{"id":176651,"date":"2018-08-14T04:42:16","date_gmt":"2018-08-14T08:42:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=176651"},"modified":"2018-08-14T04:42:33","modified_gmt":"2018-08-14T08:42:33","slug":"nothing-illegal-p60-m-ad-placement-deal-teo-asserts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/08\/14\/nothing-illegal-p60-m-ad-placement-deal-teo-asserts\/","title":{"rendered":"Nothing illegal in P60-M ad placement deal, Teo asserts"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_162109\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-162109\" style=\"width: 1944px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-162109\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1944\" height=\"1296\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo.jpg 1944w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/DOT-Sec.-Wanda-Tulfo-Teo-1024x683.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1944px) 100vw, 1944px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-162109\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">\u201cI can say that there is nothing illegal in the said contract. The transaction was between DOT and PTV-4. It is a government-to-government contract within the executive department and all payments were paid directly to PTV-4,\u201d Teo said in her opening statement during the Senate Blue Ribbon panel hearing into the controversial ad placement deal.<a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DepartmentOfTourism\/photos\/a.197422286951318.60358.197186436974903\/2125019550858239\/?type=3&amp;theater\"> (File photo: Department of Tourism &#8211; Philippines\/Facebook)<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p class=\"p1\"><strong>MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0&#8212; Former Department of Tourism (DOT) secretary, Wanda Tulfo-Teo, faced the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee on Tuesday and asserted<span class=\"Apple-converted-space\">\u00a0\u00a0<\/span>that there was \u201cnothing illegal\u201d in the PHP60 million paid by the agency to place advertisements in state-run PTV-4\u2019s program, \u201cKilos Pronto\u201d, which is hosted by her brother, Ben Tulfo.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cI can say that there is nothing illegal in the said contract. The transaction was between DOT and PTV-4. It is a government-to-government contract within the executive department and all payments were paid directly to PTV-4,\u201d Teo said in her opening statement during the Senate Blue Ribbon panel hearing into the controversial ad placement deal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Teo said all DOT programs and activities under her term were conducted and implemented \u201cwithin the bounds of law\u201d and stressed that the ad placement deal went through \u201cproper channels.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">She said the proposal for the ad placement went through the Bids and Awards Committee and was eventually approved until a memorandum of agreement (MOA) was signed between the agency and PTV-4 on March 15, 2017.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Ben Tulfo vowed to \u201cuphold the truth\u201d by clearing his name and in proving that \u201csuspicions\u201d about his involvement in corruption were false. He also lamented how his brother, Erwin Tulfo, was dragged into the controversy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Erwin admitted he was a \u201ctalent\u201d of Bitag Media Unlimited, Inc., but did not participate in the decision-making process involving the ad placement deal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\"><strong>Unaware<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Teo also claimed that she did not know that \u201cKilos Pronto\u201d is a show hosted by her brothers and only knew that her brother, Ben Tulfo, owned the production company, Bitag.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201c<em>Di ko po alam na si Ben Tulfo ay Kilos Pronto<\/em>\u00a0(I didn\u2019t know that Ben Tulfo hosts Kilos Pronto). All I know is Bitag,\u201d Teo said, adding that she had no time to watch television.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">She pointed out that the ad placements were done at PTV-4\u2019s discretion since the show had high ratings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cThat contract was between PTV and DOT, beyond that\u00a0<em>\u2018di ko alam kung saan ilalagay ng PTV \u2018yung ads namin<\/em>\u00a0(I didn\u2019t know where PTV would place the ads). Had I known it, I would not have signed the contract,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">PTV-4 General Manager Dino Apolonio confirmed that it was the state-run television network that pitched the idea of placing the advertisements in the time slot of \u201cKilos Pronto\u201d.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Senator Richard Gordon, Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chairperson, said he found it \u201cstrange\u201d that Teo did not know about her brother\u2019s TV show.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Meanwhile, opposition Senator Antonio Trillanes IV said he found Teo\u2019s explanation \u201chard to believe.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\"><strong>Not returning<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Asked by Senator Risa Hontiveros if she believed that her brothers should return the PHP60 million paid by the DOT, Teo said they should not return it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">It may be recalled that Teo\u2019s former lawyer, Ferdinand Topacio, said the Tulfos were supposed to return the money although it was not clear as to which agency.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Ben Tulfo, however, said returning the money was tantamount to admitting that he \u201cdid something illegal.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cThat would extinguish the legality of my contract with PTV-4. So now returning the money is tantamount to saying we did something illegal,\u201d Tulfo said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cWala po sa isip ko ang pagsasauli dahil wala akong ginawang iligal (It did not cross my mind to return the money because I did not do anything illegal),\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\"><strong>\u2018Something good\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">DOT Secretary Bernadette Romulo-Puyat, meanwhile, vowed to fully cooperate in the investigations conducted by the Commission on Audit (COA) and the Office of the Ombudsman (COA).<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cAs current DOT Secretary, I have pledged, and will continue to pledge, my, as well as the whole DOT\u2019s full cooperation with these constitutionally designated authorities, the Commission on Audit and Ombudsman,\u201d Puyat said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">She said that if there was one good thing that came out of the controversial contracts and the DOT being under scrutiny, it was the need for certain reforms within the agency.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">At present, she said, the DOT has rationalized guidelines on the grant of financial sponsorships to tourism-related events and on travel of DOT officials and employees.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The agency is also \u201cmore conscious\u201d on DOT\u2019s compliance with Republic Act No. 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Puyat said her agency also remains open to any suggestion for reforms that may be discussed during the hearing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Earlier, the COA described the ad placement deal as a possible violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">COA said it was conflict of interest since the DOT, then led by Teo, paid PHP60 million for the ad placements in a show produced by her brothers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Teo eventually tendered her resignation following the COA report.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA\u00a0&#8212; Former Department of Tourism (DOT) secretary, Wanda Tulfo-Teo, faced the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee on Tuesday and asserted\u00a0\u00a0that there &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":162109,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-176651","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","mauthors-azer-parrocha","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176651","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=176651"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176651\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/162109"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=176651"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=176651"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=176651"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}