In this era, unlike in the late 80s to early 90s, all social interactions and business activities require power. Economies, not only the Philippines, have become power-dependent. Mass production and manufacturing of goods for domestic and export markets necessitate a steady and stable supply of power. Business sustainability, competitiveness and efficiency could only be attained by any growing and thriving economy when power is not a major problem. In reverse, it is hard to expect business expansion, social progress and economic growth when the supply of power is sluggish and unstable.

Power shortage is not as simple as enduring high room temperature during brownouts. It has financial and economic implications when our production lines are not able to meet their highest productive levels. Exchange of goods would be impaired, value chain disrupted, and transaction costs would escalate. These do not include yet the very important opportunity costs for every business deal that is given up because of power outages. In Mindanao, every prospect for business entry and development should not be missed at this time when we need to fire up economic and business activities all over the island which we expect to improve people’s well being and bring about social progress.

What I want to say is that we could have anticipated this problem much earlier. In fairness to the government, the Department of Energy (DOE) formulated a master plan for energy development for the various power grids of the country some years back. The problem I see is the very limited number of investors who are willing to go into the development of additional and alternative sources of energy. I am sure, enabling policies and various forms of incentives have all been put in place to facilitate the entry of potential investors in energy development. Despite these efforts of the government however, there is still a need to see concrete positive response from prospective financiers of energy projects. What else could be the problem?

Last week, we have seen the DOE Chief going around and meeting with owners and operators of power generating plants in Luzon, and ensuring everyone that there would no longer be rotating brownouts in Luzon. Power supply could last up to June 2010. The assurance came with a strong challenge for each one of us to observe prudence on our use of electricity. He further emphasized that power would not be a problem comes election day, and that’s a relief; yet, he hastened to add that rotating brownouts could still happen anytime due to maintenance and repair schedules of existing plants.

As we look for remedies to our power shortage problem, we should not forget the environment. Note that most of our power generating plants are coal-fired; exceptions are the power plants in Mindanao which are mostly hydrothermal and geothermal. In the context of climate change and clean environment, the cheap coal is an extremely dirty source of power, and imposes huge costs on people’s health, the environment and the economy.

While we still have the time before we reach a stalemate, let’s explore the use of clean renewable technologies like wind, solar, geothermal and solid biomass, and we should not forget that the Philippines still has a large amount of untapped deposit of fossil fuel. The government should continue to show us the way. The private sector should take the risk to invest, and every Filipino should endeavor to reduce our country’s coal dependence and move toward a future where power supply is both reasonably priced, sustainable and is not contributing to climate change. No brownouts and no destructions to Mother Earth!

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

No one could possibly argue with the presentation; the figures and hard data can very well speak for themselves. Some could however express their concern that these data do not represent the circumstances of some individuals and communities around the country, and that is true and valid. And while some do not necessarily agree with the rosy picture being painted, we can not deny that indeed we have attained a certain level of national progress and growth.

Ordinary government officials and employees should feel proud – even if they have not realized yet that their mission as part of the government is to be able to contribute in bringing about growth and development – that what they have been working so hard despite their very meager salaries and having to withstand criticisms from those outside the government did not go to naught. They should likewise be commended for whatever achievement the nation has managed to attain for the last 10 years.

The paid advertisement is obviously intended to inform the public and create a positive image of the out-going administration and the government in general. It might be high time for the administration to proclaim what it has achieved. The President and other government officials have been the subjects of so much criticism, denigration and, to some extent, condemnation. Some recent years ago, her Cabinet deserted the President for some controversies. Since then, the approval rating of the President suffered great blows for a thread of scandals – valid, true, proven or otherwise. The dignity of the current administration – and all people in it - has to be restored as they prepare to leave Malacanang in June 2010. The trust of the people, the business sector, international community, and the general public on the government and what the government could do must be brought back; hence, the advertisement.

The government certainly invested a lot of funds for this campaign. It has to do this as part of its advocacy and outreach programs. Filipino people have the right to know what is happening to the country and where their taxes are going. This effort of the government to inform and promote awareness would go a long way and could generate immeasurable benefits. It could certainly benefit us all Filipinos – even if we are cynical, skeptic, passive, pathetic and indifferent spectators! Positive benefits would come in more ways than one. That’s how public information campaign work.

All these said, the gains and benefits would surely outweigh the investment put into it but the magnitude of such would entirely depend on one’s perspective and his/her ability to appreciate and relate with the positive outcomes of promotional campaign.

Unlike the macro indicators which are seen as not representative of the plight of the marginalized segment of the society, it is hoped that all of us would receive and enjoy an equal share of the benefits from this advertisement. But then again, that’s not how things work. We could simply ask ourselves “who would then benefit the most?”

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

With the onset of the 2010 elections, however, there are valid fears that new investments would be sluggish during the campaign period and up to the election time, and may even extend up to the end of the year, as firms have started to display a wait-and-see attitude. It is then anticipated that the national and local economies would somehow slowdown a bit this year – being an election year.

We might ask: “what are firms waiting for and wanting to see” before they continue to fuel up the investment or economic engine? After all, firms – old and new alike – have probably studied their own markets. They already know what opportunities are there – what the people need and want. They know what types of investment they could put their resources into. Then, what else do they need to know? What else are they waiting for and wanting to see?

They are waiting for the results of the elections. It is not only the winning candidates that they want to see. They want to see whether the elections would be conducted successfully in terms of employing acceptable, fair and just processes and devoid of alarming and massive disorders and fraud. They want to see democracy in action as the ultimate gauge whether or not our current leaders and election candidates have matured well enough to act out their idealism and stand guard for what they promise as better ways of managing the affairs of the government. Election is a grand event where our leaders – both those who have long been exhausted with yet still enamored by public service and those who are yet aspiring to become one – could showcase how they could lead the people and how they could cause the whole community to behave as it should be. It is in this undertaking whereby the firms could detect how resolute our candidates are in establishing a conducive environment for their businesses to thrive.

The aspirations of the firms are quite simple yet complex. Simple and complex in the sense that everybody could easily understand them but they are difficult to attain. First, firms would want stable policy environment. Business firms deal with a lot of risks and they expect the political environment not to aggravate the vulnerability of the market. Second, firms are concerned with the cost or ease of doing business. National policies and guidelines as well as more specific and detailed facilitative local procedures would go a long way in enticing new investments to come in and old and flourishing businesses to further prosper. Labor productivity and minimum wage-related concerns are some of the most serious problems in doing business which need utmost attention. And finally, firms would want to operate unperturbed by war and community discord.

These said, political leaders are expected to spark those economic engines with the flame of creativity, resourcefulness, decisiveness, sincerity and unquestionable integrity. Only then could our business sector contribute significantly to our economic growth.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

In the Philippines, 2010 is an election year. As early as the month of December 2009, we’ve seen the election advertisements of the presidential wannabees. They are loaded with promises and aspirations for a better Philippines and for greater social and economic development opportunities for all Filipinos.

Being an election year, there are certain economic realities and outcomes that we have to embrace. Money in circulation is expected to rise coming from the campaign funds of candidates. Regardless of their sources, these funds will trickle down to individuals and firms in at least three (3) forms. First, individuals can benefit from campaign-induced employment and short-term jobs. Second, advertising and multimedia firms are expected to profit from the demand for campaign materials and paraphernalia. Finally, services and utilities firms are likewise expected to do good during campaign and election periods. The flow of money from individuals to firms and from some firms to other firms would easily be seen with the increased demand for and supply of goods and services, particularly during the campaign period. These increases in supply and demand could however push prices to go up. Thus, the inflation rate for the second quarter of 2010 could be as high as or even higher than that for the month of December 2009.

After the elections, the greatest challenge the new President has to face is the huge national budget deficit. By middle of last year, the target for a balanced budget by the end of term of the current President was put behind. The year-end target for the budget deficit was adjusted several times during the second semester of last year. By December 2009, the figures have significantly ballooned blaming the low tax collection rate and Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng as culprits.

This is not a foolproof forecast but we can expect that the rate of the GNP increase for 2010 would just be about that for year 2009. Consumption would perhaps save the day because of the increased money in circulation and the stable inflow of remittances from abroad. New private investments would probably decrease as some private firms would adopt a “wait-and-see” attitude until after the election. New public investments, specifically infrastructure, would be nil because of the election ban for new projects and the small amount of funds left in the national coffers. Prior to election, public investments would be limited to those that are on-going and those whose funding have been committed much earlier. While public investment had pushed the GNP up in previous years, it could probably be the reverse for this year. While the contribution of our trade balance in the GNP in the past had only been within average range, we hope that our exports could perform better this year as the export sector could easily isolate itself from the hitches of the elections.

Having said these, we hope that our government leaders – both elective and appointive, national and local – would be able to anticipate and manage our situation the best they could and bring out the hidden possibilities in this Year of Elections.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

“The disappointment with regards to the lack of a common agreement pervades in all sectors of societies. As you rightly pointed out, the UN is a conglomeration of nations and coming to an agreement on a course of action can only be achieved in a number of ways some of which are indicated in the fourth paragraph of your note. While principles of cooperation and complementation working towards the achievement of peace, harmony, and unity is very much valued, the reality is that individual country interests prevail and geo-politics and maintenance of alliances is more of the norm rather than the exception.

“One should differentiate the UN Secretariat from the UN body that is comprised of member states. I believe the UN Secretariat did a wonderful thing of bringing all the member states together to debate on an issue of critical importance to us all. That is its task and it has done so successfully in allowing all quarters to be heard. The disappointment with regards to the absence of a consensus on a binding document can only be levied on the member states.

“Going beyond the blame game, so what if there is no binding document? If countries are committed towards ensuring that its children inherit a world that would allow them to provide for their needs and that of future generations, we should start now. We do not need the US or any superpower for that matter to spur us into action on what is right and good for us and our children. We should be challenged to act and not to continue the finger pointing on who did (or did not do) what. We should cease thinking on what should be and waiting for others to act before we act ourselves. It is on this aspect that the UN Secretariat and its specialized agencies are doing it utmost – to spur people and countries to act irregardless of the outcome of the COP 15 because it is the right thing to do.

“There is still a need and the ideal for a United Nations - and its role could not be more important at this point of our history. Like a family, a sibling can only mediate on the quarrel between his/her two other siblings. One can only try to convince and persuade one or the other to concur with the position of what is perceived to be an agreeable position but one cannot coerce.

“The UN is us. It is what we make it.”
As for the second reaction, it says: “I believe we should always set the bar high, for the UN and more importantly, for ourselves. The world isn’t changed for the better by negotiators and compromisers. It’s changed by visionaries who make things happen.”

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

When I was younger, I nurtured the dream of joining the United Nations and contribute to important discussions that would positively impact the world. I dreamt of joining the ranks of a global police force that looked at policies and actions that emphasized peace, harmony and unity among all the nations of the world.

Now, I am one among the multitudes excruciatingly disappointed with the results of the latest UN hullaballoo that is Copenhagen. 194 nations, two weeks and all I got from vigilantly following the proceedings was a paltry two and a half page Copenhagen Accord that was one hundred percent rhetoric and zero percent substance.

If there was a ray of light in the Accord, though, it was the fact that finally, the world acknowledges the results of scientific researches that unequivocally quantify anthropogenic causes of global warming and its devastating effects. The dark gray mist that clouded the horizon, however, was the glaring fact that with a concern as urgent and complex as climate change, the road to clear solutions are blocked by a lack of leadership and the employment of negotiation styles that are more about compromises, concessions and false diplomacy accented by arm wrestling and maybe even blackmail.

The Accord was actually formulated after US President Obama engaged in last minute talks with the Chinese Premier, the Indian Prime Minister, the Brazilian President and the South African President. There were 194 nations in the Conference of Parties, and yet only five perspectives were thoroughly integrated in a document that is far from thorough.

Some participants in the summit say that this top-down imposition was to be expected because of the minutiae of concerns that define the main issue: rich versus poor nations, the US versus Europe, poor versus middle class countries as well as the interest of oil states, and island nations endangered by rising sea levels. These “versus” leaves me doubting if there is still the concept of a United Nations at all.

Even UN Chief Ban Ki-Moon admits that the conference failed to arrive at a global consensus. The UN, US and other developed nations however, defend the Accord as “better than nothing” and “a good first step”. This is an extremely flimsy excuse for the Accord not to have any substance – in fact the issues being discussed in Copenhagen were already laid out in previous conferences and Copenhagen was actually mounted to define and detail the next steps to address the issues identified years ago. The sad reality is that Copenhagen is a duplication of the unsuccessful events of the past. No concrete targets were set for mid and long-term reductions of greenhouse gases. At best, Copenhagen “encourages” developed nations to reduce emissions but they are not required to; and the Accord is not even legally binding.

Allow me then to extrapolate at this juncture. The UN, as a conglomeration of world leaders, has failed to exercise leadership to protect the concerns of the majority of the world, especially vulnerable and disadvantaged nations such as the Philippines. The concessions it has given to the US and China, in particular, means that the summit is an expensive and unsuccessful exercise of democracy. Maybe what the UN needs is a fresh perspective, a mechanism that will allow them to listen to less economically developed nations, and people within who are untouched or unaffected by global politics – because we all have a stake in climate change.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

Who would not be frightened with “martial law” given our history and experience? Many of us were victims of the regime, many of us survived it, many have awakened and spent their youth with it, and the younger generations have read in their history books the wickedness and malevolence that was martial law. It is then understandable when people show unyielding disapproval for it.

Concerned groups and individuals also fear that the Martial Law will eventually be imposed throughout the country, and that this strategy has something to do with the upcoming election. Some other political concerns have been insinuated surrounding this declaration such as the President running for a Congressional seat in the 2010 election, and the possibility of a whitewash on the case of the indicted Ampatuans and the Maguindanao massacre.

When the Joint Congressional Hearing was held last week, people were disappointed that the President failed to show up. I think the absence of the President is expected, after all, she has complied with the Constitutional requirement to submit written information on the reasons for the declaration of Martial Law in Maguindanao. Her presence in Congress would have no additional value as everything has been written and when the Congress wanted further explanations, other officials involved in the decision were there and were able to provide insightful responses to queries from the floor. The only thing that other people might have been disappointed about with the absence of the President was the entertainment value of her appearing in Congress and being interrogated by excited members of the legislature.

People are now waiting for the decision of the Congress whether or not to lift the Martial Law in Maguindanao soon enough, or perhaps waiting for the Congress to draw more issues against the President and other government officials by taking this Martial Law thing as a timely opportunity.

With the declaration of Martial Law in Maguindanao, many more issues have surfaced. The government has started to search the many mansions of the Ampatuans spread all over in Mindanao and in Metro Manila for arms and ammunitions used in the massacre or any tangible evidence to connect them and other parties including the military to the atrocity, and in the process, the operatives realized how moneyed and affluent the accused family is. The abounding wealth and huge mansions of the Ampatuans are now the subject of investigation by the government and the object of awe by the public.

In Maguindanao, many local people have deserted their nipa huts and their farmlands, and many more started to pack up their little yet so sacred belongings such as cloths, farm tools, water pails, plastic basins, and salakot – perhaps the only things they possess, for fear of the eventualities of both the capture of the Ampatuans and the possible retaliation of any group or individual. Nobody would like to be caught in the crossfire especially when the only weapon you have to defend yourself with is a dull bolo – you’re lucky if you have a jungle bolo but that would not suffice either - and when the people who are supposed to defend you are the ones wrecking havocs everywhere. Who’s not affair of long guns and high-powered ammunitions passing by you every now and then? Certainly, the economic and social activities in Cotabato City, being in the heart of Maguindanao, have also been adversely affected by now, likewise with other adjoining areas. The effects of the Maguindanao massacre, likewise the proclamation of Martial Law, will be greater than what most of us could ever imagine.

While the actions and reactions are on going, and more issues surfacing, let us not forget what we are all fighting for – justice to all the victims. We might get clouded with all the surrounding issues and concerns against the President and the government that we lose sight of hastening justice to be served. Let’s focus on attaining justice now; the other issues later!

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

Aside from the initial reports of a hundred armed men, rape, a backhoe on stand-by to bury vehicles and human beings (whether they were still breathing or not); there was a red Vios whose passengers – Tacurong government employees – were indiscriminately and bloodthirstily murdered for the simple reason that they took the wrong highway at the wrong time. We all heard that Mrs. Mangudadatu was slapped repeatedly before her body was dragged by a vehicle for five kilometers; but did you know she was ordered to chew and swallow her husband’s Certificate of Candidacy?

The hairs on my neck are still standing as I write this. The brutality, pre-meditation and cold-heartedness of this gruesome disregard for what makes us human beings seems like a bad scene from a B horror movie. But the reality is that 57 lives – and counting – were snuffed out just like that. For a mob of men to be able to do what they did, they would have had to be intoxicated: high on drugs, drunk on power, inebriated with animalistic rage. This corruption of the soul needs to be condemned in the strongest terms; I hope the fear we feel will not immobilize us but provide the trigger for our collective action.

A call for action in reaction to this tragic event does not mean a call to arms and paving the way for more bloodshed. This tragic event does not imply that all our efforts for peace-making, peace-building and peace-keeping have been inutile. Inroads have been made where there were no roads for reconciliation before and if there is one thing this tragic event has taught me, it is that we should strengthen and intensify our efforts in the peace process.

Undoubtedly, this massacre will have lasting effects on the peace process – both positive and negative.

Some will say that the main players in the peace process are our leaders, and rightly so. However, pessimists will say that the process is doomed if it is the leaders themselves who are accused of violating the most basic of human rights: the right to live. Another negative implication of this tragic event is the fear, paranoia and loss of trust and confidence we feel towards our fellowmen. I overheard one woman say she would not be going to a popular mall in the south anytime soon, afraid for herself and her family to be caught in between should the two clans cross paths there, as they have often done in the past.

Yet, others will say that this tragic event has effected a feeling of solidarity among Mindanawons, this solidarity of victims. Violence has claimed the lives of both Muslims and Christians, men and women, media practitioners, lawyers, government employees, wives, fathers and friends; it has spared no one. And thus with the solidarity of victims comes the acknowledgment that we need to look out for each other, be vigilant for each other, protect each other.

The loss of 57 lives has cast a dark cloud of despair over the peace process, as if the light has been snuffed out of the road to lasting harmony in Mindanao. The path has become dark, pitch-black and with no end in sight. It needs a brave soul – a leader – who will bravely take that first step into that darkness and light the way for all of us to follow. God said “let there be light” – and the light that we need right now is justice. Together, let us ask God, Allah, Yahweh and Jehovah for this light. Because there can be no true and lasting peace in Mindanao if there is no justice.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.

The proclamation rally is not the only gauge of the negative perception this administration has suffered these past years. Surveys have demonstrated the undeniable decline in the average Pinoy’s satisfaction with the current leadership, and there are no indicators that this will change as this leadership’s twilight moments are approaching.

As the deadline for the filing of candidacy nears, we are witnesses yet again to another indicator of this administration’s perceived kiss of death. Some people call it balimbing, but this intrinsically Tagalog term belies the fact that it is a national phenomenon and afflicts not just presidentiables and senatoriables but mayors, councilors and your friendly neighborhood kapitan, as well.

I prefer to name it after its main practitioners in the animal kingdom: this indicator is what you call “rats”. This phenomenon is not the exclusive domain of pirates or Filipino seamen. Rats in Philippine politics are exactly what they are: in the event of an impending shipwreck, rats scurry from the depths of the floating coffin and jump overboard before the captain can even say “abandon ship!” If the mass exodus from the administration to the Liberal Party is any indicator, it would not be over-arching to conclude that most politicians are more rodent than public servant.

Some would go as far as to say that political parties are not built on platforms, paradigms or development perspectives; rather, that parties exist for networking, linkages and the bartering of influence within one’s bailiwick to cement his “contribution” to the victory of the winning-est candidate. Trail in the surveys and find yourself holding on to a sinking Super Ferry when everyone else has gotten on a lifeboat. Be a front runner, and everyone will pledge undying love, loyalty, their lives plus the kitchen sink – just don’t forget them when you win.

The most blasé of us would easily dismiss political turncoats as a given every time there is an election. But it is in that dismissal where the dangers lie. That pledge of support always comes at a price: concessions, a piece of the power and funding pie, compromises. If the Liberal Party intends to ride its honeymoon with the voters until May 2010, its image must remain untainted even as it accepts more rats into its idealistic and currently winnable ranks.

There is strength in numbers: and parties will be the first to admit that they need every person, source of funding and influence they can get. However, this acceptance of turncoats may eventually be perceived to be more for political expedience than principle. If that happens, the brave souls who choose to remain in a sinking ship will appear to be more upright, honorable and moral.

How long before this happens? The elections are six months away. While the clock is ticking, the boat may just remain afloat.

Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.