Why Blame Media

The administration is taking on a dangerous strategy by blaming media for its woes. Erap the President has made media bashing a habit. Now, even BSP Gov. Paeng Buenaventura has joined in. The BSP head blames media for the skittishness of investors. Tio Paeng, if he was quoted correctly, wants the press to "cooperate".

Like how? In the manner of the Marcos era newspapers, perhaps? I know Tio Paeng too well to imagine he has sunk this low. But I think I get his point. Media had indeed been critical of the Estrada administration. But then again, it is only performing its role in a democracy. There is much to criticize with the administration's handling of the economy. If Tio Paeng were not BSP governor, I am sure he would have joined the rest of the business community in egging media to pressure the administration to get its act together.

The problem, Tio Paeng, is not with media but with your boss and some of his so called economic managers. While some sectors of media may hate Erap with a passion, there are those who are ready to give him a chance. I, for one, get a headache trying to find a reason to support Erap, not because I like him but because I am realistic enough to be resigned to the fact that we will have him for the next four and a half years. His success or failure affects me directly, so why not help him succeed? It is frustrating.

If Tio Paeng forgets he is an Erap appointed BSP governor for a moment, I think I know him enough to be certain he will agree with the rest of us that his boss is really digging his own grave. Can Tio Paeng honestly deny there is no serious problem with cronyism in this administration? I think not. Will Tio Paeng give the administration high marks in leadership and direction for the economy? I think not. As for the handling of the budget deficit, I am sure Tio Paeng will be the first to admit it could have been handled much better.

Speaking for myself, I tried to be upbeat after I heard the President put the Concord on the back burner and after he said he fired all his advisers, warning them to tear up their calling cards and stationery. But I got burned. In typical urong sulong fashion, the President even accused media of misquoting him on both issues. Now the Palace would not even release a list of advisers who were fired as well as those who were retained.

I think that in the area of economic reporting and commentary, media has done a pretty good job. When Erap the President criticized media for failure to highlight the momentary improvement in the peso exchange rate, it was simply because our gut feel told us that was just a blip. True enough, a couple of days later, the peso deteriorated again. Our obligation is to tell the truth to our readers, not play adjunct to the Malacañang propaganda machine.

In any case, there are times when administration officials shoot themselves in the foot with no help from media. Finance Secretary Titoy Pardo was reported to have told some businessmen that the reason why inflation last year was kept below government target despite the worsening budget deficit was because of massive smuggling of rice, sugar and chicken.

Titoy Pardo is, as far as I knew him before he joined government, a regular altar boy, one of those who can't tell a lie. So I can understand why he might have said that. But coming from Erap's senior economic aide, that is not exactly the stuff that builds up confidence in this administration's ability. It confirms what we all know: that all those rosy economic indicators aren't rosy for the right reasons.

Or put another way, we may have good numbers for inflation, a record trade surplus and a record BOP surplus but for reasons other than good economic management. As my stockbroker puts it, the statistics are more reflective of a weak economy than competence in economic management or political leadership.

Honestly, Tio Paeng, we would really love to help drum up investments and create a positive atmosphere for investments to come in. But you guys have to clean up your act. We are journalists, writing for daily newspapers. We aren't trying to win Palanca awards for creative literature. It is as simple as that.

Loan sharks?

A friend of mine and her husband, with the help of her mother, signed up a 20 -year loan with Philamlife for P15 million to buy a house and lot in a subdivision in Libis, Quezon City. Interest rates at the time they closed the loan was at a high 18 percent for the first 10 years.

But a couple of years after, market rates tumbled and my friend took the opportunity to refinance their loan, as any sane borrower would. That's when she got into trouble with Philamlife. Her contract carried a penalty provision of six percent to pre pay the obligation. That amounted to almost a million pesos.

A million pesos to pay your loan in advance is ridiculous. My friend took exception to the applicability of that penalty provision, citing the Consumer Act as basis. But Philamlife was adamant. It insisted the Consumer Act is not applicable to the housing loans it extends. Philamlife pointed out the Act covers only sale or lease of any consumer product or service on credit. When Philamlife extended a housing loan, there was no sale or lease of any consumer product or service.

But my friend was just as sure of her grounds. The Consumer Act (RA 7394) was enacted to precisely protect the interest of consumers against deceptive, unfair acts and practices. It also has a provision specifically covering prepayment. Article 137 provides that "The person to whom credit is extended may prepay in full or in part, at any time without penalty, the unpaid balance of any consumer credit transaction."

The issue boils down to the question: is a housing loan considered consumer credit? To this layman who depends on sheer logic, of course a housing loan is consumer credit. It can't be a corporate loan or commercial loan. It is for personal consumption. And it seems that is also how the Consumer Code sees it in the sections defining the terms used in the law.

Finally, Philamlife argues that my friend cannot question the penalty provision because she agreed to it. I have a copy of the Consumer Code in my desk and Article 167 states "The provision of this Act shall apply notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary."

It is also interesting to note that since the enactment of the Consumer Code, most if not all banks have stopped the practice of charging pre-termination penalties. They sometimes disguise it as service charges. But if a well informed client protests, they always readily concede.

Will Philamlife now say they are not covered because they are an insurance company and not a bank? Former CB governor Joey Cuisia who heads Philamlife should straighten out his boys. Nakakahiya ito. Or maybe, the authors of the Consumer Code should call for a congressional inquiry to look into how the Code is being violated so remedial amendments can be passed.

This will probably be a test case that could go all the way up to the Supreme Court. Consumer groups should take up the cause. Philamlife should back down before they end up with the image of ordinary loan sharks. In a Christian sense, based on what I have learned in our Christian Ethics class at CRC, this is unjust. Sayang naman ang pagka Opus Dei ni Joey.

For Adult(ery) only

Here's an Erap joke I picked up the other day.

Erap was asked who is the woman he holds in the highest esteem.

"My mother," Erap replied almost instinctively.

He was asked the reason he chose his mother.

"Well," Erap explained, "my mother took care of me in my infancy, took care of me in my adolescence, and finally took care of me in my adultery."

(Boo Chanco's e-mail address is [email protected])