Sovereign wealth vs national development funds and money laundering

LAST Friday, June 23, columnist Bobi Tiglao may have alluded to me as the columnist when he wrote, "Another critic pompously claims that Maharlika is confused, in that it can't make up its mind whether it is a sovereign fund or a national development fund. But can't it be both, as Singapore's Temasek Holdings was in its inception and the more recent Indonesian Investment Fund is?" I have asked The Manila Times to postpone part two of last week's article to next week and publish this instead.

Before answering factually, and with I hope reasoned arguments, note that I have read Tiglao's work since the 1980s and used to consider him the most insightful and analytical columnist in the Philippines. I may not have always agreed with his conclusions, but admired his setting the factual basis, analysis and reasoning. I find it sad that over the last few years, much bitterness and bile has engulfed his writing. While his columns had bite, it came after factual analysis. These days, it seems much of the factual and analytical basis while still there has diminished while the invective has become more prominent. I wish we could have the prior style and quality of the Tiglao.