Learning a lesson or two

Our government can probably learn a thing or two from Australia, one of the world’s powerhouses in the mining industry.

According to local and foreign players who signed a position paper during the two-day Philippines-Australia Ministerial Meeting Business Dialogue, if the Philippines wants its mining industry to flourish and succeed, then it should learn from the vast experience of the Australian government.

Just like our mining companies, Australian mining firms also encountered problems in connection with indigenous peoples (IPs). But that issue is now a thing of the past for Australia. Presently, there is no native title claim being contested by a mining company.

Stakeholders are convinced that Australia ’s success in dealing with IPs can be replicated in the Philippines through the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP).

Aside from this, the stakeholders said Australia could help the Philippines in its pursuit for a membership with the global Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI).

They also asked that the Australian government share its expertise and provide funding for pressing issues in mining such as land use management and national wealth valuation planning.

During the dialogue, the stakeholders also lauded Australia’s new approach to determining and managing its foreign aid programs based on outcomes.

Recently, the Australian government placed its aid program back under the control of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to position it to be more “effective, efficient, with a focus on our region and aligned with our national interests.”

It added that the program would promote economic deve-lopment with a focus on “aid for trade”.

Among the participants in the two-day business dialogue were the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Philippine Mining and Exploration Association, Makati Business Club, Philippines Australia Business Council, Australia Philippines Business Council and the Australian-New Zealand Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines.

Better banking

Security Bank is making an aggressive shift in service culture with the public unveiling last week of their new brand identity. And the bank promises that this new brand identity comes with a whole new brand promise of a better banking experience.

No longer focused only on “efficiencies”, the bank now promises a premium experience. Think private banking services which, up until now, was offered by banks only to their “high net-worth” clients

But now, Security Bank opens up access to these “exclusive” services to the country’s “mass affluent” market segment.

People with an average daily balance of P100,000 qualify for “Better Banking” service from Security Bank. This means no more waiting in long lines, dedicated managers to attend to their needs, and  “exclusive” privileges such as pre-approved loans, waived fees, discounts and special deals.

Specifically, these privileges includes a Security Bank Gold Privilege Card which can be used in any Security Bank branch and accredited establishments to start enjoying exclusive Security Bank Gold Circle perks; dedicated customer advisors in all branches to help complete transactions, answer queries and recommend the best financial solutions; waiver of fees and charges for certain transactions like bank certification and checkbook reorder; VIP  Priority Lanes in select branches to facilitate transactions; and special rates for term deposits and home, auto, or personal loans as well as exclusive discounts through partner merchants.

Basically, customers hate lines, want genuine personalized service, want to be treated better by their banks. And this is what Security Bank will address in order to provide a better banking experience.

Desperate move

The government’s witness protection program is now seemingly becoming an easy way to escape criminal prosecution.

Take the case of former Technology Resource Center director general Dennis Cunanan who has just been admitted by the Department of Justice into the program.

Lawyer Joel Bodegon, legal counsel of Senator Bong Revilla, described this move by the DOJ as an act of desperation.

Bodegon questioned the propriety of admitting Cunanan into the WPP, saying that the DOJ, under the Witness Protection Program Law, can only grant immunity to witnesses in cases under the Prosecution Service’s jurisdiction.  He said the DOJ cannot interfere with cases under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman, a separate constitutional entity, which is not under the authority of the DOJ. 

If we are to go by the original testimony of Cunanan before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, he was very emphatic when he told senators that he was just the deputy director general of TRC when the supposed PDAF transactions happened and that he had no knowledge whatsoever about the said transactions.

It is thus surprising why all of a sudden Cunanan was accepted by the DOJ’s WPP as a provisional state witness when his only claim to fame is that he was able to talk to Senators Revilla and Jinggoy Estrada over the phone.

As we all know, only Senator Estrada and Gigi Reyes (chief of staff of Senator Juan Ponce Enrile) were directly implicated as recipients of alleged kickbacks from their PDAF.

Several political observers believe that the reason why it is taking so long for the Ombudsman to file the PDAF scam in the Sandiganbayan is due to the lack of direct evidence that will link the three senators – Senators Estrada, Enrile and Bong Revilla – to the P10-billion pork barrel scam.

Not even the affidavits of principal whistleblower Benhur Luy can directly link the three senators since his main work with his cousin and alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim Napoles is to forge signatures and gather fake receipts for the liquidation of their ghost projects.

And this could be the reason why Baligod, the lead counsel of Luy and his fellow whistleblowers, welcomed the return of Ruby Tuason.

Unfortunately, Tuason’s testimony made no mention of Revilla and Enrile.

Is this the reason why Baligod and Secretary De Lima resurrected the application for the WPP of Cunanan and two other former employees of the National Agribusiness Corporation (NABCOR)?

For comments, email at [email protected]