|
Word is
that the Lopez-led Manila Electric Co. (Meralco)
management has enough proxies on top of its 33-percent
holdings to thwart any effort of its archcritic, Meralco
director and GSIS president Winston Garcia, to engineer
any kind of significant overhaul.
That
perception was reinforced by comments made on the
ongoing debate over the high electricity rates,
especially in the Meralco franchise area, made by both
camps on Saturday, which were considered friendlier and
constructive for all stakeholders, especially the
consumers.
Some
reports quoted Meralco management endorsing President
Arroyo’s advisory for all industry players to
immediately petition the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC)
to approve the implementation of an “interim
open-access” scheme meant to benefit mainly large
consumers, i.e., those using 1 megawatt or more a month,
to deal directly with the National Power Corp. (Napocor)
and/or the independent power producers (IPPs) for their
power needs.
Under
the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Epira), open
access can only commence once 70 percent of all Napocor
generating units have been privatized to ensure that
competition, not accommodation, will prevail in the
power market.
The
endorsers, which include members of foreign chambers of
commerce, claim that such a requirement should not be
used to delay a scheme which, in their view, can reduce
distribution and system-loss charges almost overnight.
They may
have a point. After all, it has been shown that the
distribution utilities, with loads of help from the ERC,
have not been as prudent and sensitive to the public
needs as they pass on all kinds of charges to the
millions of consumers in their areas.
But they
have to be told that open access, whether interim or
permanent, is not enough. It is not even the “cure-all”
which the Meralco management seemed to imply when it
literally dragged the Chief Executive into another round
of public rage by suggesting that if interim open access
ensues, she was going to reject all moves to amend the
Epira and rid it of its iniquitous provisions.
That is
as opaque and disingenuous a statement as can be, which
was denounced by no less than Camarines Sur Rep. Luis
Villafuerte, who has been leading the charge to amend
the Epira. The Bicol legislator told us the President is
well aware of the nine-point plan to reduce power rates,
which he unveiled at the House last week, and that the
Palace has not abandoned the same.
The plan
includes, among others, revisiting the system-loss and
cross- ownership provisions of the law, as well as the
taxes and royalties imposed and, of course, the
open-access rule.
In a
word, the battle, if we may call it such, over the
general call for the reduction of power rates continues
and will not end with the Meralco stockholders’ meeting
Tuesday even if Garcia gets his wish that another Lopez,
Federico “Piki” Lopez, now CEO of the Lopez-owned First
Gen which owns the highly profitable IPPs San Lorenzo
and Santa Rita, takes over his uncle and current Meralco
chairman and CEO, Manolo; and another First Gen veteran,
Peter Garrucho, takes over Winston’s archenemy, Meralco
president and COO Jesus Francisco.
So, if
Meralco is really concerned with reducing power rates,
then it should not stop at open access but go all the
way to slay, as it were, the demons, seen or unseen, in
the power industry.
In the
same manner, the combative Mr. Garcia and his
proconsumer core, if they can be tagged as such, at the
GSIS and elsewhere should focus not just on corporate
finagling in Meralco but at the practices of the other
power-industry players as well and, of course, the ERC.
Haranguing Meralco officials, including the soft-spoken
interim corporate secretary, Justice Jose Vitug, is par
for the course. But to engage others like us in media to
a wild-goose chase with that SMS message that Vitug
resigned in disgust over the “dirty tricks” of his
assistant and Meralco loyalist Anthony Rosete in the
handling of proxies for the stockholders’ meeting, does
not speak well of his own ways.
Garcia
was already doing well with his exposés of mismanagement
at the power company. He does not need this one to
promote his message, as well as his proconsumer
standing.
Just
hammer on the established facts about the wayward
practices and the benefits to the consumers of an
amended Epira, Mr. Garcia, and the public will be with
you. Stray off course and bring other messages,
especially opaque or contrived ones, and you will turn
out to be a charlatan, not a crusader. Sayang!
Lozada’s ‘fund’
It is
well that Sens. Juan Ponce Enrile and Rodolfo Biazon
have sounded off the Senate leadership about the need to
revisit the status of witness Rodolfo “Jun” Lozada Jr.
in view of concerns over funding his and his family’s
“keep” and the insinuations of another round of
acrimonious wrangling over this embalmed issue called
the national broadband network (NBN)/ZTE inquiry.
Apart
from asking for a detailed accounting of the P2 million
or so which have been disbursed to defray Lozada’s
security and travel expenses, the two solons are now
seeking a more involved assessment of the so-called
security threat to him and his family.
That
assessment, as well as the value of keeping Lozada
indefinitely under Senate custody to shed light on the
canceled NBN/ZTE deal, should have been done earlier
after Senate blue-ribbon committee chairman Alan Peter
Cayetano issued an “interim report” on the months-long
inquiry.
Quite
apart from the fact that Lozada has not offered evidence
other than collaborative rage over what Jose de Venecia
III had earlier issued on this case, his value to the
committee and, of course, to the country, has been
marginal, at best.
Yes, we
acknowledge his contributions to the lexicon and his
graphic denunciations of some acts and personalities,
but all these have been far from conclusive proof worthy
of a court case or of regime change, as is the wish of
some sectors.
What
Senate President Manny Villar should do is draw lessons
from the witness-protection program, if not as practiced
in the country, at least in others, which have used the
same to truly indict the guilty and enhance the role of
genuine whistle blowers.
In these
countries, protected witnesses are urged to provide
detailed testimonies which are then duly recorded and
counterchecked against other sources, properly
debriefed, threats to them and their families correctly
assessed and treated as “state secrets.”
Lozada
and almost all other Senate witnesses on this and other
sensational cases have not gone through as thorough and
proper screening as should be. In a very real sense,
they have been offered through media or through some
influential sector or at the behest of an inquiring
member of the chamber.
They
have been given various and varying degrees of
incentives and protection as they wing their way through
the inquiries without as much as clear and proper
guidelines on how they conduct themselves, what
testimonies to offer, how they can be questioned and,
yes, how their and their family’s upkeep be funded.
Just
compare the one accorded Lozada and the other whistle
blowers who have been frequenting the Senate lounge,
from Sandra Cam to Vidal Doble to Madriaga to Boy Mayor
and the like, and you will realize that this kind of
work cannot and should not be accommodated in a real,
honest-to-goodness institutional inquiry, whether
criminal, administrative or in aid of legislation.
In sum,
the Senate “witness” initiatives have been long on
tokenism and short on proper and regular arrangements.
These guys have been subject to the whims and caprices
of the committees and the members and open to all kinds
of enticements or even blandishments from all sectors.
This
irregular practice has to end. A witness-assessment and
-protection scheme hewing closely to those provided by
law and the solid practices in place in other countries
should be put in place if we are to guard against the
misuse of these opportunities for purposes other than
the real search for truth and in the best public
interest. Tama na. |
