to conduct ocular inspections of major and minor thoroughfares of Metro Manila in order to remove illegally parked vehicles and to catch erring car owners.
Both versions of the bill in the Senate and the House of Representatives remain pending in the committee level.
In a speech on Saturday, Mr. Duterte said he has fulfilled all of his campaign promises, except for the traffic woes in EDSA. He said Congress refused to grant him emergency powers in Congress, which he said cited graft and corruption concerns with the proposal.
“I did not make promises I did not keep except EDSA…. What did I hear from Congress? They were not in favor of it. ‘It cannot be done, you know, graft and corruption will be committed.’ When I heard that, I said, ‘No, it’s off. Take it away from the table. I do not want it,” he said.
The House of Representatives passed on third and final reading the bill on Dec. 5 last year. House Bill No. 6425 or the proposed Traffic Crisis Act grants traffic emergency powers to the President and designates the Transportation Secretary as the traffic czar. Its counterpart measure, Senate Bill No. 1284 or the proposed Traffic and Congestion Crisis Act, is still pending for second reading approval.
During the one-on-one conversation last Sept. 12 with presidential spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo, Mr. Duterte said he no longer wanted the emergency powers because Congress refused to give it to him.
“Let’s just leave EDSA as it is. If you don’t trust me, then don’t. Congress won’t give me emergency powers for traffic. I also don’t want it anymore,” he said.
Senator Grace S. Poe-Llamanzares, chair of the Senate committee on public services, earlier said senators wanted the government to provide specific projects, which the Department of Transportation has yet to submit, wherein emergency powers would be enforced. She also noted that Mr. Duterte did not want the traffic emergency powers proposal when she sought for his position.
“Initially the President said he wanted that, but I had a talk with him, personal. ‘Mr. President, do you need this, you think it will help solve traffic?’ He said, ‘I don’t really care, we can do that without even the emergency powers.’ He said that and I think it’s clear because otherwise his allies would have approved it in the Senate,” she said in a Dec. 3, 2018, television interview.
“What I’m saying is please be specific, and DOTr has not submitted. So, I’m taking my cue from the President,” she added.

Nationwide round-up

Pompeo to visit Manila

REUTERS

Malacañang on Tuesday said US Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo is set to meet with President Rodrigo R. Duterte in Manila on Feb. 28. Presidential Spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo said the two are expected to discuss “security issues and the review of (the) Mutual Defense Treaty.” The Department of Foreign Affairs said Mr. Pompeo will travel to the Philippines immediately following his visit to Vietnam for the meeting of US President Donald J. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. — Arjay L. Balinbin

Duterte meets with Misuari

PHILSTAR/RUDY SANTOS

Malacañang on Tuesday said Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) founder Nur Misuari met with President Rodrigo R. Duterte Monday night. “The meeting with the MNLF Chairman Nur Misuari lasted I think only about 15 minutes. They are going to meet again. What transpired last night was, the President told the Chairman that he admire his patience and he apologized for not having… implemented or enforced…whatever agreements that they had previously with respect, I think, to federalism or something. And they would be talking again precisely for that. They didn’t have much time to talk, so they will meet again,” Presidential Spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo said in a press briefing on Tuesday. Mr. Panelo also said the inclusion of only 10 MNLF members in the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA), which is predominantly composed of Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) members, was not discussed. — Arjay L. Balinbin

PDEA: Cocaine could come from Colombia


The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) said the blocks of cocaine found ashore in different parts of the country could come from a Colombian drug cartel. “There’s a possibility. We are trying to communicate with the Colombian authorities through DFA [Department of Foreign Affairs] and USDEA [United States Drug Enforcement Administration],” PDEA Chief Director-General Aaron N. Aquino said in a phone message on Tuesday, Feb. 26. On Monday, President Rodrigo R. Duterte said the Medellin cartel from Colombia has already entered the country. For his part, Mr. Aquino said: “Colombia was mentioned by the President because the drug profiling of the sample cocaine that was discovered in Matnog, Sorsogon, resulted (in) a traditionally Colombian methodology.” — Vince Angelo C. Ferreras

Local bet arrested for 2010 murder

The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) arrested on Monday a candidate for vice-mayor in Masbate, Vincent Capinig, who is wanted for murder. The case against him stemmed from the killing of a 14-year-old boy in Pasig City in December 2010. The NBI said Mr. Capinig is also charged with illegal possession of firearms. The arrest warrant on Mr. Capinig was issued in 2011 by Pasig City Regional Trial Court Branch 158. He denied being involved in the killing and claimed that the complaint was already dismissed. — Vann Marlo M. Villegas

Arroyo to endorse Alunan

Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo said she is set to endorse former interior secretary Rafael M. Alunan III in Pampanga on Wednesday. “Tomorrow, I’m bringing one of the PDP (Partido Demokratiko Pilipino) candidates to Pampanga — Raffy Alunan, the newest addition,” Ms. Arroyo told reporters on the sidelines of the House Committee on Housing and Urban Development hearing in Tondo, Manila, Tuesday. The Speaker’s endorsement followed the PDP-Laba’s pronouncement that Mr. Alunan will complete its senatorial slate. President Rodrigo R. Duterte described Mr. Alunan as “one of the brightest in (Former President Fidel V.) Ramos’ Cabinet” during a PDP-Laban campaign rally in Cebu last Sunday. Mr. Alunan also served as tourism secretary of President Corazon C. Aquino’s administration. — Charmaine A. Tadalan

Panelo impostor arrested

The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Special Task Force arrested in Cebu City on Feb. 21 an individual posing on Facebook as Presidential Spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo, demanding money from his online victims. NBI Director Dante A. Gierran identified the suspect as Jose A. Villafuerte, who was charged with computer-related identity theft, obstruction of justice, unlawful use of alias, use of falsified documents, usurpation of authority or official functions, and use of fictitious name concealing true name. The case stemmed from a letter by the Office of the Chief Presidential Legal Counsel, Mr. Panelo’s other office in Malacañang, which sought a probe on the individuals behind a Facebook account falsely identified with Mr. Panelo. The said Facebook page also posted legitimate activities of Mr. Panelo’s office as well as photographs of him and his office. Mr. Villafuerte said, “Humihingi na lang po ako ng tawad at dispensa kay Secretary Salvador Panelo….Sa mga nabiktima ko po, humihingi lang po ako ng tawad sa nangyari, pasensya na po.” (I ask forgiveness from Secretary Salvador Panelo. To my victims, I also ask forgiveness for what happened. Please bear with me).

1...11,30611,30711,308...14,238Page 11,307 of 14,238
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube