Where to next, DA?
When the government proclaims anticorruption moves sans follow through, don’t expect these will ever become reality.
There is a big risk that this may actually become the end result of an important anticorruption announcement of the Department of Agriculture (DA) made last Jan. 5. This was done during a national meeting of the private sector-led regional agricultural and fisheries councils (RAFCs).
The Commission on Audit had earlier reported unliquidated and unexplained expenses scandalously amounting to one-third of the DA budget for each of the years 2020, 2021 and 2022. The Agrifisheries Alliance (AFA) representing three coalitions (farmers and fisherfolk, agribusiness and science and academe) had requested the Senate Blue Ribbon and agriculture committees to investigate this problem. No response was ever given, which we find puzzling.
RCEP conditionality
Not to be discouraged, the AFA proceeded to push for the restoration of a successful anticorruption practice in the DA. Thankfully, senators used it as a condition that will make or break the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). If such is not met, a provision in the ratification document of the trade deal states that: “The Senate of the Philippines may recommend to the President the withdrawal from the Agreement.”
Almost a year since the RCEP was ratified on Feb. 21, 2023, this conditionality has yet to be effected: for the DA regional executive directors (REDs) to provide the private sector-led regional agriculture and fisheries councils a complete list of projects for transparency’s sake. For without a list, what projects can be monitored? Thankfully, last Jan. 5, Agriculture Secretary Francisco Tiu-Laurel Jr. used strong political will in directing the REDs to give these lists to the councils. Regrettably, the action taken by the REDs on this issue has been very slow.
In the Jan. 22 Inquirer editorial, it stated that the DA wanted a much larger budget “to increase agriculture productivity, lower food costs, ensure food security, and make farming and fisheries attract private sector investors.” Indeed, the agriculture share in the total budget has been averaging just 2 percent in the past few years. Note that Vietnam, once our closest rival, has been hitting 6 percent.
And even with a small-ish amount lost to corruption, our agriculture will surely continue its rapid decline.
Cooperation
Three follow-up recommendations must be implemented immediately:
First, there is a need for a one- or two-day workshop between the REDs and the regional council leaders. They should agree on their roles, responsibilities and expectations.
Resolving unliquidated and unexplained expenses is challenging since it also involves funds that the DA devolved to local governments, many of which may not wish to cooperate.
There should be a uniform set of policies, procedures and documents for systematic monitoring and accountability. This must include a reward and punishment system.
Second, there has to be adequate monitoring budget. Most heads have complained they could not do their desired way of monitoring because the REDs have been telling them there was no adequate budget for such.
Elected interim overall RAFC head Buen Mondejar suggested that a certain percentage (i.e., 2 percent to 3 percent) of a program’s budget be allocated for monitoring, consultation and complementary activities. This was unanimously advocated by all the heads and approved by Laurel. Third, an incident uncovered during the 2023 limited monitoring should be acted upon and parties involved penalized. Mondejar specifically mentioned a P200,000-worth corn shelter whose final price tag showed P1 million. Told it was just typographical error, he pointed out that the same issue appeared in all four provinces of his region. No action has so far been taken on this.
We also heard about the discovery of a nonexistent albeit fully funded road. Mondejar was told the infrastructure can be found in another barangay. Which barangay, one might ask? No information was given. End of story.
He argued that if penalties are not meted out vis-a-vis private sector findings, monitoring would simply become a farce.
After such a long wait, the first step toward transparency is finally here. Without a follow through, however, one can already read a corrupt individual’s thought bubble: Much ado about nothing. INQ
The author is Agriwatch chair, former secretary of presidential flagship programs and projects, and former undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Trade and Industry. Contact is [email protected]
