<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic news Posted: Monday, June 16, 2003 By: Jose Gabriel Angarita

VenAmCham economist Jose Gabriel Angarita writes: In March and April of 2003, following the shut-down of the foreign exchange market, prevailing expectations focused on the possibility of the government's bringing interest rates in the Venezuelan financial system under control as well, in view of the banks' wide interest rate spreads and high profitability -- as then-Planning Minister Felipe Perez put it.

Opinions by highly qualified experts including the Central Bank Board were then expressed, insisting that the natural market mechanisms would effectively lower the cost of money and there was no need for controls, despite fears of a cessation of payments and inflation's expected impact on interest rates.

As expected, interest rates have come down. The average bank lending rate has fallen from 39.64% in December 2002 to 24.60% in May 2003, according to statistics published in this morning's edition of the El Nacional newspaper. This interest rate variation reflects the economic agents' inability to change bolivares to dollars as an investment alternative, which has flooded the system with liquidity.

But the pressure on interest rates has not induced a recovery of bank lending; indeed, it contracted by approximately 1.4 trillion bolivares between December 2002 and May 2003. The reason is quite simple: there has been no recovery of demand for credit among the economic agents. The economic contraction of 2002 and the 29% plunge in the supply of goods and services in the first quarter of 2003 have prevented companies and individuals from demanding financing for consumption, investment, and production.

A structural adjustment in the economic system is an indispensable necessity. Until the national economy recovers, until the market mechanisms for allocation of resources are set free, until a political environment free of conflict is restored, and until a climate of confidence among national and foreign investors is generated, the national financial system's credit portfolio will continue to be decisively influenced by the country's enormous macroeconomic instability -- not to mention the impact of the high proportion of total bank assets represented by government securities.

<a href=www.nzherald.co.nz>The New Zealand Herald 17.06.2003 8.30 am

NEW YORK- Oil prices rose on Monday (NY time) as low stocks in the US Midwest pulled up prices across the international market.

US crude oil futures for July rose 53 cents to US$31.18 per barrel, back within US$1.40 of last week's three month highs and 20 per cent up from the same time last year. International benchmark Brent crude gained 26 cents to US$26.65.

US crude oil normally trades at around US$1 to US$2 per barrel premium to Brent due to the US need to draw in imports to feed its oil needs. The spread stood at more than US$4 on Monday.

US prices have been driven up by low inventories, especially in the Midwest region, which has a pivotal impact on oil prices as it is home to the Cushing, Oklahoma crude futures delivery hub.

Midwest stocks have dwindled to 55 million barrels, below their normal level of around 70 million barrels for this time of year.

This has driven the July crude futures contract to a US$1.50 premium to the August contract.

"Anyone short of July will be struggling now as stocks are low in the Midwest," said Christopher Bellew of brokers Prudential-Bache International.

Delays in the resumption of Iraq's postwar oil exports have prevented US crude inventories from rebuilding after disruptions in Venezuela and Nigeria ran down supplies earlier this year.

Oil inventories are well below normal worldwide, although the deficit was reduced substantially last week by an upwards revision in stock data made by the International Energy Agency.

The addition of 80 million barrels to its end-March stock estimate for the industrialized world knocked prices sharply lower on Friday. Most of the extra oil was in Europe rather than the US

TORONTO, June 16 /CNW/ - Bolivar Gold Corp. (TSXVE: BGC) announced today that its board appointed Perry Dellelce as a director, subject to regulatory approval. Mr. Dellelce, who is a founding partner of Wildeboer Rand Thomson Apps & Dellelce, LLP, brings a wealth of corporate, securities and mergers and acquisition experience to the board. With the appointment of Mr. Dellelce, the company's board now consists of Serafino Iacono, Miguel de la Campa, Jose Francisco Arata, Andres Carrera, Ian Ward and Mr. Dellelce.

At its annual meeting earlier in the day, Bolivar's shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares reserved for issuance under its incentive stock option plan to 8,045,341, effective immediately. The board of directors has granted an aggregate of 3,055,000 stock options to its officers, directors and employees. The options have an expiry date of June 16, 2008 and vest over a period of 18 months from the date of grant. All are exercisable at $0.56, except for 335,000, which are exercisable at $0.70.

Bolivar Gold Corp. is a gold exploration and development company. The company currently has interests in Bolivar State, Venezuela. With its head office in Toronto, Canada and an office in Caracas, Venezuela, the Company's shares trade on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol "BGC".    %SEDAR: 00008480E

-30- For further information: Robert Doyle, Chief Financial Officer, Bolivar Gold Corp., 110 Yonge Street, Suite 1502, Toronto, Ontario, M5C 1T4, Tel: (416) 360-4653, Fax: (416) 360-7783, E-mail: info@bolivargold.com

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Monday, June 16, 2003 By: Gustavo Coronel

VHeadline.com commentarist Gustavo Coronel writes: The referendum slated for this year and which, if held, should decide whether our current President stays or goes, is contemplated in Article 72 of the Venezuelan Constitution. This article allows for any elected officer to be subject to a referendum at the midpoint of his/her term in office provided that no less than 20% of the voters request that such a referendum be held. The mandate will be revoked if a number of votes greater than that received originally by the officer are obtained, and the voting includes more than 25% of eligible voters.

If these conditions are met, the mandate of the elected officer will be revoked and the law demands that the replacement of such an absolute absence be replaced at once.

In the case of our President, his term will be at midpoint in August 19, 2003, as determined by a sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ).  To fulfill the number of voters requesting the referendum requires that 20% of ±12.5 million registered voters ask for it ... this is, 2.5 million signatures. To be valid, the referendum must have the participation of at least 25% of eligible voters ... 3,125,000 voters. The mandate will be revoked if more than 3,357,773 voters so decide, this being the amount of votes that the current President received at his election in July 2000.

The percentage of voters abstaining during Presidential elections since 1999 has been very high ... in the order of 49%.  I.e. only 51% of eligible voters have cast their ballots. If this trend is maintained for the referendum, and even if 59% of voters decide against the President staying, his mandate would not be revoked since the absolute number of votes would be less than what he obtained in July 2000. This means the opposition to the President must make sure that abstention is very low, that most voters actually vote.  It explains the emphasis being given, at this point in time, to the organization of civic groups to guarantee that no one fails to go and vote.

The road to the referendum is plagued with obstacles, some legal, some bureaucratic, some of a more dubious nature. Among them:

1. Are the signatures already collected in 'El Firmazo' valid or not? The Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) has not yet said a word. The current Electoral College (CNE) says they are.

2. The Electoral College must be to reappointed. The National Assembly (AN), in charge of selecting its new members, is in shambles. The government block no longer has the majority it once had. From an original 115 members the government block is down to 83, but even then, one or two more of its members are not so sure any more. This has produced a deadlock in the Assembly and the Electoral College members have not been selected. This task will probably have to be made by the TSJ as last instance ... which is highly abnormal.

3. Some high government officers claim that the Electoral College should have 6 months to be "reorganized."  This would delay the referendum considerably.

4. The Minister of Infrastructure (MINFRA), Diosdado Cabello claims without giving much explanation on the basis for his argument, that there will not be a referendum and Vice President Rangel says that the recent agreement signed under the eyes of international observers, has nothing to do with the referendum ... although this was the main reason to sign it.

5. President Chavez has gone on record saying that he does not believe there will be any referendum.

6. Many opposition members feel that the government has no real intention to "allow" a referendum.

Against this background, filled with uncertainty, most Venezuelans are looking to the referendum as the only hope of solving the Venezuelan crisis in a non-violent fashion.

• But the level of frustration increases as they see that the days go by and many organizations procrastinate in tasks they must complete to make it possible.

The President (quite rightly), says: "I am not interested in the referendum ... I will not move a finger to make it possible."  This is logical as one can not expected him to promote a referendum that might result in his removal from the Presidency. But, there is a distinction between not promoting a revocatory referendum and quite another to put obstacles in its way. Not to move a finger to make it happen is understandable, and valid. To move to make it impossible is something else ... which might well be classified as obstruction of the Constitution itself.

This is where we seem to be at this point in time.

The referendum hangs in the balance ... a very delicate balance between Constitutional action and Constitutional violation ... we will need all possible help to make the revocatory referendum happen within the boundaries stipulated in the Venezuelan Law.

Gustavo Coronel is the founder and president of Agrupacion Pro Calidad de Vida (The Pro-Quality of Life Alliance), a Caracas-based organization devoted to fighting corruption and the promotion of civic education in Latin America, primarily Venezuela. A member of the first board of directors (1975-1979) of Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), following nationalization of Venezuela's oil industry, Coronel has worked in the oil industry for 28 years in the United States, Holland, Indonesia, Algiers and in Venezuela. He is a Distinguished alumnus of the University of Tulsa (USA) where he was a Trustee from 1987 to 1999. Coronel led the Hydrocarbons Division of the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) in Washington DC for 5 years. The author of three books and many articles on Venezuela ("Curbing Corruption in Venezuela." Journal of Democracy, Vol. 7, No. 3, July, 1996, pp. 157-163), he is a fellow of Harvard University and a member of the Harvard faculty from 1981 to 1983.   You may contact Gustavo Coronel at email gustavo@vheadline.com

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Monday, June 16, 2003 By: Patrick J. O'Donoghue

Ten of Venezuela's most important NGOs have issued a statement complaining about the National Children's Rights Council (CNDN) and have called for a thorough investigation into allegedly shady administrative practices. 

After months of internal bickering and in-fighting, the board of directors finally resigned last week. 

The NGOs led by Cecodap and PROVEA indicate that personal and client-based interests ran amok in the council, causing a diversion of funds away from children's needs to bureaucracy, adverts and staff salaries ... "the board has shown an absence of governance and incapacity." 

Arguing that children should not be used as pawns in personal and political conflicts, the NGOs want to see a new board that coordinates policies and activities with the Social Cabinet.  They also called on the National Assembly (AN) to abolish the Children's Welfare Office (INAM) for once and for all. 

Among the resigning directors are: Ramon Gonzalez (president), Rosauro Leon Salazar (executive director), Noris Perez Marcano (deputy president), Damelis Yeguez (for Social Development ministry) and Lidice Navas (for Infrastructure Ministry), accused of nepotism, squandering money on travels abroad and office improvements.