Home > Op-ed | To bottom

That culprit called GATT-WTO

Just recently, farmers from all over Benguet province picketed the meeting of the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) of the Department of the Agriculture in the city. The farmers opposed the move of the BPI to allow the entrance of carrots from China as an initial component of the bilateral agreement between the Philippines and mainland China. The BPI found out in their Pest Risk Analysis that there are 13 pests found in China carrots yet it allows the carrot importation. The 13 pests, which are not found in our local agricultural products, are identified as follows: aster yellow phytoplasma, broad bean leaf virus, tobacco necrosis virus, carrot red leaf virus, potato tuber nematode, meadow nematode, bacterial blight, bacterial gall, black rot of carrots, tomato foot rot, brown wheat mite, northeast giant black chafer, and carrot willow aphid.

The BPI officials disregarded the laws that prohibit the entry of pest infested imported agricultural products. Specifically, they violated P. D. 1433 and Executive Order 292 that mandated them to prevent the entry and spread of these foreign pests in our country.

The move is not only unfair to our farmers. The move by BPI kills the vegetable industry which majority of the populace rely on. But why does this agency of the government insist in allowing these imported agricultural products despite the pests?

The issue related to carrots and agricultural products importation is traceable however to an institutionalized policy called the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) which the government adopted when it was ratified by the Senate. From its ratification, the Philippines became a member of the World trade Organization (WTO), an organization that monitors the strict implementation of GATT and to impose sanctions to member states that violate the agreement, including the agreement on agriculture (AOA).

Under the GATT-WTO, each member state commits to the removal of trade barriers from the time of its adoption. In such case, the government gradually decreases the tariffs – taxes on imported agricultural products – until the tariffs’ complete removal. The complete removal of tariffs was at the end of the 2004. Since last year then, the agricultural produce of our farmers competed with the very cheap and quality imported agricultural products. Our farmers’ nightmare is fully felt now. The entry of imported agricultural products is totally liberalized.

* * * * *

The government, specifically Pres. GMA, should be blamed on the ill-effects of vegetable importation. It must be noted that GMA was the primary sponsor of a resolution for the ratification of the GATT in the Senate when she was still a senator. In the senate deliberation, safety nets were promised to cushion the effects of the GATT. But these were never done and implemented. The tariffs were totally removed last year, yet there were no programs and policies adopted for our vegetable farmers.

* * * * *

One of my students at the Easter College, Daisy Akyaoan, who is a Benguet farmer’s daughter, found out in her 2005 thesis the economic dislocation brought about by vegetable importation among Benguet farmers.

She found out in her study that the farmers are quite aware as to the dislocation brought by vegetable importation, including the kinds of imported vegetable products that in fact land at the La Trinidad market, and the government policies on vegetable importation.

She also found out that the farmers are confronted with the following problems classified by farmers as very serious: absence of government subsidy and plans for marketing their products, absence and non-implementation of safety nets to cushion the effects of imported vegetables, and the unregulated issuance by the government of importation permits. Though third in rank as a solution to their problems, the Benguet farmers proposed that the government should withdraw from the GATT-WTO.

The study found out in detail the effect of vegetable importation. Those interested can visit the library of the Easter College. But my point in raising the results of the study is to validate the position of the Benguet farmers who are discontent with such kind of policy. Again I join them in urging the government to reconsider their position on the issues raised by the farmers.

They claim that the government is for the people, by the people, and of the people. But it is not in this case. And if the government will not address their issues, to whom will the farmers raise their issues? #

Home > Op-ed | Back to top