|
If the
news reports are accurate, President Arroyo will meet
with Manuel Lopez, Manila Electric Co. (Meralco)
chairman and CEO, tomorrow in Bohol amid the raging
controversy over high electricity rates.
Earlier,
Lopez had indicated in an interview over the
family-owned ABS-CBN television network that he had no
quarrel with Mrs. Arroyo, and would like to meet with
her to discuss electricity rates and explain Meralco’s
side in the issue. According to Malacañang, the meeting
will take place only if the agenda is how to put a leash
on runaway power rates.
But we
doubt if this meeting will immediately result in a
substantial decrease in consumers’ electricity bills.
At the
Kapihan sa Sulò news forum on Saturday, Meralco
officials explained that distribution charges account
for only 12 percent of our electric bill, with power
generation by National Power Corp. (Napocor) and
independent power producers taking up 58 percent,
transmission another 12 percent, system losses 8 percent
and taxes and universal charges 10 percent.
In other
words, if the intention is to give relief to hard-up
electricity consumers, then the cuts should be made
across-the-board, not just in the distribution
component.
Thus,
for instance, the government should consider scrapping
the royalties imposed on natural gas sourced from
Malampaya-Camago, and, likewise, do away with the
value-added tax on system loss.
Asked
why consumers are made to pay system loss charges,
Meralco said all power-distribution firms charge the
same fee, and that this is allowed by law to a certain
level.
But why
are consumers also charged for the electricity used in
Meralco offices? Meralco’s reply: This is part of
operating costs, which any business passes on to its
customers.
At the
same news forum, Napocor denied allegations it had made
overpriced coal purchases.
While
the Government Service Insurance System chided Meralco
for lack of transparency, it clarified that it had no
intention of taking over the power-distribution
utility.
Meantime, the Joint Congressional Power Commission and
the House energy committee have held initial hearings on
the issue, with administration allies seemingly bent on
putting Meralco on the defensive while keeping largely
silent on the government’s role in bringing power rates
soaring to the second-highest in Asia after Japan.
Amid the
welter of charges and countercharges on the issue, what
is needed is a sober and rational discussion. Let’s keep
the politicians off this issue, because they generate
more heat than light. Consumer welfare should come first
and foremost, and the reported meeting between the
President and Mr. Lopez, we hope, should be the start of
a sincere effort to lower electricity rates, especially
for ordinary Filipinos already burdened by high food and
fuel prices.
More agri loans means food security
Talk
about lopsided priorities.
If the
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) can infuse P20 billion
in an ailing commercial bank despite allegations of
mismanagement, why can’t it do the same for rural banks
and increase lending to farmers that will lead to food
security?
Indeed,
why not?
House
Bill 3827 seeks precisely to change that lopsided
situation by temporarily easing regulations on the cash
reserves of rural banks.
The
agricultural sector comprises a fifth of the country’s
economy; and HB 3827 will encourage rural banks to lend
more to the sector by using money previously allotted
for lenders’ capital.
Under
the measure, authored by An-Waray Party-list Rep.
Florencio Noel, rural banks’ capital-adequacy ratios—a
measure which allots a certain amount to cover its cash
deposits—would be eased for two years.
House
Speaker Prospero Nograles has said he wants the bill
passed as soon as possible and hopes the Senate will
facilitate the process. “We want to reenergize the
marginal operations of rural banks in the countryside
because they are in the best position to reach out to
the farmers in their areas of operation, and could
identify the real needs of the farmers. We have to save
our rural banks if we want to achieve food security.”
Noel
rails against the BSP’s double standard in assisting
financially troubled lenders. While the BSP did not
hesitate in bailing out a distressed commercial bank to
the tune of P20 billion, he says, the money would have
been more than enough “to reenergize similarly situated
rural banks all over the country.”
The BSP
has already closed down 468 rural banks all over the
country for failing to meet their respective
capital-adequacy ratio requirement. Apparently, the BSP
takes a hard-line approach in regulating rural banks,
but it seems to have been excessively lenient in the
case of big commercial banks.
If the
P20 billion had been used instead to infuse capital to
the 468 rural banks which had been providing financial
services to farmers but were shut down after failing to
meet the capital-adequacy ratio, then food sufficiency
won’t be a problem today. That looks to us a sound
argument for Congress to immediately pass the proposed
measure. |