I was not exaggerating yesterday when I said I was amazed at Taipei?s development after visiting it over the weekend. You have to see as I did when I first visited the erstwhile Formosa, now renamed Taiwan.

From the airport on to the city limits and until we arrived at the hotel, and especially after seeing the world-famous 101 which at one time was the tallest building in the world (until the Arabs in Dubai built a taller one), constructed like a bamboo stalk with all its rainbow colors at night, that?s the time you realize how the Philippines has been left behind by its neighbors.

Santa Banana, the expressways are fantastic and the shops are good. The catch is that they are a bit too expensive for my taste. Still, the food was great.

Believe it or not, Taiwan even has a bullet train from Taipei to the southernmost city of Kaishiong where you can see the lights in far-off islands in northernmost Philippines.

The sad part of it all is that whenever I see our neighbors becoming developed countries, my heart bleeds a little to realize how we have been left behind.

***

Whenever the President and her economic managers talk of the need to privatize government assets, the opposition and critics of the administration claim that funds raised from these activities will only be used for election purposes. Worse, that the funds will end up in the pockets of greedy people in the administration.

That?s the problem, actually, since the philosophy behind privatization is not the need to raise funds for government to continue its operations, especially in infrastructure, health, education and social projects. To my mind, this is where Malaca?ang needs to review its statements that privatization is imperative to fund government and narrow the budget deficit.

Rather, the philosophy behind privatization of government assets is that government has no business in business. This kind of philosophy strikes deep into corruption since those appointed to manage government assets are not beholden to their stockholders or shareholder but to the appointing power. Thus, when the appointing power goes, they also go, opening the doors for graft and corruption.

More often than not, those who do not understand the philosophy behind privatization claim that the government must maintain interests in strategic industries like power, energy, aviation, telecommunication and water. How wrong can they get?

That?s the reason why power distribution, telecommunications, water and aviation were all privatized. And that?s the philosophy behind the scrapping of the Oil Price Stabilization Fund?to enable oil companies to fight it out in a deregulated and free market.

Thus, whenever I read or hear noises that government assets held by the Philippine National Oil Co. should not privatized, like the fact that PNOC Exploration Corp. should be kept as an asset of government because of its strategic value, I am reminded of the ignorance of some people. Santa Banana, the bottom line is that the government has no business in business!

***

The move to privatize the assets held by the PNOC has met a lot of criticism. First, there was this outcry from ignorant souls that privatizing PNOC-EC, the government?s Energy Development Corp., which has become very profitable in geothermal, should not have been sold to the Lopezes. It was making money, anyway, they say, and besides, geothermal energy is a strategic asset.

Santa Banana, how ignorant can some people get? Precisely, sell when there is reason to sell. Otherwise, who will buy losing businesses? If you sell losing businesses, it will be only a fire sale.

Strategic business? Those who claim that government has lost a strategic advantage in geothermal are clearly ignorant of the fact that there?s a non-competing clause in PNOC-EDC?s sale to the Lopezes. This simply means that government can still go into geothermal energy.

Now comes complaints that the decision to privatize PNOC-EC, which has a 10-percent interest in the Camago-Malampaya gas exploration with Shell and Chevron owning 45 percent each. They say the facility should not be privatized because there?s need for government to gain technical expertise and even some kind of persuasive interests in oil and gas exploration.

Again, those against privatization forget that with only 10-percent government interest in the Camago-Malampaya consortium, government is neither here nor there. How can 10 percent exert pressure on anything? But, again, in the plan to sell 40 percent at the maximum in the meantime, when market conditions are good, there is also a non-competing clause which again means that government has still the power to go on oil and gas exploration and coal. It can even put up an oil refinery.

Santa Banana, clearly those complaining about the privatization of PNOC-EDC do not do their homework and only display their ignorance.

***

Another source of complaint by those who not understand the philosophy behind privatization was the recent sale of PNOC?s 40-percent share of Petron to Ashmore fund managers. Why sell when government can exert pressure on the oil industry for the benefit of consumers, especially on prices?

My gulay, don?t they understand that with only a minority 40-percent stake in Petron, government interest in the oil industry is neither here nor there? Ask any businessman, and he?ll tell you that when you are in the minority in any business, you are nothing. Besides, the government was able to get a very good price for PNOC?s 40 percent, way above Petron?s market price.

The problem, however, is that when the administration talks of privatization, almost always it ties up with the need to narrow the budget deficit to enable government to fund its projects, especially now when there?s need to grant stimulus to the economy. This kind of reasoning gives fodder for the opposition and critics of the President to claim that privatization is needed for election purposes and money for graft and corruption.

Thus, there?s need for the economic managers of President Arroyo just to educate people about the philosophy behind privatization.