BSP eyes ‘enabling’ rules on sustainable finance
THE Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) will stick to “enabling” rather than prescriptive rules on sustainable finance, as the regulator eyes to promote “flexible” policies covering banks.
“We learned that the best regulatory approach remains to be one that is enabling, flexible and risk-based,” BSP Deputy Governor Chuchi G. Fonacier said in a speech during a forum on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Practices for Philippine Banks yesterday.
“(We are) providing guidelines rather than mandates, considering banks’ risk appetites and business models, and applying standards proportionate to the size, structure, and complexity of their operations.”
Authorities want to spur increased lending to “sustainable” initiatives and projects, or those which minimize adverse impacts on the environment.
Ms. Fonacier, who heads the BSP’s bank supervision sector, said the policy thrust also responds to “industry preference” for a more progressive rather than mandatory regime.
“At present, we believe that BSP policies and regulations already enable sustainable finance to flourish,” the BSP official added.
The BSP and the International Finance Corp. (IFC) held the joint forum to engage bank boards and senior executives explore options for increased lending for climate-friendly and socially inclusive projects.
The IFC also signed a memorandum of understanding with the Bankers Institute of the Philippines and the Mongolian Bankers Association to push sustainable finance and green banking in the two countries. The World Bank unit will extend capacity-building and knowledge-sharing to industry players from these economies.
The Philippines is one of 20 countries considered most vulnerable to the impact of natural disasters and climate change. The Department of Finance earlier said that more than 1,000 deaths occur yearly in the Philippines due to natural calamities, with typhoons accounting for 74% of lives lost, 62% of damage to properties, and 70% of damage to agriculture.
The Sy-led BDO Unibank, Inc. pioneered a green bond issuance in the country last December. The bank raised $150 million from bonds issued to the IFC, which will fund renewable energy projects, green buildings, and energy-efficient equipment, to name a few.
BSP Governor Nestor A. Espenilla, Jr. previously said that regulators should fix physical and logistical barriers to make it easier for banks to lend “on a voluntary basis” rather than to rely on mandated lending. — Melissa Luz T. Lopez
Zamboanga City forms public transport planning team
ZAMBOANGA CITY Mayor Maria Isabelle Climaco-Salazar has issued an executive order creating the Local Public Transport Route Plan (LPTRP) team that will take the lead in preparing a management and development guide. The LPTRP is mandated under a 2017 directive from the Department of Transportation and the Department of Interior and Local Government. “Zamboanga City is one of the growing urban centers in Mindanao, and like other highly urbanized areas in the country, it is experiencing a significant increase in population and consequently traffic congestion due to the increase in the volume of road traffic users and limited road capacity,” Ms. Climaco said in a social media post. The LPTRP Team, to be headed by the mayor, is composed of local officials from various departments and the city council, and representatives from the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board, Department of Public Works and Highways, Western Mindanao State University, local police, and transport and business groups. — Mindanao Bureau
Trillanes says ‘truth hurts’ as Davao City declares him persona non grata
SENATOR ANTONIO F. Trillanes IV stood firm on his pronouncements tagging Davao City, President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s hometown, as the most dangerous area in the country after the city council declared him persona non grata. “The truth, definitely, hurts. My statement was based on the December 2015 statistics of the PNP (Philippine National Police) that Davao City has the highest incidence of murder and second highest in rape,” Mr. Trillanes said in a statement Tuesday, Feb. 13. Davao Vice-Mayor Bernard E. Al-ag, Jr., who chairs the council and sponsored the declaration, which effectively bans the senator from the city, said: “Declaring that my city is the most dangerous city in the Philippines is not acceptable! This is an insult to the 1.6 million Dabawenyos who are working hard everyday to make our city safe.” — Camille A. Aguinaldo
The bright side of TRAIN
A chorus of local and international economic analysts made a unanimous forecast for 2018: economic growth is expected to be faster than the 6.7% expansion in 2017. As Finance Secretary Sonny Dominguez himself proclaimed, there is “unprecedented optimism” over the country’s economic prospects under the Duterte administration.
In addition to expectations of continued strong performance among the usual growth drivers, the increased optimism stems mostly from the recently passed Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law, the first package of the Duterte administration’s tax reform program, and arguably, its most controversial legislation to date. After all, the Duterte government is embarking on the country’s first comprehensive tax program in two decades.
The government’s bold move to amend the tax code is commendable.
For years, the tax system has been widely criticized for being inefficient: the tax base is narrow and compliance cost is high, leading to low revenue collections despite having one of the highest tax rates in the region. While the timetable has been pushed back several times, the passage of TRAIN shows the government’s ability and willingness to leverage on the President’s popularity and political capital to advance its socioeconomic agenda.
The impacts of TRAIN are seen to fuel private consumption as consumers will then have more disposable income. Revenues collected from it would also strengthen the government’s ability to bankroll its development program, especially its aggressive infrastructure drive.
Despite the shortfall in revenues amounting to P67 billion from the original Department of Finance (DoF) proposal, the government has promised to roll out several flagship infrastructure projects within the year.
In a show of commitment towards this end, the infrastructure allocations accounted for a third of the total budget for 2018. The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), for instance, received P637 billion for 2018, even surpassing the Department of Education’s (DepEd) budget allocation.
By the government’s account, around 44 public infrastructure projects amounting to P1 trillion are already under construction, and 15 other projects are expected to be implemented in 2018.
The incremental revenues from TRAIN have become even more critical especially with the government’s shift in its preferred mode of infrastructure financing, from Public Private Partnerships to Official Development Assistance and local financing. In addition to the “Build, Build, Build” projects, the government is also set to implement smaller infrastructure projects included in the Three-year Rolling Infrastructure Plan (TRIP).
Given the passage of the TRAIN Law, the Duterte administration appears to understand the urgency to address the country’s infrastructure problems immediately.
On this note, the traffic conditions in Metro Manila and other urban centers are only getting worse. A number of observers have even pointed out that Metro Manila may soon become uninhabitable without any infrastructure intervention in place. The Philippines has also fared poorly in several global rankings, partly dragged down by its decrepit infrastructure. Moreover, infrastructure development has been mostly concentrated in urban cities, highlighting an urban-rural infrastructure gap. Needless to say, the country’s infrastructure quality has been a major obstacle from maximizing its economic gains.
The 2017-2018 Global Competitiveness Report puts the Philippines at 97th out of 137 countries in terms of overall infrastructure, trailing behind other ASEAN countries. Infrastructure was also cited as one of the five most problematic factors for doing business in the country.
According to the World Bank, the logistics performance index of the Philippines has also been declining with a ranking of 71st in 2016, falling several notches from 44th place in 2010. The country’s ratio of cost-to-sales of goods is also higher compared to other Southeast Asian nations.
These results are not surprising.
After all, the Philippines has consistently underinvested in the infrastructure sector, spending less than the recommended 5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). While the past governments have acknowledged this deficiency, it was only the Duterte government, supported by a wide fiscal space, which boldly dared to ramp up infrastructure spending to unprecedented levels.
By 2022, the government committed to pour in P8.2 trillion into the sector. Of course, the larger infrastructure allocation should also be matched by faster and more efficient government spending.
To the government’s credit, it has been taking initiatives to address roadblocks in the bureaucratic process.
For all its flaws and shortcomings, we must acknowledge the long-term benefits from the TRAIN, especially if the government successfully implements these infrastructure programs as planned.
However, as the government is working on legislating future tax packages, it must also heed lessons from its TRAIN experience.
While we recognize the government’s need to raise enough revenues to finance its development programs, we cannot discount the adverse effects of higher commodity prices among Filipino consumers. In the first month of TRAIN’s implementation, for instance, prices have already gone up by 4%, the highest in three years.
Moving forward, the government should prioritize tax administration reforms to boost revenue collections, instead of imposing taxes on a wide array of commodities to fill the revenue gap.
At the end of the day, while the Philippines is one of the most highly taxed economies in the region, its tax efficiency rate is also among the lowest. Perhaps we can also take a page out of our neighbors’ books.
Prof. Victor Andres “Dindo” C. Manhit is the founder and managing director of the Stratbase Group and president of its policy think tank, Albert del Rosario Institute for Strategic and International Studies (ADRi). Prof. Manhit is a former chair and retired associate professor of Political Science of De La Salle University. He has authored numerous papers on governance, political, and electoral reforms.
US Congressional gold medal for Filipino WWII veterans
On April 7 at the historic Presidio in San Francisco, surviving Filipino World War II veterans or their next of kin living in Northern California, will receive bronze replicas of the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian award conferred by the United States.
The original gold medal (not to be confused with the Congressional Medal of Honor) will be permanently displayed at the Smithsonian, alongside those of other recipients, such as George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses S. Grant, Douglas MacArthur, Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, St. Pope John Paul II, the Dalai Lama, the Navajo Talkers, the Tuskegee Airmen, and the fatalities in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack, to mention a few.
Suffice it to say that our old soldiers will be in heroic company.
Last Oct. 25, 2017, at the Emancipation Hall in the US Congress, the first batch of Filipino veterans, as well as the immediate relatives of those who had died, received their medals. Doing the honors were House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, both Republicans, and former House speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrats.
The ceremony in Washington DC came 76 years after the call to arms issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941, a few months before the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. It also came 71 years after the passage of the Rescission Act of 1946 that singled out Filipinos as being ineligible for veterans’ benefits — a colossal injustice inflicted by the US Congress and signed into law by then President Harry S. Truman, despite knowing that it was discriminatory.
The Congressional Gold Medal officially rectifies the discrimination and acknowledges the gallantry and heroism of the 260,000 young Filipinos who answered Roosevelt’s call to arms.
The road to this formal acknowledgement has been long and arduous — a struggle that I characterized in one column as The Second Death March.
In 1997, in connection with the 1st Filipino American National Empowerment Conference in Washington DC (that resulted in the formation of the National Federation of Filipino American Associations), several aging veterans marched in front of the White House and some chained themselves to the fence to attract media attention to the injustice. The old soldiers were arrested and fined $50 each but the media exposure made the civil disobedience worthwhile.
The intensive lobbying conducted by veterans’ advocates, NaFFAA, and FilAm community leaders subsequently resulted in some grudging concessions by Congress, including health benefits and eligibility for citizenship. But it was not until 2009 that an appropriation of $198 million was provided for surviving veterans (estimated at only 18,000 at that point).
Ironically, the appropriation was just a rider in an economic stimulus package that Congress badly needed to pass to jump-start the flagging US economy. And it happened only through the dogged sponsorship of Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii.
At any rate, the amount translated into one-time payments of $15,000 for those who had become US citizens and $9,000 for non-citizens, mainly residing in the Philippines.
Concerning this appropriation, a CNN news story could not have stated it more sardonically: “More than 60 years after reneging on a promise to the hundreds of thousands of Filipinos who fought for the United States during World War II, the US government will soon be sending out checks — to the few who are still alive.”
But the FilAm community did not think that the one-time payment was enough rectification of the injustice. Thus, was formed the Filipino Veterans Recognition and Education Project (FilVetsREP), headed by retired Major General Antonio Taguba.
Taguba came into national prominence when he led the inquiry into the abuses committed by members of the US military in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. At the time, he was the second-highest ranking officer of Filipino descent in the US Army.
My NaFFAA co-workers, Jon Melegrito, Bing Cardenas Branigin, and Ben de Guzman, are just three of many selfless FilVetsREP volunteers keeping the flame alive for the old soldiers whose ranks are being fast depleted by the Grim Reaper.
The main objective of FilVetsREP: full honors for more than 260,000 Filipino World War II veterans, living and dead, through conferment of the Congressional Gold Medal.
It seemed like a long shot, but the advocates found allies in Sen. Mazie Hirono and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, both Democrats from Hawaii. The Filipino Veterans of World War II bill sailed through the Senate and the House of Representatives and was signed into law by Obama as one of his last presidential acts in December of 2016.
On April 7, my wife, Gigi, and her sister, Lourdes Uy, will receive a replica of the Congressional Gold Medal on behalf of my late father-in-law, Jose S. Nobleza, who fought the Japanese as a guerrilla captain of the Bagong Katipunan unit in Albay.
Each recipient is entitled to only one bronze replica. I suppose replicas of the replica can be made for other family members. There are excellent craftsmen in the Philippines who can do a perfect copy of anything.
My father-in-law did not live long enough to enjoy the benefits that the veterans’ advocates managed to wangle from the US Congress, but his wartime service did result in a small pension for him and a college scholarship for my wife.
The honor that the Congressional Gold Medal will give to him and his comrades-in-arms, living and dead, might well be the high point of The Second Death March.
But the journey continues.
Veterans advocates in California, led by Rudy Asersion, have succeeded in including in the official school curriculum the role played by Filipino Veterans in World War II.
The Veterans Equity Center, administered by Luisa Antonio and youth volunteers, and chaired by lawyer Lourdes Tancinco, has been providing services for the aging veterans and their families in the San Francisco Bay Area. They were among those who tirelessly lobbied Washington DC for “veterans equity.” They are also the ones organizing the April 7 awarding ceremony, aside from vetting prospective recipients.
But that is only part of their work. They and the regional chapters of FilVetsREP across the US have to raise funds to cover the cost of the bronze replicas, which will be bestowed for free to the veterans or their next of kin. It costs $52 each. The US government will only answer for the original gold medal.
FilVetsREP is trying to raise $150,000 to cover the cost of the awards presentations. Approximately $1 million will be required to fund the bronze replicas for all the recipients.
For the April 7 event, the Veterans Equity Center is trying to raise $10,000. It has managed to generate $2,000 so far in donations. My contribution of $100 was a drop in the bucket. For this reason, I have offered to help in the fund-raising effort by appealing to patriotic individuals and corporations in the Philippines.
This is the least we can do for those who laid their lives on the line for our freedom. It is a noble cause and, to be pragmatic about, it also translates into good corporate PR.
Those who would like to help can visit the FilVetsREP Web site for instructions.
On the matter of full “equity” for the Filipino veterans, this may never be realized in their lifetime nor in ours. But as long as there are those will keep the memory of the heroism of our old soldiers alive, the plaintive lyrics of that marching song will continue to resonate.
“Old soldiers never die… and they won’t fade away.
Greg B. Macabenta is an advertising and communications man shuttling between San Francisco and Manila and providing unique insights on issues from both perspectives.
Look on House Bill 6779: Coverage and Limitations
On Jan. 29, House Bill 6779 or “An Act Recognizing the Civil Effects of Church Annulment Decrees” was approved on its third and final reading in the House of Representatives where 203 out of 292 members of the House voted in its favor.
Under the bill, an annulment decree issued by a church or religious sect in the Philippines will have the same effect as an annulment decree issued by a competent court. This bill however does not only cover the recognition of the civil effects of church annulment decrees but also provides, among others, the status of the child born or conceived before the issuance of the church annulment decree as well as the liquidation, partition and distribution of the conjugal properties.
Section 1 thereof provides that “[w]henever a marriage, duly and legally solemnized by a priest, minister, rabbi or presiding elder of any church or religious sect in the Philippines is subsequently annulled, dissolved or declared a nullity in a final judgment or decree in accordance with the canons and precepts of the church or religious sect, the said annulment, dissolution or declaration of nullity shall have the same effect as a decree of annulment, dissolution or declaration of nullity issued by a competent court.”
Thus, under Section 1 of HB 6779, the following requisites must be complied with:
First, the marriage must be duly and legally solemnized by a priest, minister, rabbi or presiding elder of any church or religious sect.
This means that the marriages solemnized by: (1) any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s jurisdiction; (2) any ship captain or airplane chief only in the case mentioned in Article 31 of the Family Code; (3) any military commander of a unit to which a chaplain is assigned, in the absence of the latter, during a military operation, likewise only in the cases mentioned in Article 32 of the Family Code; (4) any consul-general, consul or vice-consul in the case provided in Article 10 of the Family Code are excluded from its coverage.
Section 1 of HB 6779, when juxtaposed with Article 7 paragraph 2 of the Family Code, raises multiple questions: By requiring that the marriage must be duly and legally solemnized, does the bill require compliance with the essential and formal requisites of a valid marriage under the Family Code? Does it require compliance with the requirements stated in Article 7 paragraph 2 that any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious sect solemnizing the marriage (1) should be duly authorized by his church or religious sect, (2) should be registered with the civil registrar general, (3) should be acting within the limits of the written authority granted by his church or religious sect, and (4) that at least one of the contracting parties belongs to the solemnizing officer’s church or religious sect? If yes, then why doesn’t the bill simply refer to those marriages solemnized under Article 7 paragraph 2 of the Family Code?
Further, why is the word “imam” not reflected in the bill? In mentioning “presiding elder of any church or religious sect”, is HB 6779 adding another solemnizing officer? Basically, is HB 6779 amending/repealing Article 7 paragraph 2 of the Family Code?
Second, the marriage was celebrated in the Philippines.
Quite obviously, marriages celebrated abroad even by a priest, minister, rabbi or presiding elder of any church or religious sect are excluded.
However, another question arises: what is considered as “in the Philippines?” Will it include or exclude all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction? If the marriage is solemnized by a priest, minister, rabbi or presiding elder of any church or religious sect in a Philippine consulate or embassy abroad, will that be considered as in the Philippines? If so, wouldn’t it be clearer if the HB 6779 state “within the Philippine territory” instead?
Finally, the marriage is annulled, dissolved or declared a nullity in a final judgment or decree in accordance with the canons and precepts of the church or religious sect.
A lot of questions can arise from this but I think the most important one is on regulation. How will the government make sure of the absence of corruption and/or connivance between the spouses in availing of a church decreed annulment?
Furthermore, supposing all requisites are present, will a church annulment decree obtained abroad be recognized in the Philippines? Will said decree suffice or does it need to be judicially recognized as a foreign judgment that may later be enforced?
These are just some of the observations and questions that our legislators may want to consider as the bill progresses into a law as this proposed law is radical and may greatly affect the lives of Filipinos.
While it can be seen as a positive response to prevalent domestic abuse, HB 6779 may also have grave negative consequences as to the stability of marriage as an institution. In any case, this bill still has a long and arduous process to go through. We therefore just have to wait and see.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article is for general informational and educational purposes only and not offered as and does not constitute legal advice or legal opinion.
Jennidy S. Tambor is an Associate of the Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices (ACCRALAW), Davao Branch.
(6382) 224-0996
How governments can screw up the development of new drugs
By Philip Stevens
THE PATENT-BASED system of drug development will come under further pressure from key countries aiming to increase access to medicines at the executive board meeting World Health Organization in March.
Critics of the system want reform, arguing it makes drugs too expensive and fails to provide cures for those in need who may be unable to pay, such as people in developing countries. They want to slash drug prices by replacing intellectual property rights with government-funded prizes as the primary innovation incentive for medicines.
Developers of new drugs would gain government cash prize rewards for the successful development of a new medicine.
In return, companies would be forced to hand over their intellectual property rights to the government, allowing generic manufacturers to enter the market immediately. Competition between generic drug manufacturers would boost access to those in need as new drugs would be sold at their marginal cost of manufacture, so the theory goes.
Meanwhile, governments would control and plan what disease areas are rewarded by prizes, ensuring that funding is allocated to health priorities in a fair and transparent fashion.
“Delinking” the cost of R&D from the final price paid for a medicine, and making governments the funders and planners of drug development, sounds like a simple public health care solution. But so far, no country has taken the plunge.
This is not surprising; “delinkage” is not the silver bullet claimed by its supporters.
One charge leveled against the patent-based system is that it creates losses for patients by inflating medicine prices well beyond their manufacturing costs. This downplays the economic benefits of new medical technologies from averted hospitalization and fewer sick days for workers. But more to the point, an innovation system based on prizes could create just as many, if not more, economic losses.
The prizes fund would have to come from taxpayers; their burden would be at least the $141 billion spent by the private sector on R&D each year. Income tax hikes would distort labor markets and interfere with job creation.
Then there would be the added costs of the enormous new bureaucracy to manage the prizes system.
In the absence of private sector investment, which country would be willing to fill this funding gap? Here the rhetoric of many countries, including India, at World Health Organization meetings in Geneva has not been matched by serious action. Even modest WHO R&D delinkage “demonstration projects” fall $73 million short of the $85 million required, with contributions from only 10 countries.
This new world of government-funded prizes to drive medicine innovation does not look promising.
Money apart, designing prizes that work is even more of a problem. Government committees would struggle to determine the true economic and social value of medicine before it is even created.
With estimates for developing a new medicine between $1.2 billion and $2.6 billion, this matters a whole lot.
For prizes lower than the true market value of the invention, drug developers — and the venture capitalists so instrumental for start-ups — would direct their capital away from medicine R&D towards politically safer but less socially useful areas. New medicines would dry up.
If a government prize committee overvalues the prize, it would trigger duplication of R&D as competitors swarm. Curious then that proponents of these prizes argue they will end the supposedly “wasteful” and duplicative R&D under the patent system.
Finally, there is the problem of politicization. A prize system would hand significant new discretionary powers to government officials as the judges of which medicines win prizes. Political factors would influence decisions on where to allocate funding, rather than clinical need. Diseases that could summon the most vocal lobby groups would get attention from prize bureaucrats, while less fashionable diseases may be ignored.
Political connections and lobbying could both play a role in securing a prize, while elected officials may attempt to influence R&D spending by government agencies.
Patents, on the other hand, represent a far less arbitrary form of innovation incentive. Government merely sets the framework of patent law, under which all companies compete. And competition is the key to innovation.
Take hepatitis C, until recently an incurable disease afflicting around 12 million Indians. Since 2013, no fewer than 10 new treatments have come onto the market, offering clinicians a huge range of options. Such breadth and speed of innovation under a winner-takes-all prize system is hard to picture.
Despite their superficial attraction, no country (other than the technologically backward former Soviet Union) has yet replaced intellectual property rights with prizes. The reasons are clear. Prizes risk economic distortions, undermining incentives for innovators, and adding a new layer of bureaucratization and politics. Be warned, therefore: delinkage and drug development do not go hand in hand.
Philip Stevens is director of Geneva Network, a UK-based research organization focusing on trade, innovation and health policy.
Nation at a Glance — (02/14/18)
News stories from across the nation. Visit www.bworldonline.com (section: The Nation) to read more national and regional news from the Philippines.
UK’s Oxfam faces more pressure after new report of sex abuse by aid workers
LONDON — British aid organization Oxfam faced fresh pressure on Tuesday after a former senior member of staff said her concerns about “a culture of sexual abuse” involving aid workers in some of the organization’s offices had been ignored.
Helen Evans, who was in charge of investigating allegations against Oxfam staff members between 2012 and 2015, told Channel 4 television that abuse cases she had heard of included a woman who had been coerced to have sex in exchange for aid.
Another involved an assault on a teenage volunteer by a staff member in a charity shop in Britain, she said.
A survey of Oxfam staff in three countries including South Sudan showed around 10% of staff had been sexually assaulted and others had witnessed or experienced rape or attempted rape by colleagues, Ms. Evans said.
Ms. Evans, who headed a “safeguarding” section responsible for protecting staff and the people Oxfam works with, spoke of frustration that her calls for more support for her team were not taken seriously enough.
“I felt that our failure to adequately resource was putting people at risk,” she said in an interview broadcast by Channel 4 late on Monday. “I struggle to understand why they didn’t respond immediately to that call for additional resource.”
One of the best-known international NGOs, with aid programs running across the globe, Oxfam is under threat of losing its British government funding over the sexual misconduct allegations.
Asked about Ms. Evans’s allegations, Oxfam said her work had spurred the organization into taking concrete steps to improve the way it deals with “safeguarding” issues.
“We regret that we did not act on Helen’s concerns much quicker and with more resources,” the statement said.
“We have doubled the number of people to four in our dedicated safeguarding team and we are in the process of recruiting two extra staff.”
The deputy head of Oxfam resigned on Monday over what she said was the British charity’s failure to adequately respond to past allegations of sexual misconduct by some of its staff in Haiti and Chad.
The scandal is escalating into a broader crisis for Britain’s aid sector by bolstering critics in the ruling Conservative Party who have argued that the government should reduce spending on aid in favor of domestic priorities.
Aid minister Penny Mordaunt threatened on Sunday to withdraw government funding from Oxfam unless it gave the full facts about events in Haiti.
After meeting Oxfam officials on Monday, Ms. Mordaunt said she had written to all British charities working overseas to demand that “they step up and do more, so that we have absolute assurance that the moral leadership, the systems, the culture and the transparency that are needed.”
Britain’s Charity Commission launched a statutory inquiry on Monday, saying it had concerns that Oxfam “may not have fully and frankly disclosed material details about the allegations at the time in 2011, its handling of the incidents since, and the impact that these have both had on public trust and confidence.” — Reuters
Beijing warns on trade tensions as it aims at US chemical
BEIJING — Trade tensions between the world’s two biggest economies rose again on Tuesday as Beijing accused Washington of “excessive protectionism” after targeting imports of a key chemical from the US.
The administration of US President Donald J. Trump has brought a range of commerce cases against China, sparking fears of a trade war.
“China is concerned about the US’ serious trend towards trade protectionism in steel products,” the Ministry of Commerce said in a statement, and “calls on the US to restrain itself from using trade restriction measures.”
More than half of the US’ protective tariffs are related to steel, it noted.
A director of the ministry’s trade remedy and investigation bureau Wang Hejun was quoted as saying that “repeated and excessive protectionism” often “brings about a vicious circle.”
The statement followed news late Monday that Beijing had taken aim at imports of a key chemical from the US.
The commerce ministry said it had found dumping of styrene imports from the US, Taiwan and South Korea, in an initial ruling during a continuing trade investigation into the chemical.
Dumping, or selling goods at unfairly low prices abroad, can undercut domestic markets at the expense of local industries.
“Mainland China’s styrene industry has suffered substantial harm,” the ministry said in a statement, adding that dumping was the cause of this.
The initial ruling called for importers to place anti-dumping deposits of five to 10.7% with China’s customs administration.
Those deposits will be applied to tariffs if the ministry decides in a final ruling to levy such duties.
Styrene is the building block of many plastics. It is used to make foam packaging and many disposable plastics.
Last year China imported 3.2 million tons of the chemical worth more than $4 billion from the US.
The measures come a month after the Trump administration slapped new tariffs on Chinese-made solar panels and washing machines.
Those tariffs followed a series of trade cases brought against China during Mr. Trump’s first year in office, which have rattled Beijing.
More are expected soon. The Trump administration has major decisions looming on Chinese aluminum, steel and intellectual property practices.
Analysts say Beijing is signaling it will take action in any tit-for-tat trade war.
Last week it launched an anti-dumping investigation into sorghum imports from the US, worth almost $1 billion last year.
That was a sliver of the $14 billion in US soybean imports, which a Chinese commerce ministry spokesman last week hinted could also be in Beijing’s crosshairs.
Soybeans are America’s largest export to China.
Washington says achieving a level playing field in trade is near the top of its agenda in Sino-US relations.
But in Mr. Trump’s first year as president the trade deficit swelled to a record high of $375.2 billion by the US’ counting. — AFP
British defense secretary says warship bound for South China Sea — media
SYDNEY — A British warship will sail through the South China Sea next month to assert freedom-of-navigation rights, British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson said in remarks published on Tuesday.
British officials first flagged the voyage six months ago and the journey is likely to stoke tensions with China, who claim control of most of the area and have built military facilities on land features in the sea. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims to the energy-rich sea that carries billion of dollars in trade.
The frigate HMS Sutherland will sail through the region after a visit to Australia, Mr. Williamson said in an interview with The Australian newspaper.
“She’ll be sailing through the South China Sea (on the way home) and making it clear our navy has a right to do that,” he said, according to the newspaper.
Mr. Williamson did not specify whether it would sail within 12 nautical miles of any disputed territory, according to the paper. Several US Navy ships have made their own freedom-of-navigation journeys that drew stern rebukes from Beijing.
Speaking in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said he was aware of the comments.
“All countries in accordance with international law enjoy freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea. There is no disagreement on this,” Mr. Geng said.
“The situation on the South China Sea is also improving with each day. We hope all relevant sides especially those outside the region can respect the efforts made by regional countries,” he added.
“Like I said last week, currently the South China Sea is calm and tranquil and we hope relevant sides don’t try to create trouble out of nothing.”
In the interview, Mr. Williamson also encouraged Australia to “do more” in a region where it has conducted surveillance flights, but not freedom-of-navigation voyages of its own.
“The US is looking for other countries to do more. This is a great opportunity for the UK and Australia to do more, to exercise leadership,” he said.
China’s construction of islands and military facilities in the South China Sea has prompted international condemnation, amid concern Beijing is seeking to restrict free movement and extend its strategic reach.
The Association of South East Asian Nations is hoping to expedite negotiations with China on a code of conduct for the South China Sea, Singapore’s defense minister said last week.
However, the initial talks have failed to reach a consensus on making the code binding which has already raised concerns as to its effectiveness. — Reuters