Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 7228

P1B added to LANDBANK farmer lending program

THE Department of Agriculture (DA) has given P1 billion to the Land Bank of the Philippines (LANDBANK) to serve as additional funding for an emergency loan programs targeted at small farmers and fisherfolk.

At a virtual ceremony on Dec. 15, Agriculture Secretary William D. Dar and LANDBANK President Cecilia C. Borromeo signed the fund transfer agreement, which also outlines the implementing rules for the DA’s loan program.

The funds were allocated under Republic Act No. 11494 or the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act. The program is expected to benefit around 40,000 eligible borrowers.

“This is our way of helping agri-fishery micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), and small farmers and fishers recover from their losses, as they play a crucial role in ensuring the availability of food in Metro Manila and other urban centers,” Mr. Dar said.

Under the loan program, small farmers and fisherfolk may borrow up to P25,000 with no collateral and zero interest, payable in 10 years.

The funds can be used for production, post-harvest, processing, marketing, and other activities in the food supply chain.

Meanwhile, Ms. Borromeo said by the end of November, LANDBANK had lent P7.76 billion to the agriculture sector, benefiting 228,000 farmers.

“We welcome this opportunity to distribute timely, responsive, and non-interest bearing financing for small farmers and fishers, whose sources of livelihood and income are adversely affected by the ongoing pandemic,” Ms. Borromeo said.

The DA said an initial P2.5 billion was allotted for the loan program, which has been fully released to more than 535,000 farmers during the early stages of the pandemic.

“We will continue what we have started because it is our moral obligation to provide food for all Filipinos, and we start by helping our frontliners in the countryside,” Mr. Dar said. — Revin Mikhael D. Ochave

Agri dep’t lifts suspension on poultry imports from Brazil

THE Department of Agriculture (DA) said it lifted the suspension on poultry imports from Brazil, after Brazilian veterinary authorities submitted certifications requested by the Philippines.

In a memorandum order signed on Dec. 14, Agriculture Secretary William D. Dar said the DA was assured of the precautions taken at Brazilian processing plants against contamination with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

In August, the DA barred the entry of poultry from Brazil after China found traces of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in chicken meat.

Mr. Dar said Brazil has given “satisfactory” evidence of safe handling at the processing plants.

“Brazil has provided evidence that the safety protocols enforced in different accredited meat establishments are equivalent to the guidelines established by the Philippines relative to the mitigating measures against COVID-19 in meat establishments,” Mr. Dar said.

Jesus C. Cham, president of the Meat Importers and Traders Association (MITA), said the ban’s lifting is a welcome development for the meat industry.

Mr. Cham expects the poultry supply from Brazil to normalize by the end of the first quarter of 2021.

“Both countries should now put this incident behind them and move forward,” Mr. Cham said in a mobile phone message.

In October, Brazil wrote to the Department of Foreign Affairs, calling the ban “unjustified” in the wake of the adoption of safety procedures.

The DA partially lifted the suspension on Brazilian poultry in September for mechanically deboned meat.

According to data from the Bureau of Animal Industry, Brazilian meat imports account for 16.1% or 121,952 metric tons of total meat imports.

Separately, the DA ordered the suspension of poultry imports from parts of Poland, Belgium, South Korea, the UK, and Japan due to reported outbreaks of two strains of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI), or bird flu.

In five separate memorandum orders, Mr. Dar prohibited imports of domestic and wild birds and their products including meat, day-old chicks, eggs, and semen from Wielkopolskie, Poland, West-Vlaanderen, Belgium, Jeollabuk-Do, South Korea, England, and multiple locations in Japan.

The ban also includes the suspension on the processing, evaluation, and issuance of sanitary and phytosanitary import clearances for all such products.

“There is a need to prevent the entry of HPAI virus to protect the health of the local poultry population,” Mr. Dar said.

MITA’s Mr. Cham said the regional bans may prolong the tight supply conditions here, but will not have much of an effect on the sector. — Revin Mikhael D. Ochave

PHL wheat import outlook cut on weak animal feed demand

PHILIPPINE wheat imports are expected to total 6.8 million metric tons (MT) in the 2020-2021 marketing year (MY), downgrading its previous estimate of 7 million MT due to weaker demand for animal feed, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) said.

In a report, the USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service said the Philippine trade in wheat rose 9% year on year to 2.3 million MT in the three months to September, which is also the first quarter of MY 2020-2021.

“Milling wheat from the US drove this growth, as contacts report the bakery and noodle sectors doing well during the pandemic,” the USDA said.

“With 1 million MT shipped from July to September, the Philippines is currently the largest destination for US wheat,” it added.

The USDA added that a decline in feed wheat consumption due to African Swine Fever (ASF) is expected to offset higher milling wheat demand.

It said Philipine hog producers have downsized due to ASF, with more than 400,000 animals culled as a result of the virus.

The USDA said the animal feed segment will also be hampered by restrictions on the issuance of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Import Clearances (SPSICs), and additional requirements for obtaining the document.

“Importers have reported unpredictability in the issuance of import clearances during the last three months,” the USDA said.

Meanwhile, the USDA projected Philippine corn production for MY 2020-2021 at 8.2 million MT, across a harvestable area of 2.6 million hectares.

It added that corn imports during the period at 600,000 MT.

Under the new guidelines set by the Department of Agriculture, new requirements are now needed for corn and wheat import clearances, including a description of the commodities, an affidavit declaring the shipment’s purpose, and a separate SPSIC for every shipment with a different declared purpose, among others.

“Industry contacts have noted that new requirements in the recently issued Memorandum Circular No. 39 could disrupt corn exports and limit feed availability and affordability in 2021,” the USDA said.

The USDA estimated Philippine rice output at 12 million MT during MY 2020-2021, harvested over 4.65 million hectares.

Its rice import estimate was cut to 2.3 million MT for the year from the previous estimate of 2.6 million MT, as a result of the SPSIC bottleneck.

“The Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) issued 678 SPSICs from July to October in 2020 for 490,441 MT, down 53% from the 1.19 million MT representing 1,462 SPSICs issued during the same period in 2019,” the USDA said. — Revin Mikhael D. Ochave

New streamlined process for resolving IP disputes seen boosting small firms

TRADE Secretary Ramon M. Lopez

TRADE Secretary Ramon M. Lopez said the revised rules of procedure that will streamline the intellectual property dispute process will provide a boost to small businesses and aid in the economy’s recovery.

“The Revised Rules signal a whole-of-government advocacy in empowering our people to contribute to our country’s national and socioeconomic progress through the development of their Intellectual Properties (IPs),” he said in his message at the launch of the rules, hosted by the Supreme Court.

“Thus, we are confident that these Revised Rules will aid our industries, inventors, artists, designers, creators, as well as our micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) (in maximizing) the benefits of their IP rights,” he added.

Mr. Lopez also said that the revised rules “will foster a legal atmosphere that will spur creative activity and innovation, technology transfer, and foreign investment.”

The new rules took effect on Nov. 16.

Mr. Lopez said the new process is important because many businesses, particularly MSMEs, were significantly affected by the pandemic.

He also noted that the pandemic accelerated the digital shift, citing the number of online businesses registered, which totaled 86,000 in the year to date from 1,700 in March.

“With IP as a catalyst for our country’s growth, we believe that the Judiciary’s activities on IP rights will enhance the government’s efforts to accelerate our economic recovery,” he said.

Rowel S. Barba, director-general of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), said the new process is timely because technology is “being used and abused to commit counterfeiting, piracy, infringement and other forms of IP rights violations,” an environment he called “more challenging than ever.”

“The Revised Rules drafted with the valuable inputs from the courts, law enforcement agencies, the IPOPHL, practitioners, IP stakeholders and members of the Supreme Court, has certainly taken into account the numerous logistics, legal and operational challenges,” he said. — Vann Marlo M. Villegas

House adopts Senate versions of bills extending budget validity, creating coco trust fund

THE House of Representatives on Wednesday adopted the Senate version of a bill extending the validity of the 2020 Budget until the end of 2021, and another Senate measure creating the coconut levy trust fund, with both actions billed as necessary to provide economic relief.

With no votes opposing, House legislators adopted the Senate counterpart to House Bill (HB) No. 6656, which aims to extend the validity of this year’s budget until Dec. 31, 2021 by amending Republic Act No. 11465 or the General Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year 2020.

The measure seeks to continue financing from the 2020 Budget infrastructure projects that have reached the procurement stage, to help spur the recovery next year.

The House likewise adopted the Senate counterpart of HB No. 8136, or the proposed Coconut Farmers and Development Trust Fund Act, which will form a trust fund out of coconut levy assets, with proceeds from the trust’s investments helping rehabilitate and modernize the coconut industry.

The bill allows poor coconut farmers to benefit from taxes collected from them decades ago, now equivalent to around P76 billion.

Speaker Lord Allan Q. Velasco said he hopes the once-vetoed legislation will be signed into law by President Rodrigo R. Duterte “this time around.”

Quezon Representative Wilfrido Mark M. Enverga, chairman of the House committee on agriculture and food, said the concerns cited in the veto of the first coconut levy bill last year “have been addressed” in the new measure.

“We are very careful in crafting this new version of the bill so we are confident that we have resolved everything,” Mr. Enverga at a briefing in the House.

“We ensured that there is a limitation of 99 years. Secondly, with regard to the broad powers given to the Philippine Coconut Authority, we addressed this by delineating powers of implementing authority to the newly-constituted Board of the PCA (Philippine Coconut Authority),” he said. “We also established a Trust Fund Management Committee, composed of the Department of Budget and Management and Department of Justice.”

The House also approved on second reading HB No. 8145, which seeks to extend to 2041 the applicability of lifeline rates — in effect, subsidized electricity — for low-income users. The bill seeks to amend Republic Act No. 9136 or the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001.

Mr. Velasco, one the bill’s proponents, has said the proposed legislation would allow low-income households continued access to electricity during the pandemic. — Kyle Aristophere T. Atienza

Adoptive mothers and maternity leave

As a city dweller, my family always looks forward to Saturday nights because apart from the well-deserved break from work and online school, it is our family’s “movie night.” After dinner, we set up foam beds in our living room and imagine that we are out camping, but with an outdoor cinema. It’s nothing fancy, but what makes it special is the consistency and the commitment to make it happen every Saturday. It’s the secret to our family bond.

Just last week, we watched Instant Family, a movie about a couple that became adoptive parents of three siblings from foster care. It gives you a glimpse of the joys and travails of adoption, obscuring the difference between pregnancy and the adoption process, between giving birth and adopting a child. In either case, one becomes a parent from Day 0 which leads me to raise this question: Can adoptive mothers claim maternity leave under the 105-Day Expanded Maternity Leave Law (EMLL), which biological mothers enjoy?

Republic Act (RA) No. 11210 or the EMLL grants all covered female workers in government and the private sector, including those in the informal economy, regardless of civil status or the legitimacy of her child, 105 days’ maternity leave with full pay and an option to extend for an additional 30 days without pay. For female workers who qualify as a solo parent under RA No. 8972, or the Solo Parents’ Welfare Act, an additional 15 days’ maternity leave with full pay is granted. In instances of miscarriage or emergency termination of pregnancy, 60 days’ maternity leave with full pay is granted.

Section 3 of the EMLL specifically mentions pregnancy, miscarriage, or emergency termination of pregnancy as a prerequisite to qualify for maternity leave. No other cases are mentioned that would seem to cover the circumstances of an adoptive mother. Thus, if we look only at the EMLL, it appears that adoptive mothers are not eligible to claim maternity leave.

However, the good news is that memos and resolutions have been issued by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) stating otherwise, citing provisions of RA No. 8552 or the Domestic Adoption Law.  Section 12 of which provides that if a child is below seven years of age and is placed with the prospective adopters through a pre-adoption placement authority issued by the DSWD, the prospective adopters are to enjoy all the benefits to which biological parents are entitled from the date the adoptee is placed in that household.

The eligibility of adoptive parents is further supported by Section 34 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA No. 8552, which state that adoptive parents enjoy all the benefits to which biological parents are entitled as regards the adopted child. Maternity and paternity benefits given to biological parents upon the birth of a child may be availed of if the adoptee is below seven years of age as of the date the child is placed with the adoptive parents through the Pre-Adoptive Placement Authority issued by the DSWD.

Although another law supports the rights of the adoptive mother to maternity leave benefits, it would be impractical for adoptive mothers to comply with the documentary requirements (i.e. proof of pregnancy) mandated by the government agencies or the Social Security System (SSS) to claim maternity leave benefits under the EMLL.

Say the employer grants the 105-day leave with full pay to the adoptive mother on account of the EMLL, does the benefit qualify as tax-exempt?

In the Bureau of Internal Revenue’s Revenue Memorandum Circular (RMC) No. 105-2019, a female worker is entitled to full pay during maternity leave which consists of (i) SSS maternity benefit computed based on her average daily salary credit and (ii) salary differential to be paid by the employer, if any.

Both the SSS maternity benefit and the salary differential are exempt from income and withholding taxes based on  Section 2.78.1(B)(1)(e) of Revenue Regulation No. 2-98, granting tax exemption on payments of benefits under the Social Security System Act of 1954, as amended (now RA No. 11199 or the Social Security Act of 2018, which is known as the SSS Law).

Considering that maternity leave for adoptive mothers is not covered under the SSS Law, one cannot avail of the tax exemption discussed under RMC No. 105-2019. Thus, it is my opinion that the leave benefit with full pay granted to adoptive mothers is taxable even if the leave was granted following the rules under the EMLL.

The EMLL and the joint implementing rules and regulations issued by the CSC, Department of Labor and Employment, and SSS were created in recognition of the maternal function of women as a social responsibility and to provide them with ample transition time to regain health and overall wellness, as well as to assume their maternal roles before resuming paid work. Although adoptive mothers do not go through pregnancy and labor, which requires them to regain their health and overall wellness, adoptive mothers also need time to bond and nurture a relationship with their child, one of the prime objectives of the EMLL. Thus, it would be worthwhile if the EMLL and other related benefits can be explicitly granted as well to adoptive mothers. After all, a mother is a mother, with or without the labor pains.

The views or opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Isla Lipana & Co. The content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for specific advice.

 

Floredee T. Odulio  is a Director at the Client Accounting Services group of Isla Lipana & Co., the Philippine member firm of the PwC network.

+63 (2) 8845-2728

floredee.t.odulio@pwc.com

Child Trust Fund

One cannot help but be wary whenever the government proposes the creation of a “fund” to benefit people. The state’s track record, at least based on my perception, is less than sterling when it comes to ensuring fund profitability, long-term sustainability, and equitable distribution of benefits. Also, there have been numerous scandals involving corruption and mismanagement.

Through the years, the government has created all sorts of funds to cover pension, retirement, housing, and healthcare, among others. Now, another fund is being proposed: Child Trust Fund (CTF) to cover college-related expenses for those 18 years old and above. This fund is for school-related expenses only because tuition is already free in public schools and state universities.

“The fund can also be managed by either the government [or] part of it can also be cut out to be managed by the private sector. We are still on the exploratory stage and we would like to do a more detailed or granular study on the CTF and [then] to sell it to the [Capital Market Development] Council in the coming meetings,” National Treasurer Rosalia V. de Leon said in a statement.

The proposed CTF can subsidize daily expenses of college students like daily allowance, transportation, lodging, and other fees. Money can be drawn from the fund once a student turns 18, and those from poorer households can get more.

BusinessWorld reported recently that Ms. De Leon cited two possible models for the proposed CTF.

One is the United Kingdom model that created over six million tax-free trust fund accounts to save up for future educational expenses of children born between Sept. 1, 2002 and Jan. 2, 2011. The UK government gave seed capital of £250-500 (P16,000-P32,000) per child to create the trust fund. The UK trust fund ended in 2011.

The other model is Singapore’s Education Endowment or Edusave Scheme. The SG government gave 4,000 Singapore dollars to each recipient child seven years old and above, to cover 10 years of schooling in primary and secondary education. The fund account is closed once the child turns 16, and unused funds are transferred to other accounts.

No other details were given regarding the local proposal, considering it is still basically a concept. I am not surprised that such trust funds were actually successful in the UK and Singapore. Those two countries rank relatively high when it comes to people’s trust in their government; the government providing efficient service; and, in terms of battling corruption.

In our case, however, I am skeptical if such a fund is a good idea. I mean, it can work, and may just be helpful particularly for poorer families. And if the fund is also privately managed, then maybe it can be managed well to ensure profitability and sustainability. But I am always worried when it comes to large sums of money being handled by the government.

One just needs to recall past scandals involving AFP-RSBS and PhilHealth, and how these funds were allegedly mishandled by government appointees in one way or the other. There is always this mistaken appreciation that such trust funds are government money, and that government — through appointees — can do whatever it wants with the money.

The fact of the matter is, as far as I am concerned, such funds are actually owned by members of the fund — and that the government — or its appointees — are just trustees tasked with managing the fund. The goal, of course, is always conservation. Trustees manage the fund for the benefit of beneficiaries. Rules and decisions should thus be made in consultation with fund owners.

Take the case of PhilHealth and Pag-Ibig, and pension systems SSS and GSIS. These entities are funded by “contributions” from “members.” In fact, these funds come from mandatory deductions from workers. Conceptually, these funds should benefit the very people they are collected from. However, in our experience, this has not always been the case.

At times, it is a matter of government appointees heading these agencies making decisions that tend to disadvantage the fund owners themselves. For instance, in the 1990s, mismanagement put the military pension system at major risk. Bosses of AFP-RSBS, which was funded from soldiers’ contributions, opted to imprudently invest in real estate.

When the 1997 financial crisis hit, and real estate tanked, the pension fund lost lots of money, to the detriment of soldiers. It was also later discovered that RSBS bosses allegedly favored companies — and formed joint ventures — with real estate companies identified with senior military officials, extending as much as P2 billion in loans to them. There were also allegations of overpricing land acquisitions.

And then there is PhilHealth, where only recently a whistleblower alleged that about P15 billion in PhilHealth funds were stolen by government-appointed managers through various fraudulent schemes over the years. Allegations include unauthorized release of COVID-19 funds even to hospitals that have not yet recorded COVID-19 cases; overpricing computer systems; and, manipulating operations to block corruption investigations.

Over the years, even funds like SSS, GSIS, and Pag-Ibig have not been spared from allegations of mismanagement, bad investment, corruption, or giving “favors” to “friends” of the powers that be. Even these agencies’ choices of stock investments have been put into question at one time or the other, or how said investments have allowed these funds to impact company takeovers.

I have no strong objection to the creation of a Child Trust Fund, as long as the government can guarantee that such a fund can be free from manipulation, mismanagement, and corruption. And that its creation and operation will truly benefit the beneficiaries. In this line, the first order of the day is a truly extensive study on how such a fund can be operated and protected.

 

Marvin Tort is a former managing editor of BusinessWorld, and a former chairman of the Philippines Press Council

matort@yahoo.com

If Facebook broke up, would anyone notice?

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN if Facebook disappeared tomorrow? Would people suddenly be unable to communicate online? Would the economy screech to a halt? Would anyone be deprived of a good, service, or piece of information that was somehow crucial to their existence?

Of course not. Which is why the one of the company’s main arguments against a breakup — that it’s too big and complex to dismember — makes no sense.

Some companies play such an important role in the economy or in people’s lives that their failure or disintegration could be disastrous. This allows them to drive a hard bargain with the government if they get into trouble: Help us, or else. During the 2008 financial crisis, for example, the government had little choice but to rescue the largest US banks, lest their demise bring down the country’s whole system of credit and payments. In this sense, they were “too big to fail” — and they have grown even bigger since.

It’s easy to see why people might place Facebook in a similar category. It’s big, among the largest companies in the world by market capitalization — thanks in large part to the pace at which it has vacuumed up the competition, with the blessing of US authorities. With more than 200 million users in the US alone, it definitely plays a role in a lot of people’s lives — so much so that it has aggravated the country’s divisions by enticing people to delve ever deeper into conspiracy theories about vaccines, COVID-19, and much else.

So what would happen if, as a result of the antitrust suits filed by the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general, a court ordered Facebook to split up, reversing its acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram? The company’s lawyers argue that the various businesses have become so inextricably interwoven that a breakup would be extremely difficult, generating costs and chaos that would harm users worldwide. In other words, don’t mess with us, or else.

Really? No doubt, the breakup would be difficult for Facebook’s managers, who rely on data sharing among WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook to create the most complete possible profiles of users and then sell their attention to the highest bidder. If the companies were separated, all the investment they’d been making into surveillance and targeting wouldn’t immediately work out as well as they had hoped. For them, the product is the advertising, not the service to users.

For users, though, there would hardly be a difference. Most try to ignore the advertising anyway — or occasionally get creeped out when they see an ad for a product they’d been researching elsewhere. They’re primarily there for the content from celebrities and their friends, or to communicate through group chats and messaging systems. The apps are already separate icons on their computers and phones.

Even in the highly unlikely event that all three apps somehow failed, it’s hard to imagine consumers suffering much. They have plenty of other ways to reach each other, such as Twitter, Zoom, and e-mail. Given the role Facebook has played in polarizing society, there might even be some upside.

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Sweden’s second wave offers hard reality check

LINUS MIMIETZ/UNSPLASH

EVERY COUNTRY has at one point dared to believe they’ve figured out how to beat SARS-CoV-2, until reality sets in.

The UK’s misguided flirtation with a hands-off “herd immunity” strategy in March led quickly to a U-turn and tough restrictions. France and Spain promised they’d never repeat the draconian lockdowns they imposed early on — only to break their vow when test-and-trace systems failed to keep pace with summer vacation contagion. Israelis, who after a first lockdown were told to enjoy life and “have a beer,” are now facing a third one. Donald Trump recently claimed he’d ended the pandemic (he hadn’t).

Now, it’s Sweden’s turn. After a summer lull, the Scandinavian country famous for its voluntary “trust-based” approach to social distancing is getting battered by a winter wave of the coronavirus. Its seven-day average of daily cases and deaths per capita is currently outpacing the UK, France, and Spain, and isn’t far off the US’s tallies. While Sweden’s total deaths of 7,514 are on a per-capita basis lower than those countries, they far outstrip its Nordic neighbors at five times Denmark’s rate, nine times Finland’s, and 10 times Norway’s.

The aura of calm that Swedes have projected is fading as a result. With intensive-care beds in Stockholm almost full, Prime Minister Stefan Lofven gave a recent gloomy television address — a historically rare occurrence — imploring citizens to follow tough new restrictions to alleviate overstretched hospitals and save Christmas. Public gatherings are capped at eight people; schools have been shut, some for the first time; alcohol sales are banned after 10 p.m. While much is still recommendation rather than rule, Sweden’s government has proposed a law that would give it the power to close stores in response to a worsening pandemic.

This doesn’t come close to the widespread business closures seen elsewhere or the bureaucratic form-filling of France’s lockdowns. But it’s a sign that whatever was working in Sweden isn’t doing the trick anymore. Though the country suffered a high death rate during the first wave, there was optimism it was an upfront cost in return for less economic pain and higher immunity levels — all while respecting, and even reinforcing, a fabric of social trust. Sweden’s economy at the end of September was only 2.2% smaller than it was in 2019, according to HSBC. But the new wave is a nasty development.

It’s tempting to gloat over Sweden’s failures and the attitude of its top epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, who is by turns curiously inflexible (he opposes face masks) and unpredictable (his U-turns on guidelines for children). But maybe Sweden is simply falling into the norm for this public health crisis. After all, Germany, a bright spot of Europe earlier this year, is going through a similar reversal of fortunes. Its daily deaths are hitting their highest levels since the start of the pandemic, prompting Chancellor Angela Merkel to call on Germans to rein in Christmas celebrations in an emotional speech. Switzerland, too, is being hit harder this time around.

The reality is that all countries have had to learn from mistakes. Data estimating the strictness of COVID-19 restrictions around the world suggest countries like Italy and France have softened their lockdown approach since April, keeping schools open for example. Giuliano di Baldassarre, a professor of crisis management at Uppsala University, reckons the lessons have gone both ways: Sweden has taught other countries to consider more humane and more stable restrictions, but it has also been taught that a lack of legal or regulatory intervention can become a problem.

As countries from the UK to Croatia tighten restrictions ahead of the holidays, the ideal of a European “model” for keeping the virus in check is looking increasingly unattainable — and that includes the Swedish model, the focus of such fascination earlier this year. It would have been hard to replicate the Scandinavian country’s natural advantages, such as a high rate of remote work and single-occupant households, elsewhere. Now it seems the country’s popular commitment to social distancing is suffering from fatigue, as elsewhere. Until vaccines get rolled out at scale, the danger for people everywhere will be imagining they’ve got this virus beaten.

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Punching through the message

ANALYSES, action plans, and strategies need to be presented in bite-sizes with short titles (three words max) that explain what they are about. A punchy phrase (say “declining market share”) sounds neutral, and devoid of drama. Isn’t this how a doctor’s diagnosis should sound like? How did “positive” become a dreaded word?

The talking points (also called bullet points or “bullet”) are punchy phrases that constitute a situation or action plan. If a profit plan involves laying off unproductive and costly executives who are not contributing to the bottom line, only raising the overhead to unnatural levels, the required solution is boiled down to two words: “right sizing.” This is a nice neutral phrase that takes away the drama from layoffs — you’re not the right size.

Robert McNamara, who served as the American Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War found that situations could be summarized by metrics (numbers that can be compared and turned into ratios) and “bullet points.” With the use of short punchy summaries of situations and accompanying quantification of productivity (“body bags” or “areas under control” became favorites) a complex situation could be boiled down to a few points to show that it was manageable.

Consultants love bullets for their situation analyses. These are at the heart of presentations to the executive committee as well as pitches for new accounts. In the virtual meeting, the presenter is given full attention — “can I share my slides?” Everybody else is on mute.

Here are some rules for bullet points.

Bullets should be few, only four at most in one slide. This rule allows the eye to focus on a few items on the screen. It ensures that the presenter is not reading his narrative off the page that his audience is looking at. Bullet points serve as triggers for lengthier narratives which the speaker does not flash on the screen.

If you want to convey that department heads do not talk with each other and go off working from home on their own without evaluating resources utilized (and denied to other units) the bullet is shown simply — “silo mentality.” It is good to use words not found in ordinary conversation so that the bullets smack of divine revelations. It also allows the prophet to explain the cryptic titles. The visual for this slide shows agricultural architecture for storing wheat.

Never mention actual persons in bullet points. Characters are described by their behavior, usually dysfunctional (note the spelling of that word). A second-or-third-tier executive is sketched with a few words which carry their own spin. A “thought leader” (good) can also be called a “loose cannon” (bad). These two phrases can embrace the same behavior of going ahead without checking with anybody.

Bullet points address limited attention spans. This time constraint may be due to a busy schedule. Most likely it is a problem of attention span, especially when presenting to many in a virtual meeting (no audio and video) — did the CEO go off to have lunch?

Statistics can be overwhelming. Some numbers are thrown away as irrelevant. Bullet points connect the dots on the remaining ones to draw a specific picture. Stories (or narratives) are considered a way of explaining any development.

The field of “behavioral economics” looks at non-monetary considerations in decision-making and points to the power of the narrative in influencing seemingly pure economic moves.

Why is the price of a stock moving up? Is it just a herd mentality? Maybe there is a story going around of undue interest from some sectors. The bullet point, “bargain hunting” can wake up a sleepy stock which is seen to be undervalued.

Bullet points supply the summary of a story which can be a handy headline for the blogs — recovery, consolidation, hostile acquisition, or vulture funds. Talking points allow the reporter to punch through the message and make it easier to grasp and pass on.

Even in a PR crisis, such as a late-night attack by a sleepy leader holding a pre-recorded press conference, the punchy phrase is important. After the announcements laced with unscripted side comments, a reaction from the mentioned personality or corporation is sure to follow.

Message discipline requires a measured response, mindful of withholding some overreaction. In this case, bullet points can easily be misunderstood to mean something else entirely.

 

Tony Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda

ar.samson@yahoo.com

Europe set to approve COVID-19 vaccine on Christmas week

BERLIN/BRUSSELS — Europeans are set to start getting coronavirus vaccines before the new year after the regional drug regulator accelerated its approval process following the launch of immunization campaigns in the United States and Britain.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) said an expert panel would convene on Monday Dec. 21 to evaluate the vaccine made by US company Pfizer and German partner BioNTech . It had previously said the meeting could be as late as Dec 29.

While EMA’s mandate is to issue recommendations on new medical treatments, the European Commission has the final say on approval and typically follows EMA’s advice.

EMA said its expert meeting was brought forward after the companies had provided more data, as requested, and the EU Commission would fast-track its procedures to rule on approval “within days”.

Germany should start giving coronavirus shots 24 to 72 hours after the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine gets EU approval and could begin as soon as Christmas, Health Minister Jens Spahn said on Tuesday.

EU (European Union) Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed those sentiments by saying on Twitter “(It is) Likely that the first Europeans will be vaccinated before end 2020.”

Germany, France, Italy and five other European states will coordinate the start of their vaccination campaigns, the countries’ health ministers said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

The countries will promote “the coordination of the launch of the vaccination campaigns” and will rapidly share information on how it is proceeding, said the statement, released by Italy.

The statement was also signed by the health ministers of Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain and EU neighbor Switzerland.

TOUGH CHRISTMAS
Rising infection rates and tighter lockdown measures in many European nations have added to the pressure on the EMA to act as quickly as possible and cast a shadow over the Christmas celebrations.

The EMA added any approval would come with a safety monitoring plan, manufacturing controls, an investigation plan for use in children and binding obligations by the manufacturers to provide more efficacy and safety data. 

Britain was the first to approve the shot for emergency use on Dec. 3, followed by Canada on Dec. 9 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Dec. 11.

EMA said in early December it planned to issue its view on the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine by Dec 29, and on another candidate developed by Moderna by Jan. 12.

Both U.S. biotech firm Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech have reported vaccine effectiveness in trials of well above 90% — an unexpectedly high rate. Any side effects have eased quickly and had not been serious, they said.

BioNTech reiterated it was on track deliver 50 million doses globally this year, for 25 million two-dose courses needed for immunization. — Reuters

Australia ups the ante in trade row with China

SYDNEY — Australia will launch a formal appeal to the World Trade Organization (WTO) later on Wednesday seeking a review of China’s decision to impose hefty tariffs on imports of Australian barley, Minister for Trade Simon Birmingham said.

Acknowledging the appeal may take years to be resolved, Birmingham told reporters that Australia had little choice after Beijing in May imposed five years of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties totalling 80.5% on Canberra’s barley — effectively stopping a billion-dollar trade in its tracks.

“Australia has an incredibly strong case to mount in relation to defending the integrity and proprietary of our grain growers and barley producers,” Mr. Birmingham said.

The Chinese government embassy in Australian didn’t immediately respond to email requesting comment.

The appeal to the independent trade body threatens to further stoke bilateral tensions that have already seen China impose tariffs on a range of Australian commodities, while diplomatic communication is limited.

Already rocky after Australia in 2018 banned Huawei from its nascent 5G broadband network, the relationship with China cooled further after Canberra called this year for an independent investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, first reported in central China last year.

China has since limited beef imports, imposed tariffs on Australian wine and told its millers to stop buying Australian cotton.

While some have said Australia should seek a truce with China, Canberra’s conservative government is under growing pressure from farmers who face five years without being able to sell to what has been their most lucrative market.

“It is imperative that we support the liberalization of global trade and the rules that govern it,” said Fiona Simson, chief executive of the National Farmers Federation, in an emailed statement issued after minister Birmingham announced the WTO move.

About 70% of Australian exports of the grain typically go to China, Australian data show.

The effective block on sales to China also comes as Australian barley production is expected to hit nearly 12 million tons this crop year, after rain revived some of the biggest growing regions following years of drought.

Government sources, however, warned the WTO action won’t yield quick results.

The first stage of the appeal will seek formal talks between Australia and China, which are not expected until early next year.

Australia has low expectations of an immediate cessation of tariffs.

“We appealed a few months ago and they rejected that. So it seems unlikely that China will admit they were wrong,” said one person familiar with the details of the case who declined to be named because he was not authorized to talk to media.

Should talks between Australia and China fail to yield a result, an independent panel of experts will be set up to look into the issue. Australia expects this could take several years, and even if that panel rules in Canberra’s favour, China has the right to appeal. —Reuters

1...7,2277,2287,229...12,768Page 7,228 of 12,768
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube