Nation at a Glance — (04/03/18)
News stories from across the nation. Visit www.bworldonline.com (section: The Nation) to read more national and regional news from the Philippines.
News stories from across the nation. Visit www.bworldonline.com (section: The Nation) to read more national and regional news from the Philippines.
Akbayan Youth on Monday, April 2, filed an administrative complaint against Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) Assistant Secretary Esther Margaux J. Uson before the Office of the Ombudsman for grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. In its 10-page verified complaint, the group cited various situations where Ms. Uson allegedly lied and misled the public. Sought for comment, Senior Deputy Executive Secretary Menardo Guevarra who presided over Monday’s press briefing at Malacañang said, “We’ll im sure Asec Mocha will be able to defend herself. Meron naming mga (We have) processes to follow, and she will be given her fair chance to be able to explain her side.” — Minde Nyl R. Dela Cruz
“Matter is energy … Energy is light … We are all light beings.”
— Albert Einstein
Several recent events in the Philippines energy sector which when implemented, might mean an extended and long-term penitence for electricity consumers nationwide.
One is the planned expanded “environmental rights” to be put in the draft Constitution by Retired Chief Justice and Consultative Committee (ConCom) Chairman Reynato Puno. Two, the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) meeting with anti-coal groups Sanlakas and Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) with the ERC saying that it will “explore the possibility of incorporating environmental policies into its relevant upcoming policies…”
The ConCom chairman’s plan will open up a floodgate of endless environmental militance. It will be harder for companies to put up new airports and expressways, new malls and commercial districts, new factories and industrial zones, new universities and residential condos, new coal or gas plants because militants and environmental lobbyists can easily assert that the area is “reserved” for nature. But they can easily lobby to put up expansive “green” solar plants, wind farms, etc.
Chairman Puno said the expanded environmental rights will cover “Right to clean air and clean water, right to a healthy environment and ecology…”
If that is the case, government should prohibit candles and gensets in cases of brownouts. Gensets are noisy and run on diesel and hence, very polluting. Candles often cause fires. People should rely only on intermittent wind-solar as much as possible. If the wind does not blow and if the sun does not shine, people will be then left to endure brownouts.
Chairman Puno also said that there will be “stronger writ of kalikasan in the bill of rights so that it may not be subject to withdrawal or revision by the Congress or the Supreme Court.”
This is related to the second event as there are many anti-coal groups which also hate any brownouts that coal plants precisely want to prevent.
In August 2012, a group of ecologist-militants and allied organizations have successfully stopped the construction of a 600 MW coal power plant in Subic on the “writ of kalikasan” argument issued by the Supreme Court. The delay in the construction of that big power plant has contributed to higher price pressure in the Luzon grid in recent years.
Anti-coal activists think that all MW are the same.
This is wrong.
A 100 MW from wind or solar plant at 11 a.m. can become 20 MW or 5 MW at 11:05 a.m. when the wind suddenly stops blowing, when clouds grow dark, or when it rains. Whereas a 100 MW from coal or gas will be 100 MW for 24 hours whether the wind blows or not, whether it is a sunny or cloudy day or night time.
Below are some numbers for ASEAN countries from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Demand for power generation is in million tons oil equivalent (mtoe), electrical capacity in Gigawatts (1GW = 1,000 MW), and electricity generation in terawatthours (TWh). 2000 and 2015 data are actual, 2016 are estimates, 2025 and 2030 are projections (see table).
Check out the numbers for coal — projected electrical capacity in the region in 2030 is only 29% of total but projected electricity generation is 40% of total. The opposite is the case for other renewables (wind, solar, geothermal), nearly 11% of power capacity in 2030 but projected to produce only 7.4% of actual electricity. If geothermal is removed from this group, electricity generation will become even smaller.
During the S&P Global/Platts’ Philippine Energy Forum last March 20, 2018 at Grand Hyatt BGC, S&P analyst Deepak Kannan observed that from 2000 to 2016 in the ASEAN, “Oil continues to be a dominant source of energy accounting for 34%, coal demand has more than tripled accounting for 17%.”
It is not wise that environmental militance be incorporated in the Constitution. Any environmental advocacy should be done via legislation, not put in the charter. The ERC should also be wary not to commit anything to the anti-coal groups because they hop from one venue to another to promote their ecological-socialist agenda.
Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is President of Minimal Government Thinkers, a member-institute of Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia.
minimalgovernment@gmail.com.
China urged trade talks with the U.S. to prevent greater damage to relations while saying that previously announced retaliatory measures on American imports took effect Monday.
The U.S. didn’t respond to China’s March 26 request for consultation on Washington’s steel and aluminum tariffs, the Commerce Ministry said in a statement Monday, adding that officials have widespread public support for tougher measures and repeating Beijing’s stance that disputes should be resolved with dialogue. China previously planned to seek compensation for trade lost because of the U.S. metals actions.
“A lot of people have expressed their endorsement to the measures via phone and email, and they support the government to take actions to defend the interest of the nation,” the ministry said of responses during a public comment period that ended March 31. “Some people suggested even stronger measures.”
That followed a statement Sunday from the Customs Tariffs Commission saying that previously announced tariffs on 128 kinds of imported goods originating in the U.S. would take effect from Monday.
Those are in response to the U.S. tariffs on metal that President Donald Trump announced in March on national security grounds. Beijing said the move violated World Trade Organization rules. The U.S. has since announced some exceptions for allies, including Australia and Canada. China said Sunday the tariffs “caused serious damage” to its interests.
Items on Beijing’s original hit-list, issued on March 23, included fresh and dried fruits, ginseng, nuts, wine, and pork, as well as certain steel products, with a value of about $3 billion — a tiny fraction of its imports from the U.S., and an amount matching its exports of steel and aluminum to the U.S. So far, high-volume agricultural exports to China, such as soybeans, haven’t been swept into the mix.
China said earlier it could impose tariffs in two stages: a 15 percent duty on 120 products, and a 25 percent tariff on eight other products, including pork, after further assessing the impact of American tariffs. Sunday’s announcement covered all 128 products simultaneously.
“This shows China has the tool box to counter the unfair trade actions from Washington,” said Li Yong, a senior fellow at the China Association of International Trade in Beijing. “It’s very measured, and with no intention to escalate tension.”
Beyond the actions on metals, the Trump administration is preparing to propose a list of other Chinese products to be targeted with tariffs. Trump announced in March that the U.S. will impose duties on about $50 billion in Chinese goods to punish Beijing for what Washington sees as widespread violations of American intellectual property.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has until April 6 to release the list. U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said on March 28 that an announcement on the measures will come “very shortly.” China has said it has a plan to act further if the import levies on its goods go ahead. — Bloomberg
Joel Ruiz Butuyan wrote in his Inquirer column of March 5: “Malacañang has not explained what the Philippines stands to gain in the President’s pivot to China. Is he using the China card to wangle better terms from Western countries? The substantial decline in foreign direct investments to our country seems to negate this expectation. Or is the President turning to China as a means to neutralize Western criticism of his human rights record? The Duterte administration owes the Filipino people an explanation.”
No congressional committee, no court of law, no one can compel President Rodrigo Duterte to explain his bias towards China. The right of executive privilege shields the President from any investigation or inquiry into his policy, program, action, or decision — thanks to a Supreme Court subservient to the power that be.
Executive privilege is the right of the President and other members of the executive branch of government to keep certain communications confidential because disclosure would be contrary to the interests of the President. Those who are bent on finding out if the advice or opinion given by Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea to Janet Lim-Napoles’ lawyer Stephen David, who has been seen in Malacañang, was at the prompting of the President, and if the President really upbraided Secretary Aguirre for the exoneration of drug lords or was chastised for letting the exoneration become public knowledge would only be frustrated as the two officials can invoke the executive privilege.
Originally, the right of executive privilege was invoked when the information sought would jeopardize national security, diplomatic relations, or economic stability.
But on March 25, 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that conversation and correspondence between the President and public officials that are integral to the President’s executive and policy decision-making process fall under executive privilege. The ruling was in response to then National Economic and Development Authority Director General Romulo Neri’s invoking executive privilege when asked what then president Gloria Arroyo and he discussed about the National Broadband Network (NBN) project.
In April 2007 Department of Transportation and Communications Secretary Leandro Mendoza and Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment (ZTE) Vice-President Yu Yong signed a $329-million contract (ZTE originally offered $130 million for the project) that was supposed to provide landline, cellular, and Internet services in all government offices nationwide. The contract signing, which was done in Boao, China, was witnessed by President Arroyo.
Presidential Spokesperson Ignacio Bunye described Arroyo’s quick trip to Boao thus: “That’s the way things looked like for president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in her brief stay in this picturesque coastal town Saturday as she ‘came and went like a thief in the night.’” Witnessing the signing of the contract was so important to her that she left for Boao when her husband Mike was fighting for his life following a high-risk heart surgery.
Shortly after the signing of the contract, coffee shops began to buzz with ugly rumors of alleged bribery, overpricing of $130 million, payment of advances or kickback commissions involving high-ranking government officials, and other anomalies which included the loss of the contract, collusion among executive officials, and political pressures against the participants in the NBN Project. The Senate committees on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigation (Blue Ribbon), Trade and Commerce, and National Defense and Security called for an investigation of the project.
In September, Jose “Joey” de Venecia, who was president of Amsterdam Holdings, the company that lost its bid for the NBN project, testified before Senate committees that he was in China with Commission on Elections Chair Benjamin Abalos, who appeared to be brokering the NBN-ZTE deal, and that he heard Abalos “demand money” from ZTE officials. Later that month, Neri was invited by the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to attend its hearing on the alleged anomalies in the deal.
He testified at the Senate that Abalos and he were discussing the NBN-ZTE project while playing golf when Abalos told him: “Sec, May 200 ka dito.” Neri took it as a P200-million bribe offer in exchange for Neri’s endorsement of the project. Neri further testified that he had informed Arroyo of Abalos’s bribe offer and that Arroyo had told him to reject it.
When asked by senators 1.) whether or not the Ppresident followed up the NBN Project, 2.) whether or not she directed him to prioritize it, and 3.) whether or not she directed him to approve it, Neri, invoking executive privilege, refused to answer. He snubbed subsequent hearings on the matter. When the Senate Committee cited him for contempt, he petitioned the Supreme Court to nullify the contempt order of the Senate.
On March 25, 2008, the Supreme Court, in a 9-6 vote, upheld Neri’s invocation of executive privilege with regard to the three questions. Nine justices found the information sought to be elicited by the three questions as, first, falling under conversation and correspondence between the president and public officials necessary in the president’s executive and policy decision-making process and, second, that the information sought to be disclosed might impair our diplomatic as well as economic relations with the People’s Republic of China.
The decision was penned by Justice Teresita Leonardo-de Castro and concurred in by Justices Leonardo Quisumbing, Renato Corona, Dante Tinga, Eduardo Nachura, Ruben Reyes, Nenita Chico-Nazario, Presbitero Velasco, and Arturo Brion. Except for Quisumbing, who was appointed by president Fidel V. Ramos, all the concurring justices were Arroyo appointees to the Court. Brion was not yet an SC justice when the Court heard oral arguments on Neri’s petition.
Four other Arroyo appointees to the Court — Justices Antonio Carpio, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Adolf Azcuna, and Alicia Austria-Martinez — dissented with the majority as did Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, an appointee of president Joseph Estrada, and Chief Justice Reynato Puno, who was named to the Court by president Fidel Ramos but named Chief Justice by Arroyo.
In Justice Ynares-Santiago’s opinion, the executive privilege doctrine applies only to information if divulged would be against the public interest. She wrote that Neri failed to show how disclosure of his conversations with Arroyo would affect the country’s military, diplomatic, and economic affairs as he asserted before senators. The deal was with a company, not with the Chinese government.
Justice Carpio-Morales’ position was that executive privilege cannot be invoked when “Congress has gathered evidence that a government transaction is attended by corruption.” Justice Carpio also argued that executive privilege cannot be used to hide a crime. Chief Justice Puno held that while branches of government are independent of each other, they work interdependently as the whole government is constitutionally designed to function as an organic whole.
There is a clause in the decision that says that the president and officials of the executive branch of government can invoke executive privilege during their term of office and afterwards.
So, former president Benigno Aquino and former Health secretary Janet Garin can invoke executive privilege when the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption bring them to court for the Dengvaxia mess as, first, whatever the two officials discussed was part of the president’s executive and policy decision-making process and second, as it might impair our diplomatic as well as our economic relations with France, home of Sanofi, the Dengvaxia supplier.
Oscar P. Lagman, Jr. is a member of Manindigan! a cause-oriented group of businessmen, professionals, and academics.
oplagman@yahoo.com
While I was the incumbent Chair of the Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG), I had a short conversation with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Teresa J. Herbosa who encouraged me to institute within the GOCC Sector the system of independent directors, which she found to be foremost feature of corporate governance reforms in the private sector.
In the “publicly held corporations” (PHCs), independent directors are elected in order to represent the public interests, as distinguished from the regular directors who represent primarily the stockholders’ interest. I had thought deeply on the issue, and eventually came out with the conclusion that in the public corporate sector, the institution of the system of independent directors would by duplicative, if not a surplusage, for the following reasons:
Firstly, unlike private corporations which are set-up to represent private interests, essentially profit-maximization for the benefit of the stockholders, all GOCCs, even the ones created as stock corporations under the Corporation Code, primarily have a “public interests” purpose for their establishment, or are expected to achieve the public ends which the government seeks to achieve. The owner of all GOCCs is essentially the government, which does not seek maximization of profits as its goal in setting-up a GOCC (it can create more income through its taxing powers).
Consequently, all the members of the governing boards of GOCCs take on their role to pursue the public purpose for which the entities were formed which is to pursue the full benefits to the members of the public for whose benefit the entities are established — which is fully in accordance with the Stakeholder Theory.
Secondly, all members of every GOCC governing board, whether ex officio or appointive, take their posts as “public officials” and sworn to serve the public interests. The exercise of their fiduciary duties of diligence and loyalty to the government whose objective it is to serve the public interests and not a maximization of profits, promotes directly the interests of the publics which constitute the stakeholders of the entities they serve in.
In effect, GOCC directors and trustees are sworn to serve the public interests in a deeper sense than independent directors in the private sector, who in the end legally are bounded to fiduciaries duties to the corporation and its stockholders.
TERM OF OFFICE OF DIRECTORS AND ‘HOLD-OVER PRINCIPLE’
The GOCC Governance Act follows the one-year term policy under the Corporation Code for private corporations and provides that notwithstanding the provisions of the charters of GOCCs, “the term of office of each Appointive Director shall be for one (1) year, unless sooner removed for cause.”
The act formally expressed into statutory term the “hold-over principle” that pervades in common law for private corporations, in that in spite of the lapse of the one-year term, “appointive director shall continue to hold office until the successor is appointed.”
The act formally incorporates the “merit system” pervading in PHCs in that the re-appointment of any director shall be based on good performance in office, thus: “An Appointive Director may be nominated by the GCG for re-appointment by the President only if one obtains a performance score of above average or its equivalent or higher in the immediately preceding year of tenure as Appointive Director based on the performance criteria for Appointive Directors for the GOCC.”
The adoption of the one-year term-holdover principles for the GOCC Sector has provided a double-edged sword when it comes to the good governance principles. Indeed, there has been a mild outcry in the public sector against discarding the “fixed tenure” system of directors and trustees as provided in GOCC charters since it would engender short-sighted agenda in GOCC corporate planning, and it undermines the sense of independence and professionalism of Governing Boards against a politically inclined Administration.
Our reply to the alleged “short-termism” mentality that would pervade the GOCC Governing Boards whose members are only given a one-year term is not supported at all by the long-term experience in the private sector, where the one-year term system has been the inflexible system since the adoption of the Corporation Law in the Philippines. Indeed, the Boards of Directors/Trustees of private corporations, are perceived to have achieve the corporate visions of their corporations, since they have to renew their mandates on an annual basis, and their annual performance becomes the basis by which they are able to achieve a fresh mandate for a new one-year term during annual stockholders’ meetings. In the GOCC Sector, all directors and trustees, are mandated to pursue the President’s PDP during the six-year term of his administration, and the one-year term given to GOCC directors and trustees ensures that they will serve during the entire term of the President only when they are able to actively pursue the breakthrough goals that are set out for them that would contribute to the realization of the objectives of the PDP.
On the other hand, we do recognized that the one-year term does present a danger that during an administration where politics and pork-barrel system pervades, that GOCC directors and trustees, to be able to ensure renewal of their terms would be less professional in their work, and become swayed by the political moods pervading the government sector.
In other words, in times where the incumbent administration does not pursue the highest callings of “public service is a public trust,” or worse when corruption and self-aggrandizement pervades the top brass of the administration in power, the one-year term-holder over system becomes a tool that weaken the independence of GOCC Governing Boards, who seek to cater to the demands of the appointing powers to ensure survival in their office.
It is in those times that the professionalism and integrity of the GCG as the key government agency that oversees the GOCC Sector, as well as the integrity and competence of the members of the Governing Boards become the keys to preserving the integrity of public corporate governance in the GOCC Sector.
(The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines or the MAP).
Cesar L. Villanueva is a member of the Management Association of the Philippines (M.A.P.) , the former Chair of the Governance Commission for GOCCs and the Founding Partner of the Villanueva Gabionza & Dy Law Offices.
cvillanueva@vgslaw.com
map@map.org.ph
http://map.org.ph
Humanities as a field of academic pursuit or lifelong obsession has been relegated to a quaint addiction, like restoring antique cars or collecting stamps. Interest in culture, if too ardently expressed, is seen merely as an affectation.
In a conversation over dinner with slight acquaintances and newly met (but celebrated) strangers, culture, and its neglect in this part of the world, can sometimes crop up. The take on the subject is usually its lack of attention given (we don’t have a ministry of culture) and the almost envious state of nurturing and embrace in other countries. Coming to the defense of the motherland by taking the opposite view of culture’s rise here and the growing feasibility of expensive tickets to culture, both pop and middle brow, as well as the rise of art auctions seems a hopeless task.
The pronouncement of the self-appointed moderator of table conversations is a statement that no one can argue with — only wealthy countries and socialist ones (think Bolshoi ballet) can actively promote culture, which is subsidized by the state or large corporations to make ticket prices affordable for the middle-income audience, if not the masses. This temporary ceasefire of verbal friction brings the conversation back to how best to promote culture.
The celebrity’s seatmate declares (he is the most senior person in the table) that sports gets disproportionate time and attention in the curriculum that used to rest on three former mandates “education, culture, and sports.” Aren’t the tycoons too besotted with sports at the expense of the arts? Here, the conversation stalls and turns on the sorbet — yes, it is refreshing.
We bring up the matter of audience development, which is the demand side of culture. Of course, nobody at the table picks that up. The conversational train keeps heading towards the comparative advantage of culture in richer economies, even the nearby ones that require no visas to visit. Of course, they add, the talents, including conductors, are all imported to serve the local audience. So imported supply meets local demand for culture.
Maybe, in culture too, such as theater, music, and visual arts, the economists should have a say. Aren’t art and culture products too that need to be marketed? Perhaps, the supply side of culture where the talents such as the ones at our table, two siblings in the world of music and theater, has been getting an unfair advantage. The talent shows on TV and audition sessions from foreign theater groups feed the supply of outstanding artists. The singers, performers, and actors overwhelm the demand for them. Many talents then find their home abroad and bewail the lack of a local audience to sustain them. Ironically, it is when they harvest international acclaim are they finally appreciated by their own country and given the audience they lacked before.
Peter Drucker, our favorite management philosopher, stated that the purpose of business (and culture, perhaps) is to “create a customer.” The demand side of culture needs to be attended to. Not only should audiences be willing to travel to the venue to watch a play or ballet or orchestral performances, they should be willing to pay for it.
Developing an appetite for culture (maybe slightly less voracious than that for food and sex) needs to start early in the individual. When I look back at my own education and the nurturing of my love for the humanities, I realize that all those “must go” events where a reaction paper is required like the school plays (Julius Caesar, Macbeth, Hamlet) contributed to a lifelong affection (or affectation) for the arts. The muscle memory residing in the heart longs for those long-ago habits of sitting in a darkened theater to be moved and jangled out of my mental ruts.
These cultural forays were not exclusively devoted to performances, they extended to a love of books, ease in discussing ideas, and buying art. The development of an audience for art and culture is a kind of ecosystem. It is a self-sustaining sphere that gives talent its proper due, even in terms of material rewards. In a cultured society, cultural work is a sustainable occupation.
Audience development starts with an individual who is moved by art and culture. If there are foodies who love to explore and discover new cuisine, there must be also the “culturati,” a discerning audience that applauds and supports the arts. And there’s work to do for both groups.
A. R. Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda.
ar.samson@yahoo.com
U.S. stock futures dropped after an early equity rally petered out in Asia, where volume was low as many markets across the world remain closed for the Easter holiday. The dollar edged lower and Treasury yields increased.
American shares look set to start April on the back foot after the S&P 500 Index and Dow Jones Industrial Average posted their first quarterly losses since 2015. Futures contracts for the Nasdaq 100 fell again after President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of Amazon.com Inc. over the weekend, this time tweeting that the online giant “must pay real costs (and taxes) now!” A measure of volatility rose from Friday.
Equities in Japan, China and South Korea declined during late Monday trading, reversing an earlier advance. The yen was steady as traders digested a poll showing improved support for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet. The South Korean won rose to its strongest against the dollar in over three years as tensions in the region showed further signs of easing. The euro was little changed and the pound pushed higher.
Investors are entering the second quarter defensively after the worst three months for global stocks in more than two years. February and March were characterized by a surge in volatility amid a barrage of concerns, from escalating trade tensions to a selloff in technology shares. Focus this week will turn to U.S. manufacturing data Tuesday and labor-market figures Friday, which are expected to show the jobless rate fell to its lowest level since 2000. Traders are also waiting for more details on American tariffs on Chinese imports.
“With interest rates still relatively low, and generating negative real returns, if you remain in cash the yield attraction of equities and the growth prospects still make it look the best alternative,” Stephen Davies, founder and CEO of Javelin Wealth Management, told Bloomberg TV on Monday.
Elsewhere, West Texas crude oil climbed above $65 per barrel after capping a third straight quarterly gain. Bitcoin rebounded back above $7,000.
Here are some key events coming up this week:
Easter Monday is a public holiday in many major markets including the U.K., Australia, Canada, and most of Europe. U.S. manufacturing PMI and ISM manufacturing data due Monday. Reserve Bank of Australia April monetary policy decision due Tuesday. New York Fed debuts the Secured Overnight Financing Rate on Tuesday. Reserve Bank of India April policy decision due Thursday. U.S. employment data due Friday; jobless rate probably fell in March after holding at 4.1 percent for five straight months.
These are the main moves in markets:
Stocks
Futures on the S&P 500 Index fell 0.2 percent as of 11:35 a.m. London time. The Shanghai Composite Index dipped 0.2 percent. The MSCI Emerging Market Index gained 0.4 percent.
Currencies
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index fell 0.1 percent. The euro rose less than 0.1 percent to $1.2328. The British pound advanced 0.3 percent to $1.4061, the first advance in a week.
Bonds
The yield on 10-year Treasuries gained two basis points to 2.76 percent, the largest increase in a week.
Commodities
Gold increased 0.5 percent to $1,331.88 an ounce, the biggest climb in more than a week. West Texas Intermediate crude increased 0.4 percent to $65.20 a barrel. — Bloomberg
THE PESO strengthened against the dollar on Monday as inflows continued to support the currency.
The local unit ended yesterday’s session at P52.035 versus the greenback, 8.5 centavos stronger than Wednesday’s finish of P52.16, data from the Bankers Association of the Philippines (BAP) website showed.
The peso opened stronger at P52.13 against the US currency. Its intraday low stood at P52.18, while its best showing was at P52 per dollar.
Dollars traded slid to $507 million from the $878.5 million logged last Wednesday, the data showed.
A trader said continued inflows supported the peso.
“There is still a continuation of inflows supporting the peso. Our guess is that maybe it has something to do with the rights offer of Metrobank (Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co.),” the trader said in a phone interview yesterday, adding that they saw some banks selling the peso aggressively.
Metrobank is conducting a P60-billion rights offering to raise 799.8 million shares priced at P75 apiece until April 4. The capital raising exercise will fund the bank’s loan growth as well as the acquisition of its credit card arm.
Meanwhile, the trader also noted that the tariff imposition of China on American products did not affect yesterday’s trading, although this may create a risk-off situation.
For today, two traders see the peso moving between P51.90 and P52.50 against the dollar.
Meanwhile, the BAP has assigned Bloomberg as the new calculation agent for the dollar-peso spot reference rate effective last April 1.
In a statement sent to reporters yesterday, BAP said Bloomberg will calculate the USD/PHP spot reference rate “based on trades carried out by BAP member banks.”
Prior to the partnership between BAP and Bloomberg, the Philippine Dealing & Exchange Corp. published the foreign exchange spot summary.
“We are pleased to partner with Bloomberg to provide enhanced solutions to the FX community in the Philippines,” BAP managing director Benjamin P. Castillo was quoted as saying in the statement. — Karl Angelo N. Vidal
WASHINGTON/IXTEPEC — President Donald Trump said on Sunday that there will be no deal to legalize the status of young adult immigrants called Dreamers and he said the US-Mexico border is becoming more dangerous.
After tweeting a “Happy Easter” message on Twitter, he said: “Border Patrol Agents are not allowed to properly do their job at the Border because of ridiculous liberal (Democrat) laws like Catch & Release. Getting more dangerous.”
“’Caravans’ coming. Republicans must go to Nuclear Option to pass tough laws NOW. NO MORE DACA DEAL!” he wrote, adding a threat to kill the North American Free Trade Agreement which is being renegotiated with Mexico and Canada.
DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, is a program created in 2012 under Democratic former President Barack Obama that Mr. Trump sought to rescind last autumn.
Designed for people brought to the United States as children by parents who were undocumented immigrants, the program shielded them from deportation and gave them work permits.
Mr. Trump had said he was open to a deal with congressional Democrats who want to protect DACA in exchange for funding to build a US-Mexico border wall, a campaign trail promise.
He insisted during his 2016 White House run that Mexico would pay for the wall, something the Mexican government has repeatedly rejected.
Mexico’s presidential front-runner, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, launched his campaign close to the border on Sunday demanding respect for Mexicans and signaling he may take a harder line toward Mr. Trump if he wins the July 1 election.
“Mexico and its people will not be the piñata of any foreign government,” Lopez Obrador said in a speech in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, which borders El Paso, Texas. “It’s not with walls or use of force that you resolve social problems.”
Whether Mr. Trump will stick to his guns on DACA is unclear. Mr. Trump last month threatened to veto a spending bill because it did not address the fate of Dreamers and did not fully fund his border wall but he ultimately signed the bill.
In the months after Mr. Trump took office, apprehensions of illegal crossers along the US-Mexico border dropped from more than 42,400 arrests in January 2017 to a low of around 15,700 in April, according to US Customs and Border Protection data.
Since then, the number of arrests has risen and in the first months of 2018 was above Obama administration levels.
“Mexico has got to help us at the border,” the president, who was spending Easter at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, told reporters on his way into an Easter church service.
“A lot of people are coming in because they want to take advantage of DACA. They had a great chance. The Democrats blew it.”
Mr. Trump’s DACA tweets came after a report on the Fox New Channel’s Fox & Friends program, one of his favorites, that a “caravan” of mostly Honduran migrants was crossing Mexico and headed to the United States, “either illegally or by asking for asylum.”
More than 1,000 would-be migrants have passed through Mexico’s southern states of Chiapas and Oaxaca in recent days in a so-called “refugee caravan” organized by US-based immigrant advocacy group Pueblo Sin Fronteras.
In the town of Ixtepec, more than 1,500 men, women and children from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala waited in a sweltering warehouse on Saturday, mattresses rolled and bags packed, as local authorities and immigration officials from Mexico’s federal government organized 15 buses to take them to their next stop on the long journey north.
By traveling together, the immigrants hope to protect themselves from the crime and extortion that makes the route through Mexico dangerous. They say some but not all of them will seek asylum if they reach the United States.
Gina Garibo, a member of Pueblo Sin Fronteras traveling with the migrants, said the group would hold a meeting to discuss Mr. Trump’s statements on Sunday and stressed that the caravan’s aim was to protect vulnerable people.
“The main people here are fleeing criminal violence, political violence, in their country and this allows us to save lives,” she said in response to Mr. Trump’s comments.
A guest on Sunday’s Fox & Friends show, Brandon Judd, head of the National Border Patrol Council union, said illegal immigrants benefit from the “catch and release” program that Mr. Trump referenced in his tweet. Under it, they can be freed while awaiting court hearings if detained in the United States.
If recent border crossers do not claim asylum, they can usually be deported quickly. But if they say they fear targeted violence or persecution in their home countries, they can begin the long process of petitioning for asylum in immigration court.
Mr. Trump said on Twitter on Sunday that Mexico is doing “very little, if not NOTHING,” to stop the flow of people across the southern border. “They must stop the big drug and people flows, or I will stop their cash cow, NAFTA. NEED WALL!”
Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray said the United States and Mexico work together on migration every day. “An inaccurate news report should not serve to question this strong cooperation. Upholding human dignity and rights is not at odds with the rule of law. Happy Easter,” Mr. Videgaray said in a tweet.
Mexico deported some 80,000 people in 2017, down from about 160,000 in 2016, official statistics show. The vast majority were from Central American nations. The drop reflects fewer Central Americans crossing the country last year. — Reuters
HANOI — Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Sunday China and Vietnam should settle their disputes in the South China Sea through talks and move to jointly exploit its waters.
“We have agreed that settling the maritime issues is extremely important for the healthy and sustainable development of bilateral relations,” he told reporters after a meeting with Vietnamese Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Pham Binh Minh in Hanoi.
China claims 90% of the potentially energy-rich maritime territory and has been building on and militarizing rocky outcrops and reefs in its waters.
Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also lay claim to parts of it, through which about $5 trillion of trade passes each year. Vietnam is the country most openly at odds with China over the issue.
“The two sides should better manage disputes through talks and refrain from taking unilateral actions that may further complicate and expand the disputes,” Mr. Wang said.
“At the same time, (the two sides) should promote cooperation at the sea, including holding talks on joint exploitation,” he added.
Messrs. Wang and Minh said bilateral relations had seen positive development, with rising trade and investment as the two neighbours further opened up markets to each other. Bilateral trade exceeded $100 billion last year.
Mr. Minh said Vietnam and China shared responsibility to maintain peace and stability in the region, reiterating Vietnam’s stance that the maritime disputes must be resolved peacefully manner and according to international law. — Reuters
BANGKOK — A Thai editor faces possible criminal charges for sharing a student’s “disrespectful” picture of historic kings wearing face masks to highlight air pollution in the northern city of Chiang Mai.
The governor of Chiang Mai told Reuters on Sunday that he believed Pim Kemasingki, editor of the Chiang Mai Citylife magazine, had breached the Computer Crime Act by sharing the picture.
“It is up to the police to gather evidence,” Pawin Chamniprasart said.
In a letter to police, he wrote that the kings are worshipped and respected in Chiang Mai and “using the picture with the three kings wearing masks is disrespectful.”
Thailand’s cyber crime law, which criminalizes defamation and obscenity, has been widely criticized by international rights groups for curtailing freedom of expression.
Mr. Pim, a Thai-British national, said the image of the three statues wearing masks had been shared on a Facebook page publicizing a “Right to Breathe” anti-air pollution rally that had later been cancelled at the request of the governor.
“I shared this picture thinking it was pertinent and powerful,” Mr. Pim told Reuters.
“For decades I’ve been promoting the city and loving it… so it’s quite unsettling that fighting for healthy air for my fellow citizens has turned into me besmerching the city.”
Recently, Thailand has suffered from some of its worst air pollution in years.
Achariya Ruangrattanapong, a lawyer for Mr. Pim, said he was confident that sharing the picture was not a violation of the cyber crime law.
“How can this be a computer crime if it involves a picture that a child drew?” he said.
Mr. Pawin said he was not seeking charges of royal insult against Mr. Pim.
Under Thailand’s strict lese majeste law, those found guilty of insulting the monarchy face up to 15 years in prison. — Reuters