Presidentiable promises vs performance

If promises from presidentiables do not result in performance when they get elected, these promises are useless. This is particularly important today, as presidentiables promise performance on 12 recommendations unanimously approved by leaders of five different sectors. The five sectors are farmers and fisherfolk (Federation of Free Farmers), agribusiness (PCAFI or Philippine Chamber of Agriculture and Food Inc.), science and academe (Coalition for Agriculture Modernization in the Philippines), agriculture alliances (AA-Alyansa Agrikultura) and agriculture nongovernment organizations (Bayanihan sa Agrikultura). The 12 recommendations are found in the document “Transform Agriculture for Food Security, Jobs Creation, and Balanced Growth.”

Let us review a specific promise from a former presidentiable that did not result in performance. This relates to the Regional Cooperation Economic Partner (RCEP) that is in danger of being ratified by the Senate this week because a promise was not fulfilled.

It may be appropriate to place the blame for this nonperformance on a possible cordon sanitaire that prevents former presidentiable, now President Rodrigo R. Duterte (PRRD), from knowing what truly is happening.

Unfulfilled promise

Since the 4 a.m. meeting between PRRD and the five leaders of the AgriFisheries Alliance (AFA) on April 16, 2016, a cordon sanitaire has denied the AFA leaders request for a meeting with PRRD in the last five years. This was to report on the progress of his promises, and suggest solutions where performance was lacking.

In 2016, the then presidentiable PRRD promised that there would be stakeholder participation in tackling critical agriculture issues. The opposite happened.

1. The budget for activities that would guarantee this participation in the legislated public-private Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fisheries was cut by 50 percent.2. The PCAF Committee on International Trade where the private sector could be informed and could have contributed was abolished.

3. On Sept. 1, the RCEP was signed by PRRD, with hardly any agriculture private sector consultation.

4. For the RCEP to take effect, the Senate has to ratify it first. Disappointingly, the agriculture stakeholders were told about this only two days before the planned ratification of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Because the stakeholders strongly objected to what they perceived as possible railroading, the committee gave them more time for consultation.

On Nov. 18, the AA wrote the PCAF-Committee on International Trade (PCAF-CIT), which was abolished two years ago but was recently restored: “After two years of no meeting, it is imperative to work doubly hard on the RCEP issue. Please prepare a report on what threats the RCEP poses for a specific agriculture sector, the magnitude and timing of these threats, and which recommendations and safety measures DA (Department of Agriculture) proposes to address each threat.”

When this matter was taken up during the Nov. 22 PCAF-CIT meeting for DA’s response, the meeting minutes revealed that Denise Enriquez of the Department of Trade and Industry or DTI (not the Department of Agriculture) “replied that the threats, countermeasures, and safety nets will still be discussed by the DTI in the upcoming hearings on RCEP by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.”

Private sector participationIf the presidentiable promise of agriculture stakeholder consultation for critical issues like RCEP was fulfilled, this suggestion that the DTI (not the DA) take this up inappropriately at the next Senate hearing would not have happened. The consequence of this nonfulfillment may be disastrous. It may repeat our sad WTO (World Trade Organization) experience when farmers and fisherfolk suffered greatly because the government did not provide the necessary protective measures and support services. There is no need to rush RCEP ratification if the necessary government counterpart action is still not present.

As the presidentiable agriculture interviews now taking place, will this same fate of broken promises happen again? Hopefully not. The public is now informed of these promises through the media which can hold the elected presidentiable accountable. For one presidentiable, after only two days after the interview, there are already 63,000 facebook views. This is good for transparency and accountability.

The interviews of Mayor Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso and Vice President Leni Robredo have been completed. The next presidentiable is former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. at 10 a.m. on Dec. 16. For those interested, you can access this interview through Zoom ID 858-2592-4859, passcode agri2022, or by clicking “facebook.com/agri2022ph.” Presidentiable promises will now more likely result in performance.

The author is Agriwatch chair, former Secretary of Presidential programs and projects and former undersecretary of DA and DTI. Contact is [email protected].