DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
3/5/2012
Last Sunday, a morning headline blared, “CHED helpless vs high miscellaneous fees this coming school year – Palace.” When the price of oil products was raised several times the past month (as in the case of the horrendous two-step 30-percent increase in the price of LPG), we heard the same refrain from Malacañang--that it cannot do anything about the problem. Similarly, when Mindanaoans raised shrill cries of pain due to the power supply and power rate crises crippling their lives and the island’s economy, the government agency concerned--the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management (Psalm) Corp.--said it could do nothing as well.
Government, of course, does not involve only Malacañang but includes both the legislative and judicial branches--both of which have shown themselves unresponsive to the pleas people have been raising hell about.
So the question is, if the present government cannot do anything about these vital, day-to-day issues, why do we still allow it to continue running our lives?
The 1987 Constitution, the guide for governance in this country, says in its Preamble: “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society, and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.”
If the Filipino people, who are hurting and demanding help from their government, are told by that same government that it can do nothing, does that still make the Filipino people sovereign? Can a government that says “no” to its people’s pleas for affordable and quality education, aside from moderating prices of basic goods and commodities, be an embodiment of these people’s ideals and aspirations? Does a government that refuses to extend a helping hand by regulating oil prices to protect its public serve the “common good?”
The argument that government cannot do anything because the “world market” dictates prices is bunk. Government can do plenty. Even the paragon of “free market” economics and laissez-faire capitalism, the US of A, is seriously considering intervening in its domestic fuel market by preparing the release of its “strategic oil reserves” to dampen the skyrocketing gas prices.
For the Philippines, this column has long called for the expansion of the nation’s 30 to 60-day oil and fuel reserves to a full year’s stockpile--bought during periods of low prices.
Just imagine: If the recent oil price increases are sustained for the rest of the year, our oil imports will balloon to over $15 billion from the $12 billion (more or less) in the past; but even this is already affordable for the Philippines, which now has $77 billion in foreign exchange reserves, not to mention P17 trillion sleeping in the Special Deposit Account (SDA).
Oil and fuel are basic necessities of the economy. The same is true for electricity, of which Philippine rates are already the “highest in Asia” but bound to go ever higher as Psalm plots with Congress to make taxpayers and electricity consumers shoulder $18 billion worth of “Universal Charge.” Even as these increasing energy costs already put tremendous economic and financial pressures on all our public and private schools, colleges, and universities (among other sectors), it must also be stated that the profit-seeking business orientation of the private educational sector has also added to the burden of parents and students, as the managing hierarchy of these institutions press to maintain profits amid difficult times. All these are happening as government continues to reduce the budget for state colleges and universities every year, thereby shrinking the educated class and dooming the nation’s future.
Despite the nation’s glaring and mounting socio-economic crisis, the legislature has chosen to spend 28 days on impeachment hearings that only serve to distract from our urgent challenges.
So distracting it was that most of the nation did not notice the Judiciary’s new decision on electricity that is adverse to power consumers’ welfare. By using technicalities in the House-approved Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Epira) and the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC)’s twisted rules, it summarily disqualified consumer crusaders, who have long fought against the grand larceny being perpetrated by the power pirates, as “oppositors.”
The Senate, thankfully, called for a long recess on the impeachment hearings. But the lull didn’t.
Fresh from raising a dud in the bid to impeach the Supreme Court Chief Justice, Malacañang started to raise the boogeyman of an “ouster” or “coup” attempt against the Palace tenant--a boogey that not even its own security officials would hazard to confirm. In short: Another dud.
What are the people of this Republic to do given this situation where the government that is tasked by the Constitution to help the people build a just and humane society instead reiterates constantly that it is “helpless,” and actually works to create distractions to the crises, and shuns all efforts at solving them?
If I may ask our constitutional experts, “Can it now be deemed legal to call for the ouster of this ‘helpless,’ unresponsive government that has become a bane to the people and a hindrance to the fulfillment of the Constitution’s vision?” Maybe the people should make sure the “ouster” rumor will no longer be a dud this time.
(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN’s HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on “A Tribute to Horacio ‘Boy’ Morales: A People’s Man;” visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)
Friday, March 9, 2012
BSP’s $500-M ‘gift’ to IMF hoax
CONSUMERS' DEMAND!
Herman Tiu Laurel
3/5-11/2012
Our fellow OpinYon columnist and De La Salle professor Louie Montemar looked critically at the “news of the decade” last week emanating from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).
The surprise report in the papers that “the Philippines has just become a creditor nation, extending loans to poorer states in the European Union,” prompted Louie to write in his piece, “Making sense of the news,” that this news didn’t seem to compute given the socio-economic realities we see facing our nation.
It certainly does not make any sense. The claim that the Philippines has become a creditor nation is a big farce simply because a country with P4.9-trillion ($120-billion) outstanding national debt can hardly claim to be a real creditor country.
What’s not being stated is that the national government (NG) only borrows dollars for the BSP to pay our country’s $500-million contribution to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)’s new arrangement for borrowing (NAB) program and $251.5 million for the financial transaction plan (FTP), in accordance with the country’s obligations as a member of the Fund.
With help from financial forensics expert Hiro Vaswani, the following instances show how the BSP and the NG went about raising the Philippines’ contributions to the IMF through borrowings:
From January 2006, the headline, “NG to issue bonds to BSP for advances of IMF dues,” spelled out an idea of issuing the same type of zero-coupon bonds as the now infamous CodeNGO PeaceBonds which need not pass through the national budget but instead go straight to government’s debt to form part of our “automatic debt service.”
Then, from 2009, the headline, “BSP advances P9B IMF quota payments,” highlighted the country’s regular ritual of raising contributions for the IMF at a time when the NG incurred a budget deficit but which it repaid in subsequent years to the BSP. There is therefore no reason to expect any difference in this year’s contributions to the IMF.
The Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC), reacting to the BSP and NG’s trumpeting of our country’s sizeable contribution to the FTP, said in a statement:
“The news suggesting that ‘the Philippines has now become a creditor nation’ may sound good, but (FDC) smells something fishy about this ‘hype’…
“Ricardo Reyes, FDC president, said that while such move ‘seems to suggest that the Philippines has gotten out of its debt problem, which of course is not true,’ considering the outstanding national government debt of P4.93 trillion ($120 billion) at present, the catch lies in the next part of the BSP announcement… (where the monetary authority) ‘lends a part of our dollar reserves to IMF’s FTP’ so the Philippines can borrow again and borrow more from the IMF… (this, notwithstanding the fact that) We have suffered more than enough and continue to suffer as a consequence of (the) IMF’s debt trap.”
So it’s time that we throw rotten tomatoes and eggs, and add the rotten balut, on PeNoy’s face for this shameful attempt to glorify the Philippines’ borrowed financial tribute to the IMF as a clean contribution to the multilateral financial institution’s fund. It is a desperate effort to put an artificial shine on the 26 years of Edsa I’s financial “reforms.”
Those reforms, consisting of the liberalization of currency and capital flows, as well as the deregulation and privatization of the financial system and economy, have actually caused the Philippines to become a shameful laggard in the region.
For the Edsa devotees’ information, our country is now overtaken by Vietnam, which 26 years ago, was just beginning to rebuild from the ravages of 50 years of war with France and then the US.
In spite of that, we still hear of paeans being showered on our alleged “creditor nation status” from the likes of Cory Aquino finance chief Jess Estanislao, whose statements, quoted by Tonette Chan in the Inquirer story, “From butt of jokes in 1986, Philippines has risen to creditor nation,” which proclaim “The Philippines (as) a model of good governance in the world… (thereby enabling it to) overtake Thailand and Indonesia in terms of economic growth,” simply brim with unadulterated hubris.
Why, the reporter even had the unmitigated gall to ask, “Who is having the last laugh now?” It’s certainly not us Filipinos.
If after 26 years of Edsa, we are where we are today given officialdom’s adherence to so-called financial and economic reforms started by Estanislao then handed down to a long list of heirs in the finance department (“Boy Blue” del Rosario, Jose “Mo” Cuisia, Bobby “Bobo” de Ocampo, Jose “Litong-lito” Camacho, Cesar “Foolishima,” etc.), how on earth can they still claim that the Philippines will be “overtaking” Thailand and Indonesia soon when 26 years ago these countries were behind us?
All told, the financial milieu imposed by the Edsa I regime was merely a bankers’ heaven, erected on Cory Aquino’s pledge to “honor all debts.”
It turned our people over to the money masters and the “debt trap” and dismantled all our financial and economic floodgates to effect the massive transfer of public assets to foreign and local corporatists--financed by “sovereign guarantees.”
What we have thus become is an emaciated nation-state, a captive creature shadowing our former glory.
As told by Dani Rodrik in “The Nation-State Reborn” (Economist’s View), the restoration of any nation’s greatness would require its people to “turn for solutions to their national governments, which remain the best hope for collective action” and that even as “the nation-state may be a relic (of) the French Revolution… it is all that we have.”
In our case, that entails a truly sovereign nation-state borne of a new Philippine Revolution and not one captive to corporate powers.
(Tune in to 1098AM, DWAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN’s HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on “The BSP’s $ ‘creditor nation’ hoax;” visithttp://newkatipunero.blogspot.comfor our articles plus TV and radio archives)
Herman Tiu Laurel
3/5-11/2012
Our fellow OpinYon columnist and De La Salle professor Louie Montemar looked critically at the “news of the decade” last week emanating from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).
The surprise report in the papers that “the Philippines has just become a creditor nation, extending loans to poorer states in the European Union,” prompted Louie to write in his piece, “Making sense of the news,” that this news didn’t seem to compute given the socio-economic realities we see facing our nation.
It certainly does not make any sense. The claim that the Philippines has become a creditor nation is a big farce simply because a country with P4.9-trillion ($120-billion) outstanding national debt can hardly claim to be a real creditor country.
What’s not being stated is that the national government (NG) only borrows dollars for the BSP to pay our country’s $500-million contribution to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)’s new arrangement for borrowing (NAB) program and $251.5 million for the financial transaction plan (FTP), in accordance with the country’s obligations as a member of the Fund.
With help from financial forensics expert Hiro Vaswani, the following instances show how the BSP and the NG went about raising the Philippines’ contributions to the IMF through borrowings:
From January 2006, the headline, “NG to issue bonds to BSP for advances of IMF dues,” spelled out an idea of issuing the same type of zero-coupon bonds as the now infamous CodeNGO PeaceBonds which need not pass through the national budget but instead go straight to government’s debt to form part of our “automatic debt service.”
Then, from 2009, the headline, “BSP advances P9B IMF quota payments,” highlighted the country’s regular ritual of raising contributions for the IMF at a time when the NG incurred a budget deficit but which it repaid in subsequent years to the BSP. There is therefore no reason to expect any difference in this year’s contributions to the IMF.
The Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC), reacting to the BSP and NG’s trumpeting of our country’s sizeable contribution to the FTP, said in a statement:
“The news suggesting that ‘the Philippines has now become a creditor nation’ may sound good, but (FDC) smells something fishy about this ‘hype’…
“Ricardo Reyes, FDC president, said that while such move ‘seems to suggest that the Philippines has gotten out of its debt problem, which of course is not true,’ considering the outstanding national government debt of P4.93 trillion ($120 billion) at present, the catch lies in the next part of the BSP announcement… (where the monetary authority) ‘lends a part of our dollar reserves to IMF’s FTP’ so the Philippines can borrow again and borrow more from the IMF… (this, notwithstanding the fact that) We have suffered more than enough and continue to suffer as a consequence of (the) IMF’s debt trap.”
So it’s time that we throw rotten tomatoes and eggs, and add the rotten balut, on PeNoy’s face for this shameful attempt to glorify the Philippines’ borrowed financial tribute to the IMF as a clean contribution to the multilateral financial institution’s fund. It is a desperate effort to put an artificial shine on the 26 years of Edsa I’s financial “reforms.”
Those reforms, consisting of the liberalization of currency and capital flows, as well as the deregulation and privatization of the financial system and economy, have actually caused the Philippines to become a shameful laggard in the region.
For the Edsa devotees’ information, our country is now overtaken by Vietnam, which 26 years ago, was just beginning to rebuild from the ravages of 50 years of war with France and then the US.
In spite of that, we still hear of paeans being showered on our alleged “creditor nation status” from the likes of Cory Aquino finance chief Jess Estanislao, whose statements, quoted by Tonette Chan in the Inquirer story, “From butt of jokes in 1986, Philippines has risen to creditor nation,” which proclaim “The Philippines (as) a model of good governance in the world… (thereby enabling it to) overtake Thailand and Indonesia in terms of economic growth,” simply brim with unadulterated hubris.
Why, the reporter even had the unmitigated gall to ask, “Who is having the last laugh now?” It’s certainly not us Filipinos.
If after 26 years of Edsa, we are where we are today given officialdom’s adherence to so-called financial and economic reforms started by Estanislao then handed down to a long list of heirs in the finance department (“Boy Blue” del Rosario, Jose “Mo” Cuisia, Bobby “Bobo” de Ocampo, Jose “Litong-lito” Camacho, Cesar “Foolishima,” etc.), how on earth can they still claim that the Philippines will be “overtaking” Thailand and Indonesia soon when 26 years ago these countries were behind us?
All told, the financial milieu imposed by the Edsa I regime was merely a bankers’ heaven, erected on Cory Aquino’s pledge to “honor all debts.”
It turned our people over to the money masters and the “debt trap” and dismantled all our financial and economic floodgates to effect the massive transfer of public assets to foreign and local corporatists--financed by “sovereign guarantees.”
What we have thus become is an emaciated nation-state, a captive creature shadowing our former glory.
As told by Dani Rodrik in “The Nation-State Reborn” (Economist’s View), the restoration of any nation’s greatness would require its people to “turn for solutions to their national governments, which remain the best hope for collective action” and that even as “the nation-state may be a relic (of) the French Revolution… it is all that we have.”
In our case, that entails a truly sovereign nation-state borne of a new Philippine Revolution and not one captive to corporate powers.
(Tune in to 1098AM, DWAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN’s HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on “The BSP’s $ ‘creditor nation’ hoax;” visithttp://newkatipunero.blogspot.comfor our articles plus TV and radio archives)
The trial: Is it really over?
YESTERDAY, TODAY & TOMORROW
Linggoy Alcuaz
3/5-11/2012
After the events of Tuesday and Wednesday last week at the impeachment court, is it over? Or, are they over?
After the prosecution withdrew last Tuesday, five out of the eight articles of impeachment, Is it over for them?
They claimed that they had presented enough evidence and witnesses to convict Chief Justice Renato Corona in three out of the original eight articles. They made a formal offer of these pieces of evidence last Friday. The defense has until Wednesday to make its objections.
Next week, Monday, the Senate as an impeachment court will hold a very critical caucus. That caucus will determine how liberal or strict it will be in the application of the rules on evidence.
If the senator-judges are as strict as the rules are in criminal cases, the prosecution will be left hanging, high and dry, without any evidence.
If they are as liberal as they can and want to be in the case of a trial that is called and considered “sui generis,” then the defense will have a long and hard task of presenting its own evidence and witnesses to counter the allegations, evidence and witnesses of the prosecution in the three remaining articles of impeachment.
The hullabaloo on Wednesday between Senator-Judge Miriam Defensor Santiago and private prosecutor Atty. Aguirre is a bad portent of things to come in the future for the trial, both for the court as well as the prosecution.
Miriam’s performance and style may serve to strengthen the resolve of the confused and demoralized advocates of impeachment and conviction.
On the other hand, Atty. Aguirre’s arrogance, “kabastusan” and defiance may serve to strengthen the general perception that the prosecution has been a failure.
The worst that can happen at this critical juncture is that the bias of the court and its senator judges may be tipped against the prosecution and for the defense in their appreciation of the admissibility of allegations, evidence and witnesses.
However, from the beginning, the impeachment trial and court have not been allowed to stand alone. First, there was a full month of trial by publicity even before the Impeachment trial proper started on Monday, Jan 16.
When Corona did not imitate Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and did not resign but chose to undergo trial, a Plan B was planned and prepared for in case of acquittal. Plan B would have been a repeat of “yellow” people power ala Edsa I and II.
In the beginning, it seemed so easy to “Occupy the Supreme Court” and oust CJ Corona, The Executive Branch and the President as Commander-in-Chief command the Armed Forces, the police and most of the civilian bureaucracy.
When Marcos in 1986 and Erap in 2001 were ousted, they had in addition to these, a sizeable mass base among the civilian population.
The Supreme Court and its chief justice never commanded armed forces nor a national police. Its judicial bureaucracy is small and passive.
In better times its popularity is lacklustre. A month ago it seemed that even a midget sized people power could brush aside an acquitted Corona. After all, Taft Ave. is smaller than Edsa. Padre Faura is smaller than Ortigas Ave.
However, a month ago, on Thursday, February 9, things changed dramatically. The SC issued a TRO against the opening of Corona’s foreign currency accounts upon the request of PS Bank.
Simultaneously, the INC staged a 7,000 man mini-rally in support of Corona and the rule of law and filled Padre Faura as it had never been before.
On Monday, February 13, the Senate caucus voted 13-10 to honor the TRO.
That week, news leaked out about a mammoth INC rally to be held at the Luneta on Tuesday, Feb 28. It was originally perceived as an anti-impeachment and anti-P-Noy, pro rule of law and pro-Corona and Gatdula rally.
Malacañang denied on behalf of the INC that it would be a political rally. It was supposed to be a bible and evangelical religious prayer rally.
Whatever it would eventually be perceived, it pre-empted and overshadowed the 26th Edsa Uno anniversary celebrations and rallies. It turns out that the INC is celebrating an anniversary this year.
The gang of conspirators composed of P-Noy, the Liberal Party, “Hayop’ 10 and Evil Society and the left had laid down their plans:
Unfortunately, the timing for Plan B had peaked much earlier and was in quick decline during the whole month of February. Instead, a counter Plan C was brewing and percolating.
However, the maestro, presiding officer Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile prevented both prosecution and defense from walking out of his venue. He deprived them of any triggers within then trial. He counter pre-empted the trial publicity that had previously pre-empted the trial proper.
When we first used the term Plan C at the Balitaan sa Rembrandt on Friday, February 15, one of the guests/resource persons proclaimed that a Plan D would overshadow Plans A, B and C.
We were tempted to accept that possibility considering that people power had entered a stalemate. C had cancelled out B. Whether the vice versa of that is also true, we still cannot say.
We have not fully perceived and understood the new realities created by the mammoth INC Rally last Tuesday. That could be as important a game changer as Edsa Uno …
Linggoy Alcuaz
3/5-11/2012
After the events of Tuesday and Wednesday last week at the impeachment court, is it over? Or, are they over?
After the prosecution withdrew last Tuesday, five out of the eight articles of impeachment, Is it over for them?
They claimed that they had presented enough evidence and witnesses to convict Chief Justice Renato Corona in three out of the original eight articles. They made a formal offer of these pieces of evidence last Friday. The defense has until Wednesday to make its objections.
Next week, Monday, the Senate as an impeachment court will hold a very critical caucus. That caucus will determine how liberal or strict it will be in the application of the rules on evidence.
If the senator-judges are as strict as the rules are in criminal cases, the prosecution will be left hanging, high and dry, without any evidence.
If they are as liberal as they can and want to be in the case of a trial that is called and considered “sui generis,” then the defense will have a long and hard task of presenting its own evidence and witnesses to counter the allegations, evidence and witnesses of the prosecution in the three remaining articles of impeachment.
The hullabaloo on Wednesday between Senator-Judge Miriam Defensor Santiago and private prosecutor Atty. Aguirre is a bad portent of things to come in the future for the trial, both for the court as well as the prosecution.
Miriam’s performance and style may serve to strengthen the resolve of the confused and demoralized advocates of impeachment and conviction.
On the other hand, Atty. Aguirre’s arrogance, “kabastusan” and defiance may serve to strengthen the general perception that the prosecution has been a failure.
The worst that can happen at this critical juncture is that the bias of the court and its senator judges may be tipped against the prosecution and for the defense in their appreciation of the admissibility of allegations, evidence and witnesses.
However, from the beginning, the impeachment trial and court have not been allowed to stand alone. First, there was a full month of trial by publicity even before the Impeachment trial proper started on Monday, Jan 16.
When Corona did not imitate Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and did not resign but chose to undergo trial, a Plan B was planned and prepared for in case of acquittal. Plan B would have been a repeat of “yellow” people power ala Edsa I and II.
In the beginning, it seemed so easy to “Occupy the Supreme Court” and oust CJ Corona, The Executive Branch and the President as Commander-in-Chief command the Armed Forces, the police and most of the civilian bureaucracy.
When Marcos in 1986 and Erap in 2001 were ousted, they had in addition to these, a sizeable mass base among the civilian population.
The Supreme Court and its chief justice never commanded armed forces nor a national police. Its judicial bureaucracy is small and passive.
In better times its popularity is lacklustre. A month ago it seemed that even a midget sized people power could brush aside an acquitted Corona. After all, Taft Ave. is smaller than Edsa. Padre Faura is smaller than Ortigas Ave.
However, a month ago, on Thursday, February 9, things changed dramatically. The SC issued a TRO against the opening of Corona’s foreign currency accounts upon the request of PS Bank.
Simultaneously, the INC staged a 7,000 man mini-rally in support of Corona and the rule of law and filled Padre Faura as it had never been before.
On Monday, February 13, the Senate caucus voted 13-10 to honor the TRO.
That week, news leaked out about a mammoth INC rally to be held at the Luneta on Tuesday, Feb 28. It was originally perceived as an anti-impeachment and anti-P-Noy, pro rule of law and pro-Corona and Gatdula rally.
Malacañang denied on behalf of the INC that it would be a political rally. It was supposed to be a bible and evangelical religious prayer rally.
Whatever it would eventually be perceived, it pre-empted and overshadowed the 26th Edsa Uno anniversary celebrations and rallies. It turns out that the INC is celebrating an anniversary this year.
The gang of conspirators composed of P-Noy, the Liberal Party, “Hayop’ 10 and Evil Society and the left had laid down their plans:
- Demonize Corona. Alienate and separate him from the rest of the Supreme Court and judiciary.
- Since the articles of impeachment were irreparably flawed, force and shame Corona into resigning.
- Transfer the venue of the trial from the court to media, public opinion and the streets.
- Peak public indignation. Make use of a trigger. Call for “Occupy the Supreme Court.” Mobilize big crowds.
- Force and shame Corona to resign. If he does not, convince the Supreme Court to do a “constructive resignation” on Corona. If it does not, declare a revolutionary government and convene an appointed constitutional commission.
Unfortunately, the timing for Plan B had peaked much earlier and was in quick decline during the whole month of February. Instead, a counter Plan C was brewing and percolating.
However, the maestro, presiding officer Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile prevented both prosecution and defense from walking out of his venue. He deprived them of any triggers within then trial. He counter pre-empted the trial publicity that had previously pre-empted the trial proper.
When we first used the term Plan C at the Balitaan sa Rembrandt on Friday, February 15, one of the guests/resource persons proclaimed that a Plan D would overshadow Plans A, B and C.
We were tempted to accept that possibility considering that people power had entered a stalemate. C had cancelled out B. Whether the vice versa of that is also true, we still cannot say.
We have not fully perceived and understood the new realities created by the mammoth INC Rally last Tuesday. That could be as important a game changer as Edsa Uno …
Oligarchs cause poverty
DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
3/9/2012
The other spat that managed to outdo the “Whaa!” vs “Hear no Miriam” brouhaha in the Senate last week was the exchange between Manny Pangilinan (MVP) and Gina Lopez at a forum organized by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI). That event at a plush hotel, clearly organized to push the corporate mining agenda, was where Lopez, as a self-appointed representative of the anti-large scale mining sector, made her point that such an approach destroys the beauty of nature. Opposite to that was MVP’s counter-argument, which said that since areas where large scale mining will be conducted are not tourist spots anyway, the most important thing to keep in mind is that “Mining is not the enemy, (but) poverty is.”
MVP and those lining up behind his arguments are obviously selling the idea that giant corporate mining will solve poverty in the Philippines. But, in the hundred-year history of large scale mining in the Philippines, has poverty decreased?
John Moldero was OIC Governor of Benguet in the immediate post-Edsa I government. Son of an American haciendero married to a native, John grew up very close to the locals of the Mountain Province. As founder of the globally famous Hobbit House, a regular habitué to many expats and a feature in Western films, which put the country on the world tourism map, John is also known for his unique contribution to Philippine hospitality and entertainment.
In the 2004 elections, John joined the campaign for FPJ. Tragically, he didn’t get to finish it. While driving on his scooter down Commonwealth Ave. to organize political marchers toward a rally, he was sideswiped by a delivery van and expired just minutes after being brought to a small nearby hospital.
John often waxed nostalgic when the subject of the Mountain Province arose and whenever the topic shifted to the issue of large vs small scale mining, he would leave us with this narrative:
“I grew up playing with the children of miners of the Mountain Province. There is a basic difference between the mining in Benguet and in Kalinga. The big mining companies of Benguet, such as the world-renowned Philex, employed thousands of miners and attracted foreign investors (even Mafia figures such as Meyer Lanky), leading Fortune magazine to report it as the “crown jewel” of the Mafioso’s holdings; but the miners remained as miners all their lives, as well as the generations of their children and grandchildren that followed. The difference in Kalinga is that mainly small mining took place there and the extraction of the rich lodes was gradual and sustainable, while mining families used much of their earnings for the education of their children. The second and third generations of Kalinga mining families are now doctors and lawyers, professionals produced by the small mining endeavors of these natives.”
Here lies the real argument against large-scale mining: Who benefits and how sustainable it really is.
Large scale miners promise to set up facilities, tailings ponds (really the size of giant lakes), and dams to contain poisonous and disastrous deluvial tailings for 20 years of mining operations. But what really begs to be asked is since they are expecting to exhaust the riches of those mines, taking all the wealth in a period short of a generation, what will be left for the people’s children and grandchildren?
All the benefits will simply accrue to a handful of foreign corporate interests, whereas the mining sites and communities will be left with only the ever present danger of a deluge of poisonous and utterly damaging flash floods of tailings that render hundreds, if not millions, of hectares (as in the Tampakan mines) uninhabitable for centuries.
So why are MVP and his cohorts (such as Peter Wallace) in such a hurry? Why are government mining officials so excited to pass laws and regulations that will allow this? Why should the nation accept a mere five, seven, or even 10 percent tax, plus some other short change, when such wealth should be 100 percent for the nation?
Besides that, we should ask: How bad can tailings disasters become? To date, there are 92 mine tailings disasters from all over the world significant enough to be listed on Internet sources. One of the worst is the Stava Valley disaster on July 19, 1985, an industrial catastrophe that cost 268 lives and 133 million euros in damage. Poisonous mud spread over 4.2 square kilometers, as aerial photos showed the horrendous extent of its permanent, irremediable damage.
The Foundation Stava 1985 was created in order to make sure that the innocent lives lost on that fateful day would not be in vain and that the world remembers the dangers and folly of gigantic scale mining.
The Philippines has its own Marcopper mine disaster in Boac, Marinduque, too, where 1.5 million cubic meters of toxic mine tailings spilled into five villages and buried Barangay Hinapula under six feet of muddy floodwaters, with residents poisoned with zinc and copper beyond tolerable limits.
Marcopper is estimated to have reaped a net profit of $7.3 billion from mining 30,000 tons of copper ore a day, but Marinduque still has a 71.9-percent poverty incidence and registered as the 14th poorest province in the country as of 2006.
While the corporate mining giant’s foreign mother companies have reaped billions, the country was left with thousands of hectares of poisoned lands that must rely on public resources (if any) to clean these up.
We do not have space enough to describe the horrors and economic injustice that large scale mining companies (that laugh all the way to their transnational banks) inflict on communities and nations while leaving a trail of disaster for the public to pick up in perpetuity.
So the problem is not poverty as poverty is not a cause but an effect--an effect of the greed, corrupting power, and avaricious machinations of oligarchs who want to devour and monopolize the wealth of nations.
(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN’s HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on “A Tribute to Horacio ‘Boy’ Morales: A People’s Man;” visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)
Herman Tiu Laurel
3/9/2012
The other spat that managed to outdo the “Whaa!” vs “Hear no Miriam” brouhaha in the Senate last week was the exchange between Manny Pangilinan (MVP) and Gina Lopez at a forum organized by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI). That event at a plush hotel, clearly organized to push the corporate mining agenda, was where Lopez, as a self-appointed representative of the anti-large scale mining sector, made her point that such an approach destroys the beauty of nature. Opposite to that was MVP’s counter-argument, which said that since areas where large scale mining will be conducted are not tourist spots anyway, the most important thing to keep in mind is that “Mining is not the enemy, (but) poverty is.”
MVP and those lining up behind his arguments are obviously selling the idea that giant corporate mining will solve poverty in the Philippines. But, in the hundred-year history of large scale mining in the Philippines, has poverty decreased?
John Moldero was OIC Governor of Benguet in the immediate post-Edsa I government. Son of an American haciendero married to a native, John grew up very close to the locals of the Mountain Province. As founder of the globally famous Hobbit House, a regular habitué to many expats and a feature in Western films, which put the country on the world tourism map, John is also known for his unique contribution to Philippine hospitality and entertainment.
In the 2004 elections, John joined the campaign for FPJ. Tragically, he didn’t get to finish it. While driving on his scooter down Commonwealth Ave. to organize political marchers toward a rally, he was sideswiped by a delivery van and expired just minutes after being brought to a small nearby hospital.
John often waxed nostalgic when the subject of the Mountain Province arose and whenever the topic shifted to the issue of large vs small scale mining, he would leave us with this narrative:
“I grew up playing with the children of miners of the Mountain Province. There is a basic difference between the mining in Benguet and in Kalinga. The big mining companies of Benguet, such as the world-renowned Philex, employed thousands of miners and attracted foreign investors (even Mafia figures such as Meyer Lanky), leading Fortune magazine to report it as the “crown jewel” of the Mafioso’s holdings; but the miners remained as miners all their lives, as well as the generations of their children and grandchildren that followed. The difference in Kalinga is that mainly small mining took place there and the extraction of the rich lodes was gradual and sustainable, while mining families used much of their earnings for the education of their children. The second and third generations of Kalinga mining families are now doctors and lawyers, professionals produced by the small mining endeavors of these natives.”
Here lies the real argument against large-scale mining: Who benefits and how sustainable it really is.
Large scale miners promise to set up facilities, tailings ponds (really the size of giant lakes), and dams to contain poisonous and disastrous deluvial tailings for 20 years of mining operations. But what really begs to be asked is since they are expecting to exhaust the riches of those mines, taking all the wealth in a period short of a generation, what will be left for the people’s children and grandchildren?
All the benefits will simply accrue to a handful of foreign corporate interests, whereas the mining sites and communities will be left with only the ever present danger of a deluge of poisonous and utterly damaging flash floods of tailings that render hundreds, if not millions, of hectares (as in the Tampakan mines) uninhabitable for centuries.
So why are MVP and his cohorts (such as Peter Wallace) in such a hurry? Why are government mining officials so excited to pass laws and regulations that will allow this? Why should the nation accept a mere five, seven, or even 10 percent tax, plus some other short change, when such wealth should be 100 percent for the nation?
Besides that, we should ask: How bad can tailings disasters become? To date, there are 92 mine tailings disasters from all over the world significant enough to be listed on Internet sources. One of the worst is the Stava Valley disaster on July 19, 1985, an industrial catastrophe that cost 268 lives and 133 million euros in damage. Poisonous mud spread over 4.2 square kilometers, as aerial photos showed the horrendous extent of its permanent, irremediable damage.
The Foundation Stava 1985 was created in order to make sure that the innocent lives lost on that fateful day would not be in vain and that the world remembers the dangers and folly of gigantic scale mining.
The Philippines has its own Marcopper mine disaster in Boac, Marinduque, too, where 1.5 million cubic meters of toxic mine tailings spilled into five villages and buried Barangay Hinapula under six feet of muddy floodwaters, with residents poisoned with zinc and copper beyond tolerable limits.
Marcopper is estimated to have reaped a net profit of $7.3 billion from mining 30,000 tons of copper ore a day, but Marinduque still has a 71.9-percent poverty incidence and registered as the 14th poorest province in the country as of 2006.
While the corporate mining giant’s foreign mother companies have reaped billions, the country was left with thousands of hectares of poisoned lands that must rely on public resources (if any) to clean these up.
We do not have space enough to describe the horrors and economic injustice that large scale mining companies (that laugh all the way to their transnational banks) inflict on communities and nations while leaving a trail of disaster for the public to pick up in perpetuity.
So the problem is not poverty as poverty is not a cause but an effect--an effect of the greed, corrupting power, and avaricious machinations of oligarchs who want to devour and monopolize the wealth of nations.
(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN’s HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on “A Tribute to Horacio ‘Boy’ Morales: A People’s Man;” visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
