Farmers wary of politicians getting hands on rice tariffs

By Reicelene Joy N. Ignacio
Reporter
A FARMERS’ organization said the agriculture sector stands to lose revenue worth P60 billion annually if the rice tariffication bill is enacted, and warned that politicians could get their hands on the collected tariffs.
According to the Federation of Free Farmers’ (FFF) national manager Raul Q. Montemayor, “With an annual palay output of about 19 million tons, of which two-thirds are sold in the market, every one peso decline in palay prices will mean P12.7 billion in (lost revenue) to rice farmers.”
“The NEDA (National Economic and Development Authority) is projecting that rice prices will decline by at least P7 per kilo, which will mean an equivalent P4.50 peso decline in the price of palay. Rice farmers therefore stand to lose nearly P60 billion every year. The P10 billion rice fund is very small compared to these potential losses,” Mr. Montemayor added.
Mr. Montemayor said that the tariffs could be diverted by politicians for their own pet projects, as only P10 billion would go to the rice fund.
“Even LGUs will be allowed to receive grants for machinery and farm equipment and compete for the funds with farmers. Only P10 billion from import tariff collections will automatically go into rice fund. Congress will decide how to use any excess tariff collection through the annual budget. This could open the door for politicians to dip their fingers into the rice fund for their pet projects or constituencies,” Mr. Montemayor said.
FFF also does not support the removal of the licensing authority of the National Food Authority (NFA), calling it detrimental to rice producers and farmers.
Ruben D. Presilda, FFF President, said: “They are saying that open competition among importers and market players will ensure that rice prices will go down. What if that does not happen? What if large traders collude to manipulate prices of palay or rice to maximize their profits?”
“Some well-financed groups could be aiming to control the lucrative rice market and would find it easier to do so if there is no NFA to monitor and counter their moves. The agency also has many prime real estate properties along highways and in strategic locations which could be used for malls, condominiums, and other buildings once the agency is abolished and its assets are privatized,” Mr. Presilda added.
Agriculture Secretary Emmanuel F. Piñol said last week that the NFA’s power to license should not be abolished and that the agency could co-exist with the implementation of the rice tariffication bill.
“I am not in favor of the proposal to abolish NFA because it will effectively deprive the poor families access to subsidized rice,” Mr. Piñol said.