U.S. exposure limited

Port magnate Enrique Razon Jr. has good reason to be confident his flagship International Container Terminal Services Inc. (ICTSI) will weather US President Donald Trump’s high-tariff global blitz.

“We are mindful of the uncertainty over global trading arrangements and potential macroeconomic headwinds, but for ICTSI the direct impact of the tariffs is small owing to our limited exposure to US trade,” said the ICTSI chairperson and president.

“We look to the future with confidence, and with our highly disciplined business model and diversified operations, ICTSI remains resilient and in a strong position to continue to deliver financially and operationally for our stakeholders,” he added.

Razon’s statement calmed the market, as ICTSI has borne the brunt of the selling since Trump tariffed the world, making it one of the worst performers on the index.

It started recouping some of its losses in recent weeks, however. Analysts said the selling might have been overdone. They said the effect of the trade war on ICTSI is mostly indirect and the company could, in fact, benefit from it.

Less than three percent of cargo coursed through its ports is bound for the US and the only terminal that can be of concern is the Contecon Manzanillo terminal in Mexico.

The company operates 32 terminals in 19 countries, with one in Mexico, one in China, and none in the US and Canada.

During the company’s annual meeting, Razon said he believes China will look to other markets for its industrial output. This could benefit other ports and result in minimal impact on the volumes in ICTSI’s Yantai terminal in Northeastern China.

Trash on power lines

Those who put up campaign materials – candidates, their teams, and hired workers – on power and other public infrastructure must bear responsibility for the safety hazards and legal violations they cause.

Aided by lax enforcement, the 12 May wannabes and their cohorts disregard public safety and the grid reliability of power structures when they put up their propaganda.

The primary accountability lies with candidates who fail to ensure compliance with election rules.

Individuals and groups who tack campaign materials on power infrastructure bear the primary responsibility for violating Republic Act 11361 and Commission on Elections (Comelec) regulations, which explicitly prohibit such actions due to safety risks and threats to grid reliability.

By affixing materials to power poles and near wires, they knowingly and negligently endanger public safety and violate the law.

Also, beyond legal obligations, candidates have a moral responsibility to prioritize the public welfare.

Campaign materials that pose electrocution, fire, and power outage risks reflect a disregard for people's safety, undermining the democratic integrity they claim to uphold.

Workers removing materials face hazards and communities may suffer power disruptions. A misplaced tarpaulin, for instance, could cause a short circuit.

Campaign teams often outsource the putting up materials to paid workers and volunteers, complicating the chain of accountability.

The Comelec has not adequately addressed the violations of the various laws on the use of campaign materials. Enforcement typically targets the physical materials rather than tracing accountability to candidates or their hired hands. This gap allows candidates to deflect blame while workers face potential legal or physical risks during enforcement actions like the Task Force Baklas removals.

Local governments, which issue permits for campaign materials, often fail to monitor or regulate placements effectively. Political alliances may lead officials to overlook violations by favored candidates.

Comelec, with all its authority during the election period, can pursue candidates and local officials who cavalierly defy the rules in their effort to get elected.

If the insensitive politicos can ignore laws during the campaign, what more when they, unfortunately, are voted into power?