Author: user user

Finances and health issues are among the major factors for the stress experienced by most Filipinos, according to a survey by the Social Weather Stations (SWS).

The survey, conducted from Sept. 24 to 30, found that 53 percent of the respondents experienced ‘big’ stress in relation to their financial situation.

Some 37 percent considered it a ‘small’ factor, while 10 percent were undecided.

In terms of stress due to one’s health, 42 percent considered it a ‘big’ factor, while 46 percent said it was ‘small.’ Eleven percent were undecided.

Thirty-nine percent of the respondents said stress related to job or school was a ‘big’ factor, while 51 percent said it was ‘small.’ The remaining nine percent is undecided.

Some 38 percent said they had ‘big’ stress related to their families, while 52 percent considered it ‘small.’ Ten percent were undecided.

The survey was released in time for the annual commemoration of World Mental Health Day on Oct. 10.

According to the survey, 34 percent of the respondents experience stress ‘frequently’ in their daily lives. It was up seven points from a similar survey in December 2019.

Meanwhile, those who said they experience stress ‘sometimes’ dropped from 37 percent to 32 percent, while those who ‘rarely’ experienced stress in their daily lives dropped from 34 percent to 30 percent.

Those who said they never experienced stress increased from two percent to four percent.

Across areas, frequency of experiencing stress was higher among respondents in Metro Manila, where 50 percent of the respondents said they ‘frequently’ experienced stress in their daily lives.

It was followed by those in the rest of Luzon at 36 percent, Mindanao at 28 percent and the Visayas at 26 percent.

The survey also showed that women experience stress more frequently (41 percent frequent, 31 percent sometimes) than men (27 percent frequent, 33 percent sometimes).

The survey had 1,500 respondents and a margin of error of plus/minus three percent for national percentages.

The 21st century differs from the centuries that came before it in one essential respect: the emerging world order is now shaped by shared, long-term expectations and the inescapable logic of interdependence. No nation holds a monopoly over the resources it needs. This condition gave rise to what we now call globalization – though the concept itself is far older than the word.

Even in ancient times, communities traded and interacted with one another, albeit without the rules or uniform conditions that govern commerce today.

Globalization as we know it can be traced, in part, to a voyage that began in 1519 when Portuguese explorer Fernão de Magalhães – better known as Ferdinand Magellan – set sail under the Spanish flag in search of a westward route to the spice markets of Asia. His expedition crossed the Pacific Ocean and, by accident, landed on the Philippine archipelago in 1521. Though Magellan met his end there, the journey’s greater legacy was not the discovery of new lands but the observation of a time discrepancy that would later lead to the establishment of the International Date Line near the Philippines.

It was only in 1565 that the Galleon Trade between Manila and Acapulco was formally established. At the time, both the Philippines and Mexico were under Spanish rule, with Spain standing as the world’s dominant military and economic power. The Manila Galleon trade endured for 250 years, creating the first sustained trans-Pacific commercial route linking Asia, the Americas, and Europe.

Goods from East and South Asia converged in Manila before being shipped to the Americas, while the galleons returned laden with silver and European products. Beyond trade, this route also sparked migration and cultural exchange – Filipinos, Latin Americans, and Europeans shared languages, food, and art, leaving a legacy still visible in the Philippines’ diverse cultural landscape.

The galleons of that era were, in effect, the international liners of their time – massive ships built first in Spain and Mexico, and later in Philippine shipyards. Shipbuilding, already a thriving industry here by the 1600s, enabled Manila to become one of the world’s earliest global ports: a hub of commerce, education, and faith.

Today, globalization is no longer carried by ships but by data. Physical borders have blurred, replaced by digital connectivity. Products are now European in design, American in technology, and Asian in manufacture – the product of a global workforce that is increasingly mixed in culture and nationality.

Europe and the Philippines: A refreshed partnership

From October 13 to 15, 2025, representatives of European companies will gather in Manila for the EU-ASEAN Business Mission, aimed at deepening institutional, commercial, and social partnerships. While the European Union remains one of the Philippines’ most important trading partners, both sides acknowledge that much remains to be done to realize the relationship’s full potential.

According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, Philippine exports to the EU reached US $8.07 billion in 2024, while imports totaled $7.46 billion, producing a trade surplus of about $610 million – evidence of the competitiveness of Philippine goods in European markets.

On investments, the United Kingdom ranked among the top sources of foreign direct investment in 2024, accounting for 35% of total inflows, second only to Japan’s 38%. While no longer part of the EU, the UK’s strong presence underscores the broader significance of Europe as a long-term economic partner.

Several major European companies – including Bosch, Unilever, Shell, and Acciona – maintain substantial operations in the Philippines, contributing not only capital and technology but also expertise in sustainability and workforce development.

The moment for diversification

Amid evolving global dynamics, the Philippines has a timely opportunity to strengthen ties with Europe. Collaboration can focus on areas where European expertise aligns with Philippine development goals – renewable energy, green transition technologies, digitalization, and infrastructure modernization.

The recent 19% U.S. tariff on Philippine products may pose short-term challenges, but it also presents a strategic incentive to diversify. Expanding trade and investment with Europe, while supporting innovation and upskilling at home, will make the Philippine economy more resilient in the face of shifting geopolitical winds.

To this end, the government’s Strategic Investment Priority Plan (2025-2028) and the forthcoming Philippines-EU Free Trade Agreement could serve as key platforms for cooperation.

With its strategic location, youthful English-speaking workforce, and resource potential, the Philippines is well-positioned to attract European investment that can drive industrial upgrading and job creation. As political and economic conditions stabilize, investment momentum is expected to build.

A partnership built on shared values. Ultimately, deepening trade and strategic partnerships with Europe is more than an economic exercise. It is a reaffirmation of shared values – fairness, sustainability, and mutual prosperity.

The Philippines, much like in the days of the galleons, stands once again at the crossroads of continents. This time, its challenge is not to build ships, but to build enduring bridges – economic, cultural, and moral – that will carry it forward in an international order defined by what is right, fair, and just for all.

The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) expects the ongoing economic slowdown to last only two to three quarters, saying continued policy easing will help offset the drag from weaker business sentiment due to governance concerns surrounding public infrastructure projects.

Speaking in an interview on ‘Money Talks,’ BSP Governor Eli Remolona Jr. said central bank projections point to a slower growth in the near term, followed by a strong rebound starting in late 2026.

‘Once we factored in negative business sentiment, we found that growth would slow down in 2026, but recover and more than catch up in 2027,’ Remolona said.

‘Inflation as well would be lower than we thought in 2026 and 2027. So that gave us more room to cut,’ the BSP chief added.

The Monetary Board on Thursday surprised markets by slashing its benchmark rate by another 25 basis points to 4.75 percent, marking its fourth straight rate cut this year. This brought the cumulative rate cuts to 175 basis points since August 2024.

According to the governor, the Monetary Board’s decision was ‘overwhelmingly in favor of a cut,’ amid growth concerns.

Based on the BSP’s latest baseline scenario, the economy is now projected to grow below the government’s target of 5.5 percent this year and further down to 5.3 percent in 2026.

‘We had thought we would see higher growth rates in 2023 and 2024, but we didn’t get those growth rates. Now we know why. What we thought was investment was not investment,’ Remolona said.

He said the central bank’s latest model adjustments indicate that the so-called ‘Goldilocks rate’ – or the level of policy rate that is just right for the economy – is closer to four percent, giving policymakers more room to support the economy.

‘The numbers changed, and one reason for the change was negative business sentiment,’ he said. ‘The Goldilocks rate could be lower than we thought. That factored into the decision as well.’

He attributed the weaker business confidence to governance issues surrounding government flood control projects, which have led to a corruption probe and the suspension of several infrastructure initiatives.

‘The scandal and the business sentiment associated with it made it clearer that we needed a rate cut,’ he said. ‘It suggested a significant slowdown – not a deep one, but enough to justify a cut in the policy rate.’

According to Remolona, another rate cut remains possible before the year ends, with one more policy meeting scheduled in December.

‘It’s possible – one more 25-basis-point cut. We’re most likely to do something during a scheduled policy meeting,’ he said, while clarifying that an off-cycle move would require ‘something really bad’ in the economic data.

He noted that a 50-basis-point cut would only be considered if indicators of growth or confidence ‘surprise us on the low side,’ which the BSP currently views as a low-probability risk.

Remolona also warned that failure to strengthen the country’s anti-money laundering framework could risk the Philippines’ return to the Financial Action Task Force’s gray list.

‘We’re worrying about that, and we’re doing our best. We certainly don’t want to be back on the gray list,’ he said. ‘It took a lot of work to get out of it.’

Despite ongoing investigations, Remolona said the banking system remains sound, with ample capital and liquidity buffers.

‘The health of the banking system looks good,’ he said. ‘There’s no sign or risk of an imminent crisis. A crisis is when you begin to see deposit runs and we’re not seeing that.’

The Monetary Board will have its final review this year on Dec. 11.

The Department of Agriculture (DA) is studying the possible reimposition of a suggested retail price (SRP) on pork nearly four months after the government lifted the price cap intended to temper soaring meat costs.

Agriculture Secretary Francisco Tiu Laurel Jr. said yesterday that the department would review the matter and adjust profit margins to make them more reasonable and ensure they remain worthwhile for retailers and producers.

‘What the DA was planning when prices went out of control was to implement an MSRP (manufacturer’s suggested retail price) on pork, especially on imported pork. That is still an option,’ Tiu Laurel told lawmakers during the budget hearing of the agency for 2026.

To illustrate, Tiu Laurel said the landed cost of imported frozen liempo is at around P220 per kilo, while retail prices in local markets is P315 per kg.

He added that pork imports charged with lower tariffs cost around P250 per kg, while those taxed at higher rates are priced between P268 and P279 per kg.

The gap between import and retail prices shows a margin of roughly P65 per kilo.

‘I used to do this business. That (price markup) is high. It should just be around P260 per kg (instead of P315 per kg),’ said the agriculture chief.

Last May, the DA scrapped the MSRP on pork after traders and meat processors appealed for its suspension, citing the continuing shortage of hogs due to African swine fever (ASF).

The agency said market conditions at the time made it difficult for retailers to comply with the price ceiling as supply tightened while demand stayed strong.

Before the price cap was lifted, the DA had set the MSRP at P380 per kilo for liempo, P350 for pigue and kasim and P300 for sabit-ulo or fresh carcass.

The DA said these rates were meant to balance fair returns for producers and traders while shielding consumers from steep markups in wet markets.

The country’s hog inventory has fallen sharply to just about eight million as of this year from around 13 million heads in 2019, according to the DA, leaving local production well below pre-outbreak levels.

After formalizing plans to enforce a mandatory term limit for independent directors of publicly listed companies, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is now looking at putting a term limit for broker directors of the Philippine Stock Exchange Inc. (PSE).

SEC chairperson Francis Lim told The STAR that the proposal aims to introduce term limits for broker directors of the PSE, similar to the existing limits for independent and non-broker directors.

Lim said the PSE’s independent directors as well as non-broker directors currently have term limits, while broker directors do not have any.

‘The intent is to level the playing field and provide other brokers the opportunity to serve on the PSE board,’ Lim said.

‘At this stage, it remains an idea under study – nothing final yet – but it’s certainly worth exploring,’ he said.

Broker directors are persons who proportionately represent the PSE membership in terms of volume/value of trade and paid-up capital, while non-broker directors are those who are not associated with any broker or dealer or member of the exchange.

The PSE’s board of directors should be composed of 15 members who are elected by shareholders.

At least 51 percent of the members must be non-brokers: at least five independent directors and four directors representing the interests of issuers, investors and other market participants, with each sector having at least one representative.

Broker directors, meanwhile, should not be more than 49 percent of the board and shall proportionately represent the exchange membership in terms of volume/value of trade and paid up capital.

A broker director must be a senior officer with a rank of at least vice president or its equivalent, or a director of a brokerage firm/trading participant that has been licensed to operate as a broker or broker-dealer and is a trading participant of the PSE and must be nominated by a PSE stockholder of record.

The SEC has recently issued a draft memorandum circular, which sets the rules on the duration of term and amends its rules on term limits of independent directors of all publicly listed companies.

The issuance is expected to strengthen independence of independent directors as well as to align with the international best practices under Republic Act No. 11232, otherwise known as the Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines.

A company’s independent director is currently allowed to serve for a maximum cumulative term of nine years, after which, the independent director shall be perpetually barred from re-election as such in the company, but may continue to qualify as a non-independent director.

However, in the instance that a company wants to retain an independent director who has served for nine years, the firm’s board should provide meritorious justifications and seek shareholders’ approval during the annual shareholders’ meeting.

Under the SEC’s draft memorandum circular, an independent director shall be elected for a three-year fixed term and subject to the term limit.

An independent director should serve for a maximum cumulative term of nine years, with an independent director, who has served the maximum term, shall be disqualified to be an independent director in the same company.

Publicly listed firms and registered issuers are given until Oct. 15, 2025 by the SEC to submit their comments and inputs on the draft memorandum circular on the duration of term and term limit of independent directors.