A DAY after the rice tariffication bill was transmitted to Malacañang, rice industry stakeholders, including a top official of the agriculture department, urged President Duterte to veto the measure, particularly provisions that seek to deregulate the National Food Authority (NFA).
Agriculture Undersecretary Segfredo R. Serrano said he supports the call to remove the provision under Senate Bill 1998 that removes the regulatory power of the NFA to control the entry of imported rice in the country.
Serrano pointed out that what the President certified as urgent legislation is a bill that would convert the country’s quantitative restriction (QR) on rice imports into tariffs and not a law, like SB 1998, that would fully liberalize the sector.
“That’s just how I look at it. Unless they interpret that when you tariffy you fully liberalize [the sector]. But, of course, that is not the case,” he told the BusinessMirror in an interview.
“At least at my level that’s how I look at it. And this is in consultation with farmers and stakeholders and even our experts, including trade lawyers,” he added.
Before leaving for Germany to present the success of the World Bank-funded Philippine Rural Development Project on Tuesday, Agriculture Secretary Emmanuel F. Piñol emphasized that he supports the rice tariffication bill except for the deregulation of the NFA.
Protests
Industry stakeholders, including rice farmers, retailers and even NFA employees, held a rally in Mendiola on Thursday to call on Duterte to veto the rice tariffication bill, which they said was “anti-poor.”
Alyansa ng Industriya ng Bigas (Anib) Founding Chairman Robert Hernandez said they want the provision under SB 1998 that deregulates the NFA to be scrapped. Hernandez argued that deregulating the NFA would mean unregulated entry of imported rice, which would flood the market and depress palay prices.
“We want the regulatory function of the NFA to be restored. What will happen is an import-all-you-can scenario,” he told the BusinessMirror.
“Plus, somebody should regulate the entry of imported rice in terms also of food safety. And who is the expert on that? That’s the NFA,” he added.
Under SB 1998, interested rice importers would have to secure a sanitary and phytosanitary import clearance, a document that certifies the safety of the commodity, to bring in the staple. At present, the NFA regulates rice imports by licensing interested traders and could even control the volume that would enter the market.
Anib on Thursday also issued a resolution opposing SB 1998, which would be submitted to the President and to Senate President Vicente C. Sotto III, as well as House Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
The Federation of Free Farmers Inc. (FFF) also joined the call for the veto of SB 1998 and pointed out that there should be a “proper and substantive” consultations with farmers and stakeholders before a rice tariffication bill is enacted.
“I think the senators are putting the President in a precarious and dangerous political situation where the government will be inutile if and when another rice crisis arises,” FFF National Business Manager Raul Q. Montemayor told the BusinessMirror.
Montemayor, who also chairs the Committees on Food and Staples, as well as International Trade at the Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fisheries, said under the proposed rice tariffication bill the government has no sufficient power to respond to market disruptions.
“We are also not satisfied with how the RCEF [Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund] has been configured, particularly its rigid preallocation of funds, which may not respond to the priorities of different localities and at different periods of time,” he said.
“[We are also against] the direct appropriations of large funds to small agencies, which do not have the personnel and logistical capacity to properly handle the funds, and the lack of stakeholder participation in the crafting of policies on RCEF usage and monitoring of the usage of RCEF,” he added.
Image credits: Alysa Salen