Another health risk?

Some quarters have recently called on Senator Pia Cayetano and the Senate health committee to summon Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) director Suzette Lazo to answer concerns that common food items like cooking oil, fish sauce or “patis”, vinegar and soy sauce or “toyo” sold in wet markets on “takal” basis do not meet sanitation and quality standards and therefore put the health of millions of ordinary Filipinos in jeopardy.

But even before the committee and the FDA could take action on the matter, they are again being called to look into another issue, which unfortunately, could be more dangerous than the first.

There are concerns raised in the international community regarding the safety of certain products that may contain what is called 3-MCPD or 3-Monochloropropane. The substance is suspected to be present at dangerous toxic levels in condiments such as oyster sauce, hoisin sauce and even soy sauce, including the branded ones.

In many parts of the world, such as Europe and Australia, food safety authorities have set a limit on the presence of 3-MCPD in soy sauce products sold there. Beyond these set limits, it is feared that 3-MCPD could actually prove to be carcinogenic, or cancer-causing as laboratories tend to show.

Now, this is one issue that Senator Pia and FDA director Dr. Suzette Lazo may wish to shed light on. Are our food safety authorities aware of the 3-MCPD issue which has alarmed other parts of the world? Is Dr. Lazo’s agency monitoring local and imported soy sauce products, not just for quality and sanitation but also for their 3-MCPD levels?

The Filipino public deserves to be assured.

DOTC execs unfazed by plunder case

Transportation Secretary Ping de Jesus recently branded the case filed against DOTC Undersecretary Aristotle Batuhan and Assistant Secretary Racquel Desiderio as a mere harassment suit filed by individuals whose interest have been affected by the reforms being implemented by his department.

A group called Road Users Protection Advocates (RUPA) earlier filed a case against Batuhan and Desiderio for allegedly giving undue advantage to Stradcom regarding the collection of interconnectivity fees.

Stradcom, as the Land Transportation Office (LTO)’s information technology provider, implements a director connect facility, whereby data from private emission testing centers (PETCs) are collected and then transmitted to the LTO-IT system.

LTO chief Virginia Torres has disallowed the direct connect facility, which charged the public a lower fee for emission tests, but the DOTC issued a status quo order.

Also included in the complaint are the officers and board of directors of Stradcom.

RUPA also accused Batuhan and Desiderio of pressuring LTO to release unpaid fees amounting to P662 million to Stradcom, despite the ongoing ownership dispute involving the latter.

But regardless of who emerges the real owner of Stradcom, the payment goes to the company anyway.

Bottomline is, the LTO and DOTC have to pay Stradcom for services rendered, De Jesus said.

A bad model for the PPP

The Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) and the Camp John Hay Development Corp. (CHJDevco) are turning out to be a bad example under the government’s public-private partnership (PPP) program.

The BCDA has been demanding the payment of “back rentals” from CJHDevco for the use of the Camp John Hay property to the tune of P2.4 billion.

But CJHDevco says BCDA failed to meet its part of their deal in developing the John Hay ecozone.

Under their revised agreement, the ecozone is to be converted instead into a family-oriented public tourism complex. The government, through the BCDA, will provide the property to be developed by CJHDevco and see to it that latter gets the necessary assistance to ensure the smooth implementation of the project via the setting up of a One-Stop Action Center (OSAC) for the processing of all licenses, permits and other requirements.

The OSAC in turns out merely added to the red tape, relegating its work to merely receiving papers and passing them on to other government agencies for appropriate action.

But the BCDA’s alleged cavalier, high-handed behavior is not the only problem that CJHDevco has to contend with.

A few years ago, the Supreme Court issued a ruling withdrawing all financial incentives given to the private sector in the John Hay Project. These were the very same incentives and perks that the BCDA had offered to the CJHDevco to convince it to take the project.

The high court’s ruling, naturally, was a big blow to CJHDevco, which had already pumped in over P2.6 billion into the project since 2001. Exacerbating the situation was the BCDA’s arrogance in publicly announcing that it was terminating its contract with CJHDevco and taking over the improvements done by the latter, by force, if necessary.

Other private sector partners would have already given up by this time and probably sued the government already, but CJHDevco chose to stay put to regain investor confidence in, and restore the operational viability of the project.

In 2008, the BCDA and CJHDevco drew up the RMOA to save the project. Instead of imposing demands, the corporation merely required the BCDA to set up the OSAC to facilitate the entry of investors into the ecozone. Unfortunately, the OSAC that the BCDA had set up is totally useless.

Incidentally, the RMAO says CJHDevco’s obligations have become current. The amount demanded by BCDA cannot, therefore, be construed as “rental arrears,” yet its officials claims that they are.

The RMOA suspends the BCDA’s entitlement to rentals if it fails to put up the OSAC.

BCDA is now insisting that all it can do is endorse all applications for permits and licenses to the appropriate government agencies. If that were the case, then why set up the OSAC in the first place?

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]