AGRILINK and ACEF: Instruments for Unity in Agriculture
As the doors of the World Trade Center opened to the visitors and participants of the 14th Agrilink, the International Agri-business Exhibition and Seminars, one can’t help but go back in time to 1993. We dream of unity for agriculture.
We are all for unity of agriculture. Different folks have different strokes. In our diversity and ambition, our stakeholders seem up to an impossible dream. But many barriers have been broken. We are getting closer to unity now.
What do I see in ACEF and globalization?
Before the Philippine Senate ratified the Uruguay Round Table Agreements under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994, some sectors expressed concern that the Philippines could turn into a dumping ground for cheap goods from other countries. To lessen this risk, the Philippine Congress passed RA 7843 or the Anti-Dumping Act on December 19, 1994. This Act will protect Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices of countries exporting to the Philippines.
In March 1996, RA 8178 was enacted. It replaced quantitative restrictions on agricultural products except rice. It also enacted the Agricultural Competitive Enhancement Fund or ACEF. Tariffs to protect Filipino products, anti-dumping and countervailing measures were put in place. The tariffs for the minimum access volume or MAV compose the ACEF. The ACEF shall have a life of nine (9) years.
In December 22, 1997, AFMA was passed. AFMA shall modernize agriculture to enhance farmers’ profitability and prepare said sector for the challenges of globalization. AFMA shall transform these sectors from a resource-based to a technology-based industry. It must be market-led. An initial P2o billion was appropriated for the first year.
The DBM is mandated to include annual appropriation of funds in the next six years, which ended in 2003.
In 2005, the Department of Justice, because of the lateness of the setting up of account 183 (where MAV tariffs will be deposited and delay in implementation) ruled that RA 8178 can still be used up to December 2007. Because globalization affected agriculture in a way that is unimaginable and difficult to understand, the need to make available ACEF funds becomes more critical.
It is in this light that the private sector in FRLD, in Soroptimist of the Philippines Region (SIPR), in NAFC, in NMU and in PCCI are now pushing for its extension.
A barrier that also affected the implementation of RA 8178 is the continuing change of secretaries of the Department of Agriculture.
DA Secretaries Edgardo Angara to Domingo Panganiban, William Dar, Leonardo Montemayor, Luis Lorenzo to Arthur Yap to Domingo Panganiban to Arthur Yap or eight (8) changes in seven (7) years.
This is why the setting up of account 183 took two years.
Add to that three Senators and three Congressmen - from Sergio Osmena and Angelito Sarmiento to Manuel Villar and Alfredo Maranon to Senator Ramon Magsaysay and Macarambong and now to Senator Angara and Congressman Mitra—four changes.
The changes required new orientation for the new entrants in the Execom. This further limited the effective implementation of the ACEF.
As a private sector representative of the ACEF, I saw first hand how the ACEF committee worked for the past seven (7) years.
December 1997 is fast approaching. The extension of ACEF almost passed last 13 1h Congress. It is therefore incumbent upon all of us to push for its passage.
The presence today of Butil Representative, Leonila V. Chavez underscores the urgency of ACEF. Industries like dairy, onions, other products whose quantitative restrictions were removed with the passage of RA 8178 need support. China, as the competitor of our agriculture products, remains strong and unrelenting. The high cost of food on the table still continues to create nightmares in our household budget. The congruence of these problems make funding for competitiveness a top priority.
The need to galvanize our political will to pass the extension of ACEF is now reaching a very critical level.
The need is now. Opening up our markets to global trade clobbered Philippine agriculture. Creativity, productivity and discipline are not common practices for us Filipinos. We are challenged as we meet competition head on. We need to be more creative. We need to be more productive. We need discipline.
