“Is there Catholic Church dogma that declares Nuclear Power as evil?”
by Ducky Paredes
I do not understand the government’s position on current things economic. Why should its economic managers be ordered to speak to the Catholic bishops before doing anything with the value added tax?
There is wisdom in Article 1, Section 6 of our Constitution which says: “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.” The inherent wisdom in that is the foreknowledge that most churchmen really know very little about running a government or the importance of state affairs. Besides, why target the bishops for where to get your advice when what is needed are not matters spiritual but the very banal stuff such as where to get the money for what projects or charitable works government has to engage in so that we can all survive the tough times without too much suffering.
One would think that the better ones from whom to seek counsel would be the business sector rather than the religious.
Besides, by consulting the bishops, it gives them a sense of power such that Bishop Socrates Villegas finds it in himself to warn the government against opening the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).
Is there Catholic Church dogma that declares Nuclear Power as evil? From the arguments put fotrth by Bishop Villegas, it would seem that to him, the BNPP sis a monument to the aspiration of the Marcos government and is the symbol of its corruption.
To my mind, the BNPP is a fully-paid for asset of the government, To not use it for anything must be a sin to a government of a very poor country such as the Philippines. That this never produced one watt of power even if it was, at one time capable of lighting up all of Metro Manila has to be the least blessed act of the past government.
We paid through the nose for this and never used it; now, we are being warned against using it because it si some kind of a symbol for evil? Quick, someone bless the BNPP to drive away its evil look and the demo ns that must reside in that building!
Thomas Jefferson said about the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: “”Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
To my mind, the wall that separates the Church from the State should be made stronger and maybe higher so that going over it to visit the other side will be well nigh impossible.
* * *
We have a reaction from a reader on yesterday’s column: “Tanong lang: Paano na-satisfy ang “BDO will immediately execute the sale documents ” kung wala pala sa araw at lugar na yoon ang principal signatory of the sale (i.e., BDO President)? Ano pangako’t bunganga’t, laway, tapos dumating ang P176M?
“Bakit hindi kaliwaan ang usapan sa mga ganyan corporate deals? Mauuna ba ang bayad (cleared funds) saka na lang hihintayin ang (mga) signed documents? Hindi ba tulad din yan sa bilihan ng droga sa kanto, mayroong ‘honor system’. Iyabot mo ang pera sabay abot ng produkto? Malinis. Thence, bahala ka na sa buhay mo!
“What puzzles me to find ay ang mga brilliant na mga tao na ito (pala) ay nalilinlang ba din? Akala hindi, akala ko mga squatters lang ang naloloko.
“Salamat, may natutuhan ako sa sinulat mo.” – Lito Dionisio Santos
* * *
I do not really blame the original shareholders who were matching the offer of Antonio Go for allowing themselves to be fooled. Clearly, BDO went into the deal – talking to them and setting up an almost impossible condition for the delivery of their money — with the idea of frustrating them. BDO clearly wanted Antonio Go to get Maxicare and is continuing to do everything in its power to give Maxicare to him,
They may be brilliant persons but when someone is out to gyp you, the gypper can usually still pull it off because you really do not expect that the respectable persons you speak with at BDO –the President and the chairperson (eldest daughter of Henry Sy) — would pull off a cheap scam such as they did.
In fact, the Assistant Board Secretary of Maxicare under instructions from the Maxicare Board (all BDO appointees) made a sworn statement to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that the Stockholders’ Book was lost. He then asked for a new one and entered there the sale to Antonio Go. This was negated when former Ateneo Law Dean Eduardo de los Angeles, the Corporate Secretary went to the SEC to present the original record book.
Is Antonio Go now the owner of 60% of Maxicare? According to the original shareholders agreement, it is only the Singapore Arbitration Court that can decide on this. Thus, while for now Antonio Go is considered the owner by BDO and the BDO-appointed board of Maxicare, I see that there will still be a lot of lawsuits coming out of this foolishness that BDO pointlessly entered into. After all, if it wanted to get out of its non-core business, why did BDO immerse itself in shenanigans that will find BDO embroiled in litigation over the next few years. Is litigation a core business for BDO?
* * *
Oops! Errors in yesterday’s column “Haw Siaw at BDO”: Cigna and PCIB bought into Maxicare in 1998, not 1988, which was also when the stockholders agreement was signed. Cigna subsequently sold its 30% to Equitable. When Equitable merged with PCIB, Equitable-PCIBank became the 60% owner.
When BDO merged with Equitable-PCIBank, BDO became the owner of 60% of Maxicare shares.
# # # #
hvp 07.11.08)
Post a Comment