Top News

THIS past Wednesday, the Senate approved the bicameral conference committee report on the bill to amend the existing Republic Act (RA) 11203, or the Rice Tariffication Law. The Senate and the House of Representatives had each passed a version of the measure (Senate Bill [SB] 2779 and House Bill 10381, respectively), with SB 2779 being the one ratified by both chambers of the legislature, after some revisions. The measure will now go to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who is expected to sign it into law.

While the Agricultural Tariffication Law — its proper name — has been somewhat controversial, it is a good basic concept and now has been improved by timely and sensible amendments. The legislature has done its job; it is now up to the administration to see that the new law is properly implemented and that its objectives are met.

The general goal of the Rice Tariffication Law was to make the importation of rice easier in order to help moderate supply and prices, make the tariff on rice more uniform — the tariff was reduced somewhat, but that was not really the point — and set up a mechanism for the proceeds from collections of the tariff to be used to support the sustainability of our domestic rice producers. That fund, which was given a budget of P10 billion, is called the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF).

The law was originally passed in 2019, and some issues were revealed in its implementation, mainly that imports were not as carefully controlled as they should have been. This led to technical smuggling and hoarding by speculators, as well as some disorder in the government's own importation program, ostensibly under the control of the National Food Authority (NFA), which was for several long periods of time unable to maintain the mandated rice inventory reserves. In addition, there were continual questions raised about how effectively the RCEF was being deployed, although an examination of the record, at least in terms of the public reports on it from the Department of Agriculture (DA), it does seem that it has had mostly positive outcomes.

The amendments to RA 11203 passed by Congress address most of the shortcomings that appeared after the law was enacted. The RCEF, which would have expired this year without congressional intervention, has been extended until 2031, and its budget has been increased from P10 billion to P30 billion. This should allow a significant expansion in DA programs to support rice farmers, and if used effectively, will be a big step toward the aspiration of rice self-sufficiency and improved food security.

In addition to that, other amendments give the president and the DA more direct authority to intervene in rice importation to respond to supply issues. The bill gives the president the power to stop or limit the volume of rice imported when there is an oversupply due to local harvest and importation. Furthermore, the secretary of agriculture will be authorized to sell local rice to government agencies such as hospitals, prisons and Kadiwa outlets when there is a declaration of a shortage and an extraordinary price increase. The DA may import rice to make up for shortages of domestic supply and is authorized to designate third-party importers for this purpose.

One noteworthy detail of the amended law is that the NFA is omitted from the list of authorized importers, which can be taken as a clear message of Congress' opinion of the NFA's usefulness. The government should perhaps assess the NFA's mandate and its performance, and consider whether the agency still serves a necessary purpose that justifies its continued existence.

The amended Rice Tariffication Law is a good plan, and if carried out faithfully, can have significant benefits to the country. Of course, as we all realize, the effective and consistent implementation of laws has long been what may be politely described as a challenge in the Philippines, so reserving judgment until we see how words transform into actions is prudent. Nevertheless, the new law is a promising development, and a demonstration of effective action on Congress' part, something that does not seem to happen as often as it should and should be acknowledged when it does.

Source : msn