The five coalition Agri Fisheries Alliance fully supports Agriculture Secretary William Dar’s immediate implementation of safeguard measures that will increase the rice tariff from the current 35- percent level to a level beneficial for both farmers and consumers.
The AFA is composed of five sectors: farmers and fisherfolk, (Alyansa Agrikultura-AA), agribusiness (Philippine Chamber of Agriculture and Food Inc.-PCAFI), science and technology (Coalition for Agriculture Modernization in the Philippines-CAMP), rural women (Pambansang Kilusan ng Kababaihan sa Kanayunan-PKKK), and multisectors (Agrifisheries 2025–AF2025). They support the appropriate level to be determined by the Department of Agriculture following World Trade Organization and Philippine law (RA 8800).
PCAFI president Danilo Fausto said in a statement: “The rice farmers are suffering too much from the 35-percent tariff, which is too low and results in their earning significantly below the poverty level.
“We therefore ask for the implementation of Section 10 of the Rice Tariffication Law, which states: ‘In order to protect the Philippine rice industry from sudden or extreme fluctuations, a special safeguard duty on rice shall be imposed in accordance with RA 8800, otherwise known as the Safeguard Measures Act.’”
AA chairman Ernesto Ordoñez added: “We do not want a repeat of the mistake during the 1990’s when we agreed to the too rapid tariff reduction without giving the farmers the necessary support services and the WTO- approved safeguard measures.”
He cited the Department of Agriculture Sept. 9 national survey where imported rice with the 35-percent tariff caused farmgate wet palay prices in Regions 2, 3, 11 averaged P12.10 a kilo, barely above the P12 production cost.
CAMP chairman Emil Javier favored measures like cash transfers and assistance in credit, technology, and marketing.
But he emphasised the safeguard measure of increased tariff, which must be temporary and decreased at a fast pace when the missing support mechanisms are in place.
The AA stated it rejected calls for a return to government rice import monopoly, and supports food security instead of food self-sufficiency.
It added: “In areas where rice production is not competitive, the government must provide assistance for transition to higher value crops.”
