|
Trust
the usual skeptics to sneer at government efforts to
stave off a food crisis, the most recent one the
unveiling of a P43.7-billion package for agriculture at
the recent National Food Summit.
While it
may be true that the raft of interventions amounting to
billions should have been done long ago as part of a
coherent strategy to attain food self-sufficiency and
food security, the infusion of much-needed funds in
agriculture at this time will no doubt stimulate the
farming and fisheries sectors, and allow the country to
be shielded from the adverse effects of a global food
crisis.
Bear in
mind that the looming food crisis is global in scope. We
have climate change, burgeoning population growth,
sky-high oil prices and the growing trend toward
biofuels use as the main reasons we face the dire
prospect of scarcer and more expensive food looming in
the horizon.
The
Fields program unveiled last week spans a wide range of
agricultural concerns: fertilizers, irrigation,
education and training, loans, dryers and other
postharvest facilities and seeds. With billions allotted
for each category, certainly the unscrupulous will find
ways to divert public funds to private pockets. That’s
why the creation of an Ombudsman for agriculture is a
step in the right direction.
Banks
look askance at farmers applying for loans because they
have nothing to show except the land they till. Thus,
the President’s recommendation to Congress to pass a new
law allowing farmers to use their land as collateral for
bank loans is another step forward for the rural sector.
Between
now and 2010, farmers can avail themselves of a total of
P20 billion in credit.
The
multipronged Fields program to be handled by the
Department of Agriculture, we’re told, has gotten the
nod of major stakeholders, including the Philippine
Chamber of Commerce and Industry, as well as the food
processors and exporters, corn producers, broiler
integrators, commercial fishers and vegetable growers.
It’s not only local business that’s gung-ho about the
program, even the UN World Food Program, we’re informed,
has rendered the verdict that since the Philippines
grows 85 percent of its food needs and can very well
import the remainder, it is on the right track in
preventing a food crisis.
Another
anomaly
If your
electric bill reflects a higher generation charge and
you cough up more of your hard-earned money to keep the
lights on in your house every month, blame the state-run
National Power Corp. (Napocor) for your woes.
Napocor
recently awarded a contract worth more than P320 million
for three panamax shipments of coal for its Pagbilao
power plant to an Indonesian firm, PT Marsitero Marloan
Prakarsa, which is represented here by Transpacific
Consolidated Resources Inc. (TCRI). On the surface,
there’s nothing wrong with the deal: Napocor wants coal,
bidding takes place, and a supplier wins the contract.
But wait. It turns out that TCRI was registered only on
October 25, 2007, and that it had an authorized capital
stock of only P1 million, P250,000 of which had been
subscribed, and only P62,500 had been actually paid up.
Apart from this, TCRI was found to be registered in the
outskirts of
Cebu province but managed to conduct business in Metro Manila. It
gave as its address a teeny-weeny business center in a
budget hotel in
Quezon
City.
So the
question is: Why did Napocor award a multimillion-peso
contract to a company that is undercapitalized and with
no track record whatsoever in coal procurement? TCRI’s
registration papers say it will “engage in the supply
and procurement of coal, oil products and other
indigenous natural resources in the Asian and European
market.” But if TCRI is merely a coal trader or a
middleman in coal procurement, why did Napocor conclude
a deal with the firm when it can do so directly with
coal manufacturers to obtain much lower prices?
Will
Napocor please clear up this matter, since it involves
the public interest?
Mining
firms and CSR
Environment Secretary Lito Atienza is right: mining
companies should improve their community-engagement
and-development programs for their operations to be
sustainable.
“Mining
companies must consult and engage their host communities
in charting the social-development program they have for
them. As the mine advances, the people within and around
it must also grow and develop individually and as a
community. This is the intention of the social
provisions of our mining laws and policies, and this is
the way to go for all mines,” Atienza said.
As I see
it, if the government wants mining to be a major
contributor to the economy, mining firms both local and
foreign ought to be more fully aware of their social
responsibility. This requires not only dialogue and
consultation with host communities, but also putting up
development projects, such as school rooms and health
centers, that respond to the real needs of the people.
We should not countenance the get-rich-quick schemes of
mining firms that want only to extract maximum profit
and do nothing to address environmental, health and
social-acceptability concerns. This is what’s
responsible mining is all about.
E-mail:
ernhil@yahoo.com |
