The House of Representatives on Wednesday night ratified the bicameral conference committee report on a bill seeking to raise the excise tax rates on alcohol products as well as heated tobacco and vapor products in the country.
The proposal seeks to amend the Republic Act No. 8424 or the “National Internal Revenue Code of 1997”. This is part of the Package 2+ of the Comprehensive Tax Reform Program.
Once ratified by both Houses, the bill will be sent to Malacañang for President Rodrigo Duterte's signature.
The reconciled version proposes that distilled spirits shall have an ad valorem rate of 22 percent of the retail price, as well as an additional specific tax of PHP42 per proof liter in 2020, PHP47 in 2021, PHP52 in 2022, PHP59 in 2023, and PHP66 in 2024. The specific tax shall be increased by 6 percent every year thereafter.
Meanwhile, still wines and sparkling wines shall have an excise tax of PHP50 and shall eventually be raised by 6 percent every year thereafter.
Fermented liquors shall be taxed with PHP35 per liter in 2020, PHP37 in 2021, PHP39 in 2022, PHP41 in 2023, and PHP43 in 2024. Also, the rates of tax imposed shall be increased by 7 percent every year afterward.
The measure stipulates that heated tobacco products shall be levied with an excise tax rate of PHP25 per pack in 2020, PHP27.50 in 2021, PHP30 in 2022, and PHP32.50 in 2023. The tax imposed shall increase by 5 percent each year after that.
While for vapor products, salt nicotine shall have an excise tax of PHP37 per milliliter in 2020, with an incremental increase of PHP5 thereafter until 2023. It shall be enlarged by 5 percent every year effective in 2024.
Revenues from these proposed taxes shall be earmarked as follows: 60 percent for the implementation of the Universal Health Care Law, 20 percent to the Health Facilities Enhancement Program, and 20 percent for the attainment of the sustainable development goals.
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1089102
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
A lack of media attention: Duterte’s threat against ABS-CBN
TIME IS running out for broadcast giant ABS-CBN. With only three months left before its franchise expires, its fate is in the hands of its two loudest critics: House Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano and President Rodrigo Duterte. Both have accused the country’s biggest network of partiality during the 2016 presidential elections.
Broadcast franchises are approved by Congress. ABS-CBN got its 25-year franchise on March 30, 1995 and must receive a new one March 30 next year. If Congress fails to pass the bill for its renewal, ABS-CBN will have to cease its radio and television operations.
Cayetano earlier pledged that the House would discuss the franchise renewal before the end of the year. Recently, he said it will be discussed next year. While he reassured the broadcast giant that the House would strictly observe “due process” in its deliberation, some reports were quick to point out that, as a loyal Duterte ally, the Speaker has repeated the same threat to shut down ABS-CBN.
In a recent tirade against ABS-CBN, Duterte said, “If you are expecting na ma-renew ‘yan (franchise), I am sorry. I will see to it that you are out,” he said last December 3 during the oath-taking of newly appointed government officials in Malacañang.
Duterte first accused ABS-CBN of unfair reporting and for failing to run political ads which had already been paid for during his campaign – in April 2017. The following month, he threatened to file estafa charges against the media company for allegedly “swindling” him. In November 2018, he repeated these threats and allegations.
The shutdown of the biggest broadcast network in the country would render more than ten thousand people jobless. The threat in itself sends a chilling effect on all media. The news hardly caused a stir, with media organizations limited to single reports unlike their coverage of the earlier cases against Rappler.
CMFR monitored the leading Manila broadsheets Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star; four primetime newscasts (ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol, CNN Philippines’ News Night, GMA-7’s 24 Oras and TV5’s Aksyon) and some online news sites from December 3 to 9, 2019.
Underreported
The issue barely made it to the primetime newscasts. And the reports that did make it merely quoted government officials without any context. During the monitor period, only News Night and Aksyon aired reports on it. ABS-CBN did not report it, and neither did its archrival, GMA-7.
Although print coverage did considerably more than broadcast, analysis of job loss and press freedom issues were limited to quotes, relying on sources from Associated Labor Unions-Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (ALU-TUCP) and Defend Jobs, as well as the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) for a critical perspective.
Weaponizing the franchise
Expressed anger has proven a most effective tool when the president chooses to exert his power and to silence his critics in and out of the media.
He had threatened online news site Rappler and the Philippine Daily Inquirer — and made good on those threats. PDI offered to sell the newspaper to a businessman supporter of the president. Rappler has had to defend itself in court. At least 11 cases including cyber libel, foreign ownership and tax evasion have been filed against its CEO Maria Ressa, its executives and staff.
In concert with the digital trolls on social media, the president’s threat to shut down ABS-CBN is part of the same sustained assault against a critical press.
Not surprisingly, Duterte has weaponized the TV franchise, another armament used by Ferdinand Marcos against an independent press.
Media’s failure to call more public attention to this move against ABS-CBN is deeply disturbing. The Philippine press has held up a stunning record of defending itself, speaking truth to power and standing up against government abuse. But this obsequiousness recalls how Marcos created his crony press. Maybe Duterte has succeeded in doing the same.
https://cmfr-phil.org/media-ethics-responsibility/journalism-review/a-lack-of-media-attention-dutertes-threat-against-abs-cbn/
Broadcast franchises are approved by Congress. ABS-CBN got its 25-year franchise on March 30, 1995 and must receive a new one March 30 next year. If Congress fails to pass the bill for its renewal, ABS-CBN will have to cease its radio and television operations.
Cayetano earlier pledged that the House would discuss the franchise renewal before the end of the year. Recently, he said it will be discussed next year. While he reassured the broadcast giant that the House would strictly observe “due process” in its deliberation, some reports were quick to point out that, as a loyal Duterte ally, the Speaker has repeated the same threat to shut down ABS-CBN.
In a recent tirade against ABS-CBN, Duterte said, “If you are expecting na ma-renew ‘yan (franchise), I am sorry. I will see to it that you are out,” he said last December 3 during the oath-taking of newly appointed government officials in Malacañang.
Duterte first accused ABS-CBN of unfair reporting and for failing to run political ads which had already been paid for during his campaign – in April 2017. The following month, he threatened to file estafa charges against the media company for allegedly “swindling” him. In November 2018, he repeated these threats and allegations.
The shutdown of the biggest broadcast network in the country would render more than ten thousand people jobless. The threat in itself sends a chilling effect on all media. The news hardly caused a stir, with media organizations limited to single reports unlike their coverage of the earlier cases against Rappler.
CMFR monitored the leading Manila broadsheets Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star; four primetime newscasts (ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol, CNN Philippines’ News Night, GMA-7’s 24 Oras and TV5’s Aksyon) and some online news sites from December 3 to 9, 2019.
Underreported
The issue barely made it to the primetime newscasts. And the reports that did make it merely quoted government officials without any context. During the monitor period, only News Night and Aksyon aired reports on it. ABS-CBN did not report it, and neither did its archrival, GMA-7.
Although print coverage did considerably more than broadcast, analysis of job loss and press freedom issues were limited to quotes, relying on sources from Associated Labor Unions-Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (ALU-TUCP) and Defend Jobs, as well as the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) for a critical perspective.
Weaponizing the franchise
Expressed anger has proven a most effective tool when the president chooses to exert his power and to silence his critics in and out of the media.
He had threatened online news site Rappler and the Philippine Daily Inquirer — and made good on those threats. PDI offered to sell the newspaper to a businessman supporter of the president. Rappler has had to defend itself in court. At least 11 cases including cyber libel, foreign ownership and tax evasion have been filed against its CEO Maria Ressa, its executives and staff.
In concert with the digital trolls on social media, the president’s threat to shut down ABS-CBN is part of the same sustained assault against a critical press.
Not surprisingly, Duterte has weaponized the TV franchise, another armament used by Ferdinand Marcos against an independent press.
Media’s failure to call more public attention to this move against ABS-CBN is deeply disturbing. The Philippine press has held up a stunning record of defending itself, speaking truth to power and standing up against government abuse. But this obsequiousness recalls how Marcos created his crony press. Maybe Duterte has succeeded in doing the same.
https://cmfr-phil.org/media-ethics-responsibility/journalism-review/a-lack-of-media-attention-dutertes-threat-against-abs-cbn/
ABS-CBN has other media platforms other than TV, radio
By Ruth Abbey Gita-Carlos
Local media giant ABS-CBN Corporation can still run its other media platforms, in the event that it fails to secure a fresh 25-year congressional franchise for the operation of its television (TV) and radio broadcasting stations, Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) Secretary Martin Andanar said on Wednesday.
Andanar clarified that the operations of ABS-CBN’s other businesses, such as its magazine and movie production, will not cease, in case Congress and President Rodrigo Duterte turn up or down the renewal of the broadcast network’s franchise for another 25 years.
“I will comment on the business model of the entire broadcast company. Remember, we are talking about the franchise. Franchise is given by the government. Actually, hindi naman mahal ang franchise eh. Kung tutuusin, halos ibigay na ng gobyerno iyan para makapag-operate ka (Franchise is not expensive. In fact, the government grants it so you can operate),” the PCOO chief said during the Kapihan in Manila Bay.
“We are talking about the franchise. We are forgetting that the ABS-CBN is not in the business of franchise or TV alone. They are in the business of content production. Meron silang content online. May content sila sa magazine. Meron silang movies (They have content online. They have a magazine. They have movies),” he added.
ABS-CBN’s 25-year franchise expires on Mar. 30, 2020, unless Congress and the President grant its renewal.
A legislative franchise bill needs to be first approved by the House of Representatives before it can be transmitted to the Senate.
The measure, once approved by both chambers, will then be submitted to the President for its signing into law.
The President, however, can exercise his power to veto measures that have been passed by Congress.
On Dec. 3, Duterte said he would make a way to ensure that ABS-CBN would be “out” of business, when its license to operate expires.
The President’s pronouncement came as he admitted that he was still irked by the local broadcast firm’s unfair reporting and failure to run his paid political advertisements during the 2016 presidential race.
Andanar, however, said ABS-CBN still has other options, should it fail to renew its congressional franchise.
“I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” he said.
“Remember that ang dami pa namang TV network na available eh. Ang dami pang channels na available, frequencies na available. In fact, nabebenta nga nila ang kanilang movies sa Southeast Asia, nabebenta nila sa America (Remember, there are other available TV networks There are many available channels, frequencies. In fact, they can sell their movies in Southeast Asia and America),” Andanar added.
ABS-CBN is primarily involved in content creation and production for television, online, and over-the-top (OTT) platforms, cable, satellite, cinema, live events, and radio for domestic and international markets, according to its website.
It also operates various platforms, including domestic television, radio networks, worldwide OTT, and online platforms.
It also has interests in Philippine cable, satellite, and broadband systems; music and music publishing; consumer products and licensing; multimedia services; magazine and book publishing; product and post production services; telecommunication services; money remittance; cargo forwarding; TV shopping services; food and restaurant services; theme park development and management; property management; and cinema management.
House legislative franchises committee chairperson Franz Alvarez earlier said his panel has no scheduled hearings on the renewal of ABS-CBN's franchise until Congress adjourns for the Christmas break on Dec. 20.
But House Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano, who earlier admitted he has "personal" objections to renew ABS-CBN's franchise, had ensured that congressmen have "more than enough time" to discuss the proposed granting of franchise renewal to the local media giant.
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1089029
(Update) ABS-CBN's flagship FM station MOR 101.9 My Only Radio For Life would return to the original name WRR 101.9 For Life next year.
Local media giant ABS-CBN Corporation can still run its other media platforms, in the event that it fails to secure a fresh 25-year congressional franchise for the operation of its television (TV) and radio broadcasting stations, Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) Secretary Martin Andanar said on Wednesday.
Andanar clarified that the operations of ABS-CBN’s other businesses, such as its magazine and movie production, will not cease, in case Congress and President Rodrigo Duterte turn up or down the renewal of the broadcast network’s franchise for another 25 years.
“I will comment on the business model of the entire broadcast company. Remember, we are talking about the franchise. Franchise is given by the government. Actually, hindi naman mahal ang franchise eh. Kung tutuusin, halos ibigay na ng gobyerno iyan para makapag-operate ka (Franchise is not expensive. In fact, the government grants it so you can operate),” the PCOO chief said during the Kapihan in Manila Bay.
“We are talking about the franchise. We are forgetting that the ABS-CBN is not in the business of franchise or TV alone. They are in the business of content production. Meron silang content online. May content sila sa magazine. Meron silang movies (They have content online. They have a magazine. They have movies),” he added.
ABS-CBN’s 25-year franchise expires on Mar. 30, 2020, unless Congress and the President grant its renewal.
A legislative franchise bill needs to be first approved by the House of Representatives before it can be transmitted to the Senate.
The measure, once approved by both chambers, will then be submitted to the President for its signing into law.
The President, however, can exercise his power to veto measures that have been passed by Congress.
On Dec. 3, Duterte said he would make a way to ensure that ABS-CBN would be “out” of business, when its license to operate expires.
The President’s pronouncement came as he admitted that he was still irked by the local broadcast firm’s unfair reporting and failure to run his paid political advertisements during the 2016 presidential race.
Andanar, however, said ABS-CBN still has other options, should it fail to renew its congressional franchise.
“I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” he said.
“Remember that ang dami pa namang TV network na available eh. Ang dami pang channels na available, frequencies na available. In fact, nabebenta nga nila ang kanilang movies sa Southeast Asia, nabebenta nila sa America (Remember, there are other available TV networks There are many available channels, frequencies. In fact, they can sell their movies in Southeast Asia and America),” Andanar added.
ABS-CBN is primarily involved in content creation and production for television, online, and over-the-top (OTT) platforms, cable, satellite, cinema, live events, and radio for domestic and international markets, according to its website.
It also operates various platforms, including domestic television, radio networks, worldwide OTT, and online platforms.
It also has interests in Philippine cable, satellite, and broadband systems; music and music publishing; consumer products and licensing; multimedia services; magazine and book publishing; product and post production services; telecommunication services; money remittance; cargo forwarding; TV shopping services; food and restaurant services; theme park development and management; property management; and cinema management.
House legislative franchises committee chairperson Franz Alvarez earlier said his panel has no scheduled hearings on the renewal of ABS-CBN's franchise until Congress adjourns for the Christmas break on Dec. 20.
But House Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano, who earlier admitted he has "personal" objections to renew ABS-CBN's franchise, had ensured that congressmen have "more than enough time" to discuss the proposed granting of franchise renewal to the local media giant.
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1089029
(Update) ABS-CBN's flagship FM station MOR 101.9 My Only Radio For Life would return to the original name WRR 101.9 For Life next year.
ABS-CBN can manage even if it loses broadcast franchise – Andanar
Broadcast giant ABS-CBN can manage even if it ends up losing its legislative franchise amid President Rodrigo Duterte’s repeated threat to block its renewal, Communications Secretary Martin Andanar said Wednesday.
Andanar explained that ABS-CBN can simply distribute its contents to other channels if it loses its franchise when it expires on March 30, 2020.
“We are forgetting that ABS-CBN is not in the business of TV alone. They are in the business of content production,” Andanar said at the weekly Kapihan sa Manila Bay forum in Malate, Manila.
“Meron silang contents online, meron silang magazine, meron silang iba pang mga investment (like) movies. (They have contents online, they are into magazine, they have other investments like movies.) I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” he added.
Andanar, however, conceded that ABS-CBN’s fate is up to Congress.
Republic Act No. 3846 requires radio and television broadcasters in the Philippines to obtain a franchise from Congress.
Since he assumed office, Duterte has repeatedly threatened ABS-CBN’s franchise because the network allegedly ran an advertisement against him when he campaigned for President in 2016 and for refusing to air his own campaign advertisements.
Earlier this month, the President said “he will see to it” that ABS-CBN won’t have its franchise renewed.
“If you are expecting na ma-renew ‘yan, I am sorry. I will see to it that you are out,” Duterte said.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1202742/andanar-says-abs-cbn-can-manage-even-if-it-loses-braodcast-franchise
Andanar explained that ABS-CBN can simply distribute its contents to other channels if it loses its franchise when it expires on March 30, 2020.
“We are forgetting that ABS-CBN is not in the business of TV alone. They are in the business of content production,” Andanar said at the weekly Kapihan sa Manila Bay forum in Malate, Manila.
“Meron silang contents online, meron silang magazine, meron silang iba pang mga investment (like) movies. (They have contents online, they are into magazine, they have other investments like movies.) I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” he added.
Andanar, however, conceded that ABS-CBN’s fate is up to Congress.
Republic Act No. 3846 requires radio and television broadcasters in the Philippines to obtain a franchise from Congress.
Since he assumed office, Duterte has repeatedly threatened ABS-CBN’s franchise because the network allegedly ran an advertisement against him when he campaigned for President in 2016 and for refusing to air his own campaign advertisements.
Earlier this month, the President said “he will see to it” that ABS-CBN won’t have its franchise renewed.
“If you are expecting na ma-renew ‘yan, I am sorry. I will see to it that you are out,” Duterte said.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1202742/andanar-says-abs-cbn-can-manage-even-if-it-loses-braodcast-franchise
ABS-CBN kayang mabuhay kahit walang TV franchise – Andanar
Malabong maglaho nang tuluyan ang ABS-CBN kahit pa hindi ma-renew ang kanilang broadcasting franchise dahil sa pagbakod ni Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte.
Ayon kay Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Martin Andanar, pwedeng idaan na lang sa iba nilang channel tulad ng sa kanilang online, magazine at iba pa.
“We are forgetting that ABS-CBN is not in the business of TV alone. They are in the business of content production,” ayon kay Andanar sa Kapihan sa Manila Bay forum.
“Meron silang contents online, meron silang magazine, meron silang iba pang mga investment (like) movies. I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” aniya pa.
Sa ngayon ay nakatengga pa sa Kongreso ang bill para sa franchise renewal ng ABS-CBN.
Ito’y matapos na hinayag ni Duterte na kanyang haharangan ang renewal nito dahil sa hindi umano pag-air ng kanyang mga campaign materials noong 2016 presidential elections.
https://tnt.abante.com.ph/abs-cbn-kayang-mabuhay-kahit-walang-tv-franchise-andanar/
Ayon kay Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Martin Andanar, pwedeng idaan na lang sa iba nilang channel tulad ng sa kanilang online, magazine at iba pa.
“We are forgetting that ABS-CBN is not in the business of TV alone. They are in the business of content production,” ayon kay Andanar sa Kapihan sa Manila Bay forum.
“Meron silang contents online, meron silang magazine, meron silang iba pang mga investment (like) movies. I’m sure ABS-CBN can find a way how to distribute their content if they lose their franchise,” aniya pa.
Sa ngayon ay nakatengga pa sa Kongreso ang bill para sa franchise renewal ng ABS-CBN.
Ito’y matapos na hinayag ni Duterte na kanyang haharangan ang renewal nito dahil sa hindi umano pag-air ng kanyang mga campaign materials noong 2016 presidential elections.
https://tnt.abante.com.ph/abs-cbn-kayang-mabuhay-kahit-walang-tv-franchise-andanar/
Taking down the oligarchs
President Duterte vowed to object to the renewal of ABS-CBN’s franchise for another 25 years. This comes on the back of his allegation that the TV network purposely failed to air his TV ads (duly paid for) but instead aired ads that were critical of him and paid for by Senator Antonio Trillianes. ABS-CBN is the crown jewel of the Lopez family.
Meanwhile, the President also said he would defy the ruling of a Singaporean Court to pay Maynilad P3.6 billion and MWC P7.4 billion over losses due to a delayed rate increase. He further ordered Solicitor General Jose Calida to craft a new water contract that will be “favorable to the public”. If not an outright cancellation of Maynilad and MWC’s concessionaire’s agreement, a revision of its terms to one that is more stringent is certain. This, on top of the threat to take down the owners of the water companies, the Ayala family and Manny Pangilinan, for plunder.
President Duterte is hitting the three families where it hurts. The Ayalas and Manny Pangilinan each invested close to P200 billion in their water ventures. Even if the market value of Ayala Corp. and Metro Pacific (Pangilinan’s holding company) stands at P488 billion and P85 billion, respectively, the specter of not being able to recover P200 billion will surely grind-down their market values.
As far as the Lopez family is concerned, ABS-CBN is one of the family’s cash cows and base of political power. To withhold its franchise is akin to defanging it, politically.
In a double strike maneuver, the President is taking down three of the country’s “oligarchs.” Over the years, he has been vocal about his resentment of these powerful families, even going on record to say that they have stunted the development of the county by monopolizing sectors of the economy.
Look, before the systematic attack on conglomerates and old families (“oligarchs”) escalates, we should all take a step back and be circumspect about it.
First of all, we should understand that oligarchs are a natural result of a laissez faire economy. They are families who have done well over decades on the back of hard work, smart investments and good strategy. Sure, some have prospered from political favors, but this too is a part of a free market system. In Korea, large conglomerates are known as chaebols. Among them are Hyundai and Samsung, owned by the Ju-yung and Byung-chul families. In Japan, they are called Zaibatsus. Marubeni and Hitachi are some of them, owned by the Itoh and Odaira families.
Chaebols and Zaibatsus are industrial powerhouses whose size gives them control over parts of the economy. They have sway over the political landscape and can influence national policy. But Chaebols and Zaibatsus are not evil – they are in fact strategic allies of government in nation building. They are purposely supported by their governments in exchange for making massive investments in pioneering industries, research and development and in in high risk industries that are essential to industrialization (eg. Petrochemical plants). They lead the charge in job generations and raising revenues for government by way of exports and taxes.
In short, conglomerates with political gravitas are not parasites, per se. They can be national assets just like the Chaebols and Zaibatsus are. To take them down for the wrong reasons will do the country a disservice and potentially set us back in our industrialization.
What are the wrong reasons? Political revenge and racism are among them.
We must make a distinction between good oligarchs and bad oligarchs, being blind to their political biases. After all, every Filipino, oligarch or not, has the right to their own political beliefs. To attack them for not being in your side is not only petty but an affront to their democratic rights.
As for racism, I find it suspect that the oligarchs under siege today are of Spanish-Filipino heritage. Those of Chinese decent have been immune to the attack – so far, at least. Maybe its my imagination, but I would like to think that racism does not figure in this equation.
So how does one distinguish between good and bad oligarchs?
Bad oligarchs are those who are engaged in illegal or immoral activities; those who have amassed their wealth through illegal means but have not been held accountable; those involved in extracting natural resources but not paying the appropriate excise taxes for them; those whose operations damage the environment; those who oppress the weak; those who are usurious and opportunistic; those who evade taxes (tax avoidance is acceptable); those who give back to the community only up to the extent of tax breaks; those who make their money in the Philippines but park their money abroad.
Who are the good oligarchs? Those who invest in pioneering and capital intensive industries; those who invest in infrastructure; those that come to the support of government when its resources and talent falls short; those who adhere to the principles of good governance (as evidenced by audit reports from audit firms of high repute); those with philanthropic activities that go over and beyond tax benefits.
As far as the Ayala and Metro Pacific are concerned, both have invested billions to upgrade the country’s water system, telecommunications, power generation and distribution and infrastructure. Their services may not be perfect but they stepped-up when government could not. They are listed in the stock exchange, hence, conform to the strict scrutiny of the SEC.
As for Ayala Corp., I appreciate them for their commitment to the development of heavy industries even when conditions in the Philippines are not conducive for it. They invested billions in Integrated Micro-Electronics Inc. as well as a string of companies that manufacture auto parts.
ABS-CBN’s situation is more complicated. They too are a publicly listed, thus, governed professionally. They invest in corporate social responsibility programs like Bantay Bata.
What I take exception to is their programming. While they claim to be “in the service of the Filipino,” their programming suggest otherwise. For decades they have dumbed-down the Filipino by feeding them shows bereft of intellectual value. Let’s be honest, they feed the public trash. And I must agree with the President, they have used their media platform to build up (and take down) certain politicians.
The President’s ire should serve as a wake up call for the management of ABS-CBN.
I don’t have a problem with taking down bad oligarchs. I do have a problem if they are taken down for the wrong reasons.
https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2019/12/18/1977866/taking-down-oligarchs
Meanwhile, the President also said he would defy the ruling of a Singaporean Court to pay Maynilad P3.6 billion and MWC P7.4 billion over losses due to a delayed rate increase. He further ordered Solicitor General Jose Calida to craft a new water contract that will be “favorable to the public”. If not an outright cancellation of Maynilad and MWC’s concessionaire’s agreement, a revision of its terms to one that is more stringent is certain. This, on top of the threat to take down the owners of the water companies, the Ayala family and Manny Pangilinan, for plunder.
President Duterte is hitting the three families where it hurts. The Ayalas and Manny Pangilinan each invested close to P200 billion in their water ventures. Even if the market value of Ayala Corp. and Metro Pacific (Pangilinan’s holding company) stands at P488 billion and P85 billion, respectively, the specter of not being able to recover P200 billion will surely grind-down their market values.
As far as the Lopez family is concerned, ABS-CBN is one of the family’s cash cows and base of political power. To withhold its franchise is akin to defanging it, politically.
In a double strike maneuver, the President is taking down three of the country’s “oligarchs.” Over the years, he has been vocal about his resentment of these powerful families, even going on record to say that they have stunted the development of the county by monopolizing sectors of the economy.
Look, before the systematic attack on conglomerates and old families (“oligarchs”) escalates, we should all take a step back and be circumspect about it.
First of all, we should understand that oligarchs are a natural result of a laissez faire economy. They are families who have done well over decades on the back of hard work, smart investments and good strategy. Sure, some have prospered from political favors, but this too is a part of a free market system. In Korea, large conglomerates are known as chaebols. Among them are Hyundai and Samsung, owned by the Ju-yung and Byung-chul families. In Japan, they are called Zaibatsus. Marubeni and Hitachi are some of them, owned by the Itoh and Odaira families.
Chaebols and Zaibatsus are industrial powerhouses whose size gives them control over parts of the economy. They have sway over the political landscape and can influence national policy. But Chaebols and Zaibatsus are not evil – they are in fact strategic allies of government in nation building. They are purposely supported by their governments in exchange for making massive investments in pioneering industries, research and development and in in high risk industries that are essential to industrialization (eg. Petrochemical plants). They lead the charge in job generations and raising revenues for government by way of exports and taxes.
In short, conglomerates with political gravitas are not parasites, per se. They can be national assets just like the Chaebols and Zaibatsus are. To take them down for the wrong reasons will do the country a disservice and potentially set us back in our industrialization.
What are the wrong reasons? Political revenge and racism are among them.
We must make a distinction between good oligarchs and bad oligarchs, being blind to their political biases. After all, every Filipino, oligarch or not, has the right to their own political beliefs. To attack them for not being in your side is not only petty but an affront to their democratic rights.
As for racism, I find it suspect that the oligarchs under siege today are of Spanish-Filipino heritage. Those of Chinese decent have been immune to the attack – so far, at least. Maybe its my imagination, but I would like to think that racism does not figure in this equation.
So how does one distinguish between good and bad oligarchs?
Bad oligarchs are those who are engaged in illegal or immoral activities; those who have amassed their wealth through illegal means but have not been held accountable; those involved in extracting natural resources but not paying the appropriate excise taxes for them; those whose operations damage the environment; those who oppress the weak; those who are usurious and opportunistic; those who evade taxes (tax avoidance is acceptable); those who give back to the community only up to the extent of tax breaks; those who make their money in the Philippines but park their money abroad.
Who are the good oligarchs? Those who invest in pioneering and capital intensive industries; those who invest in infrastructure; those that come to the support of government when its resources and talent falls short; those who adhere to the principles of good governance (as evidenced by audit reports from audit firms of high repute); those with philanthropic activities that go over and beyond tax benefits.
As far as the Ayala and Metro Pacific are concerned, both have invested billions to upgrade the country’s water system, telecommunications, power generation and distribution and infrastructure. Their services may not be perfect but they stepped-up when government could not. They are listed in the stock exchange, hence, conform to the strict scrutiny of the SEC.
As for Ayala Corp., I appreciate them for their commitment to the development of heavy industries even when conditions in the Philippines are not conducive for it. They invested billions in Integrated Micro-Electronics Inc. as well as a string of companies that manufacture auto parts.
ABS-CBN’s situation is more complicated. They too are a publicly listed, thus, governed professionally. They invest in corporate social responsibility programs like Bantay Bata.
What I take exception to is their programming. While they claim to be “in the service of the Filipino,” their programming suggest otherwise. For decades they have dumbed-down the Filipino by feeding them shows bereft of intellectual value. Let’s be honest, they feed the public trash. And I must agree with the President, they have used their media platform to build up (and take down) certain politicians.
The President’s ire should serve as a wake up call for the management of ABS-CBN.
I don’t have a problem with taking down bad oligarchs. I do have a problem if they are taken down for the wrong reasons.
https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2019/12/18/1977866/taking-down-oligarchs
Bougainville votes for independence from Papua New Guinea
The result of the independence vote on the islands which make up Bougainville, a semi-autonomous region of Papua New Guinea (PNG), was announced on December 10. Polling took place over two weeks with voters asked to choose between continued autonomy within PNG or becoming independent.
The Bougainville Referendum Commission chairman, former Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, announced that 176,928 of a total 181,067—a 98.3 percent majority—chose independence. Only 3,043 voted for greater autonomy within PNG. The overwhelming result was achieved with a turnout of 85 percent of those enrolled.
The non-binding referendum was part of the 2001 Bougainville Peace Agreement which ended a protracted and bloody civil war that claimed some 15,000 lives. It was the culmination of a process initiated in 1997 by Australia, the former colonial power, after the PNG military failed to defeat an insurgency led by the self-styled Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA).
The Australian and PNG governments regarded crushing the uprising militarily as critical to secure mining interests on Bougainville and throughout PNG. Australian companies were at the forefront of plundering the country’s natural resources through highly profitable mining projects. After it became obvious that PNG could not defeat the BRA, Canberra changed tack to impose a settlement through the peace deal.
Under the agreement, the referendum vote must now be ratified by PNG’s parliament. A joint task force of the PNG and Autonomous Bougainville (ABG) governments is required to consult over the next phase of the process, without a fixed timeline. PNG Minister for Bougainville Affairs Puka Temu said he would not formally present the result to parliament until after consultation has taken place.
The PNG cabinet is reported to be considering up to ten years for a possible transition. Prime Minister James Marape assured the people of Bougainville the government had “heard” them, but did not explicitly commit to backing independence. He said the two governments must develop “a road map that leads to a lasting political settlement that the National Parliament can consider.”
Temu told Radio NZ last month that the national government will seek to ensure the vote does not trigger a break-up of PNG. In response to explosive social tensions across PNG created by the austerity measures and police-state policies of successive governments, opposition sentiment and separatist movements have erupted in East New Britain, Central Province, Lae, the Highlands and Northern (Oro) Province.
At the same time, expectations have been raised in Bougainville that the referendum will lead to independence. ABG President John Momis said both governments must “negotiate in good faith… with the aim of getting an outcome that is acceptable to both sides.” Radio NZ reported that within Bougainville, “security fears” will emerge if the result is not implemented quickly.
Sections of the pro-independence movement, such as the former militant group Me’ekamui, boycotted the poll claiming Bougainville is already independent following a 1990 Universal Declaration of Independence by late secessionist leader Francis Ona. Referendum security chairman Patrick Nisira, warned that “if we allow a gap in there, these people might come in and might actually convince people that the national government and the ABG are not genuine in what they’re doing.”
At the same time, a contest is underway, both within rival sections of the local elite and between various global mining companies over control of Bougainville’s single major asset, the huge Panguna gold and copper mine.
Following PNG’s formal independence in 1975, the mine provided 45 percent of the country’s export income. Panguna was operated by one of the world’s largest mining companies, the Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto group, but has been mothballed since the Bougainville crisis erupted. It is estimated to contain $US58 billion worth of mineral reserves.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported on December 11 that the tussle for Panguna had already “sparked a race to promise the best deal and the highest royalties to landowners while stemming the environmental degradation that has ravaged Bougainville.” The race had set off “intense political disagreement between rival groups on the island.”
Overtures by Australian-led multinational mining companies have seen “intense politicking” among local landowner groups and political players on Bougainville. Momis initially supported a moratorium on mining at Panguna to avoid reigniting conflicts between landowner groups. The moratorium was established in early 2018, but the Bougainville government now appears to favour opening up the mine to underwrite independence.
Landowners are guaranteed rights under a 2015 Mining Act, but in order to raise funds for the referendum the government proposed in January to abolish those rights while allocating “near monopoly” rights to an Australian company, Caballus Mining. The legislation was rejected by the government’s legislative committee illustrating, according to the Herald, just “how politically contentious this issue will be in an independent Bougainville.”
The regional imperialist powers, Australia and New Zealand, which regard PNG as being on the front line of great power competition with China, will view any change to the geo-strategic order following any move to independence with hostility. As allies of Washington’s build up to war with Beijing, they allege China is aggressively seeking influence and economic power across the Pacific and are actively moving to counteract it.
In the lead-up to the referendum the Sydney-based Lowy Institute declared that whatever the outcome, Canberra must “step up its engagement” with Bougainville if it wished to remain “a trusted peace and security broker in Melanesia.” If the ABG is unable to reach agreement with PNG over future independence, the institute warned, “the Bougainville issue may precipitate another regional crisis.”
Australian media is already stirring up fears of purported Chinese designs on Bougainville. The Herald reported a “rumour” that in 2018 a Chinese delegation offered $US1 billion to help finance a transition to independence. The proposed “master plan” included a highway, airport, port, bridges and a luxury resort. The report alleged that China plans to use Bougainville’s mineral wealth as “collateral” for the deal.
In fact, it is Australian mining giants that are, in the words of the Herald, “slugging it out” to take first advantage of any opportunities. Besides Caballus, the list includes mining magnate Andrew Forrest’s company, Fortescue, another chaired by former Liberal Party defence minister David Johnston and one by luxury goods dealer Jeff McGlinn. Rio Tinto’s former subsidiary BCL is also involved as well as ASX-listed companies RTG Mining Inc. and Kalia Ltd. The latter has already been granted permits to explore the northern tip of Bougainville.
Ordinary people will gain nothing from this wheeling and dealing. Under limited autonomy the majority of the population has led a subsistence existence in rural hamlets and villages with widespread illiteracy and no funds for education, health and infrastructure. If “independence” does take place, a tiny elite layer will enrich itself on the crumbs from the profits of transnational miners, while most people continue to live in abject poverty and economic backwardness.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/17/boug-d17.html
The Bougainville Referendum Commission chairman, former Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, announced that 176,928 of a total 181,067—a 98.3 percent majority—chose independence. Only 3,043 voted for greater autonomy within PNG. The overwhelming result was achieved with a turnout of 85 percent of those enrolled.
The non-binding referendum was part of the 2001 Bougainville Peace Agreement which ended a protracted and bloody civil war that claimed some 15,000 lives. It was the culmination of a process initiated in 1997 by Australia, the former colonial power, after the PNG military failed to defeat an insurgency led by the self-styled Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA).
The Australian and PNG governments regarded crushing the uprising militarily as critical to secure mining interests on Bougainville and throughout PNG. Australian companies were at the forefront of plundering the country’s natural resources through highly profitable mining projects. After it became obvious that PNG could not defeat the BRA, Canberra changed tack to impose a settlement through the peace deal.
Under the agreement, the referendum vote must now be ratified by PNG’s parliament. A joint task force of the PNG and Autonomous Bougainville (ABG) governments is required to consult over the next phase of the process, without a fixed timeline. PNG Minister for Bougainville Affairs Puka Temu said he would not formally present the result to parliament until after consultation has taken place.
The PNG cabinet is reported to be considering up to ten years for a possible transition. Prime Minister James Marape assured the people of Bougainville the government had “heard” them, but did not explicitly commit to backing independence. He said the two governments must develop “a road map that leads to a lasting political settlement that the National Parliament can consider.”
Temu told Radio NZ last month that the national government will seek to ensure the vote does not trigger a break-up of PNG. In response to explosive social tensions across PNG created by the austerity measures and police-state policies of successive governments, opposition sentiment and separatist movements have erupted in East New Britain, Central Province, Lae, the Highlands and Northern (Oro) Province.
At the same time, expectations have been raised in Bougainville that the referendum will lead to independence. ABG President John Momis said both governments must “negotiate in good faith… with the aim of getting an outcome that is acceptable to both sides.” Radio NZ reported that within Bougainville, “security fears” will emerge if the result is not implemented quickly.
Sections of the pro-independence movement, such as the former militant group Me’ekamui, boycotted the poll claiming Bougainville is already independent following a 1990 Universal Declaration of Independence by late secessionist leader Francis Ona. Referendum security chairman Patrick Nisira, warned that “if we allow a gap in there, these people might come in and might actually convince people that the national government and the ABG are not genuine in what they’re doing.”
At the same time, a contest is underway, both within rival sections of the local elite and between various global mining companies over control of Bougainville’s single major asset, the huge Panguna gold and copper mine.
Following PNG’s formal independence in 1975, the mine provided 45 percent of the country’s export income. Panguna was operated by one of the world’s largest mining companies, the Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto group, but has been mothballed since the Bougainville crisis erupted. It is estimated to contain $US58 billion worth of mineral reserves.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported on December 11 that the tussle for Panguna had already “sparked a race to promise the best deal and the highest royalties to landowners while stemming the environmental degradation that has ravaged Bougainville.” The race had set off “intense political disagreement between rival groups on the island.”
Overtures by Australian-led multinational mining companies have seen “intense politicking” among local landowner groups and political players on Bougainville. Momis initially supported a moratorium on mining at Panguna to avoid reigniting conflicts between landowner groups. The moratorium was established in early 2018, but the Bougainville government now appears to favour opening up the mine to underwrite independence.
Landowners are guaranteed rights under a 2015 Mining Act, but in order to raise funds for the referendum the government proposed in January to abolish those rights while allocating “near monopoly” rights to an Australian company, Caballus Mining. The legislation was rejected by the government’s legislative committee illustrating, according to the Herald, just “how politically contentious this issue will be in an independent Bougainville.”
The regional imperialist powers, Australia and New Zealand, which regard PNG as being on the front line of great power competition with China, will view any change to the geo-strategic order following any move to independence with hostility. As allies of Washington’s build up to war with Beijing, they allege China is aggressively seeking influence and economic power across the Pacific and are actively moving to counteract it.
In the lead-up to the referendum the Sydney-based Lowy Institute declared that whatever the outcome, Canberra must “step up its engagement” with Bougainville if it wished to remain “a trusted peace and security broker in Melanesia.” If the ABG is unable to reach agreement with PNG over future independence, the institute warned, “the Bougainville issue may precipitate another regional crisis.”
Australian media is already stirring up fears of purported Chinese designs on Bougainville. The Herald reported a “rumour” that in 2018 a Chinese delegation offered $US1 billion to help finance a transition to independence. The proposed “master plan” included a highway, airport, port, bridges and a luxury resort. The report alleged that China plans to use Bougainville’s mineral wealth as “collateral” for the deal.
In fact, it is Australian mining giants that are, in the words of the Herald, “slugging it out” to take first advantage of any opportunities. Besides Caballus, the list includes mining magnate Andrew Forrest’s company, Fortescue, another chaired by former Liberal Party defence minister David Johnston and one by luxury goods dealer Jeff McGlinn. Rio Tinto’s former subsidiary BCL is also involved as well as ASX-listed companies RTG Mining Inc. and Kalia Ltd. The latter has already been granted permits to explore the northern tip of Bougainville.
Ordinary people will gain nothing from this wheeling and dealing. Under limited autonomy the majority of the population has led a subsistence existence in rural hamlets and villages with widespread illiteracy and no funds for education, health and infrastructure. If “independence” does take place, a tiny elite layer will enrich itself on the crumbs from the profits of transnational miners, while most people continue to live in abject poverty and economic backwardness.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/17/boug-d17.html